Cincinnati, OH - Cincinnati, OH, 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 | FOELLMER Kristin | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 64% |
| 2 | GANSER Yuliya | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 33% | 6% |
| 3 | SCHMID Carola K. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 52% |
| 3 | HUZEL Lisa | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 60% | 22% | 2% |
| 5 | GLOVER Cynthia E. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 71% | 31% | 3% |
| 6 | ZAFFT Sharrie A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 77% |
| 7 | HEINRICH Eva | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 61% | 26% | 4% |
| 8 | GORDET Cristina G. | 100% | 100% | 94% | 71% | 33% | 7% | |
| 9 | WOLF Lisa A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 43% |
| 10 | NIEMEYER Jennifer A. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 60% | 19% | |
| 11 | TOTEMEIER Ann M. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 78% |
| 12 | LEIGHTON Louise N. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 62% | 18% | 2% |
| 13 | MONTOYA Amy C. | 100% | 100% | 94% | 72% | 36% | 8% | |
| 14 | BLOOMER Suzanne | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 47% | 16% | 2% |
| 15 | NANTON SHYAMALA M. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 95% | 75% | 38% | 7% |
| 16 | LORENTSON Dawn M. | 100% | 97% | 81% | 49% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 17 | QUINLAN Nicole P. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 46% |
| 18 | SCHULTZ Michelle M. | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 29% | 6% | |
| 19 | BRISK Angelica A. | 100% | 99% | 94% | 74% | 39% | 9% | |
| 20 | SIMON Sally R. | 100% | 98% | 82% | 46% | 15% | 2% | |
| 21 | KUHN April | 100% | 68% | 26% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
| 22 | GALTO Meredith | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 40% | 10% | - |
| 23 | DANNHAUSER Carol A. | 100% | 97% | 78% | 42% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 23 | WOUNDY Melissa A. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 55% | 19% | 2% |
| 25 | MCMENAMIN Dianna S. | 100% | 99% | 88% | 58% | 22% | 3% | - |
| 26 | BOWIE Charlotta | 100% | 98% | 87% | 58% | 23% | 4% | - |
| 27 | TELLES Anna | 100% | 99% | 90% | 64% | 29% | 7% | 1% |
| 28 | CLAUSEN Amalie (Amy) | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 38% | 10% | 1% |
| 29 | INAMDAR Nina S. | 100% | 94% | 66% | 29% | 7% | 1% | |
| 30 | FINNEGAN Ellen M. | 100% | 99% | 89% | 59% | 22% | 2% | |
| 31 | ROWLAND May | 100% | 97% | 80% | 47% | 16% | 2% | |
| 32 | CHANG Amanda Yen-Shih (Amanda) | 100% | 99% | 90% | 60% | 23% | 4% | - |
| 33 | POULIQUEN Karine S. | 100% | 99% | 91% | 65% | 29% | 6% | |
| 34 | RADICH Lori G. | 100% | 100% | 93% | 66% | 27% | 4% | - |
| 35 | JACKSON Wilma S. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 37% | 10% | 1% |
| 36 | TADLOCK Christine M. | 100% | 99% | 91% | 67% | 32% | 7% | - |
| 37 | BELAOUSSOFF Vera | 100% | 99% | 79% | 40% | 11% | 1% | - |
| 38 | GRIFFIN Martha A. | 100% | 93% | 65% | 27% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 39 | COOPER Tina M. | 100% | 100% | 93% | 66% | 28% | 6% | - |
| 40 | WHEELER Michele L. | 100% | 94% | 67% | 30% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 41 | HOFMAN Haejung | 100% | 97% | 83% | 52% | 20% | 4% | - |
| 42 | WILKENS Patricia A. | 100% | 90% | 60% | 26% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 43 | ZEHE Michele A. | 100% | 87% | 52% | 19% | 4% | - | - |
| 44 | JEANDHEUR Carole A. | 100% | 97% | 80% | 47% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 45 | BROWN Trish M. | 100% | 98% | 85% | 55% | 21% | 3% | - |
| 46 | MANDEL Helen (Jenner) | 100% | 68% | 26% | 5% | 1% | - | |
| 47 | MAUL Judy L. | 100% | 52% | 13% | 2% | - | - | |
| 48 | KLINE julia | 100% | 85% | 50% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 49 | RIOS Donna B. | 100% | 81% | 39% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 50 | NOLLNER Jennifer R. | 100% | 94% | 72% | 37% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 51 | TASKER Monisha B. | 100% | 91% | 62% | 26% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 52 | STANICA Teodora O. | 100% | 95% | 72% | 35% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 53 | KELLY Diane A. | 100% | 71% | 26% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 54 | GROCE Linda J. | 100% | 18% | 1% | - | - | - | - |
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.