Anaheim, CA - Anaheim, CA, 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 | NORBUTAS Jackson S. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 68% | |
| 2 | ROBINSON Riley | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 42% |
| 3 | DAO Matthew M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 73% |
| 3 | ZHANG Alec | 100% | 99% | 89% | 56% | 19% | 2% | |
| 5 | SHARMA Sanil | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 74% | 33% |
| 6 | MOSES Alexander | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 57% |
| 7 | HOLDERNESS Landon | 100% | 99% | 88% | 60% | 25% | 4% | |
| 8 | YAO Geoffrey B. | 100% | 98% | 80% | 46% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 9 | LUCERO-OLSON Aydin | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 42% | 10% | |
| 10 | PHUKAN Rohin | 100% | 87% | 51% | 17% | 3% | < 1% | |
| 11 | LIN Ryan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 59% | 21% |
| 12 | WONG Daniel | 100% | 100% | 94% | 69% | 27% | 3% | |
| 13 | LATIF IMRAN ZAKARIYYA | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 59% | 18% | |
| 14 | WONG Nicholas A. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 61% | 19% | |
| 15 | KIM Benjamin I. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 48% | 13% | |
| 16 | ALVAREZ Ian T. | 100% | 99% | 92% | 64% | 23% | 2% | |
| 17 | IVAKIMOV Vasil | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 65% | 22% | |
| 18 | LOGUE Ethan D. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 53% | 20% | 3% |
| 19 | AU Marcus J. | 100% | 100% | 93% | 64% | 24% | 3% | |
| 20 | WANG DEVON | 100% | 99% | 91% | 67% | 34% | 9% | 1% |
| 21 | AHN Gus | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 55% | 22% | 4% |
| 22 | ZHU Max | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 66% | 24% | |
| 23 | JAIN Sarthak | 100% | 98% | 83% | 44% | 12% | 1% | |
| 24 | KOPPE Alexander | 100% | 98% | 86% | 50% | 14% | 1% | |
| 25 | THOMPSON Chester | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 40% | 10% | 1% |
| 26 | SINGHA Orion | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 50% | 12% |
| 27 | JONES Caleb | 100% | 98% | 86% | 55% | 21% | 4% | - |
| 28 | USHER Alexander | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 50% | 18% | 3% |
| 29 | COOPER Rowan | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 34% | 6% | |
| 30 | SOOHOO Jackson F. | 100% | 98% | 85% | 50% | 16% | 2% | |
| 31 | JIN Daniel | 100% | 99% | 92% | 63% | 24% | 4% | |
| 32 | MCDONALD Ethan | 100% | 82% | 41% | 11% | 1% | - | |
| 33 | LIN Kyran | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 66% | 22% | |
| 34 | STRAUSS Luke | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 38% | 4% |
| 35 | ULINICH Alexander | 100% | 86% | 49% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
| 36 | BRUSKOTTER Reiland | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 48% | 15% | 1% |
| 37 | FERRIERE Joshua | 100% | 97% | 83% | 52% | 21% | 4% | - |
| 38 | BRISLAWN Reilly R. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 70% | 25% | |
| 39 | MOHEBI Saam | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 56% | 18% | |
| 40 | LIANG Aaron | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 53% | 15% | |
| 41 | WEAVER Neil | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 46% | 12% | |
| 42 | KIM Darius H. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 56% | 17% | 1% |
| 43 | ZHENG Haoran | 100% | 97% | 82% | 50% | 18% | 3% | - |
| 44 | BAZHENOV Anthony | 100% | 89% | 57% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 45 | VILLALOBOSKOWALSKI Demetrious C. | 100% | 86% | 45% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 46 | QUITORIANO Jonathan | 100% | 86% | 52% | 19% | 4% | - | - |
| 47 | DUONG Enoch | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 70% | 32% | 5% |
| 48 | WESTON Tom | 100% | 88% | 45% | 12% | 1% | - | |
| 49 | PARK Elliot | 100% | 99% | 89% | 53% | 16% | 2% | |
| 50 | EVANS noah | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 36% | 7% | - |
| 51 | KIM Nathan | 100% | 98% | 81% | 48% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 52 | LEE Chun Po | 100% | 89% | 55% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
| 53 | BHARGAV Siddharth | 100% | 90% | 61% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 54 | HARR Carver | 100% | 97% | 82% | 49% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 55 | BEAMS Yevgeny | 100% | 78% | 32% | 6% | - | - | |
| 56 | WANG owen | 100% | 60% | 18% | 2% | - | - | |
| 57 | QUITORIANO Matthew | 100% | 82% | 43% | 12% | 2% | - | |
| 58 | PAK Elliot | 100% | 31% | 4% | - | - | - | |
| 59 | CROSSMAN Brandon | 100% | 69% | 25% | 4% | - | - | |
| 60 | HIGGINS Branford | 100% | 99% | 92% | 70% | 37% | 11% | 1% |
| 61 | CHIRASHNYA Adam | 100% | 95% | 69% | 28% | 5% | - | - |
| 62 | DAVOODIAN Christopher | 100% | 92% | 48% | 12% | 1% | - | |
| 62 | NGO Ethan | 100% | 70% | 26% | 5% | - | - | |
| 64 | SCOFIELD Thien J. | 100% | 97% | 79% | 41% | 11% | 1% | |
| 65 | DEKERMANJI Christopher | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 59% | 24% | 4% |
| 66 | GU Aidan | 100% | 96% | 78% | 44% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 67 | WATT Darren | 100% | 56% | 16% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 68 | CHRISTENSEN Parker | 100% | 68% | 25% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 69 | KIM Sullivan | 100% | 46% | 9% | 1% | - | - | |
| 70 | PARK Augustine | 100% | 84% | 37% | 8% | 1% | - | |
| 71 | TOLBERT-SCHWARTZ Everett | 100% | 83% | 46% | 15% | 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.