Thompson Trophy Camel

HostConnecticut College
Date04/13/2024
TypeCross Regional
BoatFJ
ScoringTeam

#	School	Team	Rec.
1	Stanford University	Cardinal	20–1
2	Harvard University	Crimson	17–4
3	Brown University	Bears	15–6
4	Boston College	Eagles	11–10
5	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Engineers	8–13
6	Tufts University	Jumbos	7–14
7	Tulane University	Green Wave	6–15
8	Connecticut College	Camels	0–21

Pre-event forecast

Fitted on the 24,326 team race matches sailed before 2024-04-13, using the line-ups that actually raced. It called 71 of 84 matches (84%) with a log-loss of 0.348 (a coin flip scores 0.693), so the event went well for the forecast. Orderliness +0.38 ± 0.21: an orderly event, more orderly than 83% 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	11.75 school +0.29	Michelle Lahrkamp / Patricia Gerli 3.83 Vanessa Lahrkamp / Gwendolyn Donahue 3.81 Thomas Sitzmann / Alice Schmid 3.80	73%	20–1 (95%)	+4.7
2	Harvard University Crimson	1	12.50 school +0.18	Justin Callahan / Aidan Pesce 4.05 Mitchell Callahan / Alexandra Dorofeev 4.01 Lachlain Mcgranahan / Marbella Marlo 4.24	87%	17–4 (81%)	−1.4
3	Brown University Bears	3	11.26 school +0.28	Guthrie Braun / Emily Mueller 3.76 Connor Nelson / Vera Allen 3.75 Leyton Borcherding / Caroline Keeffe-Jones 3.11 9–3 Liam O'Keefe / Savannah Young 3.90 6–3	66%	15–6 (71%)	+1.1
4	Boston College Eagles	4	10.66 school +0.21	Peter Busch / Lourdes Gallo 3.72 Michael Kirkman / Lily Ornstein 3.38 7–8 Jack Redmond / Kennedy Laureigh 3.37 7–8 Jack Redmond / Lily Ornstein 3.23 4–2 Peter Joslin / Kennedy Laureigh 3.32 4–2	53%	11–10 (52%)	−0.2
5	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers	5	10.29 school +0.12	Maks Groom / Ellie Pinto 3.30 Sam Bruce / Nicholas Abate 3.77 Julius Heitkoetter / Jemma Schroder 3.08	43%	8–13 (38%)	−0.9
6	Tufts University Jumbos	7	9.92 school +0.23	Ben Mueller / Henry Tindall 3.46 Wyatt Bischoff / Celia Byrne 2.82 Trevor Davis / Leo Terry 3.39	35%	7–14 (33%)	−0.4
7	Tulane University Green Wave	6	9.95 school +0.07	Hamilton Barclay / Cj Ricci 3.49 Zander King / Alex Makoid 3.17 Kelly Holthus / Gillian Perrell 3.19	37%	6–15 (29%)	−1.9
8	Connecticut College Camels	8	7.61 school +0.34, home +0.40	Charles Bresnahan / Cecilia Bohan 1.99 Ryan Mckinney / Vivian Smith 2.45 0–15 Henry Scholz / Renee Smith 2.59 0–12 Ryan Mckinney / Renee Smith 2.47 0–6 Wade Anthony / Ashley Breyer 2.30 0–6 Andrew Powers / Andrew Selian 1.84 0–3	6%	0–21 (0%)	−1.2

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)
1	Stanford University	11.75	14.12	20–1	15.3	+2.37	6.5	<1%
3	Brown University	11.26	11.60	15–6	13.9	+0.34	0.3	38%
4	Boston College	10.66	10.62	11–10	11.2	−0.04	0.0	63%
6	Tufts University	9.92	9.81	7–14	7.4	−0.11	0.0	68%
5	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	10.29	10.02	8–13	8.9	−0.26	0.2	77%
2	Harvard University	12.50	11.96	17–4	18.4	−0.54	0.6	89%
7	Tulane University	9.95	9.38	6–15	7.9	−0.57	0.7	90%
8	Connecticut College	7.61	4.61	0–21	1.2	≤−3.00	1.7	>99%

By skipper

Skipper	School	Value	Perf.	Record	Exp. wins	Δ	Surprise (bits)	P(this good or better)
Peter Joslin	Boston College	3.32	3.28	11–10	11.2	−0.04	0.0	63%
Ben Mueller	Tufts University	3.46	3.35	7–14	7.4	−0.11	0.0	68%
Ryan Mckinney	Connecticut College	2.45	-0.55	0–21	1.2	≤−3.00	1.7	>99%
Wade Anthony	Connecticut College	2.30	-0.70	0–6	0.1	≤−3.00	0.1	>99%
Charles Bresnahan	Connecticut College	1.99	-1.01	0–21	1.2	≤−3.00	1.7	>99%
Andrew Powers	Connecticut College	1.84	-1.16	0–3	0.1	≤−3.00	0.1	>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	#	Winner	Loser	P(winner)
1	1	Harvard University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	90%
1	2	Stanford University	Connecticut College	99%
1	3	Brown University	Tufts University	86%
1	4	Boston College	Tulane University	68%
1	5	Harvard University	Connecticut College	99%
1	6	Brown University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	81%
1	7	Stanford University	Tulane University	86%
1	8	Boston College	Tufts University	69%
1	9	Brown University	Connecticut College	98%
1	10	Harvard University	Tulane University	93%
1	11	Tufts University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	41%	upset
1	12	Stanford University	Boston College	74%
1	13	Brown University	Tulane University	73%
1	14	Tufts University	Connecticut College	89%
1	15	Harvard University	Stanford University	68%
1	16	Boston College	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	61%
1	17	Tufts University	Tulane University	49%	upset
1	18	Stanford University	Brown University	51%
1	19	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Connecticut College	92%
1	20	Harvard University	Boston College	86%
1	21	Stanford University	Tufts University	86%
1	22	Tulane University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	42%	upset
1	23	Brown University	Harvard University	17%	upset
1	24	Boston College	Connecticut College	94%
1	25	Stanford University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	81%
1	26	Harvard University	Tufts University	93%
1	27	Tulane University	Connecticut College	90%
1	28	Brown University	Boston College	60%
2	29	Harvard University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	90%
2	30	Stanford University	Connecticut College	99%
2	31	Brown University	Tufts University	86%
2	32	Boston College	Tulane University	68%
2	33	Harvard University	Connecticut College	99%
2	34	Brown University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	81%
2	35	Stanford University	Tulane University	86%
2	36	Boston College	Tufts University	69%
2	37	Brown University	Connecticut College	98%
2	38	Harvard University	Tulane University	93%
2	39	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Tufts University	59%
2	40	Stanford University	Boston College	74%
2	41	Brown University	Tulane University	73%
2	42	Tufts University	Connecticut College	89%
2	43	Stanford University	Harvard University	32%	upset
2	44	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Boston College	39%	upset
2	45	Tufts University	Tulane University	49%	upset
2	46	Stanford University	Brown University	51%
2	47	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Connecticut College	92%
2	48	Boston College	Harvard University	14%	upset
2	49	Stanford University	Tufts University	86%
2	50	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Tulane University	58%
2	51	Harvard University	Brown University	83%
2	52	Boston College	Connecticut College	94%
2	53	Stanford University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	81%
2	54	Harvard University	Tufts University	93%
2	55	Tulane University	Connecticut College	90%
2	56	Brown University	Boston College	60%
3	57	Harvard University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	90%
3	58	Stanford University	Connecticut College	99%
3	59	Brown University	Tufts University	86%
3	60	Tulane University	Boston College	32%	upset
3	61	Harvard University	Connecticut College	99%
3	62	Brown University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	80%
3	63	Stanford University	Tulane University	86%
3	64	Boston College	Tufts University	69%
3	65	Brown University	Connecticut College	98%
3	66	Harvard University	Tulane University	93%
3	67	Tufts University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	41%	upset
3	68	Stanford University	Boston College	74%
3	69	Brown University	Tulane University	72%
3	70	Tufts University	Connecticut College	89%
3	71	Stanford University	Harvard University	32%	upset
3	72	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Boston College	39%	upset
3	73	Tulane University	Tufts University	51%
3	74	Stanford University	Brown University	51%
3	75	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Connecticut College	92%
3	76	Harvard University	Boston College	86%
3	77	Stanford University	Tufts University	86%
3	78	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Tulane University	58%
3	79	Harvard University	Brown University	83%
3	80	Boston College	Connecticut College	94%
3	81	Stanford University	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	81%
3	82	Harvard University	Tufts University	93%
3	83	Tulane University	Connecticut College	90%
3	84	Boston College	Brown University	40%	upset

Round 1

Team	Rec.	Cardinal	Crimson	Bears	Eagles	Engineers	Jumbos	Wave	Camels
Stanford University Cardinal	6–1	✕	L	W	W	W	W	W	W
Harvard University Crimson	6–1	W	✕	L	W	W	W	W	W
Brown University Bears	6–1	L	W	✕	W	W	W	W	W
Boston College Eagles	4–3	L	L	L	✕	W	W	W	W
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers	1–6	L	L	L	L	✕	L	L	W
Tufts University Jumbos	3–4	L	L	L	L	W	✕	W	W
Tulane University Green Wave	2–5	L	L	L	L	W	L	✕	W
Connecticut College Camels	0–7	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	✕

Round 2

Team	Rec.	Cardinal	Crimson	Bears	Eagles	Engineers	Jumbos	Wave	Camels
Stanford University Cardinal	7–0	✕	W	W	W	W	W	W	W
Harvard University Crimson	5–2	L	✕	W	L	W	W	W	W
Brown University Bears	5–2	L	L	✕	W	W	W	W	W
Boston College Eagles	4–3	L	W	L	✕	L	W	W	W
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers	4–3	L	L	L	W	✕	W	W	W
Tufts University Jumbos	2–5	L	L	L	L	L	✕	W	W
Tulane University Green Wave	1–6	L	L	L	L	L	L	✕	W
Connecticut College Camels	0–7	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	✕

Round 3

Team	Rec.	Cardinal	Crimson	Bears	Eagles	Engineers	Jumbos	Wave	Camels
Stanford University Cardinal	7–0	✕	W	W	W	W	W	W	W
Harvard University Crimson	6–1	L	✕	W	W	W	W	W	W
Brown University Bears	4–3	L	L	✕	L	W	W	W	W
Boston College Eagles	3–4	L	L	W	✕	L	W	L	W
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers	3–4	L	L	L	W	✕	L	W	W
Tufts University Jumbos	2–5	L	L	L	L	W	✕	L	W
Tulane University Green Wave	3–4	L	L	L	W	L	W	✕	W
Connecticut College Camels	0–7	L	L	L	L	L	L	L	✕

Filter by team:

#					Pos.
1	Crimson	1-2-5	def.	Engineers	3-4-6
2	Cardinal	1-2-5	def.	Camels	3-4-6
3	Bears	1-2-4	def.	Jumbos	3-5-6
4	Eagles	1-2-6	def.	Green Wave	3-4-5
5	Crimson	1-2-3	def.	Camels	4-5-6
6	Bears	1-2-6	def.	Engineers	3-4-5
7	Cardinal	2-3-4	def.	Green Wave	1-5-6
8	Eagles	1-2-6	def.	Jumbos	3-4-5
9	Bears	1-2-3	def.	Camels	4-5-6
10	Crimson	1-2-5	def.	Green Wave	3-4-6
11	Jumbos	1-2-5	def.	Engineers	3-4-6
12	Cardinal	2-3-4	def.	Eagles	1-5-6
13	Bears	2-3-4	def.	Green Wave	1-5-6
14	Jumbos	1-2-5	def.	Camels	3-4-6
15	Crimson	1-2-3	def.	Cardinal	4-5-6
16	Eagles	2-3-4	def.	Engineers	1-5-6
17	Jumbos	1-2-6	def.	Green Wave	3-4-5
18	Cardinal	1-2-5	def.	Bears	3-4-6
19	Engineers	1-2-5	def.	Camels	3-4-6
20	Crimson	1-2-3	def.	Eagles	4-5-6
21	Cardinal	1-2-3	def.	Jumbos	4-5-6
22	Green Wave	1-2-6	def.	Engineers	3-4-5
23	Bears	1-3-6	def.	Crimson	2-4-5
24	Eagles	1-2-6	def.	Camels	3-4-5
25	Cardinal	1-2-5	def.	Engineers	3-4-6
26	Crimson	1-3-4	def.	Jumbos	2-5-6
27	Green Wave	1-2-5	def.	Camels	3-4-6
28	Bears	1-2-6	def.	Eagles	3-4-5
29	Crimson	2-3-4	def.	Engineers	1-5-6
30	Cardinal	1-2-3	def.	Camels	4-5-6
31	Bears	2-3-4	def.	Jumbos	1-5-6
32	Eagles	1-3-6	def.	Green Wave	2-4-5
33	Crimson	1-2-4	def.	Camels	3-5-6
34	Bears	2-3-4	def.	Engineers	1-5-6
35	Cardinal	1-2-3	def.	Green Wave	4-5-6
36	Eagles	1-2-4	def.	Jumbos	3-5-6
37	Bears	1-2-6	def.	Camels	3-4-5
38	Crimson	1-2-5	def.	Green Wave	3-4-6
39	Engineers	1-2-6	def.	Jumbos	3-4-5
40	Cardinal	1-3-4	def.	Eagles	2-5-6
41	Bears	1-2-4	def.	Green Wave	3-5-6
42	Jumbos	1-2-3	def.	Camels	4-5-6
43	Cardinal	1-2-4	def.	Crimson	3-5-6
44	Engineers	1-3-6	def.	Eagles	2-4-5
45	Jumbos	1-2-6	def.	Green Wave	3-4-5
46	Cardinal	1-2-6	def.	Bears	3-4-5
47	Engineers	1-2-4	def.	Camels	3-5-6
48	Eagles	1-2-6	def.	Crimson	3-4-5
49	Cardinal	1-4-5	def.	Jumbos	2-3-6
50	Engineers	1-3-4	def.	Green Wave	2-5-6
51	Crimson	2-3-5	def.	Bears	1-4-6
52	Eagles	1-2-4	def.	Camels	3-5-6
53	Cardinal	1-2-3	def.	Engineers	4-5-6
54	Crimson	1-2-3	def.	Jumbos	4-5-6
55	Green Wave	1-2-5	def.	Camels	3-4-6
56	Bears	1-2-5	def.	Eagles	3-4-6
57	Crimson	1-2-5	def.	Engineers	3-4-6
58	Cardinal	1-2-5	def.	Camels	3-4-6
59	Bears	1-2-4	def.	Jumbos	3-5-6
60	Green Wave	1-3-5	def.	Eagles	2-4-6
61	Crimson	1-2-3	def.	Camels	4-5-6
62	Bears	2-3-4	def.	Engineers	1-5-6
63	Cardinal	1-2-3	def.	Green Wave	4-5-6
64	Eagles	1-2-4	def.	Jumbos	3-5-6
65	Bears	1-2-5	def.	Camels	3-4-6
66	Crimson	1-2-3	def.	Green Wave	4-5-6
67	Jumbos	2-3-4	def.	Engineers	1-5-6
68	Cardinal	1-2-5	def.	Eagles	3-4-6
69	Bears	1-2-4	def.	Green Wave	3-5-6
70	Jumbos	1-2-3	def.	Camels	4-5-6
71	Cardinal	1-3-6	def.	Crimson	2-4-5
72	Engineers	1-2-5	def.	Eagles	3-4-6
73	Green Wave	1-2-6	def.	Jumbos	3-4-5
74	Cardinal	1-2-4	def.	Bears	3-5-6
75	Engineers	1-2-3	def.	Camels	4-5-6
76	Crimson	1-2-4	def.	Eagles	3-5-6
77	Cardinal	1-2-4	def.	Jumbos	3-5-6
78	Engineers	2-3-5	def.	Green Wave	1-4-6
79	Crimson	1-2-5	def.	Bears	3-4-6
80	Eagles	1-2-4	def.	Camels	3-5-6
81	Cardinal	2-3-4	def.	Engineers	1-5-6
82	Crimson	1-2-3	def.	Jumbos	4-5-6
83	Green Wave	2-3-4	def.	Camels	1-5-6
84	Eagles	1-2-3	def.	Bears	4-5-6

School	Team	Skippers	Crew
Stanford University	Cardinal	Michelle Lahrkamp '23 Thomas Sitzmann '27 Vanessa Lahrkamp '26	Patricia Gerli '23 Alice Schmid '27 Gwendolyn Donahue '24
Harvard University	Crimson	Justin Callahan '26 Lachlain Mcgranahan '24 Mitchell Callahan '26	Aidan Pesce '26 Marbella Marlo '24 Alexandra Dorofeev '25
Brown University	Bears	Connor Nelson '24 Guthrie Braun '26 Leyton Borcherding '25 Liam O'Keefe '26	Vera Allen '27 Emily Mueller '25 Caroline Keeffe-Jones '26 Savannah Young '25
Boston College	Eagles	Jack Redmond '26 Michael Kirkman '25 Peter Busch '26 Peter Joslin '26	Kennedy Laureigh '26 Lily Ornstein '26 Lourdes Gallo '24
Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Engineers	Julius Heitkoetter '25 Maks Groom '24 Sam Bruce '24	Jemma Schroder '24 Ellie Pinto '27 Nicholas Abate '25
Tufts University	Jumbos	Ben Mueller '26 Trevor Davis '24 Wyatt Bischoff '27	Henry Tindall '25 Leo Terry '25 Celia Byrne '24
Tulane University	Green Wave	Hamilton Barclay '27 Kelly Holthus '27 Zander King '25	Cj Ricci '25 Gillian Perrell '24 Alex Makoid '25
Connecticut College	Camels	Andrew Powers '24 Charles Bresnahan '24 Henry Scholz '27 Ryan Mckinney '24 Wade Anthony '24	Andrew Selian '27 Cecilia Bohan '24 Renee Smith '24 Vivian Smith '27 Ashley Breyer '24

Conditions — 04/13/2024 (8am–6pm)

☁️Overcast

Humidity 58% · Pressure 1000.4 hPa

Temperature

50°F

↑ 52°F ↓ 47°F

Feels like 40°F

Wind

● from ▲ toward

13.6 kn

avg · max 15.0 kn

Gusts to 30.3 kn

From W (268°)

Sky & Precipitation

Cloud cover89% Sunshine6.0 hrs Humidity58% Pressure1000.4 hPa Rain0.03 in

What this breeze does at Connecticut College — from fleet racing

Breeze: W about 15 kn (weather reanalysis in the scorer’s units)

In fleet races at Connecticut College in this breeze: a typical day (−0.01)

Nothing in this breeze favours either side in fleet racing here: results follow the ratings about as 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 ±0.01 means a rating gap counts about 1% 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 Connecticut College by wind direction (angle) and speed (rings), fitted surface; dots are labelled regatta-days, ★ this regatta (51 labelled fleet-race days at Connecticut College).

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