| # | School | Team | Rec. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | University of Rhode Island | Rams 2 | 9–3 | |
| 2 | University of Rhode Island | Rams 1 | 9–3 | |
| 3 | Salve Regina University | Seahawks | 7–5 | |
| 4 | Tufts University | Jumbos | 6–6 | |
| 5 | University of Vermont | Catamounts | 5–7 | |
| 6 | Roger Williams University | Hawks | 4–8 | |
| 7 | U. S. Coast Guard Academy | Bears | 2–10 |
Each side is the sum of its three boats (the skipper's fleet rating times 0.72 plus a team race offset learned from their past matches, plus the crew's offset and a small experience term) plus the school's team race strength and a home-water edge for the host. The win probability is a logistic function of the difference. The forecast was made before the event: the model was refitted on every match sailed before the first day, with fleet ratings as of the week before.
Fitted on the 19,442 team race matches sailed before 2023-03-11, using the line-ups that actually raced. It called 28 of 42 matches (67%) with a log-loss of 0.660 (a coin flip scores 0.693), so the event went poorly for the forecast. Orderliness −0.54 ± 0.33: an upset-heavy event, more orderly than 9% 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.
For each side, the performance strength is the value that would have made its record least surprising: the strength at which the model's expected wins over exactly these opponents equal the actual wins, with every opponent fixed at its pre-event strength. For a skipper, the same shift is applied only to their boat in the matches they sailed, with team-mates and opponents fixed; team-mates who sailed every match together therefore get the same number. Surprise is in bits: -log2 of the probability of the record at the pre-event strength minus the same at the performance strength. P(this good or better) treats matches as independent coin flips at the model's pre-event probabilities, so it ignores form within the day; read it as a rough guide.
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 Rams 2 | 6.39 | 7.77 | 9–3 | 6.0 | +1.38 | 2.8 | 5% |
| 3 | Salve Regina University Seahawks | 5.89 | 6.89 | 7–5 | 4.5 | +1.00 | 1.8 | 10% |
| 5 | University of Vermont Catamounts | 5.72 | 6.12 | 5–7 | 4.0 | +0.40 | 0.3 | 37% |
| 6 | Roger Williams University Hawks | 6.06 | 5.62 | 4–8 | 5.1 | −0.44 | 0.3 | 84% |
| 7 | U. S. Coast Guard Academy Bears | 5.51 | 4.75 | 2–10 | 3.5 | −0.77 | 0.8 | 91% |
| 4 | Tufts University Jumbos | 7.16 | 6.24 | 6–6 | 8.2 | −0.92 | 1.5 | 96% |
| 2 | University of Rhode Island Rams 1 | 8.37 | 7.27 | 9–3 | 10.7 | −1.10 | 1.5 | 97% |
| Skipper | School | Value | Perf. | Record | Exp. wins | Δ | Surprise (bits) | P(this good or better) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nils Tullberg | Salve Regina University | 2.25 | 3.25 | 7–5 | 4.5 | +1.00 | 1.8 | 10% |
| Emil Tullberg | Salve Regina University | 2.24 | 3.24 | 7–5 | 4.5 | +1.00 | 1.8 | 10% |
| Olivia Lowthian | Salve Regina University | 1.35 | 2.35 | 7–5 | 4.5 | +1.00 | 1.8 | 10% |
| Charles Morris | University of Vermont | 1.53 | 1.73 | 2–4 | 1.8 | +0.20 | 0.0 | 59% |
| Drew Mastovsky | Roger Williams University | 1.82 | 1.38 | 4–8 | 5.1 | −0.44 | 0.3 | 84% |
| Conneely Julia | U. S. Coast Guard Academy | 1.69 | 0.92 | 2–10 | 3.5 | −0.77 | 0.8 | 91% |
| Luke Zylinski | U. S. Coast Guard Academy | 1.81 | 1.05 | 2–10 | 3.5 | −0.77 | 0.8 | 91% |
| Bradley Whiteway | U. S. Coast Guard Academy | 1.67 | 0.91 | 2–10 | 3.5 | −0.77 | 0.8 | 91% |
| Connor Rosow | Tufts University | 2.30 | 1.38 | 6–6 | 8.2 | −0.92 | 1.5 | 96% |
| Shea Smith | Tufts University | 2.27 | 1.35 | 6–6 | 8.2 | −0.92 | 1.5 | 96% |
| Kerem Erkmen | University of Rhode Island | 3.16 | 2.06 | 9–3 | 10.7 | −1.10 | 1.5 | 97% |
| Joshua Bartoszuk | University of Rhode Island | 2.63 | 1.54 | 9–3 | 10.7 | −1.10 | 1.5 | 97% |
Probability the model gave the side that went on to win. Red bars are upsets (the winner was given under 50%).
| Team | Rec. | 2 | 1 | Seahawks | Jumbos | Catamounts | Hawks | Bears | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| University of Rhode Island Rams 2 | 9–3 | ✕ | ✕ | L | W | W | W | W | |
| University of Rhode Island Rams 1 | 9–3 | ✕ | ✕ | L | W | W | W | W | |
| Salve Regina University Seahawks | 3–3 | W | W | ✕ | L | L | L | W | |
| Tufts University Jumbos | 3–3 | L | L | W | ✕ | W | L | W | |
| University of Vermont Catamounts | 2–4 | L | L | W | L | ✕ | L | W | |
| Roger Williams University Hawks | 3–3 | L | L | W | W | W | ✕ | L | |
| U. S. Coast Guard Academy Bears | 1–5 | L | L | L | L | L | W | ✕ |
| Team | Rec. | 2 | 1 | Seahawks | Jumbos | Catamounts | Hawks | Bears | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| University of Rhode Island Rams 2 | 9–3 | ✕ | ✕ | W | W | W | W | W | |
| University of Rhode Island Rams 1 | 9–3 | ✕ | ✕ | W | W | W | W | W | |
| Salve Regina University Seahawks | 4–2 | L | L | ✕ | W | W | L | W | |
| Tufts University Jumbos | 3–3 | L | L | L | ✕ | W | W | W | |
| University of Vermont Catamounts | 3–3 | L | L | L | L | ✕ | W | W | |
| Roger Williams University Hawks | 1–5 | L | L | W | L | L | ✕ | L | |
| U. S. Coast Guard Academy Bears | 1–5 | L | L | L | L | L | W | ✕ |
| # | Winner | Loser | Pos. | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Jumbos | 1-2-6 | def. | Seahawks | 3-4-5 | ||
| 2 | Rams 1 | 1-2-4 | def. | Hawks | 3-5-6 | ||
| 3 | Rams 2 | 1-2-6 | def. | Bears | 3-4-5 | ||
| 4 | Catamounts | 2-3-5 | def. | Seahawks | 1-4-6 | ||
| 5 | Hawks | 2-3-4 | def. | Jumbos | 1-5-6 | ||
| 6 | Rams 1 | 1-2-3 | def. | Bears | 4-5-6 | ||
| 7 | Rams 2 | 1-2-3 | def. | Catamounts | 4-5-6 | ||
| 8 | Hawks | 1-2-6 | def. | Seahawks | 3-4-5 | ||
| 9 | Jumbos | 2-3-4 | def. | Bears | 1-5-6 | ||
| 10 | Rams 2 | 1-3-6 | def. | Rams 1 | 2-4-5 | ||
| 11 | Hawks | 1-3-6 | def. | Catamounts | 2-4-5 | ||
| 12 | Seahawks | 1-2-6 | def. | Bears | 3-4-5 | ||
| 13 | Rams 2 | 1-2-6 | def. | Jumbos | 3-4-5 | ||
| 14 | Rams 1 | 1-2-4 | def. | Catamounts | 3-5-6 | ||
| 15 | Bears | 1-2-4 | def. | Hawks | 3-5-6 | ||
| 16 | Seahawks | 1-3-4 | def. | Rams 2 | 2-5-6 | ||
| 17 | Rams 1 | 1-2-4 | def. | Jumbos | 3-5-6 | ||
| 18 | Catamounts | 2-3-4 | def. | Bears | 1-5-6 | ||
| 19 | Rams 2 | 1-2-3 | def. | Hawks | 4-5-6 | ||
| 20 | Seahawks | 2-3-4 | def. | Rams 1 | 1-5-6 | ||
| 21 | Jumbos | 1-2-4 | def. | Catamounts | 3-5-6 | ||
| 22 | Seahawks | 2-3-4 | def. | Jumbos | 1-5-6 | ||
| 23 | Rams 1 | 1-3-4 | def. | Hawks | 2-5-6 | ||
| 24 | Rams 2 | 1-3-5 | def. | Bears | 2-4-6 | ||
| 25 | Seahawks | 1-2-6 | def. | Catamounts | 3-4-5 | ||
| 26 | Jumbos | 2-3-4 | def. | Hawks | 1-5-6 | ||
| 27 | Rams 1 | 1-2-4 | def. | Bears | 3-5-6 | ||
| 28 | Catamounts | 1-2-6 | def. | Rams 2 | 3-4-5 | ||
| 29 | Hawks | 1-2-5 | def. | Seahawks | 3-4-6 | ||
| 30 | Jumbos | 2-3-4 | def. | Bears | 1-5-6 | ||
| 31 | Rams 2 | 1-5-6 | def. | Rams 1 | 2-3-4 DSQ,DSQ,DSQ | ||
| 32 | Catamounts | 1-2-3 | def. | Hawks | 4-5-6 | ||
| 33 | Seahawks | 1-3-6 | def. | Bears | 2-4-5 | ||
| 34 | Rams 2 | 1-2-5 | def. | Jumbos | 3-4-6 | ||
| 35 | Rams 1 | 1-2-6 | def. | Catamounts | 3-4-5 | ||
| 36 | Bears | 1-2-6 | def. | Hawks | 3-4-5 | ||
| 37 | Seahawks | 1-2-4 | def. | Rams 2 | 3-5-6 | ||
| 38 | Rams 1 | 1-3-4 | def. | Jumbos | 2-5-6 | ||
| 39 | Catamounts | 1-3-4 | def. | Bears | 2-5-6 | ||
| 40 | Rams 2 | 1-3-6 | def. | Hawks | 2-4-5 | ||
| 41 | Rams 1 | 1-2-6 | def. | Seahawks | 3-4-5 | ||
| 42 | Jumbos | 1-2-5 | def. | Catamounts | 3-4-6 | ||
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% 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.
Short write-ups of what the ratings and results show, with the numbers and how they were computed.