MAPLEWOOD , NJ - MAPLEWOOD, NJ, 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 | HO Brianna W. | - | - | - | - | 5% | 32% | 63% |
| 2 | SHAW Kayla M. | - | - | - | 4% | 20% | 42% | 33% |
| 3 | PEVZNER Victoria | - | - | - | - | 5% | 31% | 64% |
| 3 | CHUSID Mikayla | - | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 37% | 17% |
| 5 | PERLMAN Talia | - | - | 1% | 9% | 28% | 41% | 21% |
| 6 | ACHILOVA Feyza | - | 1% | 9% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 5% |
| 7 | CHO Rebecca H. | - | 1% | 5% | 18% | 36% | 32% | 9% |
| 8 | WANG Chloe | - | 3% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 14% | 2% |
| 9 | ADAMS KIM Natalie | - | 1% | 7% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 7% |
| 10 | XU Madison | - | - | 2% | 11% | 34% | 44% | 10% |
| 11 | XU Christine | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 42% | 28% | |
| 12 | CHEN Kelly | - | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 38% | 16% |
| 13 | BHAN Zala | 3% | 19% | 34% | 29% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 14 | DRANOVSKY Dasha | - | 4% | 18% | 36% | 32% | 9% | |
| 15 | OLIVEIRA Lavinia M. | 2% | 24% | 40% | 25% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 16 | MCKEE Alexandra K. | - | 6% | 27% | 40% | 22% | 4% | - |
| 17 | HUANG NATALIE | - | - | 3% | 17% | 41% | 34% | 6% |
| 18 | PAHLAVI Dahlia | 2% | 12% | 31% | 35% | 18% | 3% | |
| 19 | SEO IRENE Y. | - | - | 4% | 22% | 43% | 28% | 4% |
| 20 | FELLUS Talia E. | 1% | 15% | 36% | 33% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 21 | PAVE Claire | - | 4% | 20% | 39% | 30% | 7% | - |
| 22 | WONG Sophia M. | - | 2% | 16% | 34% | 32% | 14% | 2% |
| 23 | NARANG Maya | - | 2% | 12% | 31% | 35% | 17% | 3% |
| 24 | CLOWES Madison | 1% | 8% | 29% | 38% | 20% | 4% | - |
| 25 | CHEN Georgia M. | 7% | 27% | 37% | 22% | 6% | 1% | |
| 26 | WANG Ashley | 8% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 6% | 1% | |
| 27 | WU Celine | - | 4% | 19% | 36% | 30% | 10% | 1% |
| 28 | ORVANANOS Anice | - | 2% | 16% | 34% | 32% | 14% | 2% |
| 29 | SLASKI Caroline O. | 1% | 14% | 43% | 32% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 30 | OETZEL Taylor | 29% | 48% | 20% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 31 | SIMPSON Lydia Q. | 4% | 19% | 35% | 29% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 32 | CHEN Jasmine | 17% | 49% | 27% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 33 | WILLIS Fletcher L. | - | 4% | 22% | 42% | 26% | 5% | - |
| 34 | RASO Olivia | 2% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 35 | CHARALEL Jessica | 28% | 41% | 24% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 35 | VAYNBERG Ellen | 20% | 46% | 27% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 37 | SHTROM Uma A. | 38% | 44% | 16% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 38 | LOGAN Jade | 18% | 38% | 31% | 11% | 2% | - | |
| 39 | SILVER Anna | 39% | 47% | 12% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 40 | THIRUVENGADAM Harini | 58% | 36% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
| 41 | SHAH Aanya | 81% | 18% | 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.