MIT Team Race Invitational Regatta

Ranking summary

#SchoolTeamRec.%
1TuftsTufts UniversityJumbos17/385.0
2MITMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyEngineers14/670.0
3Roger WilliamsRoger Williams UniversityHawks13/765.0
4Rhode IslandUniversity of Rhode IslandRams10/1050.0
5NortheasternNortheastern UniversityHuskies5/1525.0
6Salve ReginaSalve Regina UniversitySeahawks1/195.0

Penalties

TeamRacePenaltyAmountComments
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers18DNF6 points (Orig: 6)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers29DNS6 points (Orig: 6)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineers31DNF6 points (Orig: 6)
University of Rhode Island Rams27DNS6 points (Orig: 2)
University of Rhode Island Rams27DNS6 points (Orig: 3)
Roger Williams University Hawks40DSQ10 points (Orig: 4)
Salve Regina University Seahawks27DNS6 points (Orig: 4)
Salve Regina University Seahawks27DNS6 points (Orig: 5)
Salve Regina University Seahawks27DNS6 points (Orig: 6)
Salve Regina University Seahawks29DNS6 points (Orig: 5)
Salve Regina University Seahawks32DNS6 points (Orig: 6)
Tufts University Jumbos54DSQ7 points (Orig: 1)

Round 4

↓ vs →RecordTuftsRoger WilliamsRhode IslandMITNortheasternSalve Regina
Tufts Jumbos4-1XW (2-3-5)W (1-3-4)L (1-4-5 DSQ)W (1-2-5)W (1-4-5)
Roger Williams Hawks3-2L (1-4-6)XW (2-3-5)L (2-3-6)W (1-2-3)W (1-2-3)
Rhode Island Rams2-3L (2-5-6)L (1-4-6)XL (4-5-6)W (1-2-5)W (1-3-6)
MIT Engineers5-0W (2-3-6)W (1-4-5)W (1-2-3)XW (1-2-5)W (1-2-3)
Northeastern Huskies1-4L (3-4-6)L (4-5-6)L (3-4-6)L (3-4-6)XW (1-2-5)
Salve Regina Seahawks0-5L (2-3-6)L (4-5-6)L (2-4-5)L (4-5-6)L (3-4-6)X

Round 3

↓ vs →RecordNortheasternSalve ReginaRhode IslandMITRoger WilliamsTufts
Northeastern Huskies2-3XW (1-4-5)L (3-4-5)L (2-4-6)W (1-3-6)L (2-4-5)
Salve Regina Seahawks1-4L (2-3-6)XW (1-2-6)L (2-5-6)L (4-5-6 DNS)L (4-5-6)
Rhode Island Rams2-3W (1-2-6)L (3-4-5)XL (3-4-5)W (1-2-6)L (3-4-5)
MIT Engineers4-1W (1-3-5)W (1-3-4)W (1-2-6 DNF)XL (1-4-6)W (1-3-5)
Roger Williams Hawks2-3L (2-4-5)W (1-2-3)L (3-4-5)W (2-3-5)XL (2-3-4 DSQ)
Tufts Jumbos4-1W (1-3-6)W (1-2-3)W (1-2-6)L (2-4-6)W (1-5-6)X

Round 2

↓ vs →RecordRhode IslandTuftsSalve ReginaRoger WilliamsNortheasternMIT
Rhode Island Rams3-2XL (3-5-6)W (1-2-3 DNS,DNS)L (2-4-6)W (1-2-3)W (1-2-5)
Tufts Jumbos5-0W (1-2-4)XW (1-2-6)W (1-2-3)W (1-2-3)W (1-2-6)
Salve Regina Seahawks0-5L (4-5-6 DNS,DNS,DNS)L (3-4-5)XL (3-5-6)L (1-5-6)L (3-4-5 DNS)
Roger Williams Hawks4-1W (1-3-5)L (4-5-6)W (1-2-4)XW (1-2-3)W (2-3-5)
Northeastern Huskies1-4L (4-5-6)L (4-5-6)W (2-3-4)L (4-5-6)XL (4-5-6)
MIT Engineers2-3L (3-4-6 DNF)L (3-4-5)W (1-2-6 DNS)L (1-4-6)W (1-2-3)X

Round 1

↓ vs →RecordMITNortheasternRoger WilliamsSalve ReginaTuftsRhode Island
MIT Engineers3-2XW (1-2-3)L (4-5-6)W (1-2-4)W (1-2-6)L (1-5-6)
Northeastern Huskies1-4L (4-5-6)XL (4-5-6)W (1-2-6)L (4-5-6)L (3-5-6)
Roger Williams Hawks4-1W (1-2-3)W (1-2-3)XW (1-2-3)L (3-4-6)W (1-2-5)
Salve Regina Seahawks0-5L (3-5-6)L (3-4-5)L (4-5-6)XL (4-5-6)L (4-5-6)
Tufts Jumbos4-1L (3-4-5)W (1-2-3)W (1-2-5)W (1-2-3)XW (1-2-3)
Rhode Island Rams3-2W (2-3-4)W (1-2-4)L (3-4-6)W (1-2-3)L (4-5-6)X