Seed This

[frigginhurts]

I'm still waiting on everyone to seed the Pellacer, Luigs, Matherly class.  According to about 70% of the people on here it was seeded wrong on Monday night. 

 

 

[decbell1]

 

 

There obviously is an argument, as we have seen evidence that some sectionals are seeding it BCA, and others are seeding it CAB.

 

 

All I have asked for is an agreement on what the IHSAA intended with the seeding rules, and then for it to be applied consistently in similar situations.

[frigginhurts]

If we are using the criteria laid out and I have no records, head to heads, common opponents, etc.  information on them I'd decline to answer that questions.

 

 

At 113 at central it was like this

Win % order as follows.

1. Matherly (NO)

2. Pellacer (GS)

3. Luigs (MD

 

but H2H Luigs beat Matherly and Pellacer didn't wrestle the others.

 

[bigmak]

I'm still waiting on everyone to seed the Pellacer, Luigs, Matherly class.  According to about 70% of the people on here it was seeded wrong on Monday night.

 

sorry, i found youor info you posted earlier in the thread...i would seed them:

 

Pellacer

Luigs

matherly

[frigginhurts]

i think its very difficult to seed this situation and sometimes we have to use some common sense and hope to come to an agreement on who the top 2 are.  ONE thing that is very clear is if A can't be #1, after that its open for debate.

 

If the IHSAA says CAB, then thats what we probably should go by until we can get it changed....but, if the people in the room can't come to an agreement on making a subjective decision on the ranking of how good they are, then I think we have to go with the BCA model.

 

Originally I was CAB but i have now officially switched to BCA  UNLESS its obvious that one wrestler is better than the other. 

example - this is where we use common sense

 

Wrestler A:  22-2, lost to wrestler C

Wrestler B:  21-3

Wrestler C:  20-7, beat wrestler A, wrestled a BRUTAL schedule, 4 time triple crown winner the last 4 years but is a frosh so has not been a state qualifier in H.S.

 

In this instance, we use common sense, and go CAB.

 

[MattM]

 

At 113 at central it was like this

Win % order as follows.

1. Matherly (NO)

2. Pellacer (GS)

3. Luigs (MD

 

but H2H Luigs beat Matherly and Pellacer didn't wrestle the others.

 

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.

[frigginhurts]

sorry, i found youor info you posted earlier in the thread...i would seed them:

 

Pellacer

Luigs

matherly

 

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.

[jdmdjm]

No, you're ignoring the criteria and the ruling by the head of our sport lol

 

I won't even go there

[PreparetoWin]

This is how it helps me to look at these situations to understand.  Its not as much about looking for who is number 1 but looking at who isnt number 1 (or whatever seed is up for debate).  Dont look at records, dont look at anything but head to heads.  You could have 8 guys vying for a spot.  In this case you are eliminating athletes.  So the first criteria is head to head.  1 beat 4 = 4 is out....2 beat 6= 6 is out....3 beat 7= 7 is out.  Regardless of record, schedule, school, age, how much money their parents make doesnt matter, they are eliminated from the discussion unless they have a head to head over someone or common opponent. So now your down to 1,2,3,5,8.  Then you move to next criteria 1 beat a guy that beat 8 = 8 is out.....2 beat a guy who beat 3 and 5= 3 and 5 are out.  Now your down to 1 and 2.  You move to the next criteria.  This should be the only time when you even look at a record...2 has a better percentage= 2 is number one seed.  Now it resets and you go through the whole elimination process again.  1 beat 4= 4 is out....3 beat 7= 7 is out.  Now your down to 1,3,5,6,8.  Next criteria....1 beat a guy who beat 8= 8 is out....3 beat a guy who beat 5 and 6= 5 and 6 are out.  Now your down to 1 and 3....1 has a better percentage= 3 is out and 1 is your second seed....Now you reset and you keep eliminating people until you cant eliminate anymore then you go to record.

 

So in our original scenario  A,B,C first elimination C beat A= A is out....Now your down to B and C.  B has a better winning percentage than C= C is out and B is your number 1 seed.  Now you reset....C beat A= A is out.  C is your number 2 seed.  Now you reset for 3 seed and anyone can put their name in the hat and the elimination process starts again. 

 

I guess when I do it like this their isnt room for interpretation.  It gets sticky when people have wins over each other and common opponents. But if you dont have that then the elimination process tends to work.

[basic13s]

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.

 

Let me clarify. The only information relevant in this situation is WRESTLER G BEAT WRESTLER A in a heads up match. No one else has wrestled each other and no common opponents. That is all the details you need to this. It's the same situation as the BCA argument. Please pick your seeding method (CAB) (BCA) etc and seed the wrestlers

 

If I'm still sounding like I'm speaking Flemmish, decbell please intervene

Just curious

 

[littlevito]

In the end, all that matters is that the coaches finally come to an agreement and move forward. Once you get the two best split, move on.

[bigmak]

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.

 

I was at this fictional match where G beat A. It was the same ref from the EIAC tourney and after A pinned G, the coach got mad, cursed at the ref and the ref reversed the pin call, allowed some fluke move to score points and that's how G won. It wasn't legit so common sense and logic says the way you have them listed is proper seeding. It happens, read the EIAC thread. Also, I talked to G's make believe mom and he is leaving the school for a private baptist school next year in hopes to win the new baptist league championship.

[base]

Slightly different seeding question -- In a 16-man bracket with 10 or 11 teams, how many kids are seeded?  And does the loser of first round matches really get sent home with no chance to wrestle back for 3rd/4th?

 

I'm looking at 138 at the Shelbyville sectional - one of the toughest in the state with Warren Central, New Palestine, Greenfield.  At 138 lbs, a kid with 15-13 record is paired with the #1 seed.  OK so maybe he's not the best wrestler in the tournament, but it seems like he should have a chance to battle for that 3rd/4th place and move on.

[XCard]

Slightly different seeding question -- In a 16-man bracket with 10 or 11 teams, how many kids are seeded?  And does the loser of first round matches really get sent home with no chance to wrestle back for 3rd/4th?

 

I'm looking at 138 at the Shelbyville sectional - one of the toughest in the state with Warren Central, New Palestine, Greenfield.  At 138 lbs, a kid with 15-13 record is paired with the #1 seed.  OK so maybe he's not the best wrestler in the tournament, but it seems like he should have a chance to battle for that 3rd/4th place and move on.

 

Lose first round and go home.  After the 6 seeds are set, two wrestelrs are drawn essentially as the 7 & 8 seeds to keep the bracket balanced.  After that the rest are drawn into the remaining slots, which could very well be a #1 seed first round.

[frigginhurts]

Slightly different seeding question -- In a 16-man bracket with 10 or 11 teams, how many kids are seeded?  And does the loser of first round matches really get sent home with no chance to wrestle back for 3rd/4th?

 

I'm looking at 138 at the Shelbyville sectional - one of the toughest in the state with Warren Central, New Palestine, Greenfield.  At 138 lbs, a kid with 15-13 record is paired with the #1 seed.  OK so maybe he's not the best wrestler in the tournament, but it seems like he should have a chance to battle for that 3rd/4th place and move on.

 

I could EASILY be wrong but I think if its a 16 man bracket they can wrestle back for 3/4.  If its an 8 man bracket with a pig tail then the loser goes home.

I would guess you seed 6.

[XCard]

To piggy back on your post, I really think the IHSAA should consider revising the way we bracket a 9-12 team Sectional.  With the first round no longer scoring, it really does not matter where the forfeits are placed anymore, becasue they don't score.  A better situation I feel would be to pair up the remaining wresters against the lower seeded wrestlers.  Should give them a better opportunity of advancement.

[XCard]

I could EASILY be wrong but I think if its a 16 man bracket they can wrestle back for 3/4.  If its an 8 man bracket with a pig tail then the loser goes home.

I would guess you seed 6.

 

Pigtail matches are lose and go home in a 16 man bracket, wrestleback from quarters only.

[frigginhurts]

Lose first round and go home.  After the 6 seeds are set, two wrestelrs are drawn essentially as the 7 & 8 seeds to keep the bracket balanced.  After that the rest are drawn into the remaining slots, which could very well be a #1 seed first round.

 

also - if he is paired with the #1 seed then he is "essentially" an 8 seed.  I think he can wrestle back.  If he is outside the top 8 then he is probably a pig-tail and he goes home if he loses.  Basically - if you are in the top 8 and lose, you can wrestle back for 3/4.  If he is wrestling the #1 seed in his first match then he can still wrestle back because the #1 seed can't be a pig tail - right?

[bigmak]

I could EASILY be wrong but I think if its a 16 man bracket they can wrestle back for 3/4.  If its an 8 man bracket with a pig tail then the loser goes home.

I would guess you seed 6.

 

I believe this is incorrect. even when you look at the bracket on trackwrestling, it shows the loser bracket picking up the loser of 2nd round matches meaning those first round losers are done, season over. It is a shame for this kid as he is a good wrestler and can probably beat at least 2 maybe 3 others in that bracket. i watch him wrestle at spartan classic. he even has a better record than others that will get the chance to wrestle for 3/4. this whole seeding thing needs fixed, just use common sense and seed them right.

[base]

To piggy back on your post, I really think the IHSAA should consider revising the way we bracket a 9-12 team Sectional.  With the first round no longer scoring, it really does not matter where the forfeits are placed anymore, becasue they don't score.  A better situation I feel would be to pair up the remaining wresters against the lower seeded wrestlers.  Should give them a better opportunity of advancement.

That is a good idea, and I agree.  Hope someone from IHSWCA can bring up this possibility with the IHSAA in off-season talks.  It doesn't add any matches to the tournament, but gives some good wrestlers a shot at 3rd/4th and advancement to regionals.

[bigmak]

last year at the south dearborn sectional, a 1 seed had a first round match similar to this 138 you speak of. Union county had a kid ineligible all year due to grades and therefore didnt have but 1 or 2 matches. he had to wrestle the 1 seed. He almost beat the 1 seed and sent him home packing from the first round. it very well could have happened too as this unseeded wrestler is really good, was just ineligible. that 1 seed won sectionals but his toughest match of the day was that first round match. this year, that unseeded kid, was eligible and is seeded 1. lol

 

they need to fix it!

[frigginhurts]

last year at the south dearborn sectional, a 1 seed had a first round match similar to this 138 you speak of. Union county had a kid ineligible all year due to grades and therefore didnt have but 1 or 2 matches. he had to wrestle the 1 seed. He almost beat the 1 seed and sent him home packing from the first round. it very well could have happened too as this unseeded wrestler is really good, was just ineligible. that 1 seed won sectionals but his toughest match of the day was that first round match. this year, that unseeded kid, was eligible and is seeded 1. lol

 

they need to fix it!

 

i stand corrected....that is ridiculous that a #1 seed could have a pig tail match.

[XCard]

last year at the south dearborn sectional, a 1 seed had a first round match similar to this 138 you speak of. Union county had a kid ineligible all year due to grades and therefore didnt have but 1 or 2 matches. he had to wrestle the 1 seed. He almost beat the 1 seed and sent him home packing from the first round. it very well could have happened too as this unseeded wrestler is really good, was just ineligible. that 1 seed won sectionals but his toughest match of the day was that first round match. this year, that unseeded kid, was eligible and is seeded 1. lol

 

they need to fix it!

 

It would appear that common sense did not prevail last year as that wrestler it would have seemed to have been the 2nd best at the Sectional.  Most of the coaches there should have feared having to draw this kid 1st round and did the right thing by placing him in the correct spot regardless of the matches not being wrestled.  This was brought up before but this is what should have been used:

 

5. Coaches should strive to keep open minds when seedings are being decided. The main objective of seeding is to

have outstanding wrestlers separated in the brackets so that they will not meet each other until the finals. Seeding

shall be based upon the wrestler's proven ability and not upon the desire for unwarranted advantage.

[bigmak]

so i guess this greenfield kid will just have to beat the 1 seed and force the ihsaa to change the way they do brackets lol. the 1 seed is only ranked 7th in the state, ouch. what a shame tho, as im sure he would have place at least 4th. i saw this kid beat the cathedral kid who placed 8th at spartan classic as well as had a good match against the 7th placer at spartan who is ranked 12th in NCSS

[bigmak]

last year at the south dearborn sectional, a 1 seed had a first round match similar to this 138 you speak of. Union county had a kid ineligible all year due to grades and therefore didnt have but 1 or 2 matches. he had to wrestle the 1 seed. He almost beat the 1 seed and sent him home packing from the first round. it very well could have happened too as this unseeded wrestler is really good, was just ineligible. that 1 seed won sectionals but his toughest match of the day was that first round match. this year, that unseeded kid, was eligible and is seeded 1. lol

 

they need to fix it!

 

i stand corrected as i just looked...he was 5-4 going into sectionals last year so more than 1 or 2 matches. but the rest of the story is still the same except is is seeded 2 this year with a record of 26-6...it is conference that i was thinking about where he is seeded 1.