John T. Rhodes Myrtle Beach Sports Center - Myrtle Beach, SC, 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 | GUMAGAY Erika L. | - | - | - | 1% | 8% | 34% | 57% |
| 2 | PATIL Amulya | - | - | 5% | 29% | 41% | 22% | 4% |
| 3 | MILEWSKI Nicole | - | - | - | - | 5% | 31% | 63% |
| 3 | CHENG Ava | - | - | - | 2% | 12% | 40% | 46% |
| 5 | NGUYEN Audrey | - | - | 4% | 22% | 48% | 26% | |
| 6 | FAN Elizabeth | - | - | 2% | 17% | 44% | 32% | 5% |
| 7 | EDWARDS Auprell | - | - | - | 7% | 28% | 43% | 22% |
| 8 | ZHANG Yixuan | - | - | 1% | 9% | 32% | 41% | 17% |
| 9 | LU Samantha R. | - | - | - | 3% | 16% | 42% | 39% |
| 10 | LEE yat ching | - | - | 2% | 17% | 46% | 35% | |
| 11 | MOON Seojung | - | - | 2% | 20% | 41% | 30% | 7% |
| 12 | PLAZA-GASALLA Gloria | 1% | 7% | 23% | 34% | 26% | 8% | 1% |
| 13 | BENZAN India | - | - | 4% | 19% | 40% | 31% | 6% |
| 14 | MACEDON Gianna | 1% | 16% | 43% | 32% | 8% | 1% | |
| 15 | MAGALSKI Mary | - | 5% | 19% | 34% | 30% | 11% | 1% |
| 16 | NIEMAN Aubrey | 1% | 6% | 24% | 39% | 24% | 6% | - |
| 17 | BYBEE Lucy J. | - | - | 3% | 14% | 34% | 37% | 11% |
| 18 | WANG Zarina | - | 3% | 19% | 45% | 28% | 6% | - |
| 19 | DONGES Anna | - | 3% | 14% | 31% | 33% | 16% | 2% |
| 20 | COLELLA Lauren | 5% | 21% | 35% | 27% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 21 | RAFFERTY Catherine | 21% | 41% | 28% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 22 | MOSS Riley | 9% | 29% | 36% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 23 | NIX Reagan | - | - | 5% | 20% | 40% | 29% | 6% |
| 24 | NEELAM Neha | - | 7% | 31% | 43% | 17% | 2% | |
| 25 | NOH Rachel | 11% | 40% | 37% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 26 | KIZILBASH Zara | - | - | 1% | 14% | 41% | 37% | 6% |
| 27 | MIHILL Margaret | 9% | 29% | 36% | 20% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 28 | RHEINECKER Claire | 13% | 33% | 33% | 16% | 4% | - | - |
| 29 | HABER Emily | 15% | 41% | 35% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 30 | BARCLAY Khyri | 1% | 7% | 23% | 35% | 26% | 8% | 1% |
| 31 | BRITTON Kiera | 12% | 36% | 36% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 32 | SKILLMAN Natalie | 7% | 25% | 35% | 24% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 33 | MUELLER Kaitlin | 10% | 31% | 35% | 19% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 34 | WONG Caitlin | 2% | 12% | 30% | 34% | 18% | 4% | - |
| 35 | NIEMAN Anjolie | 6% | 44% | 38% | 11% | 1% | - | |
| 36 | ALLEY Mary Ellis | 12% | 36% | 36% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 37 | RHEINECKER Eleanora Grace | 29% | 47% | 22% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 38 | FORDER Isabel | 21% | 47% | 29% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 39 | DAVIS Elisabeth | 16% | 44% | 34% | 6% | - | - | - |
| 40 | MORGAN Verity | 76% | 22% | 2% | - | - | - | |
| 41 | SHARIF Cate | 35% | 46% | 17% | 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.