Oaks, PA - Oaks, PA, 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 | YANG Miranda (Yinuo) | - | - | 1% | 7% | 24% | 40% | 27% |
| 2 | DOUGLAS Julia F. | - | 4% | 18% | 36% | 31% | 10% | |
| 3 | ZHANG Tina Tianyi | - | 1% | 10% | 29% | 40% | 20% | |
| 3 | LIN Elaine | 5% | 20% | 33% | 27% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 5 | SMITH Grace L. | - | - | 2% | 9% | 28% | 40% | 22% |
| 6 | GLASSNER Sophia Rose S. | 2% | 13% | 30% | 33% | 17% | 4% | - |
| 7 | TOLBA Salma | - | 3% | 14% | 29% | 33% | 17% | 3% |
| 8 | LI Alisha | 8% | 29% | 35% | 20% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 9 | HAFEEZ Hania | - | 3% | 12% | 28% | 33% | 19% | 4% |
| 10 | GANSER Yuliya | - | 4% | 14% | 29% | 32% | 17% | 4% |
| 11 | DOROSHKEVICH Victoriia | - | - | 2% | 10% | 28% | 38% | 21% |
| 12 | SMOTRITSKY Mia | 1% | 5% | 20% | 33% | 28% | 11% | 2% |
| 13 | CHENG Ava | - | 2% | 12% | 29% | 34% | 19% | 4% |
| 14 | HU Chelsea | 26% | 40% | 25% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 15 | BAJAJ Nikita K. | 1% | 10% | 25% | 33% | 23% | 8% | 1% |
| 16 | ABRAMSON Mariela R. | 14% | 36% | 32% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 17 | GUMAGAY Erika L. | - | 4% | 16% | 32% | 31% | 14% | 3% |
| 18 | KIM Elizabeth Y. | - | 1% | 7% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 7% |
| 19 | GAO Judy | 1% | 9% | 25% | 34% | 23% | 8% | 1% |
| 20 | KRUMHOLZ Nicole | 23% | 40% | 26% | 9% | 2% | - | - |
| 21 | SZEWC Alexandra | - | 2% | 10% | 26% | 34% | 22% | 6% |
| 22 | DAMRATOSKI Anna Z. | 3% | 17% | 35% | 31% | 12% | 2% | |
| 23 | MARCHANT Sandra M. | - | 1% | 5% | 18% | 34% | 31% | 11% |
| 24 | PAPADAKIS Lily | - | 1% | 6% | 19% | 34% | 30% | 11% |
| 25 | IGOE Nirali B. | 1% | 6% | 20% | 33% | 28% | 11% | 2% |
| 26 | POLANICHKA Nicole P. | - | - | 4% | 16% | 33% | 33% | 13% |
| 27 | REDDYMEKA Sameera | 7% | 26% | 35% | 23% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 28 | YANG Chloe | 10% | 32% | 36% | 18% | 4% | - | |
| 29 | DESAI Meera P. | 1% | 8% | 27% | 37% | 22% | 5% | |
| 30 | PROKOP Jeannine A. | 3% | 15% | 31% | 30% | 16% | 4% | - |
| 31 | DE JAGER Celine | 1% | 5% | 19% | 32% | 29% | 13% | 2% |
| 32 | CHANG Ella | 22% | 40% | 28% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 33 | MING Cynthia | 2% | 13% | 30% | 32% | 18% | 5% | 1% |
| 34 | HAFEEZ Hiba | 4% | 19% | 34% | 28% | 12% | 3% | - |
| 35 | LEE Yedda | 1% | 6% | 20% | 32% | 28% | 12% | 2% |
| 36 | TOMASELLO Olivia E. | 1% | 9% | 26% | 33% | 22% | 7% | 1% |
| 37 | SHU Youshan | 25% | 41% | 25% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 38 | SIBLEY Elisabeth J. | 1% | 6% | 21% | 34% | 27% | 10% | 1% |
| 39 | SWEET Ryleigh E. | 2% | 12% | 29% | 33% | 19% | 6% | 1% |
| 40 | BOWIE Charlotta | 28% | 42% | 23% | 6% | 1% | - | |
| 41 | ZENG Katrina | 11% | 30% | 33% | 19% | 6% | 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.