New Mexico
Men - Women
2013 - 2014 - 2015
Switch to All-time Team Page
RankNameGradeRating
27  Charlotte Arter SR 19:38
28  Alice Wright FR 19:38
63  Calli Thackery JR 19:53
129  Tamara Armoush SR 20:10
157  Nicola Hood SR 20:16
164  Heleene Tambet SO 20:18
178  Amber Zimmerman SR 20:20
183  Anna Burton JR 20:21
283  Emily Reese SR 20:35
299  Nicole Roberts SR 20:37
336  Emily Hosker-Thornhill JR 20:41
617  Sophie Connor JR 21:06
National Rank #8 of 341
Mountain Region Rank #1 of 20
Chance of Advancing to Nationals 100.0%
Most Likely Finish 5th at Nationals


National Champion 0.7%
Top 5 at Nationals 40.5%
Top 10 at Nationals 82.0%
Top 20 at Nationals 98.7%


Regional Champion 67.2%
Top 5 in Regional 100.0%
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 Charlotte Arter Alice Wright Calli Thackery Tamara Armoush Nicola Hood Heleene Tambet Amber Zimmerman Anna Burton Emily Reese Nicole Roberts Emily Hosker-Thornhill
Notre Dame Invitational (Blue) 10/03 304 19:29 19:46 19:47 20:12 20:01 20:19 20:31 20:52 20:36
Wisconsin adidas Invitational 10/17 343 19:39 19:48 19:56 20:05 20:09 20:11 20:47
Mountain West Conference Championships 10/31 490 20:13 19:52 19:58 20:24 20:45 20:20 20:51 20:19
Mountain Region Championships 11/14 431 19:44 19:30 20:04 20:28 20:45 20:20 20:52
NCAA Championship 11/22 242 19:26 19:26 19:44 19:58 20:10 20:05 20:23





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 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 100% 7.2 277 0.7 4.7 9.0 12.9 13.2 12.4 9.7 8.2 6.5 4.7 4.2 2.9 2.4 1.7 1.8 1.3 1.0 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0
Region Championship 100% 1.3 38 67.2 31.9 0.9 0.0



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
Charlotte Arter 100% 33.9 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.7 0.8 1.1 1.1 1.6 1.6 2.0 2.2 2.0 2.2 2.2 2.4 2.4 2.6 2.8
Alice Wright 100% 34.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.7 0.6 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.3 2.2 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.1 2.3 2.3 2.2 2.6 2.3
Calli Thackery 100% 64.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.8
Tamara Armoush 100% 112.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
Nicola Hood 100% 127.4 0.0
Heleene Tambet 100% 132.8
Amber Zimmerman 100% 138.9


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
Charlotte Arter 2.0 23.9 25.3 18.9 12.6 6.8 4.5 3.2 1.9 1.1 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Alice Wright 2.0 23.5 25.8 19.2 11.9 7.6 4.9 2.5 1.8 1.1 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0
Calli Thackery 5.4 1.9 4.6 10.5 14.5 14.4 11.3 8.6 8.5 6.4 4.7 3.7 2.9 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0
Tamara Armoush 11.9 0.1 0.4 1.5 2.8 4.3 6.1 7.0 6.9 6.5 8.2 6.6 6.2 5.3 5.5 4.6 4.3 3.9 3.2 2.8 2.0 1.9 1.7 1.2 1.2
Nicola Hood 14.9 0.1 0.3 1.4 2.0 2.8 3.8 4.5 5.6 5.7 6.4 5.8 6.2 5.7 5.5 5.6 4.5 4.4 4.2 3.6 3.0 2.6 2.2 1.8
Heleene Tambet 15.8 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.9 1.4 2.2 3.0 3.9 4.7 5.0 5.2 6.2 6.1 6.5 5.6 5.2 4.7 4.6 3.7 4.0 3.3 3.2 2.8 2.5
Amber Zimmerman 17.4 0.0 0.2 0.5 1.1 1.8 2.0 2.9 3.6 3.6 4.6 5.8 5.2 5.4 5.8 5.3 5.5 5.2 4.5 3.7 3.9 3.5 3.1 2.7




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 67.2% 100.0% 67.2 67.2 1
2 31.9% 100.0% 31.9 31.9 2
3 0.9% 100.0% 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.9 3
4 0.0% 100.0% 0.0 0.0 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
Total 100% 100.0% 67.2 31.9 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 99.1 0.9




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 BeatingChance ReceivedAverage If >0Average
Florida State 100.0% 1.0 1.0
Vanderbilt 99.9% 1.0 1.0
Stanford 99.3% 1.0 1.0
North Carolina 99.2% 1.0 1.0
Virginia 98.7% 1.0 1.0
Minnesota 98.1% 1.0 1.0
Boise State 97.6% 2.0 2.0
Washington 90.1% 1.0 0.9
North Carolina St. 88.8% 1.0 0.9
Iona 84.9% 1.0 0.8
Ohio State 84.5% 2.0 1.7
Syracuse 82.3% 1.0 0.8
Toledo 67.0% 2.0 1.3
Arizona State 64.7% 1.0 0.6
UCLA 62.5% 1.0 0.6
Boston College 55.0% 1.0 0.6
Providence 53.2% 1.0 0.5
William and Mary 52.5% 1.0 0.5
Notre Dame 49.0% 2.0 1.0
Dartmouth 48.8% 1.0 0.5
BYU 42.7% 2.0 0.9
Princeton 19.9% 1.0 0.2
SMU 18.3% 2.0 0.4
Penn State 17.1% 1.0 0.2
Tulsa 7.4% 1.0 0.1
Bradley 4.7% 1.0 0.0
Columbia 3.0% 1.0 0.0
Cornell 1.3% 1.0 0.0
Harvard 1.1% 1.0 0.0
Florida 0.7% 1.0 0.0
Indiana 0.4% 1.0 0.0
Wyoming 0.2% 1.0 0.0
Texas A&M 0.1% 1.0 0.0
Southern Illinois 0.0% 1.0 0.0
Colorado St. 0.0% 1.0 0.0
Elon 0.0% 1.0 0.0
Weber State 0.0% 1.0 0.0
Total 20.5
Minimum 13.0
Maximum 26.0