Boston, MA - Boston, MA, 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 | ||
1 | SHEN Sophia H. | - | 4% | 22% | 48% | 26% | |
2 | WANG Ellen | - | - | 6% | 27% | 45% | 22% |
3 | JING Emily | - | - | 1% | 10% | 38% | 52% |
3 | LUNG Katerina | - | 2% | 16% | 46% | 36% | |
5 | BREKER Anika | - | - | 1% | 9% | 49% | 41% |
6 | LI Grace Q. | - | - | 1% | 11% | 50% | 39% |
7 | ZHENG Ivy | - | - | 2% | 14% | 40% | 43% |
8 | WU Julianna Y. | 17% | 47% | 30% | 6% | - | |
9 | OUYANG Bridgette Z. | - | 3% | 16% | 39% | 34% | 7% |
10 | REN Olivia Y. | - | - | 4% | 22% | 45% | 28% |
11 | DU Hannah | 5% | 22% | 37% | 27% | 9% | 1% |
12 | ACHILOVA Feyza | 4% | 20% | 36% | 29% | 10% | 1% |
13 | MILLER Naomi E. | - | 4% | 25% | 43% | 24% | 4% |
14 | PAHLAVI Dahlia | - | 11% | 40% | 36% | 12% | 1% |
15 | MCKEE Alexandra K. | 4% | 27% | 44% | 22% | 2% | - |
16 | HOLLE Aviella S. | 2% | 16% | 41% | 35% | 6% | - |
17 | SHEN Lydia | 1% | 7% | 24% | 37% | 26% | 5% |
18 | ADAMS KIM Natalie | - | 6% | 26% | 41% | 23% | 3% |
19 | COSTELLO Angeline S. | 4% | 25% | 45% | 22% | 3% | |
20 | SU Michelle | 6% | 29% | 40% | 21% | 4% | - |
21 | FU Qihan | 2% | 47% | 39% | 11% | 1% | - |
22 | OLIVEIRA Lavinia M. | 9% | 37% | 39% | 14% | 1% | - |
23 | LIU Sophia | 46% | 42% | 11% | 1% | - | |
24 | WEBB Ella | 19% | 39% | 30% | 11% | 2% | - |
25 | WU Irene M. | 6% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 7% | 1% |
26 | MUSTO Isabella | 47% | 40% | 12% | 1% | - | - |
27 | TAN Clarisse | 6% | 30% | 40% | 20% | 4% | - |
28 | LAO Sophia | 92% | 8% | - | - | - | - |
28 | GAO Anna | 49% | 39% | 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.