Kansas City, MO - Kansas City, MO, USA
Explore the probability of achieving at least a certain number of victories in the pool 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 | CHIOLDI Mina | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 48% | 14% |
2 | DUCKETT Madison | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 60% | 25% | 4% |
3 | STONE Hava S. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 35% | 6% |
3 | MIKA Veronica | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 79% | 42% | 10% |
5 | JULIEN Michelle | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 74% | 38% | 9% |
6 | BAKER Audrey C. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 52% | 19% | 3% |
7 | BALMASEDA Sabrina F. | 100% | 100% | 94% | 71% | 37% | 11% | 1% |
8 | BALAKUMARAN Maya | 100% | 100% | 95% | 74% | 40% | 13% | 2% |
9 | YODER Bridget H. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 51% | 18% | 3% |
10 | SUBRAMANIAN Nitika | 100% | 98% | 86% | 59% | 27% | 7% | 1% |
11 | TIMOFEYEV Nicole | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 58% | 17% |
12 | LI Victoria J. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 68% | 32% | 7% |
13 | OBRADOVIC Ana | 100% | 98% | 87% | 60% | 28% | 7% | 1% |
14 | ZIELINSKI Isabella G. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 36% | 9% |
15 | ATLURI Sara V. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 72% | 35% | 7% |
16 | TURNOF Kayla M. | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 34% | 9% | 1% |
17 | YONG Erika E. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 71% | 27% |
18 | NOVICK Mia J. | 100% | 97% | 80% | 47% | 17% | 3% | < 1% |
19 | CANNON Sophia E. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 74% | 40% | 10% |
20 | ENGELMAN Madeline A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 60% | 21% |
21 | TUCKER Iman R. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 73% | 37% | 8% |
22 | HURST Kennedy | 100% | 95% | 76% | 43% | 16% | 3% | - |
23 | PRIEUR Lauren | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 49% | 18% | 3% |
24 | XI Shining | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 53% | 20% | 3% |
25 | KOBERSTEIN Maggie | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 57% | 23% | 4% |
26 | GIRARDI Aemilia | 100% | 94% | 71% | 37% | 12% | 2% | - |
27 | CODY Alexandra C. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 75% | 40% | 10% |
28 | CHIANG Emily | 100% | 99% | 89% | 64% | 32% | 9% | 1% |
29 | SCALAMONI-GOLDSTEIN Charlotte S. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 30% | 5% |
30 | KONG Isabel | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 78% | 41% | 10% |
31 | ZINNI Kaylyn M. | 100% | 97% | 82% | 50% | 18% | 3% | |
32 | VESTEL Mira B. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 75% | 41% | 11% |
33 | ANDRES Katherine A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 77% | 42% | 10% |
34 | LIN Zhiyin | 100% | 99% | 87% | 54% | 20% | 4% | - |
35 | MOZHAEVA MARIA | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 62% | 27% | 5% |
36 | RIZKALA Joanna | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 48% | 14% | |
37 | SINHA Anika | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 78% | 45% | 13% |
38 | LARIMER Katherine E. | 100% | 100% | 94% | 69% | 30% | 6% | 1% |
39 | CHANG Emily | 100% | 100% | 98% | 90% | 67% | 34% | 8% |
40 | SHIN Andrea Y. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 69% | 35% | 8% |
41 | BAKER Amelia M. | 100% | 83% | 35% | 6% | < 1% | - | - |
42 | KALINICHENKO Alexandra (Sasha) | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 63% | 28% | 5% |
43 | KITTLE Lauren | 100% | 83% | 41% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
44 | TANG Catherine H. | 100% | 99% | 89% | 61% | 26% | 5% | |
45 | KALRA Siya L. | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 32% | 7% | |
46 | NEWELL Alexia C. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 96% | 80% | 46% | 13% |
47 | HILD Nisha | 100% | 98% | 87% | 61% | 29% | 8% | 1% |
48 | ALFARACHE Gabriella C. | 100% | 96% | 77% | 45% | 17% | 4% | - |
49 | KOO Samantha | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 73% | 37% | 9% |
50 | YANG Ashley M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 44% | 11% |
51 | MANUBAG Amanda R. | 100% | 100% | 96% | 81% | 52% | 21% | 4% |
52 | SEAL Julie T. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 72% | 38% | 10% |
53 | DARINGA Arianna | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 72% | 36% | 8% |
54 | HUANG Sharon | 100% | 96% | 77% | 45% | 17% | 3% | - |
55 | ULIBARRI Nevaeh L. | 100% | 88% | 55% | 21% | 4% | - | |
56 | YANG Angelina | 100% | 99% | 88% | 60% | 26% | 6% | 1% |
57 | BHATTACHARJEE Rhea | 100% | 99% | 93% | 73% | 42% | 14% | 2% |
58 | MUNGOVAN Cecilia C. | 100% | 74% | 32% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
59 | OXENSTIERNA Carolina | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 72% | 35% | 8% |
60 | ZENG Xiaoyi | 100% | 82% | 42% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
61 | SLOBODSKY Sasha L. | 100% | 87% | 54% | 20% | 4% | - | |
62 | HOLMES Emma | 100% | 64% | 22% | 4% | - | - | - |
63 | LEE Sophia | 100% | 95% | 68% | 27% | 5% | - | - |
64 | KIM Nam Heui | 100% | 84% | 41% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
65 | ABOUDAHER Janna A. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 40% | 11% | 1% |
66 | ROGERS Pauline E. | 100% | 99% | 88% | 56% | 22% | 4% | - |
67 | FEARNS Zara A. | 100% | 99% | 95% | 78% | 48% | 18% | 3% |
68 | LAMBERT Jasmine M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 73% | 31% |
69 | KRYLOVA Valery | 100% | 95% | 71% | 36% | 10% | 2% | - |
70 | PETTIT Sara M. | 100% | 99% | 91% | 64% | 29% | 7% | 1% |
71 | RODGERS Sally E. | 100% | 92% | 63% | 25% | 5% | 1% | - |
72 | KIM Sujin | 100% | 90% | 57% | 21% | 4% | - | - |
73 | TODD Phoebe | 100% | 99% | 84% | 52% | 20% | 4% | - |
74 | HAYES Grace Y. | 100% | 99% | 91% | 68% | 34% | 10% | 1% |
75 | LIM Isabel K. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 76% | 41% | 10% |
76 | DAVIS Charlotte | 100% | 60% | 17% | 3% | - | - | - |
77 | XIKES Katherine E. | 100% | 99% | 92% | 70% | 37% | 11% | 1% |
78 | WHEELER Kira | 100% | 76% | 36% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
79 | DHAR Aamina | 100% | 90% | 62% | 28% | 8% | 1% | - |
80 | BILILIES Sophia | 100% | 93% | 69% | 36% | 12% | 2% | - |
81 | HUNG Anna | 100% | 99% | 88% | 60% | 27% | 7% | 1% |
82 | HSU Mia Y. | 100% | 68% | 24% | 5% | - | - | - |
83 | LIN Selena | 100% | 92% | 62% | 23% | 5% | - | - |
84 | MARQUES Hannah | 100% | 82% | 45% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
85 | CUNNINGHAM Erin | 100% | 46% | 10% | 1% | - | - | - |
86 | HU Allison C. | 100% | 94% | 61% | 21% | 3% | - | - |
87 | NG Sarah W. | 100% | 94% | 72% | 37% | 11% | 2% | - |
88 | LI Angela | 100% | 64% | 20% | 3% | - | - | - |
89 | RAHIM Alina O. | 100% | 81% | 42% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
90 | PROBST Alyssa | 100% | 28% | 4% | - | - | - | - |
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.