San Francisco, CA - San Francisco, CA, 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 | GEBALA Gabrielle Grace A. | - | - | - | - | 2% | 31% | 68% |
| 2 | FUNG Emma | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 42% | 24% | |
| 3 | LUO Sandra J. | - | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 44% | 19% |
| 3 | ZHANG Eunice | - | - | 4% | 22% | 44% | 30% | |
| 5 | LIU Zhaoyi | - | - | - | 1% | 16% | 61% | 22% |
| 6 | WANG Celine S. | - | 3% | 16% | 36% | 34% | 11% | |
| 7 | HOBSON Ava | - | 2% | 17% | 38% | 33% | 10% | |
| 8 | PENG Serena | - | 2% | 16% | 39% | 34% | 9% | |
| 9 | DAVIS Bonnie Z. | - | - | - | 1% | 7% | 33% | 59% |
| 10 | NAIR Supriya | - | 2% | 14% | 34% | 36% | 13% | |
| 11 | VO Bao-Vy | - | 1% | 11% | 35% | 39% | 13% | |
| 12 | XU Audrey J. | 8% | 35% | 38% | 16% | 3% | - | |
| 13 | FUNG Vera | - | 3% | 16% | 39% | 37% | 6% | - |
| 14 | HOVAGHIMIAN Fira | - | 8% | 32% | 39% | 19% | 3% | |
| 15 | DAYAL Saahira | 3% | 15% | 33% | 32% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 16 | THOMAS Saejel | 7% | 29% | 40% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
| 17 | WANG Zoie Z. | - | - | - | 3% | 17% | 44% | 36% |
| 18 | BOLES Amanda X. | - | 1% | 10% | 29% | 38% | 20% | 3% |
| 19 | MANIKTALA Prisha | - | 1% | 10% | 32% | 40% | 17% | |
| 20 | LIU Emma | - | 2% | 12% | 31% | 36% | 17% | 2% |
| 21 | LIPKOVITZ Rivka | 6% | 26% | 39% | 23% | 6% | 1% | |
| 22 | AIRES Julia | 3% | 22% | 41% | 26% | 7% | 1% | |
| 23 | CHU Camille | 10% | 34% | 36% | 17% | 3% | - | |
| 24 | KANDL-ZHANG Lea | - | 1% | 9% | 29% | 40% | 20% | |
| 25 | SINGH Ashni | 1% | 11% | 29% | 35% | 20% | 4% | - |
| 26 | PENG Charlotte | - | 4% | 20% | 38% | 30% | 8% | |
| 27 | MANN Sophia J. | - | 3% | 16% | 35% | 33% | 12% | 1% |
| 28 | HO Kristen | 17% | 39% | 31% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
| 29 | GILLIS-PADE Neallie | - | 1% | 11% | 33% | 39% | 16% | |
| 30 | YANG Audrey | 2% | 17% | 38% | 31% | 11% | 1% | |
| 31 | KIM Rachel | - | 5% | 21% | 38% | 28% | 7% | |
| 32 | ENRILE Erica | 30% | 42% | 22% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 33 | MU Allison | 6% | 48% | 35% | 10% | 1% | - | |
| 34 | LUH Mia P. | 4% | 21% | 36% | 28% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 35 | CHUNG Penelope | 46% | 40% | 12% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 36 | EBERHART Ava | 5% | 23% | 38% | 25% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 37 | SANTOS Emilia | 28% | 42% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - | |
| 38 | OH Ceana | 15% | 44% | 32% | 8% | 1% | - | |
| 39 | ZHENG Zoe | 2% | 12% | 30% | 34% | 18% | 4% | - |
| 40 | MALOBRODSKY Isabel K. | 3% | 31% | 44% | 19% | 3% | - | - |
| 41 | MORRIS-WEIDE Ella | 46% | 41% | 12% | 1% | - | - | |
| 42 | LENK Sophie | 1% | 10% | 33% | 42% | 14% | 1% | - |
| 43 | LIU Jessica | 51% | 38% | 10% | 1% | - | - | |
| 44 | YANG Chloee | 81% | 18% | 1% | - | - | - | |
| 45 | KHAIRUL ANWAR Rania Zara | 21% | 42% | 28% | 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.