Jump to content

Seeding meeting stories?


AJ

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

They're used in order from 1 to 4.

If the first criteria can't be met (aka they've never wrestled), you go to #2.

If they have no common opponents or they've beaten/lost to the same wrestlers, go on to #3.

If nobody meets that criteria, you go to the best winning percentage.

If there's a tie there, it gets fun!

 

Okay, so are they all used or is it over as soon as one criteria is met?  Sorry to be a pain....just trying to understand.

 

Once a criteria is met, the others do not matter.

In theory, you could have a kid that is 1-30 and a kid that is 30-1... if the horrible kid's one win is against the 30-1 kid, he is the higher seed even though every other criteria is overwelmingly in favor of the 30-1 kid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I have a couple of questions.

 

First scenario...........from what I have read in previous posts, if 2 kids split matches, and are 1-1 against each other, the kid who won the most recent, recieves the higher seed?  Does it state this in the seeding criteria?

 

2nd scenario..........If you go to the 2nd criteria, and there is a wrestler who is 1-0 against a common opponent and the other wrestler is 1-1 against that common opponent, but won the most recent match, who does the higher seed go to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here it is

 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay...here's a scenario for you to decipher

 

 

A vs. B = A as the winner (1st meeting)

 

A vs. B = B as the winner (2nd meeting)

 

A vs. C = A as the winner

 

B vs. C = C as the winner

 

According to the criteria  B gets the seed over A because B won the last meeting.  HOWEVER, C beat B so C gets the seed over B.  BUT, A beat C in head to head.  Does that mean it is now A, C, B?

 

 

 

Thank GOD I'm not a coach!!!  You all have a very tough job ahead of you tonight!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It should be A C B because A has beaten both and B has lost to both.  Also, if you really want to analyze it closely (and get a headache) the 2nd criteria (common opponents) applies with the same result.  Of course, this is assuming that no other wrestlers get thrown into the mix, which usually does happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Laporte took approximately an hour.  Terry Miller (tournament director) does a lot of prep work to streamline the process.

 

It doesn't hurt either that there is some head-to-head criteria, especially with the 4 DAC and 3 NSC schools.  It tends to sort itself out somewhat easily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Laporte took approximately an hour.  Terry Miller (tournament director) does a lot of prep work to streamline the process.

 

It doesn't hurt either that there is some head-to-head criteria, especially with the 4 DAC and 3 NSC schools.  It tends to sort itself out somewhat easily.

 

Terry Miller is the finest.  He is definitely one prepared and organized man.  I enjoyed the DAC at La Porte, he kept the tournament running nonstop.  He is one heck of a man.  He will be sorely missed at La Porte, when he retires after this year. :'( :'( :'( :'(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they should add a #5, coaches wrestle first takedown wins the spot.

 

This was actually "suggested" by a young coach at the Marion County Tournament seeding meeting about 8 or 9 years ago.  I won't mention the two coaches involved. One has matured and the other has retired. Good times though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they should add a #5, coaches wrestle first takedown wins the spot.

 

This was actually "suggested" by a young coach at the Marion County Tournament seeding meeting about 8 or 9 years ago.  I won't mention the two coaches involved. One has matured and the other has retired. Good times though!

 

Come on, ya gotta give us more info then that.....I can hazzard a guess, but it would only be that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of respect for both coaches, I won't mention names but the weight class was 189. Neither coach would probably like to admit their behavior but both were passionate about their athletes and rightfully so.  I'll give you a hint, it was Northside vs. Southside.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of respect for both coaches, I won't mention names but the weight class was 189. Neither coach would probably like to admit their behavior but both were passionate about their athletes and rightfully so.  I'll give you a hint, it was Northside vs. Southside.

 

 

 

 

Hmm, I would have guessed a more eastern compass point for one of the coaches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somewhere around ten years ago, a genius coach, who later went on to bite the head off a live bird in front of a bunch of high school kids and get fired, had a stop watch at sectional.  The thing was stopped at like 42 minutes and some-odd seconds.  He claimed his wrestler (who had just lost to a Brownsburg kid) didn't have enough time between matches (citing this stopwatch as evidence) and said they should wrestle again.  After a lengthy conversation with the IHSAA, they did, in fact have this rematch.  Absolutely Unbelievable.  If they hadn't had enough time between matches, coach should've brought that up BEFORE his kid LOST.  At any rate, this guys classlessness didn't pay off.  His kid lost AGAIN, and Brownsburg had 14 kids in the finals that year.  A fitting ending. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • 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.