Fort Worth, TX - Fort Worth, TX, 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 | HOMER Daryl D. | - | - | - | 4% | 27% | 68% | |
2 | SMITH Jared C. | - | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 41% | 30% |
3 | SHAINBERG Jonah L. | - | - | - | 4% | 27% | 69% | |
3 | WILLIAMS Grant W. | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 42% | 42% |
5 | DOLEGIEWICZ Filip | - | - | 1% | 5% | 23% | 46% | 25% |
5 | LINDER James (Luke) L. | - | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 41% | 30% |
7 | THOMPSON Khalil A. | - | - | - | - | 5% | 30% | 64% |
8 | HARLEY Colby A. | - | 1% | 9% | 27% | 40% | 22% | |
9 | BOOTH Zaheer | - | - | 2% | 11% | 29% | 38% | 20% |
10 | SOLOMON Daniel P. | - | - | 2% | 16% | 43% | 39% | |
11 | LORTKIPANIDZE Nickoloz | - | - | 1% | 9% | 30% | 44% | 16% |
12 | ATTIG Will T. | - | 5% | 23% | 41% | 28% | 4% | |
13 | LUKASHENKO Darii | 2% | 13% | 29% | 32% | 18% | 5% | 1% |
14 | SARON Mitchell S. | - | - | - | 2% | 13% | 40% | 45% |
15 | KIM Stephen E. | - | 4% | 17% | 34% | 33% | 12% | |
16 | WILLIAMS Nolan E. | - | 5% | 18% | 35% | 31% | 10% | 1% |
17 | SCHMITT Trenton R. | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 39% | 29% | 4% |
18 | ANGLADE Junior Ronald (RJ) E. | - | 1% | 7% | 23% | 38% | 26% | 5% |
19 | COHEN Josef A. | - | - | - | 2% | 22% | 76% | |
20 | LANDAU Nathaniel (Nat) B. | - | 2% | 10% | 27% | 35% | 22% | 5% |
21 | WOOD Elden S. | 2% | 11% | 28% | 33% | 20% | 5% | 1% |
22 | WALKER Dalton F. | - | - | 3% | 21% | 47% | 28% | |
23 | CAI Lawrence (Larry) | - | 5% | 24% | 44% | 23% | 4% | |
24 | MCBRIDE Jackson R. | - | 1% | 5% | 18% | 34% | 31% | 11% |
25 | ZHOU Matthew R. | - | 4% | 16% | 31% | 31% | 15% | 3% |
26 | CHOI HYUNSEOK | - | 1% | 5% | 19% | 35% | 30% | 10% |
27 | STONE Ben | - | 6% | 26% | 41% | 24% | 3% | |
28 | HAMMERSTROM Jared | 5% | 24% | 38% | 26% | 7% | - | |
29 | CALLAHAN Jaden P. | 3% | 18% | 35% | 30% | 11% | 2% | |
30 | BARNETT Adam | 1% | 13% | 37% | 35% | 12% | 1% | |
31 | LIANG Connor | - | 1% | 8% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 6% |
32 | YANG Ziyi | 5% | 24% | 38% | 26% | 7% | - | |
33 | TE VELDE Noah C. | - | 2% | 9% | 24% | 35% | 24% | 6% |
33 | BURGUNDER Quinten (Quin) A. | - | 3% | 14% | 31% | 33% | 16% | 3% |
35 | LIMB Matthew G. | 1% | 7% | 28% | 41% | 22% | 2% | |
36 | KARAM Tariq A. | - | - | 2% | 17% | 47% | 33% | |
37 | KAYDALIN Artyom | 9% | 29% | 36% | 20% | 5% | 1% | - |
38 | ERMAKOV Lev | 6% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
38 | LINSKY Matthew | 2% | 13% | 31% | 34% | 17% | 3% | - |
40 | BOLTON Braydon A. | 1% | 9% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 5% | - |
41 | JI Cody Walter | 1% | 14% | 36% | 35% | 13% | 1% | |
42 | SINGER Carson | 6% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 8% | 1% | |
43 | BENAVRAM Lev C. | - | 5% | 26% | 42% | 22% | 4% | |
44 | KIM Avery J. | 2% | 15% | 34% | 33% | 14% | 2% | |
45 | PRIEST Leighton K. | 5% | 22% | 35% | 27% | 10% | 1% | |
46 | DHINGRA Gian K. | 1% | 8% | 27% | 39% | 22% | 2% | |
47 | MORRILL William | 6% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 8% | 1% | - |
48 | BIERNACKI Maciej L. | - | 2% | 12% | 30% | 35% | 18% | 3% |
49 | VIDOVSZKY Robert T. | - | - | - | 3% | 17% | 46% | 35% |
50 | PRICE Jack S. | - | 5% | 17% | 32% | 30% | 13% | 2% |
50 | LAI Adam J. | 2% | 12% | 30% | 34% | 18% | 4% | - |
52 | GREENBAUM Maxwell H. | 1% | 10% | 28% | 35% | 21% | 5% | - |
53 | ROBERTS Sam | 16% | 38% | 32% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
54 | HARVEY Nicholas J. | 1% | 5% | 19% | 32% | 29% | 12% | 2% |
55 | BASALYGA Jeffrey | 1% | 10% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 5% | - |
56 | MOON Sean H. | - | 3% | 14% | 34% | 36% | 13% | |
57 | BIVINS III George A. | - | 1% | 8% | 32% | 43% | 16% | |
58 | YEN Darren | - | 3% | 14% | 32% | 36% | 15% | |
59 | ESCUETA Tony V. | 13% | 33% | 34% | 16% | 4% | - | |
60 | WIND Nicky E. | 8% | 30% | 37% | 20% | 5% | - | |
61 | BOLTON Dawson E. | 4% | 19% | 35% | 29% | 11% | 2% | |
62 | SO Hananiah | 3% | 17% | 33% | 30% | 14% | 3% | - |
63 | MEHTA Sachin N. | - | 2% | 10% | 26% | 35% | 22% | 5% |
64 | RABINKOV Anthony | 16% | 37% | 32% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
65 | JEAN Noe T. | 4% | 18% | 33% | 29% | 13% | 3% | - |
66 | PORTMANN Stein J. | 7% | 31% | 42% | 17% | 2% | - | |
67 | HUSSAIN Faaris | 1% | 12% | 40% | 35% | 11% | 1% | |
68 | POPE Nico | 6% | 25% | 38% | 25% | 6% | - | |
69 | BARBER Brendan | 14% | 49% | 30% | 7% | 1% | - | |
70 | ERACHSHAW Taras P. | 1% | 15% | 38% | 34% | 11% | 1% | |
71 | SHI Andrew | 1% | 10% | 27% | 36% | 21% | 5% | - |
72 | BAILEY Asher | 9% | 29% | 34% | 20% | 6% | 1% | - |
73 | JEFFORDS Alexander | 3% | 16% | 34% | 32% | 13% | 2% | - |
74 | MOLINA Nicholas (Nico) G. | 9% | 29% | 35% | 20% | 6% | 1% | - |
75 | LIU kelly | 5% | 22% | 36% | 26% | 9% | 1% | - |
76 | BRAR Sanjeet | 29% | 45% | 22% | 4% | - | - | |
77 | MONTGOMERY Jadon T. | 11% | 40% | 35% | 12% | 2% | - | |
78 | BURR Tanner B. | 58% | 35% | 6% | - | - | - | |
79 | CZYZEWSKI Konrad R. | 24% | 41% | 26% | 8% | 1% | - | |
80 | YUN Jake | 20% | 40% | 29% | 10% | 1% | - | |
81 | REN Richard | 69% | 27% | 4% | - | - | - | |
82 | SOHN Kevin J. | - | 3% | 15% | 30% | 32% | 16% | 3% |
83 | LIN John A. | 1% | 8% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 6% | - |
84 | CHAN Matthew | 11% | 31% | 34% | 18% | 5% | 1% | - |
85 | ERACHSHAW Cyrus P. | 19% | 38% | 30% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
86 | WOODWARD Connor | 9% | 29% | 35% | 20% | 6% | 1% | - |
87 | HOUTZ Jackson | 13% | 36% | 33% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
88 | RAJA Arnav | 10% | 30% | 34% | 19% | 5% | 1% | - |
89 | NEUHEARDT Peter | 16% | 36% | 31% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
90 | GREEN IV James (Bud) | 10% | 31% | 36% | 19% | 4% | - | - |
91 | ZHOU Justin | 4% | 18% | 33% | 29% | 13% | 3% | - |
92 | BERGER Oliver | 3% | 24% | 41% | 26% | 6% | - | |
93 | XU William | 22% | 45% | 27% | 5% | - | - | |
94 | LI Joshua L. | 19% | 39% | 30% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
95 | TONG ZACHARY | 11% | 32% | 35% | 17% | 4% | 1% | - |
96 | DU Gavin J. | 17% | 38% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
97 | JINICH Ilan R. | 48% | 40% | 11% | 1% | - | - | |
98 | CHIN Matthew W. | 23% | 41% | 27% | 8% | 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.