Salt Lake City, UT - Salt Lake City, UT, 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 | KOCAB Elizabeth (Liz) R. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 52% |
| 2 | LAWSON Marie A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 53% | |
| 3 | HABERKERN Kundry E. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 72% | 25% | |
| 3 | TOTEMEIER Ann M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 36% |
| 5 | LORENTSON Dawn M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 51% | 14% |
| 6 | QUINLAN Nicole P. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 47% | |
| 7 | ZAFFT Sharrie A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 39% |
| 8 | SCHMID Carola K. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 50% | 14% | |
| 9 | SLIKAS Beth | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 83% | 51% | 15% |
| 10 | BYRON Karen J. | 100% | 97% | 81% | 50% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 11 | ASHER Valerie | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 79% | 32% | |
| 12 | BLOOMER Suzanne | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 59% | 19% | |
| 13 | HURME June A. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 73% | 35% | 8% | 1% |
| 14 | TELLES Anna | 100% | 100% | 94% | 69% | 30% | 7% | 1% |
| 15 | GLOVER Cynthia E. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 65% | 30% | 6% | |
| 16 | MIDGLEY Janice M. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 62% | 24% | 4% | |
| 17 | LYNCH Kristin A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 54% | 13% |
| 18 | GORDET Cristina G. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 40% | 6% |
| 19 | LEIGHTON Louise N. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 59% | 15% | |
| 20 | CAREY Michele S. | 100% | 93% | 68% | 33% | 9% | 1% | |
| 21 | INAMDAR Nina S. | 100% | 96% | 77% | 44% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 22 | PROKOP Jeannine A. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 27% | 5% | |
| 23 | HEINRICH Eva | 100% | 100% | 97% | 77% | 33% | 5% | |
| 24 | TADLOCK Christine M. | 100% | 97% | 80% | 46% | 14% | 1% | |
| 25 | FREY Alison | 100% | 96% | 74% | 33% | 7% | - | |
| 26 | WOLF Lisa A. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 60% | 22% | 3% |
| 27 | BRISK Angelica A. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 54% | 20% | 3% |
| 28 | MCMENAMIN Dianna S. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 86% | 53% | 16% | 2% |
| 29 | GRIFFIN Martha A. | 100% | 98% | 83% | 51% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 30 | RICH Caroline B. | 100% | 99% | 88% | 56% | 17% | 2% | |
| 31 | MAUL Judy L. | 100% | 93% | 62% | 19% | 2% | - | |
| 32 | WOUNDY Melissa A. | 100% | 98% | 80% | 41% | 11% | 1% | - |
| 33 | HOFMAN Haejung | 100% | 93% | 65% | 28% | 6% | - | |
| 34 | DANNHAUSER Carol A. | 100% | 83% | 43% | 12% | 2% | - | |
| 35 | AHER Bonnie | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 62% | 27% | 5% |
| 36 | BELAOUSSOFF Vera | 100% | 100% | 94% | 67% | 27% | 5% | - |
| 37 | CHRISTIAN Lyn T. | 100% | 97% | 81% | 50% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 38 | ROWLAND May | 100% | 99% | 90% | 64% | 29% | 7% | 1% |
| 39 | BOWIE Charlotta | 100% | 88% | 57% | 23% | 5% | - | |
| 40 | WILKENS Patricia A. | 100% | 81% | 41% | 11% | 2% | - | |
| 41 | HUZEL Lisa | 100% | 98% | 85% | 56% | 23% | 4% | |
| 42 | GROENING Joanne | 100% | 99% | 88% | 60% | 23% | 3% | |
| 43 | NOLLNER Jennifer R. | 100% | 84% | 38% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 44 | FINNEGAN Ellen M. | 100% | 96% | 76% | 39% | 10% | 1% | |
| 45 | FERREIRA DA COSTA Claudia M. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 64% | 27% | 5% | |
| 46 | MANDEL Helen (Jenner) | 100% | 80% | 41% | 11% | 1% | - | |
| 47 | SIENDA Angela J. | 100% | 57% | 16% | 2% | - | - | |
| 48 | RUNYON Cynthia J. | 100% | 97% | 81% | 46% | 14% | 2% | |
| 49 | RADICH Lori G. | 100% | 95% | 76% | 43% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 50 | GROCE Linda J. | 100% | 53% | 14% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 50 | MASE Kerin | 100% | 26% | 2% | - | - | - | - |
| 52 | RIOS Donna B. | 100% | 95% | 65% | 25% | 5% | - | - |
| 53 | REAM Jann L. | 100% | 61% | 17% | 2% | - | - | |
| 54 | JEANDHEUR Carole A. | 100% | 93% | 46% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
| 55 | JULIEN Erica | 100% | 89% | 50% | 14% | 2% | - | |
| 56 | SIMARD Sherrol A. | 100% | 36% | 6% | - | - | - | - |
| 57 | BROWN Trish M. | 100% | 96% | 77% | 45% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 58 | STANICA Teodora O. | 100% | 97% | 78% | 43% | 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.