New Haven, CT - New Haven, CT, 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 | SHAW Kayla M. | - | - | - | 4% | 18% | 42% | 36% |
| 2 | SEMEL Liana M. | - | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 38% | 18% |
| 3 | MILLER Naomi E. | - | - | 1% | 6% | 25% | 42% | 26% |
| 3 | OUYANG Bridgette Z. | - | - | 1% | 5% | 22% | 42% | 30% |
| 5 | ACHILOVA Feyza | - | - | 3% | 15% | 35% | 35% | 12% |
| 6 | WU Irene M. | - | 1% | 8% | 25% | 37% | 24% | 5% |
| 7 | YE Eileen | - | - | 4% | 19% | 37% | 31% | 9% |
| 8 | ZHAO Aileen Y. | - | 3% | 17% | 34% | 32% | 12% | 2% |
| 9 | YU Lauren C. | - | 2% | 10% | 26% | 34% | 22% | 6% |
| 10 | COSTELLO Angeline S. | - | - | 7% | 25% | 38% | 24% | 5% |
| 11 | WEBB Ella | - | 5% | 26% | 38% | 24% | 7% | 1% |
| 12 | ZHANG Alina C. | - | - | 1% | 5% | 20% | 42% | 33% |
| 13 | XUE Alanna L. | - | 1% | 9% | 30% | 39% | 19% | 3% |
| 14 | LI Rachel Y. | - | - | 3% | 15% | 35% | 35% | 12% |
| 15 | CHOW Annabelle | - | 3% | 21% | 38% | 28% | 9% | 1% |
| 16 | DU Hannah | - | 1% | 8% | 23% | 35% | 26% | 7% |
| 17 | ROY Layla | - | 5% | 20% | 36% | 28% | 10% | 1% |
| 18 | FU Qihan | - | 3% | 15% | 33% | 32% | 14% | 2% |
| 19 | SU Michelle | 1% | 8% | 24% | 33% | 24% | 8% | 1% |
| 20 | WANG Jasmine | 3% | 18% | 35% | 30% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 21 | HSIEH Rebecca | 13% | 37% | 33% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 22 | HUANG Natalie | - | 1% | 7% | 24% | 37% | 26% | 6% |
| 23 | MEYER Claudia | 27% | 42% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 24 | MI Aileen | 5% | 23% | 35% | 26% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 25 | XIANG Emma | 1% | 10% | 29% | 35% | 20% | 5% | - |
| 26 | MI Anning | 1% | 6% | 22% | 35% | 26% | 9% | 1% |
| 27 | PAHLAVI Dahlia | - | 1% | 6% | 20% | 34% | 29% | 10% |
| 28 | WU Julianna Y. | - | 1% | 13% | 35% | 35% | 14% | 2% |
| 29 | MEI Sarah | 2% | 20% | 37% | 29% | 10% | 2% | - |
| 30 | GU Emily | - | 4% | 23% | 38% | 27% | 8% | 1% |
| 31 | JIANG Claire | 30% | 42% | 22% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
| 32 | OLIVEIRA Lavinia M. | 2% | 19% | 37% | 29% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 33 | SEO Irene Y. | - | 1% | 8% | 25% | 37% | 23% | 5% |
| 34 | ASCHETTINO Aurora | 9% | 30% | 36% | 19% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 35 | SHA Yi Ling | 2% | 12% | 29% | 33% | 19% | 6% | 1% |
| 36 | SCHMIDT Victoria | 1% | 51% | 37% | 10% | 1% | - | - |
| 37 | THIRUVENGADAM Harini | 27% | 40% | 24% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 38 | YU Jaime L. | 1% | 8% | 26% | 35% | 22% | 6% | 1% |
| 39 | LENZ Zoe N. | 16% | 54% | 25% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 40 | ROHRING Anna | 61% | 32% | 6% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 41 | ZHENG Ying | 98% | 2% | - | - | - | - | - |
| 42 | WININGER-SIEVE Taylor | 53% | 38% | 9% | 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.