Cincinnati, OH - Cincinnati, OH, 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 | JOHNSON Laura S. | - | - | 6% | 30% | 47% | 16% | |
| 2 | DEMING Clare L. | - | 1% | 7% | 24% | 40% | 25% | 4% |
| 3 | SIERRA Kate | - | - | 1% | 10% | 31% | 40% | 17% |
| 3 | OBLONSKY Natalia | 1% | 5% | 17% | 31% | 29% | 14% | 3% |
| 5 | TURNER Delia M. | - | - | - | 2% | 15% | 44% | 39% |
| 6 | VANCE Beth S. | - | 2% | 12% | 29% | 35% | 19% | 4% |
| 7 | RANDALL Cathleen Coyle | 4% | 21% | 37% | 28% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 8 | ZHANG Lynn Y. | 1% | 6% | 20% | 33% | 27% | 11% | 2% |
| 9 | ENOCHS Liz | - | 1% | 6% | 21% | 36% | 28% | 8% |
| 9 | BERMAN Frauke | - | - | 1% | 5% | 23% | 46% | 26% |
| 11 | WILSON Dawn J. | - | - | - | 5% | 24% | 44% | 26% |
| 12 | DUNN Linda J. J. | - | - | 3% | 17% | 43% | 37% | |
| 13 | ALTMAN Leigh | - | 2% | 11% | 28% | 37% | 20% | 2% |
| 14 | KNUTSON Theresa S. | - | 1% | 8% | 29% | 40% | 20% | 2% |
| 15 | MARENTES Blanca E. | 4% | 23% | 40% | 27% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 16 | KING Robin E. | 11% | 33% | 35% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
| 17 | GRAJALES Emily K. | 1% | 10% | 30% | 35% | 19% | 5% | < 1% |
| 18 | KIM Nam Heui | - | 3% | 16% | 35% | 34% | 11% | 1% |
| 19 | KLEIN-BRADDOCK Kimberly K. | - | 2% | 9% | 24% | 34% | 25% | 7% |
| 20 | SHINN-CUNNINGHAM Barbara | - | 5% | 19% | 36% | 30% | 9% | 1% |
| 21 | DEROSE Miyako N. | 1% | 11% | 33% | 38% | 15% | 2% | |
| 22 | LAPP Laurie E. | - | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 41% | 28% |
| 23 | WALTER Joanne | 10% | 37% | 36% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
| 24 | FOLEY Eileen | 3% | 14% | 31% | 32% | 16% | 4% | - |
| 25 | WILKERSON Mary B. | - | 4% | 17% | 31% | 30% | 15% | 3% |
| 26 | GLUCK Myriam | 19% | 43% | 30% | 8% | 1% | - | |
| 27 | CHANCO-EVERETT Aileen | 2% | 14% | 29% | 31% | 18% | 5% | 1% |
| 28 | FELDMAN Jill A. | 7% | 25% | 36% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 29 | STARR Cynthia (Cindy) H. | 10% | 33% | 35% | 17% | 4% | - | - |
| 30 | DEGEN Anita L. | 2% | 12% | 29% | 32% | 19% | 5% | 1% |
| 31 | LUM Karen | 1% | 11% | 30% | 35% | 18% | 4% | - |
| 32 | WEBB Maud | 5% | 24% | 38% | 25% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 33 | DIEGEL Angela E. | 5% | 21% | 33% | 26% | 11% | 3% | - |
| 34 | DAHL Naomi V. | 7% | 27% | 35% | 22% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 35 | JOHNSON Pamela | 8% | 40% | 39% | 12% | 1% | - | |
| 36 | TAYLOR BLAKEMORE Kim | 4% | 18% | 35% | 30% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 37 | GORDON Sharon | 5% | 29% | 38% | 21% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 38 | SCHLIENGER Katia | 7% | 29% | 40% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
| 39 | DEANE Dede | 6% | 30% | 38% | 21% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 40 | MASLEN Cheryl L. | 10% | 34% | 37% | 16% | 3% | - | |
| 41 | HURST Susan E. | 11% | 33% | 35% | 17% | 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.