Salt Lake City, UT - Salt Lake City, UT, 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 | JING Alexandra | - | - | - | 4% | 18% | 41% | 37% |
2 | CASTANEDA Erika L. | - | 1% | 8% | 27% | 41% | 24% | |
3 | SOOD Ishani S. | 1% | 10% | 29% | 35% | 20% | 4% | |
3 | HOOSHI Erica S. | - | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 38% | 19% |
5 | CHO Gracie L. | - | 5% | 24% | 40% | 25% | 5% | |
6 | SHEN Sophia H. | - | 2% | 13% | 32% | 37% | 16% | |
7 | LIAO Lu Jia (Lucy) | - | 3% | 17% | 36% | 33% | 10% | |
8 | SEAL Grace (Gracie) C. | 3% | 16% | 32% | 31% | 15% | 3% | |
9 | DAVIA Daniella V. | - | 1% | 10% | 32% | 41% | 16% | |
10 | TAKAMIZAWA Yukari | - | 1% | 5% | 18% | 35% | 31% | 10% |
11 | GUERRA Sofia E. | - | 1% | 7% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 6% |
12 | FERNANDES Thea | 4% | 21% | 36% | 27% | 9% | 1% | |
13 | CHO Taylor S. | 3% | 21% | 40% | 28% | 8% | 1% | |
14 | GALAVOTTI Claire Teresa | 1% | 6% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 7% | |
15 | CHEN Kelly | 5% | 20% | 34% | 28% | 12% | 2% | |
16 | KIM Katherine | 5% | 23% | 37% | 26% | 8% | 1% | |
17 | LUNG Katerina | - | 1% | 10% | 30% | 40% | 19% | |
18 | LEE Bethany W. | 4% | 18% | 33% | 30% | 13% | 2% | |
19 | CHEN Allison V. | - | 6% | 24% | 35% | 25% | 8% | 1% |
20 | KHOO Lauren A. | - | 4% | 20% | 37% | 30% | 8% | |
21 | KIM Elisabeth (Gracie) | 1% | 8% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 6% | |
22 | UPTON Elizabeth | 2% | 14% | 35% | 34% | 14% | 2% | |
23 | WANG Catherine K. | 29% | 41% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - | |
24 | PRIETO Sofia M. | 1% | 11% | 28% | 34% | 20% | 5% | - |
25 | LOCKE Savannah | - | 6% | 23% | 35% | 26% | 9% | 1% |
26 | PENTSAKOV Margaret | 8% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
27 | LEE Paulina | - | 4% | 17% | 33% | 33% | 13% | |
28 | JING Emily | - | - | 4% | 22% | 44% | 30% | |
29 | MILLER Naomi E. | 1% | 10% | 29% | 36% | 20% | 4% | |
30 | PENG Amber L. | 12% | 34% | 34% | 16% | 3% | - | |
31 | WU Irene M. | 6% | 24% | 35% | 25% | 9% | 1% | |
32 | ZHAO Sophie L. | 22% | 40% | 28% | 9% | 1% | - | |
33 | KOROL Dana | 1% | 9% | 26% | 35% | 22% | 7% | 1% |
34 | DUAN Konnie | 3% | 17% | 32% | 31% | 14% | 3% | |
35 | YHIP Mikaela M. | 1% | 9% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 5% | |
36 | FAN Elaine | 1% | 12% | 32% | 34% | 17% | 4% | - |
37 | HOLLAND Naomi | 47% | 39% | 12% | 2% | - | - | |
38 | HO Rachel E. | 9% | 38% | 37% | 13% | 2% | - | |
39 | SHEN Lydia | - | 6% | 23% | 35% | 26% | 9% | 1% |
40 | WHITESIDES Ella K. | 31% | 42% | 22% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
41 | CHO Cameron S. | < 1% | 5% | 19% | 34% | 29% | 11% | 1% |
42 | VOHRA Anusha | 9% | 36% | 37% | 15% | 3% | - | |
43 | HEISER Anna M. | 51% | 38% | 10% | 1% | - | - | |
44 | ZAMELIS Madelyn | 82% | 17% | 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.