Wisconsin
Men - Women
2015 - 2016 - 2017
Switch to All-time Team Page
RankNameGradeRating
97  Sarah Disanza SR 20:02
152  Amy Davis SO 20:10
190  Alicia Monson FR 20:17
202  Michelle Lee SR 20:19
253  Shaelyn Sorensen SO 20:27
424  Sarah Heinemann SR 20:48
491  Jamie Shannon JR 20:55
569  Emma Langer FR 21:02
750  Erin Wagner SO 21:15
831  Colette Richter JR 21:20
895  Lianna Mack JR 21:25
998  Rachel Fleddermann SO 21:31
3,265  Anissa Hacker FR 25:12
National Rank #24 of 344
Great Lakes Region Rank #5 of 34
Chance of Advancing to Nationals 47.5%
Most Likely Finish 5th at Regional


National Champion 0.1%
Top 5 at Nationals 1.2%
Top 10 at Nationals 6.2%
Top 20 at Nationals 29.0%


Regional Champion 4.2%
Top 5 in Regional 81.5%
Top 10 in Regional 100.0%
Top 20 in Regional 100.0%


Race Performance Ratings


Times listed are adjusted ratings based on performance compared to other runners in race.


RaceDateTeam Rating Sarah Disanza Amy Davis Alicia Monson Michelle Lee Shaelyn Sorensen Sarah Heinemann Jamie Shannon Emma Langer Erin Wagner Colette Richter Lianna Mack
Oz Memorial 09/09 799 20:25 20:28 20:10 20:48 21:30 21:04
Badger Classic 09/23 862 20:27 20:42 20:27 20:39 21:20 21:19 21:02 21:29
Nuttycombe Wisconsin Invitational (B Race) 10/14 1254 21:55
Nuttycombe Wisconsin Invitational 10/14 747 20:14 20:20 20:13 20:48 20:55 21:13 21:46
Big 10 Championship 10/30 653 20:11 19:57 20:30 20:33 20:51 20:36 21:22 21:12 21:38
Great Lakes Region Championships 11/11 435 19:53 19:55 19:52 20:00 20:38 21:11 20:52





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 RoundAve FinishAve 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 47.5% 18.2 464 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.6 1.0 1.6 1.4 2.2 2.0 2.0 1.9 2.5 2.6 2.4 2.8 2.0 2.6 2.2 2.5 2.6 2.2 2.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 0.8 0.8 0.6
Region Championship 100% 4.2 129 4.2 10.4 15.9 23.3 27.9 11.8 5.0 1.5 0.3



Individual Results

NCAA ChampionshipAdvances to RoundAve 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
Sarah Disanza 57.6% 86.9 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3
Amy Davis 50.6% 107.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2
Alicia Monson 48.0% 127.0 0.1 0.1
Michelle Lee 48.2% 134.4 0.1
Shaelyn Sorensen 47.5% 159.5
Sarah Heinemann 47.5% 206.9
Jamie Shannon 47.5% 220.2


RegionalAve 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
Sarah Disanza 14.9 0.1 1.0 1.6 2.3 3.1 4.0 4.5 4.8 4.6 4.5 5.1 5.2 5.1 4.9 4.5 4.7 3.9 4.1 3.6 2.9 3.4 2.4 2.5 3.1
Amy Davis 20.5 0.2 0.6 0.7 1.0 1.4 2.3 2.2 2.9 2.9 3.1 3.1 4.2 4.2 4.0 3.8 3.8 3.9 4.0 3.9 3.3 4.0 3.7 3.7
Alicia Monson 25.0 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.9 0.8 1.4 1.3 1.7 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.9 2.3 3.7 3.7 3.5 4.2 3.6 3.6 4.9 4.3
Michelle Lee 27.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.7 1.3 0.8 1.5 2.1 2.2 2.1 1.8 2.4 3.3 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.5 3.9 2.5 4.0
Shaelyn Sorensen 34.6 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.6 0.9 0.8 1.8 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.7 2.7 2.7 2.1
Sarah Heinemann 53.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4
Jamie Shannon 61.4 0.1 0.1




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 4.2% 100.0% 4.2 4.2 1
2 10.4% 100.0% 10.4 10.4 2
3 15.9% 91.8% 1.8 2.5 1.4 2.2 1.6 1.5 1.2 1.7 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.1 1.3 14.6 3
4 23.3% 72.7% 0.6 0.7 2.0 1.5 2.5 2.3 3.2 1.8 1.5 0.5 0.6 6.4 16.9 4
5 27.9% 4.7% 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.3 0.2 26.6 1.3 5
6 11.8% 2.1% 0.1 0.2 0.1 11.5 0.3 6
7 5.0% 5.0 7
8 1.5% 1.5 8
9 0.3% 0.3 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 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
34 34
Total 100% 47.5% 4.2 10.4 1.8 3.1 2.1 4.1 3.0 4.1 3.6 4.9 2.5 2.0 1.1 0.9 52.5 14.5 33.0




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 BeatingChance ReceivedAverage If >0Average
Georgetown 22.0% 1.0 0.2
Vanderbilt 6.1% 1.0 0.1
Tulsa 3.4% 1.0 0.0
Florida State 0.1% 1.0 0.0
Northern Arizona 0.1% 1.0 0.0
Total 0.3
Minimum 0.0
Maximum 2.0