What Blake Ress thinks about Indiana's Wrestling Coaches

[Coach Wadkins]

Read what Blake Ress thinks about Indiana's Wrestling Coaches. Its under the section Money Matters.

 

http://www.post-trib.com/sports/2800972,mlazerus-1014.article

 

 

 

[MattM]

Well obviously he doesn't have to much respect for the process.  And people wonder why between him and Cox the wrestling had a hard time convencing the IHSAA of certain things.  Maybe one of these days we'll have someone on the higher up IHSAA staff with a understand of wrestling.  I'm not sure if anyone on the IHSAA board has a wrestling background but I'm guessing that would somewhat help our cause to start with them.

 

 

One thing is you can't compare swimming/track to wrestling because its a different type of competition.  In those sports you have several athletes competing at once while in wrestling its truely 1 on 1.  In fact I'm not sure you have to seed either of them if you would just run a preliminary race and the fastest overall times get into the final reguardless of the heat they are in.  

 

 

I believe a combination of seeding and wrestle-back together are as close as we can get to ensuring  we get the top 4 best wrestlers on to the next level.  Sure seeding is not perfect but the point isn't to be perfect or we would just pick the guys to move on and not wrestle.  The point of seeding is to spread out the talent in the field so they do not take each other out right from the start.  Just like they seed in swimming/running to ensure they top runners are not all eliminating each other in the first heat of the day.  I'm sure they do not always get it right either but it helps spread out the talent none the less.  Wrestleback then help correct any of those seeding mistakes by proving (at least on that day) who the top 4 wrestlers are.  When it comes down to it you have to prove it on the mat and thats were wrestle-back help to ensure tha happens.  Reguardless after sectional seeding we go by your finish in each level of the competition so it becomes somewhat luck of the draw again on how good your competition will be.    In our sport after sectionals you run the risk of facing a very talented wrestlers right off the bat because of how you and he finish in the previous round.  This is why wrestle-back at a level like regionals and semi-state would help get as close as we can to the best 4 go on and also help get as close as we can to ensureing they are placed in the right position in the bracket.   I think running/swimming could accomplish this same thing (I don't think they do) by having a final heat of just next best times with the winner filling in the last spot in the race finals.  That would be the equivalant of a wrestle-back to get a chance at that last placement incase you had one bad race.  To me that is a fair way to try and get the best moving on requardless of original seeding.

[Y2CJ41]

The purpose of seeding is to separate the best wrestlers so they do not meet in the first couple rounds.  Seeding is done so the best matches are in the semi-finals and finals.

[Barrq]

I actually agree with Ress to an extent, coaches do at times do a terrible job of seeding. For example, our 189 pounder, who ended up winning semi-state and placed 6th in state was seeded second in our sectionals because their kid had a better record against weaker competition, while our wrestler bumped up against better kids in a lineup, some of which he lost, one of which was by 1 point to the 3rd place in state 215 pounder. Their kid was pulled from the lineup anytime there was someone decent to wrestle so his record would be good, and was pulled against our 189 pounder in the dual meet so the head-to-head criteria would not exist. It was clearly obvious who the better kid was before the seeding meeting even began, but nothing could be done. It didn't effect anything anyways as the final match would've wasn't even close, but these things end up effecting the 3rd seed, who I feel if the seeding would've gone like they should, could've been in the finals. That happens more than it should and that is just one case. The year before Jordan Dulaney had lost 1 match and was seeded 2nd in his sectional behind a kid with 7 or so losses. Coaches should know who the better kids are and in the interest of fairness speak up and say their kids should be seeded elsewhere.

At some point in time common sense  has to be added in go to the Al Smith seeding meeting. Coach Snyder will from time to time will say he has seen both kids wrestle and say this kid is much better and many times that is how they get seeded. And he is almost always right!!!

[ATC]

I'm very disapointed with this ignorant comment.  If I say more I might be blacklisted by the IHSAA...  Oh wait I'm using my wifes log in...

 

On a side note, IHSAA Seeding criteria is suggested criteria not the law.  You can make things right in a seeding meeting if coaches have ethics.

 

[CoachM]

"If coaches have ethics" the fact is that most coaches would rather get their kid a better seed than have the most fairly seeded tournament. Example, Shelbyville sectional last year, State Champ Wright #2 and 4th place finisher Keifer#3! You can't tell me this wasn't a blatant disregard for seeding the best tournament. To change things you have to get most coaches on board and every sport has a problem with this, so things don't get changed.

[Darrick Snyder]

Seeding your own tournament like the Al Smith Classic and the IHSAA Sectional are two completely different things.

 

We set the criteria for our seeding at the Al Smith Classic, but  the IHSAA sets the criteria the sectional..I run the seeding meeting for both the Al Smith and our sectional....the seeding criteria are pretty similar.  

 

The difference: At the Al Smith I tell all coaches our seeding criteria are guidelines....we use them, but a coaches vote can override the guidline seeding criteria...this usually allows us to avoid a situation where a clearly better wrestler gets a lower seed...HOWEVER, my AD is at sectional seeding meeting  and he is adament about the fact that IHSAA wants coaches going completely based off of seeding criteria...every year this results in someone getting a seed they clearly shouldn't have.  

 

Snyder

[MattM]

he is adament about the fact that IHSAA wants coaches going completely based off of seeding criteria...every year this results in someone getting a seed they clearly shouldn't have.  

Snyder

 

Thus Black Ress is actually wrong in his statement.  He should say the IHSAA seeding criteria gets it wrong and that is one reason why wrestling coaches want wrestle-backs.

 

Someone should remind him that if he's let people that are knowledgable in wrestling help make the decision that think would work out better than trying to completely decide what should happen in a sport when you have only a slight clue about how it oppertates.  I think one of the shortfalls of the IHSAA is they don't try to seek out members that have a background in each sport to ensure some inside knowledge and understanding when making decisions.  I know they have some sports represented, but from my understanding they are not a very well rounded groups when it comes to all the sports the IHSAA represents.

[Coach Peck]

I would contend that the IHSAA seeding criteria are fine, and that the number of discrepencies that do occur is probably less than would occur should most decisions on seeding be left up to a coaches vote.  With seeding and wrestlebacks it is a very....very rare thing that the top wrestlers do not advance.  It is the State  Tournament series and therefore it is about advancing the best wrestlers.  How many times, with our current seeding and wrestlebacks, do the best wrestlers not advance?  I would also contend that even if we did not seed, and were able to do full wrestlebacks at every level that it would be a rare occurance when a truly deserving wrestler did not advance.  The Wright/Keifer example has been brought up, but it did it affect their placement in the Tournament series?  I would like to hear of some examples where the current system of seeding/wrestlebacks at the Sectional kept someone that should have placed in the top eight at State from advancing.  I do not think there are any that are concrete examples.

[MattM]

I would like to hear of some examples where the current system of seeding/wrestlebacks at the Sectional kept someone that should have placed in the top eight at State from advancing.  I do not think there are any that are concrete examples.

 

I would agree in the whole scheme of thing sectional seeding and wrestleback do not have much effect on the top 8 at state.  I think some of the point of it is help get the right sectional recognition so that teams can take that back to their team and communities in order to get publicity and help thier team support grow.  I would even agree that in most casees we put the best kids into semi-state from regionals (maybe not always in the right order).  However, after that their is a more frequent luck of the draaw factor in semi-state that does palce a fact in deciding top 8 at state.  For the sake of more local recognition, helping average wrestlers to feel they got a fair shake, and determining team tournament results  seeding and wrestlebacks at sectionals works.  For the sake of the top wrestlers getting the fairest chance at the correct outcome of semi-state the people making decisions should have placeing the wrestleback emphasis there instead of sectionals.    It's all in what you wanted to put the value on and those making that decision awhile ago probably felt it was better for the sport to put the emphasis on the sectional level.

[CoachM]

The Wright/Keiffer example isn't about hurting those specific kids; it?s about the #2 at the regional and the #2 at the semi state that had to wrestle a #3 who was clearly the real #2 in their sectional/regional. The sectional seeding criteria puts way too much emphasis on overall record, how many kids come in with blown up records, mostly due to ffts and beating the same bad kids over and over, and never live up to their seeds. Coaches are encouraged, in part, to wrestle bad teams because they get better seeds.

[CameronTroxell]

The seeding criteria seem to be just fine. I think that we all know that it truly comes down to who is running the seeding meeting. Some will allow the coaches vote and some will seed based soley on the IHSAA seeding criteria. One thing that should probably be addressed more than any is that we must have a certain degree of consistency accross the board!

 

 

 

 

[Galagore]

The seeding criteria seem to be just fine. I think that we all know that it truly comes down to who is running the seeding meeting. Some will allow the coaches vote and some will seed based soley on the IHSAA seeding criteria. One thing that should probably be addressed more than any is that we must have a certain degree of consistency accross the board!

 

 

 

 

 

I think that is why the criteria need to be black and white.  Base everything on numbers and then there is never a question of consistency.

[CameronTroxell]

The following are the IHSAA's "Suggested" Procedures for Seeding Wrestlers at Sectionals.

 

    Consideration for determining 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. A returning champion or runner-up in the same weight class;

    d. A contestant with the best overall record (winning percentage) who has wrestled at least 10 matches;

    NOTE: A wrestler with less than ten matches may not be seeded ahead of a wrestler with at least ten matches and a winning record unless

    he/she meets criteria in a, b or c. A wrestler with a losing record may not be seeded unless he/she meets criteria a, b or c unless there are

    less than six (6) wrestlers in the bracket.

 

This does not make mention of a "Vote by the Coaches" being able to be used to seed. I am not personally saying that there isn't some value in the voting, but these criteria rule out most discrepencies. I understand the whole "Wrestler A doesn't wrestle the schedule at Wrestler B does" argument, but at the same time I'm sure that Wrestler A could lose to the same people Wrestler B has lost to!!! Use the criteria and let the wrestling do the talking.

 

That said, Blake's comments are pretty ignorant.

[Regionrat1]

The following are the IHSAA's "Suggested" Procedures for Seeding Wrestlers at Sectionals.

 

    Consideration for determining 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. A returning champion or runner-up in the same weight class;

    d. A contestant with the best overall record (winning percentage) who has wrestled at least 10 matches;

    NOTE: A wrestler with less than ten matches may not be seeded ahead of a wrestler with at least ten matches and a winning record unless

    he/she meets criteria in a, b or c. A wrestler with a losing record may not be seeded unless he/she meets criteria a, b or c unless there are

    less than six (6) wrestlers in the bracket.

 

This does not make mention of a "Vote by the Coaches" being able to be used to seed. I am not personally saying that there isn't some value in the voting, but these criteria rule out most discrepencies. I understand the whole "Wrestler A doesn't wrestle the schedule at Wrestler B does" argument, but at the same time I'm sure that Wrestler A could lose to the same people Wrestler B has lost to!!! Use the criteria and let the wrestling do the talking.

 

That said, Blake's comments are pretty ignorant.

Looks party darn good to me / we need to geta wrasler in a IHSAA admin postion