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.

November NAC

Junior Women's Saber

Monday, November 12, 2018 at 8:00 AM

Kansas City, MO - Kansas City, MO, 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 JOHNSON Edith (Tori) V. - - - 1% 7% 34% 58%
2 HARRILL Gillian N. - - 1% 9% 30% 43% 17%
3 YUN Joy - - - 1% 10% 38% 50%
3 TIMOFEYEV Daniella - - 1% 7% 34% 58%
5 LINDER Kara E. - - - - 4% 29% 66%
6 JENKINS Ryan J. - - - 1% 9% 36% 54%
7 ANGLADE Alexis C. - 5% 22% 36% 28% 9% 1%
8 JENKINS Morgan J. - - - 1% 13% 49% 37%
9 MILLER Sky - - - 2% 14% 42% 41%
10 AVAKIAN Mikaela - - - 4% 19% 42% 34%
11 JOHNSON Honor B. - - - - 4% 31% 65%
12 GREENBAUM Atara R. - - - 3% 19% 43% 34%
13 STRZALKOWSKI Aleksandra (Ola) M. - 2% 14% 35% 37% 13%
14 WARD Reghan E. - 1% 8% 25% 36% 24% 6%
15 SECK Chejsa-Kaili F. - - 3% 16% 38% 36% 6%
16 LIANG Megan - - 3% 17% 42% 37%
17 KIM Catherine - 3% 16% 33% 32% 14% 2%
18 CAO Stephanie X. - 1% 6% 24% 43% 24% 4%
19 WHANG Rebecca - - 2% 12% 34% 38% 14%
20 MOSS Zara J. - 1% 4% 16% 32% 33% 14%
21 SKARBONKIEWICZ Magda - - - 2% 15% 48% 35%
21 WILLIAMS Chloe C. - 5% 21% 36% 28% 9% 1%
23 DI PERNA Chiara I. - - 1% 9% 30% 41% 19%
24 KONG Vera - - 1% 6% 23% 42% 28%
25 CHAN Casey - 1% 6% 22% 39% 27% 5%
26 POSSICK Lola P. - - 2% 12% 34% 42% 10%
27 THEODORE Maria A. - - - 3% 16% 42% 40%
28 TARTAKOVSKY Elizabeth - - - 4% 20% 42% 34%
29 HIRSCH Sydney R. - - 1% 7% 28% 44% 21%
30 LU Vivian Y. 1% 8% 29% 41% 20% 2%
31 TONG Kunling 1% 10% 28% 35% 20% 6% 1%
32 TURNER Zoe Y. - 3% 17% 37% 34% 9%
33 MOYA Keona L. - - 2% 10% 29% 39% 20%
34 HUNTER Nina B. 2% 15% 32% 32% 15% 3% -
35 HANADARI-LEVY Amit 1% 15% 33% 31% 15% 4% -
35 PINCUS Lucy Y. - 1% 9% 28% 38% 20% 3%
35 WILLIAMS Jadeyn E. - - 1% 7% 29% 48% 14%
38 ZEGERS Anneke E. - - 1% 5% 23% 43% 28%
39 TZOU Alexandra 6% 25% 38% 24% 7% 1%
40 WOZNIAK Kelli - 4% 20% 40% 30% 6%
41 KATZ Anat - 3% 17% 35% 33% 12%
42 WHITE Amber L. 7% 28% 37% 22% 5% -
43 GOUHIN Chloe - - - 1% 10% 38% 50%
43 HARRISON Imogen N. - - 2% 10% 30% 40% 19%
45 LI Anna M. - - 2% 11% 29% 39% 20%
46 FREEDMAN Janna N. - - 3% 14% 34% 37% 12%
47 WEBER Juliana I. - 5% 18% 33% 30% 13% 2%
48 KIM Zoe 1% 8% 26% 36% 23% 6%
49 FAHRI Monir J. - 5% 19% 35% 31% 10%
50 GUTHIKONDA Nithya 1% 9% 27% 36% 22% 5%
51 LACSON Sarah - 4% 20% 40% 31% 6%
52 BERMAN Stella - 1% 5% 19% 36% 31% 8%
53 BEALE Zoe M. - 5% 21% 39% 27% 7% -
54 SULLIVAN Caroline E. 1% 6% 21% 36% 28% 8% -
55 XU Ellen - 4% 16% 32% 31% 15% 3%
55 WU JiaQi 1% 9% 27% 36% 21% 6% 1%
57 DRAGON Rainer 2% 14% 35% 34% 13% 2% -
57 HE Charlotte - 2% 14% 37% 36% 10% 1%
59 ROH Rachel E. - - 3% 14% 34% 35% 14%
60 TIMOFEYEV Nicole 3% 16% 33% 32% 14% 2% -
61 SEHIC Cassandra - 5% 20% 37% 28% 9% 1%
62 SUNGA Arabella Krystienne M. 1% 11% 30% 36% 19% 3% -
63 HILADO Sarah - 2% 14% 35% 35% 13% 2%
64 SHIN Andrea Y. 2% 14% 32% 33% 15% 3% -
65 KOZAK Sonja A. - 1% 9% 29% 38% 20% 3%
66 DELSOIN Chelsea C. - 6% 24% 36% 25% 8% 1%
67 BECKER Kaitlyn - 2% 10% 25% 35% 23% 6%
68 SONG Jenny - - 3% 16% 37% 35% 9%
69 HOFFMAN Ilsa L. - 1% 6% 24% 39% 25% 5%
70 LEE Alexandra B. - - 4% 19% 44% 32%
71 LIMB Madeline I. - 3% 15% 36% 34% 12%
72 PRIESTLEY Catherine (Cate) C. 1% 10% 27% 35% 22% 5%
73 NGUYEN Thea - 1% 8% 29% 42% 20%
74 WITEK Sophie B. 1% 6% 21% 36% 28% 8%
75 ALLUM Isabel (Izzy) T. - 5% 20% 36% 30% 9%
76 HULSEBURG Kaitlyn - - 2% 14% 35% 37% 12%
77 FOUR-GARCIA Madison - 2% 10% 27% 36% 22% 4%
77 OISHI Megumi - - 5% 20% 37% 30% 8%
79 WALTER Zsofia R. 17% 40% 31% 10% 1% - -
80 KOVACS Sophia - - 4% 18% 35% 32% 11%
81 KOBOZEVA Tamara V. 2% 14% 33% 34% 15% 3% -
82 KALRA Himani V. - - 4% 16% 35% 34% 11%
82 LI Victoria J. - 13% 33% 34% 16% 4% -
84 CHIN Erika J. - 5% 22% 38% 27% 7% 1%
86 STONE Hava S. - 1% 6% 23% 37% 27% 7%
87 KALRA Siya L. 11% 34% 36% 16% 3% -
88 SHEA Erin - - 3% 16% 40% 37% 5%
89 KOBERSTEIN Maggie - 7% 29% 39% 21% 4% -
89 TUCKER Iman R. - 2% 16% 38% 32% 11% 1%
91 KIM Emily - 2% 12% 30% 35% 18% 3%
92 CANSECO Laura K. 5% 21% 36% 28% 10% 1% -
93 LIU Rachel 2% 14% 31% 34% 16% 3% -
94 MANUBAG Amanda R. 4% 21% 35% 27% 11% 2% -
95 KIM Sujin 50% 38% 11% 1% - - -
96 REDDY Shreya 6% 26% 39% 23% 6% 1% -
96 SATHYANATH Kailing 2% 14% 34% 33% 15% 3% -
98 CANNON Sophia E. - 5% 22% 35% 27% 10% 1%
99 LIN Audrey J. 2% 18% 36% 30% 12% 2% -
100 YAP Madeline - 1% 6% 24% 40% 25% 5%
101 YANG Kaitlyn H. - 6% 22% 36% 26% 8% 1%
102 MORAN Emma - 3% 15% 31% 32% 15% 2%
102 THROWER Lola S. 4% 20% 34% 29% 11% 2% -
102 HAN Jeanette X. 2% 16% 37% 32% 12% 2% -
105 MARSEE Samantha 3% 16% 32% 32% 15% 3% -
106 ABOUDAHER Janna A. 7% 44% 36% 11% 2% - -
107 LUKASHENKO Angelina 6% 23% 35% 25% 9% 1% -
108 CHEN Erica 2% 13% 36% 34% 13% 2% -
109 SULLIVAN Siobhan R. - - 3% 15% 36% 34% 11%
109 ATLURI Sara V. 10% 30% 35% 20% 5% 1% -
109 GULATI Ria 22% 39% 27% 10% 2% - -
112 YONG Annika A. - - 3% 15% 37% 37% 8%
113 VALADEZ Emily T. - 8% 27% 35% 22% 7% 1%
114 DARINGA Arianna 13% 35% 33% 15% 3% -
115 SZETO Chloe 11% 39% 35% 12% 2% -
116 HOOGENDOORN Sterre 1% 8% 28% 39% 20% 3%
117 PARKER Allegra H. 1% 11% 30% 36% 18% 3%
118 ZHUANG Sophia 4% 19% 32% 28% 13% 3% -
119 PINCUS Emma Y. 26% 53% 19% 2% - - -
119 KONG Isabel - 4% 16% 34% 33% 12% 2%
121 SOMFELEAN Clara M. 6% 24% 35% 25% 9% 1% -
122 HOOGENDOORN Levi - 5% 22% 35% 27% 10% 1%
123 LAMOTHE Laurie-Ann 1% 9% 29% 36% 19% 4% -
124 VAN ATTA Grace Y. 14% 35% 33% 14% 3% - -
125 CASHMAN Natalie - 4% 23% 40% 27% 6% -
126 ZIELINSKI Isabella G. 1% 10% 28% 35% 21% 4% -
127 DODRILL Brooke 29% 43% 22% 5% - - -
128 CHAN Audrey 1% 9% 28% 36% 21% 5%
129 OLSEN Natalie J. 2% 13% 31% 34% 17% 3% -
130 WU Zoe 62% 32% 6% - - -
131 WOLFSON Elizabeth 3% 19% 36% 28% 11% 2% -
132 FLOREZ Melissa - 2% 17% 45% 30% 5% -
132 BAWA Sanya 22% 43% 27% 7% 1% - -
134 SHEALY Maggie 1% 11% 28% 34% 20% 5% -
135 NAZLYMOV Tatiana F. 2% 13% 29% 32% 18% 5% -
135 CREUSOT Julia D. 4% 25% 38% 25% 7% 1% -
137 CHAN Leanne - - 2% 12% 32% 38% 16%
138 SCHMITT Alana P. 7% 33% 43% 15% 2% - -
139 SHAY-TANNAS Zoe 1% 13% 35% 35% 14% 2% -
140 FERRARI-BRIDGERS Marinella O. 6% 25% 37% 24% 7% 1% -
141 HONE Katarina G. 1% 6% 22% 37% 27% 7% 1%
142 BIENVENU Camille C. 3% 33% 41% 19% 4% -
143 FEARNS Zara A. 11% 34% 35% 16% 3% -
144 CHEEMA Sophia 11% 36% 36% 15% 3% -
145 TANG Catherine H. 26% 43% 25% 6% 1% -
146 KRYLOVA Valery 17% 38% 31% 12% 2% -
146 WU Erica L. 3% 18% 40% 31% 8% -
148 OXENSTIERNA Carolina - 12% 34% 34% 15% 3% -
149 BOURGEOIS audreane 17% 39% 31% 11% 2% - -
150 LIM Isabel K. 2% 16% 37% 32% 11% 2% -
151 GORMAN Victoria M. 9% 30% 36% 19% 5% - -
152 WANG Caroline Y. - 3% 16% 35% 32% 13% 2%
152 JULIEN Michelle 3% 18% 35% 30% 12% 2% -
154 ANDRES Katherine A. 3% 20% 38% 28% 9% 1% -
155 LARIMER Katherine E. 13% 38% 34% 13% 2% - -
156 MATAIEV Natalie S. 3% 20% 38% 29% 10% 1% -
156 BENTOLILA Thalia 38% 42% 17% 3% - - -
158 BENTOLILA Yedida 31% 46% 20% 3% - - -
159 NOBREGA Carolina S. 2% 14% 33% 33% 15% 2% -
161 CHEN Jacqueline 31% 42% 21% 5% 1% - -
162 CALVERT Sarah-Jane E. 18% 38% 31% 11% 2% - -
163 SUN Alyssa 4% 30% 46% 18% 3% - -
164 YURT Leyla 3% 21% 42% 26% 7% 1% -
165 CHING Sapphira S. 8% 27% 36% 22% 6% 1% -
166 ZHANG Judy 58% 34% 7% 1% - - -
167 GAJOWSKYJ Sophie K. 10% 33% 36% 17% 3% - -
168 CHEN Jane 21% 38% 28% 11% 2% - -
169 PATEL Riya 28% 42% 23% 6% 1% -
170 LIN Zhiyin 69% 27% 4% - - - -
171 MILLER Mattea K. 19% 44% 30% 7% 1% -
171 BAE EMMELINE 42% 41% 14% 2% - -
173 FALKSON Esther 22% 40% 28% 9% 1% - -
175 BALMASEDA Sabrina F. 2% 15% 35% 33% 13% 2%
176 D'ORAZIO Isabella 19% 44% 28% 7% 1% - -
178 MURPHY Niamh 37% 43% 17% 3% - - -
179 CONGIUSTA Aelex 91% 8% - - - - -
179 CUNNINGHAM Erin 91% 8% - - - - -
181 LIGH Karis 66% 30% 4% - - - -
182 KALINICHENKO Alexandra (Sasha) 6% 32% 37% 19% 5% 1% -
182 LIN Selena 31% 46% 20% 3% - - -

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.