Suffern, NY - 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 | ADVINCULA Anabella E. | - | 4% | 19% | 37% | 31% | 9% | |
| 2 | LU Junyao | - | - | 1% | 7% | 35% | 58% | |
| 3 | LUO Ashley | - | - | 5% | 22% | 43% | 29% | |
| 3 | PIEDRAHITA GOMEZ Alejandra | - | - | 3% | 14% | 34% | 35% | 14% |
| 5 | KIZILBASH Zara | - | 1% | 6% | 20% | 34% | 29% | 10% |
| 6 | JIMENEZ VASQUEZ SARA | - | - | - | 1% | 7% | 34% | 58% |
| 7 | ALVIDREZ Francesca A. | - | 2% | 12% | 37% | 40% | 9% | |
| 8 | DE JAGER Celine | - | 1% | 9% | 28% | 39% | 20% | 3% |
| 9 | BECCHINA Olivia | - | - | 1% | 9% | 29% | 42% | 18% |
| 10 | SMUK Daria A. | - | 1% | 8% | 30% | 41% | 19% | |
| 11 | ZHAO Yingying | - | 1% | 10% | 33% | 40% | 16% | |
| 12 | YANG Chloe | - | 1% | 8% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 6% |
| 13 | CORREA SANTA Carmen Andrea | - | 2% | 10% | 28% | 39% | 21% | |
| 14 | MASTRONARDI Laura | 3% | 16% | 33% | 32% | 14% | 2% | |
| 15 | KIZILBASH Alizeh H. | 2% | 18% | 41% | 30% | 8% | 1% | |
| 16 | APPLEBEE Andralyn | 11% | 35% | 36% | 15% | 3% | - | |
| 17 | SIDDIQUI Ammna K. | - | 1% | 4% | 17% | 34% | 33% | 12% |
| 18 | SALAZAR Susana | - | 1% | 7% | 27% | 42% | 23% | |
| 19 | RAI Ananya | 13% | 39% | 34% | 12% | 2% | - | < 1% |
| 20 | OAKE Erica | 5% | 22% | 35% | 27% | 10% | 1% | |
| 21 | OSTROVSKY Emily I. | 3% | 16% | 34% | 32% | 13% | 1% | |
| 22 | EBRAHIM Ameera H. | - | 4% | 18% | 37% | 32% | 9% | |
| 23 | JOYAL Anne-Sophie | - | 4% | 19% | 36% | 30% | 9% | 1% |
| 24 | BLAKE Caira | - | 2% | 16% | 38% | 34% | 10% | |
| 25 | BYRON Karen J. | 4% | 20% | 36% | 29% | 10% | 1% | |
| 26 | LI Alisha | 2% | 14% | 32% | 34% | 15% | 2% | |
| 27 | BOOK Ayelet | 15% | 35% | 32% | 14% | 3% | - | |
| 28 | YAO Jillian | - | - | - | 5% | 21% | 43% | 30% |
| 29 | GLASSNER Sophia Rose S. | - | 5% | 23% | 38% | 25% | 6% | - |
| 30 | INAMDAR Nina S. | - | 1% | 9% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 5% |
| 31 | ZENG Katrina | 7% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 32 | BANKULLA Misha R. | 1% | 11% | 31% | 35% | 18% | 4% | - |
| 33 | GAO Judy | - | - | 4% | 19% | 37% | 30% | 9% |
| 34 | GANGEMI Julia | 1% | 9% | 29% | 36% | 20% | 5% | - |
| 35 | GUZZI Jordan | 1% | 6% | 21% | 34% | 27% | 10% | 1% |
| 36 | LEE Yedda | - | 1% | 8% | 25% | 37% | 24% | 4% |
| 37 | LIN Julia L. | - | 1% | 8% | 26% | 37% | 23% | 5% |
| 38 | COYLE Dana | - | 4% | 21% | 38% | 29% | 8% | |
| 39 | BOWIE Charlotta | 1% | 9% | 34% | 38% | 16% | 2% | |
| 40 | AVERBACH Margaret | 5% | 25% | 40% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 41 | JOSEPH mikayla | 11% | 32% | 34% | 18% | 4% | - | |
| 42 | TEMIRYAEV Anna M. | - | 1% | 4% | 20% | 41% | 34% | |
| 43 | CORDERO Allison | 1% | 7% | 29% | 42% | 19% | 2% | |
| 44 | ZAKHAROV Anne E. | 2% | 17% | 38% | 31% | 11% | 1% | |
| 45 | LI Allison | 6% | 23% | 35% | 26% | 9% | 1% | |
| 46 | MCGEE Sophia | 1% | 8% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 6% | |
| 47 | MOK Chloe R. | 12% | 38% | 35% | 13% | 2% | - | |
| 48 | SANTANA Mia | 6% | 27% | 37% | 22% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 49 | SINGH Aayushi | 5% | 21% | 36% | 27% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 50 | HIRSCH Naomi B. | 1% | 7% | 26% | 38% | 23% | 4% | |
| 51 | GUTKOVSKAYA Nora | 3% | 18% | 34% | 31% | 13% | 2% | |
| 51 | YOON Katherine | 5% | 21% | 35% | 27% | 10% | 1% | |
| 53 | GORTI Saumya | 25% | 45% | 25% | 5% | - | - | |
| 54 | HOSANAGAR Inchara | 32% | 43% | 20% | 4% | - | - | |
| 55 | PAN Iris | 38% | 47% | 14% | 2% | - | - | |
| 56 | JIA Elizabeth | 43% | 41% | 14% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 57 | LEE Anna | 1% | 20% | 39% | 29% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 58 | ZISCHKE Alexandra A. | 8% | 35% | 37% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
| 59 | MAMKIN Anastasia | 76% | 22% | 2% | - | - | - | - |
| 60 | MURRELL Jessica L. | 32% | 47% | 18% | 3% | - | - | |
| 61 | SHUKLA Tanya | 31% | 49% | 18% | 3% | - | - | |
| 62 | LIU Angela | 17% | 43% | 30% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 63 | RAMANATHAN Eesha | 39% | 42% | 16% | 3% | - | - | |
| 64 | RATTRAY Katherine | 22% | 39% | 27% | 10% | 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.