Chicago Heights, IL, USA
Color shade indicates the magnitude of a surprise (positive or negative). Grey means no suprise. Read more.
| # | Name | Bout Difficulty vs. Outcome * | Pool Victories | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pool | DE | Exp. | Act. | Diff. | ||
| 1 | HAYDEN Molly | V | V V V | 0.8 | 1 | +0.2 |
| 2 | BERNAL Isabella | V | V D | 0.9 | 1 | +0.1 |
| 3 | SKOURLETOS Angelina | V V | V D | 1.9 | 2 | +0.1 |
| 3 | BARTOSZUK Camilla | V V D | 0.0 | 0 | - | |
| 5 | SACHAR Ruhi | V D | 0.0 | 0 | - | |
| 6 | ZHANG Elaine Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 7 | SU Jacqueline Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 8 | COWLES Trinity | D | 0.0 | 0 | - | |
| 9 | ASENSO-BEDIAKO Michelle | D V | D | 0.9 | 1 | +0.1 |
| 10 | ZHANG Angela Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 11 | THOMAS Paityn Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 12 | DRAGOJEVICH Jelena Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 13 | SUH Ella Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 14 | KATZMAN Anara Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 15 | SEXTONSON Addison | D | D | 0.2 | 0 | -0.2 |
| 16 | FRUSHOUR Larinda Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 17 | TALATY Annika Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 18 | CIACCIO Kaitlyn Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 19 | HOLTZ Lou Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 20 | HOLLANDER Emma Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 21 | FANG Jasmine Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 22 | ROHN Evelyn Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 23 | MATSON Marina Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 24 | BUTCHER Emma Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 25 | HARRIS Marissa Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 26 | KOPLOW Emily Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 27 | KENDRICK Lauren Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 28 | MCGATHEY Madeline Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 29 | BIJAK Madison Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 30 | CHIYOKUBO Julia Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 31 | YANG Angelina | D | V D | 0.1 | 0 | -0.1 |
| 32 | JIANG Stephanie Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 33 | TRISSLER Libby Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 34 | GREGORSKI Kai | D D | D | 0.2 | 0 | -0.2 |
| 35 | ROWAN Charlee Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 36 | SHERBORNE Emmeline Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 37 | PERRY Abbie Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 38 | LAVERTY Emma Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
| 39 | JANSEN Cara Missing ID | 0.0 | 0 | - | ||
Color coded boxes represent the outcome against opponents of varying difficulty levels from the perspective of the fencer. Letters inside the boxes indicate victory (V) and defeat (D).
| Color | Outcome | Opponent's Difficulty | Probability of Victory |
|---|---|---|---|
| Victory | Very Hard | 0% to 20% | |
| Victory | Hard | 20% to 40% | |
| Victory | Roughly Even | 40% to 60% | |
| Victory | Easy | 60% to 80% | |
| Victory | Very Easy | 80% to 100% | |
| Defeat | Very Hard | 0% to 20% | |
| Defeat | Hard | 20% to 40% | |
| Defeat | Roughly Even | 40% to 60% | |
| Defeat | Easy | 60% to 80% | |
| Defeat | Very Easy | 80% to 100% |
The visual cues provided in this table highlight bouts that may be considered surprises based on the relative strengths of the competitors:
This visualization is designed to give both fencers and spectators an immediate sense of the unexpected outcomes of the competition. While every bout has its unique circumstances, these indicators can help highlight moments where a fencer overcame the odds or where there was an unexpected turn of events.