| # | School | Team | A | TOT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |  |
Maine Maritime Academy | Mariners | 18 | 18 |
| 2 |  |
Tufts University | Jumbos | 23 | 23 |
| 3 |  |
U. S. Coast Guard Academy | Bears 1 | 35 | 35 |
| 4 |  |
Roger Williams University | Hawks | 46 | 46 |
| 5 |  |
Massachusetts Maritime Academy | Buccaneers | 54 | 54 |
| 6 |  |
University of New Hampshire | Wildcats | 57 | 57 |
| 7 |  |
Northeastern University | Huskies | 65 | 65 |
| 8 |  |
Williams College | Ephs | 71 | 71 |
| 9 | |
U. S. Coast Guard Academy | Bears 2 | 82 | 82 |
| School | Team | R1 | R2 | R3 | R4 | R5 | R6 | R7 | R8 | R9 | R10 | TOT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Maine Maritime Academy | Mariners | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 18 |
|
Tufts University | Jumbos | 4 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 23 |
|
U. S. Coast Guard Academy | Bears 1 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 7 | 4 | 35 |
|
Roger Williams University | Hawks | 3 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 7 | 8 | 6 | 46 |
|
Massachusetts Maritime Academy | Buccaneers | 5 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 9 | 3 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 54 |
|
University of New Hampshire | Wildcats | 7 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 57 |
|
Northeastern University | Huskies | 9 | 7 | 6 | 8 | 6 | 6 | 8 | 8 | 2 | 5 | 65 |
|
Williams College | Ephs | 8 | 8 | 8 | RAF | 7 | 8 | 9 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 71 |
|
U. S. Coast Guard Academy | Bears 2 | 6 | 9 | 9 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 7 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 82 |
Performance rating asks, for each skipper: holding every other boat fixed, which rating makes my actual race-by-race finishes least surprising? Boats are valued with the keelboat rating rather than the fleet rating: 0.41 × the skipper's fleet rating from the week before the event (unrated skippers start at 0.47); 0.28 × the mean fleet rating of the rated crew aboard; the skipper's own keelboat offset; the school's program effect. Non-finishes (OCS, DNF and similar) are left out of the fitting, as in the rating model.
Percentile places a rating among the 207 ICSA sailors with a keelboat rating who raced the discipline in the last three seasons. Surprise is how many bits more surprising the finishes were at the pre-event rating than at the performance rating. P(this good or better) simulates the event 3,000 times at the pre-event ratings, with the same regatta-form model as the fleet analysis pages, and reports how often the skipper would score this many points or fewer in the races they sailed.
The keelboat offsets are the current ones (the discipline files keep no weekly history), so a skipper's own offset has already seen this event; offsets are shrunk hard, so the effect is a few hundredths at most. Only skippers are rated.
| Fin | Skipper | School | Races | Rating before |
Perf. rating |
Δ | Percentile before → perf. |
Surprise (bits) |
P(this good or better) |
Avg finish actual / exp. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | John Joseph '12 | Maine Maritime Academy | 10/10 | 1.06 | 3.13 | +2.07 | 76th → 99th | 12.4 | <1% | 1.8 / 4.6 |
| 2 | Viktor Wettergren '14 | Tufts University | 10/10 | 1.38 | 2.61 | +1.23 | 87th → 99th | 5.5 | 6% | 2.3 / 4.2 |
| 3 | William Williams '12 | U. S. Coast Guard Academy Bears 1 | 10/10 | 1.58u | 1.79 | +0.22 | 91st → 96th | 0.2 | 44% | 3.5 / 3.8 |
| 4 | Alexander Rudkin '14 | Roger Williams University | 10/10 | 1.15 | 1.34 | +0.19 | 79th → 87th | 0.2 | 56% | 4.6 / 4.5 |
| 5 | Graham Philpot '12 | Massachusetts Maritime Academy | 10/10 | 0.83 | 0.98 | +0.15 | 67th → 73rd | 0.1 | 62% | 5.4 / 5.0 |
| 6 | Terry Clarke '13 | University of New Hampshire | 10/10 | -0.11 | 0.98 | +1.09 | 11th → 73rd | 5.3 | 27% | 5.7 / 6.4 |
| 7 | Olin Nelson '13 | Northeastern University | 10/10 | -0.18 | 0.40 | +0.58 | 10th → 42nd | 1.4 | 46% | 6.5 / 6.6 |
| 8 | Joshua Revkin '13 | Williams College | 10/10 | 0.17 | 0.36 | +0.19 | 22nd → 41st | 0.2 | 80% | 7.1 / 6.1 |
| 9 | Benjamin Arocho '14 | U. S. Coast Guard Academy Bears 2 | 10/10 | 1.58u | -1.32 | −2.90 | 91st → 1st | 44.1 | >99% | 8.2 / 3.8 |
Orderliness is how tightly a fleet race’s finishing order follows the pre-regatta ratings, relative to a typical event (0): positive is the favourites’ day, negative the underdogs’. A value of ±0.01 means a rating gap counts about 1% more than on a typical day. This event is not a fleet race the rating model scores, so there is no actual value for it: this is what this venue’s fleet racing history says about the breeze on the day, read off the chart at the star. How this is estimated · compare venues.
Short write-ups of what the ratings and results show, with the numbers and how they were computed.
