Y2CJ41 Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 We had a situation where the following was going on A beat B once B beat C twice C beat A once Who gets the seed or do we move on to other criteria? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takemtothemat Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 5 minutes ago, Y2CJ41 said: We had a situation where the following was going on A beat B once B beat C twice C beat A once Who gets the seed or do we move on to other criteria? To me it's an endless round robin. Next criteria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rookie78 Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 5 minutes ago, Y2CJ41 said: We had a situation where the following was going on A beat B once B beat C twice C beat A once Who gets the seed or do we move on to other criteria? Sure hope winning % minus ff's came into play busstogate 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swain358 Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 B,C,A in that order. B has most wins amongst the 3. Then to figure the two seed, C has head to head criteria over A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomer Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 39 minutes ago, rookie78 said: Sure hope winning % minus ff's came into play It did, and it helped Carroll get the seed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 23, 2018 Author Share Posted January 23, 2018 11 minutes ago, swain358 said: B,C,A in that order. B has most wins amongst the 3. Then to figure the two seed, C has head to head criteria over A Why does the number of wins matter? This lends me to believe that teams that are not in a conference and teams that try to keep away from scheduling the same teams over and over would then be at a disadvantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nkraus Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 I voted, but not sure I voted correctly...Maybe B gets the seed for having the best Head to Head percentage...confusing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 23, 2018 Author Share Posted January 23, 2018 1 minute ago, nkraus said: I voted, but not sure I voted correctly...Maybe B gets the seed for having the best Head to Head percentage...confusing It's the same percentage for all of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 If you are going by one sectional seeding interpretetion that says most wins over sectional opponents gets the seed then swain358’s version would be correct. Though there are flaws in that seeding interpretation which could lead to poor seeding. If you go by a different seed interpretation a 1 win lead give you advantage over the other wrestler, but additional wins over that same opponent has not added seeding benefit. In that case go to the next criteria to determine the seeds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nkraus Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 okay...take out percentage...most wins head to head? I kind of quit paying attention a minute after my kid was seeded tbh...weird one...surprised more time wasn't spent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 23, 2018 Author Share Posted January 23, 2018 6 minutes ago, boomer said: It did, and it helped Carroll get the seed. Wrong weight, but yes our fantastic new forfeit rule did help a Carroll kid get a seed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TripleB Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 B knocks out C, A over B, therefore A, B, C. Criminees I should get paid by IHSAA to seed the whole tourney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nkraus Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 3 minutes ago, TripleB said: B knocks out C, A over B, therefore A, B, C. Criminees I should get paid by IHSAA to seed the whole tourney. 1 seed was already established at this weight.. This was 2, 3, and 4. .. Listen, you may be right, so I'll listen, but I think you're wrong. AAAAndy beat BBBBBarney...CCCCarl beat AAAAndy...BBBBarney beat CCCarl twice...so WE SHOULD have looked at alllll common opponents to see that record...as is, BBBBarney has most wins amongst commons. BBBarney 2 seed. Seeding criteria resets. CCCarl beat AAAAndy. CCCarl 3 seed. AAAAndy 4 seed. Explain how I am wrong, because I might be! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrestling Shoe Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 I'd say because B beat C not once, but twice, it shows that it most likely means that B is the more dominant wrestler than A because if C can beat A, and B beat C twice, B trumps them all with the final order being 1 B 2 C 3 A JMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TripleB Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) Kraus Yes with that information you are correct.....I think. Edited January 23, 2018 by TripleB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nkraus Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 1 minute ago, TripleB said: Yes with that information you are correct.....I think. I am not sure either...This got really confusing to me. I literally sat here with pen and paper and drew a diagram...Go ahead Joe...make fun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 23, 2018 Author Share Posted January 23, 2018 5 minutes ago, Wrestling Shoe said: I'd say because B beat C not once, but twice, it shows that it most likely means that B is the more dominant wrestler than A because if C can beat A, and B beat C twice, B trumps them all with the final order being 1 B 2 C 3 A JMO How does it show more dominance? A beat B by pin B beat C by pin and 3-1 decision C beat A by pin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 23, 2018 Author Share Posted January 23, 2018 11 minutes ago, nkraus said: 1 seed was already established at this weight.. This was 2, 3, and 4. .. Listen, you may be right, so I'll listen, but I think you're wrong. AAAAndy beat BBBBBarney...CCCCarl beat AAAAndy...BBBBarney beat CCCarl twice...so WE SHOULD have looked at alllll common opponents to see that record...as is, BBBBarney has most wins amongst commons. BBBarney 2 seed. Seeding criteria resets. CCCarl beat AAAAndy. CCCarl 3 seed. AAAAndy 4 seed. Explain how I am wrong, because I might be! 9 minutes ago, TripleB said: Kraus Yes with that information you are correct.....I think. Common opponents is done with RECORD against common opponents, not with number of wins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nkraus Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 So...we didn't go through common opponents...MISTAKE...because we have a head to head round robin...I guess the question is...In a round robin of head to head, does the most wins prevail? Is that in our IHSAA bylaws? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 23, 2018 Author Share Posted January 23, 2018 8 minutes ago, nkraus said: So...we didn't go through common opponents...MISTAKE...because we have a head to head round robin...I guess the question is...In a round robin of head to head, does the most wins prevail? Is that in our IHSAA bylaws? Most wins I guess is a new rule, so it punished teams that seek to not wrestle teams over and over and over and over and over again along with a few teams that are not in conferences so they don't get to beat up on the same guys multiple times. nkraus 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAJR Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) Easy, throw them in a pigtail, no wrestle backs and let the IHSAA sort it out. LOL! Edited January 23, 2018 by RAJR busstogate 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrestling Shoe Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 33 minutes ago, Y2CJ41 said: How does it show more dominance? A beat B by pin B beat C by pin and 3-1 decision C beat A by pin This newfound information is helpful. Going off of what I said earlier and based off of what other people said, because B beat C twice, it not only makes him better in criteria due to common opponents, him beating C twice shows that he is a better wrestler than C, and even though he lost to A, C beat A which shows that B was able to clearly beat an opponent that is capable of beating the guy that beat him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoottowin Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 Why do some schools omit good wrestlers, even obvious 1 seeds from their initial Sectional roster? Iirc, they can add them later, right? What's the advantage to adding them later? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XCard Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 I disagree with seeding B first, I feel that it should move to the next criteria. A is at a disadvantage because he has not wrestled an extra match against either B or C. Also, if we are talking record against common opponents, then we should add up ALL common opponents that each of the three have wrestled. Of course this could take some time to compute, making for longer meetings. I think the fact that we all have different opinions on this is even more reason to move on to the next criteria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrestling Scholar Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 Isnt there specific language that says most wins against sectional ooponents is the 1st criteria, when you have a head to head tie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts