Secaucus, NJ - Secaucus, 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 | FOUR-GARCIA Madison | - | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 44% | 20% |
2 | NAZLYMOV Tatiana F. | - | - | 4% | 18% | 37% | 33% | 8% |
3 | RIZKALA Joanna | - | - | 1% | 8% | 29% | 43% | 20% |
3 | WIGGERS Susan Q. | - | 2% | 13% | 41% | 39% | 7% | |
5 | LI Amanda C. | - | - | 2% | 13% | 36% | 37% | 12% |
6 | PAK Kaitlyn | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 40% | 44% |
7 | GORMAN Victoria M. | - | - | 5% | 23% | 39% | 27% | 5% |
8 | FERRARI-BRIDGERS Marinella O. | - | 2% | 16% | 39% | 34% | 9% | |
9 | HULSEBURG Kaitlyn | - | - | - | 1% | 11% | 39% | 48% |
10 | CARVALHO Isabela A. | - | - | 3% | 16% | 37% | 34% | 11% |
11 | ENGELMAN Madeline A. | - | - | - | 1% | 12% | 44% | 42% |
12 | CHEN Erica | - | 2% | 13% | 31% | 34% | 17% | 3% |
13 | WEINBERG Alexandra L. | - | - | 1% | 6% | 26% | 43% | 24% |
14 | ATLURI Sara V. | 2% | 13% | 33% | 34% | 16% | 3% | |
15 | LEVITIS Danielle | - | 5% | 20% | 35% | 28% | 11% | 1% |
16 | SLOBODSKY Sasha L. | 6% | 36% | 40% | 16% | 2% | - | |
17 | CHANG Emily | - | - | 5% | 24% | 43% | 26% | |
18 | SCHMITT Alana P. | - | 4% | 17% | 35% | 31% | 11% | 1% |
19 | CANNON Sophia E. | - | 4% | 17% | 32% | 30% | 14% | 2% |
20 | SINHA Anika | - | - | 1% | 9% | 28% | 40% | 21% |
21 | SHOMAN Jenna | - | - | - | 4% | 28% | 68% | |
22 | TAO Hannah J. | - | - | - | 6% | 24% | 44% | 26% |
23 | SCALAMONI-GOLDSTEIN Charlotte S. | - | - | - | 5% | 21% | 42% | 31% |
24 | CHIOLDI Mina | 1% | 7% | 23% | 37% | 26% | 6% | - |
25 | NEIBART Fiona | - | 2% | 14% | 34% | 34% | 14% | 2% |
26 | YURT Leyla | - | 2% | 12% | 33% | 36% | 16% | 2% |
27 | CHEN Xinyan | 1% | 9% | 28% | 37% | 22% | 5% | |
28 | KOO Samantha | - | 3% | 18% | 38% | 32% | 9% | |
29 | SADOVA Olga | 10% | 32% | 36% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
30 | LUKASHENKO Angelina | - | 1% | 8% | 27% | 40% | 21% | 3% |
31 | SATHYANATH Kailing | 1% | 7% | 25% | 37% | 25% | 6% | |
32 | ZHIZHIN Jeanette | 15% | 46% | 30% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
33 | DEPEW Charlotte R. | 8% | 30% | 37% | 19% | 5% | < 1% | - |
35 | SHOMAN Miriam | - | 1% | 8% | 27% | 41% | 23% | |
36 | PRIEUR Lauren | 1% | 11% | 33% | 36% | 16% | 3% | - |
37 | GRINBERG Aliya | 1% | 17% | 38% | 32% | 11% | 1% | - |
38 | BOIS Adele | 1% | 10% | 35% | 36% | 15% | 3% | - |
39 | SUBRAMANIAN Nitika | - | - | 5% | 21% | 38% | 29% | 7% |
40 | FAY Zoe A. | 26% | 44% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - | |
41 | HU Allison C. | 17% | 44% | 31% | 8% | 1% | - | |
42 | O'HARA Eimile J. | 1% | 8% | 32% | 38% | 18% | 3% | |
43 | LIGH Karis | 46% | 41% | 12% | 1% | - | - | |
44 | IQBAL Sulphia | 23% | 54% | 21% | 3% | - | - | |
45 | KRYLOVA Valery | - | 3% | 14% | 30% | 33% | 17% | 3% |
46 | SPORN Melanie | 2% | 19% | 38% | 30% | 10% | 2% | - |
47 | SU Emma | 1% | 7% | 21% | 33% | 27% | 10% | 1% |
48 | HAN Lauren | - | 5% | 22% | 36% | 26% | 9% | 1% |
49 | NI Sharon | 2% | 13% | 33% | 35% | 15% | 3% | - |
50 | KALINICHENKO Alexandra (Sasha) | - | 1% | 10% | 28% | 37% | 21% | 3% |
51 | FU Linqian (Helen) | 2% | 18% | 37% | 30% | 11% | 2% | - |
52 | WANG Jianning | 28% | 42% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
53 | BAKER Audrey C. | - | 7% | 28% | 39% | 21% | 5% | - |
54 | LIAO Siwen | - | 5% | 24% | 43% | 24% | 2% | |
56 | HAQ Nylah | 51% | 38% | 10% | 1% | - | - | - |
57 | MEYTIN Sophia E. | 57% | 36% | 7% | 1% | - | - | - |
58 | BHOGAL Sukhleen | 11% | 41% | 36% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
59 | JIN Olivia P. | 2% | 13% | 33% | 34% | 15% | 3% | - |
59 | PAONE Karina K. | 2% | 21% | 41% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - |
61 | KOTSEN Ava L. | 7% | 25% | 35% | 24% | 8% | 1% | - |
62 | ELDER Rhiannon C. | 53% | 37% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - |
63 | LIN Selena | 11% | 34% | 36% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
64 | MU Vicki Y. | 7% | 30% | 37% | 20% | 5% | 1% | - |
65 | MADA Skye | 54% | 38% | 7% | 1% | - | - | - |
66 | XU Jenny | 11% | 40% | 39% | 9% | 1% | - | |
67 | FAUSTINO Emily | 76% | 22% | 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.