Navigate

Franny Charles Women's Team Race

# SchoolTeam Rec.
1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 12–0
2 Tufts University Tufts University Jumbos 2 7–5
3 Tufts University Tufts University Jumbos 1 5–7
4 University of Vermont University of Vermont Catamounts 0–12

Pre-event forecast

Fitted on the 22,415 team race matches sailed before 2024-03-09, using the line-ups that actually raced. It called 21 of 24 matches (88%) with a log-loss of 0.247 (a coin flip scores 0.693), so the event went well for the forecast. Orderliness +0.22 ± 0.34: a typical event, more orderly than 68% 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
1Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Engineers		18.53
school +0.05, home +0.39		Brooke Barry / Mercedes Escandon 1.98
Lucy Brock / Shayne Bersin 2.97
Brooke Schmelz / Samantha Karlson 3.16 8–0
Brooke Schmelz / Katherine Jankowski 3.01 4–0		91%12–0 (100%)+1.1
2Tufts University
Jumbos 2		36.15
school +0.15		Marina Garrido / Nicole Morikawa
Maisie Macgillivray / Eloise Goedkoop 2.03
Meredith Broadus / Margaret Klein 1.87		42%7–5 (58%)+2.0
3Tufts University
Jumbos 1		27.14
school +0.15		Ella Hubbard / Alessandra Torres 2.58
Haley Andreasen / Adelaide Straub 2.21
Samantha Jensen / Lilly Ladd 2.17		63%5–7 (42%)−2.6
4University of Vermont
Catamounts		43.83
school −0.28		Caitlin Derby / Alex Forrest 1.46
Jordynn Johnson / Sabina Coroi
Audrey Commerford / Lane Kaeyer 1.71		5%0–12 (0%)−0.5

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)
1Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers8.5311.5312–010.9≥+3.001.729%
2Tufts University Jumbos 26.157.377–55.0+1.221.810%
3Tufts University Jumbos 17.145.535–77.6−1.603.099%
4University of Vermont Catamounts3.830.830–120.5≤−3.000.8>99%

By skipper

SkipperSchoolValue Perf.RecordExp.
wins		ΔSurprise
(bits)		P(this good
or better)
Brooke BarryMassachusetts Institute of Technology1.984.9812–010.9≥+3.001.729%
Marina GarridoTufts University1.933.157–55.0+1.221.810%
Meredith BroadusTufts University1.873.087–55.0+1.221.810%
Haley AndreasenTufts University2.210.605–77.6−1.603.099%
Jordynn JohnsonUniversity of Vermont0.73-2.270–120.5≤−3.000.8>99%
Audrey CommerfordUniversity of Vermont1.71-1.290–120.5≤−3.000.8>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#WinnerLoser P(winner)
11Tufts University Jumbos 1Tufts University Jumbos 276%
12Massachusetts Institute of Technology EngineersUniversity of Vermont Catamounts99%
15Tufts University Jumbos 1University of Vermont Catamounts97%
16Massachusetts Institute of Technology EngineersTufts University Jumbos 292%
19Tufts University Jumbos 2University of Vermont Catamounts91%
110Massachusetts Institute of Technology EngineersTufts University Jumbos 181%
23Tufts University Jumbos 2Tufts University Jumbos 125%upset
24Massachusetts Institute of Technology EngineersUniversity of Vermont Catamounts99%
27Tufts University Jumbos 1University of Vermont Catamounts97%
28Massachusetts Institute of Technology EngineersTufts University Jumbos 292%
211Tufts University Jumbos 2University of Vermont Catamounts91%
212Massachusetts Institute of Technology EngineersTufts University Jumbos 181%
313Massachusetts Institute of Technology EngineersTufts University Jumbos 292%
314Tufts University Jumbos 1University of Vermont Catamounts96%
317Tufts University Jumbos 2Tufts University Jumbos 128%upset
318Massachusetts Institute of Technology EngineersUniversity of Vermont Catamounts99%
321Massachusetts Institute of Technology EngineersTufts University Jumbos 181%
322Tufts University Jumbos 2University of Vermont Catamounts91%
415Massachusetts Institute of Technology EngineersTufts University Jumbos 292%
416Tufts University Jumbos 1University of Vermont Catamounts96%
419Tufts University Jumbos 2Tufts University Jumbos 128%upset
420Massachusetts Institute of Technology EngineersUniversity of Vermont Catamounts99%
423Massachusetts Institute of Technology EngineersTufts University Jumbos 181%
424Tufts University Jumbos 2University of Vermont Catamounts91%

Round 1

TeamRec.Engineers21Catamounts
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers3–0✕WWW
Tufts University Jumbos 23–3L✕✕W
Tufts University Jumbos 13–3L✕✕W
University of Vermont Catamounts0–3LLL✕

Round 2

TeamRec.Engineers21Catamounts
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers3–0✕WWW
Tufts University Jumbos 23–3L✕✕W
Tufts University Jumbos 13–3L✕✕W
University of Vermont Catamounts0–3LLL✕

Round 3

TeamRec.Engineers21Catamounts
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers3–0✕WWW
Tufts University Jumbos 23–3L✕✕W
Tufts University Jumbos 13–3L✕✕W
University of Vermont Catamounts0–3LLL✕

Round 4

TeamRec.Engineers21Catamounts
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers3–0✕WWW
Tufts University Jumbos 23–3L✕✕W
Tufts University Jumbos 13–3L✕✕W
University of Vermont Catamounts0–3LLL✕
# Winner Loser Pos.
1 Tufts University Jumbos 1 1-2-6 def. Tufts University Jumbos 2 3-4-5
2 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1-2-3 def. University of Vermont Catamounts 4-5-6
5 Tufts University Jumbos 1 1-4-5 def. University of Vermont Catamounts 2-3-6
6 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1-2-5 def. Tufts University Jumbos 2 3-4-6
9 Tufts University Jumbos 2 1-2-5 def. University of Vermont Catamounts 3-4-6
10 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 2-3-4 def. Tufts University Jumbos 1 1-5-6
3 Tufts University Jumbos 2 1-3-4 def. Tufts University Jumbos 1 2-5-6
4 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1-2-5 def. University of Vermont Catamounts 3-4-6
7 Tufts University Jumbos 1 1-2-5 def. University of Vermont Catamounts 3-4-6
8 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1-2-3 def. Tufts University Jumbos 2 4-5-6
11 Tufts University Jumbos 2 1-3-6 def. University of Vermont Catamounts 2-4-5
12 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1-2-6 def. Tufts University Jumbos 1 3-4-5
13 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1-2-5 def. Tufts University Jumbos 2 3-4-6
14 Tufts University Jumbos 1 1-2-4 def. University of Vermont Catamounts 3-5-6
17 Tufts University Jumbos 2 1-5-6 def. Tufts University Jumbos 1 2-3-4 RAF
18 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1-2-3 def. University of Vermont Catamounts 4-5-6
21 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1-2-5 def. Tufts University Jumbos 1 3-4-6
22 Tufts University Jumbos 2 1-3-5 def. University of Vermont Catamounts 2-4-6
15 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1-2-4 def. Tufts University Jumbos 2 3-5-6
16 Tufts University Jumbos 1 1-2-6 def. University of Vermont Catamounts 3-4-5
19 Tufts University Jumbos 2 2-3-4 def. Tufts University Jumbos 1 1-5-6
20 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1-2-4 def. University of Vermont Catamounts 3-5-6
23 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers 1-3-4 def. Tufts University Jumbos 1 2-5-6
24 Tufts University Jumbos 2 1-2-3 def. University of Vermont Catamounts 4-5-6

Conditions — 03/09/2024 (8am–6pm)

☁️Overcast
Humidity 76%  ·  Pressure 1023.0 hPa

Temperature

39°F
↑ 42°F   ↓ 34°F
Feels like 32°F

Wind

● from   ▲ toward
7.8 kn
avg  ·  max 9.9 kn
Gusts to 18.5 kn
From SE (134°)

Sky & Precipitation

Cloud cover100% Sunshine0.0 hrs Humidity76% Pressure1023.0 hPa

What this breeze does at MIT — from fleet racing

Breeze: SE about 10 kn (weather reanalysis in the scorer’s units)
In fleet races at MIT in this breeze: a favourites’ day (+0.02)
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 ±0.02 means a rating gap counts about 2% 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 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.

All notes →