Barrq Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 This tpoic has not been talked about for a while whats wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 If you ain't first you're last, that is the motto in Indiana. The purpose of high school athletics is to see who the champion is, all the rest are scum of the earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maligned Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 If you ain't first you're last, that is the motto in Indiana. The purpose of high school athletics is to see who the champion is, all the rest are scum of the earth. ...unless you're 4th place at regional and your parents and friends will increase revenue at semi-state events. Then we love you and think you have a great shot at a title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1oldwrestler Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 I've always felt that the best wrestlebacks (at a state tournament) are those that allow the wrestler who loses to continue to wrestle as long as the guy who beat him keeps winning. In other words, in our state tournamnet, the kid who loses Friday nite to either the champ or the runner up would have a shot at placing as high as 3rd. If the guy he lost to on Friday nite lost in the semis, then that kid could place no higer than 5th, etc. This has always seemed the most logical way of running the state tourney but what do I know! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAncientElder Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 Wrestle backs, In 1939 the tournament tried a form of wrestle backs similar to what you are describing. After the class was finished any wrestler that lost to the eventual champ, except the class runner-up, went into a special pool to wrestle back for a ?true runner-up?. The theory being that the other wrestlers had lost to lesser wrestlers. The wrestle backs continued until one wrestler was left. He would then wrestle the class runner-up to determine a ?true runner up? In 1939 at 125 lbs., Laban Foster of Hammond Clark, lost in the first round to the class champ. At the end of the class he wrestled and defeated all of the other wrestlers that had lost to the class champ. He then wrestled and defeated the class runner-up. This will give you a ?true runner-up? for all weight classes about 6:oopm on Sunday. TheAncientElder (TAE) The Imperial Potentate and Grand Poobah of Classless wrestling in Indiana. I wear my Fez with pride. www.theancientelder.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1oldwrestler Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 Wrestle backs, In 1939 the tournament tried a form of wrestle backs similar to what you are describing. After the class was finished any wrestler that lost to the eventual champ, except the class runner-up, went into a special pool to wrestle back for a ?true runner-up?. The theory being that the other wrestlers had lost to lesser wrestlers. The wrestle backs continued until one wrestler was left. He would then wrestle the class runner-up to determine a ?true runner up? In 1939 at 125 lbs., Laban Foster of Hammond Clark, lost in the first round to the class champ. At the end of the class he wrestled and defeated all of the other wrestlers that had lost to the class champ. He then wrestled and defeated the class runner-up. This will give you a ?true runner-up? for all weight classes about 6:oopm on Sunday. TheAncientElder (TAE) The Imperial Potentate and Grand Poobah of Classless wrestling in Indiana. I wear my Fez with pride. www.theancientelder.net That's not the way other states do it at all and that is not what I would want at all. Wrestle backs would occur throughout the two day tournamnet, not wait until the championship was decided and it wouldn't be a pool of just the guys that lost to the champ that got into the wrestlebacks. Deciding who the 'True" second place guy is wouldn't be high on my priority list either. Once the championship is over, it's over. Look at how Illinois does it. They have wrestle backs like I'm describing and they get everything done as early as we do on Saturday evening. Wrestlebacks would be great for state for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammer Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 That's not the way other states do it at all and that is not what I would want at all. Wrestle backs would occur throughout the two day tournamnet, not wait until the championship was decided and it wouldn't be a pool of just the guys that lost to the champ that got into the wrestlebacks. Deciding who the 'True" second place guy is wouldn't be high on my priority list either. Once the championship is over, it's over. Look at how Illinois does it. They have wrestle backs like I'm describing and they get everything done as early as we do on Saturday evening. Wrestlebacks would be great for state for sure. Doesn't Illinois also have something in their tournament where once you beat someone, you advance without having to defeat them again? At least that's how their wrestlebacks appear to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STARSMAN Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 and dont they have class wrestling??? ;D ;D Sorry I had to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1oldwrestler Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 They do have class wrestling but I don't think that negatively or positively supports wrestlebacks (LOL)! And yes, the way their wrestlebacks work is that once a kid loses, he only advances as far as the kid who beats keeps advancing so it is impossible for those two to ever meet again. I'll give you an example. In 1981 there was a kid working on his 3rd AA (Big School) title. He was a senior (Ed Giese for those familiar with old time IL H.S. wrestling). Back then, AA only placed/medaled the top six, I believe. In the quarter finals Giese was wrestling an inferior kid, killing him, but in the 2nd or 3rd period he got caught and stuck with an inside cradle. The next round (the Semis), the kid that beat Giese lost so the highest Giese could place was 5th (which he did). I think the kid that beat Giese took 3rd. That's how it works. I guess it screws the kid that gets upset but our system also screws kids that get upset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hummels Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 How about a best out of three matches? 8) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1oldwrestler Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 How about a best out of three matches? 8) Nah, just wrestlebacks. Don't think we're upsetting the balance of the universe if wrestlebacks were implemented. Wrestlebacks are certainly a smaller issue that we could all agree to as opposed to getting rid of 103 or class wrestling. Oh no. Now the lid is completely blown off this thread! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naco228 Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 I dont like how, at the state tournament, someone who loses in the semis automatically goes for 3rd place I think it should be done like at Al Smith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammer Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 I dont like how, at the state tournament, someone who loses in the semis automatically goes for 3rd place I think it should be done like at Al Smith. The current system isn't perfect, but it's an improvement over the previous system. Previously, you couldn't wrestle back to 5th if you lost to a guy who went on to lose in the semis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2016GrecoGold Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 How about we do like the Olympics and Worlds and have a repechage : Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rookies03 Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 I'm kinda curious as how many people really don't like the current system. I can see an arguement for wrestlebacks at semi state to see who goes to state or even wreslte backs for kids who lose Friday night but who really cares about true 2nd or true 3rd. If some one told me they got 3rd in state vs 5th in state I think they are a dang good wrestler not "i wonder if he was really the 3rd best kid that year or if the 5th place kid coulda beat the 3rd place kid". Rather than full wrestle backs how about seeding the tournament. I was just talking to a friend who got 4th in his semi state that had the eventual 2nd, 3rd and 4th place finishers in state come out of his semi state and of course he drew the eventual champ Friday night. Had that tourney been seeded maybe he places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fearless fly Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 It really boils down to what the old fart said...do we want to come back and wrestle on Sunday? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XCard Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 Hey Rookies, your friend must have wrestled someone from the Merrilville SemiState! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maligned Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 I'm kinda curious as how many people really don't like the current system. I can see an arguement for wrestlebacks at semi state to see who goes to state or even wreslte backs for kids who lose Friday night but who really cares about true 2nd or true 3rd. If some one told me they got 3rd in state vs 5th in state I think they are a dang good wrestler not "i wonder if he was really the 3rd best kid that year or if the 5th place kid coulda beat the 3rd place kid". I couldn't agree more with this first part of your argument. I've always thought the proposals to the IHSAA got a little too watered down, asking for wrestlebacks at regional and state. The crime that continues to persist is not getting the best kids from given semi-states to the state finals. With the solid seeding system and full wrestlebacks at sectional and only two sectionals feeding into regionals, top kids have every chance to place what they deserve to place at regionals without wrestlebacks. There is no mathematical possibility whatsoever whereby (providing there are no upsets) the top kids don't have every chance to advance. Yes, upsets happen. But being upset once and not advancing is not the same as being the 3rd best kid in the state and not even wrestling at Conseco because you had to wrestle Indiana's best at your regional and then got drawn in against Indiana's second best at your semi-state. That's the tragedy. I've posted the math numerous times over the years. The Top 4 kids from a given semi-state only advance to state about 40% of the time without having to knock each other out earlier. The IHSAA has always said semi-state would take too much time if there were wrestlebacks. Wrestlebacks from the quarterfinals would have added a whopping ONE HOUR to the previous system (Top 3 from regionals) if coordinated correctly. Then out of thin air, without the request even being made, the IHSAA throws the 4th place kids from regionals into the semi-states so they can get a bunch more butts in the seats and earn more money. What a laugh! This adds at least two hours to the tournament length, doesn't do anything mathematically to ensure the best kids don't knock each other out (unless the Top 4 are all from the same regional...a rarity), and advanced only a couple kids through to state that otherwise would have been left behind at regional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 There is no way to fairly seed the state finals. The only way to possibly seed the state meet is to separate returning placers and qualifiers that win semi-state. They do something similar in Ohio where if you are a district(our semi-state level) champions. If the champions are previous placers they seed them accordingly to separate them and create possibly the best finals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maligned Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 There is no way to fairly seed the state finals. The only way to possibly seed the state meet is to separate returning placers and qualifiers that win semi-state. They do something similar in Ohio where if you are a district(our semi-state level) champions. If the champions are previous placers they seed them accordingly to separate them and create possibly the best finals. Outside of having highly informed athletic directors from multiple schools deciding the seeds by committee, it's not possible. I agree. And since there are very few ADs who would have the time to follow high school wrestling, it could never happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
529 Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 These kids already wrestle 50+ times over a 4 month period in some cases. How many times do they need to wrestle? The ticket round at semi-state is exciting I would not change it. If you win you move on if you lose you don't. Its postseason do or die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pin2win1 Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 I'm all for wrestle backs at the semi states. However, I did always find the statement "How many times does a kid have to lose to be knocked out of the tournament." I mean it is quite logical if you think about it. They could really simplify things if they just took the champions from each sectional to the regionals, then the champions from the regionals and have them wrestle at state. But that woudln't be as fun for us now would it hahahahahaha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 The IHSAA has always said semi-state would take too much time if there were wrestlebacks. Wrestlebacks from the quarterfinals would have added a whopping ONE HOUR to the previous system (Top 3 from regionals) if coordinated correctly. Then out of thin air, without the request even being made, the IHSAA throws the 4th place kids from regionals into the semi-states so they can get a bunch more butts in the seats and earn more money. What a laugh! This adds at least two hours to the tournament length, doesn't do anything mathematically to ensure the best kids don't knock each other out (unless the Top 4 are all from the same regional...a rarity), and advanced only a couple kids through to state that otherwise would have been left behind at regional. Yeah it's odd how both those issues played out with the IHSAA. They basically refused to do one senerio saying it was all about time but then out of noplace said OK to the new system which takes up at least as much time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1oldwrestler Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 There is no way to fairly seed the state finals. The only way to possibly seed the state meet is to separate returning placers and qualifiers that win semi-state. They do something similar in Ohio where if you are a district(our semi-state level) champions. If the champions are previous placers they seed them accordingly to separate them and create possibly the best finals. Y2, that would be cool but I don't think seeding is even required if wrestlebacks are set up the way IL does them. Not sure what the drawback would be because it's time efficint and it really settles the proper order of placement below 1st & 2nd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maligned Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 Y2, that would be cool but I don't think seeding is even required if wrestlebacks are set up the way IL does them. Not sure what the drawback would be because it's time efficint and it really settles the proper order of placement below 1st & 2nd. In my opinion, the reason for a seeding system would not necessarily be to find the correct 3rd-8th. It would be to have matches like Cashe/Tsirtsis in the finals instead of the semifinals. If there was just a way to put the top two semi-state champions in opposite brackets, I would be content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts