Columbus, OH, 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 | NAZLYMOV Tatiana F. | - | - | 1% | 8% | 26% | 41% | 25% | 
| 2 | PAK Kaitlyn | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 40% | 44% | 
| 3 | SKARBONKIEWICZ Magda | - | - | - | - | 4% | 28% | 68% | 
| 3 | POSSICK Lola P. | - | - | - | 4% | 20% | 42% | 34% | 
| 5 | JOHNSON Honor B. | - | - | - | - | 2% | 20% | 78% | 
| 6 | KIM Zoe | - | - | - | 1% | 8% | 35% | 56% | 
| 7 | CARVALHO Isabela A. | - | 1% | 7% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 7% | 
| 8 | GREENBAUM Atara R. | - | - | 2% | 14% | 41% | 43% | |
| 9 | ENGELMAN-SANZ Madeline A. | - | - | 3% | 13% | 32% | 37% | 15% | 
| 9 | SHOMAN Jenna | - | - | - | 1% | 11% | 43% | 46% | 
| 11 | TZOU Alexandra | - | - | 1% | 5% | 21% | 42% | 31% | 
| 12 | CHIN Erika J. | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 43% | 26% | |
| 13 | WILLIAMS Jadeyn E. | - | - | - | 1% | 10% | 39% | 49% | 
| 14 | SULLIVAN Siobhan R. | - | - | - | 2% | 14% | 41% | 43% | 
| 15 | XI Shining | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 39% | 26% | 4% | 
| 16 | GEYER Carolina M. | 1% | 16% | 35% | 31% | 14% | 3% | - | 
| 17 | CHEN Xiaohan | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 36% | 18% | 3% | 
| 18 | KOVACS Sophia | - | - | 1% | 9% | 39% | 51% | |
| 19 | BLUM Leah I. | - | - | 1% | 8% | 29% | 44% | 18% | 
| 20 | LEE Alexandra B. | - | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 41% | 30% | 
| 21 | MIKA Veronica | - | 3% | 15% | 32% | 32% | 15% | 2% | 
| 22 | FREEDMAN Janna N. | - | - | 1% | 10% | 32% | 43% | 13% | 
| 23 | LU Vivian Y. | - | - | 1% | 10% | 38% | 51% | |
| 24 | ANDRES Katherine A. | - | 3% | 17% | 36% | 33% | 11% | |
| 25 | KIM Marley I. | 3% | 18% | 35% | 30% | 12% | 2% | |
| 26 | GOUHIN Chloe | - | - | 2% | 17% | 44% | 37% | |
| 27 | BOIS Adele | - | 1% | 9% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 5% | 
| 28 | TONG Kunling | - | - | 3% | 12% | 30% | 37% | 17% | 
| 29 | ANDRES Charmaine G. | - | - | 4% | 20% | 38% | 30% | 7% | 
| 30 | HILD Nisha | - | 3% | 13% | 31% | 34% | 16% | 2% | 
| 31 | SOURIMTO Valeria | 5% | 24% | 38% | 26% | 7% | 1% | |
| 32 | LEE Hannah | 2% | 17% | 35% | 30% | 13% | 3% | - | 
| 33 | OISHI Megumi | - | - | - | 2% | 15% | 42% | 40% | 
| 34 | CHIN Sophia J. | - | 5% | 20% | 37% | 29% | 8% | 1% | 
| 35 | NATHANSON Sammy E. | 1% | 9% | 27% | 35% | 21% | 6% | 1% | 
| 36 | FOUR-GARCIA Madison | - | - | - | 3% | 18% | 44% | 35% | 
| 37 | WILLIAMS Chloe C. | - | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 43% | 26% | 
| 38 | KALRA Himani V. | - | 2% | 11% | 28% | 35% | 20% | 4% | 
| 38 | PRIEUR Lauren | 1% | 9% | 26% | 34% | 22% | 7% | 1% | 
| 40 | OLSEN Natalie J. | - | 1% | 8% | 24% | 37% | 25% | 5% | 
| 41 | SADIK HANA | - | 5% | 34% | 43% | 16% | 2% | |
| 42 | CAO Stephanie X. | - | 1% | 8% | 28% | 43% | 21% | |
| 43 | HULSEBURG Kaitlyn | - | 2% | 12% | 35% | 40% | 11% | |
| 44 | KATZ Anat | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 39% | 25% | 5% | 
| 45 | MOZHAEVA MARIA | - | 2% | 9% | 26% | 35% | 23% | 5% | 
| 46 | ERIKSON Kira R. | 2% | 13% | 34% | 34% | 14% | 2% | - | 
| 46 | CHIANG Emily | 5% | 23% | 37% | 26% | 8% | 1% | - | 
| 48 | CHANG Josephine S. | - | - | 4% | 18% | 40% | 34% | 4% | 
| 49 | CHEN Jane | - | 5% | 21% | 37% | 28% | 8% | 1% | 
| 50 | LU Elaine | 1% | 9% | 25% | 35% | 23% | 7% | 1% | 
| 51 | TAO Hannah J. | - | 1% | 5% | 21% | 40% | 30% | 4% | 
| 52 | HARRISON Imogen N. | - | - | 5% | 24% | 44% | 26% | |
| 53 | GREENBAUM Ella K. | - | 2% | 11% | 30% | 38% | 18% | |
| 54 | TIMOFEYEV Nicole | - | 1% | 9% | 31% | 42% | 16% | |
| 55 | BEVACQUA Aria F. | 1% | 13% | 34% | 35% | 15% | 2% | |
| 56 | MARSEE Samantha | - | 4% | 19% | 37% | 31% | 9% | |
| 57 | CALLAHAN Chase J. | 2% | 15% | 36% | 34% | 12% | 1% | |
| 58 | CHIOLDI Mina | - | - | 4% | 18% | 38% | 32% | 8% | 
| 59 | SCALAMONI-GOLDSTEIN Charlotte S. | - | 3% | 16% | 33% | 32% | 14% | 2% | 
| 60 | SATHYANATH Kailing | - | 1% | 4% | 18% | 35% | 33% | 10% | 
| 61 | YUAN Greta | 3% | 15% | 32% | 31% | 15% | 4% | - | 
| 62 | STONE Hava S. | - | 3% | 17% | 37% | 32% | 10% | - | 
| 63 | BILILIES Sophia | 3% | 22% | 39% | 27% | 8% | 1% | - | 
| 64 | NEIBART Fiona | 10% | 34% | 37% | 15% | 3% | - | |
| 65 | WHANG Rebecca | - | - | 2% | 12% | 32% | 38% | 15% | 
| 66 | CODY Alexandra C. | - | 4% | 16% | 34% | 34% | 12% | |
| 67 | JOHNSON Lauren | - | 3% | 17% | 37% | 34% | 9% | |
| 68 | LI Victoria J. | - | 5% | 21% | 38% | 28% | 8% | |
| 69 | KER Grace | - | 2% | 10% | 27% | 36% | 21% | 4% | 
| 70 | PENG Florella | 7% | 26% | 36% | 23% | 7% | 1% | - | 
| 71 | HWANG Gabriela M. | 2% | 18% | 36% | 30% | 12% | 2% | - | 
| 72 | ULIBARRI Nevaeh L. | 1% | 10% | 29% | 36% | 20% | 4% | - | 
| 73 | SZETO Chloe | - | 3% | 18% | 39% | 31% | 8% | |
| 74 | GORMAN Victoria M. | 1% | 8% | 29% | 40% | 19% | 3% | |
| 74 | YANG Angelina LeLe | 4% | 21% | 39% | 28% | 8% | 1% | |
| 76 | LI Amanda C. | - | 1% | 10% | 32% | 41% | 16% | |
| 77 | LEE Sophia | 17% | 41% | 32% | 10% | 1% | - | |
| 78 | WIGGERS Susan Q. | - | - | 7% | 32% | 46% | 14% | |
| 79 | GUTHIKONDA Nithya | - | - | - | 5% | 24% | 49% | 22% | 
| 80 | LEVITIS Danielle | - | 5% | 23% | 37% | 26% | 7% | 1% | 
| 81 | DELSOIN Chelsea C. | - | - | 4% | 17% | 34% | 32% | 12% | 
| 82 | XIKES Katherine E. | 1% | 7% | 23% | 37% | 26% | 6% | - | 
| 83 | LIN Audrey J. | - | 2% | 11% | 29% | 35% | 19% | 3% | 
| 84 | NEWELL Alexia C. | 1% | 5% | 19% | 33% | 29% | 12% | 2% | 
| 85 | JOHNSON Dagny L. | 1% | 10% | 29% | 36% | 19% | 4% | - | 
| 86 | LARIMER Katherine E. | 1% | 12% | 33% | 35% | 16% | 3% | - | 
| 87 | GRAFF Sophie | 4% | 19% | 36% | 30% | 10% | 1% | - | 
| 88 | NYSTROM Sofia C. | 1% | 12% | 32% | 35% | 16% | 3% | - | 
| 88 | KHAN Alissa | 8% | 31% | 37% | 19% | 4% | - | - | 
| 90 | GHAYALOD reya | 1% | 10% | 27% | 35% | 21% | 6% | 1% | 
| 91 | WU Helen | 4% | 26% | 39% | 24% | 6% | 1% | - | 
| 92 | MANSPERGER Leena | 2% | 11% | 28% | 34% | 19% | 5% | - | 
| 93 | VADASZ Ibla P. | - | 1% | 10% | 29% | 38% | 20% | 3% | 
| 94 | LUKASHENKO Angelina | - | 4% | 20% | 37% | 29% | 9% | 1% | 
| 95 | YU Zhiang | 2% | 13% | 30% | 33% | 18% | 5% | - | 
| 96 | NGUYEN Ella | 13% | 34% | 34% | 16% | 4% | - | - | 
| 97 | LU Yi Lin | 2% | 13% | 31% | 34% | 17% | 3% | |
| 98 | ALCEBAR Kayla | 3% | 20% | 41% | 28% | 7% | 1% | |
| 99 | SINHA Anika | - | 5% | 33% | 43% | 17% | 2% | |
| 100 | CALVERT Sarah-Jane E. | 8% | 36% | 38% | 15% | 2% | - | |
| 101 | CHEN Ashley | 12% | 33% | 34% | 17% | 4% | - | |
| 102 | VESTEL Mira B. | - | 3% | 18% | 37% | 32% | 10% | |
| 103 | NAYAK Indra | 32% | 42% | 21% | 5% | - | - | |
| 104 | DANK Dina | 2% | 16% | 37% | 32% | 11% | 1% | |
| 105 | FEARNS Zara A. | - | 4% | 18% | 34% | 30% | 12% | 2% | 
| 106 | TUCKER Iman R. | - | 1% | 9% | 27% | 40% | 21% | 2% | 
| 107 | WEI Vivian W. | 1% | 9% | 29% | 37% | 20% | 5% | - | 
| 107 | JULIEN Michelle | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 8% | 
| 109 | XU Ellen | - | 3% | 16% | 33% | 31% | 14% | 2% | 
| 110 | BUHAY Rachel T. | 1% | 6% | 20% | 34% | 28% | 10% | 1% | 
| 111 | ENDO Miyuki N. | 3% | 15% | 31% | 31% | 16% | 4% | - | 
| 111 | ZENG Megan | 18% | 39% | 31% | 11% | 2% | - | - | 
| 113 | LIU Sophie | 1% | 12% | 33% | 35% | 16% | 3% | - | 
| 114 | JUNG Irene | - | 6% | 24% | 38% | 25% | 6% | - | 
| 114 | XIAO julie | 11% | 31% | 34% | 18% | 5% | 1% | - | 
| 116 | SU Emma | 8% | 28% | 35% | 21% | 7% | 1% | - | 
| 116 | WANG Jianning | 14% | 36% | 33% | 14% | 3% | - | - | 
| 118 | SO Catelyn | 11% | 32% | 36% | 18% | 4% | - | - | 
| 119 | SUBRAMANIAN Nitika | 2% | 13% | 31% | 33% | 17% | 4% | - | 
| 120 | CHEN Xinyan | 4% | 21% | 37% | 28% | 10% | 1% | - | 
| 121 | KUANG TongFei | 36% | 43% | 18% | 3% | - | - | - | 
| 122 | MCKEE Ainsley | 5% | 23% | 37% | 26% | 8% | 1% | - | 
| 123 | SADOVA Olga | 42% | 43% | 14% | 2% | - | - | |
| 124 | BENOIT Adelaide L. | 6% | 27% | 38% | 23% | 6% | - | |
| 125 | HE Lizbeth | 17% | 44% | 29% | 9% | 1% | - | |
| 126 | NOVICK Mia J. | 14% | 39% | 34% | 12% | 2% | - | |
| 127 | SCHIMINOVICH Sophia I. | 5% | 21% | 35% | 27% | 10% | 2% | - | 
| 128 | TABANGAY Heartlyn | 4% | 22% | 36% | 27% | 10% | 2% | - | 
| 129 | FAN Grace | 46% | 40% | 12% | 2% | - | - | |
| 130 | ELNATAN Mica A. | 7% | 61% | 27% | 4% | - | - | |
| 131 | HENRY Soraya S. | 55% | 36% | 8% | 1% | - | - | |
| 132 | BENTOLILA Thalia | 21% | 42% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 133 | LU Amy | 2% | 13% | 29% | 33% | 18% | 5% | - | 
| 134 | RAMIREZ Mirka A. | 10% | 36% | 36% | 15% | 3% | - | - | 
| 135 | KANTIPUDI Shrika | 14% | 37% | 33% | 13% | 2% | - | - | 
| 136 | LIGH Erenei J. | 1% | 7% | 26% | 37% | 23% | 5% | - | 
| 137 | JENKINS Scotland | 30% | 45% | 21% | 4% | - | - | - | 
| 138 | DILLE Carolina G. | 17% | 38% | 31% | 11% | 2% | - | - | 
| 139 | BARNOVITZ Maya | 20% | 38% | 29% | 11% | 2% | - | - | 
| 139 | ZHANG Chenfei | 13% | 33% | 33% | 16% | 4% | - | - | 
| 141 | EVANS Madelynn | 22% | 44% | 27% | 7% | 1% | - | - | 
| 142 | ZHIZHIN Jeanette | 72% | 25% | 3% | - | - | - | - | 
| 142 | LI Angela | 27% | 44% | 23% | 5% | 1% | - | - | 
| 144 | HUANG MADELINE | 12% | 38% | 34% | 13% | 2% | - | - | 
| 145 | YANG Lea | 15% | 40% | 32% | 11% | 2% | - | - | 
| 146 | BAKER Audrey C. | 6% | 30% | 39% | 20% | 4% | - | |
| 147 | BOURGEOIS audreane | 27% | 43% | 24% | 6% | - | - | |
| 148 | MORAN Rhea | 53% | 36% | 9% | 1% | - | - | - | 
| 149 | HUNG Anna | 3% | 19% | 37% | 29% | 10% | 1% | - | 
| 150 | OBRADOVIC Ana | 17% | 38% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - | |
| 151 | JOHNSON Lydia | 18% | 39% | 31% | 11% | 2% | - | - | 
| 151 | JOHNSTON Lily | 24% | 45% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - | - | 
| 153 | BALAKUMARAN Maya | 3% | 17% | 36% | 31% | 11% | 1% | |
| 154 | ALFARACHE Gabriella C. | 14% | 36% | 33% | 14% | 3% | - | - | 
| 155 | SHI Julia | 15% | 35% | 32% | 15% | 4% | - | - | 
| 156 | CHRISTOTHOULOU Olympia C. | 19% | 40% | 29% | 10% | 2% | - | - | 
| 157 | BAWA Anahat | 49% | 38% | 11% | 2% | - | - | - | 
| 157 | SCHICK Veronica | 41% | 42% | 15% | 2% | - | - | - | 
| 159 | KOKAL Genevieve | 87% | 13% | - | - | - | - | |
| 160 | D'ORAZIO Sofia V. | 40% | 42% | 16% | 3% | - | - | - | 
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.