Phoenix Convention Center - Phoenix, AZ, 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 | TABANGAY Heartlyn | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 46% |
| 2 | GAUTAM Sahana | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 79% | 36% | |
| 3 | DENG Brooke | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 35% |
| 3 | HUANG Rachael | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 78% | 34% |
| 5 | TESTROET Aubrey | 100% | 100% | 94% | 67% | 27% | 4% | |
| 6 | CHO Michelle | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 32% | 5% | |
| 7 | RAMIREZ Mirka A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 67% | 20% |
| 8 | GOLDIN Nina | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 74% | 39% | 10% |
| 9 | MERCHANT Aishwarya | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 42% | 14% | 2% |
| 10 | FAN Grace | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 57% | 12% | |
| 11 | MALEK Zolie | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 51% | 15% |
| 12 | SEAL Cameron I. | 100% | 94% | 71% | 37% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 13 | WILSON Eva | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 53% | 20% | 3% |
| 14 | DUDNICK Morgan | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 46% | 14% | 2% |
| 15 | ISBERG Natalie | 100% | 100% | 98% | 90% | 67% | 32% | 7% |
| 16 | FREY Sarah E. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 34% | 6% | |
| 17 | MANN Sophia J. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 78% | 45% | 13% |
| 18 | NAYAK Esha | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 53% | 19% | 2% |
| 19 | YAM Danika | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 63% | 22% |
| 20 | SCHAIBLE Sofia L. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 55% | 23% | 4% |
| 21 | REGANTI Sitara | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 39% | 9% |
| 22 | LEE Lauren | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 42% | 10% | |
| 23 | CHIANG Melissa | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 71% | 28% | |
| 24 | MONTORIO Lily M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 52% | 15% |
| 24 | CHEN Kevy | 100% | 99% | 91% | 68% | 36% | 11% | 1% |
| 24 | GARRETT Madrid | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 25% | 4% |
| 27 | ZHENG Valentina | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 77% | 42% | 10% |
| 28 | GOLOVITSER Maya | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 57% | 18% |
| 29 | BROWNER June | 100% | 97% | 82% | 50% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 30 | STONE Coral | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 48% | 12% | |
| 31 | ONG Lauren | 100% | 79% | 37% | 8% | 1% | - | |
| 32 | SIDDIQUI Reem | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 51% | 13% | |
| 33 | CHI Claire | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 43% | 11% |
| 34 | GRAJALES Hannah E. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 86% | 56% | 18% |
| 35 | DHAR Layla | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 53% | 15% | |
| 36 | NAYAK Anika | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 67% | 27% | 4% |
| 37 | IYER Arushi | 100% | 99% | 89% | 56% | 19% | 2% | |
| 38 | PABIAN Emilia | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 51% | 14% |
| 38 | CHAN Kayla | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 55% | 20% | 3% |
| 40 | LI Alexis | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 58% | 23% | 4% |
| 41 | CHAVAN Arya | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 55% | 22% | 4% |
| 42 | CHIN Elise | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 68% | 25% | |
| 43 | SHEARER Alena | 100% | 97% | 82% | 50% | 20% | 4% | - |
| 44 | LUKER Hannah | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 72% | 36% | 8% |
| 45 | MANKOVA Varvara | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 61% | 18% |
| 46 | PRAXL Alexa R. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 59% | 20% |
| 47 | JEFFORDS Sophia | 100% | 96% | 75% | 38% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 47 | BRODERICK Kylin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 76% | 34% |
| 49 | GOSAVI Aabolee | 100% | 90% | 57% | 22% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 50 | CHEN Elaine | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 44% | 10% | |
| 51 | COLBY Mercer | 100% | 99% | 87% | 51% | 13% | 1% | |
| 52 | TERP Lucy | 100% | 55% | 14% | 1% | - | - | |
| 53 | CARLUCCI Laura A. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 60% | 26% | 5% |
| 54 | ADAMS Morrigan B. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 76% | 43% | 12% |
| 55 | FENG Alicia G. | 100% | 98% | 85% | 53% | 20% | 4% | - |
| 56 | MYAT Chloe | 100% | 99% | 90% | 65% | 32% | 9% | 1% |
| 57 | KORINTH Jacqueline | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 57% | 22% | 4% |
| 58 | LISSO Ria A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 62% | |
| 59 | NICHOLAS Eva | 100% | 99% | 88% | 52% | 17% | 2% | |
| 60 | HOLMES Sabrina | 100% | 100% | 95% | 72% | 34% | 7% | - |
| 61 | ZHAN Sophie | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 41% | 13% | 2% |
| 62 | BUCKHOUSE Talia | 100% | 94% | 71% | 36% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 63 | BENT Sarah | 100% | 89% | 47% | 13% | 2% | - | |
| 64 | YOUNG Audrey | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 54% | 21% | 3% |
| 65 | PALMIERI Giuliana M. | 100% | 99% | 83% | 46% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 66 | BAROUCH Susanna | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 25% | 5% | - |
| 67 | TODD Phoebe | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 27% | 4% |
| 68 | BAINS Nandini | 100% | 85% | 47% | 14% | 2% | - | |
| 69 | XU Emily T. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 56% | 17% | |
| 70 | LITTLE Avery | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 42% | 9% |
| 71 | TREACY Aisling | 100% | 100% | 96% | 83% | 54% | 22% | 4% |
| 72 | CAO Sophie | 100% | 98% | 85% | 57% | 24% | 6% | 1% |
| 73 | KINKADE Ellie | 100% | 99% | 90% | 65% | 29% | 6% | - |
| 74 | BRAMMER-GONZALES Xiomara | 100% | 98% | 76% | 36% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 75 | VANCE Beth S. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 74% | 38% | 8% |
| 76 | VILD Grace | 100% | 93% | 64% | 26% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 77 | DEBERTIN Beth | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 43% | 14% | 2% |
| 78 | KIM Caitlin | 100% | 98% | 84% | 52% | 20% | 4% | - |
| 79 | NGUYEN Madeleine | 100% | 89% | 58% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 80 | SCHICK Veronica | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 47% | 14% | 1% |
| 81 | NAIR Supriya | 100% | 87% | 54% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
| 82 | GOURNEAU Sophie L. | 100% | 90% | 52% | 15% | 2% | - | |
| 83 | LEUNG Ashlyn K. | 100% | 100% | 94% | 68% | 28% | 5% | |
| 84 | HERMAN Sabrina | 100% | 66% | 20% | 3% | - | - | |
| 85 | SUHALIM Maree | 100% | 99% | 90% | 61% | 23% | 4% | - |
| 86 | MCNALLY Teagan | 100% | 94% | 69% | 34% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 87 | SCHOEW Margot | 100% | 99% | 89% | 63% | 29% | 7% | 1% |
| 88 | NEUMAN Ella | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 59% | 23% | 4% |
| 89 | PAINE Lily | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 41% |
| 90 | ASHTIANI Shaya | 100% | 99% | 84% | 48% | 15% | 2% | - |
| 91 | LIU Hannah | 100% | 95% | 70% | 31% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 92 | VANKIRK Avery | 100% | 62% | 20% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 93 | CHOI Sophie Grace | 100% | 94% | 67% | 30% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 94 | WODISKA Ava | 100% | 30% | 4% | - | - | - | - |
| 95 | MORGAN Lily | 100% | 69% | 26% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 96 | SHELLEY Scarlett | 100% | 78% | 32% | 6% | 1% | - | |
| 97 | LABRECQUE Savannah | 100% | 99% | 91% | 62% | 26% | 6% | - |
| 98 | BANGALORE Shriya | 100% | 86% | 47% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 99 | EGAN Caroline | 100% | 90% | 59% | 24% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 100 | SAJAN Anita | 100% | 90% | 61% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 101 | DUCKETT Retta | 100% | 94% | 70% | 35% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 101 | FORD-BURRIS Zooey | 100% | 91% | 52% | 16% | 2% | - | - |
| 103 | BAIK Madeline | 100% | 64% | 17% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 103 | VERWEST Melissa | 100% | 76% | 37% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
| 103 | SNOAD Indy | 100% | 77% | 36% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 106 | WHITESIDES Abigail E. | 100% | 99% | 94% | 76% | 45% | 16% | 2% |
| 106 | MARTIN Audrey | 100% | 74% | 29% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 106 | HOAGLAND Simone | 100% | 85% | 48% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
| 109 | ABDULLAHI Saara | 100% | 66% | 23% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 110 | SEELIG Samantha | 100% | 87% | 53% | 21% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 111 | RANJAN Diya | 100% | 96% | 73% | 31% | 6% | - | |
| 112 | LAZO Emily | 100% | 63% | 19% | 3% | - | - | |
| 113 | DUCKETT Leighton | 100% | 89% | 54% | 17% | 2% | - | |
| 114 | CHOW Caitlyn | 100% | 65% | 23% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 115 | PREIMESBERGER Elaine | 100% | 70% | 22% | 3% | - | - | |
| 116 | CHANG Julia | 100% | 92% | 59% | 19% | 3% | - | - |
| 117 | DONDERIS Katherine | 100% | 98% | 84% | 52% | 20% | 4% | - |
| 117 | FOURNIER Madison | 100% | 41% | 7% | - | - | - | - |
| 119 | SIMS Addy | 100% | 42% | 7% | - | - | - | |
| 120 | RIESTERER Katherine | 100% | 76% | 34% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 121 | WHITLEY Alexis | 100% | 99% | 92% | 64% | 25% | 4% | - |
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.