The Fencing Center - San Jose, CA, USA
Explore the probability of achieving at least a certain number of victories in the pool 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 | LEE Natasha | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 52% |
| 2 | CHANG Celine A. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 57% | 23% | 4% |
| 3 | LAN Alice S. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 38% | |
| 3 | LIANG Jingjing | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 41% | 7% |
| 5 | XU Serena | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 67% | 31% | 6% |
| 6 | VERA Kalista R. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 75% | 33% |
| 7 | HUANG Lanlan | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 55% | 20% | 2% |
| 8 | LEE Camilla | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 32% | 7% |
| 9 | ZMURK Emma M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 61% |
| 10 | LIN Ashley | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 73% | 39% | 9% |
| 11 | HEPLER Sarah | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 68% | 30% | 5% |
| 12 | SALISTRA Emilia | 100% | 98% | 87% | 56% | 22% | 4% | - |
| 13 | SHARMA Sanvi | 100% | 100% | 90% | 58% | 22% | 4% | - |
| 14 | CHIEM Karen | 100% | 95% | 73% | 37% | 10% | 1% | |
| 15 | HOFMAN Haejung | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 52% | 16% |
| 16 | DUONG Zoey | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 55% | 20% | 2% |
| 17 | DAYAL Saahira | 100% | 100% | 94% | 69% | 31% | 7% | 1% |
| 18 | DALEY Keira | 100% | 93% | 67% | 30% | 7% | 1% | |
| 19 | HANSEN Kira | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 69% | 27% |
| 20 | MONTOYA Kimberlee C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 83% | 40% |
| 21 | ENRILE Erica | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 25% | 5% | - |
| 22 | MARTYNOVA Diana | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 45% | 14% | 2% |
| 23 | PHUKAN Indra | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 47% | 15% | 2% |
| 24 | PRIMES Amanda M. | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 31% | 7% | - |
| 25 | LAI Amanda | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 43% | 14% | 2% |
| 26 | CHIOU-WILLIAMS Matea | 100% | 99% | 78% | 39% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 27 | PANT Anisha | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 40% | 11% | 1% |
| 28 | MITTMAN Lela Z. | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 34% | 10% | 1% |
| 29 | BURICEA Ada | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 35% | 9% | 1% |
| 30 | BLOOMER Suzanne | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 70% | 35% | 8% |
| 31 | LYNCH Kristin A. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 49% | 15% | 2% |
| 32 | YIN Gabriela | 100% | 97% | 78% | 42% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 33 | MONTOYA Amy C. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 61% | 24% | 4% |
| 34 | ZHUANG Lauren | 100% | 100% | 92% | 63% | 27% | 6% | 1% |
| 35 | BHATT Anisha | 100% | 100% | 97% | 79% | 45% | 14% | 2% |
| 36 | SCHULTZ Nomi | 100% | 99% | 88% | 58% | 23% | 4% | - |
| 37 | CHANG Heidi | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 56% | 15% |
| 38 | COHEN Shaina | 100% | 73% | 31% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 39 | JAMES Ashley | 100% | 95% | 56% | 18% | 3% | - | - |
| 40 | LIN ariel | 100% | 95% | 71% | 34% | 8% | 1% | |
| 41 | RASMUSSEN Ashelee | 100% | 100% | 95% | 77% | 41% | 9% | |
| 42 | XU Celina | 100% | 95% | 70% | 32% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 43 | AIRES Julia | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 27% | 5% | - |
| 44 | CHIRASHNYA Mika | 100% | 99% | 75% | 34% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 45 | MADRID Maureen | 100% | 96% | 73% | 35% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 46 | RADOV Una | 100% | 56% | 16% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 47 | CHUNG Penelope | 100% | 82% | 44% | 13% | 2% | - | |
| 48 | OBENCHAIN Janel | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 46% | 12% |
| 49 | LEE Emily | 100% | 90% | 57% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
| 50 | BUCA Nora | 100% | 84% | 45% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 51 | KANDALA Aanya | 100% | 69% | 27% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 52 | EYUNNI Vibha | 100% | 39% | 7% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 53 | JAIN Aashi | 100% | 8% | - | - | - | - | - |
| 54 | JAIN Prisha | 100% | 21% | 2% | - | - | - | - |
| 55 | NAZARENKO Sasha | 100% | 5% | - | - | - | - | - |
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.