| # | School | Team | Rec. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |  |
Lake Forest High School | Scouts | 11–2 |
| 2 |  |
Walter Payton College Preparatory High School | Grizzlies | 10–3 |
| 3 |  |
Latin School of Chicago | Romans | 9–4 |
| 4 |  |
Saint Ignatius College Prep, Chicago, IL | Wolfpack | 9–4 |
| 5 |  |
Evanston Township HS | Wildkits | 5–8 |
| 6 |  |
Jones College Prep | Eagles | 3–10 |
| 7 |  |
New Trier HS | Trevian | 4–6 |
| 8 |  |
University of Chicago Laboratory Schools | Maroons | 2–8 |
| 9 |  |
Lane Tech College Prep | Varsity | 1–9 |
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 7,005 team race matches sailed before 2021-04-10, using the line-ups that actually raced. It called 41 of 55 matches (74%) with a log-loss of 0.556 (a coin flip scores 0.693), so the event went about as expected for the forecast. Orderliness −0.12 ± 0.35: a typical event, more orderly than 33% of high school 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | Walter Payton College Preparatory High School | 3.99 | 5.32 | 10–3 | 7.4 | +1.33 | 1.8 | 10% |
| 3 | Latin School of Chicago | 3.76 | 5.01 | 10–4 | 7.3 | +1.25 | 1.9 | 10% |
| 4 | Saint Ignatius College Prep, Chicago, IL | 3.90 | 4.54 | 9–5 | 7.6 | +0.64 | 0.5 | 29% |
| 5 | Evanston Township HS | 2.51 | 3.05 | 5–8 | 3.9 | +0.55 | 0.3 | 34% |
| 7 | New Trier HS | 2.69 | 2.86 | 4–6 | 3.7 | +0.17 | 0.0 | 55% |
| 1 | Lake Forest High School | 5.68 | 5.70 | 11–2 | 11.0 | +0.02 | 0.0 | 67% |
| 9 | Lane Tech College Prep | 1.69 | 0.56 | 1–9 | 2.0 | −1.13 | 0.6 | 91% |
| 6 | Jones College Prep | 3.22 | 1.84 | 3–10 | 5.7 | −1.38 | 2.0 | 98% |
| 8 | University of Chicago Laboratory Schools | 4.09 | 1.20 | 2–8 | 6.4 | −2.90 | 6.9 | >99% |
| Skipper | School | Value | Perf. | Record | Exp. wins | Δ | Surprise (bits) | P(this good or better) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mike Wissink | Latin School of Chicago | 1.33 | 2.58 | 10–4 | 7.3 | +1.25 | 1.9 | 10% |
| Wyatt Harley | Walter Payton College Preparatory High School | 1.35 | 2.34 | 8–3 | 6.4 | +0.98 | 0.9 | 23% |
| George Barton | New Trier HS | 1.13 | 1.84 | 2–3 | 1.4 | +0.71 | 0.2 | 44% |
| Charlie Gish | Lake Forest High School | 2.15 | 2.17 | 11–2 | 11.0 | +0.02 | 0.0 | 67% |
| Audra Spokas-Jaros | Lane Tech College Prep | 0.03 | -1.10 | 1–9 | 2.0 | −1.13 | 0.6 | 91% |
| Benny Wild | University of Chicago Laboratory Schools | 1.30 | -1.60 | 2–8 | 6.4 | −2.90 | 6.9 | >99% |
| David Ren | University of Chicago Laboratory Schools | 1.29 | -1.61 | 2–8 | 6.4 | −2.90 | 6.9 | >99% |
Probability the model gave the side that went on to win. Red bars are upsets (the winner was given under 50%).
| # | Winner | Loser | Pos. | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | |
Wolfpack | 1-3-4 | def. | |
Wildkits | 2-5-6 |
| 2 | |
Eagles | 1-2-5 | def. | |
Trevian | 3-4-6 |
| 3 | |
Romans | 2-3-5 | def. | |
Scouts | 1-4-6 |
| 4 | |
Grizzlies | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Varsity | 4-5-6 |
| 5 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-5 | def. | |
Maroons | 3-4-6 |
| 6 | |
Romans | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Wildkits | 4-5-6 |
| 7 | |
Eagles | 2-3-4 | def. | |
Varsity | 1-5-6 |
| 8 | |
Scouts | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Grizzlies | 4-5-6 |
| 9 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Trevian | 3-5-6 |
| 10 | |
Romans | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Maroons | 3-5-6 |
| 11 | |
Scouts | 1-2-5 | def. | |
Wildkits | 3-4-6 |
| 12 | |
Grizzlies | 1-2-6 | def. | |
Eagles | 3-4-5 |
| 13 | |
Romans | 1-2-6 | def. | |
Trevian | 3-4-5 |
| 14 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Varsity | 4-5-6 |
| 15 | |
Scouts | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Maroons | 4-5-6 |
| 16 | |
Grizzlies | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Wildkits | 3-5-6 |
| 17 | |
Romans | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Varsity | 4-5-6 |
| 18 | |
Scouts | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Trevian | 3-5-6 |
| 19 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-5 | def. | |
Eagles | 3-4-6 |
| 20 | |
Wildkits | 1-4-5 | def. | |
Maroons | 2-3-6 |
| 21 | |
Scouts | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Varsity | 4-5-6 |
| 22 | |
Romans | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Eagles | 4-5-6 |
| 23 | |
Wildkits | 1-2-5 | def. | |
Trevian | 3-4-6 |
| 24 | |
Grizzlies | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Maroons | 4-5-6 |
| 25 | |
Scouts | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Eagles | 4-5-6 |
| 26 | |
Wildkits | 2-3-4 | def. | |
Varsity | 1-5-6 |
| 27 | |
Trevian | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Maroons | 4-5-6 |
| 28 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Grizzlies | 3-5-6 |
| 29 | |
Eagles | 1-2-5 | def. | |
Wildkits | 3-4-6 |
| 30 | |
Maroons | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Varsity | 3-5-6 |
| 31 | |
Romans | 1-3-5 | def. | |
Wolfpack | 2-4-6 |
| 32 | |
Grizzlies | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Trevian | 4-5-6 |
| 33 | |
Maroons | 2-3-4 | def. | |
Eagles | 1-5-6 |
| 34 | |
Scouts | 2-3-4 | def. | |
Wolfpack | 1-5-6 |
| 35 | |
Trevian | 2-3-5 | def. | |
Varsity | 1-4-6 |
| 36 | |
Grizzlies | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Romans | 3-5-6 |
| 37 | |
Grizzlies | 2-3-5 | def. | |
Wolfpack | 1-4-6 |
| 38 | |
Scouts | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Eagles | 4-5-6 |
| 39 | |
Wildkits | 1-2-6 | def. | |
Romans | 3-4-5 |
| 40 | |
Scouts | 1-2-6 | def. | |
Wolfpack | 3-4-5 |
| 41 | |
Grizzlies | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Wildkits | 3-5-6 |
| 42 | |
Romans | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Eagles | 4-5-6 |
| 43 | |
Scouts | 1-2-6 | def. | |
Wildkits | 3-4-5 |
| 44 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Eagles | 4-5-6 |
| 45 | |
Grizzlies | 1-2-5 | def. | |
Romans | 3-4-6 |
| 46 | |
Wildkits | 2-3-4 | def. | |
Eagles | 1-5-6 |
| 47 | |
Scouts | 1-2-5 | def. | |
Grizzlies | 3-4-6 |
| 48 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Romans | 3-5-6 |
| 49 | |
Grizzlies | 1-2-3 | def. | |
Eagles | 4-5-6 |
| 50 | |
Wolfpack | 1-2-5 | def. | |
Wildkits | 3-4-6 |
| 51 | |
Romans | 1-2-5 | def. | |
Scouts | 3-4-6 |
| 52 | |
Romans | 1-2-4 | def. | |
Wolfpack | 3-5-6 |
| 53 | |
Trevian | 1-4-5 | def. | |
Maroons | 2-3-6 |
| 54 | |
Trevian | 2-3-4 | def. | |
Varsity | 1-5-6 |
| 55 | |
Varsity | 1-4-5 | def. | |
Maroons | 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 ±0.11 means a rating gap counts about 10% 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.
