Fredericksburg, VA - Fredericksburg, VA, USA
Explore the pool victory probability density 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 | HADDAD Justin R. | - | - | - | 1% | 8% | 37% | 54% |
| 2 | PARK Ian C. | 1% | 8% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 6% | |
| 3 | JAYENDRA Chandrashekar | - | - | 3% | 16% | 34% | 34% | 13% |
| 3 | SCHULZE Ethan | 2% | 28% | 39% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 5 | WU Joseph | - | 4% | 17% | 36% | 33% | 11% | |
| 6 | WIMMER Chandler M. | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 41% | 27% | |
| 7 | IVAKIMOV Vasil | - | 1% | 7% | 27% | 42% | 21% | 3% |
| 8 | JEYOON Ryan S. | 1% | 6% | 23% | 37% | 26% | 7% | |
| 9 | MORSE Tyler | 3% | 16% | 33% | 32% | 14% | 2% | |
| 10 | RHYU Kozmo | - | - | 4% | 18% | 34% | 32% | 12% |
| 11 | CHONG christopher | - | 3% | 16% | 34% | 34% | 13% | |
| 12 | LEE Daniel Y. | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 39% | 19% | |
| 13 | SHIV Rishi | 2% | 13% | 30% | 33% | 18% | 4% | |
| 14 | JIN Owen | - | 1% | 5% | 20% | 36% | 30% | 9% |
| 15 | BEACH Nicholas | - | 2% | 15% | 37% | 35% | 10% | |
| 16 | MCCOMISKEY Aiden J. | 1% | 8% | 29% | 38% | 20% | 4% | |
| 17 | WOZNIAK Ignacy | - | 1% | 10% | 27% | 35% | 21% | 5% |
| 18 | FULMER Andrew J. | - | - | 4% | 17% | 37% | 34% | 9% |
| 19 | CRANE Matthew T. | 2% | 20% | 40% | 29% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 20 | MUNLIN Donovan | - | - | - | 3% | 16% | 42% | 39% |
| 21 | O'HARA Keegan J. | - | - | 5% | 23% | 43% | 28% | |
| 22 | CLICK Aiden | 1% | 5% | 20% | 36% | 30% | 8% | |
| 23 | KROPP Jack | - | 5% | 19% | 35% | 31% | 10% | |
| 24 | PARK Brian | 1% | 10% | 32% | 36% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 25 | STEVENS Daniel | 2% | 11% | 28% | 34% | 21% | 5% | |
| 26 | DOLMETSCH Max | - | 1% | 9% | 25% | 35% | 24% | 6% |
| 27 | SPIER Julian H. | - | - | 1% | 11% | 35% | 42% | 11% |
| 28 | JIN Alexander | - | 4% | 17% | 34% | 32% | 12% | |
| 29 | HE Lawrence | 4% | 20% | 35% | 29% | 11% | 1% | |
| 30 | SNIDER Jeffrey H. | 1% | 10% | 27% | 35% | 22% | 5% | |
| 31 | TREBON Hayden | 13% | 33% | 33% | 17% | 4% | - | |
| 32 | BERKOWITZ Jeffrey | 3% | 25% | 38% | 24% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 33 | LEE Timothy S. | - | 1% | 8% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 6% |
| 34 | TAMULONIS Fen C. | 3% | 17% | 32% | 30% | 14% | 3% | |
| 35 | STOTT Donovan R. | - | 2% | 13% | 33% | 35% | 15% | 2% |
| 36 | BORODITSKY Ethan | 4% | 19% | 35% | 29% | 11% | 2% | |
| 37 | LIU John | 1% | 8% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 6% | |
| 38 | HUGHES Michael D. | 8% | 28% | 36% | 22% | 6% | 1% | |
| 39 | HENSAL Nicolas A. | - | 3% | 16% | 33% | 32% | 14% | 2% |
| 40 | TIRRELL Justin J. | - | 7% | 23% | 35% | 25% | 9% | 1% |
| 41 | JOSEPH William | - | 8% | 29% | 36% | 21% | 6% | 1% |
| 42 | HORTELANO Ethan | - | 3% | 16% | 32% | 31% | 14% | 3% |
| 43 | LEE Shwan | 1% | 7% | 27% | 39% | 22% | 4% | |
| 44 | GAO Daniel | 3% | 19% | 36% | 30% | 11% | 1% | |
| 45 | CHAWLA Armaan | 3% | 16% | 32% | 31% | 14% | 3% | |
| 46 | GOLDER Will W. | 2% | 14% | 32% | 33% | 15% | 3% | |
| 47 | BOWIE George W. | 35% | 44% | 18% | 3% | - | - | |
| 48 | AL-TAYEB Ahmed M. | - | 5% | 22% | 37% | 27% | 8% | 1% |
| 49 | PARK Vincent | 1% | 13% | 36% | 36% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 50 | SIVAKUMAR Ajit | 1% | 7% | 23% | 35% | 26% | 8% | |
| 51 | VALES Keyan | 20% | 40% | 29% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 52 | PICCUS Isaac S. | 4% | 19% | 35% | 30% | 11% | 1% | |
| 53 | PARNAS Ely | 16% | 36% | 32% | 13% | 2% | - | |
| 54 | JUNG Minche | 11% | 33% | 35% | 17% | 4% | - | |
| 55 | COETZEE Frans M. | 23% | 41% | 26% | 8% | 1% | - | |
| 56 | WU Jonathan | 23% | 47% | 24% | 5% | - | - | |
| 57 | PARCELEWICZ John M. | 16% | 38% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - | |
| 58 | PARK Frederick | 2% | 23% | 41% | 26% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 59 | DIVERIS Joseph | 41% | 42% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 60 | JACKSON James | 26% | 40% | 25% | 8% | 1% | - | |
| 61 | ALTUVE Alejandro J. | 14% | 42% | 32% | 10% | 2% | - | - |
| 62 | LEE JoonWon | 66% | 29% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
| 63 | ANDERSON Donald | 82% | 17% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
| 64 | MILLER Kurt | 73% | 24% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
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.