Women's Intermediate · 23 ranked

Power Rating

Finish order against everyone you have shot with, across every season, with the strength of each field taken out. As of Nov 7, 2026.
#AthletePower RatingAdjusted %Ahead / behindEvidenceEventsLast event
1 AC
Adriana Culmone provisional
1432 84.05 18 / 0 0.8 45% 3 Sierra Vista AZ 2025
2 AN
Abby Nelson provisional
1331 78.32 21 / 3 0.7 54% 3 Searsboro IA 2025
3 LL
Lauren Longfield
1256 81.42 63 / 21 3.7 8 Constellis NC 2026
4 KH
Kimberly Herron provisional
1208 78.43 24 / 9 1.1 40% 4 Nationals 2024 2024
5 VH
Victoria Harrison provisional
1132 77.39 23 / 11 1.2 45% 4 Sierra Vista AZ 2025
6 EB
Elisa Boyd provisional
1127 76.81 15 / 6 1.6 3 Deep Creek MT 2026
7 TN
Taylor Needleman provisional
1011 79.76 28 / 5 2.3 3 Cowtown AZ 2026
8 JA
Jenna Arriesgado provisional
1007 73.20 11 / 11 0.8 54% 3 Searsboro IA 2025
9 BW
Brandy Willingham
894 76.91 36 / 25 1.6 6 Cowtown AZ 2026
10 KS
Kaitlyn Suter provisional
813 75.04 15 / 12 1.6 3 Rupert ID 2026
11 JR
Jeanine Reny provisional
782 75.53 13 / 13 1.2 50% 3 Laurens SC 2025
12 RD
Rebecca Davison provisional
772 75.47 19 / 14 2.5 4 Intrepid MO 2026
13 BJ
Brooke Jackson provisional
723 72.83 10 / 23 0.9 54% 4 Searsboro IA 2025
14 JJ
Jenna Jardine provisional
699 75.19 23 / 16 3.3 4 Cowtown AZ 2026
15 MA
Michele Aikin provisional
698 72.23 8 / 15 1.0 49% 3 Reno NV 2025
16 KB
Kayleen Burton provisional
616 73.73 12 / 23 1.8 54% 4 Searsboro IA 2025
17 RM
Rosalie MacG provisional
574 74.75 5 / 14 2.2 3 Deep Creek MT 2026
18 AR
Ashley Respess provisional
559 72.98 9 / 18 1.2 45% 3 Sierra Vista AZ 2025
19 AS
Andrea Stoufer provisional
504 74.42 5 / 10 2.2 3 Big Springs IA 2026
20 VF
Victoria Flaherty provisional
386 73.40 18 / 20 2.4 3 Constellis NC 2026
21 TR
Tracy Rinderer provisional
363 72.99 18 / 19 2.1 3 Constellis NC 2026
22 CL
Cassandra Lambert provisional
359 73.04 11 / 21 1.4 58% 3 Garrettsville OH 2025
23 MG
Marcey Gavidia
39 66.81 6 / 41 2.9 6 Phoenix AZ 2025
How Power Rating works, and why it can disagree with a head-to-head

It is not an average and not a head-to-head. Every event is a set of comparisons: each athlete finished ahead of some of the field and behind the rest. The rating is the strength that best explains every one of those comparisons in the division, across every season on record. Beating a strong athlete moves you more than beating a weak one; a strong field that beats you costs less than a weak one. That is what takes the strength of each field out.

Recent results count more. A result loses half its weight every 18 months: a year old counts 63%, two years 40%, four years 15%. The "Evidence" column is the total weight an athlete's comparisons carry, in full-weight events. An athlete whose results are all three or four years old can have a long record and little evidence, and the rating is pulled toward 1000 when evidence is thin.

So two athletes can disagree with their own head-to-head. If A beat B twice in 2022 and B has won eleven events since 2023 against the current field while A has not competed, B rates higher today. The two meetings still stand (they are on the compare page), but they say who was better in 2022, at 15% weight now; the rating says who the evidence favours now.

Reading the numbers. 1000 is an average rated athlete; a 250-point gap is about a 73% chance of finishing ahead, 500 points about 88%. Adjusted % is the other view of the same results: what the athlete would be expected to score against an average field, in the % of possible you already read. Minimum 3 events to be rated; fewer than 5 is provisional. No result in 24 months: inactive, rated but unranked. Season points and standings are unchanged by any of this.

Hover a row for the plain-English version of that athlete's evidence. How scoring works →
Official partners SIG Sauer