McCarthy Cup

# SchoolTeam Rec.
1 University of Texas University of Texas Longhorns 4–2
2 Texas A&M University at Galveston Texas A&M University at Galveston Sea Aggies 2–4
3 Rice University Rice University Owls 2–4
3 Texas A&M University Texas A&M University Aggies 2–4

Pre-event forecast

Fitted on the 28,606 team race matches sailed before 2026-03-07, using the line-ups that actually raced. It called 5 of 8 matches (62%) with a log-loss of 0.694 (a coin flip scores 0.693), so the event went poorly for the forecast. 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 Texas
Longhorns
13.98
school −0.20, home +0.36
Matias Martin / Reema Nannapaneni 2.27 1–1
Logan Downey / Eric Li 1.28 1–1
Dennis Kostjuhin / Ria Chhabra 0.50 1–1
Matias Martin / Kate Lyon 2.17 2–0
Elizabeth Cleaves / Reema Nannapaneni 0.80 2–0
Dennis Kostjuhin / Eric Li 0.53 2–0
86%3–1 (75%)−0.5
2Texas A&M University at Galveston
Sea Aggies
22.25
school −0.08
Blake Polsen / Jake Boss
Ethan Polsen / Colton Oliver 1.18
Macie Bettis / Evelyn Chase 0.00
54%1–1 (50%)−0.1
3Rice University
Owls
32.14
school −0.05
Lewis Forrest / Clara Beinhocker 0.79
Leo Marek / Naayaa Mehta 0.71
Oliver Zhu / Lindsey Frost
39%2–4 (33%)−0.4
3Texas A&M University
Aggies
42.02
school −0.17
Korbin Bendele / Menya Bird 1.98
Canaan Cortes / Elisabeth Ritenour -0.40
Drew Gourley / Jeffrey Souto 0.59 1–1
Drew Gourley / Jacob Sadler 0.54 1–1
28%2–2 (50%)+0.9

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)
3Texas A&M University2.023.222–21.1+1.200.831%
2Texas A&M University at Galveston2.252.121–11.1−0.130.078%
3Rice University2.141.852–42.4−0.290.177%
1University of Texas3.983.213–13.5−0.780.391%

By skipper

SkipperSchoolValue Perf.RecordExp.
wins
ΔSurprise
(bits)
P(this good
or better)
Korbin BendeleTexas A&M University1.983.182–21.1+1.200.831%
Drew GourleyTexas A&M University0.591.792–21.1+1.200.831%
Canaan CortesTexas A&M University-0.400.802–21.1+1.200.831%
Lewis ForrestRice University0.790.502–42.4−0.290.177%
Leo MarekRice University0.710.432–42.4−0.290.177%
Oliver ZhuRice University0.600.312–42.4−0.290.177%
Matias MartinUniversity of Texas2.271.493–13.5−0.780.391%
Dennis KostjuhinUniversity of Texas0.50-0.283–13.5−0.780.391%

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)
11Texas A&M UniversityUniversity of Texas10%upset
12Texas A&M University at GalvestonRice University54%
14University of TexasRice University83%
16Texas A&M UniversityRice University46%upset
28University of TexasRice University83%
29University of TexasTexas A&M University91%
210Rice UniversityTexas A&M University at Galveston47%upset
212Rice UniversityTexas A&M University54%

Round 1

TeamRec.LonghornsAggiesOwlsAggies
University of Texas Longhorns1–2✕LWL
Texas A&M University at Galveston Sea Aggies3–0W✕WW
Rice University Owls0–3LL✕L
Texas A&M University Aggies2–1WLW✕

Round 2

TeamRec.LonghornsAggiesOwlsAggies
University of Texas Longhorns3–0✕WWW
Texas A&M University at Galveston Sea Aggies1–2L✕LW
Rice University Owls2–1LW✕W
Texas A&M University Aggies0–3LLL✕
# Winner Loser Pos.
1 Texas A&M University Aggies 1-2-3 def. University of Texas Longhorns 4-5-6
2 Texas A&M University at Galveston Sea Aggies 1-2-6 def. Rice University Owls 3-4-5
3 Texas A&M University at Galveston Sea Aggies 1-2-5 def. Texas A&M University Aggies 3-4-6
4 University of Texas Longhorns 1-3-5 def. Rice University Owls 2-4-6
5 Texas A&M University at Galveston Sea Aggies 2-3-5 def. University of Texas Longhorns 1-4-6
6 Texas A&M University Aggies 2-3-4 def. Rice University Owls 1-5-6
7 Texas A&M University at Galveston Sea Aggies 1-2-5 def. Texas A&M University Aggies 3-4-6
8 University of Texas Longhorns 1-2-6 def. Rice University Owls 3-4-5
9 University of Texas Longhorns 1-2-3 def. Texas A&M University Aggies 4-5-6
10 Rice University Owls 1-2-6 def. Texas A&M University at Galveston Sea Aggies 3-4-5
11 University of Texas Longhorns 1-2-4 def. Texas A&M University at Galveston Sea Aggies 3-5-6
12 Rice University Owls 1-2-6 def. Texas A&M University Aggies 3-4-5

Conditions — 03/07/2026 (8am–6pm)

☁️Overcast
Humidity 80%  ·  Pressure 1014.7 hPa

Temperature

69°F
↑ 77°F   ↓ 60°F
Feels like 68°F

Wind

● from   ▲ toward
10.0 kn
avg  ·  max 12.8 kn
Gusts to 26.8 kn
From SE (143°)

Sky & Precipitation

Cloud cover87% Sunshine4.0 hrs Humidity80% Pressure1014.7 hPa Rain0.92 in

What this breeze does at Texas — from fleet racing

Breeze: SE about 12 kn (weather reanalysis in the scorer’s units)
In fleet races at Texas in this breeze: a favourites’ day (+0.08)
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 ±0.08 means a rating gap counts about 7% 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 →