Pasadena Convention Center - Pasadena, CA, 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 | KIM Katherine | - | - | - | - | 5% | 30% | 65% |
| 2 | GOOR Viviene E. | - | - | 1% | 9% | 32% | 43% | 15% |
| 3 | RANDOLPH Piper | - | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 41% | 30% |
| 3 | LIU Joy Zhaoyi | - | - | - | 2% | 15% | 41% | 41% |
| 5 | CHO Cameron S. | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 42% | 42% |
| 6 | LOCKE Savannah | - | - | - | 2% | 13% | 40% | 46% |
| 6 | MORALES LEDEZMA Georgina Elizabeth | - | 1% | 10% | 34% | 38% | 16% | 2% |
| 8 | PENG Amber L. | - | - | - | 2% | 16% | 45% | 37% |
| 9 | SUN Ruoxi | - | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 43% | 26% |
| 10 | FUNG Vera | 1% | 7% | 22% | 34% | 26% | 10% | 1% |
| 11 | SOOD Ishani S. | - | - | - | 1% | 9% | 37% | 53% |
| 12 | DE LA CRUZ Eden | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 44% | 22% | |
| 13 | TALWALKAR Apoorva | - | - | 4% | 18% | 37% | 32% | 8% |
| 14 | LEE Ji Ahn | - | 1% | 11% | 31% | 38% | 17% | 2% |
| 15 | PENG Serena | 6% | 27% | 38% | 23% | 5% | - | |
| 16 | FUNG Emma | - | - | 8% | 31% | 41% | 18% | 2% |
| 17 | DAVIS Bonnie Z. | - | - | 1% | 7% | 29% | 45% | 19% |
| 18 | CHEN Chloe I. | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 38% | 28% | 6% |
| 19 | YANICELLI Sloane | - | 2% | 27% | 42% | 23% | 5% | - |
| 20 | KETTELLE Molly | - | 8% | 29% | 37% | 20% | 5% | - |
| 21 | CHO Gracie L. | - | - | 5% | 22% | 44% | 29% | |
| 22 | MORADI Raiyan N. | - | - | 8% | 29% | 40% | 20% | 2% |
| 23 | FERNANDES Thea | - | 1% | 7% | 22% | 35% | 27% | 7% |
| 24 | KOROL Dana | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 38% | 27% | 6% |
| 25 | DUAN Konnie | - | - | 2% | 17% | 39% | 34% | 7% |
| 26 | CHEW Alexis T. | - | - | 3% | 14% | 35% | 36% | 12% |
| 27 | CHANG Elizabeth | - | 3% | 15% | 34% | 33% | 13% | 1% |
| 28 | LEE Allison | - | 2% | 12% | 30% | 35% | 17% | 3% |
| 29 | SUN Chien-Yu | - | - | 4% | 20% | 42% | 28% | 5% |
| 30 | WELBORN Calissa | - | 5% | 23% | 38% | 26% | 7% | 1% |
| 31 | CHOI Kailyn | 1% | 10% | 43% | 35% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 32 | RAO Sonia D. | 1% | 7% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 7% | 1% |
| 33 | DO Leila | 1% | 8% | 28% | 38% | 20% | 5% | - |
| 34 | MANIKTALA Prisha | - | - | 5% | 25% | 42% | 25% | 3% |
| 35 | MORALES Paulina | 12% | 36% | 36% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 36 | SHUM Elizabeth | 2% | 14% | 33% | 33% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 37 | MU Allison | 1% | 15% | 37% | 33% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 38 | SUN Emily | 1% | 12% | 33% | 35% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 39 | GUAN Sophie | 4% | 20% | 37% | 29% | 9% | 1% | |
| 40 | KO Claire | - | 11% | 32% | 36% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 41 | CABALU Alaina | 8% | 30% | 39% | 20% | 3% | - | - |
| 42 | GUAN Sydney | 13% | 33% | 33% | 17% | 4% | 1% | - |
| 42 | VO Bao-Vy | - | 1% | 15% | 38% | 34% | 11% | 1% |
| 44 | OLSHANSKY Eliora S. | 4% | 19% | 33% | 29% | 13% | 3% | - |
| 45 | ZHENG Zoe | 28% | 43% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 46 | DANIELYANTS Gabriela | 26% | 43% | 25% | 6% | - | - | - |
| 47 | HOBSON Ava | 2% | 11% | 27% | 33% | 20% | 6% | 1% |
| 48 | CASTANEDA Keira | 6% | 26% | 38% | 23% | 6% | - | |
| 49 | LUH Mia P. | 28% | 42% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - | |
| 50 | JANEW Anastasia | 22% | 57% | 18% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 51 | SHUM Maya | 6% | 23% | 35% | 25% | 9% | 2% | - |
| 52 | XIE Su | 3% | 25% | 41% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 53 | WANG Brina | 5% | 34% | 39% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 54 | GOEL Riyana | 33% | 58% | 9% | - | - | - | - |
| 55 | ZAMELIS Madelyn | 40% | 42% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 56 | BECKSTEAD Makayla | 15% | 43% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 57 | PATTERSON Natalia | 2% | 14% | 35% | 35% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 58 | MCKAY Teresa | 61% | 35% | 4% | - | - | - | - |
| 59 | SINGH Sania | 71% | 25% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
| 60 | WANG Celine S. | 14% | 38% | 33% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
| 61 | LIU Jessica | 74% | 24% | 2% | - | - | - | - |
| 62 | STAPLETON Teagan | 57% | 40% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
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.