USA Fencing National Championships & July Challenge

Div I Women's Saber

Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 8:00 AM

Minneapolis, MN, USA

Probability density of pool victories

Reset

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 SKARBONKIEWICZ Magda 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 89% 53%
2 POSSICK Lola P. 100% 100% 100% 97% 83% 48% 12%
3 TARTAKOVSKY Elizabeth 100% 100% 100% 98% 87% 49%
3 LINDER Kara E. 100% 100% 100% 100% 98% 85% 47%
5 RUSSO Francesca 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 89% 50%
6 SULLIVAN Siobhan R. 100% 100% 100% 99% 92% 67% 25%
7 CHAMBERLAIN Maia C. 100% 100% 100% 99% 94% 71% 28%
8 GREENBAUM Atara R. 100% 100% 100% 99% 92% 70% 29%
9 KIM Zoe 100% 100% 100% 100% 96% 81% 41%
10 KOVACS Sophia 100% 100% 97% 81% 46% 14% 2%
11 GOUHIN Chloe 100% 100% 100% 97% 83% 52% 16%
12 PAK Kaitlyn 100% 100% 100% 98% 88% 55% 13%
13 ANGLADE Alexis C. 100% 100% 100% 99% 93% 67% 25%
14 KONG Vera 100% 100% 99% 93% 67% 29% 5%
15 ANDRES Charmaine G. 100% 99% 94% 75% 42% 13% 2%
16 XIKES Katherine E. 100% 85% 51% 19% 4% - -
17 JOHNSON Honor 100% 100% 100% 100% 96% 64%
18 LU Vivian Y. 100% 100% 100% 97% 84% 53% 16%
19 MILLER Sky 100% 100% 100% 97% 84% 52% 15%
20 LEE Alexandra B. 100% 100% 100% 96% 78% 41% 9%
21 FOX-GITOMER Chloe N. 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 96% 71%
22 TAO Hannah J. 100% 99% 92% 69% 34% 9% 1%
23 DELSOIN Chelsea C. 100% 100% 98% 90% 67% 33% 7%
23 BOIS Adele 100% 100% 96% 80% 50% 18% 3%
25 NAZLYMOV Tatiana F. 100% 100% 100% 96% 81% 49% 14%
26 SHEALY Maggie 100% 100% 99% 90% 60% 22% 3%
27 OISHI Megumi 100% 100% 99% 93% 63% 14%
28 ANDRES Katherine A. 100% 100% 98% 86% 58% 22% 2%
29 WILLIAMS Jadeyn E. 100% 100% 100% 98% 87% 59% 20%
30 SINGLETON-COMFORT Leanne 100% 100% 100% 97% 84% 49% 13%
31 LU Elaine 100% 95% 73% 36% 10% 1% -
32 PEDRAZA Regina 100% 97% 78% 39% 8% -
33 TONG Kunling 100% 100% 98% 90% 67% 33% 7%
34 CARVALHO Isabela A. 100% 100% 98% 88% 61% 24% 3%
35 KAKHIANI-MECKLING Teodora 100% 100% 100% 99% 95% 77% 37%
36 JENKINS Ryan J. 100% 100% 100% 100% 98% 84% 43%
37 LIN Audrey J. 100% 99% 93% 74% 41% 13% 1%
38 WIGGERS Susan Q. 100% 92% 64% 27% 6% -
39 MIKA Veronica 100% 100% 95% 75% 37% 9% 1%
40 HILD Nisha 100% 97% 82% 51% 20% 4% -
41 SAYLES Nina R. 100% 98% 84% 55% 22% 5% -
42 JUNG Irene 100% 96% 79% 46% 16% 3% -
43 CAO Stephanie X. 100% 99% 91% 65% 27% 4%
44 CHIN Erika J. 100% 100% 98% 88% 62% 28% 6%
45 TZOU Alexandra 100% 100% 99% 94% 73% 35% 7%
46 MARSEE Samantha 100% 100% 95% 76% 40% 10% 1%
47 LIGH Erenei J. 100% 81% 42% 12% 2% - -
48 SZETO Chloe 100% 100% 94% 74% 40% 11% 1%
49 FEARNS Zara A. 100% 98% 86% 57% 24% 6% 1%
50 SHOMAN Jenna 100% 100% 100% 97% 82% 48% 13%
51 VADASZ Ibla P. 100% 95% 74% 40% 13% 2% -
52 CODY Alexandra C. 100% 99% 95% 77% 45% 15% 2%
53 STRZALKOWSKI Aleksandra (Ola) M. 100% 100% 100% 97% 83% 46% 10%
54 PAUL Lila 100% 96% 73% 33% 8% 1% -
55 ENGELMAN-SANZ Madeline A. 100% 100% 97% 84% 57% 25% 5%
56 JULIEN Michelle 100% 99% 93% 71% 37% 11% 1%
57 HE Charlotte 100% 98% 85% 54% 21% 4% -
58 THEODORE Maria A. 100% 100% 100% 97% 81% 45% 11%
59 BLUM Leah I. 100% 99% 91% 67% 32% 8% 1%
60 KER Grace 100% 99% 89% 63% 30% 8% 1%
61 GUTHIKONDA Nithya 100% 100% 96% 82% 52% 20% 3%
62 CHIN Sophia J. 100% 93% 65% 29% 7% 1% -
63 GHAYALOD Reya 100% 99% 92% 69% 36% 10% 1%
64 BUHAY Rachel T. 100% 95% 75% 42% 14% 2% -
65 SHI Cathleen 100% 94% 67% 30% 7% 1% -
66 CHEN Xiaohan 100% 99% 95% 77% 45% 15% 2%
67 LI Amanda C. 100% 100% 98% 86% 56% 21% 3%
68 DUCKETT Madison 100% 99% 90% 67% 35% 11% 1%
69 SADIK HANA 100% 91% 65% 31% 10% 2% -
70 JOHNSON Lauren 100% 99% 94% 75% 40% 11% 1%
71 DRAGON Rainer 100% 99% 91% 69% 37% 12% 2%
72 YODER Bridget H. 100% 96% 78% 45% 16% 3% -
73 FREEDMAN Janna N. 100% 100% 99% 92% 72% 39% 10%
74 LEE Hannah 100% 98% 86% 54% 19% 3% -
75 SCALAMONI-GOLDSTEIN Charlotte S. 100% 97% 82% 53% 23% 6% 1%
76 LI Victoria J. 100% 99% 93% 72% 37% 10% 1%
77 LACSON Sarah 100% 98% 87% 58% 25% 6% 1%
78 SHEARER Natalie E. 100% 98% 84% 54% 22% 4% -
79 CALLAHAN Chase J. 100% 97% 82% 51% 19% 3% -
80 KIM Marley I. 100% 93% 68% 34% 10% 2% -
81 NEWELL Alexia C. 100% 99% 90% 63% 28% 6% -
82 KRASTEV Minna 100% 98% 86% 58% 25% 6% 1%
83 SATHYANATH Kailing 100% 98% 85% 55% 23% 5% -
84 NATH Trisha 100% 89% 59% 25% 6% 1% -
85 HARRISON Imogen N. 100% 100% 99% 92% 68% 32% 6%
86 OLSEN Natalie J. 100% 98% 87% 56% 20% 2%
87 TONG Jessie 100% 76% 32% 6% - -
88 MCKEE Brynnley 100% 76% 34% 8% 1% - -
89 PALEO Gabriella 100% 86% 50% 17% 3% - -
90 SCHIMINOVICH Sophia I. 100% 91% 60% 22% 4% - -
91 PRIEUR Lauren 100% 94% 70% 36% 11% 2% -
92 LIU Sophie 100% 92% 64% 27% 6% 1% -
93 GORMAN Victoria M. 100% 97% 80% 45% 14% 2% -
93 YANG Ashley M. 100% 96% 77% 44% 15% 3% -
95 SUN Alyssa 100% 83% 40% 10% 1% - -
96 XI Shining 100% 99% 89% 60% 25% 5% -
97 NATHANSON Sammy E. 100% 95% 72% 31% 4% -
98 XIAO julie 100% 82% 40% 9% 1% -
99 TIBURCIO Diana 100% 94% 70% 32% 7% 1%
100 BROWN Emma 100% 99% 90% 66% 32% 8% 1%
101 BILILIES Sophia 100% 89% 59% 25% 6% 1% -
102 LU Amy 100% 93% 69% 34% 10% 2% -
103 GREENBAUM Ella K. 100% 96% 77% 43% 15% 3% -
104 ALCEBAR Kayla 100% 92% 66% 32% 9% 1% -
105 SINHA Anika 100% 75% 34% 9% 1% - -
105 FANG Victoria W. 100% 95% 70% 33% 9% 1% -
105 BEVACQUA Aria F. 100% 96% 79% 48% 19% 4% -
108 GHOSH Priyanka 100% 100% 96% 80% 49% 18% 3%
108 NI Sharon 100% 94% 71% 36% 10% 1% -
110 ERIKSON Kira R. 100% 87% 51% 18% 3% - -
110 NEIBART Fiona 100% 85% 47% 13% 2% - -
112 CHIANG Emily 100% 84% 49% 18% 4% - -
113 ZIELINSKI Isabella G. 100% 87% 55% 22% 5% 1% -
114 ENDO Miyuki N. 100% 91% 61% 25% 6% 1% -
114 YANG Lea 100% 59% 18% 3% - - -
116 BALAKUMARAN Maya 100% 96% 76% 39% 11% 1% -
116 BARNOVITZ Maya 100% 78% 36% 9% 1% - -
118 HWANG Gabriela M. 100% 77% 36% 9% 1% -
119 ULIBARRI Nevaeh L. 100% 74% 34% 9% 1% - -
120 YANG Angelina LeLe 100% 92% 65% 30% 8% 1% -
121 YUAN Greta 100% 92% 62% 25% 5% - -
122 ALFARACHE Gabriella C. 100% 70% 28% 6% 1% - -
122 LEE Sophia 100% 69% 25% 4% - - -
124 WEI Vivian W. 100% 87% 50% 16% 3% - -

Explanation

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.