National Harbor, MD - National Harbor, MD, 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 | TUCKER ALARCON Ariadna C. | - | - | - | - | 3% | 23% | 74% |
2 | SHEN Lydia | - | - | - | 1% | 13% | 43% | 42% |
3 | CASTANEDA Erika L. | - | - | - | 1% | 10% | 38% | 51% |
3 | ZHAO Aileen Y. | - | 3% | 15% | 33% | 33% | 14% | 1% |
5 | CHEN Allison V. | - | - | 1% | 7% | 27% | 43% | 23% |
6 | CHEN Jia P. | - | - | - | 1% | 6% | 31% | 63% |
7 | OUYANG Bridgette Z. | - | - | 1% | 8% | 27% | 41% | 23% |
8 | SCHATZ Erika J. | - | 1% | 5% | 22% | 38% | 28% | 7% |
9 | CHUSID Mikayla | - | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 43% | 21% |
10 | FERRETTI Anna Rebecca | - | - | - | - | 7% | 36% | 56% |
11 | CHEN Kelly | - | - | - | 2% | 17% | 45% | 35% |
12 | WONG Sophia M. | - | 3% | 16% | 34% | 33% | 13% | 1% |
13 | ORVANANOS Anice | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 38% | 18% | 2% |
14 | MICHAELSEN Emily | - | - | 1% | 11% | 33% | 40% | 16% |
15 | ADAMS KIM Natalie | - | - | 3% | 17% | 39% | 32% | 9% |
16 | CHO Rebecca H. | - | - | 4% | 17% | 38% | 34% | 7% |
17 | YU Jaime L. | - | - | 1% | 10% | 35% | 43% | 11% |
18 | SENIC Adeline | - | - | 1% | 6% | 25% | 43% | 25% |
19 | WU Celine | - | - | 3% | 19% | 45% | 27% | 5% |
20 | ROY Layla | - | - | 6% | 27% | 42% | 21% | 3% |
21 | TAN Kaitlyn N. | - | - | - | 4% | 19% | 43% | 35% |
22 | PAHLAVI Dahlia | - | 3% | 14% | 32% | 34% | 16% | 2% |
23 | XU Madison | - | - | 1% | 7% | 29% | 46% | 18% |
24 | YU Lauren C. | - | 2% | 12% | 34% | 35% | 15% | 2% |
25 | PALMER Meredith K. | - | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 35% | 10% |
26 | GU EMILY | 1% | 11% | 32% | 36% | 17% | 3% | - |
27 | YE Eileen | - | - | 1% | 8% | 24% | 40% | 27% |
28 | LIU Sophia | - | 1% | 6% | 25% | 43% | 23% | 3% |
29 | SEO IRENE Y. | - | 1% | 9% | 28% | 38% | 21% | 4% |
30 | MI Anning | 5% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 9% | 1% | - |
31 | RASO Olivia | 1% | 11% | 29% | 35% | 20% | 5% | - |
32 | WEBB Ella | - | 4% | 17% | 35% | 32% | 12% | 1% |
33 | HUANG NATALIE | - | - | - | 5% | 26% | 46% | 22% |
34 | FELLUS Talia E. | - | 3% | 19% | 41% | 29% | 7% | 1% |
35 | WANG Chloe | - | 5% | 21% | 36% | 28% | 9% | - |
36 | LENZ Zoe N. | 10% | 30% | 34% | 20% | 6% | 1% | - |
37 | PAVE Claire | 6% | 22% | 34% | 26% | 10% | 2% | - |
38 | QIAN Zhiyan | 1% | 7% | 27% | 41% | 20% | 4% | - |
39 | ZHAO Sophie L. | - | 4% | 16% | 31% | 31% | 15% | 3% |
39 | MAESTRADO Ashley R. | 2% | 17% | 37% | 31% | 11% | 2% | - |
41 | HOLLE Aviella S. | - | 3% | 13% | 29% | 33% | 18% | 4% |
42 | LIN Emma | 2% | 19% | 37% | 29% | 11% | 2% | - |
43 | LI Sophia M. | - | 8% | 32% | 38% | 18% | 3% | - |
44 | HWANG Jungmin | 1% | 8% | 27% | 38% | 21% | 5% | - |
45 | SCHMIDT Victoria | 10% | 47% | 33% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
46 | CASTANEDA Keira | - | 2% | 12% | 31% | 36% | 17% | 3% |
47 | MI Aileen | 5% | 20% | 33% | 27% | 12% | 2% | - |
48 | SMIGRODZKI Nymeria | 1% | 12% | 33% | 35% | 16% | 3% | - |
49 | CHARALEL Jessica | 11% | 39% | 35% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
50 | MARKOVSKY Nina | 21% | 42% | 28% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
51 | BAROCHIA Saatchi | 3% | 18% | 39% | 30% | 8% | 1% | - |
52 | KOROTCOVA Anastasia | 4% | 23% | 44% | 24% | 5% | - | - |
53 | SMITH Emilee E. | 13% | 40% | 35% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
54 | THIRUVENGADAM Harini | 14% | 38% | 35% | 12% | 1% | - | - |
55 | LAM Victoria M. | 2% | 18% | 37% | 31% | 11% | 2% | - |
56 | BASSIK Eva | 1% | 12% | 33% | 35% | 16% | 3% | - |
57 | ABD-ELMONIEM Nusayba K. | 2% | 11% | 27% | 33% | 21% | 7% | 1% |
58 | JONES Jenna | 20% | 40% | 28% | 9% | 2% | - | - |
58 | ZULUETA Catherine | 16% | 38% | 32% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
60 | NIKOLIC Alexandra | 1% | 6% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 7% | - |
61 | WILLIS Fletcher L. | - | 8% | 30% | 39% | 19% | 4% | - |
62 | DATLA Medha | 65% | 30% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
63 | ALEXANDER Amelia | 50% | 39% | 10% | 1% | - | - | - |
64 | ZHUANG Sophie | 26% | 43% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
65 | KNOEPFFLER ANDREA V. | 10% | 38% | 35% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
66 | KRUPENKO Sabrina R. | - | 5% | 19% | 34% | 29% | 11% | 1% |
67 | BHOGAL Sukhneet | 26% | 47% | 23% | 4% | - | - | - |
68 | SARKARIA Jasminder | 2% | 17% | 39% | 33% | 9% | 1% | - |
69 | DATLA Meha | 38% | 43% | 16% | 2% | - | - | - |
69 | SHKLYAR Estella | 4% | 20% | 35% | 28% | 11% | 2% | - |
71 | ZARE Yasmin | 18% | 40% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
72 | CAO Domi Yu En | 1% | 8% | 25% | 35% | 24% | 7% | - |
73 | TAI Serena | 41% | 43% | 14% | 2% | - | - | - |
74 | WIERENGA Esther | 66% | 30% | 4% | - | - | - | - |
75 | BOWDEN Ms Hope A. | 16% | 40% | 31% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
75 | TAI Valerie | 16% | 41% | 33% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
77 | WANG Cynthia | 34% | 47% | 17% | 2% | - | - | - |
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.