Navigate

Q1 Regatta

# SchoolTeam Rec.
1 University of North Texas University of North Texas Mean Green 8–0
2 University of Texas University of Texas Longhorns 5–3
3 Texas A&M University Texas A&M University Aggies 4–4
4 Texas A&M University at Galveston Texas A&M University at Galveston Aggies 3–5
5 University of Central Oklahoma University of Central Oklahoma Bronchos 0–8

Pre-event forecast

Fitted on the 18,929 team race matches sailed before 2023-02-04, using the line-ups that actually raced. It called 13 of 14 matches (93%) with a log-loss of 0.366 (a coin flip scores 0.693), so the event went well for the forecast. Orderliness +0.33 ± 0.52: a typical 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.

PlaceSchool Pred. Strength Boats (skipper / crew, boat value) Pred. win % Recordvs forecast
1University of North Texas
Mean Green		23.53
school +0.14		Dutch Byerly / Alana Babilonia 2.32
Taylor Snyder / Alaya Weekley 0.89
Timothy Verriere / Gage Hendrickson		70%8–0 (100%)+2.4
2University of Texas
Longhorns		13.49
school +0.06, home +0.37		John Mason / Leigha Forrest 1.70
Etienne Black / Warren Wegener
Thomas Norman / Sireen Kenana 0.93 3–1
Thomas Norman / Delilah D'Souza 0.95 0–2		74%3–3 (50%)−1.4
3Texas A&M University
Aggies		32.34
school −0.11		Kate Hennig / Katy Heaney
Hanna Progelhof / Andrew Pool
Ryyan Amsden / Maggie Menefee		46%3–3 (50%)+0.2
4Texas A&M University at Galveston
Aggies		43.37
school −0.10		Jacob Granberry / Brett Pearson
Emma Stodghill
Joshua Richie		46%0–2 (0%)−0.9
5University of Central Oklahoma
Bronchos		50.15Catherine Bruce / Branden Mercer
Caleb Vanderburg / Jayson Raj
Peyton Miller		5%0–6 (0%)−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.

PlaceSchoolStrength Perf.RecordExp.
wins		ΔSurprise
(bits)		P(this good
or better)
1University of North Texas3.536.538–05.6≥+3.004.34%
3Texas A&M University2.342.573–32.8+0.230.060%
2University of Texas3.492.133–34.4−1.361.497%
5University of Central Oklahoma0.15-2.850–60.3≤−3.000.4>99%
4Texas A&M University at Galveston3.370.370–20.9≤−3.001.7>99%

By skipper

SkipperSchoolValue Perf.RecordExp.
wins		ΔSurprise
(bits)		P(this good
or better)
Taylor SnyderUniversity of North Texas0.893.898–05.6≥+3.004.34%
Timothy VerriereUniversity of North Texas0.053.058–05.6≥+3.004.34%
Hanna ProgelhofTexas A&M University0.911.143–32.8+0.230.060%
Ryyan AmsdenTexas A&M University0.340.573–32.8+0.230.060%
John MasonUniversity of Texas1.700.343–34.4−1.361.497%
Etienne BlackUniversity of Texas0.36-1.003–34.4−1.361.497%
Thomas NormanUniversity of Texas0.93-0.433–34.4−1.361.497%
Catherine BruceUniversity of Central Oklahoma-0.61-3.610–60.3≤−3.000.4>99%
Caleb VanderburgUniversity of Central Oklahoma-1.02-4.020–60.3≤−3.000.4>99%
Peyton MillerUniversity of Central Oklahoma1.41-1.590–60.3≤−3.000.4>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#WinnerLoser P(winner)
12University of North TexasTexas A&M University80%
14Texas A&M UniversityUniversity of Central Oklahoma92%
15University of North TexasUniversity of Texas50%
17University of North TexasUniversity of Central Oklahoma97%
18Texas A&M UniversityUniversity of Texas25%upset
19University of North TexasTexas A&M University at Galveston57%
110University of TexasUniversity of Central Oklahoma97%
211University of TexasTexas A&M University75%
212University of North TexasTexas A&M University at Galveston52%
213Texas A&M UniversityUniversity of Central Oklahoma90%
214University of North TexasUniversity of Texas51%
216University of North TexasTexas A&M University74%
218University of North TexasUniversity of Central Oklahoma96%
220University of TexasUniversity of Central Oklahoma96%

Round 1

TeamRec.GreenLonghornsAggiesAggiesBronchos
University of North Texas Mean Green4–0✕WWWW
University of Texas Longhorns2–2L✕LWW
Texas A&M University Aggies3–1LW✕WW
Texas A&M University at Galveston Aggies1–3LLL✕W
University of Central Oklahoma Bronchos0–4LLLL✕

Round 2

TeamRec.GreenLonghornsAggiesAggiesBronchos
University of North Texas Mean Green4–0✕WWWW
University of Texas Longhorns3–1L✕WWW
Texas A&M University Aggies1–3LL✕LW
Texas A&M University at Galveston Aggies2–2LLW✕W
University of Central Oklahoma Bronchos0–4LLLL✕
# Winner Loser Pos.
1 Texas A&M University at Galveston Aggies 1-2-4 def. University of Central Oklahoma Bronchos 3-5-6
2 University of North Texas Mean Green 1-3-5 def. Texas A&M University Aggies 2-4-6
3 University of Texas Longhorns 1-3-4 def. Texas A&M University at Galveston Aggies 2-5-6
4 Texas A&M University Aggies 1-2-4 def. University of Central Oklahoma Bronchos 3-5-6
5 University of North Texas Mean Green 1-2-6 def. University of Texas Longhorns 3-4-5
6 Texas A&M University Aggies 1-2-5 def. Texas A&M University at Galveston Aggies 3-4-6
7 University of North Texas Mean Green 1-2-4 def. University of Central Oklahoma Bronchos 3-5-6
8 Texas A&M University Aggies 1-3-4 def. University of Texas Longhorns 2-5-6
9 University of North Texas Mean Green 1-2-4 def. Texas A&M University at Galveston Aggies 3-5-6
10 University of Texas Longhorns 1-2-4 def. University of Central Oklahoma Bronchos 3-5-6
11 University of Texas Longhorns 1-2-3 def. Texas A&M University Aggies 4-5-6
12 University of North Texas Mean Green 1-2-3 def. Texas A&M University at Galveston Aggies 4-5-6
13 Texas A&M University Aggies 1-2-3 def. University of Central Oklahoma Bronchos 4-5-6
14 University of North Texas Mean Green 1-2-3 def. University of Texas Longhorns 4-5-6
15 Texas A&M University at Galveston Aggies 1-2-3 def. University of Central Oklahoma Bronchos 4-5-6
16 University of North Texas Mean Green 1-2-5 def. Texas A&M University Aggies 3-4-6
17 University of Texas Longhorns 2-3-4 def. Texas A&M University at Galveston Aggies 1-5-6
18 University of North Texas Mean Green 1-2-3 def. University of Central Oklahoma Bronchos 4-5-6
19 Texas A&M University at Galveston Aggies 2-3-4 def. Texas A&M University Aggies 1-5-6
20 University of Texas Longhorns 1-2-3 def. University of Central Oklahoma Bronchos 4-5-6

Conditions — 02/04/2023 (8am–6pm)

☀️Clear sky
Humidity 68%  ·  Pressure 1028.1 hPa

Temperature

51°F
↑ 62°F   ↓ 36°F
Feels like 46°F

Wind

● from   ▲ toward
7.2 kn
avg  ·  max 12.8 kn
Gusts to 21.8 kn
From SSW (196°)

Sky & Precipitation

Cloud cover37% Sunshine9.6 hrs Humidity68% Pressure1028.1 hPa

What this breeze does at Texas — from fleet racing

Breeze: S about 10 kn (weather reanalysis in the scorer’s units)
In fleet races at Texas in this breeze: a favourites’ day (+0.07)
Favourites’ conditions: in fleet racing here the results follow the ratings more closely than usual, and the top seeds hold their places.

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 ±0.07 means a rating gap counts about 6% 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 Texas by wind direction (angle) and speed (rings), fitted surface; dots are labelled regatta-days, ★ this regatta (19 labelled fleet-race days at Texas).

From the notes

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

All notes →