Former Cost Plus World Market Building - Davis, CA, 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 | MADISON Ethan | - | - | 1% | 10% | 39% | 49% | |
| 2 | MEINHOLD Li | - | - | - | 2% | 19% | 59% | 20% |
| 3 | KIM Benjamin | - | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 41% | 21% |
| 3 | JAIN Sarthak | 2% | 15% | 35% | 35% | 12% | ||
| 5 | HE Zhiheng | 1% | 13% | 39% | 39% | 9% | ||
| 6 | ROOD Alex | - | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 34% | 11% |
| 7 | ARIETA Ryan | - | - | - | 4% | 28% | 68% | |
| 8 | GARRETT Samuel | 1% | 14% | 40% | 39% | 6% | ||
| 9 | GREEN Ummi | - | - | 2% | 13% | 37% | 36% | 11% |
| 10 | ZACHES Torrey | - | 1% | 8% | 27% | 41% | 23% | |
| 11 | YAO Geoffrey | - | 1% | 9% | 35% | 45% | 11% | 1% |
| 12 | CHIRASHNYA Adam | 2% | 12% | 32% | 36% | 17% | 2% | |
| 15 | BOTHELIO Jere | 8% | 38% | 40% | 13% | 1% | ||
| 16 | YAMASAKI Kyle | - | - | - | < 1% | 5% | 34% | 61% |
| 17 | MILLER Kevin | - | 2% | 26% | 72% | |||
| 18 | WELDON Benjamin | - | 2% | 24% | 45% | 25% | 3% | |
| 19 | MAYCHROWITZ Matthew | - | 3% | 15% | 35% | 35% | 12% | |
| 20 | CELECKI Barrett | - | - | 4% | 28% | 68% | ||
| 21 | LOGUE Ethan | - | 2% | 14% | 35% | 37% | 12% | |
| 21 | HARGROVE Charles | - | 5% | 25% | 41% | 25% | 3% | |
| 23 | CLARKSON Cole | 1% | 5% | 19% | 33% | 29% | 12% | 2% |
| 24 | ZAYDMAN David | - | 5% | 23% | 41% | 27% | 4% | |
| 25 | HEPLER Sarah | 9% | 32% | 36% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 26 | PERKA Mike | - | 2% | 13% | 33% | 36% | 15% | |
| 27 | KAUFMAN Joel | - | 4% | 26% | 44% | 23% | 2% | |
| 28 | MING Nathan | - | 4% | 37% | 43% | 14% | 1% | - |
| 29 | CAI Brian | - | - | 2% | 16% | 43% | 39% | |
| 30 | BARNETT Devin | 33% | 51% | 16% | - | |||
| 31 | BECK Brian | - | 7% | 30% | 42% | 18% | 2% | |
| 32 | WATT Darren | 15% | 43% | 32% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 33 | ZUHARS Renee | 1% | 16% | 37% | 32% | 12% | 2% | |
| 34 | HENDRICK Heidi | - | 1% | 9% | 27% | 38% | 22% | 3% |
| 35 | WANG Owen | - | 4% | 31% | 46% | 18% | 2% | - |
| 36 | OLIVER GUIMERA Arturo | 1% | 10% | 34% | 37% | 15% | 2% | |
| 37 | ANGADALA Leela Krishna | 7% | 32% | 42% | 17% | 2% | - | |
| 38 | BHARGAV Siddharth | 5% | 24% | 38% | 25% | 7% | 1% | |
| 39 | MARIANI Lou | - | - | - | 1% | 12% | 44% | 43% |
| 40 | MONDALA Adrian | 3% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 42 | LUO Xiao Ran | 13% | 37% | 35% | 13% | 2% | ||
| 43 | RYAN Chris | 2% | 14% | 33% | 34% | 15% | 2% | |
| 44 | GREEN Jabreel | 5% | 29% | 45% | 20% | 2% | ||
| 45 | COVINGTON Max | 1% | 9% | 32% | 41% | 17% | 1% | |
| 46 | WONG Nathan | 3% | 17% | 35% | 31% | 12% | 2% | |
| 47 | BERMENDER Eric | 1% | 11% | 32% | 37% | 16% | 2% | - |
| 48 | GU Aidan | 5% | 23% | 37% | 26% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 49 | CHANG Celine | 14% | 37% | 34% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
| 51 | BEITTEL David | 3% | 31% | 62% | 4% | |||
| 52 | LEE Kaitlyn | 37% | 48% | 15% | 1% | |||
| 53 | BHATT Arjun | 17% | 48% | 28% | 6% | - | - | |
| 54 | HOOPES JR. Richard | - | 6% | 24% | 41% | 25% | 4% | |
| 55 | HOGE William | 53% | 37% | 9% | 1% | - | ||
| 56 | YU Austin | - | 60% | 34% | 6% | - | - | |
| 57 | MADRID Betsy | 23% | 40% | 27% | 8% | 1% | - | |
| 58 | ASTLE Stephen | 8% | 29% | 37% | 21% | 5% | ||
| 59 | GOLDBERG Artie | 3% | 16% | 34% | 31% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 60 | MEWES Katie | 13% | 35% | 34% | 15% | 3% | - | |
| 61 | BEATTY Max | 8% | 29% | 36% | 21% | 6% | 1% | |
| 62 | BLOOMER Suzanne | 5% | 31% | 44% | 18% | 1% | ||
| 63 | MONTOYA Amy | 20% | 42% | 29% | 8% | 1% | - | |
| 64 | MCDONALD Caden | 11% | 36% | 36% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 65 | JOSEPH Jeremy | 5% | 79% | 15% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 66 | STANICA Teodora | 74% | 24% | 3% | - | - | - | |
| 66 | BHARGAV Angad | 43% | 42% | 13% | 2% | - | - | |
| 69 | LACKRONE Addison | 15% | 36% | 32% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 70 | SIMARD Sherrol | 79% | 19% | 2% | - | - | - | - |
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.