Oaks, PA - Oaks, PA, 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 | TOLBA Abdelrahman | - | - | - | 2% | 15% | 47% | 36% |
| 2 | JOSEPH Willem | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 42% | 28% | |
| 3 | JUDD Mehta J. | 1% | 6% | 21% | 34% | 27% | 10% | 1% |
| 3 | TAHOUN Mostafa | 4% | 21% | 37% | 28% | 9% | 1% | |
| 5 | BING Charles | - | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 41% | 28% |
| 6 | DESOLA Aidan J. | - | 2% | 10% | 26% | 35% | 22% | 6% |
| 7 | WANG Michael | - | 1% | 7% | 22% | 35% | 27% | 8% |
| 8 | RINEHART Conner M. | - | 1% | 5% | 18% | 35% | 32% | 10% |
| 9 | LIU Eric Y. | - | 1% | 6% | 21% | 36% | 29% | 7% |
| 10 | SCHAEFER Joshua M. | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 37% | 26% | 6% |
| 11 | CHIN Julian S. | - | - | - | 3% | 20% | 48% | 29% |
| 12 | LI Eric | - | - | 1% | 8% | 27% | 41% | 23% |
| 13 | WANG Gerald Y. | - | - | 4% | 17% | 36% | 33% | 10% |
| 14 | GOGUEN-COMPAGNONI Nicholas | - | - | - | 4% | 20% | 42% | 32% |
| 15 | DAUM Charlie | - | - | 4% | 17% | 35% | 33% | 11% |
| 16 | MOHAMED Murad | - | 1% | 5% | 19% | 35% | 31% | 10% |
| 17 | FORTUNE Alexander J. | - | 5% | 21% | 34% | 28% | 11% | 2% |
| 18 | ZHAO Jesse | - | 3% | 17% | 36% | 31% | 11% | 1% |
| 19 | PEGRAM Rafferty G. | - | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 42% | 21% |
| 20 | ZHAO Dylan L. | - | 5% | 21% | 35% | 27% | 10% | 1% |
| 21 | WHITEHEAD Amir | - | 3% | 13% | 30% | 33% | 18% | 4% |
| 22 | MOHAMED Amir | - | 3% | 16% | 35% | 35% | 11% | |
| 23 | LUM-DEBONO Alex | 3% | 16% | 33% | 31% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 24 | GUO Sean | - | 1% | 5% | 19% | 36% | 30% | 9% |
| 24 | SICHITIU Alexander | - | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 42% | 28% |
| 26 | SIMA Congyu Josh | - | 5% | 22% | 36% | 26% | 9% | 1% |
| 27 | STRAYER Andrew | - | 1% | 8% | 31% | 42% | 16% | 2% |
| 28 | SELL Ethan J. | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 38% | 26% | 6% |
| 29 | KNIZHNIK David | - | 11% | 33% | 35% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 30 | WANG Andrew | - | 1% | 5% | 19% | 34% | 30% | 10% |
| 31 | GAUTAM Vishnu | 10% | 32% | 36% | 18% | 4% | - | |
| 32 | MILLER Aidan A. | - | 7% | 24% | 35% | 25% | 8% | 1% |
| 33 | ZHANG Zixuan "Mark" | 8% | 31% | 39% | 18% | 3% | - | - |
| 34 | PO Oliver | - | 2% | 12% | 31% | 35% | 17% | 3% |
| 35 | TALLARICO Matthew | 2% | 13% | 30% | 33% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 36 | POPESCU Tudor | 6% | 30% | 40% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
| 37 | TIAN Aaron C. | - | - | 4% | 16% | 33% | 34% | 13% |
| 38 | MAGIDSON Josh | 22% | 40% | 27% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 39 | ORLOV Dmitriy | 11% | 33% | 34% | 17% | 4% | - | - |
| 40 | PITERBARG Maxim | - | 20% | 39% | 29% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 41 | WERWA Griffith | 1% | 10% | 31% | 38% | 17% | 2% | - |
| 42 | POPE Alexander | 12% | 34% | 35% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
| 43 | FINLEY Dylan | 1% | 6% | 22% | 36% | 26% | 9% | 1% |
| 44 | SYOMICHEV Gleb A. | 2% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 45 | JIN Dennis H. | 6% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 46 | WOODTHORPE Michael G. | 1% | 10% | 27% | 35% | 21% | 6% | - |
| 47 | CAI Oliver K. | 1% | 5% | 20% | 34% | 28% | 10% | 1% |
| 48 | REZA Farazi | 7% | 26% | 37% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 49 | LA BARR Edward T. | 6% | 31% | 38% | 19% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 50 | MENG Zhaoyi | 1% | 11% | 30% | 36% | 19% | 3% | |
| 51 | DRESSEL Jet | 27% | 42% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - | |
| 52 | AMRANI David | 23% | 40% | 26% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 53 | KALIPERSAD Neil A. | 7% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 54 | POIROT Max | 17% | 37% | 31% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
| 55 | SONG Bryan | 1% | 11% | 30% | 34% | 19% | 5% | 1% |
| 56 | GALLER Dave | 3% | 21% | 40% | 27% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 57 | TOMASI John | 3% | 15% | 31% | 31% | 16% | 4% | - |
| 58 | SZE Benjamin | 81% | 18% | 2% | - | - | - | - |
| 59 | ZHANG Teddy | 55% | 36% | 8% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 60 | BAUMANN Gunnar | 21% | 41% | 28% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 60 | SZE Timothy | 40% | 42% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 62 | XIANG Siyuan | 96% | 4% | - | - | - | - | - |
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.