Rockland Community College - Suffern, NY, 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 | FOSS Persephone | - | - | 2% | 9% | 26% | 39% | 24% |
| 2 | GONG Joy | - | - | - | 3% | 18% | 44% | 35% |
| 3 | CHOI Charlotte | - | - | 1% | 7% | 25% | 41% | 26% |
| 3 | WANG JiaQi | - | - | - | 1% | 10% | 37% | 51% |
| 5 | FUNG Iris | - | - | - | 2% | 12% | 38% | 48% |
| 6 | MAK Jayden | - | 3% | 14% | 30% | 32% | 17% | 3% |
| 7 | XU Elaine | - | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 39% | 17% |
| 8 | JOHN Sophia | 1% | 9% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 5% | - |
| 9 | LIANG Claire | - | - | 2% | 13% | 32% | 37% | 15% |
| 9 | LEE Grace | - | - | 2% | 10% | 28% | 40% | 20% |
| 11 | OSMINKINA-JONES Kai | - | - | 2% | 12% | 29% | 37% | 19% |
| 12 | ZHANG Ashley | - | - | - | 4% | 18% | 41% | 37% |
| 13 | WANG Keira | 1% | 7% | 23% | 35% | 25% | 8% | 1% |
| 14 | PATEL Maia | - | 1% | 9% | 26% | 37% | 22% | 4% |
| 15 | ZHAO Selena | 1% | 6% | 21% | 34% | 27% | 9% | 1% |
| 16 | SEO Kaitlyn | - | 4% | 16% | 30% | 31% | 16% | 3% |
| 17 | YERENKOVA Ameliia | - | 1% | 8% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 5% |
| 18 | GOEL Lineysha | - | 2% | 13% | 31% | 35% | 16% | 2% |
| 19 | NANDA Maanika | - | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 39% | 18% |
| 20 | NIU Jessica | - | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 45% | 22% |
| 21 | CHAU Zoey | - | 5% | 20% | 34% | 28% | 11% | 2% |
| 22 | HILD Anya | - | 2% | 9% | 26% | 36% | 22% | 4% |
| 22 | ZHANG Audrey | - | 5% | 20% | 33% | 28% | 11% | 2% |
| 24 | ZHENG Winona | 4% | 17% | 31% | 30% | 15% | 4% | - |
| 25 | JUNG Elise | 2% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 26 | BANDHU Saahiti | - | 4% | 16% | 31% | 31% | 15% | 3% |
| 27 | ZONG Eliane | 1% | 10% | 29% | 35% | 20% | 5% | - |
| 28 | PARK Haylie | - | 1% | 7% | 23% | 36% | 27% | 7% |
| 29 | MCCARTHY Nora Louisa Abrous | 1% | 10% | 27% | 34% | 21% | 6% | 1% |
| 30 | MALUKI Nia | - | 3% | 14% | 32% | 33% | 15% | 2% |
| 31 | GU Allison | 1% | 11% | 29% | 34% | 19% | 5% | - |
| 32 | WANG MONA | - | 5% | 20% | 36% | 29% | 10% | 1% |
| 33 | GALLAGHER Isabella | - | 2% | 12% | 31% | 35% | 17% | 3% |
| 34 | LAU Angela | 8% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 35 | YAP Anna | 1% | 9% | 26% | 35% | 23% | 6% | 1% |
| 36 | WEI Madison | - | 3% | 14% | 31% | 33% | 16% | 3% |
| 37 | WANG Chloe | 15% | 38% | 32% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 38 | SMITH Genevieve | 19% | 40% | 30% | 10% | 2% | - | - |
| 39 | NEGROIU Mara | 2% | 13% | 31% | 33% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 40 | YOUNG Sienna | 4% | 18% | 32% | 29% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 41 | JUN Sofia | 16% | 38% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 42 | MOFFITT Charlotte | 1% | 9% | 26% | 34% | 22% | 6% | 1% |
| 43 | MAGITSKY Giadora | 1% | 12% | 29% | 34% | 19% | 5% | - |
| 44 | FADEL Emma | 3% | 13% | 29% | 31% | 18% | 5% | 1% |
| 45 | ARORA Rhiya | 4% | 17% | 31% | 29% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 46 | KIM Eunjae | 1% | 7% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 7% | 1% |
| 47 | PASSMAN Caroline | 5% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 48 | SAGER Bianca | 14% | 36% | 33% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 49 | MARGULIS Roxana | 1% | 8% | 25% | 35% | 24% | 7% | 1% |
| 50 | DIBADJ Ava | 43% | 40% | 14% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 51 | CHANG Grace | 8% | 29% | 37% | 20% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 52 | KURITNIK Sarah | 4% | 19% | 33% | 28% | 12% | 3% | - |
| 53 | KABILING Anika Von Marie | 1% | 8% | 25% | 34% | 24% | 8% | 1% |
| 54 | WANG Selina | 10% | 31% | 36% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 55 | RIFKIN Talia | 7% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 56 | ROMEO lia | 2% | 12% | 27% | 32% | 20% | 7% | 1% |
| 57 | PARAISO Isabella | 39% | 41% | 16% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 57 | FUNG Dylan | 4% | 21% | 35% | 28% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 59 | SAXENA Devina Shyamli | 30% | 41% | 22% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 60 | CANARAN Daphne M. | 28% | 42% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 61 | CONVERSO-PARSONS Maia | 13% | 35% | 34% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
| 62 | GUAN Vivian | 27% | 41% | 24% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 63 | TOM Danielle | 15% | 37% | 33% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
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.