Minneapolis, MN, 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 | BECKER William L. | - | - | - | - | 2% | 22% | 75% |
2 | THORNTON Ronald J. | - | - | - | 1% | 15% | 48% | 37% |
3 | PHILLIPS Kim V. | - | - | - | 1% | 11% | 58% | 30% |
3 | DASHNAW Stephen | - | - | - | 8% | 51% | 34% | 6% |
5 | ZOLLER Matthew | 1% | 8% | 34% | 42% | 15% | 1% | - |
6 | DOLEGIEWICZ Mariusz | - | - | 4% | 29% | 53% | 13% | |
6 | BACON Michael F. | - | - | - | 3% | 30% | 67% | |
8 | MONTORIO Louis V. | - | - | - | 1% | 15% | 51% | 34% |
9 | VIDOVSZKY Tamas J. | - | - | - | - | 2% | 38% | 59% |
10 | KAOURIS George | - | 1% | 9% | 32% | 39% | 17% | 1% |
11 | NEMAZIE David A. | - | - | 6% | 26% | 42% | 24% | 2% |
12 | ESCUETA Jr Antonio V. | - | 7% | 50% | 36% | 7% | - | |
13 | GRAFF Jon | - | 3% | 20% | 43% | 31% | 3% | - |
14 | MIGHELL Jason | - | 1% | 12% | 35% | 37% | 14% | 1% |
15 | RICHARDSON Troy A. | 1% | 8% | 33% | 41% | 17% | 1% | - |
16 | MEHTA Nalin J. | 5% | 77% | 18% | 1% | - | - | |
17 | MARTINEZ Mario D. | 2% | 25% | 46% | 24% | 2% | - | - |
18 | LILLARD Samuel N. | - | 2% | 24% | 52% | 21% | 2% | |
19 | CHEN Lester | - | 8% | 39% | 37% | 14% | 2% | - |
20 | SIMS Martin L. | 16% | 55% | 24% | 4% | - | - | - |
21 | CHENG Jonathan | 2% | 20% | 45% | 31% | 3% | - | - |
22 | DALRYMPLE Sr. Ronald W. | 5% | 34% | 44% | 17% | 1% | - | - |
23 | STATEN Joseph | 26% | 48% | 21% | 4% | - | - | - |
24 | VARADARAJAN VENKATAKRISHNAN | 63% | 32% | 4% | - | - | - | - |
25 | BUHAY Renato | 93% | 7% | - | - | - | - | |
26 | CHOU William | 39% | 46% | 13% | 1% | - | - | - |
26 | ELCHONESS David | 67% | 29% | 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.