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 | JING Emily | - | - | - | - | 6% | 35% | 59% |
| 2 | LUNG Katerina | - | - | 1% | 5% | 24% | 46% | 24% |
| 3 | PEVZNER Victoria | - | - | - | - | 4% | 28% | 68% |
| 3 | CHEN Jia P. | - | - | - | 3% | 18% | 46% | 33% |
| 5 | NG Sarah W. | - | - | - | 3% | 18% | 50% | 29% |
| 6 | ZHANG Alina C. | - | - | 4% | 22% | 49% | 25% | |
| 6 | OUYANG Bridgette Z. | - | - | 1% | 9% | 36% | 54% | |
| 8 | SHEN Lydia | 1% | 10% | 31% | 36% | 18% | 3% | |
| 9 | ZHAO Aileen Y. | - | - | 4% | 20% | 38% | 29% | 7% |
| 10 | FU Qihan | 1% | 6% | 23% | 38% | 26% | 6% | - |
| 11 | CHEN Allison V. | - | - | 1% | 10% | 29% | 40% | 20% |
| 12 | WU Celine | 1% | 12% | 35% | 37% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 13 | LIU Angel(Daying) | - | - | 1% | 9% | 27% | 41% | 22% |
| 14 | SEO Irene Y. | - | - | 2% | 16% | 45% | 37% | |
| 15 | SENIC Adeline | - | 4% | 18% | 36% | 31% | 10% | |
| 16 | KULKARNI Sohah A. | 3% | 27% | 41% | 23% | 5% | - | |
| 17 | TAN Kaitlyn N. | - | 2% | 13% | 36% | 36% | 12% | |
| 18 | YAO Ada | - | - | - | 5% | 24% | 46% | 25% |
| 19 | HU Felice | - | 1% | 11% | 34% | 39% | 15% | |
| 20 | CHARALEL Jessica | 13% | 34% | 34% | 16% | 4% | - | - |
| 21 | KOKES Gwendolen | 3% | 16% | 32% | 31% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 22 | WANG Jasmine | - | - | 2% | 9% | 28% | 40% | 22% |
| 23 | SU Michelle | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 32% | 11% | 1% |
| 24 | SIMONOV Dasha | 1% | 7% | 25% | 40% | 25% | 3% | |
| 25 | WANG Chloe | 1% | 16% | 40% | 33% | 10% | 1% | |
| 26 | KAPUSTINA Arina | - | 3% | 20% | 40% | 30% | 7% | |
| 27 | CHO Rebecca H. | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 37% | 28% | 7% |
| 28 | LEE Lavender | - | 4% | 19% | 35% | 30% | 10% | 1% |
| 29 | ROY Layla | 3% | 17% | 35% | 32% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 30 | WILLIS Fletcher L. | 3% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 15% | 3% | - |
| 31 | SOLDATOVA Maria | 16% | 43% | 32% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 32 | EYER Hailey M. | 3% | 16% | 32% | 31% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 33 | WANG Yudi | - | 6% | 22% | 38% | 27% | 7% | - |
| 34 | LENZ Zoe N. | 1% | 10% | 31% | 38% | 17% | 2% | |
| 35 | TUCKER ALARCON Frida | 1% | 6% | 21% | 36% | 28% | 8% | 1% |
| 36 | FURST Chloe | 6% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 37 | MARKOVSKY Nina | - | 2% | 12% | 33% | 38% | 15% | - |
| 38 | HOU Wendong | 1% | 6% | 21% | 34% | 27% | 10% | 1% |
| 39 | LI Sophia M. | - | - | 5% | 28% | 45% | 22% | |
| 40 | SHA Yi Ling | - | 4% | 19% | 35% | 31% | 10% | |
| 41 | NAGER Abigail | 9% | 34% | 40% | 15% | 2% | - | |
| 42 | ORVANANOS Anice | 1% | 13% | 39% | 37% | 10% | 1% | |
| 43 | ZHENG Julie | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 37% | 16% | 1% |
| 44 | CHENG Angelina | - | 2% | 15% | 35% | 33% | 13% | 2% |
| 45 | SHMAY Anastasia | - | - | 4% | 19% | 38% | 31% | 7% |
| 46 | QIAN Jade | 18% | 40% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 47 | ZHANG Elaine | 11% | 33% | 35% | 17% | 4% | - | - |
| 48 | PARK Jacqueline | 17% | 36% | 31% | 13% | 3% | - | - |
| 49 | FORNES Jolie A. | 2% | 14% | 33% | 34% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 50 | ZHOU Sophia | 5% | 35% | 41% | 16% | 2% | - | |
| 51 | CHOW Annabelle | 12% | 42% | 36% | 10% | 1% | - | |
| 52 | JHAVERI Sanjana | 43% | 42% | 13% | 2% | - | - | |
| 53 | DESOLA Lucy | 20% | 39% | 29% | 10% | 2% | - | |
| 54 | JI Eva | 8% | 30% | 38% | 20% | 4% | - | |
| 55 | LEVY Avery | 11% | 34% | 36% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
| 56 | GAO Anna | 13% | 37% | 35% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
| 57 | CHAGARES Isabella | 5% | 26% | 39% | 24% | 5% | - | - |
| 58 | BADLANI Diya | 20% | 39% | 29% | 10% | 2% | - | - |
| 59 | SHTROM Uma A. | 20% | 41% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 60 | TANG Sophia | 24% | 44% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - | |
| 61 | KUTTIKAT Sanjana | 73% | 25% | 3% | - | - | - | |
| 62 | KANDADAI Lara | 11% | 37% | 37% | 13% | 1% | - | |
| 63 | ZHANG Alina | 6% | 28% | 39% | 22% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 64 | ZHU Elise | 7% | 44% | 37% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 65 | PAULUS Isabella | 6% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 66 | JIN Wendy | 37% | 43% | 17% | 3% | - | - | - |
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.