Anaheim, CA - Anaheim, CA, 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 | KELLY William J. | - | - | - | 3% | 17% | 42% | 38% |
| 2 | KUMBLA Samarth | - | - | 2% | 17% | 47% | 35% | |
| 3 | FUKUDA Renzo K. | - | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 43% | 23% |
| 3 | KIM Brandon J. | - | - | 3% | 21% | 51% | 24% | |
| 5 | DIVITO Dylan | - | - | - | 2% | 18% | 51% | 28% |
| 6 | ZENG Lucas H. | - | - | - | 1% | 13% | 43% | 42% |
| 7 | BURKE Spencer W. | - | - | 1% | 7% | 30% | 47% | 15% |
| 8 | LAO Scott E. | - | - | 4% | 18% | 37% | 32% | 9% |
| 9 | DICKSON Farr R. | - | - | - | 1% | 9% | 37% | 54% |
| 10 | NAGIMOV Marsel | - | - | 1% | 9% | 42% | 48% | |
| 11 | GOLDADE Luke A. | - | 1% | 11% | 40% | 36% | 11% | 1% |
| 12 | AYUPOV Ilya | - | - | - | 1% | 7% | 37% | 55% |
| 13 | XIAO EDWARD | - | - | 4% | 25% | 44% | 23% | 3% |
| 14 | TSANG Matthew K. | - | - | 1% | 10% | 32% | 40% | 17% |
| 15 | CHENG Matthew S. | 2% | 12% | 31% | 35% | 17% | 3% | |
| 16 | ZHANG Luke T. | - | 2% | 11% | 31% | 37% | 17% | 2% |
| 17 | CHIN Jason Y. | - | - | 3% | 17% | 43% | 37% | |
| 18 | OTAKE Jared K. | - | - | 1% | 9% | 29% | 42% | 20% |
| 19 | ZHENG Alan H. | - | - | 1% | 11% | 33% | 39% | 16% |
| 20 | BANERJEE ANUP | - | - | - | 3% | 19% | 46% | 31% |
| 21 | FARQUHARSON Cole | - | 2% | 11% | 33% | 39% | 14% | |
| 22 | SCHULZE-KALT Graydon L. | 1% | 7% | 25% | 40% | 23% | 4% | |
| 23 | GRANT Lachlan K. | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 39% | 19% | |
| 24 | VAZQUEZ Zander | 1% | 10% | 29% | 36% | 19% | 4% | |
| 25 | DIERKS Kian | 2% | 15% | 35% | 33% | 13% | 2% | |
| 26 | KO Brian J. | - | - | - | 1% | 11% | 45% | 43% |
| 27 | WESTPHAL David R. | - | - | 2% | 14% | 36% | 36% | 12% |
| 28 | JEON Caleb A. | - | - | - | 3% | 20% | 47% | 30% |
| 29 | LI Raphael C. | - | - | 3% | 17% | 37% | 33% | 9% |
| 30 | JAIN Aditya | - | - | 4% | 18% | 37% | 32% | 9% |
| 31 | BERK Theodore | 1% | 12% | 42% | 35% | 9% | 1% | |
| 32 | CAI Jason Zhicheng | - | 5% | 24% | 38% | 25% | 7% | 1% |
| 33 | LEVY Jacob M. | - | - | 1% | 6% | 25% | 42% | 26% |
| 34 | OH Samuel H. | - | - | 5% | 24% | 45% | 25% | |
| 35 | YU Anders | - | - | 4% | 27% | 48% | 19% | 2% |
| 36 | WU Jerry Z. | - | 3% | 18% | 37% | 31% | 10% | 1% |
| 37 | GIRALDO Pablo E. | - | - | 3% | 20% | 48% | 29% | |
| 38 | BARTEL Jacob L. | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 34% | 10% | 1% |
| 39 | CORTRIGHT Joshua C. | 1% | 9% | 31% | 38% | 18% | 3% | - |
| 40 | SUNG Chang-Han S. | - | 3% | 18% | 36% | 31% | 11% | 1% |
| 41 | HONG Daniel | - | - | 4% | 21% | 43% | 31% | |
| 42 | PAEK Alex J. | - | - | 5% | 22% | 45% | 28% | |
| 42 | WOO Christian | 7% | 30% | 42% | 19% | 3% | - | |
| 44 | PATINO Yahir | 6% | 26% | 39% | 23% | 6% | 1% | |
| 45 | FUKUDA Alessio R. | - | - | 3% | 16% | 38% | 35% | 8% |
| 46 | KIM Banseok J. | 6% | 25% | 38% | 24% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 47 | MURUHIN Yaroslav | - | 2% | 12% | 34% | 38% | 13% | 1% |
| 48 | SEAL Maximus R. | 1% | 17% | 39% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 49 | JI Evan | 4% | 36% | 40% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
| 49 | GOBBO Alexander | - | 3% | 19% | 37% | 30% | 10% | 1% |
| 51 | ZHOU Oscar J. | - | 2% | 21% | 47% | 26% | 4% | - |
| 52 | THAI William | - | - | - | 7% | 31% | 45% | 16% |
| 52 | WANG Andrew | - | 3% | 19% | 39% | 29% | 9% | 1% |
| 54 | HOBSON Aaron K. | - | 5% | 29% | 44% | 19% | 2% | |
| 55 | CHIN Julian S. | - | 4% | 18% | 36% | 32% | 10% | |
| 56 | RYOU Aiden | 19% | 41% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 57 | HODESS Ethan | 1% | 11% | 35% | 40% | 12% | 1% | |
| 58 | MORALES Ian N. | 1% | 14% | 37% | 35% | 12% | 1% | |
| 59 | TSAY Jeremy M. | - | 1% | 11% | 31% | 36% | 18% | 3% |
| 60 | KELLY Benjamin J. | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 34% | 10% | |
| 61 | BAEK David | 21% | 41% | 28% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 62 | DETERING Julian | - | 12% | 35% | 35% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 63 | LE Jacob W. | 16% | 38% | 32% | 12% | 2% | - | |
| 63 | CHI Alexander | 21% | 41% | 28% | 8% | 1% | - | |
| 65 | HSIUNG Richie | 2% | 14% | 37% | 34% | 12% | 1% | |
| 66 | KIM Aaron J. | 2% | 14% | 34% | 34% | 14% | 2% | |
| 67 | KIM Derek A. | - | 6% | 26% | 39% | 23% | 5% | - |
| 68 | LIM Charles Q. | 4% | 30% | 41% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
| 69 | WANG Ethan | 3% | 34% | 41% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 70 | WU Conrad J. | 1% | 7% | 26% | 38% | 22% | 5% | - |
| 71 | AVRON Case B. | 1% | 12% | 36% | 35% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 72 | HUANG Kevin D. | 2% | 33% | 43% | 18% | 3% | - | - |
| 73 | LEE David Y. | - | 5% | 25% | 38% | 24% | 7% | 1% |
| 74 | CHUANG Kian J. | 2% | 16% | 38% | 32% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 75 | PIESNER Zachary C. | 1% | 23% | 44% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 76 | HARRIS Otto | 3% | 54% | 36% | 7% | - | - | - |
| 77 | OH Jaden | 1% | 22% | 52% | 22% | 3% | - | - |
| 78 | ZHENG zhe | 8% | 36% | 38% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
| 79 | MO Jason | 8% | 36% | 39% | 16% | 2% | - | |
| 80 | KIM Ryan Y. | 18% | 41% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 81 | TAN Peter | 24% | 44% | 26% | 6% | - | - | |
| 82 | BROWN Darius D. | 63% | 32% | 5% | - | - | - | |
| 83 | HARRIS Rhonen | 55% | 36% | 8% | 1% | - | - | |
| 84 | MILLER Chance | 14% | 57% | 25% | 3% | - | - | |
| 85 | NAM Michael | 6% | 43% | 37% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
| 86 | LLIDO Soren | 14% | 38% | 34% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 87 | MCCOSH Evin M. | - | 18% | 51% | 26% | 4% | - | - |
| 88 | RAINS Jackson T. | 80% | 18% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
| 89 | DORMAN Patrick | 7% | 55% | 33% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 90 | LIEBERMAN Grant | 22% | 41% | 28% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 91 | WOMACH Tristan | 22% | 44% | 27% | 6% | - | - | |
| 92 | LI Avery Peihong | 22% | 42% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 93 | PARK Sky | 87% | 13% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
| 94 | ALVES Austin | 92% | 8% | - | - | - | - | - |
| 95 | PIALLING Mikhail | 83% | 16% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
| 95 | ULLOA Trent J. | 71% | 25% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
| 95 | PARK Gabriel | 55% | 36% | 8% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 98 | QIU Jay (Tengjie) | 82% | 17% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
| 99 | EDISON Ansel | 79% | 19% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
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.