UWM Sports Complex - Pontiac, MI, 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 | MARISI Gianna | - | - | - | 1% | 8% | 35% | 56% |
| 2 | FENG Grace | - | - | - | - | 5% | 29% | 66% |
| 3 | DENG Melissa | - | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 41% | 28% |
| 3 | WANG Joanna | - | - | - | 5% | 24% | 46% | 25% |
| 5 | LI Han (Helina) | - | - | 4% | 19% | 40% | 31% | 6% |
| 6 | DAVIS Logan | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 41% | 42% |
| 7 | BIODROWICZ Julia | - | - | - | - | 5% | 32% | 62% |
| 8 | WANG CAROL | - | - | 1% | 5% | 21% | 42% | 31% |
| 9 | WANG SIQI | - | - | - | 3% | 17% | 46% | 35% |
| 10 | WANG Sophia | - | - | 6% | 28% | 46% | 21% | |
| 11 | YU Eliza | 1% | 7% | 23% | 35% | 26% | 8% | 1% |
| 12 | TANG Melody Fujiao | - | 1% | 5% | 19% | 35% | 31% | 9% |
| 13 | HAN Gian | - | 2% | 10% | 26% | 35% | 23% | 5% |
| 14 | PAN Yiran | 3% | 19% | 35% | 30% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 15 | LIU Enjia sherry | - | - | - | 4% | 18% | 41% | 37% |
| 16 | POEI Lauren | 1% | 10% | 26% | 34% | 22% | 6% | 1% |
| 17 | CULLIVAN Sienna | - | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 35% | 10% |
| 18 | BROWN Lola | - | - | 3% | 19% | 45% | 33% | |
| 19 | TAN Dorathy | 1% | 8% | 24% | 34% | 24% | 8% | 1% |
| 20 | DESERANNO Seren | - | 3% | 17% | 37% | 32% | 10% | 1% |
| 20 | LIN Yunong | 2% | 13% | 31% | 33% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 22 | DONG Angela | - | 1% | 7% | 25% | 41% | 23% | 3% |
| 23 | MUMMANENI Samyuta | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 7% |
| 24 | LI Joy | 1% | 7% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 7% | 1% |
| 25 | XIE Ling | 1% | 10% | 38% | 37% | 13% | 1% | |
| 26 | BEYER Johanna | 1% | 9% | 31% | 37% | 18% | 3% | - |
| 27 | COLLINS Anna | - | 1% | 8% | 26% | 38% | 24% | 3% |
| 28 | LICHTENSTEIGER Megan | - | 2% | 9% | 25% | 36% | 23% | 5% |
| 29 | JIANG Chloe | 2% | 13% | 33% | 34% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 30 | ORRINGER Lottie | 1% | 6% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 7% | 1% |
| 31 | MORSE Katherine | 7% | 27% | 38% | 22% | 5% | - | - |
| 32 | DIRKES Catherine | 3% | 17% | 33% | 30% | 13% | 3% | - |
| 33 | CAMPBELL June | - | 5% | 19% | 36% | 30% | 10% | 1% |
| 34 | LIN Kenzie | 10% | 35% | 36% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
| 35 | SHAOOLIAN Maya | 16% | 37% | 31% | 13% | 3% | - | - |
| 36 | PUTHOFF Olivia | - | 4% | 17% | 35% | 32% | 11% | 1% |
| 37 | XU Sunia (Tai Yang) | 5% | 21% | 35% | 27% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 38 | AADHI Hansika | - | 3% | 25% | 44% | 24% | 4% | |
| 39 | CHOI Sophie | 7% | 25% | 35% | 24% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 40 | HUSSIAN Annabelle | 6% | 26% | 38% | 24% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 41 | LEVY Gabrielle | 5% | 26% | 38% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 41 | WANG DINA C. | 3% | 16% | 34% | 31% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 43 | HANNAH Abigail | 1% | 7% | 27% | 39% | 22% | 5% | - |
| 44 | GE Lena Lan | 17% | 40% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 45 | HOROWITZ Shuli | 11% | 32% | 34% | 17% | 4% | 1% | - |
| 46 | ZOLDAN Nolabelle | 16% | 36% | 32% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 47 | MALONE Ella | 5% | 21% | 35% | 27% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 48 | BROWNING Ruby | 56% | 38% | 6% | - | - | - | |
| 49 | BLAKEY Heaven | - | 3% | 16% | 34% | 33% | 12% | 1% |
| 50 | MARTIN Sloan | - | 1% | 5% | 20% | 37% | 31% | 6% |
| 51 | FECHER Lily | 1% | 11% | 31% | 36% | 18% | 3% | - |
| 51 | KOSCIK-AQUINO Emily | 2% | 12% | 29% | 33% | 19% | 5% | - |
| 53 | PARA Akshaya | 15% | 35% | 32% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 54 | ZEE Savannah | 6% | 24% | 35% | 24% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 55 | CHOI Suha | 52% | 38% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 56 | RUPERT Ellie | 1% | 6% | 20% | 34% | 28% | 11% | 1% |
| 57 | LEIBERMAN Naomi | 21% | 55% | 21% | 3% | - | - | |
| 58 | CHUNG Stella | 31% | 42% | 21% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
| 59 | JEANBAPTISTE Lauren | 12% | 44% | 33% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 60 | FEDOROFF Elizabeth | 16% | 38% | 32% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
| 61 | TAYLOR-OSBORN Nadia | 41% | 42% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 61 | SRIKANTH Shreya | 33% | 42% | 20% | 5% | 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.