Monroe 33 Tennis, Basketball and Sports - Monroe Township, NJ, USA
Explore the probability of achieving at least a certain number of victories in the pool 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 | SHOMAN Jenna | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 56% |
| 2 | TZOU Alexandra | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 51% |
| 3 | JOHNSON Honor B. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 81% |
| 3 | JULIEN Michelle | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 81% | 38% |
| 5 | PAK Kaitlyn | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 63% |
| 6 | BEVACQUA Aria F. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 94% | 69% | 30% | 5% |
| 7 | HASSANEIN Toqa | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 53% | 20% | 3% |
| 8 | LIU Sophie | 100% | 100% | 94% | 74% | 40% | 12% | 1% |
| 9 | LUKASHENKO Angelina | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 77% | 41% | 9% |
| 10 | PAUL Lila | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 54% | 13% |
| 11 | TAO Hannah J. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 70% | 26% |
| 12 | XIKES Katherine E. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 89% | 52% | 15% | 1% |
| 13 | DANK Dina | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 65% | 26% | 4% |
| 14 | CHIOLDI Mina | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 68% | 26% |
| 15 | ANTHONY Alexia B. | 100% | 100% | 97% | 82% | 48% | 15% | 2% |
| 16 | OBRADOVIC Ana | 100% | 97% | 81% | 47% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 17 | LI Amanda C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 43% |
| 18 | PRIEUR Lauren | 100% | 100% | 98% | 89% | 63% | 26% | 3% |
| 18 | BOIS Adele | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 67% | 23% |
| 20 | HULSEBURG Kaitlyn | 100% | 100% | 100% | 97% | 79% | 34% | 2% |
| 21 | DUCKETT Madison | 100% | 100% | 99% | 92% | 67% | 26% | 3% |
| 22 | YUAN Greta | 100% | 100% | 97% | 85% | 55% | 20% | 2% |
| 23 | CHEN Celina Z. | 100% | 90% | 58% | 23% | 5% | - | - |
| 24 | MANSPERGER Leena | 100% | 100% | 99% | 88% | 56% | 19% | 2% |
| 25 | BALAKUMARAN Maya | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 71% | 31% | 4% |
| 26 | SOURIMTO Valeria | 100% | 100% | 98% | 84% | 52% | 18% | 2% |
| 27 | JOHNSTON Lily | 100% | 92% | 62% | 24% | 5% | - | - |
| 28 | SUBRAMANIAN Nitika | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 54% | 18% | 2% |
| 29 | REN Xinling | 100% | 92% | 64% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 30 | HE Lizbeth | 100% | 98% | 78% | 37% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 31 | NATH Trisha | 100% | 99% | 81% | 41% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 32 | MCSWEENEY Kylie | 100% | 93% | 66% | 31% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 33 | NAYAK Anika | 100% | 67% | 24% | 4% | < 1% | - | - |
| 34 | BAKER Audrey C. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 76% | 39% | 10% | 1% |
| 35 | LEE Sophia | 100% | 99% | 89% | 59% | 23% | 4% | - |
| 36 | CARVALHO Isabela A. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 33% | 3% |
| 37 | ATLURI Sara V. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 72% | 30% | 5% |
| 37 | JEONG Katie | 100% | 98% | 86% | 53% | 20% | 4% | - |
| 39 | LI Angela | 100% | 97% | 75% | 27% | 4% | - | - |
| 40 | WANG Jianning | 100% | 95% | 71% | 33% | 8% | 1% | - |
| 40 | SHUM Cindy | 100% | 88% | 56% | 22% | 5% | 1% | - |
| 42 | ALANGAD Rhea | 100% | 32% | 4% | - | - | - | - |
| 43 | LEVITIS Danielle | 100% | 100% | 98% | 86% | 55% | 20% | 2% |
| 44 | NAYAK Esha | 100% | 84% | 45% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 45 | YEN Natalie | 100% | 93% | 49% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 46 | MESSICK Maya | 100% | 83% | 30% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 47 | SADOVA Olga | 100% | 99% | 84% | 44% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 48 | SPEARS Mya B | 100% | 97% | 73% | 33% | 6% | - | - |
| 49 | FLATT Sophia | 100% | 81% | 40% | 11% | 1% | - | - |
| 50 | HORMEL Molly | 100% | 42% | 6% | - | - | - | - |
| 51 | MORAN Rhea | 100% | 78% | 36% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 52 | JENKINS Scotland | 100% | 85% | 46% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 53 | DAI Olivia | 100% | 78% | 36% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 54 | SLOBODSKY Sasha L. | 100% | 96% | 76% | 40% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 54 | DUBETSKY Ashley | 100% | 28% | 3% | - | - | - | - |
| 56 | BERNSTEIN Aiden S. | 100% | 83% | 45% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
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.