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 | SINGLETON-COMFORT Leanne | - | 2% | 14% | 38% | 35% | 11% | |
| 2 | BURKE Nora S. | - | 3% | 16% | 33% | 32% | 14% | 2% |
| 3 | AKSAMIT Monica | - | 1% | 5% | 20% | 36% | 30% | 9% |
| 3 | STONE Anne-Elizabeth | - | 1% | 7% | 22% | 35% | 27% | 8% |
| 5 | AVAKIAN Mikaela | - | - | - | 3% | 16% | 40% | 40% |
| 6 | JENKINS Ryan J. | - | - | 1% | 8% | 35% | 56% | |
| 7 | JOHNSON Edith (Tori) V. | - | - | - | 1% | 7% | 33% | 60% |
| 8 | CHAMBERLAIN Maia C. | - | - | 1% | 13% | 52% | 34% | |
| 9 | ADYNSKI Gillian I. | 1% | 8% | 27% | 39% | 23% | 3% | |
| 10 | RUSSO Francesca | - | 1% | 8% | 27% | 41% | 23% | |
| 11 | KIM Zoe | 2% | 14% | 34% | 34% | 14% | 2% | |
| 12 | FOX-GITOMER Chloe N. | - | - | 1% | 5% | 23% | 43% | 29% |
| 13 | MERZA Sarah | - | 3% | 15% | 34% | 35% | 13% | |
| 14 | GUTHIKONDA Nithya | 13% | 36% | 35% | 14% | 2% | - | |
| 15 | HARRILL Gillian N. | - | - | 3% | 19% | 41% | 32% | 4% |
| 16 | LINDER Kara E. | - | - | 1% | 8% | 25% | 40% | 25% |
| 17 | MILLER Sky | - | - | 5% | 27% | 42% | 22% | 3% |
| 18 | GRENCH Eileen | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 39% | 25% | 5% |
| 19 | GORMAN Alexandra C. | - | 2% | 11% | 29% | 36% | 19% | 3% |
| 19 | HARRISON Imogen N. | - | 1% | 10% | 29% | 39% | 19% | 2% |
| 21 | THOMPSON Kamali A. | - | 1% | 8% | 26% | 38% | 22% | 3% |
| 22 | BABY Sada M. | 1% | 12% | 30% | 35% | 18% | 3% | |
| 23 | JOHNSON Honor B. | - | - | 2% | 14% | 44% | 40% | |
| 24 | JENKINS Morgan J. | - | 3% | 13% | 30% | 33% | 17% | 3% |
| 25 | YUN Joy | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 43% | 27% | |
| 26 | HIRSCH Sydney R. | - | - | 3% | 17% | 41% | 38% | |
| 27 | MICHEL Violet N. | - | 4% | 19% | 39% | 32% | 6% | |
| 28 | GOUHIN Chloe | - | 2% | 14% | 35% | 37% | 12% | |
| 29 | MERZA Celina | 8% | 27% | 35% | 22% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 30 | GREENBAUM Atara R. | - | 1% | 5% | 19% | 34% | 31% | 10% |
| 31 | HOFFMAN Ilsa L. | 3% | 20% | 39% | 30% | 8% | 1% | |
| 32 | LITYNSKI Jacqueline Z. | 2% | 16% | 37% | 32% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 33 | ANGLADE Alexis C. | - | 1% | 6% | 23% | 38% | 27% | 5% |
| 34 | MOSS Zara J. | - | 1% | 7% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 6% |
| 35 | STRZALKOWSKI Aleksandra (Ola) M. | - | 1% | 8% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 5% |
| 36 | MILLER Tiffany D. | 2% | 13% | 31% | 34% | 17% | 3% | |
| 37 | TARTAKOVSKY Elizabeth | - | - | 4% | 22% | 49% | 24% | |
| 38 | KIM Catherine | 2% | 13% | 35% | 36% | 12% | 1% | |
| 39 | WHITE Amber L. | - | 2% | 13% | 32% | 34% | 16% | 3% |
| 40 | MORALES Jessica Y. | - | - | 3% | 16% | 35% | 34% | 12% |
| 41 | THEODORE Maria A. | - | 3% | 14% | 32% | 33% | 15% | 3% |
| 42 | MOYA Keona L. | - | - | 3% | 13% | 31% | 36% | 17% |
| 43 | SAPIENZA Lindsay | 1% | 9% | 25% | 34% | 23% | 8% | 1% |
| 44 | LARGAESPADA Fatima | - | - | 2% | 10% | 27% | 39% | 22% |
| 45 | BENTOLILA Esther | 14% | 40% | 34% | 11% | 1% | - | |
| 46 | LIANG Megan | 3% | 21% | 41% | 29% | 6% | - | |
| 47 | TURNER Zoe Y. | 1% | 11% | 28% | 34% | 20% | 5% | - |
| 48 | DECKER Laura | 14% | 35% | 33% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
| 49 | HOOGENDOORN Sterre | 4% | 19% | 34% | 29% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 50 | ROH Rachel E. | 2% | 11% | 28% | 33% | 20% | 5% | 1% |
| 51 | HASSETT Tara A. | 1% | 9% | 25% | 34% | 23% | 7% | 1% |
| 52 | MANUBAG Amanda R. | 6% | 27% | 40% | 22% | 4% | - | - |
| 53 | HONE Katarina G. | 4% | 21% | 35% | 27% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 53 | HE Charlotte | 16% | 40% | 32% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
| 55 | MAJOR Desirae A. | 4% | 42% | 37% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 56 | TONG Kunling | 15% | 40% | 33% | 11% | 1% | - | |
| 57 | WITEK Sophie B. | 1% | 10% | 31% | 37% | 18% | 3% | |
| 57 | LIMB Madeline I. | 4% | 20% | 37% | 29% | 10% | 1% | |
| 59 | HILADO Sarah | 9% | 31% | 37% | 19% | 4% | - | |
| 60 | SHEALY Maggie | 6% | 24% | 37% | 26% | 8% | 1% | |
| 61 | SAYLES Nina R. | 23% | 42% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 62 | HANADARI-LEVY Amit | 1% | 9% | 26% | 34% | 22% | 7% | 1% |
| 63 | KOLMYKOVA Aleksandra | 30% | 40% | 22% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 64 | CHAN Casey | - | 2% | 11% | 29% | 35% | 19% | 4% |
| 65 | MILLER Stephanie M. | 8% | 26% | 34% | 22% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 66 | WOZNIAK Kelli | 2% | 12% | 32% | 35% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 67 | KATZ Anat | 5% | 21% | 34% | 27% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 68 | BROWNE Alexis G. | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 35% | 19% | 4% |
| 69 | DRAGON Rainer | 1% | 14% | 36% | 33% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 70 | BERMAN Stella | 5% | 22% | 37% | 27% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 71 | WHANG Rebecca | 1% | 5% | 19% | 33% | 29% | 12% | 2% |
| 72 | BUSTAMANTE Evie I. | 7% | 25% | 35% | 23% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 73 | WALTER Zsofia R. | 27% | 44% | 23% | 5% | - | - | |
| 74 | MENTZER Katherine | 45% | 40% | 13% | 2% | - | - | |
| 75 | SULLIVAN Caroline E. | 5% | 25% | 41% | 25% | 5% | - | |
| 76 | HUNTER Nina B. | 7% | 25% | 36% | 24% | 7% | 1% | |
| 77 | SHVARTSMAN Rochelle | 26% | 43% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - | |
| 78 | CHAN Leanne | 14% | 38% | 33% | 12% | 2% | - | |
| 79 | PRIESTLEY Catherine (Cate) C. | 3% | 18% | 38% | 31% | 10% | 1% | |
| 80 | AKARD Micah M. | 8% | 28% | 35% | 21% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 81 | DUNGEY Amelia S. | 6% | 24% | 36% | 24% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 81 | SATHYANATH Kailing | 5% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 83 | BECKER Kaitlyn | - | 4% | 17% | 33% | 31% | 13% | 1% |
| 84 | TUCKER Iman R. | 18% | 40% | 30% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 85 | LU Vivian Y. | 8% | 30% | 38% | 20% | 3% | - | |
| 86 | HASSAN Aziza R. | 44% | 40% | 13% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 87 | ALLUM Isabel (Izzy) T. | 3% | 21% | 43% | 26% | 6% | - | |
| 88 | GREENBAUM Ella K. | 5% | 28% | 42% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
| 89 | EDWARDS Darby | 14% | 36% | 33% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 90 | HOOGENDOORN Levi | 25% | 41% | 26% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 90 | GHOSH Priyanka | 17% | 38% | 31% | 11% | 2% | - | |
| 92 | KUZNETSOVA Nastassja | 26% | 41% | 25% | 7% | 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.