La Jolla, CA - La Jolla, CA, 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 | YEU Irene | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 53% | |
2 | DANIEL Chloe L. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 85% | 53% | 16% |
3 | VIE Natalie J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 56% | 17% |
3 | GAO Aretha R. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 30% | 6% |
5 | MONTOYA Kimberlee C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 58% |
6 | ZUHARS Renee A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 79% | 37% |
7 | BRILL Sophie | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 28% | 5% |
8 | DRAKE-THOMAS Christine E. | 100% | 97% | 80% | 45% | 14% | 2% | - |
9 | BEITTEL Chloe F. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 83% | 42% | |
10 | WU Amelia | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 87% | 56% | 17% |
11 | SMIK Leonie A. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 80% | 46% | 15% | 2% |
12 | BROOKS Tean R. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 62% | 24% | 4% |
13 | GERARDIN Marie | 100% | 99% | 91% | 66% | 31% | 7% | - |
14 | KIMURA Kimberley H. | 100% | 98% | 85% | 51% | 16% | 2% | |
15 | CAPLIN Michelle | 100% | 98% | 86% | 58% | 25% | 6% | 1% |
17 | HARRISON Amelia H. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 61% | 19% | |
18 | BEI Karen | 100% | 100% | 96% | 76% | 40% | 11% | 1% |
19 | LEANG Andrea K. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 49% | 11% | |
20 | SHAMSIAN Shaya | 100% | 97% | 81% | 49% | 18% | 3% | |
21 | WILEY Erica | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 53% | 19% | 3% |
22 | SEAL Julie T. | 100% | 96% | 77% | 39% | 10% | 1% | |
23 | HARKNESS Anya C. | 100% | 98% | 84% | 51% | 17% | 2% | |
24 | QURESHI Aafreen | 100% | 93% | 68% | 32% | 8% | 1% | |
25 | CHAN Paree A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 60% | 18% |
26 | LAVERY Chloe K. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 66% | 28% | 6% | - |
27 | CHAN Cheri K. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 77% | 42% | 10% |
28 | LEANG Priscilla Y. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 63% | 23% | |
29 | CHIMIENTI Michele | 100% | 99% | 90% | 61% | 23% | 3% | |
30 | YOUNG Ashley | 100% | 97% | 80% | 47% | 16% | 2% | |
31 | PARKER Jacquie D. | 100% | 95% | 71% | 33% | 7% | - | |
32 | MONTOYA Amy C. | 100% | 83% | 42% | 11% | 1% | - | |
33 | GEBALA Natalie Brooke A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 49% | 11% |
34 | GRIFFEN Emily P. | 100% | 99% | 88% | 59% | 23% | 4% | |
35 | PRIMES Amanda M. | 100% | 92% | 64% | 27% | 5% | - | |
36 | COBLE Avery L. | 100% | 95% | 69% | 31% | 6% | - | |
37 | HAWKINS Laura A. | 100% | 99% | 88% | 57% | 20% | 2% | |
38 | BEIHOLD Emily M. | 100% | 99% | 88% | 61% | 28% | 7% | 1% |
39 | NGUYEN Kaylin A. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 90% | 65% | 30% | 6% |
40 | LAMBERT Jasmine M. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 48% | 16% | 2% |
41 | ZHOU Emily | 100% | 96% | 76% | 38% | 10% | 1% | - |
42 | WANG Nora | 100% | 100% | 94% | 71% | 34% | 9% | 1% |
43 | ERTAS Eileen | 100% | 90% | 60% | 24% | 5% | - | - |
44 | STOJANOVIC Mina | 100% | 96% | 76% | 41% | 13% | 2% | - |
45 | THORESON Brynn E. | 100% | 79% | 38% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
45 | SOIN Aditi A. | 100% | 94% | 69% | 33% | 9% | 1% | - |
47 | LYNN Heather D. | 100% | 99% | 93% | 69% | 30% | 5% | - |
48 | RICH Caroline B. | 100% | 97% | 79% | 45% | 14% | 2% | |
49 | JIANG Corina | 100% | 87% | 54% | 21% | 4% | - | |
50 | SOIN Anika A. | 100% | 95% | 70% | 31% | 6% | - | |
51 | JIANG Claire | 100% | 86% | 50% | 17% | 3% | - | |
52 | FERNANDEZ Lucero | 100% | 90% | 57% | 20% | 3% | - | |
53 | LI Charlotte | 100% | 57% | 16% | 2% | - | - | - |
54 | DARANOUVONG Logan | 100% | 97% | 72% | 33% | 9% | 1% | - |
55 | ZHANG mickey | 100% | 64% | 20% | 3% | - | - | - |
56 | CHANG Amanda Yen-Shih (Amanda) | 100% | 84% | 35% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
57 | MOHEBI Sue | 100% | 85% | 46% | 12% | 1% | - | |
58 | ZHANG Ivyla | 100% | 44% | 7% | - | - | - | - |
59 | TONG Irene | 100% | 82% | 37% | 8% | 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.