Oscar Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Individual Rankings Confound Me?????? Could someone please make some sense out of it for me. For example if my son gets lucky and headlocks the #1 guy while he is getting beat 13-0 and pins the # 1 guy, while my son has 25-0 record against the comp on his schedule . Geography is a funny thing. Now ranking people tell me were my son might be ranked. This is a make believe scenario. But this is what I see happening. Your rankings could use more validity. You need a statistical genious like Thornton to break down more details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midwest Wrestling Fanpage Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Individual Rankings Confound Me?????? Could someone please make some sense out of it for me. For example if my son gets lucky and headlocks the #1 guy while he is getting beat 13-0 and pins the # 1 guy, while my son has 25-0 record against the comp on his schedule . Geography is a funny thing. Now ranking people tell me were my son might be ranked. This is a make believe scenario. But this is what I see happening. Your rankings could use more validity. You need a statistical genious like Thornton to break down more details. The Rankings don't mean nothing tourney time is coming, thats wherr we will see what the true rankings are, best of luck to the wrestlers that are putting in the work it takes to make it to Conseco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formerchamp Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Rankings dont mean anything. I think i was ranked 17th or so the one year i won a title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maligned Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Individual Rankings Confound Me?????? Could someone please make some sense out of it for me. For example if my son gets lucky and headlocks the #1 guy while he is getting beat 13-0 and pins the # 1 guy, while my son has 25-0 record against the comp on his schedule . Geography is a funny thing. Now ranking people tell me were my son might be ranked. This is a make believe scenario. But this is what I see happening. Your rankings could use more validity. You need a statistical genious like Thornton to break down more details. Could you proofread/edit your post? I was interested to understand your point, but I couldn't follow your scenario. I'm not being sarcastic. I'm interested in your post. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC3390 Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Rankings are for fun! They are a good way to see how other guys are performing and how one wrestler "might" stack up against another. If you are trying to replace the tornament with statistical analysis then we could just let computers wrestle the state tournament. You notice that there are 16 guys ranked in each class. the bottom 10-15 in any one could be replaced by other guys who have either not wrestled the top 16 or who have decided to stay under the radar by not posting results. The ranking guy can't be at all events and does the best with what info he has. He makes changes to his picks when he has new info. I think he does a great job and I would not want to have to spend the time that he does reading the many e-mails he gets every day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakeandBreighton Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Wrestling isn't college football, computers and statisticians do not decide who plays for the championship, the individuals do! That's what makes wrestling so great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ontherise219 Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 If you want your kid to be ranked don't go the board and make a fuss. Send your info to the rankings guy or to your local semi state ranker. Send his record and notable win if he is 25-0 and all he has beat is dishrags send some summer wrestling accomplishments. And if the rankings don't mean anything why are they one of the most viewed topics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted January 18, 2010 Author Share Posted January 18, 2010 Could you proofread/edit your post? I was interested to understand your point, but I couldn't follow your scenario. I'm not being sarcastic. I'm interested in your post. Thanks. Sorry I ran a lot of stuff together. I was in a hurry before work. My point is that time and time again I see someone who has not been mentioned(Ranked) win one match against a ranked kid and all of a sudden he is a stud and the other kid is a dud. It really makes no sense. It is more complicated than that. Or maybe I am just making it too complicated. I guess I feel a more valid ranking would include some kind of "Sarigin" power ranking as to eliminate the geography problem with relationship to strenghth of schedule. This would eliminate the up and down movement associated with "one" big win. Hope this makes it a little clearer. Respectfully Oscar P.S. To the other responses. I am not trying to get my son ranked. I have been at this long enough to know were my son fits in the mix. I am also informed enough to realize the rankings have no bearing on who will be at Conseco.For example : At my sons weight class there are 5 kids that could possibly earn that 4th ticket spot to Conseco. Four will go home that day and everyone will forget them.On the other hand there will be three kids who get a ticket out of the Fort Wayne Semi who the four that went home could have probably beaten and quite possibly did during the season. That is the geography issue. This is the main reason they should have wrestle backs at all levels. That is a whole different post that has been discussed many times, to no avail. \ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrecoISU Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 This isn't the BCS ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 For something like a sagrin rating to be effective we would need more results posted... like a lot more results! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WrestlingDad78 Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 I agree with Oscar. One minute a kid is ranked in the top 10 and one loss has him unrated. I don't understand the logic but do understand Rankings Guy does the best he can and I appreciate his work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCWrestlefan Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 I agree with Oscar. One minute a kid is ranked in the top 10 and one loss has him unrated. I don't understand the logic but do understand Rankings Guy does the best he can and I appreciate his work. Was not just one loss for Buchanan as you stated in an earlier post on a different thread. He was beaten again on Sat. by dec. 8-2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OZZMAN222 Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 I THINK BEING RANKED IS OK BUT GOING TO THE BE SHOW NO ONE CARES THEY JUST WANT TO WIN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WrestlingDad78 Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Who beat Buchanan 8-2? I only use him as an example. I saw Jake wrestle as HWT and he looked strong. I wonder if dropping to 215 is too much for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Buchanan got beat by Logan Cooper of Perry Meridian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCWrestlefan Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Who beat Buchanan 8-2? I only use him as an example. I saw Jake wrestle as HWT and he looked strong. I wonder if dropping to 215 is too much for him. New Castle Wrestler.. Maybe it was 7-2, but either way.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RankingsGuy Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 I agree with Oscar. One minute a kid is ranked in the top 10 and one loss has him unrated. I don't understand the logic but do understand Rankings Guy does the best he can and I appreciate his work. to critique your unfounded argument about one "fluke" loss dropping a kid completely out of the rankings i point to a few examples... #5 at 103 and 2x SQ dylan hall was pinned with a lead early in the season by an unranked wrestler from evansville north, #5 at 112 and last year's state runner up at 103 dusty kief has a loss to a freshman from evansville memorial on a big 5 point move late in the match and he remains ranked high, at 119 layten binion of mishawaka remained ahead of tyler chapple of penn despite being pinned by him in the dual meet because at the time of the fall binion had a double digit lead, also at 119 former medalist steven ross of concord remains ranked despite a loss by fall to slough of jimtown due to his nice wins over bradley of muncie south and chapple of penn, at 125 former state champion ethan raley was absolutely wrecked by justin kieffer of roncalli and remains ranked in the top 5, at 130 #6 mike clark of calumet had an early season loss to aaron witt of floyd central and has since turned his wrestling up to a new level, completely outwrestling nick schrader from mishawaka at the al smith in an 8-7 loss and clark is ranked ahead of witt despite that loss, at 135 cody zink of woodlan has a questionable loss to fiechter of southern wells who bumped up from 130 and beat him, yet zink remains ranked b/c of his big win over weinzapfel and his respectable loss to brock norton of carroll, at 140 former state placer and 3rd ranked matt milton has an early season loss to scurria of carmel yet remains ranked ahead of him because of his win over manbu of warsaw and his major decision over bowman of franklin.... do i need to continue? i could point to examples at every weight class Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RankingsGuy Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 on a related note... to answer y0ur question about the geography issue, my aim is not to rank the 16 kids that will qualify for state, my aim is to rank the 16 BEST kids, regardless of geography. there are many examples i can think of where kids will be left home from the merrillville semi state that would probably win fort wayne and evansville. this year for example, there's a good chance that hawkins of crown point and bradley of knox will wrestle in the regional final and the loser could draw alex gregory in the ticket round. there's a good chance that mcmurray of portage and quiroz of chesterton will wrestle in the regional final and the loser could draw vlahos of lafayette harrison. there's a good chance that returning state medalist medina from munster will be left home at the regional this year because ayersman of lake central, orzechowicz of griffith, rodriguez of highland, and garcia of merrillville will be taking the 4 spots. just because someone is 25-0 does not mean that they are one of the 16 best kids in the state. that 25-0 record may look more like 17-8 if they wrestled in the region... just a thought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WrestlingDad78 Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 I agree with Oscar. One minute a kid is ranked in the top 10 and one loss has him unrated. I don't understand the logic but do understand Rankings Guy does the best he can and I appreciate his work. to critique your unfounded argument about one "fluke" loss dropping a kid completely out of the rankings i point to a few examples... #5 at 103 and 2x SQ dylan hall was pinned with a lead early in the season by an unranked wrestler from evansville north, #5 at 112 and last year's state runner up at 103 dusty kief has a loss to a freshman from evansville memorial on a big 5 point move late in the match and he remains ranked high, at 119 layten binion of mishawaka remained ahead of tyler chapple of penn despite being pinned by him in the dual meet because at the time of the fall binion had a double digit lead, also at 119 former medalist steven ross of concord remains ranked despite a loss by fall to slough of jimtown due to his nice wins over bradley of muncie south and chapple of penn, at 125 former state champion ethan raley was absolutely wrecked by justin kieffer of roncalli and remains ranked in the top 5, at 130 #6 mike clark of calumet had an early season loss to aaron witt of floyd central and has since turned his wrestling up to a new level, completely outwrestling nick schrader from mishawaka at the al smith in an 8-7 loss and clark is ranked ahead of witt despite that loss, at 135 cody zink of woodlan has a questionable loss to fiechter of southern wells who bumped up from 130 and beat him, yet zink remains ranked b/c of his big win over weinzapfel and his respectable loss to brock norton of carroll, at 140 former state placer and 3rd ranked matt milton has an early season loss to scurria of carmel yet remains ranked ahead of him because of his win over manbu of warsaw and his major decision over bowman of franklin.... do i need to continue? i could point to examples at every weight class I never used the word "fluke". I used Buchanan as my example. Jake was rated in the top 10. Jake lost to a good wrestler and fell out of the rankings. If Notre Dame is ranked in the top 10 and loses to a good USC team, typically they won't disappear from the rankings. Obviously you know more than me since Jake lost again this weekend and might not deserve to be ranked. Like I said, I may not understand the reasonings for your decisons, but I understand you do the best you can with the information you receive. You have done a great job this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 First off, as stated the whole 215lbs rankings were redone this weekend. Its really a big mess when you consider all the results. Lots of losses and wins that don't generally make logical sense. The RankingsGuy and I basically made criteria to determine who deserved a ranking and who did not. It honestly would have been easier to draw names out of a hat. Secondly, if you don't like the rankings we can go back to the old way or you don't have to read them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RankingsGuy Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 I appreciate the kind words and your point is valid about 215... it was in shambles, there are 2 kids head and shoulders above the rest of the state and then another 15-20 who all have a tangled mess of common opponents and one point wins and one point losses each way. last night Y2 and myself spent quite awhile conferencing about what criteria we were going to use to sort out the mess. that criteria may be offensive to some since it used "if you lost to this kid then you definitely have no business being ranked" logic, so if anyone is interested about 215 and our thought process on it, you may send me a private message. all of the other weight classes i feel i have a very firm grasp on, but 215 is a rare crapshoot since literally all but 3 of the 16 qualifiers from last years 215 weight class graduated, as well as most of the kids who made it to the semi state. 215 is riddled with former regional qualifers and even some first time varsity wrestlers who will all be vying for spots downstate which makes it so rare as a weight class Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted January 18, 2010 Author Share Posted January 18, 2010 First off, as stated the whole 215lbs rankings were redone this weekend. Its really a big mess when you consider all the results. Lots of losses and wins that don't generally make logical sense. The RankingsGuy and I basically made criteria to determine who deserved a ranking and who did not. It honestly would have been easier to draw names out of a hat. Secondly, if you don't like the rankings we can go back to the old way or you don't have to read them. Has that criteria been stated before? That is all I am trying to get at here. I do not want to change anything necessarily unless it can be made better. I am just trying to understand. Like I said. I am confused and I am wondering just how many people are just as confused. What you state here indicates that the rankings are some what of crap shoot with some criteria thrown in so we get some of it right. I will say, that the picture is becoming a little clearer. By the way I am not trying to be critcal for the sake of putting anyone down, but for the sake of improvement. I too appreciate what you guys do for wrestling. Respectfully Oscar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 How about you rank 215 and see if you don't get complaints. Lets see your best shot at ranking a bunch of kids who have all beaten eachother. Good luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IUBjj171 Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 well i think the rankings are great. Oscar what kind of criteria would you use to rank any sport? Common opponents? How did they win? Maj? Tech? Pin? I can see your point where you look at a guy who isnt ranked and beats a no 1 guy. Caleb schmitt won state in 2007 at 135. Was he ranked especially high? No, im not sure if he was even ranked but he quietly beat kids that were. So whoop-de-doo if your kids is ranked in state. It has no bearing when it comes down to tourney time. Second is that if you catch a kid and pin them, then you also need some other matches against high quality kids to prove that it wasnt jsut a fluke or the other kid making a mistake. RankingsGuy keep it up, its a hard job but you do it well. I can usually make sense of why people are where. Doesnt take a college degree to make sense of it. Much better system than BCS haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69er Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Penn's Devin Reagan beat travis daughtry 10-6 and only lost to arthur wright 2-3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts