RankingsGuy Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 the next rankings will be posted on monday nite. if you feel that you have pertinent information, please share it either here or send me an email at RankingsGuy@hotmail.com , the next set of rankings are well on their way, but will not be finished until tmrw nite so you still have time to get your info in! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Its Monday and the sun is down, so technically......... ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCatWrestler2008 Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 How much more time til the rankings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clive2246 Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 How much more time til the rankings? Yeah....what's up with the rankings not being done yet?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RankingsGuy Posted January 13, 2009 Author Share Posted January 13, 2009 THEY ARE UP!!!!!! enjoy and comment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clive2246 Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 Nice job, once again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 Very interesting.... and very good. These rankings should start some quality dicsussions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naco228 Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 good to see Zach Nixon is ranked fyi, even though its a loss, he loss to March and he beat Lewandowski, if that means anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinedad Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 Very interesting.... and very good. These rankings should start some quality dicsussions. Quality is a relitive term, and when you are talking about rankings, I would argue how much quality you have. It seems to me that people get all bent out of shape and the discussion quickly deteriorates into he beat so so by this much and this kid lost to that kid, so therefore he should be ranked higher. Interesting discussions, but I dont know about quality.... ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KarlHungus Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 Very interesting.... and very good. These rankings should start some quality dicsussions. Quality is a relitive term, and when you are talking about rankings, I would argue how much quality you have. It seems to me that people get all bent out of shape and the discussion quickly deteriorates into he beat so so by this much and this kid lost to that kid, so therefore he should be ranked higher. Interesting discussions, but I dont know about quality.... ;D I would use the term "mildly entertaining". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinedad Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 Very interesting.... and very good. These rankings should start some quality dicsussions. Quality is a relitive term, and when you are talking about rankings, I would argue how much quality you have. It seems to me that people get all bent out of shape and the discussion quickly deteriorates into he beat so so by this much and this kid lost to that kid, so therefore he should be ranked higher. Interesting discussions, but I dont know about quality.... ;D I would use the term "mildly entertaining". Good call Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. RIght Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 WOW i would of thought Porras would of moved up past Harper not everyone else, but I guess thats why I'm not the Rankings Guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RankingsGuy Posted January 13, 2009 Author Share Posted January 13, 2009 see post titled 130 for my explanation of that weight class Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. RIght Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 ok thanks, I didn't see there was a post about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FULLDRAW Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 good job R-Guy really like what you did at 130 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCatWrestler2008 Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 good to see Zach Nixon is ranked fyi, even though its a loss, he loss to March and he beat Lewandowski, if that means anything Nick, why are you on Zach Nixon's jock? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travias09 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 if u ask me josh julien should be ranked he is 18-2 with 15 pins including a pin on cathedrals Blake Roytek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Who are his losses to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMTuc Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 How does Cambell get #1 over Phillips when Phillips has beat more ranked kids? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 The rankings aren't based on how many wins over ranked wrestlers you have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FCFIGHTER170 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Campbell beat Phillips when they have wrestled in the past... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 The rankings aren't based on how many wins over ranked wrestlers you have. One would think it does have some weight. I am pretty sure the RankingsGuy does look at quality wins and loses when he ranks someone. That is not his only method, but one would think it does come into play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrestler931 Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 i think you need to redo 112....at least 5-20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubwrestlingfan1 Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Explain how the Rankings are done, i have always been confused on this?? Sorry i am blonde well bleached blonde . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlightDeck184 Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Explain how the Rankings are done, i have always been confused on this?? Sorry i am blonde well bleached blonde . cubwrestlingfan1, go to the topic "ASK THE RANKING GUY". He explains in depth what he factors in to his rankings and you can also ask him any questions you may have concerning the rankings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts