Rockland Community College, Eugene Levy Field House - 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 | XU Sunia (Tai Yang) | - | - | 1% | 10% | 30% | 40% | 19% |
| 2 | QI Julieanne | - | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 42% | 29% |
| 3 | YANG Hanting(Catherine) | - | - | - | 3% | 16% | 41% | 39% |
| 3 | ADYANTHAYA Anika | - | - | - | 4% | 19% | 43% | 33% |
| 5 | XU Serena | - | - | - | 2% | 13% | 43% | 42% |
| 6 | SU Evelyn | - | - | 1% | 7% | 24% | 40% | 28% |
| 7 | PRESMAN Aerin | - | - | - | 1% | 11% | 39% | 48% |
| 8 | LIANG Carina | 1% | 6% | 21% | 34% | 27% | 10% | 1% |
| 9 | WONG Sydney | - | - | 3% | 14% | 36% | 37% | 10% |
| 10 | DESANTIS-IBANEZ Elena | - | 1% | 5% | 19% | 37% | 31% | 8% |
| 11 | KONG Mila W. | - | 8% | 30% | 38% | 20% | 4% | < 1% |
| 12 | WANG Chloe | - | - | 3% | 14% | 33% | 36% | 13% |
| 13 | KAUR Manroop | - | - | - | 1% | 11% | 39% | 49% |
| 14 | MA Sophie | - | - | 4% | 17% | 35% | 33% | 10% |
| 15 | TAM Connie | - | 2% | 10% | 26% | 34% | 22% | 5% |
| 16 | LI Caroline | - | 1% | 5% | 18% | 34% | 31% | 11% |
| 17 | NING Miranda | - | - | 4% | 19% | 38% | 31% | 7% |
| 18 | GOH Cayla | - | - | - | 3% | 16% | 42% | 39% |
| 19 | MISHIMA Audrey | - | - | 1% | 9% | 28% | 41% | 21% |
| 20 | KAKANI Aditi | 1% | 6% | 22% | 34% | 26% | 9% | 1% |
| 21 | OLELE Ifechi | - | - | 3% | 13% | 32% | 38% | 14% |
| 22 | KROPP Charlie | - | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 41% | 24% |
| 23 | KUMAR Eva | - | - | - | 2% | 13% | 42% | 43% |
| 23 | CHEN Alina | - | 3% | 12% | 28% | 33% | 19% | 4% |
| 25 | ZHU Una | - | 4% | 17% | 34% | 32% | 12% | 2% |
| 26 | WANG Sophie Y. | - | - | 2% | 9% | 29% | 41% | 20% |
| 27 | LOBANOVA Varvara | - | - | 3% | 14% | 34% | 36% | 13% |
| 28 | XIAO Katelyn | 2% | 14% | 32% | 33% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 29 | ZHENG Erin | - | 4% | 19% | 36% | 29% | 9% | 1% |
| 30 | BISONO Valentina | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 39% | 25% | 5% |
| 31 | DEPOMMIER-GONZALEZ Isabelle | - | - | 1% | 9% | 31% | 43% | 15% |
| 32 | BURROWS Beatrice | 5% | 21% | 34% | 27% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 33 | VOSKOV Olivia | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 33% | 11% | 1% |
| 34 | SHEIKH PAREE | 2% | 11% | 28% | 34% | 20% | 5% | - |
| 35 | DHAIYA Tanya | - | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 42% | 28% |
| 36 | PETROFF Eva | - | - | 5% | 21% | 39% | 29% | 7% |
| 37 | KLAUSZ Izabella | 6% | 26% | 37% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 38 | LEE Kate | 1% | 10% | 27% | 35% | 21% | 6% | 1% |
| 39 | ALLIEVI Simone | 4% | 18% | 33% | 30% | 13% | 3% | - |
| 40 | LI Alice | - | 1% | 7% | 25% | 37% | 24% | 5% |
| 41 | HAN Emma | 1% | 9% | 28% | 37% | 20% | 4% | - |
| 42 | LEE Eden | 1% | 10% | 27% | 35% | 21% | 5% | - |
| 43 | WONG Angelina | - | 2% | 10% | 28% | 36% | 20% | 4% |
| 44 | GOLIYAD Lisa | - | 4% | 15% | 31% | 32% | 15% | 3% |
| 45 | KANG kailin | - | 2% | 14% | 33% | 34% | 15% | 2% |
| 46 | JU Jennifer | 9% | 29% | 36% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 47 | KOUAME Candice | 5% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 48 | PINCHUK Yael | 21% | 42% | 28% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 49 | ZOU You yang (Yoyo) | - | 1% | 7% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 7% |
| 50 | LIN Cynthia | 2% | 12% | 28% | 32% | 19% | 6% | 1% |
| 51 | LI Xier | 4% | 20% | 35% | 28% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 52 | BI Michelle | - | 3% | 14% | 32% | 34% | 15% | 2% |
| 53 | CHOU Andrea | 7% | 30% | 39% | 19% | 5% | - | - |
| 54 | SHEFFIELD Skye | - | - | 1% | 8% | 27% | 45% | 19% |
| 55 | FAN Joy | 3% | 17% | 34% | 31% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 55 | YANG Eleanor | 6% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 57 | WEI Sherry | - | - | 2% | 13% | 34% | 38% | 13% |
| 58 | LI Nicole | 9% | 32% | 36% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 59 | MEYER Rebecca | - | 2% | 11% | 31% | 37% | 17% | 2% |
| 60 | FUNATOMI Maya | 15% | 35% | 32% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 61 | CHAKRAPANI Tara | 30% | 43% | 22% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
| 62 | KAMENSKY Elina | 1% | 9% | 27% | 36% | 21% | 6% | - |
| 63 | ZHANG Audrey A. | 4% | 21% | 36% | 27% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 64 | YOUN Kylie | 7% | 30% | 39% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
| 65 | DU Andria | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 36% | 16% | 2% |
| 66 | GRUDZINSKI Josephine | 29% | 46% | 21% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 67 | TING Evelyn | 18% | 37% | 30% | 13% | 3% | - | - |
| 68 | JIANG Chenxi | 1% | 9% | 30% | 36% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 69 | LAW Mila | 3% | 16% | 34% | 31% | 13% | 3% | - |
| 70 | CHEN Laila | 2% | 11% | 28% | 34% | 20% | 5% | - |
| 71 | BOROTKO Katerina | - | 4% | 17% | 34% | 31% | 12% | 2% |
| 72 | SHABBIR Aiza | 28% | 42% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 72 | YOUN Emily | 10% | 34% | 36% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
| 74 | CHEN Allison | 31% | 42% | 22% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
| 75 | HU Chloe | 7% | 28% | 37% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 75 | HOWARD Katherine | 4% | 21% | 37% | 27% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 77 | WU Madisen | 10% | 32% | 36% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 78 | YU Livia | 7% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 79 | TOBY kaja | 4% | 18% | 33% | 29% | 13% | 3% | - |
| 80 | SHIN Jamie | 29% | 42% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 81 | LAU Karina | 11% | 31% | 34% | 18% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 82 | ZHANG Jane | - | 4% | 19% | 36% | 29% | 10% | 1% |
| 83 | FENG Esther | 5% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 84 | LI Rebecca | 12% | 34% | 35% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
| 85 | CHEN Dian | 19% | 41% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 86 | FAYLAYEV Sofia | 42% | 41% | 14% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 87 | VENKATESAN Harshitha | - | 6% | 27% | 39% | 23% | 5% | - |
| 88 | DING Iris Siyue | 4% | 37% | 40% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
| 89 | BUES Caelan | 77% | 21% | 2% | - | - | - | - |
| 90 | YAN Ximei (Alicia) | 1% | 7% | 25% | 37% | 23% | 6% | 1% |
| 91 | XU Mulan | 5% | 25% | 38% | 24% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 92 | YU Eva | < 1% | 3% | 15% | 33% | 33% | 14% | 2% |
| 92 | TIAN Victoria | 13% | 33% | 33% | 16% | 4% | 1% | - |
| 94 | REYES Camila | 13% | 34% | 34% | 16% | 4% | - | - |
| 95 | YAO Sophia | 8% | 27% | 35% | 22% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 96 | NOONAN Jane | 28% | 43% | 23% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
| 97 | PAREKH Riana | 28% | 46% | 22% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 98 | XU Rebecca | 2% | 12% | 29% | 32% | 19% | 5% | 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.