phscoach Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 I understand this may sound odd, but who is the authority in Indiana as far as the ins and outs of seeding? If I have a rules question, there are several officials I talk to for clarification. Is there a "person" about seeding questions? I ask this because A) it's that time of year... There have been several experienced coaches I have dealt with this season that interpret the same information in very different ways C) There have been several newer coaches I have dealt with that I feel are either not as informed as they realize or have been given bad information that they took for the gospel. Any thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 The winter bulletin has the seeding information and you could contact Robert Faulkins at the IHSAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phscoach Posted January 18, 2013 Author Share Posted January 18, 2013 The winter bulletin has the seeding information and you could contact Robert Faulkins at the IHSAA. I understood that part. I have the winter bulletin in my Dropbox so if I have questions it is always with me. But I also understand that even though is is explicitly written that coaches should strive to keep an open mind and avoid seeding their wrestlers upon the desire for unwarranted advantage, emotion and pride sometimes can cloud the logical process of events. This came up at a tournament this weekend and I thought as a member of the coaches' association, I would do some looking and asking to see if I could find a resource for newer coaches to get some questions answered that were unclear or murky. Although I'm sure Robert Faulkens is very well-informed on our sport, I doubt he wants to spend time answering the same questions over and over again if there is another resource to draw from. The seeding criteria is laid out and makes perfect sense. I'm looking more at the awkward head-to-head/common opponent situations that may be seen three different ways. If there is no resource, then I need to go a different way. Just asking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjmcwhir1 Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 I understood that part. I have the winter bulletin in my Dropbox so if I have questions it is always with me. But I also understand that even though is is explicitly written that coaches should strive to keep an open mind and avoid seeding their wrestlers upon the desire for unwarranted advantage, emotion and pride sometimes can cloud the logical process of events. This came up at a tournament this weekend and I thought as a member of the coaches' association, I would do some looking and asking to see if I could find a resource for newer coaches to get some questions answered that were unclear or murky. Although I'm sure Robert Faulkens is very well-informed on our sport, I doubt he wants to spend time answering the same questions over and over again if there is another resource to draw from. The seeding criteria is laid out and makes perfect sense. I'm looking more at the awkward head-to-head/common opponent situations that may be seen three different ways. If there is no resource, then I need to go a different way. Just asking. The only thing unclear or murky is this post... Just ask your question, thats what this messageboard is for! Last weekends tournament can seed however they see fit, it has nothing to do with the Sectional seeding process. The seeding criteria for Sectionals is very clearly spelled out in the Winter Bulletin. The Winter bulletin, along with this message board, are your resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TripleB Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 So if I'm in a seeding meeting I can say "Indianamat said....." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FANMAN Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 So if I'm in a seeding meeting I can say "Indianamat said....." I think it would hold up.. Lettuce know how it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCGRAD2000 Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Wrestler A 23-8 Wins over wrester b, c, and d Wrestler B 20-5 beats wrestler c and lost to a Wrestler C 25-7 lost to a and b is a semi state quarter kid Wrestler D 25-5 head to head lost to A Wrestler E 23-11 Lost to wrestler b and c has a common over wrestler A How should these be seeded? Good Luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TripleB Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 I don't need to reference Indianamat, I just say "TripleB, rankings extraordinaire and tourney seeding guru once told me....." and hope half the room doesn't realize that I'm TripleB. J/K.... I think the issue in the original question relates to conferences that don't specifically lay out seeding guidelines and coaches who don't realize that seeding guidelines have changed. It does't help that winter bulletin had to be re-released and I've heard that it's still not right. First and formost you need a good, knowledgeable tournament director who will stick to the criteria and not allow coaches to drift from that. At HHC conference seeding meeting we had Todd Weaver as our tourney director and he did an excellent job of sticking to criteria and shutting us coaches up when we started arguing. Seeding criteria needs to be posted on the board and coaches need to be reminded that when a seed is set, the criteria starts all over w/ the next seed. I've sat through many arguments b/c coaches haven't grasped that the criteria restarts w/ the next seed. When a coach argues something, point to the criteria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TripleB Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Wrestler A 23-8 Wins over wrester b, c, and d Wrestler B 20-5 beats wrestler c and lost to a Wrestler C 25-7 lost to a and b is a semi state quarter kid Wrestler D 25-5 head to head lost to A Wrestler E 23-11 Lost to wrestler b and c has a common over wrestler A How should these be seeded? Good Luck need more info..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCGRAD2000 Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 need more info..... Like what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winning Ugly Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Wrestler A 23-8 Wins over wrester b, c, and d Wrestler B 20-5 beats wrestler c and lost to a Wrestler C 25-7 lost to a and b is a semi state quarter kid Wrestler D 25-5 head to head lost to A Wrestler E 23-11 Lost to wrestler b and c has a common over wrestler A How should these be seeded? Good Luck A has common over E also, therefore E is out and the rest solves itself. A is 1, B is 2, C is 3, D is 4, and E is 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyGonzo Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Wrestler A 23-8 Wins over wrester b, c, and d Wrestler B 20-5 beats wrestler c and lost to a Wrestler C 25-7 lost to a and b is a semi state quarter kid Wrestler D 25-5 head to head lost to A Wrestler E 23-11 Lost to wrestler b and c has a common over wrestler A How should these be seeded? Good Luck According to the info you have... This is how it should go Wrestler A get #1 because he has two common wins over wrestler E and has beaten all 3 others Wrestler D would get #2 because his only loss is to wrestler A, and based on his record win % Wrestler B gets #3 because of the win over wrestler C and E Wrestler C gets #4 Wrestler E gets #5, even with the common win over A, because A has two common wins over him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winning Ugly Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 According to the info you have... This is how it should go Wrestler A get #1 because he has two common wins over wrestler E and has beaten all 3 others Wrestler D would get #2 because his only loss is to wrestler A, and based on his record win % Wrestler B gets #3 because of the win over wrestler C and E Wrestler C gets #4 Wrestler E gets #5, even with the common win over A, because A has two common wins over him C is a semi state quarter kid so he would have a higher seed than D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Seeding criteria needs to be posted on the board and coaches need to be reminded that when a seed is set, the criteria starts all over w/ the next seed. I've sat through many arguments b/c coaches haven't grasped that the criteria restarts w/ the next seed. This is sometimes forgotten at some seeding meetings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TripleB Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Like what? Nevermind... am trying to multitask and didn't read whole post. sorry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phscoach Posted January 18, 2013 Author Share Posted January 18, 2013 This is sometimes forgotten at some seeding meetings And that's a good point. I myself have made that mistake before. I asked Triple B about one this morning just to see if we saw things the same way and we do. Not sure if that's a good thing or not.... Ironically, we were using sectional seeding criteria at that meeting, and it still got squirrelly. I honestly don't have a question. I know some folks ask broad questions because they don't want to have people figure out their games. I just listened to a lot of people over the last couple years interpret the same information two different ways. This site is nice, but it's social media. Can't use it as fact. Just wondered if there was a "casebook" type document that could illustrate commonly confused scenarios. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phscoach Posted January 18, 2013 Author Share Posted January 18, 2013 Here's one that has come up several times this year. Again, not a real fight I am trying to win, but a discussion point for a discussion board. A has a .688 winning percentage. B has a .677 winning percentage. C has a .661 winning percentage. C beat A head to head. No other H2H or common. No Semi-state QF. Coach 1 says it should be B,C,A because C is above A by H2H and then B has to get the seed by better win%. Coach 2 says it should C,A,B because A is the best win% but C beat A. Coach 3 says it should be it should be A,B,C because that scenario cancels everything out but winning %. Not saying I agree with each argument, but those are the ones presented. Who is correct? Discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TripleB Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 1st seed - B 2nd seed - C 3rd seed - A A can't be first seed b/c he lost to C.. B gets it over C b/c of higher winning percentage... follow the criteria C is over A b/c of head to head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 1st seed - B 2nd seed - C 3rd seed - A A can't be first seed b/c he lost to C.. B gets it over C b/c of higher winning percentage... follow the criteria C is over A b/c of head to head. Should it be C, A, B? C has the highest seed criteria of all over A A has criteria over B B has criteria over C Since C has the head to head, shouldn't that be considered of higher value than two winning percentage criterion? I love this, getting me prepped for Monday! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TripleB Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Once A is out, A is out... Then it's between C and B... A. No head to head B. No commons C. No SSQ D. B as higher percentage record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Once A is out, A is out... Then it's between C and B... A. No head to head B. No commons C. No SSQ D. B as higher percentage record. But A has higher winning percentage over B, so he can't be out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TripleB Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 But A has higher winning percentage over B, so he can't be out. Now Joe and I are demonstrating why Coach Hannon asked what he asked..L.O.L. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Yes, yes we are! I can't wait until Monday night! This is why we should just have a random draw, haha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigmak Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Yes, yes we are! I can't wait until Monday night! This is why we should just have a random draw, haha. i know...there should be a pre-tourney to determine seeds for conference tourney. not if we can only find a way to seed that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phscoach Posted January 18, 2013 Author Share Posted January 18, 2013 Now Joe and I are demonstrating why Coach Hannon asked what he asked..L.O.L. Can I get an AMEN from the congregation?? This is my point exactly. Two reasonably intelligent and experienced coaches seeing the same scenario in opposite ways. Now if there were a resource released by NFHS, IHSAA, or even the IHSWCA we could settle these lengthy battles in record time. And the murky gets clear... P.S. The Harry Potter reference was removed when my 81 lb freshman call me a loser for even mentioning Harry Potter. This is an all-time low in my coaching career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts