Bob Bavier Team Race

HostCharleston
Date03/02/2019
TypeNOT ALLOWED Interconference
Boat420/FJ
ScoringTeam

#	School	Team	Rec.
1	Yale University	Bulldogs	17–2
2	Stanford University	Cardinal	16–3
3	College of Charleston	Cougars	13–6
4	Harvard University	Crimson	10–9
5	Jacksonville University	Fins	10–9
6	Georgetown University	Hoyas	10–9
7	University of South Florida	Bulls	5–14
8	George Washington University	Colonials	3–16
9	Eckerd College	Tritons	0–16

Pre-event forecast

Fitted on the 12,061 team race matches sailed before 2019-03-02, using the line-ups that actually raced. It called 71 of 84 matches (84%) with a log-loss of 0.405 (a coin flip scores 0.693), so the event went well for the forecast. Orderliness +0.32 ± 0.21: an orderly event, more orderly than 78% of college team race events (temperature of the forecast log-odds that best fits the results, relative to the league average; nothing about the field, venue or wind predicts it, see the Weather tab). vs forecast is a team's wins minus the wins the model expected from the matches it sailed: positive means it beat its rating.

Place	School	Pred.	Strength	Boats (skipper / crew, boat value)	Pred. win %	Record	vs forecast
1	Yale University Bulldogs	1	11.67 school +0.24	Nicholas Baird / Sonia Lingos-Utley 4.25 Nicolas Hernandez / Catherine Webb 3.56 Shawn Harvey / Claudia Loiacono 3.59	83%	17–2 (89%)	+1.2
2	Stanford University Cardinal	2	11.23 school +0.56	Jacob Rosenberg / Kathryn Booker 3.39 Jack Parkin / Taylor Kirkpatrick 3.56 Romain Screve / Sammy Pickell 3.68 14–3 Romain Screve / Meg Gerli 3.66 2–0	74%	16–3 (84%)	+1.8
3	College of Charleston Cougars	3	10.83 school +0.42	Augie Dale / Katherine Lounsbury 3.78 9–6 Steven Leuck / Payton Alexander 3.27 10–4 Jack Brown / Annabel Carrington 3.27 6–4 Alie Toppa / Annabel Carrington 3.63 7–2 Jack Brown / Payton Alexander 3.24 3–2 Jack Brown / Katherine Lounsbury 3.30 4–0	68%	13–6 (68%)	+0.0
4	Harvard University Crimson	4	10.29 school +0.06	Eli Burnes / Lena Episalla 3.45 Henry Burnes / Catherine Tang 3.59 Nicholas Karnovsky / Jessica Williams 3.14	57%	10–9 (53%)	−0.8
5	Jacksonville University Fins	7	8.97 school +0.18	Alfonso Garcia Bringas / Daniel Ofarril 3.26 Andre Guaragna / Caroline Bourgeois 2.91 Stephan Verhulst / Ana Carrasco 2.57	39%	10–9 (53%)	+2.6
6	Georgetown University Hoyas	5	9.16 school +0.08	Andrew Person / Lucy Beimfohr 2.95 Noah Kelleher / Maya Rabinowitz 2.32 5–7 Jack Reiter / Jack Hogan 5–7 Noah Kelleher / Marley Mais 2.36 5–2 Jack Reiter / Annabelle Ayer 5–2	43%	10–9 (53%)	+1.9
7	University of South Florida Bulls	9	7.82 school +0.06	Scott Ewing / Carolina Perez Rovira 2.15 Marina Barzaghi / Darby Capellin 3.03 John Whitehead / Rachel Yannelli 2.44 1–11 John Whitehead / John Monahan 2.34 4–3	16%	5–14 (26%)	+1.9
8	George Washington University Colonials	6	8.96 school +0.14	Wade Wagner / Mercedes Mcphee 2.77 Matt Logue / Michael Houllahan Adam Didomizio / Cassondra Parker 2.88	39%	3–16 (16%)	−4.4
9	Eckerd College Tritons	8	8.48 school +0.20	Daniel Vail / Tatiana Chinitz 2.41 Connor Ratcliff / Kim Kusminsky 2.46 Karl Rasmus Sayre / Camryn Kennedy 3.32	27%	0–16 (0%)	−4.3

Surprisal: who beat their rating

Pre-event strength against the strength that would have made each record least surprising, everything else fixed. Δ is in the model's logit units, the same scale as the boat values above (a side is three boats plus the school term); green is a clear over-performance, red a clear under-performance. Skippers need three or more matches.

Place	School	Strength	Perf.	Record	Exp. wins	Δ	Surprise (bits)	P(this good or better)
5	Jacksonville University	8.97	9.73	10–9	7.4	+0.76	1.5	12%
2	Stanford University	11.23	11.97	16–3	14.2	+0.75	1.0	21%
7	University of South Florida	7.82	8.49	5–14	3.1	+0.67	1.0	18%
1	Yale University	11.67	12.26	17–2	15.8	+0.59	0.5	35%
6	Georgetown University	9.16	9.73	10–9	8.1	+0.57	0.8	22%
3	College of Charleston	10.83	10.85	13–6	13.0	+0.01	0.0	61%
4	Harvard University	10.29	10.04	10–9	10.8	−0.25	0.2	77%
8	George Washington University	8.96	7.43	3–16	7.4	−1.53	4.5	>99%
9	Eckerd College	8.48	5.48	0–16	4.3	≤−3.00	7.8	>99%

By skipper

Skipper	School	Value	Perf.	Record	Exp. wins	Δ	Surprise (bits)	P(this good or better)
Alfonso Garcia Bringas	Jacksonville University	3.26	4.03	10–9	7.4	+0.76	1.5	12%
Andre Guaragna	Jacksonville University	2.91	3.68	10–9	7.4	+0.76	1.5	12%
Stephan Verhulst	Jacksonville University	2.57	3.33	10–9	7.4	+0.76	1.5	12%
John Whitehead	University of South Florida	2.44	3.11	5–14	3.1	+0.67	1.0	18%
Scott Ewing	University of South Florida	2.15	2.82	5–14	3.1	+0.67	1.0	18%
Nicholas Baird	Yale University	4.25	4.84	17–2	15.8	+0.59	0.5	35%
Noah Kelleher	Georgetown University	2.32	2.90	10–9	8.1	+0.57	0.8	22%
Andrew Person	Georgetown University	2.95	3.53	10–9	8.1	+0.57	0.8	22%
Alie Toppa	College of Charleston	3.63	3.91	7–2	6.6	+0.28	0.1	56%
Jack Brown	College of Charleston	3.27	3.28	13–6	13.0	+0.01	0.0	61%
Augie Dale	College of Charleston	3.78	3.60	9–6	9.5	−0.18	0.1	73%
Eli Burnes	Harvard University	3.45	3.20	10–9	10.8	−0.25	0.2	77%
Adam Didomizio	George Washington University	2.88	1.35	3–16	7.4	−1.53	4.5	>99%
Connor Ratcliff	Eckerd College	2.46	-0.54	0–16	4.3	≤−3.00	7.8	>99%
Karl Rasmus Sayre	Eckerd College	3.32	0.32	0–16	4.3	≤−3.00	7.8	>99%

Match by match

Probability the model gave the side that went on to win. Red bars are upsets (the winner was given under 50%).

Rd	#	Winner	Loser	P(winner)
1	1	Jacksonville University	Harvard University	21%	upset
1	2	Georgetown University	University of South Florida	79%
1	3	Stanford University	George Washington University	91%
1	4	Yale University	Eckerd College	96%
1	5	College of Charleston	Jacksonville University	84%
1	6	Harvard University	University of South Florida	93%
1	7	Stanford University	Georgetown University	89%
1	8	Yale University	George Washington University	94%
1	9	College of Charleston	Eckerd College	90%
1	10	University of South Florida	Jacksonville University	23%	upset
1	11	Stanford University	Harvard University	72%
1	12	Yale University	Georgetown University	93%
1	13	George Washington University	Eckerd College	62%
1	14	College of Charleston	University of South Florida	95%
1	15	Stanford University	Jacksonville University	91%
1	16	Harvard University	Yale University	20%	upset
1	17	Georgetown University	Eckerd College	65%
1	18	College of Charleston	George Washington University	86%
1	19	Stanford University	University of South Florida	97%
1	20	Yale University	Jacksonville University	94%
1	21	Harvard University	Eckerd College	86%
1	22	Georgetown University	George Washington University	54%
1	23	Stanford University	College of Charleston	54%
1	24	Yale University	University of South Florida	98%
1	25	Jacksonville University	Eckerd College	62%
1	26	Harvard University	George Washington University	79%
1	27	College of Charleston	Georgetown University	88%
1	28	Stanford University	Yale University	39%	upset
1	29	University of South Florida	Eckerd College	31%	upset
1	30	Jacksonville University	George Washington University	50%
1	31	Harvard University	Georgetown University	76%
1	32	Yale University	College of Charleston	71%
1	33	Stanford University	Eckerd College	94%
1	34	George Washington University	University of South Florida	78%
1	35	Georgetown University	Jacksonville University	55%
1	36	College of Charleston	Harvard University	62%
2	37	Harvard University	Jacksonville University	79%
2	38	Georgetown University	University of South Florida	78%
2	39	Stanford University	George Washington University	91%
2	40	Yale University	Eckerd College	96%
2	41	College of Charleston	Jacksonville University	84%
2	42	Harvard University	University of South Florida	92%
2	43	Stanford University	Georgetown University	89%
2	44	Yale University	George Washington University	94%
2	45	College of Charleston	Eckerd College	90%
2	46	Jacksonville University	University of South Florida	74%
2	47	Stanford University	Harvard University	72%
2	48	Yale University	Georgetown University	92%
2	49	George Washington University	Eckerd College	61%
2	50	College of Charleston	University of South Florida	94%
2	51	Stanford University	Jacksonville University	91%
2	52	Yale University	Harvard University	80%
2	53	Georgetown University	Eckerd College	66%
2	54	College of Charleston	George Washington University	86%
2	55	Stanford University	University of South Florida	96%
2	56	Yale University	Jacksonville University	94%
2	57	Harvard University	Eckerd College	86%
2	58	Georgetown University	George Washington University	55%
2	59	Stanford University	College of Charleston	54%
2	60	Yale University	University of South Florida	98%
2	61	Jacksonville University	Eckerd College	61%
2	62	Harvard University	George Washington University	79%
2	63	College of Charleston	Georgetown University	87%
2	64	Yale University	Stanford University	61%
2	65	University of South Florida	Eckerd College	33%	upset
2	66	Jacksonville University	George Washington University	50%
2	67	Georgetown University	Harvard University	25%	upset
2	68	Yale University	College of Charleston	71%
2	69	Stanford University	Eckerd College	94%
2	70	University of South Florida	George Washington University	24%	upset
2	71	Jacksonville University	Georgetown University	44%	upset
2	72	Harvard University	College of Charleston	38%	upset
3	73	Yale University	College of Charleston	71%
3	74	Stanford University	Harvard University	72%
3	77	Yale University	Harvard University	80%
3	78	College of Charleston	Stanford University	46%	upset
3	81	College of Charleston	Harvard University	62%
3	82	Yale University	Stanford University	61%
4	75	Jacksonville University	University of South Florida	73%
4	76	Georgetown University	George Washington University	55%
4	79	Jacksonville University	George Washington University	50%
4	80	Georgetown University	University of South Florida	77%
4	83	University of South Florida	George Washington University	24%	upset
4	84	Jacksonville University	Georgetown University	44%	upset

Round 1

Team	Rec.	Bulldogs	Cardinal	Cougars	Crimson	Fins	Hoyas	Bulls	Colonials	Tritons
Yale University Bulldogs	6–2	✕	L	W	L	W	W	W	W	W
Stanford University Cardinal	8–0	W	✕	W	W	W	W	W	W	W
College of Charleston Cougars	6–2	L	L	✕	W	W	W	W	W	W
Harvard University Crimson	5–3	W	L	L	✕	L	W	W	W	W
Jacksonville University Fins	3–5	L	L	L	W	✕	L	L	W	W
Georgetown University Hoyas	4–4	L	L	L	L	W	✕	W	W	W
University of South Florida Bulls	2–6	L	L	L	L	W	L	✕	L	W
George Washington University Colonials	2–6	L	L	L	L	L	L	W	✕	W
Eckerd College Tritons	0–8	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	✕

Round 2

Team	Rec.	Bulldogs	Cardinal	Cougars	Crimson	Fins	Hoyas	Bulls	Colonials	Tritons
Yale University Bulldogs	8–0	✕	W	W	W	W	W	W	W	W
Stanford University Cardinal	7–1	L	✕	W	W	W	W	W	W	W
College of Charleston Cougars	5–3	L	L	✕	L	W	W	W	W	W
Harvard University Crimson	5–3	L	L	W	✕	W	L	W	W	W
Jacksonville University Fins	4–4	L	L	L	L	✕	W	W	W	W
Georgetown University Hoyas	4–4	L	L	L	W	L	✕	W	W	W
University of South Florida Bulls	2–6	L	L	L	L	L	L	✕	W	W
George Washington University Colonials	1–7	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	✕	W
Eckerd College Tritons	0–8	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	✕

Round 3

Team	Rec.	Bulldogs	Cardinal	Cougars	Crimson
Yale University Bulldogs	3–0	✕	W	W	W
Stanford University Cardinal	1–2	L	✕	L	W
College of Charleston Cougars	2–1	L	W	✕	W
Harvard University Crimson	0–3	L	L	L	✕

Round 4

Team	Rec.	Fins	Hoyas	Bulls	Colonials
Jacksonville University Fins	3–0	✕	W	W	W
Georgetown University Hoyas	2–1	L	✕	W	W
University of South Florida Bulls	1–2	L	L	✕	W
George Washington University Colonials	0–3	L	L	L	✕

Filter by team:

#					Pos.
1	Fins	1-2-4	def.	Crimson	3-5-6
2	Hoyas	1-2-4	def.	Bulls	3-5-6
3	Cardinal	1-2-6	def.	Colonials	3-4-5
4	Bulldogs	1-2-3	def.	Tritons	4-5-6
5	Cougars	1-2-4	def.	Fins	3-5-6
6	Crimson	1-2-4	def.	Bulls	3-5-6
7	Cardinal	2-3-4	def.	Hoyas	1-5-6
8	Bulldogs	2-3-4	def.	Colonials	1-5-6
9	Cougars	1-2-3	def.	Tritons	4-5-6
10	Bulls	1-2-5	def.	Fins	3-4-6
11	Cardinal	1-2-3	def.	Crimson	4-5-6
12	Bulldogs	1-3-4	def.	Hoyas	2-5-6
13	Colonials	1-2-5	def.	Tritons	3-4-6
14	Cougars	1-2-3	def.	Bulls	4-5-6
15	Cardinal	1-2-5	def.	Fins	3-4-6
16	Crimson	1-4-5	def.	Bulldogs	2-3-6
17	Hoyas	1-2-6	def.	Tritons	3-4-5
18	Cougars	1-2-4	def.	Colonials	3-5-6
19	Cardinal	1-2-3	def.	Bulls	4-5-6
20	Bulldogs	1-2-3	def.	Fins	4-5-6
21	Crimson	1-2-3	def.	Tritons	4-5-6
22	Hoyas	1-2-5	def.	Colonials	3-4-6
23	Cardinal	1-2-4	def.	Cougars	3-5-6
24	Bulldogs	1-2-5	def.	Bulls	3-4-6
25	Fins	1-2-4	def.	Tritons	3-5-6
26	Crimson	1-2-3	def.	Colonials	4-5-6
27	Cougars	1-4-5	def.	Hoyas	2-3-6
28	Cardinal	1-2-4	def.	Bulldogs	3-5-6
29	Bulls	1-2-5	def.	Tritons	3-4-6
30	Fins	1-3-6	def.	Colonials	2-4-5
31	Crimson	1-3-6	def.	Hoyas	2-4-5
32	Bulldogs	1-2-3	def.	Cougars	4-5-6
33	Cardinal	1-2-3	def.	Tritons	4-5-6
34	Colonials	2-3-5	def.	Bulls	1-4-6
35	Hoyas	1-2-5	def.	Fins	3-4-6
36	Cougars	1-2-5	def.	Crimson	3-4-6
37	Crimson	1-2-3	def.	Fins	4-5-6
38	Hoyas	1-2-6	def.	Bulls	3-4-5
39	Cardinal	1-2-5	def.	Colonials	3-4-6
40	Bulldogs	1-2-3	def.	Tritons	4-5-6
41	Cougars	1-2-6	def.	Fins	3-4-5
42	Crimson	2-3-4	def.	Bulls	1-5-6
43	Cardinal	2-3-4	def.	Hoyas	1-5-6
44	Bulldogs	1-2-6	def.	Colonials	3-4-5
45	Cougars	1-2-3	def.	Tritons	4-5-6
46	Fins	1-2-4	def.	Bulls	3-5-6
47	Cardinal	1-2-5	def.	Crimson	3-4-6
48	Bulldogs	1-2-3	def.	Hoyas	4-5-6
49	Colonials	1-2-3	def.	Tritons	4-5-6
50	Cougars	1-2-3	def.	Bulls	4-5-6
51	Cardinal	2-3-4	def.	Fins	1-5-6
52	Bulldogs	1-2-5	def.	Crimson	3-4-6
53	Hoyas	2-3-5	def.	Tritons	1-4-6
54	Cougars	1-2-3	def.	Colonials	4-5-6
55	Cardinal	1-2-4	def.	Bulls	3-5-6
56	Bulldogs	1-2-6	def.	Fins	3-4-5
57	Crimson	2-3-5	def.	Tritons	1-4-6
58	Hoyas	1-2-3	def.	Colonials	4-5-6
59	Cardinal	1-2-6	def.	Cougars	3-4-5
60	Bulldogs	1-2-4	def.	Bulls	3-5-6
61	Fins	1-2-3	def.	Tritons	4-5-6
62	Crimson	1-3-6	def.	Colonials	2-4-5
63	Cougars	2-3-4	def.	Hoyas	1-5-6
64	Bulldogs	1-2-6	def.	Cardinal	3-4-5
65	Bulls	1-2-6	def.	Tritons	3-4-5
66	Fins	1-2-5	def.	Colonials	3-4-6
67	Hoyas	1-2-3	def.	Crimson	4-5-6
68	Bulldogs	1-2-4	def.	Cougars	3-5-6
69	Cardinal	1-2-3	def.	Tritons	4-5-6
70	Bulls	1-2-3	def.	Colonials	4-5-6
71	Fins	1-2-4	def.	Hoyas	3-5-6
72	Crimson	1-2-4	def.	Cougars	3-5-6
73	Bulldogs	1-2-6	def.	Cougars	3-4-5
74	Cardinal	1-2-3	def.	Crimson	4-5-6
77	Bulldogs	1-3-4	def.	Crimson	2-5-6
78	Cougars	1-2-6	def.	Cardinal	3-4-5
81	Cougars	1-2-3	def.	Crimson	4-5-6
82	Bulldogs	1-2-5	def.	Cardinal	3-4-6
75	Fins	1-2-4	def.	Bulls	3-5-6
76	Hoyas	2-3-5	def.	Colonials	1-4-6
79	Fins	1-2-5	def.	Colonials	3-4-6
80	Hoyas	1-2-4	def.	Bulls	3-5-6
83	Bulls	1-2-6	def.	Colonials	3-4-5
84	Fins	1-3-6	def.	Hoyas	2-4-5

School	Team	Skippers	Crew
Yale University	Bulldogs	Nicholas Baird '19 Nicolas Hernandez '19 Shawn Harvey '22	Sonia Lingos-Utley '22 Catherine Webb '23 Claudia Loiacono '21
Stanford University	Cardinal	Jack Parkin '21 Jacob Rosenberg '20 Romain Screve '21	Taylor Kirkpatrick '20 Kathryn Booker '19 Sammy Pickell '22 Meg Gerli '19
College of Charleston	Cougars	Alie Toppa '20 Augie Dale '19 Jack Brown '21 Steven Leuck '20	Annabel Carrington '19 Katherine Lounsbury '20 Payton Alexander '19
Harvard University	Crimson	Eli Burnes '22 Henry Burnes '22 Nicholas Karnovsky '19	Lena Episalla '19 Catherine Tang '19 Jessica Williams '20
Jacksonville University	Fins	Alfonso Garcia Bringas '21 Andre Guaragna '21 Stephan Verhulst '19	Daniel Ofarril '22 Caroline Bourgeois '22 Ana Carrasco '21
Georgetown University	Hoyas	Andrew Person '21 Jack Reiter '22 Noah Kelleher '19	Lucy Beimfohr '21 Jack Hogan '22 Annabelle Ayer '22 Maya Rabinowitz '21 Marley Mais '21
University of South Florida	Bulls	John Whitehead '20 Marina Barzaghi '21 Scott Ewing '18	Rachel Yannelli '19 John Monahan '20 Darby Capellin '19 Carolina Perez Rovira '22
George Washington University	Colonials	Adam Didomizio '19 Matt Logue '22 Wade Wagner '19	Cassondra Parker '21 Michael Houllahan '20 Mercedes Mcphee '19
Eckerd College	Tritons	Connor Ratcliff '21 Daniel Vail '21 Karl Rasmus Sayre '19	Kim Kusminsky '19 Tatiana Chinitz '19 Camryn Kennedy '21

Conditions — 03/02/2019 (8am–6pm)

☁️Overcast

Humidity 85% · Pressure 1018.2 hPa

Temperature

67°F

↑ 72°F ↓ 59°F

Feels like 69°F

Wind

● from ▲ toward

4.9 kn

avg · max 8.4 kn

Gusts to 20.6 kn

From WSW (247°)

Sky & Precipitation

Cloud cover92% Sunshine6.8 hrs Humidity85% Pressure1018.2 hPa Rain0.07 in

What this breeze does at Charleston — from fleet racing

Breeze: SW about 8 kn (weather reanalysis in the scorer’s units)

In fleet races at Charleston in this breeze: a typical day (−0.00)

Nothing in this breeze favours either side in fleet racing here: results follow the ratings about as usual.

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 ±0.00 means a rating gap counts about 1% less 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.

Orderliness beyond the fleet at Charleston by wind direction (angle) and speed (rings), fitted surface; dots are labelled regatta-days, ★ this regatta (69 labelled fleet-race days at Charleston).

From the notes

Short write-ups of what the ratings and results show, with the numbers and how they were computed.

How team race forecasts workThree boats’ ratings, a school term and a home edge; 78.8% of held-out matches called.
Play 1, Play 2, Play 4: how team races are wonHow often each play happens, how that shifts with breeze and level, and whether a star wins differently.
Which team races go to form?Orderliness is a real property of a team race regatta and nothing known in advance predicts it.

All notes →

Navigate

Menu