Birmingham Jefferson Convention Complex - Birmingham, AL, 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 | LI Sophia M. | - | - | - | - | 3% | 24% | 73% |
| 2 | CHO Emily (Euran) | - | - | 2% | 13% | 41% | 44% | |
| 3 | REN Kayley | - | - | 2% | 14% | 40% | 43% | |
| 3 | WANG Amabel | - | - | 5% | 21% | 40% | 30% | 4% |
| 5 | MARISI Gianna | - | - | 1% | 12% | 46% | 41% | |
| 6 | PARK Lina | - | - | 6% | 25% | 43% | 25% | |
| 7 | PARK Zena | - | 2% | 15% | 38% | 36% | 9% | |
| 8 | WANG Sophia | - | 6% | 24% | 38% | 25% | 6% | - |
| 9 | CHERNYKH Elina | - | 5% | 22% | 38% | 27% | 7% | - |
| 10 | DENG Melissa | - | - | 2% | 20% | 50% | 28% | |
| 11 | DAVIS Logan | - | - | 2% | 12% | 39% | 48% | |
| 12 | WANG Joanna | - | 4% | 23% | 41% | 27% | 5% | |
| 13 | ALKADI Mai | 1% | 7% | 29% | 39% | 21% | 4% | |
| 14 | TANG Melody Fujiao | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 42% | 25% | |
| 15 | HAFEZ Tahiyah | - | 2% | 12% | 33% | 39% | 15% | |
| 16 | GAO Anne | - | 3% | 15% | 36% | 35% | 11% | |
| 17 | RIEGERT-JOHNSON Simone | - | 6% | 23% | 38% | 26% | 6% | |
| 18 | BUDKO Julia | 5% | 21% | 36% | 28% | 9% | 1% | |
| 19 | ORRINGER Lottie | - | 3% | 21% | 50% | 23% | 3% | |
| 20 | DESERANNO Seren | 6% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 7% | 1% | |
| 21 | BROWN Lily | 1% | 15% | 36% | 34% | 13% | 1% | |
| 22 | TAN Isabella | 4% | 26% | 39% | 24% | 6% | 1% | |
| 23 | WRIGHT Taliyah | - | 13% | 35% | 36% | 14% | 2% | |
| 24 | LIU Elinda | 1% | 17% | 41% | 31% | 9% | 1% | |
| 25 | MUMMANENI Samyuta | 1% | 7% | 29% | 39% | 21% | 4% | |
| 26 | ZELDIN Nadia | 1% | 13% | 34% | 36% | 15% | 2% | |
| 27 | CHOI JULIE | - | 5% | 20% | 37% | 30% | 7% | |
| 28 | DINH May | 6% | 33% | 44% | 16% | 2% | - | |
| 29 | EVELAND Zoe | - | 8% | 29% | 39% | 21% | 3% | |
| 30 | ALLEYNE Taylar | 1% | 6% | 25% | 38% | 24% | 6% | - |
| 31 | CANO Sofia | 29% | 44% | 22% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 32 | DONG Emily | 4% | 36% | 41% | 17% | 3% | - | |
| 33 | QUINTERO Camila | 4% | 24% | 39% | 25% | 7% | 1% | |
| 34 | SHTEPA Rada | 76% | 21% | 2% | - | - | - | |
| 35 | LIN isabella | 12% | 34% | 35% | 16% | 3% | - | |
| 36 | BRIDGES Camille | 28% | 46% | 22% | 4% | - | - | |
| 37 | WANG hannah | 68% | 29% | 3% | - | - | - | |
| 38 | WRIGHT Trinity | 10% | 31% | 36% | 18% | 4% | - | |
| 39 | YOTHER Anna | 48% | 39% | 12% | 2% | - | - | |
| 39 | YAU Katie | 33% | 47% | 17% | 2% | - | - | |
| 41 | CHENG Emma | 80% | 18% | 1% | - | - | - | |
| 42 | KIM Alison | 24% | 45% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 43 | REEVES June | 2% | 47% | 43% | 8% | - | - | |
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.