Chelsea Piers - Stamford, CT - Stamford, CT, 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 | YANG Iris | - | - | - | - | - | 7% | 93% |
| 2 | FENG Grace | - | - | - | - | 5% | 31% | 64% |
| 3 | CHEN Renee | - | - | - | - | 6% | 35% | 58% |
| 3 | SHIM Grace J. | - | - | - | 1% | 8% | 38% | 53% |
| 5 | ZELDIN Nadia | - | - | 5% | 22% | 41% | 28% | 5% |
| 5 | KAPRAN Anastasia | - | - | 1% | 5% | 24% | 46% | 24% |
| 7 | DAI Zizhuo (Zizi) | - | - | - | - | 7% | 36% | 57% |
| 8 | HAO Danica | - | - | 1% | 10% | 42% | 37% | 9% |
| 9 | YURKOVA Mariia | - | - | - | 2% | 23% | 48% | 27% |
| 10 | HARRIS Julia | - | - | - | 5% | 39% | 53% | 2% |
| 11 | FIELD Elizabeth | - | - | 2% | 15% | 46% | 33% | 5% |
| 12 | LI Han (Helina) | - | - | 4% | 20% | 42% | 29% | 4% |
| 13 | FENG Audrey | - | - | 1% | 14% | 54% | 30% | 1% |
| 14 | CHO Emily (Euran) | - | - | - | 2% | 20% | 48% | 31% |
| 15 | SHENG Katherine | - | - | 2% | 12% | 39% | 39% | 9% |
| 16 | YANG Emma | - | - | - | 1% | 8% | 36% | 55% |
| 17 | KRAHE Annika | - | 5% | 20% | 35% | 28% | 10% | 1% |
| 18 | HAFEZ Tahiyah | - | - | - | 7% | 35% | 46% | 12% |
| 19 | WANG Sabrina | - | - | 1% | 9% | 33% | 45% | 12% |
| 20 | BERGEL Daphne | 1% | 8% | 25% | 35% | 23% | 7% | 1% |
| 21 | WANG Joanna | - | - | - | 3% | 17% | 45% | 34% |
| 22 | NICUDEMUS Bryella | 17% | 41% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 23 | LI Savannah | 1% | 9% | 31% | 38% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 24 | JOO Natalie | - | - | 3% | 13% | 32% | 37% | 15% |
| 25 | LIN Yunong | - | 5% | 22% | 40% | 26% | 6% | - |
| 26 | DIMATULAC Elise Ann | - | - | 2% | 16% | 43% | 33% | 6% |
| 27 | WANG Amabel | - | - | 2% | 12% | 30% | 38% | 18% |
| 28 | KIM Claire | 2% | 16% | 36% | 33% | 11% | 1% | - |
| 29 | CHEN Sophie | 2% | 15% | 33% | 32% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 30 | CAI Ilana | - | 2% | 10% | 31% | 39% | 16% | 2% |
| 31 | HAFEZ Sahar | 1% | 14% | 47% | 33% | 5% | - | - |
| 32 | LIU Caydence | - | 7% | 35% | 46% | 12% | 1% | - |
| 33 | SHIN Elizabeth | 9% | 30% | 37% | 19% | 4% | - | - |
| 34 | LI Xiang (Shining) | 3% | 21% | 41% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 35 | YIN Chloe | 1% | 11% | 37% | 37% | 12% | 1% | - |
| 36 | WAN Celine | 5% | 24% | 41% | 26% | 3% | - | - |
| 37 | HUSSIAN Annabelle | 1% | 11% | 37% | 37% | 12% | 1% | - |
| 38 | BING Charlotte | - | - | 4% | 19% | 41% | 31% | 5% |
| 39 | BO Iris | 3% | 25% | 41% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 40 | HUANG Sophie | 1% | 8% | 35% | 43% | 13% | 1% | - |
| 41 | ELNAGGAR Lily | - | - | 4% | 20% | 41% | 30% | 5% |
| 42 | LIU Yino | - | 1% | 8% | 30% | 42% | 17% | 2% |
| 43 | DE CASTRO Kai | 3% | 16% | 35% | 33% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 44 | HUNG Samara | 13% | 37% | 35% | 13% | 1% | - | - |
| 45 | PEDERSEN Clara | 2% | 17% | 45% | 31% | 5% | - | - |
| 46 | GOMEZ Sofia | 56% | 35% | 8% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 47 | ORBÉ-AUSTIN Maya | 17% | 39% | 31% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
| 47 | LEO Jenna | 33% | 46% | 18% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 49 | HUDSON Sophie | 65% | 32% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
| 50 | ZHOU Angela | 21% | 44% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 51 | ORBE-AUSTIN Nia | 24% | 49% | 23% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 51 | KANG Annabella | 15% | 40% | 34% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 53 | GUPTA-NWANZE Nisa | 45% | 43% | 11% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 54 | CAVANAGH Emma | 4% | 26% | 40% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 55 | MACKINTOSH Quinn | 3% | 18% | 37% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 56 | MAIA ZUCKERMAN Julia | 2% | 14% | 31% | 32% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 57 | ZHANG Zoey | 12% | 35% | 36% | 15% | 2% | - | - |
| 58 | YOUM Amelia | 21% | 48% | 26% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 59 | BAULIN Zoya | 16% | 55% | 26% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 60 | PRINZ-STRATEMAN Matilda | 22% | 41% | 27% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 61 | SHANG Arianna | 51% | 37% | 11% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 62 | BERTOLINI Mia | 43% | 44% | 11% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 63 | VOROS Madeleine | 14% | 39% | 36% | 11% | 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.