Minneapolis, MN, 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 | SENIC Adeline | - | - | - | - | 1% | 21% | 77% |
| 2 | AMR HOSSNY Sara | - | - | - | 1% | 11% | 45% | 42% |
| 3 | GEBALA Gabrielle Grace A. | - | - | - | - | 1% | 14% | 85% |
| 3 | TAN Kaitlyn N. | - | - | - | - | 4% | 27% | 69% |
| 5 | CHEN Allison V. | - | - | - | - | - | 11% | 88% |
| 6 | SUN Ruoxi | - | - | - | 1% | 7% | 35% | 58% |
| 7 | EYER Hailey M. | - | - | - | - | 2% | 24% | 74% |
| 8 | CALISE Ella | - | - | 6% | 29% | 48% | 16% | |
| 9 | GOOR Viviene E. | - | - | - | 1% | 11% | 39% | 48% |
| 9 | CHO Rebecca H. | - | - | - | - | 3% | 25% | 72% |
| 9 | KIM Rachel | - | - | 3% | 18% | 40% | 32% | 6% |
| 12 | FEDELI Caterina S. | - | - | - | - | - | 12% | 87% |
| 13 | LEE Lavender | - | - | - | 1% | 8% | 36% | 56% |
| 14 | WANDJI Anais | - | - | - | 5% | 32% | 63% | |
| 15 | CHUSID Mikayla | - | - | - | - | - | 11% | 88% |
| 16 | RAO Sonia D. | - | 1% | 7% | 27% | 41% | 22% | 1% |
| 17 | LIU Jaelyn A. | - | - | - | - | - | 8% | 92% |
| 17 | DOROSHKEVICH Taisiia | - | - | - | 2% | 17% | 51% | 29% |
| 19 | LIU Angel(Daying) | - | - | - | 2% | 20% | 79% | |
| 20 | WU Celine | - | - | 1% | 9% | 32% | 43% | 15% |
| 21 | MI Aileen | - | - | 1% | 12% | 45% | 41% | |
| 22 | ROY Layla | - | - | 1% | 8% | 40% | 51% | |
| 23 | VO Bao-Vy | 1% | 11% | 32% | 37% | 17% | 2% | |
| 24 | COOPER Piper W. | - | - | 1% | 6% | 26% | 49% | 19% |
| 25 | LIU Joy Zhaoyi | - | - | - | 1% | 7% | 34% | 58% |
| 26 | ORVANANOS Anice | - | - | - | 3% | 20% | 45% | 31% |
| 27 | YANG Iris | - | - | - | 1% | 10% | 41% | 48% |
| 28 | LI Sophia M. | - | - | 1% | 9% | 34% | 42% | 14% |
| 29 | SEO IRENE Y. | - | - | - | 2% | 13% | 42% | 44% |
| 30 | MEI Sarah | - | - | 3% | 20% | 50% | 27% | |
| 31 | LUH Mia P. | - | 3% | 17% | 40% | 35% | 4% | |
| 32 | KAPUSTINA Arina | - | - | 3% | 16% | 40% | 38% | 3% |
| 33 | BIODROWICZ Julia | - | - | 2% | 12% | 36% | 39% | 11% |
| 34 | DAVIS Bonnie Z. | - | - | - | 6% | 32% | 52% | 9% |
| 34 | ZHOU Catherine | - | - | 9% | 32% | 40% | 17% | 1% |
| 36 | HAN Crystal | - | - | 3% | 16% | 37% | 33% | 10% |
| 37 | LUO Sandra J. | - | - | - | 1% | 12% | 42% | 45% |
| 38 | ZHENG Julie | - | - | 1% | 7% | 33% | 51% | 9% |
| 38 | LIPKOVITZ Rivka | - | - | 3% | 19% | 42% | 30% | 5% |
| 40 | NAIR Supriya | - | 1% | 6% | 22% | 40% | 29% | 2% |
| 41 | WANG Jasmine | - | 2% | 11% | 32% | 38% | 16% | 1% |
| 42 | ZHANG Eunice | - | 1% | 9% | 33% | 45% | 11% | |
| 42 | YANG Audrey | - | 5% | 27% | 46% | 20% | 2% | |
| 44 | CHEW Alexis T. | - | - | 1% | 9% | 39% | 51% | |
| 45 | FUNG Emma | - | 1% | 6% | 27% | 46% | 20% | |
| 46 | CHEN Renee | - | - | 1% | 10% | 36% | 39% | 13% |
| 47 | SHA Yi Ling | - | - | 3% | 16% | 41% | 34% | 6% |
| 48 | WEI Angela | - | 6% | 25% | 39% | 25% | 5% | - |
| 49 | KO Claire | - | 3% | 18% | 37% | 30% | 10% | 1% |
| 50 | DAI Zizhuo (Zizi) | - | 4% | 19% | 38% | 30% | 8% | - |
| 51 | TRACZ Calleigh D. | - | 2% | 18% | 43% | 31% | 6% | - |
| 51 | HAN Ashley | - | 1% | 9% | 29% | 38% | 20% | 3% |
| 51 | LEE Allison | - | - | 1% | 12% | 36% | 41% | 10% |
| 51 | GUAN Adeline | - | 1% | 12% | 35% | 37% | 13% | 1% |
| 55 | LEVY Avery | - | 3% | 16% | 37% | 32% | 10% | 1% |
| 55 | SHENG Chuxi | - | 1% | 7% | 26% | 40% | 23% | 3% |
| 57 | BOLES Amanda X. | - | 5% | 22% | 39% | 28% | 6% | - |
| 58 | DO Leila | - | 1% | 8% | 29% | 45% | 16% | 1% |
| 59 | SHIM Grace J. | - | - | 2% | 12% | 34% | 38% | 15% |
| 59 | SAIFEE Lamya | 2% | 13% | 32% | 34% | 16% | 3% | - |
| 61 | HOBSON Ava | - | 1% | 7% | 25% | 39% | 25% | 3% |
| 62 | FUNG Vera | - | - | 5% | 21% | 39% | 29% | 6% |
| 63 | CHOW Annabelle | - | 1% | 8% | 29% | 42% | 21% | |
| 64 | GREENLEAF Ella | 6% | 26% | 39% | 24% | 5% | - | - |
| 65 | LEE emily | 1% | 7% | 26% | 38% | 23% | 5% | - |
| 66 | MU Allison | 1% | 10% | 31% | 36% | 18% | 3% | - |
| 67 | CHEN Chloe I. | - | - | 1% | 9% | 31% | 41% | 18% |
| 67 | MCSHERRY Ava | - | 1% | 6% | 24% | 41% | 25% | 4% |
| 69 | BAWA Sahana | - | 7% | 26% | 37% | 23% | 6% | - |
| 70 | FENG Grace | - | 4% | 22% | 40% | 26% | 6% | - |
| 71 | HSU Kaylin | 1% | 8% | 26% | 38% | 23% | 4% | - |
| 72 | SWANSON Alexa | 1% | 11% | 35% | 37% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 73 | YAN Noelle | - | 7% | 34% | 42% | 15% | 2% | |
| 74 | CHANG Elizabeth | - | - | 5% | 28% | 49% | 18% | |
| 75 | PAULUS Sloane | - | 13% | 42% | 35% | 8% | 1% | |
| 76 | DESERANNO Seren | 3% | 20% | 39% | 30% | 8% | - | |
| 77 | LICHTENSTEIGER Megan | 14% | 39% | 35% | 12% | 1% | - | |
| 78 | ZHENG Zoe | 1% | 12% | 41% | 35% | 11% | 1% | - |
| 79 | BEAVER Ava | - | 5% | 19% | 36% | 30% | 9% | 1% |
| 80 | DAVIS Logan | - | 1% | 12% | 36% | 37% | 14% | 1% |
| 81 | SHEN Emilia | - | 2% | 12% | 34% | 36% | 13% | 1% |
| 82 | PAULUS Isabella | 1% | 9% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 5% | - |
| 83 | WANG Celine S. | 1% | 9% | 27% | 36% | 22% | 5% | - |
| 84 | ZHUANG Christina | - | - | 5% | 21% | 42% | 30% | 1% |
| 84 | SUN Emily | - | - | 9% | 33% | 40% | 17% | 1% |
| 86 | HO Addison | 1% | 7% | 23% | 36% | 26% | 7% | - |
| 87 | LI Han | 24% | 42% | 26% | 7% | 1% | - | - |
| 88 | HAFEZ Tahiyah | 2% | 18% | 36% | 31% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 89 | HAN Katherine | 1% | 10% | 28% | 35% | 21% | 4% | - |
| 90 | LAO Sophia | 15% | 38% | 33% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 91 | STRUGAR Steliana | - | - | 6% | 25% | 41% | 24% | 3% |
| 91 | HUBERT AVA CLAIRE | 2% | 13% | 30% | 34% | 18% | 3% | - |
| 93 | ZHANG Selena | - | 1% | 14% | 37% | 35% | 11% | 1% |
| 94 | LI Eleanor | 9% | 32% | 38% | 17% | 3% | - | - |
| 95 | BROWN Lola | 1% | 9% | 32% | 39% | 17% | 3% | - |
| 95 | GAO Anne | 2% | 18% | 40% | 30% | 9% | 1% | - |
| 97 | LUO Miranda | 2% | 14% | 35% | 34% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 98 | CHERNYKH Elina | 15% | 43% | 32% | 9% | 1% | - | - |
| 99 | YANG Emma | - | 8% | 38% | 41% | 13% | 1% | |
| 100 | REN Kayley | - | 10% | 37% | 40% | 12% | 1% | |
| 101 | PEVZNER Nicole | 7% | 29% | 40% | 21% | 4% | - | |
| 102 | VANMOORSEL Faye | 37% | 47% | 14% | 1% | - | - | |
| 103 | FIELD Julianna | 7% | 30% | 40% | 19% | 4% | - | |
| 104 | QUINTERO Camila | 41% | 41% | 15% | 2% | - | - | |
| 105 | LAI Sophia | - | 2% | 25% | 42% | 25% | 5% | - |
| 106 | DENG Melissa | 3% | 16% | 33% | 32% | 14% | 2% | - |
| 107 | CASTANEDA Keira | - | 1% | 9% | 35% | 42% | 12% | 1% |
| 108 | KIM Chloe | 1% | 8% | 30% | 39% | 19% | 4% | - |
| 109 | SHUM Maya | - | 3% | 15% | 35% | 33% | 12% | 1% |
| 110 | ALKADI Mai | 10% | 31% | 35% | 19% | 4% | - | - |
| 111 | LENK Sophie | 2% | 15% | 39% | 32% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 112 | WYNN Kylie | 7% | 30% | 38% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
| 113 | WANG Sunny | 9% | 29% | 36% | 21% | 5% | - | - |
| 114 | GOLLNICK Mira | - | 7% | 28% | 39% | 21% | 4% | - |
| 115 | LIAW Elaine | 2% | 18% | 46% | 28% | 6% | - | - |
| 115 | PUOPOLO Mia | 17% | 51% | 27% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 117 | LIU Lucy | 26% | 43% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - | - |
| 118 | SHMUKLER Maria | 17% | 38% | 31% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 119 | COX Sophia | 14% | 38% | 33% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 120 | POWLEDGE Cora | 47% | 40% | 11% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 121 | NIRGUDE Esha | 28% | 44% | 23% | 5% | - | - | |
| 122 | BUDKO Julia | 6% | 27% | 40% | 23% | 4% | - | |
| 123 | ZELDIN Nadia | 20% | 42% | 29% | 8% | 1% | - | - |
| 124 | PENG Charlotte | 3% | 18% | 37% | 31% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 125 | WANG Reese | 6% | 33% | 40% | 18% | 3% | - | - |
| 126 | MARTIRE Alessandra | 2% | 15% | 39% | 33% | 10% | 1% | - |
| 127 | BARTON Nanea | 11% | 32% | 35% | 18% | 4% | - | - |
| 128 | OWENS Elise | 8% | 36% | 39% | 15% | 2% | - | - |
| 129 | DESAI Kanushi | 16% | 39% | 32% | 12% | 2% | - | - |
| 130 | HWANG Chanel | 34% | 45% | 18% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 131 | WANG CAROL | 18% | 45% | 30% | 7% | 1% | - | |
| 132 | HOVAGHIMIAN Fira | 2% | 18% | 45% | 29% | 6% | - | |
| 133 | HUSSIAN Annabelle | 81% | 18% | 1% | - | - | - | |
| 134 | JIN Amie | 74% | 24% | 2% | - | - | - | |
| 135 | ZHAO Aimee | 28% | 44% | 23% | 5% | 1% | - | - |
| 136 | GOEL Riyana | 43% | 43% | 13% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 137 | ZHANG Ivy | 9% | 35% | 41% | 14% | 2% | - | - |
| 138 | EVELAND Zoe | 7% | 30% | 39% | 20% | 4% | - | - |
| 139 | BURGESS Logan | 21% | 48% | 26% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 140 | JIN Sophia | 17% | 39% | 32% | 10% | 2% | - | - |
| 141 | PIQUETTE Annika | 55% | 37% | 8% | 1% | - | - | - |
| 142 | TAN Isabella | 19% | 52% | 24% | 4% | - | - | - |
| 143 | LEMASTERS Elise M. | 15% | 36% | 33% | 14% | 3% | - | - |
| 144 | CHENG Isa | 48% | 47% | 4% | - | - | - | - |
| 144 | MADSEN Lindsey | 45% | 40% | 13% | 2% | - | - | - |
| 146 | BABB Cicely | 40% | 52% | 7% | - | - | - | - |
| 147 | TEPMAN Alexandra D. | 10% | 33% | 38% | 17% | 2% | - | - |
| 148 | YU Jane | 4% | 23% | 40% | 27% | 6% | - | |
| 149 | XIE Lillian | 2% | 13% | 36% | 37% | 12% | 1% | |
| 150 | MORALES Paulina | 4% | 21% | 39% | 28% | 7% | 1% | - |
| 151 | REYNOLDS Lourdes | 24% | 44% | 26% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 152 | CAO Kayla | 30% | 49% | 18% | 2% | - | - | |
| 153 | KANG Marian | 11% | 32% | 35% | 18% | 4% | - | |
| 154 | OCAK Yasemin | 9% | 37% | 37% | 15% | 3% | - | - |
| 155 | ISHANOVA Sofia | 6% | 28% | 41% | 22% | 4% | - | - |
| 156 | AADHI Hansika | 5% | 45% | 38% | 11% | 1% | - | |
| 157 | HOOGSTRA Lucy | 22% | 46% | 26% | 5% | - | - | - |
| 157 | SHELARE Mehal | 4% | 20% | 35% | 28% | 11% | 2% | - |
| 159 | SAUCEDO Fernanda | 63% | 31% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
| 159 | ZOLDAN Gweniveve A. | 3% | 22% | 42% | 25% | 6% | 1% | - |
| 159 | BROSS Lara | 3% | 17% | 34% | 31% | 13% | 2% | - |
| 159 | GUO Audrey | 39% | 42% | 16% | 3% | - | - | - |
| 163 | LAU Elena | 10% | 60% | 27% | 4% | - | - | |
| 164 | CROMWELL Keira | 1% | 9% | 29% | 38% | 20% | 3% | - |
| 164 | MCDERMOTT Catherine | 5% | 28% | 42% | 22% | 3% | - | - |
| 166 | IQBAL Mariam | 10% | 30% | 36% | 19% | 5% | - | - |
| 166 | WANG Hannah | 58% | 37% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
| 168 | CANO Sofia | 59% | 36% | 5% | - | - | - | - |
| 169 | TOMASI Samantha | 41% | 44% | 14% | 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.