Jump to content

BrokenTowelRack

Gorillas
  • Posts

    240
  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Articles

Coach

Teams

Team History

Wrestlers

Wrestler Accomplishments

Dual Results

Individual Results

Team Rankings

Individual Rankings Master

Individual Ranking Detail

Tournament Results

Brackets

College Signings

Media

State Bracket Year Info

Team Firsts and Lasts

Family History

Schedule-Main

Schedule-Details

Team History Accomplishments

Current Year Dual Results

Current Year Tournament Results

Forums

Events

Store

Downloads

Everything posted by BrokenTowelRack

  1. By the BCA logic, most extreme example is Wrestler A: 29-1, loss to C Wrestler B: 15-15, no common opponents, no head to heads Wrestler C: 1-29, win over A In the BCA argument, the number 1 seed must have a .500 or better record, and a higher win percentage than someone in the group with a head to head win. In the CAB argument, the number 1 seed can have a losing record, and as few as 1 win.
  2. What is the most extreme scenario on the other end of the spectrum? Just for the sake of a side by side comparison..
  3. So Wrestler C with a record of 1-29 gets seeded 1st over two wrestlers with a combined record of 57-3. Thanks for the interpretation IHSAA.
  4. Based on Mr. Faulkens and Decbell's Interpretation: Wrestler A: 29-1, loss to Wrestler C Wrestler B: 28-2, has not wrestled Wrestler A or C, nor anyone who beat A or C Wrestler C: 1-29, win over Wrestler A No other common opponents, none are semi-state quarterfinalists Based on the IHSAA posted interpretation, we are to seed this C, A, B
  5. This came from the same Sectional where we had a coach whose team wrestled a schedule full of non-IHSAA sanctioned Baptist schools and then was trying to claim winning percentage over everyone with no common opponents. I really think the IHSAA should send a trained, uninterested, third party to moderate these seeding meetings. C, A, B was the final result we arrived at in this meeting, which was arrived at by C's Athletic Director at C's host Sectional who was not interested in any discussion and actually told all dissenters (of which there was a majority had it gone to a vote) that they were wrong. The IHSAA interpretation means very little to me. In the Winter Bulletin it references that we only care about separating the best wrestlers until the finals. Why seed 6 at all? Let's just pick the best 2 and seed them. After all, the IHSAA only cares about who the State Champion is at the end of the day. I would wager a years salary that none of these three in question are the State Champion this year.
  6. Decbell, you only presented one interpretation in a quick email to the commissioner. You didn't take the time to outline the other argument and let him decide which one made more sense in the spirit of the Winter Bulletin.
  7. So just for clarification Decbell: Wrestler A: 15-15, loss to Wrestler C Wrestler B: 30-0, has not wrestled Wrestler A or C, or anyone who beat A or C. Wrestler C: 1-29, win over Wrestler A Wrestler C is the 1 seed?
  8. There was no common opponent criterion in this example or the real life example. There was a team at this sectional who had wrestled nobody in the sectional and had a schedule filled with non-IHSAA sanctioned Baptist schools.
  9. Determination of seeded wrestlers is given in order of importance: a. Head to head competition; (The wrestler with the most head to head wins gets the seed. If they have beaten each other an equal number of times, then the winner of the last match gets the seed.); b. Record against common opponents; c. Semi‐State quarterfinalist in IHSAA Tournament Series; d. A contestant with the best overall record (winning percentage) who has wrestled at least 10 matches; e. Farthest advancement in previous year IHSAA State Tournament Series; f. Draw by lot. Criteria is reset after determining each seed. Wrestler C has criteria a over Wrestler A Thus, C must be above A. Wrestler B has criteria d over Wrestler C Thus, B must be above C B, C, A
  10. I agree 100% Thornton. It just so happened that this particular weight was seeded C, A, B. This is incorrect according to IHSAA by-laws. The explanation given was that since Trackwrestling pre-seeded A as 1 since he had the highest win percentage, and C beat A, that he was now the 1 seed, which left A 2nd and B 3rd. Oh by the way, C is the host school.
  11. 3 wrestlers vying for the 1 seed. Wrestler A: 25-5 has a loss to Wrestler C Wrestler B: 28-8 has not wrestled A or C Wrestler C: 23-8 has a win over Wrestler A No other common opponents, none are semi state quarterfinalists. Seed these 1, 2, and 3
  12. I think a couple people above nailed it on the head.. The Lake County Tournament is the Harvest Classic without Penn. Morton wrestles at the Harvest, why would they want to wrestle these teams again, and then again at Sectionals? It's also the Northwest Crossroads Conference Tournament with Hanover, Lake Central, and Calumet. Lowell wrestles in the NCC and wrestles Hanover in a dual and sees Lake Central and Calumet at the Al Smith. Crown Point wrestles the top 2 teams from this tournament in duals during the season and has an opportunity to wrestle Portage and Lowell instead on this date. Merrillville has an opportunity to wrestle a bunch of great duals in Missouri, including against Evansville Mater Dei on this weekend. I understand why all 4 would decline, and am surprised more haven't.
  13. [table] Portage 34 Lowell 29 [/table]106- Cummings (L) dec. Joseph (P) 8-3132- Gross (L) mdec. L. Escobedo (P) 18-10 138- D. Hughes (L) mdec. "Bam" Lawrence (P)
  14. [table] Portage 74 Rensselaer Central 00 [/table]
  15. [table] Crown Point 36 Portage 28 [/table]
  16. [table] Crown Point 39 Lowell 29 [/table]132- Donaldson (CP) dec. Gross (L) 5-3145- Hughes (L) mdec. Denny Schurg (CP) 170- James (L) dec. Dax Jones (CP) 11-7
  17. [table] Lowell 59 Rensselaer Central 21 [/table] 113- Cummings (L) tf. White (RC) 17-0
  18. Anyone with any insight on periodization and peaking and the Olympic Training Center 16 week training cycle have anything to say about how 3 days off impacts things for the athletes? I know kids bodies are resilient and most won't get out of shape in 3 days, but there has to be some adjustment period to training after 3 days off to get back on track.. Anyone with any insight would be much appreciated.
  19. I think Plymouth is worth a look. They have a 32-28 loss to #14 Mishawaka and a 48-22 win over HM Lowell.
  20. 160 lb. Al Smith Quarterfinal - Kenny Hughes (Lowell) 18-0 won by fall over Tyler Downhour (Rochester) 15-3 (Fall 0:12)
  21. Hughes TF Borta 15-0 at ISWA Folkstyle State this March.
  22. [table] Perry Meridian 33 Lowell 31 [/table]Perry JV over Lowell 33-31 132- Napier (PM) dec. Gross (Lowell) 138- D. Hughes (Lowell) tf. Uk (PM) 16-0
  23. [table] Lowell 51 Kokomo 25 [/table] 152- Gaddis (Kokomo) dec. Mavros (Lowell) 3-1
  24. [table] Lowell 44 Lebanon 27 [/table]113- Cummings (Lowell) mdec. Bocock (Lebanon) 15-1145- D. Hughes (Lowell) mdec. VanCamp (Lebanon) 9-0
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.