Milwaukee, WI - Milwaukee, WI, 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 | LIN Audrey J. | - | 3% | 16% | 35% | 34% | 12% | |
2 | DELSOIN Chelsea C. | - | - | 2% | 9% | 27% | 40% | 23% |
3 | DUBOIS Lauren N. | - | - | 4% | 18% | 36% | 32% | 10% |
3 | ANDRES Katherine A. | - | - | - | 6% | 25% | 43% | 26% |
5 | PAUL Lila | - | - | 3% | 16% | 35% | 35% | 10% |
6 | MARSEE Samantha | 1% | 5% | 20% | 35% | 29% | 9% | |
7 | LU Amy | 14% | 38% | 33% | 13% | 2% | - | |
8 | HURST Kennedy | 1% | 7% | 22% | 33% | 26% | 10% | 1% |
9 | SHOMAN Jenna | - | - | - | 1% | 10% | 38% | 51% |
10 | PRIEUR Lauren | - | - | 3% | 19% | 39% | 31% | 8% |
11 | ENGELMAN Madeline A. | - | 1% | 5% | 23% | 43% | 28% | |
12 | XU Ellen | - | 4% | 18% | 35% | 31% | 11% | |
13 | HILD Nisha | - | 3% | 14% | 29% | 32% | 17% | 3% |
14 | WIGGERS Susan Q. | - | - | 1% | 7% | 25% | 41% | 25% |
15 | DUCKETT Madison | 1% | 8% | 28% | 38% | 22% | 4% | |
16 | KONG Carys H. | - | 2% | 12% | 28% | 34% | 20% | 4% |
17 | CHIOLDI Mina | - | - | 1% | 7% | 23% | 41% | 29% |
18 | BLUM Leah I. | - | - | - | 2% | 15% | 42% | 41% |
19 | MIKA Veronica | - | 1% | 7% | 22% | 35% | 27% | 8% |
20 | CODY Alexandra C. | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 38% | 16% | |
20 | FANG Victoria W. | 1% | 6% | 21% | 36% | 28% | 8% | |
22 | ROMAGNOLI Isabella | - | 4% | 19% | 36% | 31% | 9% | |
23 | BUHAY Rachel T. | 1% | 8% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 6% | |
24 | SINHA Anika | 1% | 7% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 7% | |
25 | BEVACQUA Aria F. | - | 3% | 17% | 35% | 32% | 12% | 1% |
26 | HOLMES Emma | 11% | 32% | 35% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
27 | SCALAMONI-GOLDSTEIN Charlotte S. | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 34% | 11% | |
28 | CHIANG Emily | 8% | 28% | 37% | 21% | 5% | 1% | |
29 | GRAFF Sophie | - | 4% | 19% | 34% | 29% | 11% | 2% |
30 | GHAYALOD reya | - | 2% | 13% | 31% | 34% | 16% | 3% |
31 | WEI Vivian W. | 2% | 12% | 29% | 33% | 19% | 5% | - |
32 | JEAN Olympe G. | - | 7% | 37% | 38% | 15% | 3% | - |
33 | ALCEBAR Kayla | - | - | 2% | 15% | 37% | 35% | 11% |
34 | HUNG Anna | 3% | 15% | 31% | 31% | 16% | 4% | - |
35 | SUBRAMANIAN Nitika | - | 2% | 12% | 28% | 34% | 20% | 4% |
36 | GORMAN Victoria M. | - | 6% | 21% | 34% | 27% | 10% | 2% |
37 | LESSARD-KULCHYSKI Khloé | 5% | 22% | 35% | 26% | 10% | 2% | - |
38 | JULIEN Michelle | 1% | 9% | 28% | 37% | 21% | 4% | |
39 | MCMAHON Byronie | 39% | 41% | 17% | 3% | - | - | |
40 | CHEN Xinyan | 3% | 19% | 38% | 30% | 10% | 1% | |
41 | NATHANSON Sammy E. | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 38% | 28% | 6% |
42 | YANG Ashley M. | - | 2% | 10% | 26% | 35% | 22% | 6% |
43 | PENG Florella | 1% | 6% | 21% | 33% | 27% | 11% | 2% |
44 | CZEKAJEWSKA Sonia M. | 7% | 30% | 39% | 19% | 4% | - | - |
45 | TABANGAY Heartlyn | - | 2% | 12% | 28% | 34% | 20% | 5% |
46 | LU Elaine | - | 1% | 14% | 37% | 34% | 12% | 2% |
47 | BALAKUMARAN Maya | - | 4% | 16% | 31% | 31% | 15% | 3% |
48 | RIZKALA Joanna | - | 4% | 17% | 36% | 32% | 11% | |
49 | LIGH Erenei J. | 3% | 16% | 33% | 32% | 14% | 2% | |
50 | PASHIN Anna | 5% | 28% | 39% | 22% | 6% | - | |
51 | LI Amanda C. | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 38% | 16% | |
52 | YANG Angelina | 3% | 17% | 34% | 31% | 13% | 2% | |
53 | ADAMS Morrigan B. | 29% | 41% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - | |
54 | WANG Jianning | 30% | 43% | 22% | 5% | 1% | - | |
55 | TODD Phoebe | 9% | 32% | 35% | 18% | 5% | 1% | - |
56 | SATHE Mehek S. | - | 4% | 17% | 32% | 30% | 14% | 2% |
57 | SHI Cathleen | - | 4% | 20% | 37% | 29% | 9% | 1% |
58 | PLONKA Kaley V. | 2% | 13% | 33% | 33% | 15% | 3% | - |
59 | NG Sarah W. | 11% | 32% | 35% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
60 | SOURIMTO Valeria | 1% | 9% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 6% | |
61 | ANDRES Charmaine G. | 1% | 12% | 30% | 35% | 19% | 4% | |
62 | ERIKSON Kira R. | - | 4% | 16% | 33% | 32% | 13% | 2% |
63 | LI Angela | 41% | 42% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
64 | YEN Natalie | 13% | 33% | 33% | 17% | 4% | 1% | - |
65 | MUNGOVAN Cecilia C. | 11% | 32% | 34% | 18% | 5% | 1% | - |
66 | BOLTON Eleksi M. | 10% | 33% | 36% | 17% | 4% | - | - |
67 | FU Linqian (Helen) | 8% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
68 | VADASZ Ibla P. | 1% | 10% | 30% | 36% | 19% | 4% | |
69 | NATH Trisha | 12% | 34% | 35% | 16% | 3% | - | |
70 | LEE Sophia | 18% | 39% | 31% | 11% | 2% | - | |
71 | MORAN Rhea | 23% | 40% | 27% | 9% | 2% | - | - |
72 | LIAO Siwen | 2% | 11% | 29% | 35% | 19% | 4% | - |
73 | STREU Mirabel | 32% | 56% | 11% | 1% | - | - | - |
74 | JAVERI Amaya | 42% | 41% | 14% | 2% | - | - | - |
75 | CRUZ Sonia | 30% | 44% | 21% | 4% | - | - | - |
76 | WHALEN Paige C. | 4% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 9% | 1% | |
77 | OGANEZOVA Valerie | 50% | 38% | 11% | 1% | - | - | |
78 | ALTIRS Kate | 7% | 25% | 34% | 23% | 8% | 1% | - |
78 | ZENG Megan | 50% | 43% | 7% | - | - | - | - |
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.