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 | YANG Iris | - | - | - | - | 19% | 80% | |
| 2 | TANG Melody Fujiao | - | - | - | 1% | 10% | 38% | 50% |
| 3 | DAI Zizhuo (Zizi) | - | - | - | - | 2% | 22% | 76% |
| 3 | WANG Carol | - | - | - | - | 5% | 31% | 64% |
| 5 | FENG Audrey | - | - | 2% | 15% | 43% | 40% | |
| 6 | GUAN Adeline | - | 1% | 5% | 22% | 42% | 30% | |
| 7 | SHIN Elizabeth | 4% | 20% | 36% | 29% | 10% | 1% | |
| 8 | LI Alice | - | - | 2% | 16% | 38% | 35% | 9% |
| 9 | WANG Amabel | - | - | 4% | 19% | 44% | 32% | |
| 10 | MARISI Gianna | - | - | 1% | 11% | 40% | 48% | |
| 11 | XIE Lillian | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 42% | 42% |
| 12 | ZELDIN Nadia | - | - | 1% | 9% | 33% | 43% | 15% |
| 13 | JOO Sara | - | 2% | 17% | 37% | 33% | 10% | 1% |
| 14 | KAPRAN Anastasia | - | - | 1% | 15% | 69% | 14% | |
| 15 | LI Han (Helina) | - | - | - | 2% | 15% | 42% | 41% |
| 16 | LI Joy | - | - | 3% | 19% | 42% | 31% | 5% |
| 17 | CHEN Renee | - | - | - | - | 1% | 16% | 84% |
| 18 | EYER Brooke | - | - | 5% | 27% | 41% | 23% | 4% |
| 19 | WANG Joanna | - | - | - | 1% | 8% | 36% | 56% |
| 20 | SHIM Grace J. | - | - | - | 1% | 6% | 33% | 60% |
| 21 | YAO Abby | - | 1% | 7% | 30% | 40% | 19% | 3% |
| 22 | WANG SIQI | - | - | 1% | 11% | 42% | 46% | |
| 23 | YACOBUCCI Nadia | - | 2% | 14% | 38% | 36% | 10% | |
| 24 | WU Chingfei Amber | - | - | 4% | 24% | 43% | 26% | 3% |
| 25 | MUMMANENI Samyuta | - | - | - | 3% | 28% | 60% | 8% |
| 26 | MCFARLANE Asha | - | - | 4% | 20% | 40% | 30% | 6% |
| 27 | KRAHE Annika | - | - | 4% | 20% | 39% | 31% | 5% |
| 28 | MCSHERRY Kayla | - | - | 3% | 18% | 40% | 32% | 6% |
| 29 | KIM Claire | - | 2% | 14% | 37% | 37% | 9% | |
| 30 | BADLANI Diya | 1% | 9% | 31% | 41% | 16% | 2% | |
| 31 | ORBE-AUSTIN Nia | 1% | 8% | 27% | 38% | 22% | 4% | |
| 32 | DE CASTRO Kai | - | 5% | 24% | 39% | 25% | 6% | - |
| 33 | JIANG Chloe | - | - | 5% | 24% | 42% | 25% | 4% |
| 34 | YUAN Agnes | - | 3% | 17% | 35% | 33% | 12% | 1% |
| 35 | YU Jane | - | 1% | 7% | 28% | 44% | 20% | |
| 36 | DIMATULAC Elise Ann | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 42% | 29% | |
| 36 | ORRINGER Lottie | 1% | 6% | 24% | 41% | 24% | 4% | |
| 38 | HAFEZ Tahiyah | - | 1% | 6% | 27% | 47% | 19% | |
| 39 | WANG Dina C. | - | - | 8% | 30% | 40% | 19% | 3% |
| 40 | YU Eliza | - | 5% | 23% | 38% | 26% | 7% | - |
| 41 | DONG Iris | - | 1% | 14% | 41% | 34% | 10% | 1% |
| 42 | ZHAO Olivia | - | - | 4% | 25% | 53% | 17% | 1% |
| 43 | PUTHOFF Olivia | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 40% | 25% | 4% |
| 44 | BERTOLINI Mia | - | 8% | 28% | 37% | 22% | 5% | - |
| 45 | LIN Yunong | - | 2% | 15% | 39% | 34% | 11% | 1% |
| 46 | HARRIS Parker | - | 4% | 19% | 40% | 30% | 7% | |
| 47 | LEO Jenna | 16% | 41% | 33% | 10% | 1% | - | |
| 48 | WAN Celine | 1% | 11% | 37% | 40% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 49 | LI Savannah | 1% | 10% | 28% | 37% | 20% | 4% | |
| 50 | CHEN Sophie | 1% | 7% | 24% | 38% | 25% | 6% | |
| 51 | OLAWOYE Jadesola | 12% | 36% | 35% | 14% | 3% | - | |
| 52 | ORBÉ-AUSTIN Maya | 1% | 11% | 32% | 38% | 16% | 2% | |
| 53 | SHANG Arianna | 35% | 43% | 18% | 4% | - | - | |
| 54 | SINGH Evangelina | - | 5% | 23% | 37% | 27% | 7% | - |
| 55 | ZHU Ella | - | 5% | 41% | 39% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 56 | SFINTESCU Emma | 1% | 14% | 42% | 32% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 57 | YIN Chloe | - | 4% | 23% | 39% | 26% | 7% | - |
| 58 | RIVERA Leahy | - | 4% | 21% | 40% | 27% | 7% | - |
| 59 | FEDER Acadia | 3% | 24% | 39% | 25% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 60 | WANG Annie | 1% | 10% | 30% | 36% | 19% | 3% | |
| 61 | HUSSIAN Annabelle | 12% | 36% | 36% | 14% | 2% | - | |
| 62 | PAN Yiran | 15% | 37% | 32% | 13% | 2% | - | |
| 63 | REZA Fukaina | 5% | 25% | 41% | 24% | 5% | - | |
| 64 | COLE Sofia | 29% | 45% | 21% | 4% | - | - | |
| 65 | CHOI Cara | 20% | 45% | 29% | 6% | - | - | |
| 66 | BENNETT Emi | 30% | 45% | 21% | 3% | - | - | |
| 67 | CHO Olivia | 17% | 39% | 31% | 11% | 2% | - | |
| 68 | PEVZNER Sophia | 30% | 43% | 22% | 5% | - | - | |
| 69 | YANG Hanli | 16% | 40% | 33% | 10% | 1% | - | |
| 70 | CLARK Lillian | 9% | 40% | 37% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 71 | DESERANNO Seren | - | 2% | 14% | 33% | 35% | 15% | 1% |
| 72 | LAVINE Samantha | 2% | 23% | 45% | 26% | 4% | - | - |
| 73 | CHAN Kaitlyn | 34% | 46% | 18% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 74 | SONG Sarah | 68% | 28% | 4% | - | - | - | - |
| 75 | LI Christina | 1% | 27% | 42% | 23% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 76 | BAULIN Zoya | 7% | 31% | 43% | 18% | 1% | - | |
| 77 | TOROPOVA Arina | 2% | 21% | 43% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 78 | SHEN Gloria | 1% | 18% | 41% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 79 | XU-FERGUSON Victoria | 21% | 44% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 80 | BO Iris | 5% | 26% | 40% | 24% | 5% | - | |
| 81 | ZAMLYNNY Maya | - | 5% | 20% | 37% | 30% | 8% | |
| 81 | CHAN Jolene | 8% | 31% | 40% | 18% | 3% | - | |
| 83 | KATS Ekaterina | 12% | 36% | 35% | 14% | 2% | - | |
| 84 | SONG Erin | 2% | 14% | 41% | 39% | 5% | - | |
| 85 | DHALIWAL Seerat | 24% | 49% | 22% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 87 | LENZ Phoebe | 29% | 62% | 9% | - | - | - | - |
| 88 | RAFFAELE Nancy | 10% | 36% | 40% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 89 | JUVVADI Aanika | 90% | 9% | - | - | - | - | - |
| 90 | GUSTAFSSON Anna | 62% | 35% | 2% | - | - | - | - |
| 90 | UDUD Katherine | 37% | 46% | 16% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 92 | MACKINTOSH Quinn | 28% | 44% | 23% | 5% | - | - | |
| 93 | ZHANG Caroline | 18% | 44% | 31% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 94 | POLING Katherine | 19% | 41% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 95 | GOMEZ Sofia | 35% | 53% | 11% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 96 | OTTAVIANO Maris | 6% | 39% | 41% | 13% | 1% | - | - |
| 96 | PIERSIG Eleanor | 58% | 35% | 7% | - | - | - | - |
| 98 | SEO Celine | 71% | 26% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
| 99 | MCCORMICK Ella | 41% | 44% | 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.