Anaheim, CA - Anaheim, 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 | ANDRES Katherine A. | - | - | - | 2% | 15% | 43% | 40% |
| 2 | FEARNS Zara A. | - | - | 1% | 8% | 26% | 41% | 25% |
| 3 | YONG Erika E. | - | - | - | 2% | 21% | 76% | |
| 3 | XI Shining | - | - | 1% | 7% | 29% | 45% | 18% |
| 5 | TIMOFEYEV Nicole | - | - | - | - | 6% | 33% | 61% |
| 6 | VESTEL Mira B. | - | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 42% | 24% |
| 7 | SCHIMINOVICH Sophia I. | - | - | 4% | 20% | 43% | 29% | 4% |
| 8 | ANDRES Charmaine G. | - | 2% | 11% | 32% | 39% | 16% | |
| 9 | JUNG Irene | - | 1% | 9% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 5% |
| 10 | BARTON Mele | 2% | 16% | 37% | 34% | 11% | 1% | |
| 11 | KER Grace | - | 1% | 5% | 20% | 37% | 30% | 8% |
| 12 | ENDO Miyuki N. | 1% | 7% | 26% | 39% | 23% | 5% | |
| 13 | CHANG Audrey | 3% | 17% | 34% | 30% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 14 | PI Sophia | 18% | 44% | 28% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 15 | GOMES Diana C. | - | 4% | 20% | 39% | 29% | 8% | 1% |
| 16 | NOVICK Mia J. | - | 2% | 13% | 35% | 36% | 13% | 1% |
| 17 | JEAN Olympe G. | 2% | 15% | 36% | 33% | 12% | 2% | |
| 18 | CALLAHAN Chase J. | - | - | 4% | 17% | 36% | 33% | 10% |
| 19 | EVANS Madelynn | 4% | 25% | 42% | 24% | 5% | - | - |
| 20 | NGUYEN Siena | 1% | 6% | 24% | 36% | 24% | 8% | 1% |
| 21 | BARNOVITZ Maya | 2% | 18% | 39% | 31% | 9% | - | |
| 22 | YANG Lea | - | 5% | 25% | 42% | 22% | 4% | - |
| 23 | FANG Victoria W. | - | - | 2% | 15% | 41% | 35% | 6% |
| 24 | LIN Lauren | 5% | 31% | 41% | 19% | 4% | - | - |
| 25 | HOLMES Emma | - | 6% | 25% | 41% | 25% | 3% | |
| 25 | CHIN Elise | 23% | 44% | 26% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 27 | KRASTEV Minna | - | 1% | 7% | 27% | 42% | 23% | |
| 28 | ERIKSON Kira R. | - | 1% | 9% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 5% |
| 29 | HU Michelle | 26% | 44% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - | |
| 30 | TUNG Renee | 20% | 39% | 29% | 10% | 2% | - | - |
| 31 | KOLL-BRAVMANN Ryder S. | 13% | 42% | 35% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 32 | LIN Grace | 46% | 41% | 12% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 33 | TONG Jessie | 4% | 25% | 41% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 34 | WANG Zidan | 6% | 24% | 36% | 25% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 35 | HITOMI Nadya | 3% | 22% | 40% | 28% | 7% | - | |
| 36 | BENTOLILA Thalia | - | 4% | 18% | 34% | 30% | 12% | 2% |
| 37 | RAMIREZ Mirka A. | 7% | 26% | 37% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 38 | GEYER Victoria M. | 58% | 34% | 7% | 1% | - | - | |
| 39 | NEELEY Leilani | 61% | 32% | 6% | - | - | - | - |
| 40 | CHEN Athena | 35% | 43% | 18% | 4% | - | - | - |
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.