| # | School | Team | Rec. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |  |
Jacksonville University | Fins | 11–1 |
| 2 |  |
North Carolina State University | Wolfpack | 10–2 |
| 3 |  |
Eckerd College | Tritons | 9–3 |
| 4 |  |
The Citadel | Bulldogs | 6–6 |
| 5 |  |
Rollins College | Tars | 3–9 |
| 6 |  |
Florida Institute of Technology | Panthers | 3–9 |
| 7 |  |
Embry-Riddle University | Eagles | 0–12 |
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 36 of 42 matches (86%) with a log-loss of 0.286 (a coin flip scores 0.693), so the event went well for the forecast. Orderliness −0.09 ± 0.29: a typical event, more orderly than 33% 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | Rollins College | 0.99 | 2.93 | 3–9 | 1.4 | +1.94 | 2.4 | 8% |
| 4 | The Citadel | 3.59 | 4.88 | 6–6 | 4.7 | +1.29 | 1.3 | 18% |
| 2 | North Carolina State University | 6.24 | 7.42 | 10–2 | 8.7 | +1.18 | 1.1 | 20% |
| 1 | Jacksonville University | 7.20 | 7.60 | 11–1 | 10.6 | +0.40 | 0.1 | 59% |
| 3 | Eckerd College | 7.02 | 6.22 | 9–3 | 9.9 | −0.80 | 0.5 | 92% |
| 6 | Florida Institute of Technology | 4.29 | 1.54 | 3–9 | 5.7 | −2.75 | 5.5 | >99% |
| 7 | Embry-Riddle University | 0.57 | -2.43 | 0–12 | 1.0 | ≤−3.00 | 1.6 | >99% |
| Skipper | School | Value | Perf. | Record | Exp. wins | Δ | Surprise (bits) | P(this good or better) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jackson Mcgeough | Rollins College | 0.89 | 2.83 | 3–9 | 1.4 | +1.94 | 2.4 | 8% |
| Julian Drake | Rollins College | -0.13 | 1.81 | 3–9 | 1.4 | +1.94 | 2.4 | 8% |
| Gregory Walters | The Citadel | 1.41 | 2.71 | 6–6 | 4.7 | +1.29 | 1.3 | 18% |
| Kenneth Buck | The Citadel | 1.02 | 2.31 | 6–6 | 4.7 | +1.29 | 1.3 | 18% |
| Henry Parker | The Citadel | 0.29 | 1.59 | 6–6 | 4.7 | +1.29 | 1.3 | 18% |
| Isabella Du Plessis | North Carolina State University | 1.99 | 3.17 | 10–2 | 8.7 | +1.18 | 1.1 | 20% |
| Matthew Monts | Eckerd College | 2.32 | 1.52 | 9–3 | 9.9 | −0.80 | 0.5 | 92% |
| Brendan Smucker | Florida Institute of Technology | 1.78 | -0.97 | 3–9 | 5.7 | −2.75 | 5.5 | >99% |
| Brandon Depalma | Florida Institute of Technology | 1.01 | -1.74 | 3–9 | 5.7 | −2.75 | 5.5 | >99% |
| Zechariah Frantz | Embry-Riddle University | 0.61 | -2.39 | 0–12 | 1.0 | ≤−3.00 | 1.6 | >99% |
| Andrew Lam | Embry-Riddle University | 0.50 | -2.50 | 0–12 | 1.0 | ≤−3.00 | 1.6 | >99% |
| Venesh Pershaud | Embry-Riddle University | -0.62 | -3.62 | 0–12 | 1.0 | ≤−3.00 | 1.6 | >99% |
Probability the model gave the side that went on to win. Red bars are upsets (the winner was given under 50%).
| Team | Rec. | Fins | Wolfpack | Tritons | Bulldogs | Tars | Panthers | Eagles | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jacksonville University Fins | 6–0 | ✕ | W | W | W | W | W | W |
| North Carolina State University Wolfpack | 5–1 | L | ✕ | W | W | W | W | W |
| Eckerd College Tritons | 4–2 | L | L | ✕ | W | W | W | W |
| The Citadel Bulldogs | 3–3 | L | L | L | ✕ | W | W | W |
| Rollins College Tars | 1–5 | L | L | L | L | ✕ | L | W |
| Florida Institute of Technology Panthers | 2–4 | L | L | L | L | W | ✕ | W |
| Embry-Riddle University Eagles | 0–6 | L | L | L | L | L | L | ✕ |
| Team | Rec. | Fins | Wolfpack | Tritons | Bulldogs | Tars | Panthers | Eagles | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jacksonville University Fins | 5–1 | ✕ | W | L | W | W | W | W |
| North Carolina State University Wolfpack | 5–1 | L | ✕ | W | W | W | W | W |
| Eckerd College Tritons | 5–1 | W | L | ✕ | W | W | W | W |
| The Citadel Bulldogs | 3–3 | L | L | L | ✕ | W | W | W |
| Rollins College Tars | 2–4 | L | L | L | L | ✕ | W | W |
| Florida Institute of Technology Panthers | 1–5 | L | L | L | L | L | ✕ | W |
| Embry-Riddle University Eagles | 0–6 | L | L | L | L | L | L | ✕ |
| # | Winner | Loser | Pos. | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | |
Fins | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Tars | 4-5-6 |
| 2 | |
Tritons | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Eagles | 4-5-6 |
| 3 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Panthers | 3-5-6 |
| 4 | |
Fins | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Bulldogs | 3-5-6 |
| 5 | |
Tritons | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Tars | 3-5-6 |
| 6 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Eagles | 4-5-6 |
| 7 | |
Bulldogs | 1-2-6 | def. | |
Panthers | 3-4-5 |
| 8 | |
Fins | 1-3-5 | def. | |
Tritons | 2-4-6 |
| 9 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Tars | 3-5-6 |
| 10 | |
Panthers | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Eagles | 4-5-6 |
| 11 | |
Tritons | 1-2-5 | def. | |
Bulldogs | 3-4-6 |
| 12 | |
Fins | 1-2-5 | def. | |
Wolfpack | 3-4-6 |
| 13 | |
Panthers | 2-3-5 | def. | |
Tars | 1-4-6 |
| 14 | |
Bulldogs | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Eagles | 4-5-6 |
| 15 | |
Wolfpack | 1-3-6 | def. | |
Tritons | 2-4-5 |
| 16 | |
Fins | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Panthers | 3-5-6 |
| 17 | |
Tars | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Eagles | 3-5-6 |
| 18 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Bulldogs | 3-5-6 |
| 19 | |
Tritons | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Panthers | 3-5-6 |
| 20 | |
Fins | 1-2-5 | def. | |
Eagles | 3-4-6 |
| 21 | |
Bulldogs | 1-2-6 | def. | |
Tars | 3-4-5 |
| 22 | |
Fins | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Tars | 3-5-6 |
| 23 | |
Tritons | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Eagles | 4-5-6 |
| 24 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Panthers | 3-5-6 |
| 25 | |
Fins | 2-3-4 | def. | |
Bulldogs | 1-5-6 |
| 26 | |
Tritons | 1-2-5 | def. | |
Tars | 3-4-6 |
| 27 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Eagles | 4-5-6 OCS |
| 28 | |
Bulldogs | 1-4-5 | def. | |
Panthers | 2-3-6 |
| 29 | |
Tritons | 2-3-4 | def. | |
Fins | 1-5-6 |
| 30 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Tars | 4-5-6 |
| 31 | |
Panthers | 1-4-5 | def. | |
Eagles | 2-3-6 |
| 32 | |
Tritons | 1-3-5 | def. | |
Bulldogs | 2-4-6 |
| 33 | |
Fins | 1-2-6 | def. | |
Wolfpack | 3-4-5 |
| 34 | |
Tars | 1-3-5 | def. | |
Panthers | 2-4-6 |
| 35 | |
Bulldogs | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Eagles | 3-5-6 |
| 36 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Tritons | 3-5-6 |
| 37 | |
Fins | 1-2-5 | def. | |
Panthers | 3-4-6 |
| 38 | |
Tars | 1-3-6 | def. | |
Eagles | 2-4-5 |
| 39 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Bulldogs | 4-5-6 |
| 40 | |
Tritons | 1-3-4 | def. | |
Panthers | 2-5-6 |
| 41 | |
Fins | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Eagles | 4-5-6 |
| 42 | |
Bulldogs | 1-4-5 | def. | |
Tars | 2-3-6 |
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 ±0.01 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.
Short write-ups of what the ratings and results show, with the numbers and how they were computed.
