King of Prussia, PA - King of Prussia, PA, 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 | MORRILL William | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 34% |
| 2 | NOBLE Colin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 78% | 35% | 6% |
| 3 | SHOMAN Zachary | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 55% | 14% |
| 3 | KIM Matthew | 100% | 99% | 87% | 58% | 23% | 4% | |
| 5 | DENG Andrew | 100% | 98% | 88% | 61% | 26% | 5% | |
| 6 | MORRILL Justin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 72% | 30% |
| 7 | HAN Daniel Y. | 100% | 84% | 47% | 15% | 3% | < 1% | |
| 8 | CHAN Matthew | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 25% |
| 9 | BULL Anderson | 100% | 99% | 90% | 64% | 28% | 5% | |
| 10 | CADAMBI Roshan | 100% | 97% | 80% | 45% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 11 | MARGULIES William | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 52% | 19% | 3% |
| 12 | DA GRACA Aidan | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 25% | 4% |
| 13 | ZHOU Miles | 100% | 98% | 88% | 61% | 27% | 5% | |
| 14 | RAUSCHER Ryan | 100% | 97% | 81% | 47% | 16% | 2% | |
| 15 | OVERDECK Andrew | 100% | 97% | 82% | 50% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 16 | BUCHMANN Finn D. | 100% | 98% | 88% | 59% | 24% | 4% | |
| 17 | ALTIRS Alexander | 100% | 99% | 93% | 72% | 37% | 9% | |
| 18 | PIWOWAR Alex | 100% | 93% | 67% | 33% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 19 | NG Jeremiah | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 25% | |
| 20 | HONG Vincent Q. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 72% | 38% | 9% | |
| 21 | KIM Shaun M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 53% | 14% |
| 22 | CHAUDHURI Eeshaan A. | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 29% | 6% | 1% |
| 23 | SHOMAN Noah | 100% | 100% | 95% | 77% | 42% | 11% | |
| 24 | MICLAUS Justin | 100% | 94% | 69% | 33% | 9% | 1% | |
| 25 | COLE Alexander | 100% | 99% | 90% | 64% | 28% | 5% | |
| 26 | SANDERS Samuel B. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 91% | 54% | 16% | 2% |
| 27 | ZHENG Edward L. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 26% | 4% |
| 28 | CHEN Evan P. | 100% | 93% | 69% | 34% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 29 | HUANG Alexander C. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 53% | 20% | 3% |
| 30 | SKINNER Graham B. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 61% | 21% | |
| 31 | EDELMAN Seth A. | 100% | 94% | 70% | 35% | 10% | 1% | |
| 32 | VARUKATTY-GAFOOR Sohil | 100% | 90% | 59% | 24% | 5% | - | |
| 33 | ELLIS Jonah | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 30% |
| 34 | PANDEY Neil | 100% | 89% | 57% | 22% | 5% | - | |
| 35 | YUAN Kevin | 100% | 99% | 90% | 64% | 29% | 6% | |
| 36 | FLITSANOV Macabee | 100% | 99% | 86% | 37% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 37 | HUANG Tyler T. | 100% | 97% | 78% | 44% | 14% | 2% | |
| 38 | FIELDS Matthew S. | 100% | 95% | 74% | 39% | 12% | 2% | |
| 39 | BLEYMAN David | 100% | 96% | 76% | 42% | 14% | 2% | |
| 40 | OH Triton | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 30% | 6% | |
| 41 | LIU Mingyang Ryan | 100% | 95% | 74% | 39% | 11% | 1% | |
| 42 | ZENG Noah | 100% | 98% | 86% | 57% | 24% | 4% | |
| 43 | HU Andrew | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 46% | 14% | 2% |
| 44 | TANG Charles | 100% | 87% | 46% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 45 | POSY Daniel | 100% | 91% | 58% | 22% | 4% | - | - |
| 46 | LEONARD Charles | 100% | 92% | 66% | 31% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 47 | SAVOY Luca | 100% | 97% | 81% | 49% | 18% | 3% | |
| 48 | OWENS Harrison J. | 100% | 96% | 76% | 42% | 13% | 1% | |
| 49 | GOLD Jackson | 100% | 90% | 60% | 26% | 6% | 1% | |
| 50 | WANG Robert | 100% | 99% | 89% | 62% | 26% | 5% | |
| 51 | VOSS Jeffer | 100% | 75% | 33% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 52 | NOURELDIN Gabriel | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 69% | 34% | 7% |
| 53 | MOULTON Ian | 100% | 87% | 50% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
| 54 | NEUMANN-LORECK Oliver | 100% | 68% | 17% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 55 | DEPEW Spencer | 100% | 69% | 28% | 6% | 1% | - | |
| 56 | GOLD Carter | 100% | 51% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
| 57 | HUANG Maxwell H. | 100% | 88% | 55% | 22% | 5% | - | |
| 58 | RAGAN STEINSSON Sigurdur | 100% | 88% | 53% | 18% | 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.