Charlotte, NC, 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 | WILLIAMS Jadeyn E. | - | - | - | 1% | 6% | 32% | 61% |
| 2 | MARSEE Samantha | - | 1% | 8% | 27% | 42% | 22% | |
| 3 | DELSOIN Chelsea C. | - | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 38% | 16% |
| 3 | KIM Zoe | - | - | - | 1% | 10% | 37% | 52% |
| 5 | NEWELL Alexia C. | - | 1% | 6% | 21% | 35% | 28% | 8% |
| 5 | SHOMAN Jenna | - | - | - | 2% | 13% | 41% | 44% |
| 7 | PAK Kaitlyn | - | - | 2% | 15% | 42% | 41% | |
| 8 | TZOU Alexandra | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 43% | 26% | |
| 9 | TONG Kunling | - | - | 1% | 7% | 24% | 41% | 27% |
| 10 | LEE Alexandra B. | - | - | 1% | 12% | 41% | 46% | |
| 11 | DUCKETT Madison | - | 2% | 10% | 28% | 38% | 20% | 3% |
| 12 | CHIN Erika J. | - | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 43% | 26% |
| 13 | JOHNSON Lauren | - | 1% | 9% | 33% | 43% | 14% | |
| 14 | ANDRES Katherine A. | - | 1% | 8% | 27% | 41% | 23% | |
| 15 | OLSEN Natalie J. | - | - | 8% | 30% | 42% | 20% | |
| 16 | ALCEBAR Kayla | - | 3% | 16% | 35% | 32% | 12% | 2% |
| 17 | CARVALHO Isabela A. | - | - | 2% | 10% | 30% | 40% | 19% |
| 17 | LU Vivian Y. | - | - | - | 1% | 10% | 38% | 50% |
| 17 | GHAYALOD reya | - | 1% | 6% | 20% | 35% | 30% | 9% |
| 20 | NAZLYMOV Tatiana F. | - | 1% | 5% | 22% | 42% | 31% | |
| 21 | WILLIAMS Chloe C. | - | - | - | 3% | 17% | 42% | 38% |
| 22 | CHEN Xiaohan | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 38% | 28% | 5% |
| 23 | LI Victoria J. | - | - | 4% | 20% | 40% | 30% | 7% |
| 24 | LI Amanda C. | - | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 41% | 30% |
| 25 | CODY Alexandra C. | - | 2% | 11% | 28% | 34% | 20% | 4% |
| 26 | POSSICK Lola P. | - | - | - | 2% | 15% | 42% | 41% |
| 27 | TAO Hannah J. | 1% | 6% | 23% | 38% | 27% | 6% | |
| 28 | HE Charlotte | - | 4% | 21% | 40% | 28% | 6% | |
| 29 | VESTEL Mira B. | - | - | 3% | 15% | 35% | 36% | 11% |
| 30 | MIKA Veronica | - | 1% | 5% | 19% | 34% | 31% | 11% |
| 31 | YONG Erika E. | - | 1% | 8% | 30% | 42% | 20% | |
| 32 | XIAO julie | 13% | 44% | 32% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 33 | CAO Stephanie X. | - | - | 1% | 6% | 25% | 42% | 26% |
| 34 | OISHI Megumi | - | - | 1% | 5% | 19% | 41% | 34% |
| 35 | TIMOFEYEV Nicole | - | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 42% | 21% |
| 36 | SHEARER Natalie E. | - | 4% | 27% | 42% | 23% | 4% | |
| 37 | DUNGEY Amelia S. | - | - | 1% | 8% | 27% | 41% | 22% |
| 38 | FOUR-GARCIA Madison | - | - | - | 3% | 16% | 44% | 38% |
| 39 | GUTHIKONDA Nithya | - | - | 2% | 11% | 32% | 39% | 17% |
| 40 | KER Grace | - | 1% | 7% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 7% |
| 41 | BOIS Adele | - | - | 2% | 13% | 33% | 38% | 14% |
| 42 | KRASTEV Minna | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 38% | 23% | 5% |
| 43 | SCHIMINOVICH Sophia I. | 1% | 11% | 30% | 36% | 18% | 4% | - |
| 44 | SZETO Chloe | - | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 35% | 9% |
| 45 | ENGELMAN-SANZ Madeline A. | - | - | 1% | 9% | 30% | 43% | 18% |
| 46 | XI Shining | - | 1% | 8% | 26% | 37% | 23% | 4% |
| 47 | SADIK HANA | 1% | 12% | 33% | 35% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 48 | BILILIES Sophia | 1% | 11% | 30% | 34% | 19% | 5% | 1% |
| 49 | STONE Hava S. | - | 6% | 26% | 42% | 22% | 3% | |
| 49 | GREENBAUM Ella K. | - | 2% | 10% | 30% | 40% | 18% | |
| 51 | BEVACQUA Aria F. | - | 3% | 23% | 41% | 27% | 6% | |
| 52 | LEE Hannah | 1% | 11% | 36% | 36% | 14% | 2% | |
| 53 | ENDO Miyuki N. | - | 4% | 18% | 33% | 30% | 13% | 2% |
| 54 | SCALAMONI-GOLDSTEIN Charlotte S. | 1% | 6% | 20% | 33% | 28% | 11% | 2% |
| 55 | JUNG Irene | - | 2% | 13% | 33% | 36% | 14% | 2% |
| 56 | ANDRES Charmaine G. | - | - | 3% | 13% | 31% | 36% | 17% |
| 57 | LU Elaine | 1% | 8% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 6% | - |
| 58 | DANK Dina | - | 2% | 13% | 32% | 35% | 16% | 2% |
| 59 | LEE Sophia | 2% | 13% | 29% | 33% | 18% | 5% | - |
| 60 | LU Amy | 1% | 8% | 26% | 36% | 22% | 6% | - |
| 61 | JOHNSON Lydia | 14% | 35% | 33% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 62 | NATHANSON Sammy E. | - | 4% | 18% | 34% | 30% | 11% | 1% |
| 63 | ULIBARRI Nevaeh L. | 1% | 11% | 33% | 35% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 64 | XIKES Katherine E. | 1% | 12% | 30% | 34% | 18% | 5% | - |
| 65 | YANG Ashley M. | - | 2% | 12% | 30% | 34% | 18% | 4% |
| 66 | BALAKUMARAN Maya | - | 4% | 19% | 36% | 30% | 10% | 1% |
| 67 | SATHYANATH Kailing | - | - | 4% | 18% | 38% | 33% | 7% |
| 67 | YANG Angelina LeLe | 1% | 7% | 23% | 34% | 25% | 9% | 1% |
| 69 | WIGGERS Susan Q. | - | 3% | 16% | 34% | 32% | 13% | 2% |
| 70 | CALLAHAN Chase J. | - | 3% | 15% | 34% | 32% | 14% | 2% |
| 71 | LEMUS-IAKOVIDOU ALEXANDRA | 17% | 38% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 72 | YUAN Greta | - | 5% | 24% | 39% | 25% | 7% | 1% |
| 73 | FEARNS Zara A. | - | 2% | 10% | 29% | 36% | 19% | 4% |
| 74 | JULIEN Michelle | - | - | 2% | 11% | 31% | 40% | 17% |
| 75 | WEI Vivian W. | 1% | 9% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 6% | 1% |
| 76 | HULSEBURG Kaitlyn | - | - | 2% | 13% | 33% | 37% | 14% |
| 77 | FREEDMAN Janna N. | - | 2% | 14% | 35% | 36% | 12% | |
| 77 | CHANG Josephine S. | - | 5% | 21% | 38% | 29% | 7% | |
| 79 | ERIKSON Kira R. | 3% | 18% | 36% | 30% | 11% | 1% | |
| 80 | LIN Audrey J. | - | 3% | 14% | 34% | 36% | 13% | |
| 81 | NATH Trisha | 4% | 22% | 37% | 27% | 9% | 1% | |
| 82 | LIU Sophie | 7% | 28% | 39% | 21% | 5% | - | |
| 83 | JEONG Katie | 3% | 17% | 35% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 84 | MCKEE Brynnley | 4% | 20% | 37% | 29% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 85 | BLUM Leah I. | - | - | 4% | 17% | 34% | 32% | 11% |
| 86 | GORMAN Victoria M. | - | - | 3% | 15% | 37% | 35% | 9% |
| 87 | NYSTROM Sofia C. | 3% | 19% | 36% | 29% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 88 | CHANG Emily | - | 2% | 15% | 34% | 34% | 13% | 1% |
| 89 | CHIN Elise | 7% | 34% | 38% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
| 90 | LIAO Siwen | 2% | 12% | 30% | 33% | 18% | 4% | - |
| 90 | KIM Marley I. | 1% | 7% | 23% | 36% | 25% | 7% | 1% |
| 92 | MARYASH Samantha | 7% | 33% | 38% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 93 | WU Helen | 2% | 17% | 34% | 30% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 94 | SHI Cathleen | 1% | 7% | 27% | 38% | 22% | 5% | - |
| 95 | HILD Nisha | - | 2% | 10% | 28% | 37% | 21% | 3% |
| 96 | JOHNSON Dagny L. | - | 6% | 24% | 38% | 25% | 6% | - |
| 97 | YU Zhiang | 22% | 42% | 27% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 98 | SUN Alyssa | 2% | 10% | 27% | 34% | 21% | 6% | 1% |
| 99 | CHANG Audrey | 17% | 38% | 32% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 100 | PRIEUR Lauren | - | 3% | 16% | 34% | 33% | 13% | 2% |
| 101 | WU Lanting | 6% | 29% | 37% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 102 | KOBOZEVA Tamara V. | 2% | 16% | 35% | 32% | 13% | 2% | |
| 103 | ZIELINSKI Isabella G. | 2% | 12% | 31% | 35% | 17% | 3% | |
| 104 | MATAIEV Natalie S. | 12% | 36% | 35% | 14% | 2% | - | |
| 105 | MAKLIN Sofia | 8% | 29% | 37% | 20% | 5% | - | |
| 106 | MOZHAEVA MARIA | 1% | 8% | 27% | 38% | 22% | 4% | |
| 107 | FESTA Carina | 16% | 38% | 32% | 12% | 2% | - | |
| 108 | CHIANG Emily | 3% | 18% | 35% | 31% | 11% | 1% | |
| 109 | JOHNSTON Lily | 21% | 45% | 27% | 6% | - | - | |
| 110 | SADOVA Olga | 1% | 43% | 40% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 111 | CHEN Ashley | 4% | 20% | 35% | 28% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 112 | HURST Kennedy | 1% | 8% | 24% | 34% | 24% | 8% | 1% |
| 112 | BARNOVITZ Maya | 10% | 32% | 36% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 114 | LIM Jaslene | 15% | 38% | 33% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 115 | BAKER Audrey C. | - | 6% | 28% | 38% | 21% | 5% | - |
| 116 | ALFARACHE Gabriella C. | 6% | 30% | 38% | 20% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 117 | LIGH Erenei J. | 1% | 11% | 30% | 35% | 18% | 4% | - |
| 117 | PANIGRAHI Kingsley | 40% | 44% | 14% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 119 | ZHIZHIN Jeanette | 43% | 40% | 14% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 120 | PAUL Lila | - | 2% | 12% | 30% | 35% | 18% | 3% |
| 121 | CHAPMAN-LAYLAND Astrid M. | 11% | 34% | 35% | 16% | 4% | - | - |
| 122 | SLOBODSKY Sasha L. | 8% | 29% | 37% | 21% | 5% | - | - |
| 123 | FANG Victoria W. | - | 6% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 8% | 1% |
| 124 | CHRISTOTHOULOU Olympia C. | 11% | 33% | 34% | 17% | 4% | - | - |
| 125 | LACSON Sarah | - | 4% | 21% | 40% | 29% | 6% | |
| 126 | GRAFF Sophie | 4% | 23% | 42% | 25% | 5% | - | |
| 127 | DAI Olivia | 53% | 38% | 8% | 1% | - | - | |
| 128 | KNIGHT Skylar | 34% | 42% | 19% | 4% | - | - | |
| 129 | NI Sharon | 9% | 33% | 37% | 18% | 4% | - | |
| 130 | JEAN Olympe G. | 28% | 43% | 23% | 5% | 1% | - | |
| 131 | LI Angela | 31% | 53% | 15% | 2% | - | - | |
| 132 | REN Xinling | 26% | 42% | 25% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 133 | ELNATAN Mica A. | 47% | 44% | 8% | 1% | - | - | |
| 134 | CHIN Sophia J. | - | 3% | 14% | 30% | 33% | 17% | 3% |
| 135 | MANSPERGER Leena | 1% | 19% | 38% | 30% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 136 | HOLMES Emma | 2% | 14% | 36% | 33% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 137 | HWANG Gabriela M. | - | 4% | 18% | 34% | 31% | 11% | 1% |
| 138 | MANN Sophia J. | 16% | 36% | 32% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 139 | SCOTT Eve | 44% | 42% | 12% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 140 | YANG Lea | 6% | 28% | 38% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 141 | PANIGRAHI Emersen | 32% | 42% | 20% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 141 | LEE Lauren | 12% | 35% | 35% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
| 143 | NOVICK Mia J. | 3% | 22% | 39% | 26% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 144 | SCHICK Veronica | 47% | 39% | 12% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 145 | LIN Nicole | 17% | 45% | 29% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 146 | NGUYEN Ella | 8% | 28% | 35% | 21% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 147 | LIU Zhi Jun | 13% | 35% | 33% | 15% | 4% | - | - |
| 148 | LIM Jovine | 7% | 27% | 37% | 22% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 149 | MENKE Kavya I. | 2% | 14% | 32% | 34% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 150 | LUKASHENKO Angelina | < 1% | 6% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 8% | 1% |
| 151 | HE Lizbeth | 15% | 37% | 33% | 13% | 2% | - | |
| 152 | HSU Mia Y. | 53% | 36% | 10% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 153 | SINHA Anika | 2% | 14% | 32% | 32% | 16% | 4% | - |
| 154 | ROBINSON Emerald | 27% | 42% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 155 | KANTIPUDI Shrika | 16% | 38% | 32% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 155 | LO JOCELYN | 80% | 18% | 2% | - | - | - | - |
| 157 | BOLTON Eleksi M. | 33% | 45% | 19% | 3% | - | - | |
| 158 | FANG sophie | 19% | 45% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 158 | LAGOON Miriam | 49% | 39% | 11% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 158 | YAO Rainie | 54% | 36% | 8% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 161 | FAYETTE Mathilde | 95% | 5% | - | - | - | - | - |
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.