Miami (Ohio)
Men
-
Women
2012
-
2013 -
2014
Switch to All-time Team Page
Rank | Name | Grade | Rating |
159 |
Jess Hoover |
JR |
20:16 |
315 |
Melissa Girgis |
JR |
20:39 |
560 |
Laura Bess |
SO |
21:03 |
579 |
Anna Lamb |
JR |
21:05 |
621 |
Julia Valencia |
SO |
21:08 |
696 |
Elisa Frazier |
JR |
21:13 |
1,057 |
Brenna Poulsen |
JR |
21:37 |
1,151 |
Mattie Moncayo |
SO |
21:42 |
1,493 |
Alex Chitwood |
JR |
22:03 |
|
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 |
1.1% |
Top 10 in Regional |
74.1% |
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 | |
Jess Hoover |
Melissa Girgis |
Laura Bess |
Anna Lamb |
Julia Valencia |
Elisa Frazier |
Brenna Poulsen |
Mattie Moncayo |
Alex Chitwood |
Greater Louisville Classic (Gold) |
10/05 |
1001 |
20:17 |
20:53 |
21:17 |
20:54 |
|
|
21:34 |
21:42 |
|
Pre-National Invitational (Blue) |
10/19 |
923 |
20:07 |
20:33 |
21:01 |
21:15 |
21:07 |
21:14 |
21:31 |
|
|
Mid-American Championships |
11/02 |
803 |
20:18 |
20:27 |
20:34 |
20:33 |
21:01 |
20:58 |
21:47 |
21:32 |
22:03 |
Great Lakes Region Championships |
11/15 |
1029 |
20:23 |
20:46 |
21:16 |
21:49 |
21:17 |
21:30 |
|
21:57 |
|
NCAA Tournament Simulation
Based on results of 5,000 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 |
1.1% |
28.8 |
696 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.0 |
0.1 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
0.3 |
Region Championship |
100% |
9.4 |
279 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
1.0 |
3.2 |
9.7 |
19.4 |
21.6 |
19.1 |
12.7 |
7.6 |
3.6 |
1.5 |
0.5 |
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 |
Jess Hoover |
25.2% |
113.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
Melissa Girgis |
1.6% |
147.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Laura Bess |
1.1% |
208.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anna Lamb |
1.1% |
210.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Julia Valencia |
1.1% |
213.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Elisa Frazier |
1.1% |
222.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brenna Poulsen |
1.1% |
245.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
Jess Hoover |
24.2 |
|
0.0 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.3 |
0.6 |
0.5 |
0.7 |
0.8 |
1.4 |
1.4 |
1.9 |
1.9 |
2.6 |
2.9 |
3.5 |
3.5 |
3.9 |
4.2 |
4.6 |
4.3 |
5.0 |
4.8 |
4.8 |
Melissa Girgis |
42.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
0.0 |
|
0.0 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.0 |
0.2 |
0.1 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.4 |
0.5 |
0.6 |
1.0 |
1.1 |
Laura Bess |
68.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anna Lamb |
70.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
0.0 |
Julia Valencia |
75.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Elisa Frazier |
81.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brenna Poulsen |
108.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
0.1% |
60.0% |
| |
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
0.1 |
4 |
5 |
1.0% |
38.8% |
| |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
0.1 |
|
0.0 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.6 |
|
0.4 |
5 |
6 |
3.2% |
18.6% |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.2 |
0.0 |
|
2.6 |
|
0.6 |
6 |
7 |
9.7% |
0.6% |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
9.6 |
|
0.1 |
7 |
8 |
19.4% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19.4 |
|
|
8 |
9 |
21.6% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21.6 |
|
|
9 |
10 |
19.1% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19.1 |
|
|
10 |
11 |
12.7% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.7 |
|
|
11 |
12 |
7.6% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.6 |
|
|
12 |
13 |
3.6% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
13 |
14 |
1.5% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
14 |
15 |
0.5% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
15 |
16 |
0.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
16 |
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17 |
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
Total |
100% |
1.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.1 |
0.0 |
0.1 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.1 |
0.0 |
98.9 |
0.0 |
1.1 |
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 5,000 simulations of the NCAA Tournament.
Received By Beating | Chance Received | Average If >0 | Average |
Baylor |
3.8% |
1.0 |
0.0 |
Toledo |
2.9% |
1.0 |
0.0 |
Lamar |
1.2% |
1.0 |
0.0 |
Tennessee |
1.0% |
1.0 |
0.0 |
Southern Illinois |
0.3% |
1.0 |
0.0 |
Ohio State |
0.2% |
1.0 |
0.0 |
Eastern Kentucky |
0.1% |
1.0 |
0.0 |
Tulsa |
0.1% |
1.0 |
0.0 |
Kansas |
0.0% |
1.0 |
0.0 |
Portland |
0.0% |
1.0 |
0.0 |
|
Total |
|
|
0.1 |
|
Minimum |
|
|
0.0 |
Maximum |
|
|
2.0 |