The future of US Fencing is at stake!

For transparency, fairness, and athlete support, VOTE NOW for:
(1) Maria Panyi, (2) Andrey Geva, (3) Igor Chirashnya, and (4) Sue Moheb.

Raleigh SJCC & Division II North American Cup

Cadet Women's Foil

Saturday, June 3, 2023 at 8:00 AM

Raleigh Convention Center - Raleigh, NC, USA

Probability density of pool victories

Reset

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 EYER Hailey M. - - - - 2% 21% 77%
2 FEDELI Caterina S. - - - - 2% 20% 78%
3 HU Felice 2% 14% 37% 34% 11% 1% -
3 YANG Iris - - - 2% 13% 43% 42%
5 CHEN Allison V. - - - - 5% 31% 64%
6 CHEN Chloe I. - - 1% 9% 28% 40% 21%
7 KIM Rachel - - 4% 21% 42% 27% 6%
8 CHO Emily (Euran) - 3% 15% 33% 32% 14% 2%
9 SONG Yuqiao Aprille - - - 2% 14% 41% 43%
10 ORVANANOS Anice - - 1% 8% 30% 44% 17%
11 SHENG Chuxi - - 4% 24% 45% 25% 2%
12 YANG Emma - 3% 19% 43% 29% 6%
13 LIN Zhi tong - 4% 20% 38% 30% 8%
14 SEO IRENE Y. - - 3% 21% 46% 30%
15 CHOW Annabelle - - 2% 18% 43% 33% 3%
16 PEVZNER Nicole - 4% 20% 39% 29% 8% 1%
17 DAI Zizhuo (Zizi) - - 5% 21% 38% 29% 7%
18 MI Aileen - - - 3% 19% 44% 33%
19 AMR HOSSNY Sara - - 1% 6% 28% 45% 21%
20 MEI Sarah - - 4% 25% 46% 24%
21 LUO Sandra J. - 1% 7% 29% 44% 19%
21 CALISE Ella - 1% 8% 27% 41% 22%
23 LEE Lavender - - - 3% 20% 45% 31%
24 WANDJI Anais - - 1% 7% 26% 42% 24%
25 LAI Sophia - 1% 9% 28% 37% 21% 4%
26 SHMAY Anastasia - 5% 21% 35% 27% 9% 1%
27 LI Eleanor - 2% 14% 37% 35% 12% 1%
28 ROZPEDOWSKI Claire 4% 27% 44% 21% 4% -
29 LIU Angel(Daying) - - 2% 16% 43% 39%
29 DOROSHKEVICH Taisiia - - 3% 19% 45% 34%
31 BERGEL Daphne 37% 44% 16% 2% - - -
32 LI Sophia M. - < 1% 3% 13% 33% 37% 14%
33 MANIKTALA Prisha - - 1% 7% 28% 45% 20%
34 CHEN Renee - 2% 13% 38% 37% 10%
35 NISSINOFF Alexandra - - 4% 19% 37% 31% 9%
36 HSU Kaylin - 7% 30% 41% 19% 3%
37 MCSHERRY Ava - - 4% 22% 42% 29% 3%
38 LEVY Avery - 4% 26% 41% 23% 5% -
39 ZHOU Catherine - 1% 7% 24% 40% 25% 3%
40 COOPER Piper W. - 1% 6% 23% 40% 26% 4%
41 XIE Lillian 2% 17% 36% 30% 12% 2% -
42 YURKOVA Mariia - 7% 25% 38% 24% 5%
43 FENG Grace - 2% 14% 39% 36% 10%
44 WANG Jasmine 1% 10% 36% 38% 14% 2%
45 SHIM Grace J. 1% 9% 30% 37% 20% 4%
46 WEI Angela - 4% 26% 41% 23% 5% -
47 KIM Sydney 17% 39% 31% 11% 2% - -
48 REN Kayley - 1% 16% 43% 32% 8% -
49 SAIFEE Lamya - 2% 13% 32% 35% 16% 2%
50 PAULUS Sloane E. - 4% 20% 38% 29% 8% 1%
51 CASCONE Emily - 1% 9% 29% 37% 20% 4%
52 LIPKOVITZ Rivka - 1% 11% 34% 39% 15% 1%
53 KULKARNI Sohah A. - 5% 22% 37% 27% 8% 1%
54 LI Han (Helina) 2% 14% 33% 34% 14% 2% -
55 BURBERRY Livia - 9% 31% 38% 18% 3% -
56 WANG Joanna 1% 12% 36% 36% 13% 2% -
57 WANG Chloe 1% 13% 37% 33% 13% 2% -
58 ZHANG Ivy 6% 29% 43% 19% 3% -
59 BAE Yooju 19% 47% 27% 6% 1% - -
60 ZELDIN Nadia - 8% 45% 36% 9% 1% -
61 WANG CAROL 2% 19% 36% 29% 11% 2% -
62 SHA Yi Ling - 1% 10% 32% 39% 17% 2%
63 DIMATULAC Elise Ann 33% 45% 19% 3% - -
64 CAO Kayla 59% 33% 7% 1% - - -
65 YU Jane - 10% 32% 36% 17% 4% -
66 ARMSTRONG Olivia 12% 47% 32% 8% 1% - -
67 LAO Sophia 1% 24% 41% 26% 7% 1% -
68 HARRIS Julia 1% 15% 40% 32% 10% 1% -
69 TANG Melody Fujiao 8% 39% 38% 13% 2% -
69 ZOU Ella 7% 33% 38% 18% 4% -
71 HAN Katherine 13% 48% 31% 8% 1% -
72 HWANG Chanel 16% 56% 24% 4% - - -
73 GUEVARRA Isabelle C. 9% 43% 35% 11% 2% - -
73 WANG Sophia 4% 20% 37% 29% 9% 1% -
75 MATHAI Rachel 23% 60% 15% 1% - - -
76 VERGARA Jaden Reese 18% 40% 30% 10% 1% - -
77 LI Xiang (Shining) 62% 33% 5% - - - -
78 REZA Fukaina 63% 32% 4% - - -
79 OWENS Elise 19% 44% 29% 7% 1% - -
80 TAMIR Esu 46% 42% 11% 1% - - -
81 DONG Emily 56% 36% 8% 1% - -
82 VIJAYAKUMAR Diya 22% 46% 26% 5% - -
83 MULLER Van 65% 33% 2% - - - -
84 WANG DINA C. 60% 34% 6% - - -
85 UHRICH Reese 65% 31% 4% - - - -
86 KRINGS Sasha 92% 8% - - - - -
87 SUNMAN Rory 68% 30% 3% - - - -

Explanation

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.