Y2CJ41 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 These differences work for teams not individuals... Just because a bigger school has a higher probability of having more "elite" athletes doesnt make those elite athletes better than a small schools elite athletes Answer these questions please 1. True or False: Every entry into the sectional tournament has an equal chance at the state finals. Everyone must win 5/6 matches to qualify. My answer is true 2. True or False: If you pick random 100 wrestlers from 1A and 100 from 3A, you are more likely to have more 3A state qualifiers. My answer is true In my fantasy world the second answer should be false since the first answer is true. Big schools and small schools VARSITY aren't equal. Big schools and small schools WRESTLERS are. Big schools and small schools varsity shouldn't be equal, but that doesn't mean it should be classed. If it was classed a wrestler from a smaller school would have a significantly easier chance to win state than a wrestler from a bigger school If big school and small school individuals are equal, then the small school individuals should make it to state at the same percentage as big school individuals right? If what you are saying is true I have a wager for you. Put whatever you want on this, money, IndianaMat gear, pride, etc. You pick 700 1A wrestlers at sectional I'll pick 100 3A wrestlers Whoever gets the most state qualifiers wins. Wanna take me up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Fan Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 (edited) Answer these questions please 1. True or False: Every entry into the sectional tournament has an equal chance at the state finals. Everyone must win 5/6 matches to qualify. My answer is true 2. True or False: If you pick random 100 wrestlers from 1A and 100 from 3A, you are more likely to have more 3A state qualifiers. My answer is true In my fantasy world the second answer should be false since the first answer is true. If big school and small school individuals are equal, then the small school individuals should make it to state at the same percentage as big school individuals right? 1. FALSE just because a kid from a 1a school qualifies for sectionals doesn't mean he is at the same level as a kid from a 3a school. As i have stated before this is due to the bigger schools having a larger sample size to determine their sectional entries. 2. TRUE because of the probability of 3A schools having more "elite" wrestlers out of their 2000 sample size. The only way you will make this equal, as you prefer, in a one class system is to have all school sizes the exact same so their probability of having "elite" wrestlers is the same... Even if you class the event the sample sizes for small schools wont change... They may get more average wrestlers but the "elite" kids are already wrestling... Edited March 5, 2015 by Super_Fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winwithike Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 If big school and small school individuals are equal, then the small school individuals should make it to state at the same percentage as big school individuals right? Accounting for every wrestler and not just varsity, they are closer than they would be if wrestling were classed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rookies03 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 So I'm a bad person for wanting to grow the sport? I'm a bad person for wanting small schools to succeed. I'm a bad person for wanting more kids to enjoy this sport? Thanks for the support, I guess I'm bad for the sport. I'll pull the plug on this site in 10 minutes. I can narrow it down to about 18 kids right now on who will start next year at Carroll. Why do I need to include the other 2000 again? Lol your not bad at all. I respect your opinions I'm just trying to get you to see that everything you say isn't 100% correct and it's not law just because you think it... Other people have factual information that doesn't support your theory and you just deny it... There are many ways we can accomplish these things without making it a classed individual tourney. +1 Amen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KarlHungus Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 1. FALSE just because a kid from a 1a school qualifies for sectionals doesn't mean he is at the same level as a kid from a 3a school. As i have stated before this is due to the bigger schools having a larger sample size to determine their sectional entries. 2. TRUE because of the probability of 3A schools having more "elite" wrestlers out of their 2000 sample size. The only way you will make this equal, as you prefer, in a one class system is to have all school sizes the exact same so their probability of having "elite" wrestlers is the same... Even if you class the event the sample sizes for small schools wont change... They may get more average wrestlers but the "elite" kids are already wrestling... you still haven't given an honest answer on why you think other states class wrestling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 1. FALSE just because a kid from a 1a school qualifies for sectionals doesn't mean he is at the same level as a kid from a 3a school. As i have stated before this is due to the bigger schools having a larger sample size to determine their sectional entries. 2. TRUE because of the probability of 3A schools having more "elite" wrestlers out of their 2000 sample size. The only way you will make this equal, as you prefer, in a one class system is to have all school sizes the exact same so their probability of having "elite" wrestlers is the same... Even if you class the event the sample sizes for small schools wont change... They may get more average wrestlers but the "elite" kids are already wrestling... If you class the sport you close the gap between the bigger and smaller schools. Thus creating close to the perfect world of every school the same size. Obviously, the more classes the more equal it becomes, but I'm good with just two for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bog190 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 These differences work for teams not individuals... Just because a bigger school has a higher probability of having more "elite" athletes doesnt make those elite athletes better than a small schools elite athletes If this statement were true there wouldn't be a huge dropoff in 1a state placers and champs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Fan Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 you still haven't given an honest answer on why you think other states class wrestling. I don't know why they decided to class wrestling? Maybe you should ask them and not the guy opposing classing wrestling... If you class the sport you close the gap between the bigger and smaller schools. Thus creating close to the perfect world of every school the same size. Obviously, the more classes the more equal it becomes, but I'm good with just two for now. I don't see it closing the gap... School populations wont change in a way to increase population for smaller schools thus not giving them many more "elite" wrestlers than they had to start with... In fact I would guess that because it would be classed those "elite" athletes from the small schools would move to bigger schools just like kids now drive to national events in order to search out better competition. If this statement were true there wouldn't be a huge dropoff in 1a state placers and champs. Well your percentages were slightly off in the beginning because there wasn't 3600 entries and also there were more 3A entries than 1A so the data you presented was slightly incorrect bringing those numbers slightly closer to what we would expect them to look like. I would also assume its due to the fact that most 1A schools dont wrestle many big tourneys or 3A schools in their regular season schedule so they lack the experience of wrestling "elite" competition in a very stressful situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warsawwrestling Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 (edited) If you class the sport you close the gap between the bigger and smaller schools. Thus creating close to the perfect world of every school the same size. Obviously, the more classes the more equal it becomes, but I'm good with just two for now. First off, most if not all those states have been classed for a while. If Indiana did class it would be interesting, now that there is open enrollment these days. I just see many other things that can be done with just as much energy to improve the sport. Like I said before, if we would come together as coaches, parents and wrestlers to get more tournaments, more RTC's and better off season wrestling programs by helping each other. I feel this would do a better job of creating a more powerful sport through numbers, creating better wrestling and improving the coaching power with ISHAA. Edited March 5, 2015 by warsawwrestling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KarlHungus Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 (edited) I don't know why they decided to class wrestling? Maybe you should ask them and not the guy opposing classing wrestling... Im asking for your opinion. You have consistently avoided the question often with a sarcastic tone. I am wondering why? Edited March 5, 2015 by KarlHungus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Accounting for every wrestler and not just varsity, they are closer than they would be if wrestling were classed. Hopefully you can follow this, I added "JV" numbers. I put 1A at 1.3 so an average of 18 wrestlers on each team, 2A with 23, 3A with 30. I might be a little high, but who knows. Sect JV Percentage 1A-- 999--- 1300-- 20.63% 2A-- 1211-- 2000-- 31.75% 3A-- 1362-- 3000-- 47.62% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bog190 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Well your percentages were slightly off in the beginning because there wasn't 3600 entries and also there were more 3A entries than 1A so the data you presented was slightly incorrect bringing those numbers slightly closer to what we would expect them to look like. I would also assume its due to the fact that most 1A schools dont wrestle many big tourneys or 3A schools in their regular season schedule so they lack the experience of wrestling "elite" competition in a very stressful situation. My percentages would not change because it was based on student population as you and Busco had been referring to frequently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I don't see it closing the gap... School populations wont change in a way to increase population for smaller schools thus not giving them many more "elite" wrestlers than they had to start with... In fact I would guess that because it would be classed those "elite" athletes from the small schools would move to bigger schools just like kids now drive to national events in order to search out better competition. Right now we have a gap of 161-4830 in terms of enrollment. Small schools would be 161-710 and big schools would be 713-4830 I think that would close the gap a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galagore Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Hopefully you can follow this, I added "JV" numbers. I put 1A at 1.5 so an average of 18 wrestlers on each team, 2A with 23, 3A with 30. I might be a little high, but who knows. Sect JV Percentage 1A-- 999--- 1300-- 20.63% 2A-- 1211-- 2000-- 31.75% 3A-- 1362-- 3000-- 47.62% Translates to number of: Qualifiers: 1A - 46 2A - 71 3A - 107 Placers: 1A - 23 2A - 36 3A - 53 Champs: 1A - 3 2A - 4 3A - 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 For those that want to play with numbers download this, it has enrollments, 2 and 3 class information, amongst the last 5 years data https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1r-4OoK27f6-4cfQlPpjYA--6h4Z9IbyXwmAwnAeo9cc/edit?usp=sharing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Fan Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Thats a nice document... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Fan Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Im asking for your opinion. You have consistently avoided the question often with a sarcastic tone. I am wondering why? Well if i had to assume the reason they decided to class wrestling i would guess that they put more importance on the team rather than the individual. Translates to number of: Qualifiers: 1A - 46 2A - 71 3A - 107 Placers: 1A - 23 2A - 36 3A - 53 Champs: 1A - 3 2A - 4 3A - 7 LOL i love your title above your picture now... It suits you well sir Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Well if i had to assume the reason they decided to class wrestling i would guess that they put more importance on the team rather than the individual. I'm going to go out on a limb here, but my guess is it could have something to do with recognizing that there is a correlation to school size and individual success. It is a hunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrecoCoach Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 You aren't making the selection during wrestle-offs or at any point during the regular season. You are making selections the day of sectional, when varsity rosters are set in stone. Let's make the starting point state. Sample size of 224 wrestlers. Hey! 100% of 1A wrestlers qualified for state. I know. Ridiculous. We can pick any starting point we want and we have different opinions on what it should be. My opinion remains that if you argue practice partners are important then they should be included in the starting point. Also, we've all had JV kids in our line up for sectionals due to illness, skin infections, grades, whatever. All JV are eligible up to Sectional entry list and then only 28 are eligible up until weigh ins of sectional. This is available with the NWCA body fat data. The IHSAA posts total participants for each sport every year. If I didn't have so many kids at home, I'd do it myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galagore Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Let's make the starting point state. Sample size of 224 wrestlers. Hey! 100% of 1A wrestlers qualified for state. I know. Ridiculous. We can pick any starting point we want and we have different opinions on what it should be. My opinion remains that if you argue practice partners are important then they should be included in the starting point. Also, we've all had JV kids in our line up for sectionals due to illness, skin infections, grades, whatever. All JV are eligible up to Sectional entry list and then only 28 are eligible up until weigh ins of sectional. This is available with the NWCA body fat data. The IHSAA posts total participants for each sport every year. If I didn't have so many kids at home, I'd do it myself. Joe set the starting point, official active sectional wrestlers. I can't speak for him, but I assume, he'd let the selection take place after the rat tail round is complete. Then pick from there. The question is, would you take that bet? After rat tails, you get to select 700 1A guys, opponent gets to select 100 3A guys. Loser pays winner $1000.00. You taking that bet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjayroza Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 (edited) I have always been anti-classes for the individual tournament. 1.) I am anti- because of selfish reasons. I think we can all agree that we would like to know who is the best wrestler in the state during the tournament. (Again this is selfish, but it provides me the most enjoyment. That is the most important right. < Just kidding.) 2.) Where do classes end? I know Y2 is ok with breaking it into 2 classes. However, I am sure we can continue to use the logic to break it out into 3, 4 or even 5 classes. Meaning, if we break it into 2 classes there will still be schools at the bottom that dont statistically send the amount to state that the higher 2A schools do. (And so on) 3.) We give the option to Mater Dei to move up to 3A, because they are an anomaly of a small school. Their team and their wrestlers get to wrestle the other top teams. Do we then not believe we can have anomalies amongst individuals in small schools and they can't beat those top individuals? I know Illinois, Ohio, etc all have classed systems. However, it would have been a shame last year if we wouldn't have seen a Micic vs Nick Lee match just because Hanover was 2A, and Nick was in 3A. (Just because Mater Dei decides to go to 3) Those are the type of matches I dread we will not see if we move to 2 or 3 class individual tournament. Yes, we may have seen them wrestle during Al Smith, or some other big tournament but sometimes we don't - just like the Micic/Lee case. We didnt see this until the tournament. I understand the reasons why there are people who want a class system. The numbers support what you are saying. I cannot disagree. I will also not disagree that after the dust settles it will bring in more fans. These are the only points why I would want to keep it. If we can think of a way around these items I could possibly hop to the dark side. LOL (Tournament of Champions?) Edited March 5, 2015 by pjayroza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrecoCoach Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Joe set the starting point, official active sectional wrestlers. I can't speak for him, but I assume, he'd let the selection take place after the rat tail round is complete. Then pick from there. The question is, would you take that bet? After rat tails, you get to select 700 1A guys, opponent gets to select 100 3A guys. Loser pays winner $1000.00. You taking that bet? I've stated in this thread that I am for class wrestling. I fully acknowledge that big schools have an unfair advantage in many ways. Joe's stats assume all schools start equal when they clearly don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galagore Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Understandable. Many have tried to skew the "bet" into being something confusing, which it is not. I just wanted to make sure any late comers understood its simplicity. I apologize for my implications of your views on class wrestling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I have always been anti-classes for the individual tournament. 1.) I am anti- because of selfish reasons. I think we can all agree that we would like to know who is the best wrestler in the state during the tournament. (Again this is selfish, but it provides me the most enjoyment. That is the most important right. < Just kidding.) You're right it's selfish. It's a fan view of the sport. It's not from the view that you want wrestling to grow and prosper. To me this holds very little water. 2.) Where do classes end? I know Y2 is ok with breaking it into 2 classes. However, I am sure we can continue to use the logic to break it out into 3, 4 or even 5 classes. Meaning, if we break it into 2 classes there will still be schools at the bottom that dont statistically send the amount to state that the higher 2A schools do. (And so on) Just as in football, there comes a point where you look and say "we need another class." Then you add it. You don't start with 10, you start with two. Football used to have three classes, now it has six. 3.) We give the option to Mater Dei to move up to 3A, because they are an anomaly of a small school. Their team and their wrestlers get to wrestle the other top teams. Do we then not believe we can have anomalies amongst individuals in small schools and they can't beat those top individuals? I know Illinois, Ohio, etc all have classed systems. However, it would have been a shame last year if we wouldn't have seen a Micic vs Nick Lee match just because Hanover was 2A, and Nick was in 3A. (Just because Mater Dei decides to go to 3) Those are the type of matches I dread we will not see if we move to 2 or 3 class individual tournament. Yes, we may have seen them wrestle during Al Smith, or some other big tournament but sometimes we don't - just like the Micic/Lee case. We didnt see this until the tournament. I understand the reasons why there are people who want a class system. The numbers support what you are saying. I cannot disagree. I will also not disagree that after the dust settles it will bring in more fans. These are the only points why I would want to keep it. If we can think of a way around these items I could possibly hop to the dark side. LOL (Tournament of Champions?) The tournament of champions has never sat well with me. It's not done any where else, except maybe Florida(they tried it a few years ago). Plus that pretty much says "yeah you won, but well you aren't the best." We would be arguing Micic vs. Lee like we do Lee vs. Red now. It's no different. The sun would still come up, we'd still have great wrestling and we'd hopefully be growing the sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I've stated in this thread that I am for class wrestling. I fully acknowledge that big schools have an unfair advantage in many ways. Joe's stats assume all schools start equal when they clearly don't. Hopefully I'm reading you correctly is this what you want? Class--Sect Enries----Qualifiers----Placers-- 1A--999---27.97%--21----2.10%---5---0.50% 2A--1211--33.90%--62----5.12%--23---1.90% 3A--1362--38.13%--141--10.35%--84---6.17% Just a quick translation 2.1% of the 1A wrestlers that enter the tournament qualify for state. Class--Sect----Qualifiers----Placers-- 1A---999--27.97%---21---9.38%---5----4.46% 2A--1211--33.90%---62--27.68%--23---20.54% 3A--1362--38.13%--141--62.95%--84---75.00% Quick translation, 9.38% of the state qualifiers are from 1A, while they represent 27.97% of the entries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts