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 | XU Christine | - | - | 3% | 13% | 31% | 37% | 16% |
2 | SADAN Jordan E. | - | - | - | 3% | 16% | 43% | 38% |
3 | JING Emily | - | - | - | - | 4% | 29% | 66% |
3 | HE Fenghuan | - | - | - | 3% | 17% | 42% | 38% |
5 | FERRETTI Anna Rebecca | - | - | 2% | 11% | 29% | 38% | 20% |
6 | ZHENG Ivy | - | - | - | 1% | 7% | 35% | 57% |
7 | WANG Ellen | - | - | - | 5% | 28% | 53% | 14% |
8 | SEO Irene Y. | - | - | 6% | 25% | 40% | 25% | 4% |
9 | LUNG Katerina | - | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 42% | 24% |
10 | JANG Kimberley | - | 2% | 10% | 30% | 40% | 19% | |
11 | HO Brianna W. | - | - | 3% | 17% | 36% | 34% | 9% |
12 | FU Qihan | 1% | 7% | 24% | 36% | 24% | 7% | 1% |
13 | SHEN Lydia | - | - | 3% | 18% | 45% | 31% | 4% |
14 | COSTELLO Angeline S. | - | - | 2% | 13% | 40% | 38% | 6% |
15 | OUYANG Bridgette Z. | - | - | - | 1% | 10% | 38% | 52% |
16 | CHO Rebecca H. | - | 1% | 13% | 36% | 37% | 12% | 1% |
17 | CHEN Allison V. | - | - | 1% | 7% | 25% | 42% | 25% |
18 | ZHANG Alina C. | - | 1% | 8% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 6% |
19 | HUANG Natalie | 1% | 12% | 35% | 36% | 13% | 2% | - |
20 | SULTANA-HOLE Olivia B. | - | 3% | 15% | 34% | 33% | 13% | 2% |
21 | TAN Kaitlyn N. | - | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 39% | 18% |
22 | ACHILOVA Feyza | 1% | 12% | 36% | 35% | 14% | 2% | - |
23 | SHAW Kayla M. | - | - | 2% | 10% | 31% | 40% | 17% |
24 | RASO Olivia | 3% | 16% | 32% | 31% | 15% | 3% | - |
25 | BASSON Bayley D. | 2% | 13% | 31% | 33% | 17% | 4% | - |
26 | ZHANG Rongrui | - | 3% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 16% | 3% |
27 | CHUSID Mikayla | - | 2% | 11% | 31% | 38% | 18% | |
28 | OLIVEIRA Lavinia M. | 5% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 8% | 1% | |
29 | LI Rachel Y. | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 39% | 27% | 5% |
30 | MILLER Naomi E. | - | - | 6% | 23% | 39% | 27% | 6% |
31 | LIU Sophia | 3% | 17% | 34% | 31% | 13% | 2% | - |
32 | MAESTRADO Ashley R. | 3% | 18% | 36% | 31% | 11% | 1% | |
33 | GU Emily | - | 1% | 12% | 34% | 35% | 15% | 2% |
34 | PAHLAVI Dahlia | 14% | 33% | 32% | 16% | 4% | 1% | - |
35 | LIN Victoria T. | - | 4% | 21% | 38% | 28% | 8% | 1% |
36 | YU Jaime L. | 2% | 11% | 29% | 34% | 19% | 5% | - |
37 | FELLUS Talia E. | - | 3% | 19% | 38% | 30% | 9% | 1% |
38 | PAVE Claire | - | 6% | 25% | 37% | 24% | 7% | 1% |
39 | ZHAO Aileen Y. | - | - | 3% | 15% | 36% | 35% | 11% |
40 | CHARALEL Jessica | 3% | 19% | 39% | 29% | 9% | 1% | - |
41 | YU Lauren C. | 10% | 40% | 37% | 12% | 1% | - | - |
42 | YU Nicole J. | 6% | 25% | 37% | 24% | 7% | 1% | |
43 | SU Michelle | - | 4% | 16% | 32% | 32% | 14% | 2% |
44 | WONG Sophia M. | - | - | 5% | 22% | 41% | 27% | 5% |
45 | WU Celine | - | 4% | 18% | 34% | 30% | 12% | 2% |
46 | SUNG Yoomin | 18% | 40% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
47 | MCNEILLY-ANTA Isabela | 1% | 12% | 31% | 35% | 18% | 3% | - |
48 | HOU Wendong | 3% | 20% | 35% | 28% | 11% | 2% | - |
48 | LEE Lavender | - | 3% | 14% | 31% | 34% | 16% | 3% |
50 | QIAN Jade | 26% | 45% | 24% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
51 | ROY Layla | 1% | 9% | 26% | 35% | 22% | 6% | 1% |
52 | GAO Anna | 24% | 45% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
53 | LENZ Zoe N. | 3% | 26% | 40% | 24% | 7% | 1% | - |
54 | WANG Yudi | 7% | 30% | 38% | 20% | 5% | - | - |
55 | PARK Jacqueline | 23% | 45% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
56 | LEE Kaitlyn | 11% | 37% | 38% | 13% | 1% | - | - |
58 | TANG Sophia | 24% | 47% | 23% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
60 | SLASKI Caroline O. | 11% | 34% | 36% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
61 | TOBIN Brean | 21% | 40% | 28% | 9% | 1% | - | |
63 | KOGAN Alexis | 38% | 46% | 14% | 1% | - | - | - |
63 | KOGAN Stella | 21% | 45% | 28% | 5% | - | - | - |
65 | WILTSE Kaiya M. | 11% | 35% | 36% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
67 | LAPPER Whitney P. | 8% | 32% | 40% | 18% | 2% | - | - |
68 | ZGOMBIC Emily | 17% | 46% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
69 | YU Esther J. | 18% | 41% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
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.