New Haven, CT - New Haven, CT, 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 | LI Amanda C. | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 96% | 77% | 36% |
| 2 | SHOMAN Jenna | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 68% | 24% |
| 3 | DUBOIS Lauren N. | 100% | 100% | 98% | 88% | 61% | 25% | 4% |
| 3 | SOURIMTO Valeria | 100% | 100% | 100% | 95% | 73% | 27% | |
| 5 | ENGELMAN Madeline A. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 93% | 70% | 33% | 6% |
| 6 | BEVACQUA Aria F. | 100% | 100% | 95% | 71% | 24% | ||
| 7 | MIKA Veronica | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 72% | 35% | 6% |
| 8 | SINHA Anika | 100% | 100% | 97% | 81% | 44% | 12% | 1% |
| 9 | OBRADOVIC Ana | 100% | 100% | 99% | 91% | 67% | 32% | 7% |
| 10 | PAUL Lila | 100% | 100% | 98% | 85% | 51% | 14% | |
| 11 | SO Catelyn | 100% | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 68% | 24% |
| 12 | BALAKUMARAN Maya | 100% | 100% | 96% | 80% | 48% | 18% | 3% |
| 13 | LI Jaimie | 100% | 99% | 94% | 71% | 36% | 9% | 1% |
| 14 | JOHNSON Dagny L. | 100% | 100% | 99% | 90% | 66% | 31% | 7% |
| 15 | PASHIN Anna | 100% | 96% | 78% | 43% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 16 | LEE Sophia | 100% | 99% | 92% | 66% | 27% | 4% | |
| 17 | HILD Nisha | 100% | 100% | 95% | 75% | 41% | 12% | 1% |
| 18 | LAMMER Sophie G. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 59% | 18% | ||
| 19 | MANSPERGER Leena | 100% | 100% | 99% | 94% | 74% | 38% | 9% |
| 20 | LU Elaine | 100% | 85% | 48% | 16% | 3% | - | |
| 21 | LI Sophie | 100% | 100% | 94% | 69% | 30% | 6% | - |
| 22 | MCKEE Ainsley | 100% | 73% | 30% | 6% | - | ||
| 23 | JAVERI Amaya | 100% | 98% | 88% | 61% | 28% | 7% | 1% |
| 24 | LOPEZ-ONA Mia | 100% | 84% | 49% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 25 | LEUNG Ashlyn K. | 100% | 99% | 90% | 65% | 30% | 8% | 1% |
| 26 | NAYAK Indra | 100% | 97% | 83% | 54% | 24% | 6% | 1% |
| 27 | HUANG Caroline | 100% | 76% | 37% | 11% | 2% | - | - |
| 28 | FEIG Sela | 100% | 94% | 60% | 19% | 2% | ||
| 29 | NAYAK Anika | 100% | 92% | 62% | 23% | 4% | - | |
| 30 | SHINCHUK Ellisha | 100% | 97% | 78% | 41% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 32 | YOUNG Audrey | 100% | 100% | 97% | 84% | 52% | 17% | 2% |
| 33 | MONTORIO Lily M. | 100% | 96% | 76% | 40% | 12% | 2% | - |
| 34 | NATH Trisha | 100% | 89% | 47% | 13% | 2% | - | - |
| 35 | WU Allison Y. | 100% | 94% | 69% | 30% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 36 | MCKEE Brynnley | 100% | 75% | 29% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 37 | KHAN Alissa | 100% | 92% | 55% | 13% | 1% | ||
| 38 | GUILFOYLE Alanna | 100% | 86% | 41% | 8% | 1% | - | |
| 39 | NAYAK Esha | 100% | 77% | 36% | 10% | 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.