La Jolla, CA - La Jolla, CA, 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 | REDDY Shreya | 1% | 9% | 26% | 35% | 23% | 6% | |
2 | CAO Stephanie X. | - | 1% | 9% | 27% | 40% | 23% | |
3 | MILLER Tiffany D. | 1% | 5% | 19% | 35% | 31% | 10% | |
3 | KONG Vera | - | - | 1% | 5% | 20% | 41% | 33% |
5 | SHIN Andrea Y. | 2% | 17% | 35% | 31% | 13% | 2% | - |
6 | DESAI Maya D. | 3% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 15% | 3% | |
6 | VESTEL Mira B. | 4% | 18% | 33% | 30% | 13% | 2% | |
8 | HILL Julia W. | 1% | 8% | 24% | 35% | 25% | 7% | |
9 | DOHERTY Maverick L. | - | 2% | 13% | 33% | 36% | 15% | |
10 | MARSEE Samantha | 2% | 13% | 31% | 34% | 17% | 3% | |
11 | COIMBRA Miya Y. | - | 3% | 20% | 37% | 29% | 9% | 1% |
12 | CHIN Erika J. | - | - | 1% | 7% | 24% | 41% | 27% |
13 | LACSON Sarah | 1% | 5% | 20% | 35% | 30% | 10% | |
14 | YAP Madeline | - | 3% | 15% | 34% | 34% | 13% | 2% |
15 | ANDRES Katherine A. | 2% | 14% | 31% | 33% | 17% | 3% | |
16 | TANG Catherine H. | 2% | 12% | 29% | 35% | 19% | 4% | |
17 | CHAN Audrey | - | 2% | 13% | 32% | 34% | 16% | 3% |
17 | MOZHAEVA MARIA | - | 1% | 8% | 26% | 38% | 24% | 5% |
19 | LEE Alexandra B. | - | - | - | 4% | 19% | 42% | 34% |
20 | SHEN Sarah | 1% | 8% | 24% | 34% | 24% | 8% | 1% |
21 | IYER Mohini R. | 1% | 22% | 39% | 27% | 9% | 1% | - |
22 | LEE Erin Y. | 10% | 31% | 35% | 19% | 5% | - | |
23 | KONG Isabel | 3% | 18% | 33% | 30% | 13% | 2% | |
24 | DUNLAP Allison N. | 1% | 9% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 6% | |
25 | ERIKSON Kira R. | 5% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 9% | 1% | |
26 | TENG Christine Renmei | - | 4% | 18% | 33% | 30% | 13% | 2% |
27 | CODY Alexandra C. | - | 2% | 12% | 30% | 35% | 18% | 3% |
28 | KIM Emily | - | 8% | 28% | 37% | 21% | 5% | - |
29 | CHOU Dana C. | 3% | 18% | 34% | 30% | 13% | 2% | |
30 | SEAL Julie T. | 2% | 12% | 29% | 34% | 19% | 4% | |
31 | ROGERS Pauline E. | 23% | 41% | 27% | 8% | 1% | - | |
32 | KIM Catherine | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 37% | 27% | 7% |
33 | XU Ellen | 4% | 19% | 34% | 29% | 12% | 2% | |
34 | GULATI Ria | 1% | 6% | 22% | 37% | 27% | 7% | |
35 | GEYER Carolina M. | 1% | 17% | 37% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - |
36 | LAMBERT Jasmine M. | - | 1% | 7% | 24% | 38% | 26% | 6% |
37 | ULIBARRI Nevaeh L. | 18% | 37% | 30% | 12% | 2% | - | |
38 | BUHAY Rachel T. | 2% | 12% | 27% | 33% | 20% | 6% | 1% |
39 | PLONKA Kaley V. | 8% | 43% | 36% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
40 | TOM Kristen Noelle C. | 2% | 13% | 31% | 34% | 17% | 3% | |
41 | ABOUDAHER Janna A. | 15% | 35% | 32% | 14% | 3% | - | |
42 | PATEL Riya | 19% | 38% | 29% | 11% | 2% | - | |
43 | RAHIM Alina O. | 68% | 28% | 4% | - | - | - | - |
44 | GOMES Gisela | 79% | 19% | 2% | - | - | - | - |
45 | ORICCHIO Madeleine | 30% | 43% | 21% | 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.