Kenosha, WI - Kenosha, WI, 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 | TALAVERA Daena | - | - | 5% | 25% | 45% | 25% | |
| 2 | MASSICK Laine | - | - | - | 2% | 12% | 39% | 46% |
| 3 | NEWHARD Zelia K. | - | 4% | 18% | 34% | 31% | 12% | 2% |
| 3 | ZHAO Sophie L. | 1% | 11% | 29% | 33% | 19% | 5% | 1% |
| 5 | SENIC Adeline | - | 6% | 34% | 44% | 16% | ||
| 6 | HALL Velma | - | 1% | 9% | 29% | 41% | 20% | |
| 7 | DEBACK Greta I. | - | 1% | 9% | 28% | 37% | 21% | 3% |
| 8 | SADAN Jordan E. | - | 4% | 29% | 46% | 21% | ||
| 9 | GALAVOTTI Claire Teresa | - | - | 3% | 14% | 33% | 35% | 14% |
| 10 | DE LA CRUZ Eden | 2% | 16% | 37% | 33% | 12% | 1% | |
| 11 | FERNANDES Thea | - | 2% | 13% | 33% | 35% | 15% | 2% |
| 12 | KOSTELNY Alexis | - | 1% | 10% | 29% | 37% | 19% | 3% |
| 13 | SOOD Ishani S. | - | 3% | 24% | 47% | 26% | ||
| 14 | TALWALKAR Apoorva | 1% | 9% | 32% | 39% | 17% | 2% | |
| 15 | NAMGALAURI Mariam | - | 6% | 23% | 37% | 26% | 8% | 1% |
| 16 | WILSON Anna S. | 14% | 48% | 30% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 17 | YANG Lingting | - | - | 3% | 14% | 34% | 35% | 13% |
| 18 | HIRSCH Sophie A. | 2% | 18% | 37% | 30% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 19 | SANTOS Annika Beatrice I. | 2% | 16% | 34% | 31% | 14% | 3% | - |
| 20 | HAYES Alyssa R. | 35% | 50% | 13% | 1% | - | ||
| 21 | RODRIGUEZ Celeste | 31% | 42% | 22% | 5% | 1% | - | |
| 22 | LEE Fiona E. | 8% | 35% | 37% | 16% | 3% | - | - |
| 23 | PFLAUM Philippa J. | 57% | 34% | 8% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 24 | BAWA Sahana | 41% | 47% | 10% | 1% | - | ||
| 25 | MCNALLY Teagan | 51% | 38% | 10% | 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.