Raleigh Convention Center - Raleigh, NC, 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 | ZHOU Catherine | - | - | 5% | 20% | 37% | 30% | 9% |
| 2 | SHIM Grace J. | - | - | 1% | 8% | 27% | 41% | 22% |
| 3 | SHMAY Anastasia | - | 1% | 7% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 7% |
| 3 | ASCHETTINO Aurora | - | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 37% | 16% |
| 5 | LAI Sophia | - | - | 1% | 7% | 27% | 42% | 23% |
| 6 | WEBB Ella | - | - | 4% | 16% | 33% | 34% | 13% |
| 7 | MARKOVSKY Nina | - | 2% | 11% | 29% | 35% | 19% | 4% |
| 8 | CHEN Renee | - | - | 1% | 9% | 29% | 40% | 21% |
| 9 | NIKOLIC Alexandra | - | 1% | 5% | 19% | 35% | 31% | 10% |
| 10 | LEE Ji Ahn | - | - | 1% | 7% | 25% | 42% | 25% |
| 11 | PAULUS Sloane E. | - | 1% | 8% | 26% | 38% | 22% | 4% |
| 12 | WANG Chloe | - | 5% | 19% | 33% | 29% | 12% | 2% |
| 13 | QIAN Zhiyan | 1% | 9% | 28% | 35% | 21% | 6% | 1% |
| 14 | KULKARNI Sohah A. | 1% | 9% | 29% | 37% | 20% | 5% | - |
| 15 | TURNER Stephanie E. | - | 1% | 5% | 19% | 37% | 30% | 8% |
| 16 | LONG Madeline M. | - | 1% | 9% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 5% |
| 17 | RENTON Samantha | - | - | - | 3% | 17% | 42% | 38% |
| 18 | KETTELLE Molly | - | 1% | 5% | 20% | 37% | 29% | 8% |
| 19 | WEI Angela | - | 2% | 13% | 32% | 34% | 16% | 3% |
| 19 | VAUGHAN Norah | - | 1% | 9% | 27% | 37% | 21% | 3% |
| 21 | LEVY Avery | 1% | 13% | 33% | 33% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 22 | MEYER Claudia | - | 3% | 18% | 36% | 31% | 11% | 1% |
| 23 | MATOS MENA Deyanara | 1% | 12% | 32% | 35% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 24 | CHOW Annabelle | - | - | 3% | 13% | 32% | 36% | 16% |
| 25 | BEAVER Hannah | - | - | 3% | 16% | 35% | 34% | 12% |
| 26 | SHENG Chuxi | - | 1% | 5% | 20% | 36% | 29% | 9% |
| 27 | HAN Katherine | - | 10% | 32% | 35% | 18% | 4% | - |
| 28 | KAPOOR Saanvi | 2% | 19% | 37% | 29% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 29 | WELBORN Calissa | - | 1% | 7% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 6% |
| 30 | HSIEH Sabrina | 3% | 20% | 38% | 28% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 31 | DEBLAERE Caecie M. | - | 3% | 15% | 34% | 33% | 14% | 2% |
| 32 | MUHAMMAD Auset | - | 1% | 9% | 28% | 37% | 21% | 4% |
| 33 | WANG Sophia | 1% | 13% | 34% | 33% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 34 | LIN Ju-An Adrianne | - | 2% | 13% | 32% | 34% | 16% | 3% |
| 35 | ROZPEDOWSKI Claire | - | 6% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 8% | 1% |
| 36 | MADDOX Lacey E. | - | - | 1% | 10% | 30% | 40% | 18% |
| 37 | YU Jane | 1% | 10% | 28% | 35% | 20% | 5% | - |
| 38 | CHARALEL Jessica | - | 3% | 17% | 36% | 32% | 11% | 1% |
| 38 | LAO Sophia | 9% | 31% | 37% | 18% | 4% | 1% | - |
| 40 | SHAH Suhani | 7% | 28% | 37% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 41 | BASSIK Eva | - | 3% | 17% | 35% | 31% | 12% | 2% |
| 42 | VIJAYAKUMAR Diya | 5% | 30% | 39% | 21% | 5% | - | - |
| 43 | TAN Clarisse | - | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 35% | 10% |
| 44 | BASSIK Judith M. | - | 3% | 15% | 33% | 33% | 15% | 2% |
| 45 | TIBURZI Hallie | - | 6% | 25% | 38% | 24% | 6% | 1% |
| 46 | PIERRYNOWSKI Kathryn S. | - | - | < 1% | 2% | 12% | 39% | 48% |
| 47 | MATHAI Rachel | 63% | 32% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
| 48 | YANIV Liya | 7% | 39% | 37% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 49 | DONG Emily | 2% | 27% | 41% | 24% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 50 | MAXWELL CJ F. | - | 1% | 9% | 29% | 37% | 20% | 4% |
| 51 | WISEMAN Margaret (Daisy) | 7% | 26% | 37% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 52 | OWENS Elise | 14% | 36% | 34% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 53 | BERGEL Daphne | 20% | 41% | 29% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 54 | ARMSTRONG Olivia | 27% | 43% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 55 | MILLER Tiffany E. | 19% | 41% | 29% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 55 | SCHMIDT Victoria | 2% | 20% | 37% | 29% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 57 | LI Xiang (Shining) | 67% | 28% | 4% | - | - | - | - |
| 58 | TAMIR Esu | 24% | 41% | 26% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 59 | HAZEL Susan L. | 8% | 40% | 36% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
| 60 | HE Katherine | 71% | 26% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
| 60 | UHRICH Reese | 54% | 36% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 60 | KRINGS Sasha | 88% | 12% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
| 63 | ZHANG Vicky | 57% | 35% | 8% | 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.