Jump to content

Elwood Sectional Seeding


a_fleenor171

Recommended Posts

Our sectional tonight used the criteria, "Most head to head wins in the sectional weight class" as the first criteria.  There were several instances where 'Wrestler A' beat 'Wrestler B', but 'Wrestler B' had more head to head wins against the rest of the field and was given the higher seed.

 

For example, Jeff Dunasky Jr. of Guerin Catholic (25-2) beat Cooper Mansfield(27-7?) last week. Was winning 21-4 before getting the fall in the 2nd period. However, Dunasky only had 3 wins against sectional opponents entered at 145lb. Cooper Mansfield had 4 wins against the field. Mansfield was given the 1 seed, Dunasky the 2 seed.

 

All coaches in the seeding meeting agreed that this was a dumb way to interpret the criteria, but the host site AD, and host site tournament director were adamant they talked to Robert Faulkens and this was the correct interpretation of the criteria and used it for every weight class.

 

I guess my questions are, has anyone else heard of this interpretation? Does anyone else actually follow this interpretation of the criteria?

 

The other head scratchers were state qualifier Jared Brown of Pendleton Heights getting a 2 seed behind a kid he beat head to head and had a better record than.

Noblesville's DeWayne Simpson was 28-3 I believe and had beat the 1 seed head to head, but was given the 2 seed as well.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the way the criteria was interpreted at the Lafayette Jeff sectional meeting last night as well.  This is the seeding criteria from the winter bulletin and nowhere does it mention the number of wins vs opponents in the sectional field.  I'm not sure how this is the interpretation?

 

a. Head to head competition current year; (The wrestler with the most head to head wins gets the seed. If they have beaten each other an equal number of times, then the winner of the last match gets the seed. Head to Page 79 of 84 head is counted at any level of interscholastic competition.  Matches against teammates are not counted for seeding purposes.);

b. Record against common opponents;

c. Semi‐State quarterfinalist, or higher in previous year IHSAA Tournament Series;

d. Win percentage. A contestant with the best overall record (winning percentage) who has wrestled at least 10 matches; For seeding purposes, forfeits should not be included in a wrestler’s record.

 

Just curious how many other sectionals did it the New way vs the way its been done for 50 years?

Edited by WL wrestling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been coaching since 2003, I have been apart of 3 different Sectional Seeding meetings in that span, and I have NEVER seen what I saw last night at a seeding meeting!!!!  I feel terrible for the wrestlers involved due to the interpretation of the "Head to Head'" criteria.

 

If wrestler "A" has a Head to Head win over wrestler "B", but wrestler "B" has more wins against other sectional opponents, he still gets the seed over wrestler "A"....Even Though wrestler "A" has a 1. Head to head win 2.Higher winning percentage 3. Farther Advancement in Last years tournament series. 

 

This was the case in in the 3 mentioned situations above, but it was even worse when they tried to seed the #3,4,5,&6....I was at a loss for words.  I still can't believe what I witnessed.   I spoke up about this situation during the meeting,  but nothing was changed.

 

Most of you all know me, I was pretty fired up about it, because it is doing an injustice to all of the wrestlers who put a body work together throughout the entire regular season, only to see this happen. This could have a negative ripple effect through the entire Tournament series (Regional, Semi State, State) due to this.  Either way all the kids have to wrestle it out, but at Sectional seeding meeting it is our job as coaches, to separate, and seed the best wrestlers....& that wasn't done. 

 

Coach Weimer 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, WL wrestling said:

This is the way the criteria was interpreted at the Lafayette Jeff sectional meeting last night as well.  This is the seeding criteria from the winter bulletin and nowhere does it mention the number of wins vs opponents in the sectional field.  I'm not sure how this is the interpretation?

 

a. Head to head competition current year; (The wrestler with the most head to head wins gets the seed. If they have beaten each other an equal number of times, then the winner of the last match gets the seed. Head to Page 79 of 84 head is counted at any level of interscholastic competition.  Matches against teammates are not counted for seeding purposes.);

b. Record against common opponents;

c. Semi‐State quarterfinalist, or higher in previous year IHSAA Tournament Series;

d. Win percentage. A contestant with the best overall record (winning percentage) who has wrestled at least 10 matches; For seeding purposes, forfeits should not be included in a wrestler’s record.

 

Just curious how many other sectionals did it the New way vs the way its been done for 50 years?

 

I've never been in a seeding meeting so I may be off, but it seems to me that someone is getting a & b confused, or at least combining them.  Record against common opponents pretty much takes into account head to head wins against all in the sectional.  I know it could include opponents outside the sectional, but in general, it seems if you followed the way in the original post, it would almost make B (common opponents) redundant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Per the winter bulletin (sec 5 and 6) for those who may not have seen or can access it(bottom of 78/top of 79):

 

5. Coaches should strive to keep open minds when seeding assignments 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.   
6. Determination of seeded wrestlers is given in order of importance: Varsity contests are the only record submitted
for seeding consideration.
a. Head to head competition current year; (The wrestler with the most head to head wins gets the seed. If they
have beaten each other an equal number of times, then the winner of the last match gets the seed. Head to
Page 79 of 84
head is counted at any level of interscholastic competition.  Matches against teammates are not counted for
seeding purposes.);
b. Record against common opponents;
c. Semi‐State quarterfinalist, or higher in previous year IHSAA Tournament Series;
d. Win percentage. A contestant with the best overall record (winning percentage) who has wrestled at least 10
matches; For seeding purposes, forfeits should not be included in a wrestler’s record.
e. Farthest advancement in previous year IHSAA State Tournament Series;
f. Draw by lot. Criteria is reset after determining each seed.
    Criteria is reset after determining each seed
    NOTE: A wrestler with less than ten matches may not be seeded ahead of a wrestler with at least ten matches
and a winning record unless he/she meets criteria in a, b or c.  A wrestler with a losing record may not be
seeded unless he/she meets criteria a, b or c unless there are less than six (6) wrestlers in the bracke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, TonyAbbott said:

The two sectionals mentioned here, some of the coaches have been around a long time it’s hard for me to believe this has been misinterpreted.

I don't want to put words in anyone else's mouth, but it wasn't the coaches interpretation. Every coach was pretty much in agreement that this was wrong and the 'old way' was the common sense way.

 

However, multiple coaches along with the host site AD and tournament director said they had talked to Robert Faulkens and this was his interpretation and there was nothing we could do about it.

 

Frustrating to say the least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unreal that after a head 2 head result they can place the losing guy above the winner.. twilight zone sounding stuff to me.. almost as bad as my dream I would have where I drank the whole fridge of liquids and woke up not knowing if it was real...too bad this is real life and kids are getting messed over! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's crazy to me that every year there are threads like this one with questions about seeding.  I don't get how there is not an established way of doing it that is used every year and has been used the same way for years.  Why should that process change?  Add to what seems like every few years there seem to be changes about how state or semi-state is scored.  Why is there not an established scoring system that again, doesn't need to be changed?

 

It just seems weird that processes that have been the same for many years, aren't set to the point they don't change!

Edited by SWINfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SWINfan said:

It's crazy to me that every year there are threads like this one with questions about seeding.  I don't get how there is not an established way of doing it that is used every year and has been used the same way for years.  Why should that process change?  Add to what seems like every few years there seem to be changes about how state or semi-state is scored.  Why is there not an established scoring system that again, doesn't no needs to be changed?

 

It just seems weird that processes that have been the same for many years, aren't set to the point they don't change!

Agreed. This isn't rocket science. It really isn't that hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, a_fleenor171 said:

I don't want to put words in anyone else's mouth, but it wasn't the coaches interpretation. Every coach was pretty much in agreement that this was wrong and the 'old way' was the common sense way.

 

However, multiple coaches along with the host site AD and tournament director said they had talked to Robert Faulkens and this was his interpretation and there was nothing we could do about it.

 

Frustrating to say the least.

Nobody at that meeting agreed with how they did it.  He's the Assistant Commissioner of the IHSAA!  How do you go against what he says.  I don't think for 1 second we did it in correctly based on what the expectations of the IHSAA are, we all think that way is incorrect.  We all spoke up and thought it was not in the best interest of the sport or the kids. I totally agree with you frustrating

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Raven27 said:

Nobody at that meeting agreed with how they did it.  He's the Assistant Commissioner of the IHSAA!  How do you go against what he says.  I don't think for 1 second we did it in correctly based on what the expectations of the IHSAA are, we all think that way is incorrect.  We all spoke up and thought it was not in the best interest of the sport or the kids. I totally agree with you frustrating

 

Maybe at that point, coaches should just quote the line about the purpose of seeding is to separate the outstanding wrestlers above all else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Coach Nieman said:

Maybe at that point, coaches should just quote the line about the purpose of seeding is to separate the outstanding wrestlers above all else. 

That was stated.  The AD even called Faulkens again.  Per the IHSAA we didn't do it wrong everybody else did.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How in the world does someone interpret the first criteria as, "head to head against all opponents in the bracket?" It states that, "If they have beaten EACH OTHER an equal number of times, then the winner of the last match gets the seed." Clearly it is talking about the two wrestlers vying for the respective seed and not the entire field of participants. If ever it was appropriate to protest, "Mongolia style," this would have been it! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what happens when someone is in charge who doesn't understand wrestling.

 

Interpreting it like this is stupid, but it does discourage teams from sitting or bumping their varsity wrestler during the season.  However, coaches who use their starter in the correct weight are still penalized if the other team sits or bumps their starter.  If that's the reason for the interpretation, then they didn't think through all the consequences of the change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any chance someone from that sectional could contact Mr. Faulkens?  In my experience with him I do think he is a fair man and tries to make things right when something like this happens.  If the tournament director misunderstood, maybe there is a chance (small though it may be) it could be reseeded with it being early in the week.

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.