Alabama
Men - Women
2016 - 2017 - 2018
Switch to All-time Team Page
RankNameGradeRating
372  Mckenzie Yanek SO 20:39
471  Lizzy Danis SO 20:48
482  Rebecca Buteau SO 20:49
609  Nicole Gardner JR 21:00
688  Caroline Barlow SR 21:07
861  Maddie Dearborn FR 21:19
898  Jessica Gray JR 21:21
1,037  Rachael Reddy JR 21:31
1,090  Shannon Marsh FR 21:34
1,204  Sarah Mohan JR 21:41
1,293  Alison Ringle SR 21:47
1,402  Brittany Tolson SO 21:54
1,516  Haley Wright SO 22:01
1,624  Kaitlin York JR 22:07
1,642  Alexa Cruz SO 22:09
1,705  Brianna Koshy JR 22:13
1,745  Caroline Brooks SO 22:16
2,288  Eliza Witherspoon FR 22:56
2,328  Margot Dooley FR 22:59
2,488  Gabby Prizio FR 23:14
2,527  Ashley Eavenson FR 23:19
2,632  Emma Sidman FR 23:30
2,800  Savannah Fraleigh FR 23:54
2,830  Isabel Caddo FR 24:02
2,838  Daley Cline FR 24:03
2,958  Caroline Cumbest FR 24:27
National Rank #98 of 348
South Region Rank #10 of 47
Chance of Advancing to Nationals 1.1%
Most Likely Finish 8th at Regional


National Champion 0.0%
Top 5 at Nationals 0.0%
Top 10 at Nationals 0.0%
Top 20 at Nationals 0.0%


Regional Champion 0.2%
Top 5 in Regional 26.2%
Top 10 in Regional 96.4%
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 Mckenzie Yanek Lizzy Danis Rebecca Buteau Nicole Gardner Caroline Barlow Maddie Dearborn Jessica Gray Rachael Reddy Shannon Marsh Sarah Mohan Alison Ringle
UCR Invitational 09/16 936 20:30 20:32 20:40 21:10 21:22 21:10 21:13
Joe Piane Invitational (Blue) 09/29 1070 21:17 20:55 20:58 21:07 20:52 21:15 21:11 22:05 21:28
Crimson Classic 10/13 990 20:46 21:15 20:41 20:40 21:22 21:05 21:12 21:20 21:41 21:46
SEC Championship 10/27 846 19:59 20:38 20:46 20:59 20:53 21:45 21:35 22:15 21:37 21:51 22:05
South Region Championships 11/10 1053 21:04 20:50 20:52 20:50 21:32 22:26 21:45





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 1.1% 29.3 707 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4
Region Championship 100% 7.0 228 0.2 0.8 3.4 8.7 13.2 15.5 15.3 17.9 16.5 5.1 2.3 0.9 0.4 0.1



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
Mckenzie Yanek 1.6% 152.0
Lizzy Danis 1.2% 170.5
Rebecca Buteau 1.3% 171.0
Nicole Gardner 1.1% 198.0
Caroline Barlow 1.1% 213.0
Maddie Dearborn 1.1% 233.0
Jessica Gray 1.1% 231.0


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
Mckenzie Yanek 31.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 1.1 0.8 1.1 1.5 1.9 1.5 2.0 2.6 2.1 2.9 2.2 3.2 3.3 2.0 2.5
Lizzy Danis 39.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.7 0.4 0.6 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.3 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.7 2.1
Rebecca Buteau 40.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.4 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.1 1.7
Nicole Gardner 52.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.7 0.6
Caroline Barlow 62.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.1
Maddie Dearborn 77.1 0.1
Jessica Gray 81.0 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 0.2% 100.0% 0.2 0.2 1
2 0.8% 100.0% 0.8 0.8 2
3 3.4% 4.5% 0.1 0.1 0.1 3.2 0.2 3
4 8.7% 8.7 4
5 13.2% 0.4% 0.1 13.2 0.1 5
6 15.5% 15.5 6
7 15.3% 15.3 7
8 17.9% 17.9 8
9 16.5% 16.5 9
10 5.1% 5.1 10
11 2.3% 2.3 11
12 0.9% 0.9 12
13 0.4% 0.4 13
14 0.1% 0.1 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
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
47 47
Total 100% 1.1% 0.2 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 98.9 0.9 0.2




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
Texas A&M 2.7% 1.0 0.0
Total 0.0
Minimum 0.0
Maximum 1.0