Tulane
Men -
Women
2016
-
2017 -
2018
Switch to All-time Team Page
Rank | Name | Grade | Rating |
41 |
Emmanuel Rotich |
JR |
31:27 |
763 |
Moses Aloiloi |
SR |
33:19 |
1,317 |
Joshua Cheruyot |
JR |
34:05 |
1,823 |
Carlos Zervigon |
SO |
34:49 |
1,966 |
Andrew Kipkemboi |
FR |
35:03 |
2,071 |
Stephen Medlin |
SR |
35:15 |
2,537 |
James Hill III |
JR |
36:32 |
|
National Champion |
0.0% |
Top 5 at Nationals |
0.0% |
Top 10 at Nationals |
0.0% |
Top 20 at Nationals |
0.0% |
Regional Champion |
0.0% |
Top 5 in Regional |
0.0% |
Top 10 in Regional |
1.5% |
Top 20 in Regional |
100.0% |
|
Race Performance Ratings
Times listed are adjusted ratings based on performance compared to other runners in race.
Race | Date | Team Rating | |
Emmanuel Rotich |
Moses Aloiloi |
Joshua Cheruyot |
Carlos Zervigon |
Andrew Kipkemboi |
Stephen Medlin |
James Hill III |
Joe Piane Invitational (Gold) |
09/29 |
1058 |
31:44 |
33:16 |
34:57 |
34:33 |
35:05 |
|
36:58 |
Pre-Nationals (Black) |
10/14 |
1030 |
31:24 |
33:53 |
34:19 |
34:50 |
34:50 |
37:20 |
35:33 |
AAC Championship |
10/28 |
1027 |
31:32 |
33:29 |
33:40 |
35:00 |
34:55 |
35:01 |
36:46 |
South Region Championships |
11/10 |
1030 |
31:35 |
33:25 |
34:02 |
34:53 |
35:26 |
34:38 |
36:38 |
NCAA Tournament Simulation
Based on results of 2,000 simulations of the NCAA Tournament.
Numbers in tables represent percentage of times each outcome occured during simulation.
Team Results
| Advances to Round | Ave Finish | Ave Score |
Finishing Place |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
31 |
NCAA Championship |
0.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Region Championship |
100% |
14.4 |
400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2 |
0.2 |
1.1 |
3.6 |
7.9 |
15.3 |
22.8 |
23.3 |
15.9 |
7.4 |
2.4 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individual Results
NCAA Championship | Advances to Round | Ave Finish |
Finishing Place |
---|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
Emmanuel Rotich |
98.7% |
47.0 |
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.3 |
0.3 |
0.4 |
0.4 |
0.4 |
0.7 |
1.0 |
0.8 |
1.4 |
1.2 |
1.6 |
1.5 |
0.8 |
1.5 |
1.8 |
2.1 |
1.4 |
1.9 |
1.7 |
Regional | Ave Finish |
Finishing Place |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
Emmanuel Rotich |
1.9 |
31.3 |
21.6 |
14.7 |
10.6 |
6.4 |
4.7 |
3.2 |
1.9 |
1.6 |
1.4 |
0.6 |
0.6 |
0.5 |
0.3 |
0.2 |
0.1 |
0.3 |
0.2 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
|
|
|
Moses Aloiloi |
43.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
0.4 |
0.6 |
0.5 |
0.5 |
Joshua Cheruyot |
83.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carlos Zervigon |
126.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Andrew Kipkemboi |
138.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Medlin |
147.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James Hill III |
188.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NCAA Championship Selection Detail
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
Region Finish |
Chance of Finishing |
Chance of Advancing |
Auto |
|
At Large Selection |
|
No Adv |
Auto |
At Large |
Region Finish |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
1 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
2 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
3 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
4 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
5 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
6 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
7 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
8 |
0.2% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
8 |
9 |
0.2% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
9 |
10 |
1.1% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
10 |
11 |
3.6% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
11 |
12 |
7.9% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.9 |
|
|
12 |
13 |
15.3% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15.3 |
|
|
13 |
14 |
22.8% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22.8 |
|
|
14 |
15 |
23.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23.3 |
|
|
15 |
16 |
15.9% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15.9 |
|
|
16 |
17 |
7.4% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.4 |
|
|
17 |
18 |
2.4% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
18 |
19 |
0.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
19 |
20 |
0.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
20 |
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23 |
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25 |
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27 |
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28 |
29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29 |
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 |
32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33 |
34 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34 |
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35 |
36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36 |
|
Total |
100% |
0.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
Points
At large teams are selected based on the number of wins (points) against teams already in the championships. As a result, advancement is predicated on accumulating enough points before the last at-large selection. Accordingly, the points below are the total number of wins against automatic qualifiers or teams selected in the at-large process before the last selection.
Minimum, maximum, and average points are number seen in 2,000 simulations of the NCAA Tournament.
Received By Beating | Chance Received | Average If >0 | Average |
|
Total |
|
|
0.0 |
|
Minimum |
|
|
0.0 |
Maximum |
|
|
0.0 |