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 | CHOI Charlotte | - | 1% | 9% | 29% | 41% | 20% | |
| 2 | VINOKUR Anita | - | - | 3% | 17% | 41% | 38% | |
| 3 | YOUNG Charlotte G. | - | - | - | 2% | 12% | 39% | 47% |
| 3 | KWON Ava | 2% | 16% | 35% | 32% | 14% | 2% | |
| 5 | SHMULER Fiona | - | - | 1% | 10% | 31% | 41% | 17% |
| 6 | WANG MONA | 3% | 20% | 37% | 29% | 10% | 1% | |
| 7 | GUGALA Hanna | - | - | 4% | 19% | 43% | 35% | |
| 8 | ZHAO Selena | - | 5% | 19% | 33% | 29% | 12% | 2% |
| 9 | SCHAIBLE Sofia L. | - | 3% | 14% | 35% | 37% | 12% | |
| 10 | HALPERIN Elizabeth H. | 1% | 6% | 21% | 36% | 28% | 8% | |
| 11 | CHIANG Melissa | - | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 39% | 19% |
| 12 | FOSS Persephone | - | 5% | 20% | 33% | 28% | 11% | 2% |
| 13 | FUNG Iris | - | 3% | 14% | 32% | 36% | 15% | |
| 14 | MOON Claire | 1% | 9% | 28% | 38% | 21% | 4% | |
| 15 | DUTA Lyra | - | 4% | 18% | 37% | 30% | 10% | 1% |
| 16 | NEUMAN Ella | 2% | 14% | 33% | 35% | 15% | 2% | |
| 17 | BUSH Bethany | - | - | 3% | 14% | 32% | 35% | 15% |
| 18 | HUANG Rachael | - | - | 3% | 16% | 41% | 39% | |
| 19 | LIU Chelsea | - | 4% | 19% | 36% | 29% | 10% | 1% |
| 20 | CAI Xinyi | - | 3% | 14% | 33% | 35% | 14% | |
| 21 | SPEARS Mya B | - | - | - | 4% | 21% | 44% | 30% |
| 22 | XU Elaine | - | - | 3% | 15% | 34% | 35% | 13% |
| 23 | BORGUETA Madison | - | 1% | 10% | 28% | 36% | 21% | 4% |
| 24 | YANNOPOULOS Pompie | 1% | 8% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 6% | |
| 25 | HU Alicia | 6% | 25% | 38% | 24% | 6% | 1% | |
| 26 | LEE Grace | 22% | 41% | 28% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 27 | BARNES Sarah | - | 5% | 20% | 35% | 28% | 10% | 1% |
| 28 | HO Sophia | 2% | 15% | 35% | 32% | 13% | 3% | - |
| 29 | KHOST Maeve | 4% | 27% | 40% | 23% | 6% | 1% | |
| 30 | VISWANATHAN Nishka | 7% | 30% | 38% | 20% | 4% | - | |
| 31 | CO SAY Meagan Elizabeth | - | 2% | 12% | 28% | 33% | 20% | 5% |
| 32 | WU Harper | 39% | 41% | 16% | 3% | - | - | |
| 33 | VATS Ishita | - | 4% | 20% | 36% | 29% | 10% | 1% |
| 34 | NEDOPAKA Kateryna | - | 4% | 19% | 38% | 31% | 9% | |
| 35 | MERMEGAS Olivia | - | 6% | 23% | 37% | 26% | 7% | |
| 36 | PROBASCO Leila | 2% | 15% | 35% | 33% | 13% | 2% | |
| 37 | IANNUZZI Lucy | - | 3% | 15% | 36% | 35% | 12% | |
| 38 | RANDALL-COLLINS Shea M. | 2% | 15% | 34% | 33% | 14% | 2% | |
| 39 | LIU Teresa | 11% | 36% | 35% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 40 | TASSONE Charlie | 18% | 41% | 31% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 41 | BUTMAN Chloe Alexandra | 1% | 11% | 28% | 34% | 20% | 6% | 1% |
| 42 | CHOWDHERY Myra | - | 2% | 12% | 30% | 35% | 18% | 3% |
| 43 | PARK Haylie | - | 2% | 12% | 31% | 36% | 16% | 2% |
| 44 | KIM Audrey | - | 7% | 23% | 34% | 25% | 9% | 1% |
| 45 | HILD Anya | 18% | 38% | 30% | 11% | 2% | - | |
| 46 | NG Sophia | 1% | 7% | 26% | 38% | 24% | 4% | |
| 47 | JAJRA Avni | 59% | 33% | 7% | 1% | - | - | |
| 48 | GOODWIN Julia | 46% | 39% | 12% | 2% | - | - | |
| 49 | MISHRA Riona | 59% | 33% | 7% | 1% | - | - | |
| 50 | KANG Soeun | - | 4% | 18% | 35% | 30% | 11% | 1% |
| 51 | SHI Chuqing | 11% | 34% | 36% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
| 52 | WONG Charlene | 2% | 14% | 34% | 34% | 15% | 2% | |
| 53 | NANDA Maanika | 6% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 8% | 1% | |
| 54 | ILAGAN Ava | 6% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 8% | 1% | |
| 55 | MYAT Chloe | 1% | 7% | 25% | 37% | 24% | 6% | |
| 56 | HU Sophia | 63% | 31% | 6% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 57 | CHURCH Madeline | 60% | 32% | 7% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 58 | BAINS Nandini | 11% | 33% | 36% | 17% | 3% | - | |
| 59 | NAYAK Esha | 1% | 13% | 32% | 34% | 16% | 3% | |
| 59 | LAFFY Lily | 1% | 7% | 26% | 38% | 24% | 5% | |
| 61 | LEE Kaitlin | 3% | 21% | 39% | 28% | 8% | 1% | |
| 62 | BANEGAS Shelly | 5% | 36% | 38% | 17% | 4% | - | - |
| 63 | VATSA Shradha | 37% | 42% | 17% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 64 | HUANG Zoe | 14% | 37% | 34% | 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.