Myrtle Beach Convention Center, Hall A - Myrtle Beach, SC, 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 | JEYOON Ryan S. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 38% |
| 2 | SIVAKUMAR Ajit | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 52% |
| 3 | CLICK Aiden | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 48% |
| 3 | KIM Donghyeok | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 62% |
| 5 | LEE Daniel Y. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 66% | |
| 6 | WU Byron | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 61% | 19% | |
| 7 | LEE Samuel Y. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 72% | 34% | 6% | |
| 8 | HENSAL Nicolas A. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 48% | 12% | |
| 9 | TREBON Hayden | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 26% | 4% |
| 10 | XU Alex | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 61% | 18% |
| 11 | JAAFAR Omar | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 62% | 11% | |
| 12 | LEE Shwan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 64% | 21% | |
| 13 | VALES Keyan | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 34% | 8% | 1% |
| 14 | HAN David | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 69% | 30% | 4% |
| 15 | RHYU Kozmo | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 37% |
| 16 | LEE JoonWon | 100% | 86% | 51% | 18% | 3% | - | - |
| 17 | ARANA Abraham | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 39% | 7% |
| 18 | SINGH Aryaman | 100% | 94% | 55% | 16% | 2% | - | |
| 19 | WANG Trontour | 100% | 98% | 86% | 54% | 20% | 3% | - |
| 20 | ILYAS Zakariya | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 28% | 6% | - |
| 21 | SPITTLE Jake | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 51% | 18% | 3% |
| 22 | LIN Harrison | 100% | 89% | 54% | 18% | 2% | - | |
| 23 | GATZA Logan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 63% | 21% | |
| 24 | LEONE III Charles D. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 83% | 41% | |
| 25 | NORMAN Christian | 100% | 100% | 97% | 79% | 40% | 9% | |
| 26 | WOLFE Alex | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 53% | 17% | 2% |
| 27 | VACCARO Dominick J. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 47% | 14% | 1% |
| 28 | LEE JUNYOUNG | 100% | 97% | 82% | 50% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 29 | JONES Tyler | 100% | 100% | 94% | 72% | 35% | 8% | 1% |
| 30 | KIM Dylan J. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 32% | 5% |
| 31 | BERNARD Jack B. | 100% | 79% | 39% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
| 32 | MILLER Kurt | 100% | 61% | 18% | 2% | - | - | |
| 33 | FU Ethan | 100% | 97% | 77% | 38% | 9% | 1% | |
| 34 | SLOUGH Sean | 100% | 100% | 93% | 67% | 28% | 4% | |
| 35 | JEON Hwidong | 100% | 98% | 81% | 46% | 15% | 2% | - |
| 36 | SCHARF Ryan | 100% | 92% | 64% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 37 | ROTHKA Spencer J. | 100% | 95% | 73% | 37% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 38 | MODULLA Yathin | 100% | 97% | 78% | 42% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 39 | JACKSON James | 100% | 100% | 94% | 67% | 26% | 4% | |
| 40 | WANG Bryan | 100% | 99% | 91% | 63% | 27% | 5% | |
| 41 | CORLEY Avery | 100% | 88% | 48% | 14% | 2% | - | |
| 42 | CREMONA Diego Maria | 100% | 95% | 68% | 27% | 5% | - | |
| 43 | DAVIS Jonah | 100% | 86% | 45% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 44 | PARNAS Ely | 100% | 99% | 91% | 67% | 32% | 8% | 1% |
| 45 | TRIMMER Colin | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 72% | 35% | 7% |
| 46 | RYEOM JIHOON | 100% | 87% | 50% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
| 47 | SCHERNIKAU Jack | 100% | 94% | 66% | 28% | 6% | - | |
| 48 | GERBER Benjamin | 100% | 98% | 76% | 35% | 7% | - | |
| 49 | KIM Ryan | 100% | 97% | 79% | 44% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 50 | COREY Colin | 100% | 79% | 38% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 51 | PASZKOWIAK Jacob | 100% | 98% | 82% | 47% | 15% | 2% | - |
| 52 | KIM Taeho | 100% | 90% | 60% | 24% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 53 | CHUNG Joshua | 100% | 88% | 50% | 13% | 1% | - | |
| 54 | SELLAR Ian | 100% | 55% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 55 | REDDY Daksh | 100% | 52% | 13% | 1% | - | - | |
| 56 | JAAFAR Hamza | 100% | 74% | 29% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 57 | LE Kevin | 100% | 95% | 73% | 37% | 11% | 1% | - |
| 58 | MCCOLLAM Isaac | 100% | 70% | 26% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 59 | MILLER Jonathan | 100% | 34% | 5% | - | - | - | |
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.