Rockland Community College, Eugene Levy Field House - Suffern, NY, 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 | LEE Lavender | - | - | - | - | 9% | 40% | 50% |
| 2 | GRIFFIN Emma G. | - | - | - | - | 2% | 23% | 74% |
| 3 | BREKER Anika | - | - | 1% | 8% | 36% | 56% | |
| 3 | CALISE Ella | - | 1% | 9% | 31% | 41% | 18% | |
| 5 | ORVANANOS Anice | - | 2% | 12% | 35% | 41% | 9% | |
| 6 | CHO Rebecca H. | - | - | - | 1% | 11% | 40% | 48% |
| 7 | SEMEL Liana M. | - | - | - | 6% | 33% | 61% | |
| 8 | SHEN Emilia | - | 1% | 6% | 25% | 45% | 24% | |
| 9 | TAN Kaitlyn N. | - | - | - | 1% | 10% | 37% | 52% |
| 10 | ZHENG Julie | 1% | 11% | 32% | 36% | 17% | 2% | |
| 11 | OUYANG Bridgette Z. | - | - | 2% | 14% | 41% | 42% | |
| 12 | LI Eleanor | - | - | 5% | 23% | 42% | 26% | 4% |
| 13 | RENTON Samantha | - | - | - | 5% | 31% | 47% | 16% |
| 14 | LI Shuang | - | - | 2% | 15% | 41% | 37% | 5% |
| 15 | DE LA CRUZ Eden | - | 3% | 16% | 37% | 35% | 8% | |
| 16 | CASCONE Emily | - | 1% | 9% | 28% | 38% | 21% | 3% |
| 17 | CHO Emily (Euran) | - | - | 4% | 21% | 45% | 29% | |
| 18 | ASCHETTINO Aurora | - | - | 2% | 15% | 38% | 36% | 9% |
| 19 | CHEN Renee | - | - | - | 3% | 17% | 43% | 36% |
| 20 | LI Rachel Y. | - | 1% | 7% | 27% | 43% | 22% | |
| 21 | WHELAN Amelia | 2% | 13% | 33% | 35% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 22 | DAI Zizhuo (Zizi) | - | - | 2% | 15% | 46% | 32% | 6% |
| 23 | MCSHERRY Ava | - | - | 4% | 19% | 40% | 30% | 7% |
| 24 | HAO Danica | - | 2% | 18% | 41% | 30% | 8% | 1% |
| 25 | WEI Angela | - | 5% | 28% | 47% | 18% | 2% | - |
| 26 | SHMAY Anastasia | - | 3% | 17% | 36% | 32% | 11% | 1% |
| 27 | WANG Yudi | 2% | 22% | 42% | 27% | 6% | - | - |
| 28 | DONG Angela | 8% | 29% | 38% | 20% | 4% | - | |
| 29 | ZHAO Aileen Y. | 1% | 14% | 38% | 33% | 11% | 1% | |
| 30 | DIMATULAC Elise Ann | 32% | 44% | 20% | 4% | - | - | |
| 31 | LEVY Avery | 13% | 36% | 35% | 14% | 2% | - | |
| 32 | FENG Audrey | 5% | 24% | 39% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 33 | ZHANG Selena | 14% | 37% | 34% | 13% | 2% | - | |
| 34 | SEIDL Cassidy M. | - | 3% | 15% | 33% | 33% | 14% | 2% |
| 35 | SHA Yi Ling | - | 5% | 24% | 38% | 25% | 7% | 1% |
| 35 | MEI Sarah | - | - | 2% | 12% | 35% | 38% | 12% |
| 37 | KAPRAN Anastasia | 13% | 36% | 35% | 14% | 2% | - | |
| 38 | WU Renee | - | 4% | 20% | 40% | 29% | 7% | |
| 39 | YU Jane | 1% | 10% | 33% | 39% | 15% | 2% | - |
| 40 | LIU Eva | 4% | 31% | 42% | 20% | 3% | - | - |
| 41 | SHENG Chuxi | - | - | 4% | 22% | 44% | 26% | 3% |
| 42 | CHENG Isa | 3% | 22% | 47% | 24% | 3% | - | - |
| 43 | WANG Annie | 15% | 46% | 30% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 44 | MARKOVSKY Nina | 10% | 32% | 37% | 18% | 3% | - | |
| 45 | SHIM Grace J. | 1% | 11% | 32% | 37% | 17% | 2% | |
| 46 | MING YUE | 14% | 36% | 34% | 14% | 2% | - | |
| 47 | MEYER Claudia | 14% | 38% | 33% | 12% | 2% | - | |
| 48 | ZELDIN Nadia | 5% | 24% | 38% | 26% | 7% | 1% | |
| 49 | GREEN Marisa | 1% | 10% | 40% | 36% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 50 | LAO Sophia | 26% | 42% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - | |
| 51 | LI Han (Helina) | 14% | 44% | 32% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 52 | WANG Chloe | 12% | 35% | 36% | 15% | 2% | - | |
| 52 | YANG Emma | 2% | 15% | 35% | 34% | 12% | 1% | |
| 54 | SONG Jenna | 51% | 39% | 9% | 1% | - | - | |
| 54 | BABIAC Julia | 5% | 23% | 38% | 27% | 7% | 1% | |
| 56 | GE Yu Ming | - | 6% | 23% | 39% | 27% | 6% | |
| 57 | SAKALLA Serene | 18% | 41% | 30% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 58 | FONG Ellis | 25% | 49% | 22% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 59 | SHAH Suhani | 20% | 41% | 29% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 60 | ORBE-AUSTIN Nia | 24% | 55% | 19% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 61 | FANG Adela | 56% | 38% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
| 62 | LIU Long | 50% | 39% | 10% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 63 | TURNER Stephanie E. | 3% | 19% | 37% | 31% | 9% | 1% | |
| 64 | MCDERMOTT Catherine | 42% | 45% | 12% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 65 | CHAKRAPANI Ila | 68% | 28% | 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.