USA Fencing National Championships & July Challenge

Div II Women's Épée

Friday, July 8, 2022 at 1:00 PM

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 CANNING Charlotte 100% 100% 99% 93% 71% 35% 8%
2 YOU Emily 100% 100% 94% 73% 35% 8%
3 CHISHOLM Phoebe C. 100% 100% 100% 95% 71% 32% 6%
3 STOECKEL Sofia I. 100% 100% 98% 88% 61% 26% 5%
5 SMUK Daria A. 100% 100% 100% 96% 79% 44% 11%
6 SONG Angela 100% 99% 94% 73% 38% 9%
7 WEISS Olivia 100% 100% 100% 98% 90% 63% 22%
8 YOU Isabel B. 100% 99% 85% 50% 17% 3% -
9 KIM Jayna 100% 100% 97% 86% 59% 26% 5%
10 HICKS Grace 100% 100% 99% 92% 68% 29% 5%
11 BHATT Anisha 100% 82% 45% 14% 3% < 1% -
12 WITTER Catherine A. 100% 100% 99% 92% 67% 26%
13 BURN Lauren M. 100% 100% 100% 100% 96% 76% 33%
14 FLANIGAN KENDRA 100% 92% 65% 31% 9% 1% -
15 LI Alisha 100% 100% 99% 91% 69% 35% 8%
16 BUSH Emma 100% 100% 99% 92% 70% 36% 9%
17 TAN Jocelyn 100% 98% 84% 53% 20% 3%
18 CHIRASHNYA Noya 100% 100% 98% 85% 52% 14%
19 REMEZA Alissa 100% 100% 100% 99% 94% 73% 29%
20 TIMMONS Sarah J. 100% 100% 100% 100% 94% 70% 26%
21 GUJJA Misha 100% 100% 100% 97% 84% 53% 17%
22 GAO Judy 100% 100% 100% 96% 82% 49% 14%
23 SHU Youshan 100% 100% 96% 77% 41% 10%
24 ZHU Serene M. 100% 100% 98% 86% 57% 19%
25 MCSHINE Katelyn H. 100% 100% 99% 94% 75% 39% 9%
26 ZENG Katrina 100% 99% 94% 76% 44% 16% 2%
27 TAYLOR-CASAMAYOR Maia 100% 100% 98% 88% 61% 26% 5%
28 LEE Yedda 100% 100% 99% 94% 73% 37% 8%
29 BREKSA Lydia 100% 99% 89% 59% 22% 4% -
30 NGUYEN Ashley L. 100% 97% 79% 45% 15% 2% -
31 ANDERSON Claire 100% 99% 90% 62% 25% 4%
32 FREEMAN Kate 100% 74% 32% 8% 1% -
33 SPRINGER Sierra 100% 100% 97% 83% 49% 13%
34 LIN Ashley 100% 100% 96% 78% 46% 16% 2%
35 XU Katelyn 100% 98% 84% 55% 24% 6% 1%
36 KRUMHOLZ Nicole 100% 100% 96% 80% 50% 19% 3%
37 SPURLIN Alicen 100% 100% 100% 99% 88% 56% 16%
38 LIN Elaine 100% 100% 100% 99% 92% 67% 23%
39 BEAVER Kaitlyn 100% 98% 84% 53% 22% 5% -
40 BOWIE Charlotta 100% 100% 97% 82% 50% 17% 2%
41 NGUYEN Audrey 100% 100% 97% 84% 55% 22% 4%
42 PRIHODKO Nina 100% 100% 99% 92% 69% 33% 7%
43 LEE Kaitlyn M. 100% 100% 97% 82% 48% 13%
44 SINHA Zara 100% 98% 86% 55% 20% 3%
45 PECK Maia A. 100% 100% 99% 93% 71% 35% 8%
46 BENNETT Olivia 100% 94% 71% 37% 12% 2% -
47 YAO Yilin 100% 100% 99% 88% 59% 21% 3%
48 BOTNER Olivia 100% 100% 100% 96% 80% 46% 12%
49 LI Charlotte 100% 99% 88% 61% 28% 7% 1%
50 NELSON Grace E. 100% 97% 83% 51% 19% 4% -
51 BARBARA Camille 100% 100% 98% 90% 66% 31% 7%
52 BYBEE Lucy J. 100% 97% 81% 49% 17% 3%
53 MIINEA Elena 100% 97% 82% 49% 16% 2%
54 SHICK Klaudia 100% 97% 80% 46% 15% 2%
55 HSIU Elizabeth 100% 99% 92% 68% 33% 7%
56 MUELLER Emma M. 100% 100% 100% 97% 81% 46% 11%
57 GULLY Wren 100% 96% 69% 29% 7% 1% -
58 SHARMA Sanvi 100% 100% 97% 81% 45% 12%
59 DRYSDALE Lita 100% 95% 74% 37% 10% 1%
60 SMOTRITSKY Liat 100% 70% 25% 5% - -
61 CAREY Michele S. 100% 100% 98% 89% 61% 25% 5%
62 VICKERMAN Sofia 100% 94% 64% 25% 5% 1% -
63 PULLEN Ayah 100% 99% 90% 65% 32% 9% 1%
64 JACKSON Viktoria 100% 86% 50% 16% 3% - -
65 DALEY Keira 100% 91% 62% 27% 6% 1%
66 ZHU-HILL Alice A. 100% 100% 96% 79% 45% 14% 2%
67 PARKS Eliana 100% 98% 81% 45% 14% 2% -
68 PATIL Amulya 100% 100% 97% 80% 48% 17% 3%
69 WRIGHT Margaret A. 100% 100% 100% 99% 94% 70% 27%
70 TYTELL Elizabeth 100% 96% 78% 45% 15% 2%
71 PEELER Julia 100% 100% 95% 75% 39% 9%
72 WIDMANN Ceili 100% 79% 39% 10% 1% -
73 GROSSL Karina 100% 99% 88% 58% 22% 3%
74 NEELAM Neha 100% 91% 58% 21% 4% -
75 PEARSON Heila 100% 100% 99% 94% 74% 40% 10%
76 LI Fei 100% 99% 93% 72% 37% 10% 1%
77 LEE Olivia 100% 100% 98% 88% 59% 24% 4%
78 LEWIS Rachel 100% 93% 68% 34% 10% 2% -
79 ABRAMSON Mariela R. 100% 100% 92% 66% 29% 6% -
79 LEE Samantha X. 100% 91% 60% 24% 6% 1% -
81 PINNAMANENI Drithi 100% 100% 99% 93% 73% 37% 9%
82 SEUK Irene 100% 99% 93% 72% 40% 13% 2%
83 BLIN Margaux J. 100% 100% 100% 98% 86% 54% 15%
84 DONGES Anna 100% 95% 73% 38% 11% 1% -
85 ROWLAND May 100% 100% 96% 74% 36% 9% 1%
86 CHIEM Karen 100% 98% 88% 61% 26% 5%
87 ZHEREBCHEVSKA Veronika 100% 100% 100% 99% 91% 64% 23%
87 NIEMAN Aubrey 100% 88% 52% 17% 3% - -
89 MESCHIA Maggie 100% 100% 98% 89% 65% 31% 7%
90 OLORVIDA Isabella 100% 97% 80% 48% 17% 3% -
91 MADRID Maureen 100% 99% 90% 64% 30% 8% 1%
92 DOUGLAS Marketa F. 100% 96% 74% 37% 11% 2% -
93 SCHLIEP Anna J. 100% 100% 98% 87% 60% 26% 5%
94 MACEDON Gianna 100% 99% 88% 50% 15% 2% -
95 JHANGIANI KAVYA 100% 100% 90% 63% 29% 7% 1%
95 CABANIS eliza 100% 92% 62% 25% 6% 1% -
97 SAUCEDO Grecia 100% 76% 35% 9% 1% - -
98 ENGLISH Marli 100% 96% 73% 35% 9% 1% -
99 CHOI Grace 100% 100% 99% 93% 74% 40% 11%
100 CHIRASHNYA Mika 100% 82% 45% 14% 2% - -
100 MARTIN Adriana 100% 90% 42% 9% 1% - -
102 DONDISCH Andrea 100% 66% 24% 4% - - -
103 KIZILBASH Zara 100% 98% 84% 54% 21% 4%
104 KUMAR Anusha 100% 94% 70% 35% 10% 1%
105 STONER Shanrael M. 100% 95% 73% 37% 11% 1%
106 WONG Alexandra R. 100% 100% 99% 91% 63% 22%
107 KANEVSKY Samantha 100% 100% 91% 62% 28% 7% 1%
108 DOERR Zoe 100% 99% 94% 76% 45% 16% 3%
109 SIMHADRI Meghana 100% 88% 56% 23% 6% 1% -
110 POON Desiree 100% 92% 64% 29% 7% 1% -
111 JARUSHI Amnee 100% 89% 57% 21% 4% - -
112 CHANG Abigail 100% 81% 43% 13% 2% - -
113 XU Priscilla 100% 62% 22% 4% - - -
114 CARLSON Ava 100% 88% 57% 24% 6% 1% -
115 BYRON Karen J. 100% 97% 80% 49% 19% 4% -
116 SATO Elyse 100% 34% 4% - - - -
117 PROKOPEAS Grace 100% 96% 77% 41% 12% 1%
118 SHERTZ Kira E. 100% 94% 70% 35% 10% 1%
119 MURDOCH ROY Grace 100% 96% 73% 37% 11% 2% -
120 YOU Joyce 100% 33% 5% - - - -
121 RHEA Heather 100% 82% 44% 14% 3% -
122 DANNHAUSER Carol A. 100% 78% 38% 10% 1% -
122 HALM Alexandra F. 100% 81% 40% 11% 1% -
124 MA Katelyn 100% 94% 71% 35% 9% 1% -
125 COURTNEY Elya Rebekah 100% 92% 62% 25% 5% -
126 DAVIS Elisabeth 100% 52% 13% 2% - - -
127 MAY Courtney 100% 16% 1% - - - -

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.