The IHSAA was right.

[Y2CJ41]

I thought I raised Grenadier better....tsk tsk tsk....

He has wised up and is now heading to the Light Side, no more Dark Side for him!

[FormerHornet]

Essentially, all that I've gathered from this entire thread is that single class supporters refuse to accept facts and use anecdotal evidence as truth. Multi-class supporters use valid evidence and statistics to prove their point, but to no avail. It's like playing chess with a pigeon...

 

Its tradition vs. progress. The one class system does possess benefits but the benefits are outweighed by its negatives. The largest benefit being the prestige of being a champion from a singe-class system. However, Indiana has possessed multiple single class champions that have lost to state champions from multi-class systems.

[ENoblewrestling]

Essentially, all that I've gathered from this entire thread is that single class supporters refuse to accept facts and use anecdotal evidence as truth. Multi-class supporters use valid evidence and statistics to prove their point, but to no avail. It's like playing chess with a pigeon...

That is not necessarily the case.  As a one class supporter I can tell you that most of the stats that are thrown around by class supporters can be viewed in different ways depending on how you interpret the data.  If you debate this you are almost always attacked from about 10 different places  and you end up in hours of discussion that go no where.  I think that most of us have just given up on having any kind of debate on here, but the idea that class supporters just discuss things with emotion is off base.  I will say that in my opinion there are both positive and negative outcomes that come form both classing and staying one class.

Edited January 8, 2016 by buscowrestling

[bigdanteague]

That is not necessarily the case.  As a one class supporter I can tell you that most of the stats that are thrown around by class supporters can be viewed in different ways depending on how you interpret the data.  If you debate this you are almost always attacked from about 10 different places  and you end up in hours of discussion that go no where.  I think that most of us have just given up on having any kind of debate on here, but the idea that class supporters just discuss things with emotion is off base.  I will say that in my opinion there are both positive and negative outcomes that come form both classing and staying one class.

Attacking the stats provided by multi class advocates is not a valid argument for single class. That is a logical fallacy. Grenadier is correct, all arguments in favor of single class are anecdotal and/or emotional.

[AJ]

Attacking the stats provided by multi class advocates is not a valid argument for single class. That is a logical fallacy. Grenadier is correct, all arguments in favor of single class are anecdotal and/or emotional.

 

Not true... you are then implying that there is only one way to look at data and that all data says exactly what you want the data to say.

 

The debate is a fun one to have but doesnt get a lot of traction either way because it is hard to have debates via a keyboard.

[bigdanteague]

Not true... you are then implying that there is only one way to look at data and that all data says exactly what you want the data to say.

 

The debate is a fun one to have but doesnt get a lot of traction either way because it is hard to have debates via a keyboard.

The only thing I am implying is that arguing against multi class stats is not a de facto argument for a single class. I fully agree that data can be interpretated several ways. Single class advocates have rarely if ever produced any data. Some folks are convinced by data, others by their emotions. To each their own.

[ENoblewrestling]

Attacking the stats provided by multi class advocates is not a valid argument for single class. That is a logical fallacy. Grenadier is correct, all arguments in favor of single class are anecdotal and/or emotional. 

So I should just accept the class wrestling proponents argument that 12% of the population should make up 33% of the state qualifiers?  That is one of the key linchpins of their argument, Ill never see how anyone sees that as being statistically sound.

 

Saying that classed state champs don't "throw away their medals" and that they "don't cry about winning a watered down state title" is just as much of an anecdotal/ emotional argument as me saying that I talked to a kid from Ohio once who "wished that they had single class".  Or pointing out that Eric Guerrero said that our one class system was awesome, at the coaches clinic a few years back.  Both sides use emotion in the arguments.

[bigdanteague]

So I should just accept the class wrestling proponents argument that 12% of the population should make up 33% of the state qualifiers?  That is one of the key linchpins of their argument, Ill never see how anyone sees that as being statistically sound.

 

Saying that classed state champs don't "throw away their medals" and that they "don't cry about winning a watered down state title" is just as much of an anecdotal/ emotional argument as me saying that I talked to a kid from Ohio once who "wished that they had single class".  Or pointing out that Eric Guerrero said that our one class system was awesome, at the coaches clinic a few years back.  Both sides use emotion in the arguments.

If the argument is that all individuals have an equal shot then no one should be making an argument based on total population, only on total entrants. The total population argument is a straw man, another logical fallacy.

 

No one said anecdotal/emotional arguments had NO validity so the "I know you are but what am I" argument really is of little value. Grenadiers point remains valid, one side has produced data, one side has not.

[Y2CJ41]

So I should just accept the class wrestling proponents argument that 12% of the population should make up 33% of the state qualifiers?  That is one of the key linchpins of their argument, Ill never see how anyone sees that as being statistically sound.

 

Saying that classed state champs don't "throw away their medals" and that they "don't cry about winning a watered down state title" is just as much of an anecdotal/ emotional argument as me saying that I talked to a kid from Ohio once who "wished that they had single class".  Or pointing out that Eric Guerrero said that our one class system was awesome, at the coaches clinic a few years back.  Both sides use emotion in the arguments.

The whole population isn't entered at the state tournament. Each team is only allowed 14 entries in the state tournament. I know you're a new coach, so you probably didn't realize that.

 

63% of the state qualifiers come from 33% of the entries. If we used the whole population it would be much higher.

 

I'll make a bet with you, I'll pick 50 3A wrestlers, you can pick 1000 1A wrestlers. Whoever gets the most state qualifiers wins, wanna take me up?

[takedownartist]

While Indiana high school wrestling has been improving steadily over the years, the depth of talent after the top 6 or so state placers is still lacking compared to top tier states.

We have gained national attention with our top guys.

Why water it down with less than stellar talent winning State Championships in smaller classes?

Plenty of small school kids have won state by putting in the work year round by traveling to find the best off season partners and tournaments. These types of kids relish the one class system by taking down giants.

[Y2CJ41]

While Indiana high school wrestling has been improving steadily over the years, the depth of talent after the top 6 or so state placers is still lacking compared to top tier states.

We have gained national attention with our top guys.

Why water it down with less than stellar talent winning State Championships in smaller classes?

Plenty of small school kids have won state by putting in the work year round by traveling to find the best off season partners and tournaments. These types of kids relish the one class system by taking down giants.

What is your definition of "plenty?" I need specific numbers. Are 10 small school champs every 10 years a "plenty?"

 

"Watering down" of a state tournament has not hindered our neighboring states in terms of depth.

[Y2CJ41]

Over the past 10 years....

3 Class System

3A

1st- 104

2nd- 105

Total- 209

 

2A

1st- 28

2nd- 29

Total- 57

 

1A

1st- 8

2nd- 6

Total- 14

 

2 Class System

2A

1st- 117

2nd- 123

Total- 240

 

1A

1st- 23

2nd- 17

Total- 40

 

Is that "plenty?"

[casualwrestlingfan]

Why can't I have my cake and eat it? Oh yeah I'm cutting weight! For the millionth time I'll say I want both classed and single class team state duals and individual tournaments. Best of both worlds. Keep the traditions with single class and saying you're the best overall. Have classed and give smaller schools and individuals with less resources to compete and grow the sport.

[Y2CJ41]

Why can't I have my cake and eat it? Oh yeah I'm cutting weight! For the millionth time I'll say I want both classed and single class team state duals and individual tournaments. Best of both worlds. Keep the traditions with single class and saying you're the best overall. Have classed and give smaller schools and individuals with less resources to compete and grow the sport.

How many states have this kind of setup? How many have tried and succeeded?

[julio]

OK, I am going to bite on this subject. Why does California still have one class?

[casualwrestlingfan]

How many states have this kind of setup? How many have tried and succeeded?

Not sure but probably none. The schedule makes it almost impossible but it's something I'd love to see try and happen. Then again I also like to see freestyle and Greco-Roman become high school sponsored. Also have that crazy notion of making a style that encompasses all 3 styles in 3 different periods as well. I can dream can't I?

[takedownartist]

What is your definition of "plenty?" I need specific numbers. Are 10 small school champs every 10 years a "plenty?"

 

"Watering down" of a state tournament has not hindered our neighboring states in terms of depth.

 

Illinois has almost double Indiana population.

Once we double our state's population I am okay with two class system.

Edited January 8, 2016 by takedownartist

[Fabio Jr.]

So the size of the schools does matter in IL

[takedownartist]

So the size of the schools does matter in IL

 

 

Talent depth

[fartfry18]

Over the past 10 years....

3 Class System

3A

1st- 104

2nd- 105

Total- 209

 

2A

1st- 28

2nd- 29

Total- 57

 

1A

1st- 8

2nd- 6

Total- 14

 

2 Class System

2A

1st- 117

2nd- 123

Total- 240

 

1A

1st- 23

2nd- 17

Total- 40

 

Is that "plenty?"

Just a question on your stats... Is MD considered 3A?  If class system happens, does the school still get to bump there wrestlers up to the bigger class if they want too. .  I would say class system is not rewarding to the wrestler because of the fact that being the best in your class is not the same as saying the best in your state.  I understand the argument that bigger schools consistently produce more talent or state placers and state champs.  However, as a big fan of Indiana Wrestling, what I love about it is the single class.  Wrestling is essentially an individual sport which makes it the best sport because there's no one else to blame when you are out on the mat.  It teaches a wrestler many things.  I also believe in the life lesson it teaches of don't make excuses and adapt and overcome if you want to be the best.  This means, don't blame that just because your from a smaller school means you can't be as good of a wrestler as someone from a bigger school.  That's an insane idea.  Big schools have more talent because they have more kids attending and more opportunities of getting talent at their school.  There is no disadvantage though to a wrestler from a smaller school when he steps out on the mat with a wrestler from a bigger school.  You can argue team mates to practice with.  Well those team mates are now sitting in the stands watching and can't help the individual.  A wrestler can be as good as HE/SHE wants to be.  I just feel that if the system is classed, it takes a lot of the validity of being the best in the state away.  I also feel that the size of the school is not a direct indicator to the talent level of wrestling at that school.  The talent level of wrestling is directly affected by the hardwork and dedication put in by the coaches and by the INDIVIDUALS of the program.  Also, the benefit of a one-class system for smaller schools is there is regionals and semi-state and other accomplishments you can make it too and feel rewarded about for accomplishing.  I would rather say I wrestled with all the talent and lost in the ticket round than I won state but class 1A and I'll never have the chance or shot to prove my ability and see how I would do in the bigger classes. 

Edited January 8, 2016 by fartfry18

[Fabio Jr.]

Talent depth

So having more kids gives talent depth

[Y2CJ41]

OK, I am going to bite on this subject. Why does California still have one class?

Why do 42 states have class wrestling would be an easier one to answer. Why would Wyoming with 47 schools have a classed system and since 1974? Why does Idaho with 98 schools have classed wrestling since 1963?

 

 

Not sure but probably none. The schedule makes it almost impossible but it's something I'd love to see try and happen. Then again I also like to see freestyle and Greco-Roman become high school sponsored. Also have that crazy notion of making a style that encompasses all 3 styles in 3 different periods as well. I can dream can't I?

Florida actually tried this a few years ago and it had a solid financial backing, but I'm not sure it lasted past a year or two. There is a reason this doesn't work, much like it didn't for basketball. One week you tell a kid/team they are a state champion, but the next week you say "well you're not really a state champion." 

 

 

Illinois has almost double Indiana population.

Once we double our state's population I am okay with two class system.

But size of state shouldn't matter, much like Mater Dei proves the size of the school doesn't matter.

 

 

Just a question on your stats... Is MD considered 3A?

Yes, for two reasons. The first they bump up to 3A for the team state duals and secondly they are an EXTREME anamoly. 

 

If class system happens, does the school still get to bump there wrestlers up to the bigger class if they want too. 

In Indiana a team can bump up a class in the classed sports. 

 

I would say class system is not rewarding to the wrestler because of the fact that being the best in your class is not the same as saying the best in your state.

Not rewarding? So the kids in the 42 states with classed wrestling don't have a rewarding experience in wrestling? I find that absurd.

 

I understand the argument that bigger schools consistently produce more talent or state placers and state champs.

That isn't an argument, that is a fact as proven by data.

 

However, as a big fan of Indiana Wrestling, what I love about it is the single class.Wrestling is essentially an individual sport which makes it the best sport because there's no one else to blame when you are out on the mat. It teaches a wrestler many things.

That is the same in a classed or non-classed state. Wrestling doesn't change in a classed state. 

 

I also believe in the life lesson it teaches of don't make excuses and adapt and overcome if you want to be the best. 

See above, this won't change in a classed system.

 

This means, don't blame that just because your from a smaller school means you can't be as good of a wrestler as someone from a bigger school.

No one is blaming, we are here to grow the sport. We want more kids with a "rewarding experience." More kids with a rewarding experience will grow the sport at all levels.

 

That's an insane idea.

Not in 42 other states

 

Big schools have more talent because they have more kids attending and more opportunities of getting talent at their school.

So thus you are for classed wrestling.

 

There is no disadvantage though to a wrestler from a smaller school when he steps out on the mat with a wrestler from a bigger school.

I beg to differ. Number and quality of practice partners, less multi-sport athletes, and more and higher quality coaches make a huge difference. 

 

You can argue team mates to practice with. Well those team mates are now sitting in the stands watching and can't help the individual.

You don't think teammates help? Really? Really? You don't think the kid with better practice partners won't be better prepared for the match?

 

A wrestler can be as good as HE/SHE wants to be. I just feel that if the system is classed, it takes a lot of the validity of being the best in the state away.

Validity? You mean like it takes away from being a state champion in football or even our recently crowned champs? I see that Bellmont is ordering rings, sure sounds like validity to me.

 

I also feel that the size of the school is not a direct indicator to the talent level of wrestling at that school.

The statistics show otherwise. I'll give you the same bet I did Sammy. You get 1000 wrestlers of your choosing from 1A level, I'll take 50 from the 3A level. Whoever gets the most state qualifiers win. I'll even throw in some IndianaMat gear if you win.

 

The talent level of wrestling is directly affected by the hardwork and dedication put in by the coaches and by the INDIVIDUALS of the program.

Then why do small schools struggle? Are you trying to tell me the small school athletes don't work hard or aren't dedicated?

 

Also, the benefit of a one-class system for smaller schools is there is regionals and semi-state and other accomplishments you can make it too and feel rewarded about for accomplishing.

So a small school should celebrate having a regional champion like others celebrate having a state champion. Sounds nice.

 

I would rather say I wrestled with all the talent and lost in the ticket round than I won state but class 1A and I'll never have the chance or shot to prove my ability and see how I would do in the bigger classes. 

Actually your school would have celebrated your championship. You would have a big mural on the wall and get a big fancy ring. Being a semi-state qualifier gets you a pat on the back. There is a difference.

 

I'll leave you with a quote from a guy that coached in Indiana and then went off to Arizona and coached. He was NOT a fan of classed wrestling, but he stated it perfectly when he said "when you win a state title you win a state title." There was little to no difference having a kid win a title in Indiana or Arizona.

[takedownartist]

So having more kids gives talent depth

 

Most, if not all top tier states have greater population.

 

Those states always  produce more college AA's then us and that will result in better future coaches when the AA's return home to work with greater number of athletes.

 

The rich always get richer. Sorry

[casualwrestlingfan]

Why do 42 states have class wrestling would be an easier one to answer. Why would Wyoming with 47 schools have a classed system and since 1974? Why does Idaho with 98 schools have classed wrestling since 1963?

 

 

 

Florida actually tried this a few years ago and it had a solid financial backing, but I'm not sure it lasted past a year or two. There is a reason this doesn't work, much like it didn't for basketball. One week you tell a kid/team they are a state champion, but the next week you say "well you're not really a state champion." 

 

 

 

But size of state shouldn't matter, much like Mater Dei proves the size of the school doesn't matter.

 

 

Just a question on your stats... Is MD considered 3A?

Yes, for two reasons. The first they bump up to 3A for the team state duals and secondly they are an EXTREME anamoly. 

 

If class system happens, does the school still get to bump there wrestlers up to the bigger class if they want too. 

In Indiana a team can bump up a class in the classed sports. 

 

I would say class system is not rewarding to the wrestler because of the fact that being the best in your class is not the same as saying the best in your state.

Not rewarding? So the kids in the 42 states with classed wrestling don't have a rewarding experience in wrestling? I find that absurd.

 

I understand the argument that bigger schools consistently produce more talent or state placers and state champs.

That isn't an argument, that is a fact as proven by data.

 

However, as a big fan of Indiana Wrestling, what I love about it is the single class.Wrestling is essentially an individual sport which makes it the best sport because there's no one else to blame when you are out on the mat. It teaches a wrestler many things.

That is the same in a classed or non-classed state. Wrestling doesn't change in a classed state. 

 

I also believe in the life lesson it teaches of don't make excuses and adapt and overcome if you want to be the best. 

See above, this won't change in a classed system.

 

This means, don't blame that just because your from a smaller school means you can't be as good of a wrestler as someone from a bigger school.

No one is blaming, we are here to grow the sport. We want more kids with a "rewarding experience." More kids with a rewarding experience will grow the sport at all levels.

 

That's an insane idea.

Not in 42 other states

 

Big schools have more talent because they have more kids attending and more opportunities of getting talent at their school.

So thus you are for classed wrestling.

 

There is no disadvantage though to a wrestler from a smaller school when he steps out on the mat with a wrestler from a bigger school.

I beg to differ. Number and quality of practice partners, less multi-sport athletes, and more and higher quality coaches make a huge difference. 

 

You can argue team mates to practice with. Well those team mates are now sitting in the stands watching and can't help the individual.

You don't think teammates help? Really? Really? You don't think the kid with better practice partners won't be better prepared for the match?

 

A wrestler can be as good as HE/SHE wants to be. I just feel that if the system is classed, it takes a lot of the validity of being the best in the state away.

Validity? You mean like it takes away from being a state champion in football or even our recently crowned champs? I see that Bellmont is ordering rings, sure sounds like validity to me.

 

I also feel that the size of the school is not a direct indicator to the talent level of wrestling at that school.

The statistics show otherwise. I'll give you the same bet I did Sammy. You get 1000 wrestlers of your choosing from 1A level, I'll take 50 from the 3A level. Whoever gets the most state qualifiers win. I'll even throw in some IndianaMat gear if you win.

 

The talent level of wrestling is directly affected by the hardwork and dedication put in by the coaches and by the INDIVIDUALS of the program.

Then why do small schools struggle? Are you trying to tell me the small school athletes don't work hard or aren't dedicated?

 

Also, the benefit of a one-class system for smaller schools is there is regionals and semi-state and other accomplishments you can make it too and feel rewarded about for accomplishing.

So a small school should celebrate having a regional champion like others celebrate having a state champion. Sounds nice.

 

I would rather say I wrestled with all the talent and lost in the ticket round than I won state but class 1A and I'll never have the chance or shot to prove my ability and see how I would do in the bigger classes. 

Actually your school would have celebrated your championship. You would have a big mural on the wall and get a big fancy ring. Being a semi-state qualifier gets you a pat on the back. There is a difference.

 

I'll leave you with a quote from a guy that coached in Indiana and then went off to Arizona and coached. He was NOT a fan of classed wrestling, but he stated it perfectly when he said "when you win a state title you win a state title." There was little to no difference having a kid win a title in Indiana or Arizona.

Yeah I get that point. Guess I would think being a 1A/2A/3A individual champion being a glorified Al Smith champion. Still a champion though and that can be crucial to new wrestlers wanting to join. Single class being the champion of champions. Also it was interesting AJ did come back with that answer.

[fartfry18]

I didn't say 14 individual statements in the first place, so that they could be picked apart and taken out of context. They were reasons that influenced each other. Also the argument that it must be the right way because 42 other states are doing it is flawed or that it's not an insane idea because 42 other states have it. Like ole Bobby, momma always says that just because everyone else is doing it doesn't mean it's right? Question for you using facts for Wyoming and Idaho, is the quality of there wrestling or wrestlers improving?

Big thing I want to mention is you're saying that you'd rather be a state champion in 1A because you would have a poster and a shiny ring and people would celebrate you is the wrong thing to teach kids. That's all the superficial stuff that means nothing without the reason of why you have those things. Also, I want to congratulate Bellmont because I'm taking nothing away from there accomplishments, To compare class system as team duals and individual tourney is two opposites bud. Bigger schools completely matter in team duals because of obvious reasons of having a bigger selection or pool to draw talent out of. That's what football and basketball are and why other sports need to be classed. In an individual tournament, it's different because it's not how good the rest of your team is, it's how good you are. So I certainly think if you class the individual tournament it takes the validity of saying your the best wrestler [champ] of your state. Also so your stats aren't valid stats if you manipulate them and use MD as 3A when they're not. I also feel as though MD would be an anomaly to most of your argument about the classed system and how bigger schools have the advantage. I think that's the beauty of wrestling is that especially in the individual tournament, ultimately is how far you want to go. I'm not saying team mates and coaches don't matter, but every coach know that if the wrestler is going to be good, they have to decide it and they have to decide how good. I'm not saying that smaller classes don't work hard because they have less champs. I'm saying that that they still have the same shot out on the Mat as the other kid. To say they don't is teaching them that in life if your not given the same opportunities or same resources to use as other people have well then don't work harder to get where you want or achieve want you want to ultimately achieve. We'll just help you and change things so that you can have the same thing.