The future of US Fencing is at stake!

For transparency, fairness, and athlete support, VOTE NOW for:
(1) Maria Panyi, (2) Andrey Geva, (3) Igor Chirashnya, and (4) Sue Moheb.

National Championships & July Challenge (Summer Nationals)

Div I-A Women's Foil

Monday, July 3, 2023 at 2:00 PM

Phoenix Convention Center - Phoenix, AZ, USA

Probability density of pool victories

Reset

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 JANG Kimberley - - 4% 22% 43% 30%
2 KIM Katherine - - - 2% 13% 39% 46%
3 BREKER Anika - - 1% 10% 40% 50%
3 GRIFFIN Emma G. - - - - 3% 26% 72%
5 ORVAÑANOS Anice 1% 6% 22% 36% 27% 8%
6 PHILPOT Eden E. - - 2% 15% 43% 40%
7 CHEW Alexis T. - 1% 7% 23% 36% 26% 7%
8 ZHUANG Christina 5% 22% 36% 26% 9% 1% -
9 EYER Hailey M. - - - 1% 7% 33% 60%
10 ASCHETTINO Aurora - 4% 18% 35% 31% 11% 1%
11 ZHANG Alina C. - - 1% 5% 21% 43% 31%
12 CASTANEDA Keira - 5% 22% 36% 26% 9% 1%
13 DAVIA Daniella V. - - 2% 10% 29% 39% 21%
14 CHEN Chloe I. - 3% 20% 39% 30% 7%
15 LUO Sandra J. 1% 6% 21% 35% 28% 9% 1%
16 KOKES Aurora - 1% 8% 30% 46% 16%
17 KIM Rachel 1% 11% 30% 36% 19% 4%
18 STRUGAR Steliana 1% 7% 28% 37% 21% 5% -
19 KNIGHT Skylar - - - 2% 14% 41% 42%
20 LEE Lavender - 1% 9% 29% 40% 21%
21 NEWHARD Zelia "Zizi" - 3% 18% 37% 32% 9%
22 NAMGALAURI Mariam - 3% 15% 34% 35% 14%
23 SHA Yi Ling 1% 11% 31% 37% 17% 2% -
24 DOROSHKEVICH Taisiia - 1% 8% 24% 38% 25% 4%
25 FUNG Vera 1% 12% 34% 38% 14% 1%
26 SOOD Ishani S. - 4% 23% 41% 27% 6%
27 FENG Grace 4% 23% 39% 26% 7% 1%
28 PENG Amber L. - - 1% 9% 34% 47% 9%
29 LI Sophia M. - 1% 10% 29% 37% 20% 3%
30 NIKOLIC Alexandra 2% 12% 30% 34% 18% 4% -
31 MANIKTALA Prisha - 3% 14% 32% 35% 15% 2%
32 MILLER Naomi E. - 7% 31% 41% 19% 3%
33 RANDOLPH Piper - 1% 6% 24% 42% 27%
34 KOROL Neta - 1% 7% 26% 42% 24%
35 FERNANDES Thea 1% 11% 35% 36% 15% 2%
36 DO Leila 1% 12% 34% 36% 15% 2%
37 ZHOU Catherine - 2% 13% 35% 38% 12% 1%
38 KOSTELNY Alexis 1% 7% 23% 35% 25% 8% 1%
39 HAN Crystal 4% 22% 37% 27% 9% 1%
40 MORADI Raiyan N. 7% 29% 40% 21% 4% -
41 RENTON Samantha - 3% 18% 37% 32% 10%
42 CHO Cameron S. - - 2% 13% 34% 38% 12%
43 MEI Sarah - 2% 11% 28% 35% 20% 4%
44 CHEN Renee - 6% 22% 37% 27% 8% 1%
45 WANG Jasmine 4% 22% 38% 27% 8% 1% -
46 SEAL Grace (Gracie) C. - - 3% 15% 34% 36% 12%
47 FIELD Julianna 8% 36% 36% 16% 4% - -
48 LAI Sophia - 2% 15% 34% 33% 14% 2%
49 DE LA CRUZ Eden - 3% 18% 38% 32% 9%
50 SHMAY Anastasia 2% 22% 39% 28% 8% 1%
51 MCBRYAN Teresa N. - 2% 17% 41% 33% 6%
51 PAHLAVI Dahlia - 4% 18% 35% 32% 11%
53 VAUGHAN Norah 24% 42% 26% 7% 1% -
54 CHOW Annabelle 12% 51% 30% 7% 1% -
55 PANT Anisha - 2% 15% 35% 36% 12%
56 OLIVEIRA Lavinia M. 1% 13% 34% 35% 15% 2%
57 LI Eleanor 13% 38% 35% 12% 2% -
58 LIU Angel(Daying) 1% 8% 25% 37% 24% 6%
59 ZHANG Eunice 4% 19% 35% 29% 11% 2% -
60 FUNG Emma - 1% 11% 31% 36% 18% 3%
61 HAN Ashley 18% 38% 30% 11% 2% - -
62 BOLES Amanda X. 29% 42% 23% 6% 1% -
63 BEAVER Hannah 15% 38% 32% 12% 2% -
64 GU Emily 7% 31% 39% 20% 4% -
65 RAO Sonia D. 11% 32% 35% 17% 4% - -
66 MEYER Claudia 5% 25% 38% 25% 7% 1% -
67 YIM Rachael 25% 43% 25% 6% 1% - -
68 NEUMAN Sophie 70% 28% 3% - - -
69 SEAL Julie T. 1% 6% 23% 37% 26% 7%
70 ZHANG Selena 10% 42% 35% 12% 2% -
71 MAHABALESHWARKAR Aanika 70% 26% 4% - - -
72 TALWALKAR Apoorva - 5% 21% 35% 28% 10% 1%
73 RASO Olivia 12% 33% 34% 16% 4% - -
74 ROZPEDOWSKI Claire 4% 20% 38% 29% 8% 1% -
75 SCHMIDT Victoria 16% 46% 29% 8% 1% - -
76 ALKADI Mai 18% 41% 30% 9% 1% - -
77 ZOLDAN Gweniveve A. 49% 40% 10% 1% - - -
78 LIN Ju-An Adrianne 14% 35% 33% 15% 3% - -
79 BASSIK Eva 46% 40% 12% 2% - -
79 ZAMELIS Madelyn 62% 32% 5% - - -
81 MARTIRE Alessandra 58% 35% 7% 1% - - -
82 TRELOAR Allison F. 6% 26% 37% 23% 7% 1%
83 HAFEZ Tahiyah 30% 44% 22% 4% - -
84 MIZIN Sarita O. 46% 39% 12% 2% - - -

Explanation

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.