1894life Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 I personally think the values are too far apart. But I am not in charge of the program, so all I can do is share my opinion. I don't expect maligned to scrap the whole process, but I think he would welcome discussion about how to make it better. I just know at this point, they used results from this site to compile a rating that determined the multiplier. I just pointed out that there may be an issue with incomplete data, since not all the results get posted. It may not make a difference with the bigger schools but in 1A I think that is a valid issue. If your results are not posted, there is less of a chance they will get caught by another school since 1A schools tend to have dual matches against schools of their similar size (for the most part - I know there are exceptions). Again, no dog in the fight like Rick does. I do not think my team has a valid argument to be rated any higher than we are. I just think the system may limit certain teams from being considered. Our sectional does not have a 3A team in it, so I would assume we would be one of the lowest rated ones. I just don't think it's that big a discrepancy. I agree with this. In arugument to not having any 3a schools in the sectional, it would almost be penanlizing the teams who do have to face many 3a opponents in the tournament. I also heard this year that they were re aligning the sectionals. I think they should tally up total scores from each team based on this years tournament. Then add up the scores from each team for every sectional. Then base the multiplier off of that. I don't know if I explained that way I wanted to, but that is an idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maligned Posted February 16, 2012 Author Share Posted February 16, 2012 Just to be clear: the multipliers were based off a full season of data of all results of all teams from last year--not limited data this year. Also, Jasper is very close to these other teams--they just don't have anyone at state so they can't move up. They're not still way back at 180. As we said, we'll publish all teams' final scores after the state finals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hook and half Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 maligned- i think your ratings speak for themselves: empiracally and intuitively, they represent the best teams! here is what's being lost in the debate: 1. 24 classed teams will compete for a state championship, rather than 8. 2. each class will be seeded, ostensibly reserving the top two teams for an exciting finale. this is a great improvement over the ihsaa format. 3. each team will get 3 duals against the best competition indiana has to offer. many of these duals would otherwise not occur. if the ratings system is a harbinger of the tournament, i expect the tournament to be a top-notch event. i fully expect the ihswca to keep the event and have no desire to turn it back to the ihsaa. keep up the good work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olemissHC Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 if the ratings system is a harbinger of the tournament, i expect the tournament to be a top-notch event. i fully expect the ihswca to keep the event and have no desire to turn it back to the ihsaa. keep up the good work! Believe me, if the IHSAA wants it back...they will get it back....lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phscoach Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Just to be clear: the multipliers were based off a full season of data of all results of all teams from last year--not limited data this year. Also, Jasper is very close to these other teams--they just don't have anyone at state so they can't move up. They're not still way back at 180. As we said, we'll publish all teams' final scores after the state finals. That makes more sense to me. So then this year's data will go to next season and so on and so forth. Thank you for clearing that up. Keep up the good work! Again, I'm not saying anyone is wrong or any team doesn't need to be involved because my team is better. I'm just a guy trying to understand the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ahawkeye Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 maligned- i think your ratings speak for themselves: empiracally and intuitively, they represent the best teams! here is what's being lost in the debate: 1. 24 classed teams will compete for a state championship, rather than 8. 2. each class will be seeded, ostensibly reserving the top two teams for an exciting finale. this is a great improvement over the ihsaa format. 3. each team will get 3 duals against the best competition indiana has to offer. many of these duals would otherwise not occur. if the ratings system is a harbinger of the tournament, i expect the tournament to be a top-notch event. i fully expect the ihswca to keep the event and have no desire to turn it back to the ihsaa. keep up the good work! +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlittlejohn Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Rick, did you notice that on the IHSAA website they listed Ian Songer as being from Southridge insead of Jasper? Maybe the points he would have picked up advancing to the 2nd round of the semistate did not get factored into Jaspers score? Songer was correctly identified as being from Jasper during the scoring process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1894life Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 How are they going to seed the meet in December? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maligned Posted February 17, 2012 Author Share Posted February 17, 2012 I agree with this. In arugument to not having any 3a schools in the sectional, it would almost be penanlizing the teams who do have to face many 3a opponents in the tournament. I also heard this year that they were re aligning the sectionals. I think they should tally up total scores from each team based on this years tournament. Then add up the scores from each team for every sectional. Then base the multiplier off of that. I don't know if I explained that way I wanted to, but that is an idea. A few more points on the multiplier: 1. It has nothing to do with which classes are represented in a sectional or regional--only overall quality and the average number of points being prevented or allowed because of an above-average or below-average sectional or regional. 2. We will definitely be able to use this year's tourney results to develop the multiplier for next year. For a number of reasons, people don't seem to trust the end-of-season, full-year Genius ratings. Genius gives a more comprehensive picture of each team's quality, but I think seeing in black and white how the tournament performances match the multiplier will feel easier for people to take in. The results will be similar enough that I have no problem doing this. 3. The "wide range" between the cap (1.3) and the low end (0.7) is actually much smaller than the data suggests it should be. One early-round multiplier without a cap would have been more than 1.6 while several low-end multipliers would have been around 0.6 without a lower limit. The disparity in quality between numerous sectional/regional combinations is enormous. There are a couple regionals that only have 3 or 4 teams that were in the top half of the Genius year-end ratings last year. At the same time, there are a couple regionals that had 12 or more teams in the top half. This has a huge, huge effect on the number of kids advancing or not advancing out of these sectionals/regionals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maligned Posted February 17, 2012 Author Share Posted February 17, 2012 Jasper did not make it. I do want to point out some facts. Jasper lost to Heitage Hills by 1 pt. in team regional. They had 4 Seniors, we had 1. Take their Seniors out, take our Senior: Jasper wins 32-21. Those are the the returning points coming back which is what the duals are for next year. Heritage Hills has a great team and a great coaching staff. They deserve to be there. Jasper should not be 50+ points behind. Jasper has won 30 sectionals in 30+ years, 14 conference titles in 18 years. Jasper had 11 underclassmen in the regional(school record), 8 underclassmen in Semi State(School Record). The multiplier in the Castle reg was much higher, probably because of Castle. Last year Castle beat us at team regional by 2. We have beaten Heritage Hills 8 out of the last 10 years. We have beaten Boonville , who finished 2'nd in the Castle sect. 10/10. Princeton is in our conference.Our conference record speaks for itself. Head to Head we have more pts. coming back vs. HH. The mult. has us 50+ Pts. behind! I don't know if we will ever qualify under this format? I don't have a solution unless the Head to Head comes into play. Good luck to all the teams that make it! I do appreciate what this committee has done, it was a great undertaking! Yours in Wrestling Rick Stenftenagel Jasper Wrestling Coach Coach, I have really appreciated your thoughts and dialogue throughout the past few weeks. You obviously have great respect in the wrestling community, so you deserve answers to these issues. Firstly, the scoring system is just that: a scoring system independent of previous results. Just as with a team tournament during the year, you have to perform well and you have to have some luck. The scoring system is based on projection tools, but in the end it is a scoring system--it is left in the hands of the teams to earn points. I want to break down why Heritage Hills leads you 251 to 211 (equivalent to a 10-point dual spread): 1. Wrestlers scoring points (you do not score for a forfeit or for an underclassman with less than 10 matches who doesn't advance to regional; wrestlers of this type have no projection value on your team quality for next year): HH 14, Jasper 12 2. Underclassmen who scored: HH 11, Jasper 11 3. Total advanced to regional or beyond: HH 12, Jasper 12 4. Advanced to state: HH 2, Jasper 0 5. Early-round difficulty (sectional AND regional incorporated--not just sectional): HH's path 12th, Jasper's 30th Also, it's worth mentioning that if you had simply had scoring wrestlers at the two weights you had zero and had you won even one more match at any weight at semi-state, you would have 235 points right now and be squarely in the mix for the coaches' vote for wildcard #3. As it is, you still have a realistic chance to be in the coaches' vote next year for the final wildcard depending on what happens this weekend and in the wildcard #3 vote. As I said in another post, we'll re-evaluate multipliers for next season based on how successful teams were in this year's tournament compared to their multipliers. We're always open to feedback and discussion about how it all works. Enjoy the wrestling this weekend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NateSteffen Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 I know that the state finals just got done last night, but how long until the final scores are calculated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maligned Posted February 19, 2012 Author Share Posted February 19, 2012 I know that the state finals just got done last night, but how long until the final scores are calculated? We'll get things out as quickly as we can, but it will take a little time to be sure all scores are official. We want to post a list of all teams in the state and there are a number of issues to be sure all our bases are covered before that is possible. We'll shoot for Wednesday as with other weeks, but I can't absolutely promise that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Maligned and crew, Though my teams not in the running to make next years event I would like to thank you guys for your time and efforts with this great undertaking. You have done a great job coming up with a viable plan and are quickly crunching numbers in order to keep everyone as up to date as possible on the results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 We'll shoot for Wednesday as with other weeks, but I can't absolutely promise that. its Wednesday ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thescrambler Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Hurry hurry hurry ! ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricket11 Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 EMD is actually 1A in size, but schools were given the option of moving up in class. EMD elected to move up to 3A. great news for the 1a schools Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maligned Posted February 23, 2012 Author Share Posted February 23, 2012 its Wednesday ;D Yeah, sorry, we had an issue with the data from one of the semi-state reporters. I have it all set to go the moment I can cross-check his data with our other reporter from his area to be sure everything is right. It may be Thursday night. Really sorry! Almost there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NateSteffen Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Its friday morning... Any results to post?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maligned Posted February 24, 2012 Author Share Posted February 24, 2012 Really sorry, guys. Got it posted now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts