Madison, NJ - Madison, NJ, 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 | BROWN Emma | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 49% | 11% | |
| 2 | GHOSH Priyanka | 100% | 100% | 100% | 91% | 62% | 24% | 4% |
| 3 | SAYLES Nina R. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 66% | 31% | 7% | |
| 3 | PAK Kaitlyn | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 77% | 33% | |
| 5 | CHIOLDI Mina | 100% | 98% | 84% | 54% | 21% | 4% | |
| 6 | HASSAN Aziza R. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 48% | 14% |
| 7 | WEBER Juliana I. | 100% | 99% | 94% | 76% | 43% | 14% | 2% |
| 8 | SATHYANATH Kailing | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 46% | 10% | |
| 9 | HUBER Emily V. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 61% | 13% |
| 10 | TIBURCIO Diana | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 72% | 38% | 10% |
| 11 | SHOMAN Miriam | 100% | 97% | 82% | 50% | 18% | 3% | |
| 12 | DELSOIN Chelsea C. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 53% | 17% | 2% |
| 13 | WEINBERG Alexandra L. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 69% | 28% |
| 14 | FERRARI-BRIDGERS Marinella O. | 100% | 98% | 87% | 59% | 25% | 5% | |
| 15 | AKARD Micah M. | 100% | 99% | 91% | 68% | 34% | 10% | 1% |
| 16 | KALINICHENKO Alexandra (Sasha) | 100% | 100% | 87% | 52% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 17 | HULSEBURG Kaitlyn | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 50% | 15% | |
| 18 | LI Amanda C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 49% | 14% |
| 19 | NI Sharon | 100% | 100% | 99% | 78% | 39% | 10% | 1% |
| 20 | MANUBAG Amanda R. | 100% | 99% | 94% | 75% | 42% | 13% | 2% |
| 21 | SHOMAN Jenna | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 32% | |
| 22 | TAO Hannah J. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 67% | 32% | 7% |
| 23 | NEWELL Alexia C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 68% | 29% | 5% |
| 24 | SHVARTSMAN Rochelle | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 52% | 15% |
| 25 | BLUM Leah I. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 46% | 12% | |
| 26 | BOIS Adele | 100% | 99% | 90% | 66% | 31% | 7% | |
| 27 | YANG Kaitlyn H. | 100% | 100% | 93% | 66% | 28% | 5% | - |
| 28 | ATLURI Sara V. | 100% | 97% | 82% | 49% | 17% | 2% | |
| 29 | CHEN Erica | 100% | 100% | 94% | 73% | 35% | 7% | |
| 30 | SCALAMONI-GOLDSTEIN Charlotte S. | 100% | 96% | 78% | 44% | 14% | 2% | |
| 31 | HILD Nisha | 100% | 98% | 86% | 56% | 24% | 6% | 1% |
| 32 | YANG Ashley M. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 60% | 26% | 5% |
| 33 | GORMLEY Arwen E. | 100% | 97% | 79% | 44% | 13% | 1% | |
| 34 | DEPEW Charlotte R. | 100% | 82% | 42% | 12% | 2% | - | |
| 35 | DARINGA Arianna | 100% | 90% | 60% | 26% | 6% | 1% | |
| 36 | XIKES Katherine E. | 100% | 96% | 74% | 39% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 37 | MAREK Sofia | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 27% | 4% | |
| 38 | CANNON Sophia E. | 100% | 92% | 64% | 28% | 6% | 1% | |
| 39 | KOO Samantha | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 30% | 6% | |
| 40 | ALCEBAR Kayla | 100% | 96% | 79% | 46% | 16% | 2% | |
| 41 | YURT Leyla | 100% | 97% | 73% | 30% | 6% | - | |
| 42 | OGDEN Kayla A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 43% | 11% |
| 43 | ZOLA Candace J. | 100% | 97% | 80% | 47% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 43 | LEVITIS Danielle | 100% | 100% | 81% | 42% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 45 | SHIH Christina | 100% | 73% | 33% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 46 | NEIBART Fiona | 100% | 93% | 67% | 32% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 47 | RIZKALA Joanna | 100% | 97% | 83% | 53% | 21% | 4% | |
| 48 | KRYLOVA Valery | 100% | 84% | 48% | 17% | 3% | - | |
| 49 | BALAKUMARAN Maya | 100% | 84% | 47% | 16% | 3% | - | |
| 50 | KATZ Anat | 100% | 98% | 85% | 56% | 23% | 4% | |
| 51 | SINHA Anika | 100% | 97% | 79% | 46% | 16% | 2% | |
| 52 | CHIANG Emily | 100% | 89% | 48% | 12% | 1% | - | |
| 53 | SLOBODSKY Sasha L. | 100% | 81% | 41% | 11% | 1% | - | |
| 54 | CHARLES Caitlin | 100% | 71% | 9% | - | - | - | - |
| 55 | WHEELER Kira | 100% | 46% | 9% | 1% | - | - | |
| 56 | FIDLER Sara | 100% | 36% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
| 57 | FAUSTINO Emily | 100% | 2% | - | - | - | - | - |
| 58 | SWIFT Olana | 100% | 77% | 37% | 11% | 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.