The Fencing Center - San Jose, 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 | SADOVSKY Leor B. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 28% |
2 | COELHO Cristiano P. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 58% | |
3 | TSAY Jeremy M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 63% |
3 | LUH Ethan K. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 48% |
5 | KIM Ryan Y. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 61% | 21% |
5 | MA Bryant | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 52% | 14% | 1% |
7 | NAYGAS LAWRENCE I. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 50% |
8 | WOO Christian | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 32% | |
9 | SHEN Owen | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 87% | 46% | 9% |
10 | SISINNI Riccardo | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 61% | 24% | 4% |
11 | DETERING Julian | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 47% |
12 | KANG Anthony | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 62% | 15% |
13 | CO Dylan | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 51% | 11% |
14 | FINNEY Lorenz | 100% | 99% | 93% | 73% | 41% | 13% | 2% |
15 | LLIDO Soren | 100% | 100% | 96% | 82% | 51% | 18% | 3% |
16 | CORTRIGHT Joshua C. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 50% | 9% | |
17 | VALOUEV Aleksey | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 51% | 13% | |
18 | LI Jett | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 43% | 13% | 2% |
19 | BAEK David | 100% | 99% | 90% | 66% | 33% | 9% | 1% |
20 | SMITH Grant D. | 100% | 93% | 66% | 30% | 8% | 1% | - |
21 | TEH Ryan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 54% | 17% | 2% |
21 | GONZALEZ Matthew | 100% | 99% | 89% | 58% | 21% | 3% | - |
23 | WU Lucas | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 48% | 12% | 1% |
24 | SOTO-ULEV Aden A. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 72% | 35% | 8% |
25 | MA Andrew | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 49% | 10% |
26 | ANDERSON Jacob | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 64% | 26% | 3% |
27 | YU Leo | 100% | 95% | 71% | 31% | 6% | - | |
28 | MYERS Dean | 100% | 100% | 94% | 71% | 35% | 9% | 1% |
29 | PARK Sky | 100% | 98% | 81% | 46% | 15% | 2% | - |
30 | HARRIS Otto | 100% | 97% | 79% | 41% | 10% | 1% | |
31 | MARTIN IV Elmer D. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 61% | 23% |
32 | SETLUR Bhrugu | 100% | 96% | 73% | 28% | 4% | - | - |
33 | WANG Ethan | 100% | 99% | 90% | 65% | 33% | 9% | 1% |
34 | YEE Johnathan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 69% | 27% | 4% |
35 | CRACRAFT John R. | 100% | 93% | 64% | 25% | 4% | - | |
36 | HUSSAIN Ibrahim | 100% | 97% | 77% | 36% | 9% | 1% | |
37 | FUKUDA Diego | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 51% | 19% | 3% |
38 | FANG Jaden | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 26% | 5% | - |
39 | LAM Nicolas | 100% | 74% | 31% | 7% | 1% | - | |
40 | LIU William | 100% | 97% | 77% | 32% | 6% | - | - |
41 | HUSSAIN Ismail A. | 100% | 93% | 61% | 21% | 3% | - | - |
41 | EDISON Ansel | 100% | 78% | 38% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
43 | KIM Jonah | 100% | 76% | 30% | 5% | - | - | - |
44 | WACHTEL Oliver | 100% | 99% | 91% | 59% | 17% | 2% | - |
45 | ZWEIBACK Jacob | 100% | 90% | 61% | 26% | 7% | 1% | - |
46 | TONKOVICH Ryan | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 26% | 5% | - |
47 | CHUANG Kian J. | 100% | 100% | 94% | 70% | 30% | 5% | |
48 | BOUCHARD Kai | 100% | 64% | 22% | 4% | - | - | |
49 | REDDY Rohan | 100% | 55% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
50 | SEO Shawn | 100% | 95% | 64% | 24% | 4% | - | - |
51 | PETERSON Lucas | 100% | 78% | 30% | 5% | - | - | - |
52 | KHER Roan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 66% | 30% | 6% |
53 | TUAN Evan | 100% | 89% | 58% | 25% | 7% | 1% | - |
54 | AGRAWAL Niki | 100% | 95% | 69% | 29% | 6% | 1% | - |
55 | KALAMAS Nikolas | 100% | 69% | 25% | 4% | - | - | - |
56 | RUBIN Max | 100% | 95% | 72% | 36% | 10% | 2% | - |
57 | REICHEL Ezra | 100% | 79% | 34% | 7% | 1% | - | |
58 | GREENEBAUM Oliver | 100% | 37% | 6% | 1% | - | - | - |
59 | ALBINALI Eissa | 100% | 70% | 23% | 3% | - | - | - |
59 | BECKER Ethan | 100% | 94% | 71% | 35% | 10% | 1% | - |
61 | JIANG Yehong | 100% | 56% | 13% | 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.