Fort Worth Convention Center - Fort Worth, TX, 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 | DOROSHKEVICH Taisiia | - | - | - | 2% | 15% | 45% | 39% |
2 | CALISE Ella | - | - | - | 1% | 7% | 34% | 58% |
3 | WANG Joanna | - | 1% | 8% | 25% | 37% | 24% | 5% |
3 | WANG YiXi | - | - | - | 1% | 7% | 35% | 58% |
5 | LIU Joy Zhaoyi | - | - | - | - | 1% | 22% | 77% |
6 | DAI Zizhuo (Zizi) | - | - | - | 3% | 18% | 43% | 36% |
7 | LAI Sophia | - | - | - | 4% | 24% | 48% | 23% |
8 | YANG Emma | - | - | 1% | 8% | 29% | 41% | 20% |
9 | LENK Sophie | - | 1% | 7% | 27% | 43% | 23% | |
10 | ZHANG Soleil C. | - | - | 2% | 14% | 36% | 37% | 11% |
11 | LI Han (Helina) | - | 2% | 12% | 33% | 37% | 15% | 2% |
12 | CHO Emily (Euran) | - | - | - | 2% | 12% | 39% | 47% |
13 | SHEN Emilia | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 39% | 45% |
14 | HAO Danica | - | 1% | 7% | 27% | 38% | 22% | 5% |
15 | WYNN Kylie | - | 2% | 13% | 33% | 35% | 15% | 2% |
16 | YURKOVA Mariia | - | - | 1% | 9% | 32% | 49% | 9% |
17 | SAIFEE Lamya | - | - | 2% | 13% | 34% | 37% | 14% |
18 | MARISI Gianna | - | - | 1% | 7% | 30% | 48% | 14% |
18 | WANG SIQI | - | - | 1% | 10% | 34% | 41% | 14% |
20 | GUO Audrey | 1% | 12% | 33% | 36% | 15% | 2% | - |
21 | SHIM Grace J. | - | - | - | 3% | 18% | 43% | 35% |
22 | WANG CAROL | - | - | 3% | 16% | 40% | 33% | 8% |
23 | DENG Melissa | - | - | 1% | 10% | 32% | 42% | 14% |
24 | KIM Rachel | - | - | 1% | 11% | 40% | 48% | |
25 | YAN Noelle | - | - | 3% | 17% | 43% | 37% | |
26 | YU Jane | - | 1% | 7% | 27% | 40% | 22% | 4% |
27 | DONG Angela | - | 2% | 12% | 33% | 38% | 15% | 1% |
28 | GU Maggie Runlin | - | - | - | - | 6% | 35% | 59% |
29 | MANIKTALA Prisha | - | - | - | 4% | 19% | 42% | 34% |
30 | ZOU Ella | - | - | 1% | 11% | 34% | 40% | 13% |
31 | LIU Enjia sherry | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 39% | 25% | 5% |
32 | LUO Miranda | - | 4% | 19% | 38% | 31% | 7% | - |
33 | WANG Amabel | - | 2% | 12% | 30% | 35% | 18% | 3% |
34 | SWANSON Alexa | - | - | 1% | 9% | 33% | 44% | 12% |
35 | AYUPOVA AMELIYA | - | - | 1% | 9% | 30% | 42% | 19% |
36 | CHEN Renee | - | - | - | 1% | 8% | 37% | 54% |
37 | FENG Grace | - | - | - | 2% | 12% | 42% | 45% |
38 | HSU Kaylin | - | - | - | 3% | 17% | 43% | 37% |
39 | DAVIS Logan | - | - | 4% | 20% | 37% | 30% | 9% |
40 | SHMUKLER Maria | - | 2% | 14% | 34% | 34% | 14% | 2% |
41 | CHUN Adelle Ha-Eune | - | 1% | 12% | 39% | 36% | 11% | 1% |
42 | HO Addison | - | - | 2% | 10% | 33% | 43% | 12% |
43 | FETECAU Ilinca | - | - | 5% | 22% | 39% | 28% | 7% |
44 | PEVZNER Nicole | - | 1% | 9% | 32% | 44% | 14% | |
45 | MCSHERRY Ava | - | - | - | 3% | 18% | 44% | 35% |
46 | HU Jenna | - | - | 2% | 13% | 34% | 38% | 13% |
47 | OH Ceana | - | - | 4% | 21% | 38% | 28% | 7% |
48 | LIU Samantha | 1% | 18% | 40% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - |
49 | REN Kayley | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 39% | 24% | 3% |
50 | ZHANG Ivy | - | 1% | 10% | 30% | 38% | 19% | 3% |
51 | JOO Natalie | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 42% | 22% | |
52 | DUAN Sophie | - | 2% | 15% | 37% | 36% | 10% | |
53 | BAE Yooju | 1% | 9% | 30% | 40% | 17% | 2% | |
54 | CAO Kayla | 3% | 20% | 39% | 29% | 8% | 1% | |
55 | IQBAL Mariam | 3% | 18% | 36% | 31% | 11% | 1% | - |
55 | FIELD Elizabeth | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 39% | 27% | 5% |
57 | YUEN Elsie | 1% | 12% | 33% | 36% | 16% | 2% | - |
58 | TANG Melody Fujiao | - | 5% | 21% | 36% | 27% | 9% | 1% |
59 | WANG Sophia | 1% | 12% | 33% | 36% | 16% | 2% | - |
60 | PARK Lina | - | - | 3% | 17% | 36% | 33% | 11% |
61 | GUAN Adeline | - | 2% | 13% | 31% | 35% | 17% | 2% |
62 | BERGEL Daphne | 3% | 18% | 36% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - |
63 | SHTEPA Rada | 19% | 41% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
64 | FENG Audrey | 2% | 14% | 35% | 33% | 14% | 2% | - |
65 | ZELDIN Nadia | - | 4% | 19% | 37% | 30% | 10% | 1% |
66 | LI Alice | 2% | 15% | 39% | 32% | 10% | 1% | |
67 | XIE Lillian | - | - | 7% | 28% | 38% | 22% | 5% |
68 | MONAT Jennifer | 11% | 38% | 39% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
69 | YONG Rosalind | - | 6% | 29% | 39% | 21% | 5% | - |
70 | LEE Jeemin | 1% | 10% | 30% | 38% | 18% | 3% | |
71 | PAULUS Sloane E. | - | - | 2% | 13% | 34% | 37% | 14% |
72 | PENG Charlotte | - | 6% | 27% | 40% | 22% | 5% | - |
72 | TAO Ann | 1% | 7% | 25% | 37% | 24% | 6% | 1% |
72 | CUI alivia | 1% | 7% | 25% | 38% | 24% | 6% | 1% |
75 | ZAMLYNNY Maya | 4% | 25% | 41% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - |
75 | LI Joy | - | 6% | 25% | 39% | 24% | 6% | - |
77 | TAN Shouyin | 12% | 38% | 34% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
78 | CHERNYKH Elina | - | 8% | 39% | 37% | 14% | 2% | - |
79 | BORGES Valeryn | - | 1% | 10% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 4% |
80 | EYER Brooke | 14% | 37% | 33% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
80 | WANG Melissa | - | 2% | 12% | 31% | 36% | 17% | 2% |
82 | KIM Sydney | - | 7% | 29% | 41% | 19% | 3% | - |
83 | CHOI JULIE | 2% | 16% | 36% | 33% | 12% | 1% | - |
84 | AADHI Hansika | - | 5% | 23% | 39% | 26% | 6% | - |
85 | PARK Zena | - | 3% | 20% | 41% | 29% | 6% | |
86 | HAN Gian | 10% | 34% | 38% | 16% | 2% | - | |
87 | ORBÉ-AUSTIN Maya | 35% | 46% | 17% | 3% | - | - | |
88 | ALKADI Mai | 15% | 39% | 33% | 11% | 1% | - | |
89 | PEDERSEN Haley | 17% | 43% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
90 | WANG Emma | 9% | 38% | 37% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
91 | ZOLDAN Gweniveve A. | 1% | 9% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 5% | - |
92 | WU Nicole Moxuan | 1% | 12% | 33% | 36% | 16% | 2% | - |
93 | YANG Audrey | - | - | 3% | 15% | 35% | 35% | 13% |
94 | HAFEZ Tahiyah | - | 1% | 7% | 32% | 42% | 17% | 2% |
95 | DESAI Esha | 2% | 14% | 33% | 34% | 15% | 2% | - |
96 | KRYLTSOVA Eva | 4% | 32% | 41% | 19% | 4% | - | - |
97 | LI Xiang (Shining) | 7% | 33% | 38% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
98 | WU Chingfei Amber | 2% | 17% | 39% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - |
99 | DENG Claire | 5% | 38% | 41% | 15% | 2% | - | - |
100 | TSIMIKLIS Aphrodite | - | 4% | 20% | 36% | 29% | 10% | 1% |
101 | ORBE-AUSTIN Nia | 53% | 36% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
102 | MIRZA Sophia | 4% | 21% | 39% | 27% | 8% | 1% | - |
102 | CHOI Sophie | 30% | 43% | 21% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
102 | POEI Lauren | 1% | 9% | 29% | 38% | 19% | 3% | - |
102 | LIU Jingyi (Eva) | 1% | 7% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 6% | - |
106 | ANDONIAN Lauren | 8% | 29% | 38% | 20% | 5% | - | - |
107 | LING Camryn | 42% | 41% | 14% | 2% | - | - | |
108 | KATS Ekaterina | 26% | 44% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
109 | ZHANG Gwenyth | 2% | 20% | 43% | 29% | 7% | 1% | - |
110 | WANG DINA C. | 4% | 22% | 39% | 26% | 8% | 1% | - |
111 | SHIN Jaelynn | 15% | 51% | 27% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
111 | LI Azalea | 5% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 8% | 1% | - |
113 | VANMOORSEL Faye | 2% | 16% | 37% | 32% | 11% | 1% | - |
114 | OLSHANSKY Dalia | 38% | 43% | 17% | 3% | - | - | - |
115 | DESERANNO Seren | 1% | 12% | 33% | 36% | 16% | 2% | - |
116 | NIRGUDE Esha | 17% | 40% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
117 | GOITIA Genevieve | 42% | 41% | 14% | 2% | - | - | - |
117 | LAI Miranda | 15% | 43% | 32% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
119 | BING Charlotte | 2% | 14% | 33% | 32% | 15% | 3% | - |
120 | MA Emily(Yiming) | 36% | 46% | 17% | 2% | - | - | - |
120 | ALVAREZ Isabella | 51% | 38% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
120 | SAH Madeleine | 44% | 42% | 12% | 2% | - | - | - |
123 | ZHANG Zoey | 22% | 58% | 18% | 2% | - | - | - |
124 | RIVERA Leahy | 34% | 44% | 19% | 3% | - | - | - |
124 | GE Lena Lan | 16% | 44% | 32% | 7% | - | - | - |
126 | HOROWITZ Shuli | 13% | 39% | 34% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
127 | FRASER Morgan | 8% | 34% | 38% | 17% | 3% | - | |
128 | CHEN Sophie | 22% | 43% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - | |
129 | HUGHES Olivia | 25% | 47% | 23% | 5% | - | - | |
130 | CANO Sofia | 63% | 31% | 6% | - | - | - | - |
131 | WAN Celine | 61% | 34% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
132 | TAN Isabella | 23% | 44% | 26% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
133 | SINGH Evangelina | 45% | 39% | 13% | 2% | - | - | - |
134 | CHU Felicity | 63% | 34% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
135 | ROUSH Rowynn | 75% | 23% | 2% | - | - | - | - |
135 | GRIMM Parker | 37% | 43% | 17% | 3% | - | - | - |
137 | MITCHELL Macy | 74% | 24% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
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.