Boise State
Men - Women
2013 - 2014 - 2015
Switch to All-time Team Page
RankNameGradeRating
4  Emma Bates SR 18:55
20  Marisa Howard SR 19:28
151  Tessa Murray SR 20:15
205  Emma Hyyppa FR 20:24
242  Sarah Hastings SO 20:30
468  Anna Holdiman SO 20:54
678  Gracie Tostenson FR 21:10
774  Charlotte Corless FR 21:17
1,097  Anne Brinegar FR 21:39
National Rank #12 of 341
West Region Rank #3 of 39
Chance of Advancing to Nationals 98.5%
Most Likely Finish 10th at Nationals


National Champion 0.1%
Top 5 at Nationals 7.1%
Top 10 at Nationals 39.9%
Top 20 at Nationals 93.1%


Regional Champion 11.3%
Top 5 in Regional 96.6%
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 Emma Bates Marisa Howard Tessa Murray Emma Hyyppa Sarah Hastings Anna Holdiman Gracie Tostenson Charlotte Corless Anne Brinegar
Roy Griak Invitational 09/27 398 19:01 19:27 19:55 20:19 20:52 21:37 20:42 21:57
Wisconsin adidas Invitational 10/17 615 19:00 19:33 20:49 20:32 21:27 21:11 21:12
Mountain West Conference Championships 10/31 568 19:09 19:25 20:53 20:25 20:52 21:06 21:51 21:48
West Region Championships 11/14 407 18:51 19:21 20:19 20:17 20:27 20:35 21:03
NCAA Championship 11/22 470 18:43 19:32 20:25 20:11 20:52 21:06





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 98.5% 12.1 371 0.1 0.4 1.0 2.2 3.5 4.9 5.9 6.4 7.1 8.5 8.0 7.9 6.6 6.5 6.5 5.3 4.5 3.3 2.7 1.9 1.9 1.3 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0
Region Championship 100% 3.0 121 11.3 26.3 33.9 18.1 6.9 2.0 1.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 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
Emma Bates 100% 4.0 7.9 14.1 15.2 12.7 10.4 8.1 7.5 5.6 4.6 3.4 2.3 2.0 1.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1
Marisa Howard 100.0% 21.7 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.9 0.7 1.4 1.9 2.4 2.3 2.8 3.3 3.2 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.8 3.6 3.2 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.2 2.9 2.7
Tessa Murray 98.5% 125.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Emma Hyyppa 98.5% 152.0
Sarah Hastings 98.5% 168.4
Anna Holdiman 98.5% 217.2
Gracie Tostenson 98.5% 237.7


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
Emma Bates 1.1 46.1 40.7 10.4 2.1 0.6 0.1 0.0
Marisa Howard 4.5 0.1 2.3 14.8 23.0 20.6 15.5 9.1 5.3 2.9 2.0 1.1 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Tessa Murray 28.4 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.8 1.5 1.5 1.8 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.0 2.4 3.1 2.7 3.2 3.1 2.9 2.7 3.1
Emma Hyyppa 38.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.9 1.4 2.1 1.9
Sarah Hastings 44.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.0
Anna Holdiman 73.2 0.0 0.0 0.0
Gracie Tostenson 97.1




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 11.3% 100.0% 11.3 11.3 1
2 26.3% 100.0% 26.3 26.3 2
3 33.9% 100.0% 5.1 13.4 7.2 4.7 2.0 0.9 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 33.9 3
4 18.1% 100.0% 1.2 3.1 3.6 3.7 2.5 1.4 1.0 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.2 18.1 4
5 6.9% 97.4% 0.2 0.8 0.9 1.3 0.8 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.2 6.7 5
6 2.0% 77.0% 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.5 6
7 1.0% 53.1% 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.5 0.5 7
8 0.3% 14.3% 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 8
9 0.1% 0.1 9
10 0.1% 0.1 10
11 0.0% 0.0 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
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
Total 100% 98.5% 11.3 26.3 5.1 14.6 10.5 9.0 6.8 4.9 2.8 1.9 1.2 1.2 0.8 1.0 0.9 1.5 37.7 60.8




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
Vanderbilt 99.9% 1.0 1.0
Minnesota 98.1% 1.0 1.0
Baylor 96.5% 1.0 1.0
Iona 84.9% 1.0 0.8
Toledo 67.0% 1.0 0.7
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% 1.0 0.5
Dartmouth 48.8% 1.0 0.5
BYU 42.7% 2.0 0.9
SMU 18.3% 1.0 0.2
Columbia 3.0% 1.0 0.0
Missouri 2.0% 1.0 0.0
Cornell 1.3% 1.0 0.0
Harvard 1.1% 1.0 0.0
California 0.7% 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
Illinois 0.1% 1.0 0.0
Texas A&M 0.1% 2.0 0.0
Colorado St. 0.0% 2.0 0.0
South Dakota 0.0% 1.0 0.0
Butler 0.0% 1.0 0.0
Weber State 0.0% 2.0 0.0
Total 9.5
Minimum 3.0
Maximum 14.0