New Haven, CT - New Haven, CT, 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 | ROY Layla | - | - | - | 7% | 37% | 44% | 11% |
2 | ORVANANOS Anice | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 39% | 45% |
3 | WU Celine | - | - | 1% | 9% | 30% | 40% | 20% |
3 | LEE Lavender | - | - | - | 4% | 18% | 43% | 35% |
5 | WILLIS Fletcher L. | - | - | - | 4% | 21% | 47% | 27% |
6 | MI Aileen | - | - | 4% | 19% | 36% | 31% | 9% |
7 | GOOR Viviene E. | - | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 39% | 18% |
8 | YURKOVA Mariia | 1% | 8% | 25% | 35% | 24% | 7% | 1% |
9 | ZHOU olivia | - | 3% | 15% | 32% | 34% | 15% | 1% |
10 | SHA Yi Ling | - | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 38% | 16% |
11 | LIAW Elaine | - | 5% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 7% | 1% |
12 | PAULUS Isabella | 2% | 15% | 34% | 32% | 14% | 3% | - |
13 | TRACZ Calleigh D. | 1% | 8% | 23% | 35% | 25% | 8% | 1% |
14 | YANG Iris | - | 2% | 12% | 29% | 35% | 19% | 3% |
15 | CASCONE Emily | - | - | 1% | 8% | 29% | 44% | 17% |
16 | HOU Wendong | - | 4% | 16% | 32% | 32% | 14% | 2% |
17 | CHO Rebecca H. | - | - | - | 1% | 6% | 31% | 62% |
18 | CHAGARES Isabella | 10% | 37% | 36% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
19 | KAZA Nitya V. | 1% | 9% | 30% | 36% | 19% | 4% | - |
20 | NISSINOFF Alexandra | 1% | 9% | 26% | 35% | 23% | 6% | 1% |
21 | SEAH Dana | - | 4% | 16% | 32% | 32% | 15% | 3% |
22 | AO Alyssa | 31% | 42% | 21% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
23 | CHEN Renee | 1% | 8% | 24% | 34% | 25% | 8% | 1% |
24 | JIANG Claire | 2% | 14% | 33% | 33% | 15% | 2% | - |
25 | ZHOU Sophia | 1% | 7% | 29% | 42% | 18% | 3% | - |
26 | SHMAY Anastasia | - | 1% | 9% | 27% | 36% | 21% | 4% |
27 | GAO Anna | 4% | 21% | 36% | 28% | 10% | 1% | - |
28 | ADVINCULA Allegra | - | 2% | 12% | 28% | 34% | 19% | 4% |
29 | PARSONS Leada | 39% | 41% | 16% | 3% | - | - | - |
30 | WANG Sophie | - | 5% | 20% | 37% | 28% | 9% | 1% |
31 | WANG Sabrina | 6% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
32 | GREENLEAF Ella | 6% | 28% | 38% | 22% | 6% | 1% | - |
33 | COHEN-RAYMOND Beatrix | - | 2% | 10% | 28% | 38% | 21% | 3% |
34 | CHEN Thea | 16% | 38% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
35 | SCHULTZ Norah | 32% | 42% | 21% | 5% | - | - | - |
36 | VENKATESH Isha | 6% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
37 | WANG Jolie Z. | 3% | 21% | 40% | 26% | 8% | 1% | - |
38 | PAULUS Sloane | 43% | 40% | 14% | 2% | - | - | - |
39 | MORGESON Olivia | 21% | 40% | 28% | 10% | 2% | - | - |
40 | ZHANG Ivy | 9% | 32% | 36% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
41 | DALBERG Meadow | 2% | 17% | 39% | 32% | 8% | 1% | - |
42 | DALBERG Violet | 7% | 51% | 32% | 8% | 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.