XCard Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 East Chicago Sectional (10 Team) 103 - 1 112 - 4 119 - 6 125 - 4 130 - 3 135 - 1 140 - 1 145 - 1 152 - 3 160 - 1 171 - 0 189 - 0 215 - 1 285 - 0 Total = 26 Will get brackets to y2 later tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Posted January 27, 2009 Author Share Posted January 27, 2009 East Chicago Sectional (10 Team) 103 - 1 112 - 4 119 - 6 125 - 4 130 - 3 135 - 1 140 - 1 145 - 1 152 - 3 160 - 1 171 - 0 189 - 0 215 - 1 285 - 0 Total = 26 Will get brackets to y2 later tonight. That goes against all the data!!! Maybe East Chicago is just an outlier? (Yep, I broke out the math speak!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 I always wonder how grade issues, injury, wrestlers moving weights for sectionals, and skin issues play in the FF stats during sectional time. The stats are based on just the sectional roster not a regular season meet roster. I would say for some teams may have had less FFs at some point during the year but because of one factor or another now have one or two more holes. It wouldn't throw off the stats a lot but it may be slightly more realistic to the numbers we are trying to figure out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinedad Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Warren Central Sectional 10 teams 103-1 112-1 119-1 125-0 130-0 135-0 140-0 145-0 152-0 160-0 171-0 189-0 215-2 285-2 Total 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midget5589 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 laporte has 9 total ff's all from two schools 7 from north judson and 2 from john glenn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 East Chicago added http://indianamat.com/brackets/ffdistrubution2009.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ontherise219 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Calumet will add some forfiets for sure with the Gary Schools, River forest and Lake Station. Wow XCARD E.C should be easy to pick at 119 all you have to do is show up and get a ticket to the next Round Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 http://indianamat.com/brackets/ffdistrubution2009.html 23 sectionals reporting in! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intwrest Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Y2, on your breakdown you have listed the Warren Central Sectional and the Shelbyville Sectional. They are the same one. Shelbyville and Franklin Central have rotated every other year with this one, but, this year being FC's turn, they cannot host because of construction or some other issue. Shelbyville couldn't because of some stupid poison ball event. So, Warren Central stepped up to host. Thank you Warren Central. From what I understand, FC does not want to host it anymore. Shelbyville can't host it every year because of the **** punkin chasers. Next year Shelby has it, but not sure after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Intwrest, I noticed that after I uploaded the last update. When I get the next one uploaded everything will be correctly noted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Its updated and I forgot about another team at the Southridge sectional this year in Crawford County. http://indianamat.com/brackets/ffdistrubution2009.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scout101 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Ok Joe, can I now say that regardless of how many teams are in the sectional, Mooresville is looking pretty good with only 7. 5 from Indian Crk and 2 from Monrovia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Having 7 forfeits in the whole sectional is something to be proud of or brag about. Right now the state average is creaping towards 2 per team and if you can average less than 1 per team, its doing pretty good. Last year the average per team was just under 2 also. I think no matter what you think of the lower weight classes, you can agree that we need to get the number of forfeits down not only in this state but across the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 Northview and Castle added http://indianamat.com/brackets/ffdistrubution2009.html 103 and 112 lead the way with 60+ forfeits around the state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 Updated with New Haven Some minor good news is last year forfeits were averaging 1.98 per team and is down to 1.92 per team. Last year's stats http://www.garrettwrestling.com/brackets/2008/ffdistrubution.html This year's stats http://indianamat.com/brackets/ffdistrubution2009.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MatChick76 Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Updated with New Haven Some minor good news is last year forfeits were averaging 1.98 per team and is down to 1.92 per team. Last year's stats http://www.garrettwrestling.com/brackets/2008/ffdistrubution.html This year's stats http://indianamat.com/brackets/ffdistrubution2009.html Thanks for this Y2...great job! I was a little surprised by the 33 FF @ 130 & the 31 FF @ 160...I would see both of those weights as relatively easy to fill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Updated again with Decatur Central forfeits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Updated with Shendandoah sectional. We need three sectionals to have all the data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 From 125-285 there is an average of 34 forfeits in each weight class, which is a hair over one per sectional at each weight. At 103-119 there is an average of 65 forfeits, which is almost double the rest of the weight classes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Added Crown Point, only one more sectional to go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fire77 Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 does this start the weight class realignment discussion with the 26 %, 23 %, 17 % for the first three classes to eliminate forfiets as much as possible. 110,118,125,130,135,140,145,152,162,175,195,215,235,285. keeping just 14 classes, I would love to see more but that would probably just add to the forfiets. I know some don't like the " slower" heavier matches but are they better than forfeits? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueBolt Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 does this start the weight class realignment discussion with the 26 %, 23 %, 17 % for the first three classes to eliminate forfiets as much as possible. 110,118,125,130,135,140,145,152,162,175,195,215,235,285. keeping just 14 classes, I would love to see more but that would probably just add to the forfiets. I know some don't like the " slower" heavier matches but are they better than forfeits? Personally, I think if you were to adopt the weight classes used by the NCAA you would see forfeits in High School Wrestling also. It doesn't seem to matter where we start the weight classes, kids will adjust their eating habits accordingly and still managed to miss weight. One personal observation...Given the incredible number of over weight kids I see at the local Malls, and just about everywhere else, I am REALLY against adjusting weight classes to make it easier for them to eat an entire buffet at Pizza Hut and then show up in the wrestling room! While I do understand there are obviously some incredibly gifted wrestlers that weigh close to, if not more than 285 pounds, I would BET you that they are in the minority to those kids who are basically just over weight and not generally interested in their long term health. Just throwing weight classes at the top of the roster seems like it sends the wrong message. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fire77 Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 First of all I would love to see more than 14 classes ( 100 to unlimited), but I doubt that will ever happen. I think with forfeit % at 26 and 23 it is more of not having enough wrestlers close to those weights instead of one forth of them just missing weight. Maybe the coaches can correct me are 1/4 of the two lightest weight classes missing weight or are you unable to find enough wrestlers at those weights with reasonable weight cutting? I could see how about one in ten wrestlers missing weight for a variety of reasons ( no school so no practice, sick, injured, etc...) but I find it hard to believe that that many at just two weight classes are at those numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nutsdad Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 the arguement against getting rid of 103 is null and void with the percentage of forfeits at 112 being almost identical. :o :o :-X :-X :-X :-X Either that or it strengthens the argument that 112 is where the 1st weight class should be. No one is advocating getting rid of a weight class, only adjusting the classes to get more kids on the mat. That won't get more kids on the mat if you combine both these classes, because some most schools have both and 1 kid is gonna get knocked out in wrestle offs!! IMO these 2 classes have some of the better matches to watch and yes I might be a little bias!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ontherise219 Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 From Calumet. We can add 14 Gary Roosevelt was not there. 103- 5 112-1 119-3 125-1 130-2 135-2 140-1 145-1 152-2 160-3 171-4 189-1 215-1 Hwt-0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts