Purdue
Men
-
Women
2012
-
2013 -
2014
Switch to All-time Team Page
Rank | Name | Grade | Rating |
428 |
Blair Doney |
SR |
20:50 |
553 |
Brynn Olinger |
FR |
21:02 |
624 |
Linsey Daluga |
SR |
21:08 |
637 |
Michelle Potter |
SO |
21:09 |
644 |
Laura Maibuecher |
SO |
21:10 |
663 |
Kristen Fritts |
JR |
21:11 |
1,060 |
Sharise Lund |
SO |
21:37 |
1,282 |
Dana Payonk |
SR |
21:50 |
1,530 |
Katie Hoevet |
SO |
22:06 |
|
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 |
0.1% |
Top 10 in Regional |
26.6% |
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 | |
Blair Doney |
Brynn Olinger |
Linsey Daluga |
Michelle Potter |
Laura Maibuecher |
Kristen Fritts |
Sharise Lund |
Dana Payonk |
Katie Hoevet |
Notre Dame Invitational (Blue) |
10/04 |
1074 |
20:46 |
20:54 |
21:06 |
21:24 |
21:10 |
21:18 |
21:40 |
22:37 |
21:58 |
Pre-National Invitational (Blue) |
10/19 |
1104 |
20:53 |
21:15 |
21:08 |
|
21:22 |
21:11 |
21:03 |
21:45 |
|
Big Ten Championships |
11/03 |
1038 |
20:54 |
20:47 |
21:02 |
21:01 |
21:03 |
20:56 |
22:30 |
21:32 |
22:14 |
Great Lakes Region Championships |
11/15 |
1109 |
20:49 |
21:21 |
21:20 |
21:07 |
21:05 |
21:24 |
21:32 |
|
|
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 |
0.1% |
28.8 |
756 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
0.1 |
Region Championship |
100% |
11.7 |
344 |
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
0.3 |
1.6 |
4.4 |
8.5 |
11.7 |
17.6 |
18.1 |
18.8 |
11.5 |
5.2 |
1.5 |
0.6 |
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 |
Blair Doney |
0.2% |
173.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brynn Olinger |
0.1% |
203.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Linsey Daluga |
0.1% |
210.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michelle Potter |
0.1% |
226.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Laura Maibuecher |
0.1% |
193.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kristen Fritts |
0.1% |
200.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sharise Lund |
0.1% |
237.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
Blair Doney |
53.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.1 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
Brynn Olinger |
68.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
Linsey Daluga |
75.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
0.0 |
Michelle Potter |
76.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Laura Maibuecher |
77.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
Kristen Fritts |
79.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sharise Lund |
108.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
0.1% |
75.0% |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
0.1 |
5 |
6 |
0.3% |
13.3% |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
0.3 |
|
0.0 |
6 |
7 |
1.6% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
7 |
8 |
4.4% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
8 |
9 |
8.5% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.5 |
|
|
9 |
10 |
11.7% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11.7 |
|
|
10 |
11 |
17.6% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17.6 |
|
|
11 |
12 |
18.1% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18.1 |
|
|
12 |
13 |
18.8% |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18.8 |
|
|
13 |
14 |
11.5% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11.5 |
|
|
14 |
15 |
5.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.2 |
|
|
15 |
16 |
1.5% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
16 |
17 |
0.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
17 |
18 |
0.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
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% |
0.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
99.9 |
0.0 |
0.1 |
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 |
UTSA |
2.6% |
1.0 |
0.0 |
Eastern Kentucky |
0.1% |
1.0 |
0.0 |
Northwestern |
0.0% |
1.0 |
0.0 |
|
Total |
|
|
0.0 |
|
Minimum |
|
|
0.0 |
Maximum |
|
|
1.0 |