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 | SUBRAMANIAN Nitika | - | - | 4% | 19% | 38% | 31% | 7% |
| 2 | DHAR Aamina | - | 3% | 17% | 35% | 33% | 11% | 1% |
| 3 | KYNETT Kathryn G. | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 45% | 39% |
| 3 | SO Catelyn | - | - | 5% | 20% | 36% | 30% | 9% |
| 5 | SPRINGER Ella | - | 1% | 5% | 21% | 36% | 29% | 8% |
| 6 | FERREIRA Alejandra E. | - | - | 3% | 15% | 33% | 35% | 14% |
| 7 | TSUI Natalie | - | 1% | 7% | 22% | 35% | 27% | 7% |
| 8 | LUKER Sophia | - | 1% | 8% | 24% | 35% | 25% | 7% |
| 9 | SADOVA Olga | - | 6% | 25% | 38% | 24% | 6% | < 1% |
| 9 | TABANGAY Heartlyn | - | - | 2% | 10% | 29% | 40% | 19% |
| 11 | JEAN Olympe G. | - | 2% | 10% | 26% | 35% | 22% | 5% |
| 12 | ZIELINSKI Isabella G. | - | - | 1% | 9% | 28% | 41% | 21% |
| 13 | FEIG Sela | - | 4% | 17% | 31% | 30% | 14% | 3% |
| 14 | GRAJALES Hannah E. | 2% | 12% | 28% | 32% | 19% | 6% | 1% |
| 15 | MANN Sophia J. | 1% | 15% | 36% | 33% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 16 | ZOLLER Noelle | 6% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 17 | CALVERT Sarah-Jane E. | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 38% | 18% | |
| 18 | LIGH Erenei J. | - | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 39% | 18% |
| 19 | JOHNSON Dagny L. | - | - | 1% | 9% | 29% | 41% | 19% |
| 20 | CHRISTOTHOULOU Olympia C. | - | 1% | 8% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 6% |
| 20 | WEI Vivian W. | - | 1% | 5% | 19% | 35% | 30% | 9% |
| 22 | CHIANG Emily | - | - | 2% | 10% | 29% | 39% | 20% |
| 23 | JOHNSTON Lily | - | 3% | 16% | 35% | 32% | 12% | 2% |
| 24 | BILILIES Sophia | - | - | 2% | 10% | 29% | 39% | 20% |
| 25 | KANTIPUDI Shrika | 2% | 10% | 26% | 33% | 22% | 7% | 1% |
| 25 | HORAN Alexa | 1% | 11% | 30% | 34% | 18% | 5% | - |
| 27 | XIONG Haojiao | 1% | 5% | 20% | 36% | 30% | 8% | |
| 28 | KONDEV Elizabeth | 4% | 19% | 34% | 29% | 12% | 2% | |
| 29 | DENG Brooke | - | 2% | 12% | 29% | 34% | 19% | 4% |
| 30 | DAVIS Charlotte | 13% | 34% | 34% | 16% | 3% | - | |
| 31 | CANSECO Carly | - | 9% | 31% | 36% | 18% | 4% | - |
| 32 | HAMBAZAZA Liisa | 1% | 8% | 24% | 34% | 24% | 8% | 1% |
| 33 | XIKES Katherine E. | - | - | 2% | 10% | 28% | 39% | 22% |
| 34 | ENDO Miyuki N. | - | - | 2% | 9% | 27% | 39% | 23% |
| 35 | SCOTT Eve | 1% | 13% | 34% | 36% | 14% | 2% | < 1% |
| 36 | TIBURCIO Diana | - | - | - | 3% | 14% | 39% | 44% |
| 37 | LIM Jovine | - | 2% | 11% | 28% | 34% | 20% | 4% |
| 38 | MULAGARI Sadhika | 1% | 8% | 23% | 33% | 25% | 9% | 1% |
| 39 | SCHMITT Alana P. | - | - | 5% | 20% | 42% | 33% | |
| 40 | YEN Natalie | 8% | 27% | 35% | 22% | 7% | 1% | |
| 41 | NGUYEN Ella | - | 4% | 17% | 33% | 30% | 13% | 2% |
| 42 | RIZKALA Joanna | - | - | - | 4% | 23% | 48% | 25% |
| 43 | SU Emma | - | 2% | 9% | 24% | 34% | 24% | 7% |
| 44 | KNIGHT Skylar | - | 1% | 10% | 27% | 36% | 21% | 5% |
| 45 | NOVICK Mia J. | - | 2% | 10% | 27% | 35% | 21% | 5% |
| 46 | COLTER Aurora | 2% | 10% | 26% | 33% | 22% | 7% | 1% |
| 47 | ADAMS Morrigan B. | 1% | 6% | 20% | 33% | 28% | 11% | 1% |
| 48 | LIN Nicole | 4% | 18% | 32% | 29% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 49 | NGUYEN Siena | 1% | 8% | 24% | 35% | 25% | 7% | |
| 50 | CHEN Kevy | - | 4% | 18% | 34% | 30% | 12% | 2% |
| 51 | LIAO Siwen | - | - | 3% | 15% | 34% | 35% | 13% |
| 52 | CHIN Elise | - | 3% | 17% | 33% | 31% | 13% | 2% |
| 53 | PANIGRAHI Emersen | 6% | 25% | 35% | 23% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 54 | MUND Ruth | - | 3% | 15% | 32% | 33% | 15% | 2% |
| 55 | TODD Peregrine | 3% | 17% | 32% | 30% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 56 | MANSPERGER Leena | - | 1% | 5% | 20% | 35% | 29% | 9% |
| 57 | BERNSTEIN Aiden S. | 2% | 14% | 33% | 32% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 58 | YERRAMILLI Kavya | 1% | 7% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 6% | |
| 58 | ZENG Megan | 5% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 8% | 1% | |
| 60 | SCHICK Veronica | 2% | 17% | 35% | 31% | 13% | 3% | - |
| 61 | ARNECKE Lauren A. | - | 5% | 22% | 37% | 27% | 8% | 1% |
| 62 | NAYAK Esha | 4% | 18% | 33% | 29% | 13% | 3% | - |
| 63 | FLATT Sophia | - | 11% | 32% | 35% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 64 | CHANG Audrey | 1% | 6% | 21% | 35% | 28% | 9% | |
| 65 | FESTA Carina | - | 1% | 7% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 7% |
| 66 | GOMERMAN Sophia | 1% | 13% | 34% | 34% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 67 | FANG Victoria W. | - | - | 2% | 13% | 33% | 39% | 13% |
| 68 | EVANS Madelynn | 1% | 15% | 35% | 33% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 69 | ULIBARRI Nevaeh L. | - | 1% | 5% | 19% | 34% | 31% | 11% |
| 70 | GRULICH Rayaana | 2% | 15% | 32% | 31% | 15% | 4% | - |
| 71 | BAWA Anahat | 3% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 72 | ATTIA Jasmine | 21% | 39% | 28% | 10% | 2% | - | - |
| 73 | SUN Alyssa | - | - | 3% | 14% | 32% | 35% | 15% |
| 74 | CHOWDHURY Ranlyn | - | 3% | 13% | 28% | 33% | 19% | 4% |
| 75 | KHAN Alissa | - | 2% | 9% | 24% | 34% | 25% | 7% |
| 76 | HUANG Madeline | - | 3% | 15% | 33% | 32% | 14% | 2% |
| 77 | NAYAK Anika | 19% | 39% | 29% | 10% | 2% | - | |
| 78 | BUHAY Kirsten M. | 10% | 30% | 36% | 19% | 5% | - | |
| 79 | ALFARACHE Gabriella C. | - | 4% | 16% | 32% | 31% | 14% | 3% |
| 79 | MARYASH Samantha | - | 1% | 8% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 6% |
| 81 | ROBINSON Stella | 1% | 9% | 28% | 37% | 21% | 5% | - |
| 82 | YOUNG Audrey | 2% | 12% | 28% | 33% | 19% | 6% | 1% |
| 83 | D'ORAZIO Sofia V. | 1% | 13% | 33% | 33% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 84 | LIM Jaslene | - | 3% | 15% | 33% | 32% | 14% | 2% |
| 85 | REN Xinling | 1% | 8% | 23% | 34% | 25% | 8% | 1% |
| 86 | KALKINA Yelena | - | - | - | 1% | 8% | 36% | 55% |
| 86 | XU Emily T. | - | 8% | 27% | 37% | 22% | 6% | 1% |
| 88 | LISSO Ria A. | - | - | - | 3% | 17% | 43% | 37% |
| 89 | FAN Grace | 3% | 16% | 34% | 32% | 13% | 2% | |
| 90 | CARLUCCI Laura A. | 2% | 11% | 27% | 34% | 21% | 5% | |
| 91 | FREEDMAN Amelia F. | 11% | 33% | 35% | 17% | 4% | - | |
| 92 | SATHE Mehek S. | - | - | 4% | 15% | 32% | 34% | 14% |
| 93 | GAJOWSKYJ Sophie K. | 1% | 7% | 21% | 33% | 26% | 10% | 2% |
| 94 | DAI Olivia | 4% | 19% | 33% | 29% | 13% | 3% | - |
| 95 | LIN Sarah | 2% | 15% | 36% | 33% | 12% | 1% | - |
| 96 | CHARLES Caitlin | 5% | 28% | 39% | 22% | 5% | - | - |
| 97 | TUNG Renee | 8% | 26% | 35% | 23% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 97 | GOLOVITSER Maya | 5% | 36% | 38% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
| 99 | HUA Catherine W. | - | 2% | 12% | 30% | 35% | 18% | 3% |
| 100 | COLBY Mercer | 8% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 101 | FANG sophie | 7% | 26% | 35% | 23% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 102 | MORALES Victoria J. | - | 4% | 19% | 35% | 30% | 10% | 1% |
| 103 | SCHOEW Margot | 3% | 22% | 38% | 26% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 104 | MUELLER Amelia D. | 13% | 33% | 33% | 16% | 4% | 1% | - |
| 105 | BRAMMER-GONZALES Xiomara | 89% | 11% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
| 106 | DAVIS Jayna M. | 1% | 8% | 25% | 37% | 24% | 6% | |
| 107 | CHO Michelle | 9% | 29% | 35% | 21% | 6% | 1% | |
| 108 | LI Victoria | 20% | 38% | 28% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
| 109 | MACE Eliza M. | - | 1% | 7% | 22% | 34% | 27% | 9% |
| 110 | MACDONALD Kaylie S. | 1% | 6% | 21% | 33% | 27% | 10% | 1% |
| 111 | SHEN Jamie | 3% | 21% | 38% | 27% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 112 | REGANTI Sitara | 12% | 36% | 34% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
| 113 | KEITH Margaret | 6% | 23% | 35% | 25% | 9% | 2% | - |
| 114 | TESTROET Aubrey | 28% | 41% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 115 | PANIGRAHI Kingsley | 9% | 28% | 35% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 116 | FREY Sarah E. | 21% | 41% | 27% | 9% | 2% | - | - |
| 117 | BIRNSTILL Reese | 36% | 43% | 18% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 118 | BROWNER June | 12% | 33% | 34% | 16% | 4% | - | - |
| 119 | ZHANG Sophie | 1% | 8% | 23% | 34% | 25% | 9% | 1% |
| 120 | ISBERG Natalie | 4% | 19% | 35% | 30% | 11% | 1% | |
| 121 | FAYETTE Mathilde | 73% | 24% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
| 122 | BARRIE Sadie Q. | 25% | 40% | 25% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 123 | CHANCO-EVERETT Aileen | 1% | 16% | 36% | 32% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 123 | MILLER Sophia | 47% | 39% | 12% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 125 | RODGERS Rachel | 59% | 33% | 7% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 126 | WOODY Sophia | 19% | 41% | 29% | 9% | 2% | - | - |
| 126 | PREIMESBERGER Elaine | 28% | 43% | 22% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
| 128 | WODISKA Ava | 63% | 31% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
| 129 | CLEARY Mel | 20% | 41% | 29% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 129 | CHOW Caitlyn | 78% | 20% | 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.