The 40th Grey Lynne Marchiando Team Races

HostMIT
Date04/01/2023
TypeCross Regional
Boat420/FJ
ScoringTeam

#	School	Team	Rec.
1	Stanford University	Cardinal	11–3
2	Roger Williams University	Hawks	10–4
3	Harvard University	Crimson	10–4
4	Boston University	Terriers	7–7
5	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Engineers	7–7
6	Boston College	Eagles	5–9
7	U. S. Coast Guard Academy	Bears	4–10
8	University of Rhode Island	Rams	2–12

Pre-event forecast

Fitted on the 20,646 team race matches sailed before 2023-04-01, using the line-ups that actually raced. It called 39 of 57 matches (68%) with a log-loss of 0.612 (a coin flip scores 0.693), so the event went poorly for the forecast. Orderliness −0.40 ± 0.26: an upset-heavy event, more orderly than 14% 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	Stanford University Cardinal	2	11.27 school +0.47	Michelle Lahrkamp / Patricia Gerli 3.56 Vanessa Lahrkamp / Justin Lim 3.85 9–3 Chapman Petersen / Isabelle Mcnabb 3.38 9–1 Chapman Petersen / Gwendolyn Donahue 3.38 2–2 Vanessa Lahrkamp / Gwendolyn Donahue 3.82 2–0	78%	11–3 (79%)	+0.1
2	Roger Williams University Hawks	3	10.61 school +0.30	Aidan Hoogland / Molly Matthews 3.54 9–4 Cameron Wood / Michaela Odonnell 3.48 9–4 Mathieu Dale / Annika Irene 3.22 9–4 Carlos De Castro / Carly Kiss 3.55 6–0	62%	11–4 (73%)	+1.8
3	Harvard University Crimson	1	11.48 school +0.30	Justin Callahan / Kennedy Leehealey 3.97 Lachlain Mcgranahan / Christopher Wang 3.94 Mitchell Callahan / Grace Li 3.25	81%	10–5 (67%)	−2.1
4	Boston University Terriers	7	8.63	Micky Munns / Matthew Hamelsky 2.74 Noah Robitshek / Abigail Murray 2.76 Tyler Mowry / Catherine Shakin 3.07	23%	7–7 (50%)	+3.8
5	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers	5	9.65 home +0.41	Sam Bruce / Maaya Prasad 3.45 Maks Groom / Wendy Wu 3.02 Julius Heitkoetter / Abigail Vanlonkhuyzen 2.76	43%	7–7 (50%)	+0.9
6	Boston College Eagles	6	9.60 school +0.28	Colleen O'Brien / John (Jack) Plavan 3.12 Michael Kirkman / Sara Schumann 2.86 Michaela O'Brien / Lilly Mathieu 3.35 3–7 Michaela O'Brien / Chip Kreuzkamp 3.23 2–2	42%	5–9 (36%)	−0.9
7	U. S. Coast Guard Academy Bears	4	9.99 school −0.07	Colman Schofield / Lauren O'Neill 3.52 Daniel Unangst / Jack Farrell 3.39 Matthew Kickhafer / Charles Pohl 3.14	52%	4–10 (29%)	−3.2
8	University of Rhode Island Rams	8	8.28	Jonathan Riley / Abbie Chipps 2.55 Kerem Erkmen / Clare Laroche 3.20 Joshua Bartoszuk / Parker Brown 2.54	16%	2–12 (14%)	−0.3

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)
4	Boston University	8.63	10.13	7–7	3.2	+1.50	4.4	1%
2	Roger Williams University	10.61	11.30	11–4	9.3	+0.70	0.9	22%
5	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	9.65	9.99	7–7	6.1	+0.35	0.2	39%
1	Stanford University	11.27	11.31	11–3	10.9	+0.04	0.0	64%
8	University of Rhode Island	8.28	8.12	2–12	2.3	−0.16	0.0	70%
6	Boston College	9.60	9.23	5–9	5.9	−0.37	0.2	81%
3	Harvard University	11.48	10.61	10–5	12.1	−0.87	1.4	96%
7	U. S. Coast Guard Academy	9.99	8.72	4–10	7.2	−1.27	2.9	99%

By skipper

Skipper	School	Value	Perf.	Record	Exp. wins	Δ	Surprise (bits)	P(this good or better)
Carlos De Castro	Roger Williams University	3.55	6.55	6–0	5.1	≥+3.00	1.5	34%
Aidan Hoogland	Roger Williams University	3.54	4.07	9–4	7.8	+0.54	0.5	33%
Kerem Erkmen	University of Rhode Island	3.20	3.04	2–12	2.3	−0.16	0.0	70%
Joshua Bartoszuk	University of Rhode Island	2.54	2.38	2–12	2.3	−0.16	0.0	70%

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	Harvard University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	86%
1	2	Roger Williams University	U. S. Coast Guard Academy	64%
1	3	Stanford University	Boston University	93%
1	4	University of Rhode Island	Boston College	20%	upset
1	5	Harvard University	U. S. Coast Guard Academy	81%
1	6	Boston University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	27%	upset
1	7	Roger Williams University	University of Rhode Island	93%
1	8	Stanford University	Boston College	84%
1	9	Boston University	U. S. Coast Guard Academy	20%	upset
1	10	Harvard University	University of Rhode Island	96%
1	11	Stanford University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	84%
1	12	Boston College	Roger Williams University	28%	upset
1	13	Boston University	University of Rhode Island	59%
1	14	Stanford University	U. S. Coast Guard Academy	78%
1	15	Harvard University	Roger Williams University	71%
1	16	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Boston College	50%
1	17	Stanford University	University of Rhode Island	95%
1	18	Roger Williams University	Boston University	88%
1	19	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	U. S. Coast Guard Academy	42%	upset
1	20	Harvard University	Boston College	86%
1	21	Stanford University	Roger Williams University	67%
1	22	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	University of Rhode Island	80%
1	23	Harvard University	Boston University	95%
1	24	U. S. Coast Guard Academy	Boston College	62%
1	25	Roger Williams University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	71%
1	26	Harvard University	Stanford University	55%
1	27	U. S. Coast Guard Academy	University of Rhode Island	85%
1	28	Boston College	Boston University	71%
2	29	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Harvard University	14%	upset
2	30	Roger Williams University	U. S. Coast Guard Academy	64%
2	31	Stanford University	Boston University	93%
2	32	University of Rhode Island	Boston College	20%	upset
2	33	Roger Williams University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	71%
2	34	Stanford University	Harvard University	45%	upset
2	35	Boston College	U. S. Coast Guard Academy	38%	upset
2	36	Boston University	University of Rhode Island	59%
2	37	Stanford University	Roger Williams University	67%
2	38	Boston College	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	50%	upset
2	39	Boston University	Harvard University	5%	upset
2	40	U. S. Coast Guard Academy	University of Rhode Island	85%
2	41	Boston College	Stanford University	16%	upset
2	42	Roger Williams University	Boston University	88%
2	43	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	U. S. Coast Guard Academy	42%	upset
2	44	Harvard University	University of Rhode Island	96%
2	45	Boston University	Boston College	29%	upset
2	46	Stanford University	U. S. Coast Guard Academy	78%
2	47	Roger Williams University	Harvard University	28%	upset
2	48	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	University of Rhode Island	80%
2	49	U. S. Coast Guard Academy	Boston University	80%
2	50	Harvard University	Boston College	86%
2	51	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Stanford University	17%	upset
2	52	Roger Williams University	University of Rhode Island	93%
2	53	Harvard University	U. S. Coast Guard Academy	82%
2	54	Boston University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	26%	upset
2	55	Roger Williams University	Boston College	71%
2	56	Stanford University	University of Rhode Island	95%
2	57	Roger Williams University	Harvard University	28%	upset

Round 1

Team	Rec.	Cardinal	Hawks	Crimson	Terriers	Engineers	Eagles	Bears	Rams
Stanford University Cardinal	6–1	✕	W	L	W	W	W	W	W
Roger Williams University Hawks	4–3	L	✕	L	W	W	L	W	W
Harvard University Crimson	7–0	W	W	✕	W	W	W	W	W
Boston University Terriers	3–4	L	L	L	✕	W	L	W	W
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers	3–4	L	L	L	L	✕	W	W	W
Boston College Eagles	2–5	L	W	L	W	L	✕	L	L
U. S. Coast Guard Academy Bears	2–5	L	L	L	L	L	W	✕	W
University of Rhode Island Rams	1–6	L	L	L	L	L	W	L	✕

Round 2

Team	Rec.	Cardinal	Hawks	Crimson	Terriers	Engineers	Eagles	Bears	Rams
Stanford University Cardinal	5–2	✕	W	W	W	L	L	W	W
Roger Williams University Hawks	7–1	L	✕	W	W	W	W	W	W
Harvard University Crimson	3–5	L	L	✕	L	L	W	W	W
Boston University Terriers	4–3	L	L	W	✕	W	W	L	W
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers	4–3	W	L	W	L	✕	L	W	W
Boston College Eagles	3–4	W	L	L	L	W	✕	W	L
U. S. Coast Guard Academy Bears	2–5	L	L	L	W	L	L	✕	W
University of Rhode Island Rams	1–6	L	L	L	L	L	W	L	✕

Filter by team:

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

School	Team	Skippers	Crew
Stanford University	Cardinal	Chapman Petersen '26 Michelle Lahrkamp '23 Vanessa Lahrkamp '26	Isabelle Mcnabb '26 Gwendolyn Donahue '24 Patricia Gerli '23 Justin Lim '23
Roger Williams University	Hawks	Aidan Hoogland '24 Cameron Wood '22 Carlos De Castro '26 Mathieu Dale '25	Molly Matthews '23 Michaela Odonnell '24 Carly Kiss '25 Annika Irene '23
Harvard University	Crimson	Justin Callahan '26 Lachlain Mcgranahan '24 Mitchell Callahan '26	Kennedy Leehealey '26 Christopher Wang '23 Grace Li '25
Boston University	Terriers	Micky Munns '23 Noah Robitshek '25 Tyler Mowry '23	Matthew Hamelsky '23 Abigail Murray '23 Catherine Shakin '23
Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Engineers	Julius Heitkoetter '25 Maks Groom '24 Sam Bruce '24	Abigail Vanlonkhuyzen '23 Wendy Wu '23 Maaya Prasad '22
Boston College	Eagles	Colleen O'Brien '24 Michael Kirkman '25 Michaela O'Brien '24	John (Jack) Plavan '23 Sara Schumann '25 Lilly Mathieu '23 Chip Kreuzkamp '24
U. S. Coast Guard Academy	Bears	Colman Schofield '25 Daniel Unangst '24 Matthew Kickhafer '23	Lauren O'Neill '24 Jack Farrell '23 Charles Pohl '26
University of Rhode Island	Rams	Jonathan Riley '23 Joshua Bartoszuk '25 Kerem Erkmen '25	Abbie Chipps '25 Parker Brown '26 Clare Laroche '23

Conditions — 04/01/2023 (8am–6pm)

🌦️Light drizzle

Humidity 92% · Pressure 996.9 hPa

Temperature

55°F

↑ 63°F ↓ 41°F

Feels like 51°F

Wind

● from ▲ toward

10.2 kn

avg · max 14.6 kn

Gusts to 26.0 kn

From SSW (204°)

Sky & Precipitation

Cloud cover94% Sunshine2.2 hrs Humidity92% Pressure996.9 hPa Rain0.36 in

What this breeze does at MIT — from fleet racing

Breeze: SW about 12 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 3% 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