The Fencing Center - San Jose, CA, USA
Explore the probability of achieving at least a certain number of victories in the pool 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 | MACHULSKY Leehi | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 86% |
| 2 | GEBALA Natalie Brooke A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 71% | |
| 3 | LEE Natasha | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 83% | 39% |
| 3 | HANSEN Kira | 100% | 100% | 100% | 92% | 54% | ||
| 5 | MONTOYA Kimberlee C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 74% |
| 6 | CHA Eugenie | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 50% | 13% | |
| 7 | HEPLER Sarah | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 36% | 3% |
| 8 | LEANG Priscilla Y. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 51% | |
| 9 | MARTYNOVA Diana | 100% | 99% | 93% | 67% | 26% | 2% | |
| 10 | CHIRASHNYA Noya | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 62% | 20% | |
| 11 | ZHEREBCHEVSKA Veronika | 100% | 100% | 95% | 64% | 14% | ||
| 12 | OBENCHAIN Janel | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 64% | 19% |
| 13 | MONTOYA Amy C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 93% | 66% | 23% | |
| 14 | LI Charlotte | 100% | 100% | 90% | 59% | 20% | 2% | |
| 14 | WILEY Erica | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 63% | |
| 16 | HOFMAN Haejung | 100% | 100% | 98% | 79% | 39% | 8% | |
| 17 | SHARMA Sanvi | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 56% | 16% | |
| 18 | ENRILE Erica | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 40% | 9% | - |
| 19 | DAYAL Saahira | 100% | 97% | 79% | 43% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 20 | POON Desiree | 100% | 93% | 65% | 27% | 6% | - | - |
| 21 | CHIEM Karen | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 54% | 15% | |
| 22 | LAI Amanda | 100% | 91% | 56% | 17% | 2% | - | |
| 23 | HSIU Elizabeth | 100% | 100% | 95% | 72% | 31% | 5% | |
| 24 | RICH Caroline B. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 43% | 11% | - |
| 25 | PRIMES Amanda M. | 100% | 100% | 89% | 41% | 6% | ||
| 26 | LEE Kaitlyn M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 51% | 7% |
| 27 | CHANG Celine A. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 61% | 21% | 2% | |
| 28 | DUONG Zoey | 100% | 100% | 87% | 47% | 13% | 1% | |
| 29 | SCHOR Elisabeth | 100% | 58% | 16% | 2% | - | - | |
| 30 | MOLLINIER Angel | 100% | 86% | 43% | 11% | 1% | - | |
| 31 | XU Celina | 100% | 85% | 26% | 3% | - | ||
| 32 | KAUR Jaap | 100% | 78% | 38% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 33 | RYAN Minhuey | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 81% | 37% | 6% |
| 34 | HAU Olivia | 100% | 99% | 86% | 49% | 14% | 1% | |
| 35 | CHUNG Penelope | 100% | 97% | 76% | 34% | 6% | - | |
| 36 | LIANG Jingjing | 100% | 100% | 91% | 55% | 15% | 2% | - |
| 37 | CHIRASHNYA Mika | 100% | 100% | 90% | 52% | 13% | 1% | - |
| 38 | SALISTRA Emilia | 100% | 95% | 68% | 28% | 6% | - | |
| 39 | BHATT Anisha | 100% | 97% | 76% | 35% | 6% | - | |
| 40 | BLOOMER Suzanne | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 65% | 14% | |
| 41 | WELBORN Kathrina | 100% | 98% | 82% | 45% | 11% | 1% | |
| 41 | SRIVASTAVA Arya | 100% | 95% | 48% | 11% | 1% | - | |
| 43 | MA Katelyn | 100% | 98% | 74% | 33% | 7% | - | |
| 44 | KIM Eugenia (Eugenia Kim) | 100% | 96% | 76% | 40% | 11% | 1% | - |
| 45 | DALEY Keira | 100% | 97% | 82% | 47% | 15% | 2% | - |
| 46 | MYERS Cal | 100% | 29% | 2% | - | - | ||
| 47 | MULAGARI Swarasai | 100% | 90% | 55% | 18% | 3% | - | |
| 48 | MAGYARI-KOPE Ingrid | 100% | 17% | 1% | - | - | - | |
| 49 | BANERJEE Eesha | 100% | 31% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
| 50 | DING Grace | 100% | 95% | 73% | 36% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 51 | ESTRADA Ariana | 100% | 81% | 42% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 52 | CHEN Samantha | 100% | 24% | 2% | - | - | - | |
| 53 | PERKINS-OLLILA Emily | 100% | 66% | 23% | 4% | - | - | |
| 54 | COHEN Shaina | 100% | 89% | 35% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 55 | GILLIS-PADE Neallie | 100% | 60% | 18% | 2% | - | - | |
| 56 | BENNETT Vienne | 100% | 90% | 57% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
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.