Ontario Convention Center - Ontario, CA, 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 | WANG Zoe | - | - | - | 3% | 19% | 47% | 31% |
| 2 | WANG Ziqi (yoyo) | - | - | - | 4% | 17% | 41% | 38% |
| 3 | MONTOYA Kimberlee C. | - | - | 1% | 6% | 32% | 61% | |
| 3 | CAMAMA Tessa | - | 4% | 17% | 34% | 33% | 12% | |
| 5 | CHUNG Penelope | 1% | 7% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 7% | |
| 6 | HANKINS Morgan | - | - | 4% | 17% | 35% | 33% | 11% |
| 7 | LI Xiaoyun | - | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 42% | 23% |
| 8 | WU Jessica | - | 2% | 13% | 32% | 37% | 15% | |
| 9 | MAI Mailan | 1% | 9% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 5% | |
| 10 | LEE Camilla | - | 2% | 11% | 31% | 39% | 17% | |
| 11 | WANG Victoria | 1% | 7% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 7% | |
| 12 | GIERAT-KATZ Izabella | 1% | 12% | 32% | 35% | 16% | 3% | |
| 13 | LAI Amanda | - | 3% | 16% | 34% | 34% | 13% | |
| 14 | SALISTRA Emilia | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 38% | 16% | |
| 15 | HERNASA Anna | - | 5% | 18% | 33% | 30% | 13% | 2% |
| 16 | HEPLER Sarah | - | 1% | 8% | 25% | 37% | 24% | 5% |
| 17 | XU Jessica | - | 3% | 15% | 36% | 34% | 11% | 1% |
| 18 | MOLLINIER Angel | 1% | 5% | 19% | 33% | 29% | 11% | 1% |
| 19 | GUO Luxi | - | - | 1% | 5% | 21% | 43% | 30% |
| 20 | WANG Chantal | 5% | 24% | 37% | 26% | 7% | 1% | |
| 21 | BUSH emma | - | - | 3% | 16% | 42% | 39% | |
| 22 | KROTZ Gemma | 3% | 18% | 36% | 31% | 11% | 1% | |
| 23 | MENDOZA zoie | - | 4% | 17% | 36% | 34% | 9% | |
| 24 | FU Shannon | 7% | 27% | 37% | 22% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 25 | SUN Karolyn | 4% | 19% | 34% | 29% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 26 | CHIEM Karen | 1% | 8% | 24% | 34% | 24% | 8% | 1% |
| 27 | OPERARIO Abigail Z. | 1% | 6% | 23% | 36% | 27% | 7% | |
| 28 | SHETTY Nandita | 24% | 41% | 26% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 29 | SUN Hanya | - | 3% | 14% | 34% | 36% | 14% | |
| 30 | HARRISON Amelia H. | - | - | < 1% | 4% | 20% | 46% | 29% |
| 31 | JIN Zhengtian | - | 4% | 16% | 32% | 31% | 14% | 2% |
| 32 | GAN Shelby | 7% | 29% | 38% | 21% | 5% | - | |
| 33 | CHEN Weiting | - | 1% | 6% | 19% | 35% | 30% | 9% |
| 34 | GULLY Wren | 2% | 13% | 31% | 33% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 35 | LIN Isabel | 5% | 24% | 38% | 25% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 36 | LEE Yeriel | 1% | 10% | 29% | 36% | 20% | 4% | |
| 37 | MADRID Maureen | 6% | 26% | 38% | 24% | 6% | - | |
| 38 | JAMES Ashley | 8% | 29% | 37% | 20% | 5% | - | |
| 39 | AIRES Julia | 3% | 21% | 38% | 28% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 40 | LEREE Fernanda | 5% | 26% | 38% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 41 | BURICEA Ada | 2% | 14% | 32% | 33% | 16% | 3% | |
| 42 | CHEONG Chloe | 3% | 19% | 36% | 30% | 11% | 1% | |
| 43 | LI Yunxuan (Joy) | 11% | 35% | 36% | 16% | 3% | - | |
| 44 | HUANG Lanlan | 1% | 6% | 24% | 40% | 26% | 4% | |
| 44 | SCHULTZ Nomi | 1% | 11% | 31% | 37% | 17% | 2% | |
| 46 | CHEN Julia Z. | 22% | 41% | 28% | 8% | 1% | - | |
| 47 | MAENG Gloria | 44% | 40% | 13% | 2% | - | - | |
| 48 | KUTSY Olga | 10% | 32% | 35% | 18% | 5% | - | |
| 49 | SCHOR Elisabeth | 1% | 12% | 32% | 36% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 50 | FREEMAN Katherine | 6% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 50 | RADOV Una | 25% | 40% | 25% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 52 | GUESNARD Maelig | 1% | 9% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 5% | - |
| 53 | HALUSHKO Liliia | 2% | 13% | 29% | 33% | 18% | 5% | - |
| 54 | LIANG Jingjing | 1% | 10% | 30% | 36% | 19% | 4% | |
| 55 | BUCA Nora | 7% | 26% | 37% | 23% | 6% | 1% | |
| 56 | MENG Fina | 27% | 41% | 24% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 57 | RALSTON Katherine | 26% | 41% | 25% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 58 | KANE Chloe | 8% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 6% | 1% | |
| 59 | THOMSON Sarah | 26% | 41% | 25% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 60 | BROWN Riley | 2% | 12% | 30% | 33% | 18% | 4% | - |
| 61 | BLASKO Judit | 27% | 41% | 24% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 62 | CHAN Allison M. | 1% | 8% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 5% | |
| 63 | EGENOLF Gabriella | 31% | 42% | 22% | 5% | 1% | - | |
| 64 | XU Hua | 44% | 40% | 14% | 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.