NFHS DATA FLAWED - HS Weight Changes

[petro330]

The following is the actual DATA that the NFHS did NOT divulge to the state governing bodiers across the country before they voted on the weight change and by the way the DAT clearly indicates that the old weights are better for the SPORT and the kids participating

 

This post http://www.mdwrestling.net/forum/viewto ... =2&t=25946 has a link to the actual 2011 NWCA weight class data. Even though the NFHS claims that the new weight classes were chosen to have an even distribution of wrestlers in each weight class, the data shows that this is not at all the case. In fact, there is a more even distribution of wrestlers in the old weight classes than in the new ones! States voted on the new weight classes based on the NFHS description of them as having an equal number of wrestlers in each one. This is so far from the truth that it is astonishing. Either we were lied to or the NFHS wrestling committee is incredibly incompetent and can't understand basic math. Look at this summary information:

Percentage Breakdown of wrestlers across the old and new weight classes when using minimum wrestling weights (Males)

Hit link for actual DATA

 

http://www.mdwrestling.net/forum/viewto ... =2&t=25946

 

The rationale that the NFHS has provided over and over as being the basis for the "option B" weight classes, which are the ones that were chosen (i.e., each weight class was created to have approximately 7.14% of the wrestlers) is bogus.On top of our having been misled, the data confirms what many coaches have known all along based on experience and instinct: the new weight classes are truly horrendous. The top four classes have only a total of 13.71% of wrestlers spread out over all four of them. Meanwhile, classes 132, 138, and 145 all have more than 10% of wresters in them. Also, there were 5.85% of wrestlers in 103, which is a higher percentage of wrestlers than are an any one of the top four new classes, and they still raised the lowest weight class to 106.

The states that voted for this change cast their vote based on the description of these classes as having about 7.14% of wrestlers in each class, but that is simply untrue. The process had no integrity; the new classes were railroaded through under false pretenses. We should lobby our state associations to a) demand that the NFHS investigate how this screw up was able to occur, and refrain from adopting the new classes until the investigation is complete.

 

Link for State Details

 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/64005673/NWCA ... -Data-2011

 

Hit link below to support changing back

 

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreads ... c6MQ#gid=0

[chambers]

You say that the top  four classes have only a total of 13.71% of wrestlers. That is their weight at 7%. The vast majority of the top few weights do not have kids anywhere near 7%.  That is why the numbers appear so bad. My 215 last year could have cut down to 171 and been over 7% but in reality that was not going to happen.

[Y2CJ41]

Chambers,

For some reason opponents of the new weight classes have an extremely hard time accepting that.  They think that everyone wrestles at their lowest possible weight. 

[MattM]

Unfortunately any argument against the new weights would have held much more weight (pun intended) if presented last year.  Anyone paying attention new then that it would come down to a vote this spring/summer between the old weights and Option B.  Heck we knew two years ago this maybe coming doen the pipe when the national federation presented the first weight options. 

[1oldwrestler]

I was as against the weight change as anybody but it's time to let it go.

[aoberlin]

I am still sticking with hormones in the milk and high fructose corn syrup to blame.  Oh yeah and video games. 

[Y2CJ41]

You also need to blame either Obama or Bush, one of them is responsible for this!

[tenaciuos1]

Well the DATA link isn't working for me, probably another part of the conspiracy (I'm gonna say it is Bush) to take over the world!!!

[GrecoCoach]

petro330 is either lying as much as he says the NFHS did or he wasn't paying attention last year when the 3 options were explained.

 

Last year's options included one that used the minimum weight data at 7% for all wrestlers, one that used the alpha weight at the beginning of the season, and one that was a combination of the two.  The combination option ( is the new weights, and of the three options was the most common sense and realistic of the three options.  Some kids come into the season way fatter than they intend to wrestle, and some kids will never get down to 7% body fat. 

 

The NFHS showed everyone the data at that point with the explanations.  The NFHS never said it would balance exactly 7.14% of athletes in each weight class.  In fact, they explained that the lower weights and upper weights would statistically have fewer athletes no matter how they aligned the weight classes.  The stats showed that these new weights truly balanced them better than the old weights.

[Winning Ugly]

You say that the top  four classes have only a total of 13.71% of wrestlers. That is their weight at 7%. The vast majority of the top few weights do not have kids anywhere near 7%.  That is why the numbers appear so bad. My 215 last year could have cut down to 171 and been over 7% but in reality that was not going to happen.

I am glad somebody said it.  What is the motivation for NFHS to lie about the data?  At some point you have to adapt to change or move to Michigan.  10ldwrestler is right, it is time to move on.

[WC182Dad]

Thats whats great I agree with Chambers the weight change will add a hole new wrestler. Just moving weight classes shouldnt be that heartbreakining, there was a huge differnce between the upper weight classes that was unfair to our bigger guys. I love the adjustment its great for a wrestler weighing 190 to cut to 82 instead of just wrestling there walk around weight. This is the first time in 12 years my boy has actually cut for a weight class:)