San Jose, CA - San Jose, 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 | MARSEE Samantha | - | - | 4% | 23% | 40% | 27% | 6% |
2 | CALLAHAN Chase J. | - | - | - | 4% | 17% | 41% | 38% |
3 | ANDRES Katherine A. | - | - | 1% | 12% | 35% | 38% | 14% |
3 | KRASTEV Minna | - | - | - | 5% | 24% | 44% | 27% |
5 | CODY Alexandra C. | - | - | 2% | 12% | 35% | 38% | 13% |
6 | ANDRES Charmaine G. | - | - | 1% | 7% | 29% | 44% | 19% |
7 | JUNG Irene | 1% | 6% | 25% | 38% | 24% | 6% | - |
8 | HERRERA LARA Luisa F. | - | 3% | 17% | 37% | 31% | 10% | 1% |
9 | SHEARER Natalie E. | - | - | - | 5% | 23% | 46% | 25% |
10 | XU Ellen | - | - | - | 3% | 19% | 44% | 34% |
11 | PENG Florella | - | 1% | 8% | 30% | 38% | 19% | 3% |
12 | CHIN Sophia J. | - | - | - | 4% | 20% | 45% | 31% |
13 | FANG Victoria W. | - | - | 2% | 12% | 35% | 37% | 13% |
14 | PLONKA Kaley V. | - | 2% | 11% | 28% | 35% | 20% | 4% |
15 | YANG Lea | 4% | 23% | 38% | 26% | 7% | 1% | - |
16 | YEN Natalie | 2% | 10% | 27% | 33% | 21% | 6% | 1% |
17 | KER Grace | - | - | 3% | 16% | 38% | 33% | 9% |
18 | WANG Zidan | - | 1% | 15% | 40% | 33% | 10% | 1% |
19 | CHIN Elise | 1% | 12% | 35% | 35% | 14% | 2% | - |
20 | BARNOVITZ Maya | 14% | 34% | 33% | 16% | 4% | - | - |
21 | TSE Angelina | - | - | 1% | 5% | 23% | 43% | 27% |
22 | GOMES Diana C. | - | 5% | 22% | 38% | 27% | 7% | 1% |
23 | GHAYALOD reya | - | - | 3% | 15% | 38% | 34% | 10% |
24 | KONG Carys H. | - | - | - | 6% | 26% | 43% | 25% |
25 | TSOI Julie | 1% | 6% | 20% | 33% | 28% | 11% | 1% |
26 | HITOMI Nadya | 1% | 13% | 35% | 35% | 13% | 2% | - |
27 | LEMUS-IAKOVIDOU ALEXANDRA | 1% | 9% | 29% | 37% | 20% | 4% | - |
28 | DIECK Miranda P. | 4% | 27% | 46% | 20% | 3% | - | - |
29 | TONG Jessie | 37% | 42% | 17% | 3% | - | - | - |
30 | PYO Penelope E. | 4% | 20% | 34% | 28% | 12% | 2% | - |
31 | BUCKHOUSE Talia | 41% | 42% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
32 | KATILA-MIIKKULAINEN Alli | 14% | 42% | 32% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
33 | RAMIREZ Mirka A. | 3% | 19% | 37% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - |
34 | LIN Grace | 41% | 44% | 14% | 2% | - | - | - |
35 | HUANG MADELINE | 51% | 39% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
36 | TUNG Renee | 1% | 8% | 31% | 39% | 18% | 3% | - |
37 | REGANTI Sitara | 12% | 40% | 35% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
38 | LI Chengxuan | 45% | 41% | 12% | 1% | - | - | - |
39 | LIN Lauren | 5% | 22% | 34% | 27% | 10% | 2% | - |
40 | STREU Mirabel | 15% | 50% | 30% | 5% | - | - | - |
40 | SHAPONA Lillian | 26% | 52% | 20% | 3% | - | - | - |
42 | BARTON Mele | 4% | 24% | 39% | 25% | 6% | 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.