MIT FJ Team Racing Invite

HostMIT
Date03/07/2020
TypeNOT ALLOWED In-Conference
BoatFJ
ScoringTeam

#	School	Team	Rec.
1	Roger Williams University	Hawks	18–4
2	Brown University	Bears	17–5
3	University of Rhode Island	Rams	16–6
4	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Engineers 1	14–8
5	Tufts University	Jumbos	13–9
6	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Engineers 2	12–10
7	Northeastern University	Huskies	12–10
8	Harvard University	Crimson	10–12
9	Salve Regina University	Seahawks	8–14
10	University of Vermont	Catamounts	7–15
11	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Engineers 3	5–17
12	BUSA	British U	0–22

Pre-event forecast

Fitted on the 14,785 team race matches sailed before 2020-03-07, using the line-ups that actually raced. It called 78 of 110 matches (71%) with a log-loss of 0.628 (a coin flip scores 0.693), so the event went poorly for the forecast. Orderliness −0.62 ± 0.18: an upset-heavy event, more orderly than 8% 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	Roger Williams University Hawks	4	8.11 school +0.32	Riley Read / Annika Irene 2.52 Peter Neal / Molly Matthews 2.67 John Walton / Kristi Dolan 2.70 11–3 Chase Reynolds / Kristi Dolan 5–1	70%	16–4 (80%)	+1.9
2	Brown University Bears	1	8.66 school +0.28	Gabriel Hannon / Mo Liu John Mastrandrea / Madeleine Montagner 3.03 Tucker Weed / Elizabeth Rolfes 2.88	79%	15–5 (75%)	−0.8
3	University of Rhode Island Rams	6	7.50 school −0.22	Parker Colantuono / Wyle Goddard 2.85 Christian Moffitt / Edward Gary 2.55 Ben Rosenberg / Elizabeth Taylor 2.17	58%	14–6 (70%)	+2.4
4	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	3	8.20 school −0.08, home +0.39	Lulu Russell / Isabelle Yen 2.32 Kaila Pfrang / Elizabeth Obermaier 2.80 Dana Haig / Maile Jim 2.73	72%	12–8 (60%)	−2.4
5	Tufts University Jumbos	7	6.92 school +0.15	Austen Freda / Harper Mckerrow 2.89 Connor Sheridan / Jacob Whitney 2.25 Matthew Galbraith / Caroline Kelly 1.54	48%	11–9 (55%)	+1.5
6	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	2	8.34 school −0.08, home +0.39	Alex Abate / Lynn Liu 2.47 Crew Fritsch / Zoe Lallas 2.52 John Ped / Abigail Lee 2.88	73%	10–10 (50%)	−4.6
7	Northeastern University Huskies	9	5.98	Santiago Hirschmann / Coleen Ross 2.43 Carter Brock / Reid Wishner Ben Palmer / Kyle Fitzgerald 1.67	27%	10–10 (50%)	+4.6
8	Harvard University Crimson	5	7.71	Eric Hansen / Gayatri Balasubramanian 2.44 Dylan Ascencios / Corinne Lee 2.57 Sarah Burn / Jessica Williams 2.53	61%	8–12 (40%)	−4.2
9	Salve Regina University Seahawks	10	4.86 school −0.70	Alex Bowdler / Peter Cronin 1.89 Grace Vincens / Caroline Mcneil 2.38 Gregory Dillon / Hadley O'Sullivan	16%	6–14 (30%)	+2.8
10	University of Vermont Catamounts	8	6.40	Peter Schneider / Marit Lebakken Lolly Vasilion / Helen Field 2.53 Joshua Stone / Lilia Hutchins 1.81 3–7 Ryan Hamilton / Amy Sloat 2–8	37%	5–15 (25%)	−2.4
11	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	11	4.42 school −0.08, home +0.39	Charles Lindsay / Wendy Wu 3–13 Meredith Julian / Veronika Silkin 3–9 David Morejon / Grace Mao 0–12 Julia Wyatt / Elissa Ito 2.05 3–7 Raymond Huffman / Zoe Fisher 0–10	10%	3–17 (15%)	+1.0

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)
7	Northeastern University Huskies	5.98	7.33	10–10	5.4	+1.35	4.7	1%
9	Salve Regina University Seahawks	4.86	6.15	6–14	3.2	+1.29	2.9	4%
3	University of Rhode Island Rams	7.50	8.22	14–6	11.6	+0.72	1.3	15%
1	Roger Williams University Hawks	8.11	8.76	16–4	14.1	+0.65	0.9	21%
11	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	4.42	4.99	3–17	2.0	+0.57	0.4	32%
5	Tufts University Jumbos	6.92	7.36	11–9	9.5	+0.43	0.5	29%
2	Brown University Bears	8.66	8.39	15–5	15.8	−0.28	0.2	79%
4	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	8.20	7.54	12–8	14.4	−0.67	1.2	94%
10	University of Vermont Catamounts	6.40	5.45	5–15	7.4	−0.96	1.6	96%
8	Harvard University Crimson	7.71	6.56	8–12	12.2	−1.14	3.4	99%
6	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	8.34	7.06	10–10	14.6	−1.28	4.3	>99%

By skipper

Skipper	School	Value	Perf.	Record	Exp. wins	Δ	Surprise (bits)	P(this good or better)
Alex Bowdler	Salve Regina University	1.89	3.18	6–14	3.2	+1.29	2.9	4%
Grace Vincens	Salve Regina University	2.38	3.66	6–14	3.2	+1.29	2.9	4%
Gregory Dillon	Salve Regina University	0.96	2.25	6–14	3.2	+1.29	2.9	4%
Meredith Julian	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	1.46	2.61	3–9	1.5	+1.15	1.4	15%
Ben Rosenberg	University of Rhode Island	2.17	2.90	14–6	11.6	+0.72	1.3	15%
Austen Freda	Tufts University	2.89	3.32	11–9	9.5	+0.43	0.5	29%
Joshua Stone	University of Vermont	1.81	1.49	3–7	3.3	−0.32	0.1	78%
Peter Schneider	University of Vermont	1.72	0.76	5–15	7.4	−0.96	1.6	96%
Eric Hansen	Harvard University	2.44	1.29	8–12	12.2	−1.14	3.4	99%
Dylan Ascencios	Harvard University	2.57	1.43	8–12	12.2	−1.14	3.4	99%
Sarah Burn	Harvard University	2.53	1.38	8–12	12.2	−1.14	3.4	99%
Alex Abate	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	2.47	1.20	10–10	14.6	−1.28	4.3	>99%
David Morejon	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	0.63	-2.37	0–12	0.6	≤−3.00	0.9	>99%
Raymond Huffman	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	0.30	-2.70	0–10	0.6	≤−3.00	0.8	>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	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	Northeastern University Huskies	41%	upset
1	2	Roger Williams University Hawks	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	51%
1	3	Salve Regina University Seahawks	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	3%	upset
1	4	Tufts University Jumbos	Brown University Bears	16%	upset
1	5	University of Rhode Island Rams	Harvard University Crimson	45%	upset
1	7	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	6%	upset
1	8	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	Northeastern University Huskies	92%
1	9	Roger Williams University Hawks	Brown University Bears	42%	upset
1	10	Salve Regina University Seahawks	Harvard University Crimson	5%	upset
1	11	Tufts University Jumbos	University of Vermont Catamounts	69%
1	13	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	52%
1	14	Brown University Bears	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	98%
1	15	Northeastern University Huskies	Harvard University Crimson	14%	upset
1	16	Roger Williams University Hawks	University of Vermont Catamounts	89%
1	17	Salve Regina University Seahawks	University of Rhode Island Rams	6%	upset
1	19	Brown University Bears	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	60%
1	20	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	Harvard University Crimson	65%
1	21	University of Vermont Catamounts	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	97%
1	22	University of Rhode Island Rams	Northeastern University Huskies	83%
1	23	Roger Williams University Hawks	Tufts University Jumbos	70%
1	25	Brown University Bears	Harvard University Crimson	72%
1	26	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	University of Vermont Catamounts	87%
1	27	University of Rhode Island Rams	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	30%	upset
1	28	Tufts University Jumbos	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	98%
1	29	Northeastern University Huskies	Salve Regina University Seahawks	76%
1	31	Harvard University Crimson	University of Vermont Catamounts	80%
1	32	University of Rhode Island Rams	Brown University Bears	24%	upset
1	33	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	Tufts University Jumbos	79%
1	34	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	Salve Regina University Seahawks	97%
1	35	Roger Williams University Hawks	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	99%
1	37	University of Rhode Island Rams	University of Vermont Catamounts	76%
1	38	Harvard University Crimson	Tufts University Jumbos	69%
1	39	Brown University Bears	Salve Regina University Seahawks	98%
1	40	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	Roger Williams University Hawks	61%
1	41	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	Northeastern University Huskies	92%
1	43	Tufts University Jumbos	University of Rhode Island Rams	36%	upset
1	44	University of Vermont Catamounts	Salve Regina University Seahawks	82%
1	45	Harvard University Crimson	Roger Williams University Hawks	36%	upset
1	46	Northeastern University Huskies	Brown University Bears	6%	upset
1	47	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	93%
1	49	Tufts University Jumbos	Salve Regina University Seahawks	89%
1	50	Roger Williams University Hawks	University of Rhode Island Rams	68%
1	51	Northeastern University Huskies	University of Vermont Catamounts	39%	upset
1	52	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	Harvard University Crimson	12%	upset
1	53	Brown University Bears	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	58%
1	55	Roger Williams University Hawks	Salve Regina University Seahawks	97%
1	56	Northeastern University Huskies	Tufts University Jumbos	28%	upset
1	57	University of Rhode Island Rams	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	99%
1	58	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	University of Vermont Catamounts	87%
1	59	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	Harvard University Crimson	62%
1	61	Roger Williams University Hawks	Northeastern University Huskies	91%
1	62	Salve Regina University Seahawks	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	82%
1	63	Tufts University Jumbos	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	20%	upset
1	64	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	University of Rhode Island Rams	67%
1	65	Brown University Bears	University of Vermont Catamounts	91%
2	67	Northeastern University Huskies	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	9%	upset
2	68	Brown University Bears	Salve Regina University Seahawks	98%
2	69	University of Rhode Island Rams	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	98%
2	70	Harvard University Crimson	Tufts University Jumbos	69%
2	71	University of Vermont Catamounts	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	15%	upset
2	73	Brown University Bears	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	58%
2	74	University of Rhode Island Rams	Northeastern University Huskies	82%
2	75	Salve Regina University Seahawks	Tufts University Jumbos	12%	upset
2	76	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	92%
2	78	Roger Williams University Hawks	University of Vermont Catamounts	86%
2	79	Brown University Bears	University of Rhode Island Rams	76%
2	80	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	Tufts University Jumbos	81%
2	81	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	Northeastern University Huskies	90%
2	83	University of Vermont Catamounts	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	95%
2	84	Roger Williams University Hawks	Harvard University Crimson	63%
2	85	Tufts University Jumbos	University of Rhode Island Rams	36%	upset
2	86	Brown University Bears	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	62%
2	88	Northeastern University Huskies	University of Vermont Catamounts	40%	upset
2	89	Harvard University Crimson	Salve Regina University Seahawks	94%
2	90	Roger Williams University Hawks	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	99%
2	91	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	Tufts University Jumbos	78%
2	93	Brown University Bears	University of Vermont Catamounts	90%
2	94	Harvard University Crimson	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	35%	upset
2	95	Northeastern University Huskies	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	56%
2	96	Roger Williams University Hawks	Salve Regina University Seahawks	97%
2	98	Tufts University Jumbos	University of Vermont Catamounts	61%
2	99	University of Rhode Island Rams	Harvard University Crimson	45%	upset
2	100	Brown University Bears	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	98%
2	101	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	Salve Regina University Seahawks	97%
2	102	Roger Williams University Hawks	Northeastern University Huskies	90%
2	104	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	Harvard University Crimson	61%
2	105	Tufts University Jumbos	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	97%
2	106	University of Rhode Island Rams	Salve Regina University Seahawks	93%
2	107	Brown University Bears	Northeastern University Huskies	93%
2	108	Roger Williams University Hawks	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	47%	upset
2	109	Harvard University Crimson	University of Vermont Catamounts	78%
2	111	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	Salve Regina University Seahawks	96%
2	112	Tufts University Jumbos	Northeastern University Huskies	70%
2	113	University of Rhode Island Rams	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	30%	upset
2	114	Brown University Bears	Roger Williams University Hawks	61%
2	115	Harvard University Crimson	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	87%
2	116	University of Vermont Catamounts	Salve Regina University Seahawks	82%
2	118	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	55%
2	119	Tufts University Jumbos	Brown University Bears	15%	upset
2	120	University of Rhode Island Rams	Roger Williams University Hawks	33%	upset
2	121	Salve Regina University Seahawks	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	80%
2	122	Northeastern University Huskies	Harvard University Crimson	16%	upset
2	123	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	University of Vermont Catamounts	87%
2	125	University of Rhode Island Rams	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	35%	upset
2	126	Roger Williams University Hawks	Tufts University Jumbos	69%
2	127	Northeastern University Huskies	Salve Regina University Seahawks	75%
2	128	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	92%
2	129	Brown University Bears	Harvard University Crimson	72%
2	130	University of Rhode Island Rams	University of Vermont Catamounts	74%
2	132	Roger Williams University Hawks	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	39%	upset

Round 1

Team	Rec.	Hawks	Bears	Rams	1	Jumbos	2	Huskies	Crimson	Seahawks	Catamounts	3	U
Roger Williams University Hawks	9–2	✕	W	W	L	W	L	W	L	W	W	L	W
Brown University Bears	7–4	L	✕	L	W	L	W	L	W	W	W	W	W
University of Rhode Island Rams	7–4	L	W	✕	L	L	L	W	W	L	W	L	W
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	18–15	W	L	W	✕	L	✕	W	W	L	W	✕	W
Tufts University Jumbos	7–4	L	W	W	W	✕	W	L	L	W	W	W	W
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	18–15	W	L	W	✕	L	✕	W	W	L	W	✕	W
Northeastern University Huskies	6–5	L	W	L	L	W	L	✕	W	W	W	L	W
Harvard University Crimson	4–7	W	L	L	L	W	L	L	✕	L	W	L	W
Salve Regina University Seahawks	5–6	L	L	W	W	L	W	L	W	✕	L	W	W
University of Vermont Catamounts	3–8	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	W	✕	L	W
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	18–15	W	L	W	✕	L	✕	W	W	L	W	✕	W
BUSA British U	0–11	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	✕

Round 2

Team	Rec.	Hawks	Bears	Rams	1	Jumbos	2	Huskies	Crimson	Seahawks	Catamounts	3	U
Roger Williams University Hawks	9–2	✕	L	L	W	W	W	W	W	W	W	W	W
Brown University Bears	10–1	W	✕	W	W	L	W	W	W	W	W	W	W
University of Rhode Island Rams	9–2	W	L	✕	W	L	W	W	W	W	W	W	W
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1	13–20	L	L	L	✕	L	✕	L	L	L	W	✕	W
Tufts University Jumbos	6–5	L	W	W	W	✕	W	W	L	L	W	W	W
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2	13–20	L	L	L	✕	L	✕	L	L	L	W	✕	W
Northeastern University Huskies	6–5	L	L	L	W	L	W	✕	W	W	W	W	W
Harvard University Crimson	6–5	L	L	L	W	W	W	L	✕	W	W	W	W
Salve Regina University Seahawks	3–8	L	L	L	W	W	W	L	L	✕	L	W	W
University of Vermont Catamounts	4–7	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	W	✕	L	W
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 3	13–20	L	L	L	✕	L	✕	L	L	L	W	✕	W
BUSA British U	0–11	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	✕

Filter by team:

#					Pos.
1	Engineers 3	1-2-5	def.	Huskies	3-4-6
2	Hawks	1-2-6	def.	Engineers 2	3-4-5
3	Seahawks	1-3-6	def.	Engineers 1	2-4-5
4	Jumbos	1-3-5	def.	Bears	2-4-6 DNF
5	Rams	1-3-6	def.	Crimson	2-4-5
6	Catamounts	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
7	Engineers 3	1-2-6	def.	Engineers 2	3-4-5
8	Engineers 1	1-3-4	def.	Huskies	2-5-6 DSQ
9	Hawks	1-3-6	def.	Bears	2-4-5
10	Seahawks	1-2-5	def.	Crimson	3-4-6
11	Jumbos	1-2-3	def.	Catamounts	4-5-6
12	Rams	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
13	Engineers 2	2-3-4	def.	Engineers 1	1-5-6
14	Bears	1-2-3	def.	Engineers 3	4-5-6
15	Huskies	1-2-6	def.	Crimson	3-4-5
16	Hawks	1-2-3	def.	Catamounts	4-5-6
17	Seahawks	1-2-6	def.	Rams	3-4-5
18	Jumbos	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
19	Bears	2-3-4	def.	Engineers 1	1-5-6
20	Engineers 2	2-3-5	def.	Crimson	1-4-6
21	Catamounts	1-2-5	def.	Engineers 3	3-4-6
22	Rams	1-3-4	def.	Huskies	2-5-6
23	Hawks	1-2-5	def.	Jumbos	3-4-6
24	Seahawks	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
25	Bears	1-2-3	def.	Crimson	4-5-6
26	Engineers 1	1-2-4	def.	Catamounts	3-5-6
27	Rams	1-2-5	def.	Engineers 2	3-4-6
28	Jumbos	1-2-4	def.	Engineers 3	3-5-6
29	Huskies	1-2-5	def.	Seahawks	3-4-6
30	Hawks	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
31	Crimson	1-2-5	def.	Catamounts	3-4-6
32	Rams	1-3-5	def.	Bears	2-4-6
33	Engineers 1	1-2-5	def.	Jumbos	3-4-6
34	Engineers 2	1-2-3	def.	Seahawks	4-5-6
35	Hawks	1-2-4	def.	Engineers 3	3-5-6
36	Huskies	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
37	Rams	1-2-4	def.	Catamounts	3-5-6
38	Crimson	1-2-6	def.	Jumbos	3-4-5
39	Bears	1-2-5	def.	Seahawks	3-4-6
40	Engineers 1	1-2-3	def.	Hawks	4-5-6
41	Engineers 2	1-2-3	def.	Huskies	4-5-6
42	Engineers 3	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
43	Jumbos	1-2-5	def.	Rams	3-4-6
44	Catamounts	1-2-5	def.	Seahawks	3-4-6
45	Crimson	2-3-4	def.	Hawks	1-5-6
46	Huskies	1-2-5	def.	Bears	3-4-6
47	Engineers 1	1-2-3	def.	Engineers 3	4-5-6
48	Engineers 2	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
49	Jumbos	1-2-4	def.	Seahawks	3-5-6
50	Hawks	1-3-5	def.	Rams	2-4-6
51	Huskies	1-2-4	def.	Catamounts	3-5-6
52	Engineers 3	1-4-5	def.	Crimson	2-3-6
53	Bears	1-2-3	def.	Engineers 2	4-5-6
54	Engineers 1	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
55	Hawks	1-3-5	def.	Seahawks	2-4-6
56	Huskies	1-2-6	def.	Jumbos	3-4-5
57	Rams	1-2-5	def.	Engineers 3	3-4-6
58	Engineers 2	1-2-3	def.	Catamounts	4-5-6
59	Engineers 1	2-3-5	def.	Crimson	1-4-6
60	Bears	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
61	Hawks	1-2-3	def.	Huskies	4-5-6
62	Seahawks	1-2-6	def.	Engineers 3	3-4-5
63	Jumbos	2-3-5	def.	Engineers 2	1-4-6
64	Engineers 1	1-3-5	def.	Rams	2-4-6
65	Bears	2-3-4	def.	Catamounts	1-5-6
66	Crimson	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
67	Huskies	1-3-6	def.	Engineers 2	2-4-5
68	Bears	1-2-3	def.	Seahawks	4-5-6
69	Rams	1-2-5	def.	Engineers 3	3-4-6
70	Crimson	1-2-5	def.	Jumbos	3-4-6
71	Catamounts	2-3-4	def.	Engineers 1	1-5-6
72	Hawks	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
73	Bears	1-2-5	def.	Engineers 2	3-4-6
74	Rams	1-2-6	def.	Huskies	3-4-5
75	Seahawks	1-4-5	def.	Jumbos	2-3-6
76	Engineers 1	1-2-4	def.	Engineers 3	3-5-6
77	Crimson	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
78	Hawks	1-2-6	def.	Catamounts	3-4-5
79	Bears	1-3-6	def.	Rams	2-4-5
80	Engineers 2	1-2-4	def.	Jumbos	3-5-6
81	Engineers 1	1-2-3	def.	Huskies	4-5-6
82	Seahawks	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
83	Catamounts	1-5-6	def.	Engineers 3	2-3-4 DSQ
84	Hawks	2-3-5	def.	Crimson	1-4-6
85	Jumbos	1-2-6	def.	Rams	3-4-5
86	Bears	1-2-5	def.	Engineers 1	3-4-6
87	Engineers 2	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
88	Huskies	1-2-6	def.	Catamounts	3-4-5
89	Crimson	1-2-5	def.	Seahawks	3-4-6
90	Hawks	1-2-6	def.	Engineers 3	3-4-5
91	Engineers 1	2-3-4	def.	Jumbos	1-5-6
92	Rams	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
93	Bears	1-2-3	def.	Catamounts	4-5-6
94	Crimson	1-2-4	def.	Engineers 2	3-5-6
95	Huskies	1-2-4	def.	Engineers 3	3-5-6
96	Hawks	1-2-5	def.	Seahawks	3-4-6
97	Engineers 1	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
98	Jumbos	1-2-4	def.	Catamounts	3-5-6
99	Rams	1-2-5	def.	Crimson	3-4-6
100	Bears	2-3-4	def.	Engineers 3	1-5-6
101	Engineers 2	1-2-5	def.	Seahawks	3-4-6
102	Hawks	1-2-5	def.	Huskies	3-4-6
103	Catamounts	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
104	Engineers 1	1-5-6	def.	Crimson	2-3-4 RAF
105	Jumbos	1-2-5	def.	Engineers 3	3-4-6
106	Rams	1-2-5	def.	Seahawks	3-4-6
107	Bears	2-3-4	def.	Huskies	1-5-6
108	Hawks	1-3-6	def.	Engineers 2	2-4-5
109	Crimson	1-2-5	def.	Catamounts	3-4-6
110	Engineers 3	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
111	Engineers 1	1-2-6	def.	Seahawks	3-4-5
112	Jumbos	1-2-4	def.	Huskies	3-5-6
113	Rams	1-2-3	def.	Engineers 2	4-5-6
114	Bears	2-3-4	def.	Hawks	1-5-6
115	Crimson	1-2-4	def.	Engineers 3	3-5-6
116	Catamounts	1-3-6	def.	Seahawks	2-4-5
117	Huskies	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
118	Engineers 2	1-2-4 DSQ	def.	Engineers 1	3-5-6 RAF
119	Jumbos	2-3-4	def.	Bears	1-5-6
120	Rams	1-3-4	def.	Hawks	2-5-6
121	Seahawks	1-2-5	def.	Engineers 3	3-4-6
122	Huskies	2-3-4	def.	Crimson	1-5-6
123	Engineers 2	2-3-5	def.	Catamounts	1-4-6
124	Bears	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
125	Rams	1-2-5	def.	Engineers 1	3-4-6
126	Hawks	2-3-4	def.	Jumbos	1-5-6
127	Huskies	1-2-6	def.	Seahawks	3-4-5
128	Engineers 2	1-3-5	def.	Engineers 3	2-4-6
129	Bears	1-4-5	def.	Crimson	2-3-6
130	Rams	1-2-6	def.	Catamounts	3-4-5
131	Jumbos	1-2-3	def.	British U	4-5-6
132	Hawks	1-2-5	def.	Engineers 1	3-4-6

School	Team	Skippers	Crew
Roger Williams University	Hawks	Chase Reynolds '23 John Walton '22 Peter Neal '20 Riley Read '22	Kristi Dolan '20 Molly Matthews '23 Annika Irene '23
Brown University	Bears	Gabriel Hannon '20 John Mastrandrea '20 Tucker Weed '22	Mo Liu '22 Madeleine Montagner '22 Elizabeth Rolfes '21
University of Rhode Island	Rams	Ben Rosenberg '23 Christian Moffitt '21 Parker Colantuono '22	Elizabeth Taylor '24 Edward Gary '22 Wyle Goddard '21
Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Engineers 1	Dana Haig '22 Kaila Pfrang '21 Lulu Russell '22	Maile Jim '22 Elizabeth Obermaier '21 Isabelle Yen '21
Tufts University	Jumbos	Austen Freda '21 Connor Sheridan '22 Matthew Galbraith '21	Harper Mckerrow '23 Jacob Whitney '21 Caroline Kelly '23
Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Engineers 2	Alex Abate '22 Crew Fritsch '23 John Ped '21	Lynn Liu '20 Zoe Lallas '20 Abigail Lee '20
Northeastern University	Huskies	Ben Palmer '22 Carter Brock '22 Santiago Hirschmann '23	Kyle Fitzgerald '24 Reid Wishner '24 Coleen Ross '20
Harvard University	Crimson	Dylan Ascencios '24 Eric Hansen '23 Sarah Burn '24	Corinne Lee '23 Gayatri Balasubramanian '21 Jessica Williams '20
Salve Regina University	Seahawks	Alex Bowdler '22 Grace Vincens '20 Gregory Dillon '23	Peter Cronin '22 Caroline Mcneil '22 Hadley O'Sullivan '23
University of Vermont	Catamounts	Joshua Stone '20 Lolly Vasilion '22 Peter Schneider '20 Ryan Hamilton '23	Lilia Hutchins '23 Helen Field '21 Marit Lebakken '23 Amy Sloat '20
Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Engineers 3	Charles Lindsay '21 David Morejon '20 Julia Wyatt '21 Meredith Julian '21 Raymond Huffman '21	Wendy Wu '23 Grace Mao '23 Elissa Ito '23 Veronika Silkin '22 Zoe Fisher '23

Conditions — 03/07/2020 (8am–6pm)

☁️Overcast

Humidity 31% · Pressure 1018.9 hPa

Temperature

37°F

↑ 42°F ↓ 29°F

Feels like 24°F

Wind

● from ▲ toward

13.7 kn

avg · max 15.0 kn

Gusts to 28.2 kn

From NNW (342°)

Sky & Precipitation

Cloud cover61% Sunshine9.2 hrs Humidity31% Pressure1018.9 hPa

What this breeze does at MIT — from fleet racing

Breeze: N about 15 kn (weather reanalysis in the scorer’s units)

In fleet races at MIT in this breeze: an underdogs’ day (−0.04)

Underdogs’ conditions: in fleet racing here the fleet bunches up and lower-rated boats beat the seeds more often than 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 ±0.04 means a rating gap counts about 4% 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 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