Jump to content

Seed This


BrokenTowelRack

Recommended Posts

shouldn't they make sure that the #1 seed and at least #2 seed never have a pig tail...don't they earn that right?  kind of like any other tournament.???????

 

Can the IHSAA change this rule?

 

similar to what someone said earlier - seed the top 6 - if there are ten wrestler let the bottom 4 fight it out in pig tails to advance to the quarters to wrestle the top 6 seeds.  If there are 11 wrestlers, then the top 5 are automatically in the quarters and the remaining 6 fight it out in pig tails.  seems like a real simple solution to advance the 4 best wrestlers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 188
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

shouldn't they make sure that the #1 seed and at least #2 seed never have a pig tail...don't they earn that right?  kind of like any other tournament.???????

 

Can the IHSAA change this rule?

 

similar to what someone said earlier - seed the top 6 - if there are ten wrestler let the bottom 4 fight it out in pig tails to advance to the quarters to wrestle the top 6 seeds.  If there are 11 wrestlers, then the top 5 are automatically in the quarters and the remaining 6 fight it out in pig tails.  seems like a real simple solution to advance the 4 best wrestlers.

 

these arent pig tail matches. this was the standard 16 man bracket like in the shelbyville sectional that was mentioned and in the south dearborn sectional last year. that first round is still win or go home. there are forfeits and byes throughout the rest of those brackets yet the #1 had to wrestle. just doesnt make sense.

 

here is a link to that SD sectional bracket. my scenario was 113. but also look at 145 and tell me why it was seeded as such with the 1 seed wrestling a guy with that record. i would be ticked to be a one seed there lol. whats the point in "earning" that spot?

 

http://indianamat.com/brackets/2013/SouthDearborn.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have all the info - might have been some common opponents because it was seeded

Luigs

Matherly

Pellacer.

 

My guess is we are missing some info unless the coaches decided to seed them based on their opinion of who was the better wrestler.

 

I don't remember the details of how this was seeded but we did not have a long drawn out debate. There is a reason it worked out like it did.

Here are the top 4 seeds and their records and winning percentage.

Luigs MD 17-9.  65%

Matherly NO 29-4.  88%

Pellacer GS 27-7. 79%

Graham TE 27-6.  82%

 

I coach the 4th seed Graham. The only head to head match he has is vs. Pellacer. We lost that match. I believe everything worked out when it came to common opponents.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just the #1/2 seed either.  Take a look at Zionsville sectional 170 lbs.

 

16 man bracket

 

In the first round, there is a matchup:

Westfield Senior (17-12)

vs

Zionsville Freshman (24-8)

 

One of these successful wrestlers will not get a chance to go for 3rd/4th place. It's one match and done.  Meanwhile, in the same weight class there is a matchup of:

Wrestler1  (2-3)

vs

Wrestler2 (3-6)

BOTH of these wrestlers will get at least 2 chances to wrestle on the day.

 

Just doesn't seem right

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just the #1/2 seed either.  Take a look at Zionsville sectional 170 lbs.

 

16 man bracket

 

In the first round, there is a matchup:

Westfield Senior (17-12)

vs

Zionsville Freshman (24-8)

 

One of these successful wrestlers will not get a chance to go for 3rd/4th place. It's one match and done.  Meanwhile, in the same weight class there is a matchup of:

Wrestler1  (2-3)

vs

Wrestler2 (3-6)

BOTH of these wrestlers will get at least 2 chances to wrestle on the day.

 

Just doesn't seem right

 

excactly! its not right and people obviously arent using common sense. nothing about that says its right and its in almost every bracket. i need everyone to send me their brackets for approval and final modification before submitting please and thank you! lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just the #1/2 seed either.  Take a look at Zionsville sectional 170 lbs.

 

16 man bracket

 

In the first round, there is a matchup:

Westfield Senior (17-12)

vs

Zionsville Freshman (24-8)

 

One of these successful wrestlers will not get a chance to go for 3rd/4th place. It's one match and done.  Meanwhile, in the same weight class there is a matchup of:

Wrestler1  (2-3)

vs

Wrestler2 (3-6)

BOTH of these wrestlers will get at least 2 chances to wrestle on the day.

 

Just doesn't seem right

 

in last years 145 bracket in the link i posted earlier, #1 seed and senior Hartman (UC) 24-4 wrestles first round match against unseeded senior Haakinson (BA) 21-11 (12). while further down in the bracket, sophmore Day (FC) 7-14 wrestles sophmore Ford (CO) 9-5 and worse than that, freshman Schneider (LA) 1-2 receives a first round bye. and people actually agreed to that? wow!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in last years 145 bracket in the link i posted earlier, #1 seed and senior Hartman (UC) 24-4 wrestles first round match against unseeded senior Haakinson (BA) 21-11 (12). while further down in the bracket, sophmore Day (FC) 7-14 wrestles sophmore Ford (CO) 9-5 and worse than that, freshman Schneider (LA) 1-2 receives a first round bye. and people actually agreed to that? wow!

I could live with it if the first round loser at least had an opportunity to wrestle back through and move to regionals.

 

Think of the difference though - sectionals with 8 teams -- everyone has the chance to wrestle back.  Sectionals with 9+ teams, unless there are forfeits there are kids who don't get the chance so it's luck of the draw to see if you get placed in a winnable match, or if you randomly draw into one of the kids better than you, and your day is done

Link to comment
Share on other sites

these arent pig tail matches. this was the standard 16 man bracket like in the shelbyville sectional that was mentioned and in the south dearborn sectional last year. that first round is still win or go home. there are forfeits and byes throughout the rest of those brackets yet the #1 had to wrestle. just doesnt make sense.

 

here is a link to that SD sectional bracket. my scenario was 113. but also look at 145 and tell me why it was seeded as such with the 1 seed wrestling a guy with that record. i would be ticked to be a one seed there lol. whats the point in "earning" that spot?

 

http://indianamat.com/brackets/2013/SouthDearborn.pdf

 

ok...so they aren't called pig tails...whatever the case...why can't the #1, #2 and so on get the byes into the quarters like they do in every other tournament in other sports if there is an odd # of teams?  seems like a pretty easy solution, eh little chum?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok...so they aren't called pig tails...whatever the case...why can't the #1, #2 and so on get the byes into the quarters like they do in every other tournament in other sports if there is an odd # of teams?  seems like a pretty easy solution, eh little chum?

 

that just makes too much sens for the suits i guess. but yea, kinda what im saying lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please Seed these wrestlers.

Sectional seeding criteria,six are seeded.

 

Record.  Win%

A: 30-2 (93.75)

B:15-7 (68.18)

C: 14-7 (66.66)

D: 12-7 (63.15)

E: 17-10 (62.96)

F: 13-10  (56.52)

G: 11-11 (50.00)

 

Only one head to head or common opponent criteria is met.

WRESTLER G BEAT WRESTLER A

 

Please seed 1-6

 

Thanks.

 

This is easy.

 

B C D E F G

 

A is unseeded.  Next year A should transfer out of the baptist league and beat someone with a winning record.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on just that information I would say

 

Pellacer

Luigs

Matherly

 

Matherly has no claim to a top seed due to losing head to head to someone else who has not yet been seeded in the bracket yet.  So based on just those three names only Pellacer and Luigs can still lay claim to the the 1st seed.  If Pellacer is entered as a possible 1st seed against Luigs then you have to go through the criteria for them with the first criteria that comes up to break the deadlock.  Win percentage is the first criteria the comes up which both canidates meet giving Pellacer the 1st seed.  If Luigs then is able to lay claim to the 2nd seed, Matherly name is able to re-enter the discussion once again and he can may a play for the 3rd spot. 

 

However, were there are any earlier criteria in play which you did not mention (common opponents used or previous semi-state quarterfinalist) that may have shifted things?  If so that may have shuffled the order around allowing Luigs to claim the 1st spot over Pellacer.  Then Matherly name can come back into discussion and make a claim the 2nd seed.  Based on win percentage (unless other criteria were in play too) Matherly would have got the 2nd seed over Pellacer.  Creating a different order of Luigs, Matherly then Pellacer.  After Luigs gets placed in the bracket Matherly is able to come back into play. So if Luigs can make claim to the 1st seed Matherly can then make an argument for the 2nd seed.  However, without that additional information of common opponents, etc. you can't say for sure.  From the criteria all that is known is due to the head to head loss (first criteria) Matherly can not be seeded ahead of Luigs and as a result must wait for Luigs to be seeded before his name can come back into play.  This ensures Luigs gets top credit for his loss to Matherly when seeded, but does not yet ensure he is ahead of other competitors like Pellacer (unless other criteria shows this).

 

To make things more complicated there have been situation in the past however with a round-robin effect of head to head loses  between multiple wrestlers which then add a little bit of a monkey wrench into the mix of waiting for one wrestler to be seeded before anther one can.  That sometimes does result in a very good wrestler dropping way down in seeding because he lost one match he shouldn't have to a wrestler who then lost a few other matches to wrestlers also being seeded in the bracket.

 

 

I agree with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about CBA?  We're in a rock-paper-scissors situation (A over B over C over A, etc.) where each person has a 1-1 record in terms of claiming superiority over another.  But C's superiority "victory" is head-to-head criteria, while his "loss" is only win% criteria (kind of like a win by pin and a loss by decision).  B then has both a win and a loss by the less authoritative win% criteria and A has a weak "victory" (win%) and a more impactful "loss" (head-to-head).  Thus, C's 1-1 resume is the strongest, followed by B, followed by A.  :)

 

All the BCAs and CABs came out wrong at Ev Central.  The finish was CBA (Luigs, Pellacer, Matherly).  That's one point in my lucky guess column.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.