Boston, MA - Boston, MA, USA
Explore the probability of achieving at least a certain number of victories in the pool for each fencer, with their actual victories highlighted in a box. Learn more.
| # | Name | Number of victories | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ||
| 1 | ZHANG Daniel D. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 93% | 51% |
| 2 | LI Brandon H. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 82% |
| 3 | BINDER Zachary (Zach) B. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 58% |
| 3 | LI Owen | 100% | 99% | 91% | 60% | 22% | 3% | |
| 5 | SCHENCK Koen M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 40% | 6% |
| 6 | AUGUSTINE Ethan A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 80% | 26% |
| 7 | YANG Adam | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 70% | 26% | |
| 8 | SULLIVAN Jackson R. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 43% | |
| 9 | LIU Patrick | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 85% |
| 10 | XIAO Enoch A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 43% | |
| 11 | KWON Ethan | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 36% | 7% | |
| 12 | MITCHELL Philip D. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 91% | 54% | 10% | |
| 13 | BREIER Matthew F. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 31% | 5% | |
| 14 | KAO Castor T. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 38% | 7% | |
| 15 | SHA Yi Peng | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 55% | 12% | 1% |
| 16 | DEGREMONT Henri S. | 100% | 99% | 87% | 54% | 17% | 2% | |
| 17 | XIAO Ethan J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 42% |
| 18 | LIU Niles J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 59% | |
| 19 | JIMENEZ Diran | 100% | 100% | 99% | 87% | 53% | 13% | |
| 20 | ZELTSER Lawrence M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 80% | 33% | 2% |
| 21 | BELLUOMO David C. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 24% | 1% |
| 22 | LOCKWOOD Owen | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 44% | 9% |
| 23 | NAGER Noah | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 32% | 2% |
| 24 | LI Eric | 100% | 100% | 98% | 82% | 37% | 5% | - |
| 25 | COSTELLO Chaissen F. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 81% | 35% | 4% | |
| 25 | ACHILOV Sayid | 100% | 94% | 66% | 25% | 4% | - | |
| 27 | XIAO Anthony | 100% | 98% | 83% | 45% | 12% | 1% | |
| 28 | BING Charles | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 66% | 25% | 3% |
| 29 | JIANG Owen | 100% | 100% | 100% | 93% | 51% | 11% | - |
| 30 | SIMA Congyu Josh | 100% | 96% | 75% | 38% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 31 | BROWN Alexander R. | 100% | 98% | 71% | 28% | 5% | - | - |
| 32 | DING Jonathan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 25% | 4% |
| 33 | YANG Andy H. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 55% | 16% | |
| 34 | LIGH Thomas | 100% | 98% | 72% | 29% | 6% | - | - |
| 35 | TIAN Yuzhe (Charlie) | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 27% | 5% | - |
| 36 | LEE Chris | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 83% | 37% | 3% |
| 37 | ALIMI Yacine A. | 100% | 93% | 65% | 27% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 38 | BAUMANN Gunnar | 100% | 91% | 50% | 6% | - | - | - |
| 39 | FEDONCHIK Henry J. | 100% | 99% | 85% | 37% | 6% | - | |
| 40 | ZHAO Jesse | 100% | 94% | 67% | 29% | 6% | - | - |
| 41 | LI Arvin | 100% | 83% | 44% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
| 42 | KITAGAWA Eric S. | 100% | 97% | 75% | 26% | 3% | - | - |
| 43 | SANTULLI Tristan | 100% | 100% | 96% | 74% | 34% | 7% | - |
| 44 | MILLER Aidan A. | 100% | 75% | 29% | 5% | - | - | |
| 44 | WERWA Griffith | 100% | 66% | 20% | 3% | - | - | |
| 46 | GONG Benjamin | 100% | 92% | 57% | 19% | 3% | - | |
| 47 | JIN Dennis H. | 100% | 75% | 19% | 2% | - | - | |
| 48 | HOWARD Michael | 100% | 87% | 48% | 13% | 1% | - | |
| 49 | KLEIN Sebastian W. | 100% | 84% | 46% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 50 | KONG Luculentus X. | 100% | 86% | 38% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 50 | DAVIDSON Elliot | 100% | 90% | 58% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
| 52 | LI Ayren | 100% | 82% | 43% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 53 | GARDOS Noah | 100% | 59% | 14% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 54 | BOUSSY Luciano | 100% | 72% | 22% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 55 | WOODTHORPE Michael G. | 100% | 44% | 8% | 1% | - | - | |
| 56 | QI Steve | 100% | 60% | 17% | 2% | - | - | |
| 56 | WU Michael | 100% | 46% | 6% | - | - | - | |
| 58 | LIU Charles | 100% | 21% | 2% | - | - | - | - |
| 59 | REN Bingye | 100% | 46% | 7% | - | - | - | - |
The heatmap in this table provides a visual representation of the victory probability distribution for each fencer in their respective pools:
This heatmap visualization offers an immediate understanding of each fencer's expected performance compared to their actual results.