Ike Geiger Team Race Regatta

HostMIT
Date03/16/2019
TypeNOT ALLOWED In-Conference
BoatFJ
ScoringTeam

#	School	Team	Rec.
1	University of Rhode Island	Rams	12–2
2	Boston University	Terriers	10–4
3	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Engineers	8–6
4	Northeastern University	Huskies	7–7
5	Brown University	Bears	6–8
6	Roger Williams University	Hawks	6–8
7	Harvard University	Crimson	4–10
8	University of Vermont	Catamounts	3–11

Pre-event forecast

Fitted on the 12,533 team race matches sailed before 2019-03-16, using the line-ups that actually raced. It called 36 of 57 matches (63%) with a log-loss of 0.625 (a coin flip scores 0.693), so the event went poorly for the forecast. Orderliness −0.14 ± 0.32: a typical event, more orderly than 28% 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	University of Rhode Island Rams	2	8.87 school −0.45	Brendan Read / Lauren Richards 3.10 Dakota Northrup / Ryan Geib 3.30 Luke Ingalls / Ian Nannig 2.89	69%	12–2 (86%)	+2.3
2	Boston University Terriers	1	8.89 school −0.15	Collin Alexander / Trent Chismar 2.71 Josh Dochoda / Charles Honke 3.33 Casey Cabot / Kyle Dochoda 2.95 8–2 Casey Cabot / Erica Brown 2.87 2–2	70%	10–4 (71%)	+0.3
3	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers	3	8.82 school −0.06, home +0.37	Ivan Shestopalov / Sarah Caso 3.25 6–6 James Peraire-Bueno / Lynn Liu 2.33 3–5 Annie Hughes / Brooke Mcgoldrick 3.02 4–4 James Peraire-Bueno / Tiffany Xi 2.33 5–1 Dana Haig / Brooke Mcgoldrick 2.65 4–0 Ivan Shestopalov / Noa Yoder 3.12 2–0 Annie Hughes / Noa Yoder 3.00 0–2	66%	8–6 (57%)	−1.3
4	Northeastern University Huskies	7	7.38	Jackson Hamilton / Jacqueline Berlin 2.95 Santiago Hirschmann / Jon Ewing 2.30 Ted Bjerregaard / Alexandra Nygren 2.08	32%	7–7 (50%)	+2.5
5	Brown University Bears	4	8.42 school +0.14	John Mastrandrea / Megha Malpani 2.73 Jack Murphy / Sawyer Balint 2.57 Tucker Weed / Jack Papetti 2.90	57%	7–8 (47%)	−1.5
6	Roger Williams University Hawks	6	7.55 school +0.20	Cameron Wood / Kylie Freitas 2.68 Kelsey Shakin / Kristi Dolan 2.70 Madeline Pope / Ariana Smaldone	34%	6–9 (40%)	+0.9
7	Harvard University Crimson	5	7.79	Jackson Wagner / Gayatri Balasubramanian 2.76 Jonas Nelle / Zennie Wey Francis Doyle / Iulianna Taritsa 2.44	42%	4–10 (29%)	−1.9
8	University of Vermont Catamounts	8	7.35 school +0.06	Thomas Harden / Isabella Arnaboldi 2.84 Vincent Yannelli / Helen Field 2.37 Lolly Vasilion / Lucy Mulvihill 2.32 1–7 Joshua Stone / Lucy Mulvihill 2–4	31%	3–11 (21%)	−1.3

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)
1	University of Rhode Island	8.87	9.93	12–2	9.7	+1.07	1.6	13%
4	Northeastern University	7.38	8.21	7–7	4.5	+0.83	1.5	12%
6	Roger Williams University	7.55	7.84	6–9	5.1	+0.29	0.2	39%
2	Boston University	8.89	8.99	10–4	9.7	+0.10	0.0	57%
3	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	8.82	8.38	8–6	9.3	−0.44	0.4	86%
5	Brown University	8.42	7.96	7–8	8.5	−0.45	0.5	87%
8	University of Vermont	7.35	6.83	3–11	4.3	−0.52	0.5	86%
7	Harvard University	7.79	7.11	4–10	5.9	−0.68	0.9	92%

By skipper

Skipper	School	Value	Perf.	Record	Exp. wins	Δ	Surprise (bits)	P(this good or better)
Joshua Stone	University of Vermont	1.49	1.82	2–4	1.6	+0.32	0.1	52%
James Peraire-Bueno	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	2.33	1.90	8–6	9.3	−0.44	0.4	86%
Ivan Shestopalov	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	3.25	2.81	8–6	9.3	−0.44	0.4	86%
Thomas Harden	University of Vermont	2.84	2.32	3–11	4.3	−0.52	0.5	86%
Vincent Yannelli	University of Vermont	2.37	1.85	3–11	4.3	−0.52	0.5	86%
Jonas Nelle	Harvard University	2.25	1.58	4–10	5.9	−0.68	0.9	92%
Francis Doyle	Harvard University	2.44	1.76	4–10	5.9	−0.68	0.9	92%
Annie Hughes	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	3.02	1.62	4–6	7.1	−1.40	3.2	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	Northeastern University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	17%	upset
1	2	Harvard University	Roger Williams University	50%
1	3	University of Rhode Island	Boston University	52%
1	4	Brown University	University of Vermont	68%
1	5	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Harvard University	79%
1	6	Boston University	Northeastern University	81%
1	7	Roger Williams University	University of Vermont	47%	upset
1	8	University of Rhode Island	Brown University	62%
1	9	Boston University	Harvard University	77%
1	10	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	University of Vermont	72%
1	11	University of Rhode Island	Northeastern University	82%
1	12	Brown University	Roger Williams University	70%
1	13	Boston University	University of Vermont	78%
1	14	University of Rhode Island	Harvard University	76%
1	15	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Roger Williams University	80%
1	16	Brown University	Northeastern University	74%
1	17	University of Rhode Island	University of Vermont	89%
1	18	Boston University	Roger Williams University	80%
1	19	Harvard University	Northeastern University	60%
1	20	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Brown University	63%
1	21	Roger Williams University	University of Rhode Island	21%	upset
1	22	Northeastern University	University of Vermont	62%
1	23	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Boston University	38%	upset
1	24	Brown University	Harvard University	65%
1	25	Northeastern University	Roger Williams University	46%	upset
1	26	University of Rhode Island	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	49%	upset
1	27	University of Vermont	Harvard University	30%	upset
1	28	Boston University	Brown University	62%
2	30	Northeastern University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	17%	upset
2	31	University of Rhode Island	Harvard University	74%
2	32	Roger Williams University	Brown University	30%	upset
2	33	Boston University	University of Vermont	78%
2	34	Harvard University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	25%	upset
2	35	Northeastern University	Brown University	26%	upset
2	36	University of Rhode Island	University of Vermont	87%
2	37	Boston University	Roger Williams University	80%
2	38	Harvard University	Brown University	36%	upset
2	39	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	University of Vermont	71%
2	40	Roger Williams University	Northeastern University	54%
2	41	University of Rhode Island	Boston University	50%
2	42	University of Vermont	Brown University	31%	upset
2	43	Roger Williams University	Harvard University	42%	upset
2	44	University of Rhode Island	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	48%	upset
2	45	Boston University	Northeastern University	81%
2	46	Roger Williams University	University of Vermont	48%	upset
2	47	Brown University	University of Rhode Island	40%	upset
2	48	Northeastern University	Harvard University	38%	upset
2	49	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Boston University	39%	upset
2	50	University of Rhode Island	Roger Williams University	78%
2	51	Northeastern University	University of Vermont	60%
2	52	Brown University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	38%	upset
2	53	Boston University	Harvard University	74%
2	54	University of Rhode Island	Northeastern University	81%
2	55	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Roger Williams University	80%
2	56	University of Vermont	Harvard University	30%	upset
2	57	Boston University	Brown University	62%
3	29	Brown University	Roger Williams University	70%

Round 1

Team	Rec.	Rams	Terriers	Engineers	Huskies	Bears	Hawks	Crimson	Catamounts
University of Rhode Island Rams	6–1	✕	W	W	W	W	L	W	W
Boston University Terriers	5–2	L	✕	L	W	W	W	W	W
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers	5–2	L	W	✕	L	W	W	W	W
Northeastern University Huskies	3–4	L	L	W	✕	L	W	L	W
Brown University Bears	4–3	L	L	L	W	✕	W	W	W
Roger Williams University Hawks	2–5	W	L	L	L	L	✕	L	W
Harvard University Crimson	2–5	L	L	L	W	L	W	✕	L
University of Vermont Catamounts	1–6	L	L	L	L	L	L	W	✕

Round 2

Team	Rec.	Rams	Terriers	Engineers	Huskies	Bears	Hawks	Crimson	Catamounts
University of Rhode Island Rams	6–1	✕	W	W	W	L	W	W	W
Boston University Terriers	5–2	L	✕	L	W	W	W	W	W
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers	3–4	L	W	✕	L	L	W	L	W
Northeastern University Huskies	4–3	L	L	W	✕	W	L	W	W
Brown University Bears	2–5	W	L	W	L	✕	L	L	L
Roger Williams University Hawks	4–3	L	L	L	W	W	✕	W	W
Harvard University Crimson	2–5	L	L	W	L	W	L	✕	L
University of Vermont Catamounts	2–5	L	L	L	L	W	L	W	✕

Round 3

	Team	Rec.	Bears	Hawks
	Brown University Bears	1–0	✕	W
	Roger Williams University Hawks	0–1	L	✕

Filter by team:

#					Pos.
1	Huskies	2-3-4	def.	Engineers	1-5-6 DNF
2	Crimson	2-3-4	def.	Hawks	1-5-6 DNF
3	Rams	1-2-3	def.	Terriers	4-5-6
4	Bears	1-2-3	def.	Catamounts	4-5-6
5	Engineers	1-3-4	def.	Crimson	2-5-6
6	Terriers	1-3-4	def.	Huskies	2-5-6
7	Hawks	2-3-4	def.	Catamounts	1-5-6
8	Rams	2-3-4	def.	Bears	1-5-6
9	Terriers	2-3-4	def.	Crimson	1-5-6
10	Engineers	1-3-4	def.	Catamounts	2-5-6 DNF
11	Rams	1-2-6 DNF	def.	Huskies	3-4-5
12	Bears	1-2-3	def.	Hawks	4-5-6
13	Terriers	1-2-4	def.	Catamounts	3-5-6
14	Rams	1-2-3	def.	Crimson	4-5-6
15	Engineers	1-2-3	def.	Hawks	4-5-6
16	Bears	1-2-4	def.	Huskies	3-5-6
17	Rams	1-3-5	def.	Catamounts	2-4-6
18	Terriers	2-3-4	def.	Hawks	1-5-6
19	Crimson	1-2-5	def.	Huskies	3-4-6
20	Engineers	1-2-6	def.	Bears	3-4-5
21	Hawks	2-3-5	def.	Rams	1-4-6 DNF
22	Huskies	1-2-3	def.	Catamounts	4-5-6 DNF
23	Engineers	1-2-4	def.	Terriers	3-5-6 DNF
24	Bears	1-2-4	def.	Crimson	3-5-6
25	Huskies	2-3-4	def.	Hawks	1-5-6
26	Rams	1-2-6	def.	Engineers	3-4-5
27	Catamounts	1-4-5	def.	Crimson	2-3-6 DNF
28	Terriers	1-3-4	def.	Bears	2-5-6
30	Huskies	1-2-5	def.	Engineers	3-4-6
31	Rams	1-3-6	def.	Crimson	2-4-5
32	Hawks	1-4-6	def.	Bears	2-3-5 DSQ
33	Terriers	1-3-4	def.	Catamounts	2-5-6
34	Crimson	1-4-5	def.	Engineers	2-3-6
35	Huskies	1-2-4	def.	Bears	3-5-6
36	Rams	2-3-4	def.	Catamounts	1-5-6
37	Terriers	1-2-5	def.	Hawks	3-4-6
38	Crimson	1-2-6	def.	Bears	3-4-5
39	Engineers	1-2-6	def.	Catamounts	3-4-5
40	Hawks	2-3-5	def.	Huskies	1-4-6
41	Rams	1-2-5	def.	Terriers	3-4-6
42	Catamounts	1-3-5	def.	Bears	2-4-6
43	Hawks	1-2-6	def.	Crimson	3-4-5
44	Rams	1-2-6	def.	Engineers	3-4-5
45	Terriers	1-2-4	def.	Huskies	3-5-6
46	Hawks	1-3-5	def.	Catamounts	2-4-6
47	Bears	2-3-4	def.	Rams	1-5-6
48	Huskies	1-3-5	def.	Crimson	2-4-6
49	Engineers	2-4-6	def.	Terriers	1-3-5 DSQ
50	Rams	1-3-5	def.	Hawks	2-4-6
51	Huskies	1-2-6	def.	Catamounts	3-4-5
52	Bears	2-3-4	def.	Engineers	1-5-6
53	Terriers	2-3-4	def.	Crimson	1-5-6
54	Rams	1-2-6	def.	Huskies	3-4-5
55	Engineers	1-3-4	def.	Hawks	2-5-6
56	Catamounts	1-4-5	def.	Crimson	2-3-6
57	Terriers	1-4-5	def.	Bears	2-3-6
29	Bears	1-2-3	def.	Hawks	4-5-6 DNS,DNS,DNS

School	Team	Skippers	Crew
University of Rhode Island	Rams	Brendan Read '19 Dakota Northrup '19 Luke Ingalls '21	Lauren Richards '19 Ryan Geib '19 Ian Nannig '19
Boston University	Terriers	Casey Cabot '21 Collin Alexander '20 Josh Dochoda '20	Kyle Dochoda '21 Erica Brown '21 Trent Chismar '22 Charles Honke '20
Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Engineers	Annie Hughes '19 Dana Haig '22 Ivan Shestopalov '21 James Peraire-Bueno '19	Brooke Mcgoldrick '20 Noa Yoder '19 Sarah Caso '19 Lynn Liu '20 Tiffany Xi '19
Northeastern University	Huskies	Jackson Hamilton '19 Santiago Hirschmann '23 Ted Bjerregaard '23	Jacqueline Berlin '19 Jon Ewing '21 Alexandra Nygren '20
Brown University	Bears	Jack Murphy '22 John Mastrandrea '20 Tucker Weed '22	Sawyer Balint '20 Megha Malpani '19 Jack Papetti '21
Roger Williams University	Hawks	Cameron Wood '22 Kelsey Shakin '19 Madeline Pope '21	Kylie Freitas '20 Kristi Dolan '20 Ariana Smaldone '20
Harvard University	Crimson	Francis Doyle '22 Jackson Wagner '19 Jonas Nelle '22	Iulianna Taritsa '20 Gayatri Balasubramanian '21 Zennie Wey '20
University of Vermont	Catamounts	Joshua Stone '20 Lolly Vasilion '22 Thomas Harden '20 Vincent Yannelli '19	Lucy Mulvihill '22 Isabella Arnaboldi '21 Helen Field '21

Conditions — 03/16/2019 (8am–6pm)

☀️Clear sky

Humidity 45% · Pressure 1009.8 hPa

Temperature

46°F

↑ 48°F ↓ 41°F

Feels like 34°F

Wind

● from ▲ toward

15.5 kn

avg · max 18.4 kn

Gusts to 34.2 kn

From W (278°)

Sky & Precipitation

Cloud cover20% Sunshine11.0 hrs Humidity45% Pressure1009.8 hPa

What this breeze does at MIT — from fleet racing

Breeze: W about 16 kn (weather reanalysis in the scorer’s units)

In fleet races at MIT in this breeze: a typical day (+0.01)

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 ±0.01 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.

Orderliness beyond the fleet at MIT by wind direction (angle) and speed (rings), fitted surface; dots are labelled regatta-days, ★ this regatta (112 labelled fleet-race days at MIT).

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