Jump to content

Sectional seeding meetings


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Trev Young said:

wrestler A is 6-1 against the sectional field at the weight class.

wrestler B is 3-0 against the field with a win over wrestler A.

Wrestler A is the one seed for having most wins against the sectional field. 

"wrestler with the most WINS against opponents in the bracket gets the one seed. It does not matter if Wrester A lost to wrestler B in the bracket as long as wrestler A has the most wins in the bracket. Wrestler A gets the seed."

 

5 minutes ago, Trev Young said:

Same.  

So, you guys (OH) wrestle Miss in three duals, Eastbrook in 2 and MG in 2.

Thats 7 wins against the field for a lot of your guys. In most cases it won't matter if my guy beat yours at that western invite because we won't have that many "wins against the bracket". 

Absolutely the DUMBEST thing I have ever heard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Trev Young said:

Same.  

So, you guys (OH) wrestle Miss in three duals, Eastbrook in 2 and MG in 2.

Thats 7 wins against the field for a lot of your guys. In most cases it won't matter if my guy beat yours at that western invite because we won't have that many "wins against the bracket". 

That's just ignorant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have an email from the man himself telling me that our "Coaches Association developed and presented the idea of this "new" head to head criteria."  I have it on good authority that his statement is false!

Edited by Clint Gard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Trev Young said:

wrestler A is 6-1 against the sectional field at the weight class.

wrestler B is 3-0 against the field with a win over wrestler A.

Wrestler A is the one seed for having most wins against the sectional field. 

"wrestler with the most WINS against opponents in the bracket gets the one seed. It does not matter if Wrester A lost to wrestler B in the bracket as long as wrestler A has the most wins in the bracket. Wrestler A gets the seed."

This just hurt my head!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not the first year that it has been done like this.  I haven't been a High School Coach in 3 years and our meeting called for help on a head to head question about Wrestler A wins over Wrestler B then B beats wrestler A, who gets the criteria.  Then it was explained that wasn't what head to head meant. 🤦‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So seed this:

 

Everyone lost to the wrestler (s) below them except wrestler H.  He has not beaten anyone in the bracket but has not lost to anyone in the bracket.  

 

Wrestler A 15-3 record 6-0 vs sectional bracket

Wrestler B 14-4 record 5-1 vs sectional bracket

Wrestler C 13-5 record 4-2 vs sectional bracket

Wrester D 12-6 record 3-3 vs sectional bracket

Wrestler E 11-7 record 2-4 vs sectional bracket

Wrestler F 10-8 record 1-5 vs sectional bracket

Wrestler G 9-9 record 0-6 vs sectional bracket

 

Wrestler H 22-0 record 0-0 vs sectional bracket

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would love to know how they determine the second part of the head to head criteria in their version of head to total sectional interpretation.   

 

"If they have beaten each other an equal number of times, then the winner of the last match gets the seed." 

 

This wording clearly indicates an individual vs. individual not a group head to head determination.

Edited by MattM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, NCGRAD2000 said:

So seed this:

 

Everyone lost to the wrestler (s) below them except wrestler H.  He has not beaten anyone in the bracket but has not lost to anyone in the bracket.  

 

Wrestler A 15-3 record 6-0 vs sectional bracket

Wrestler B 14-4 record 5-1 vs sectional bracket

Wrestler C 13-5 record 4-2 vs sectional bracket

Wrester D 12-6 record 3-3 vs sectional bracket

Wrestler E 11-7 record 2-4 vs sectional bracket

Wrestler F 10-8 record 1-5 vs sectional bracket

Wrestler G 9-9 record 0-6 vs sectional bracket

 

Wrestler H 22-0 record 0-0 vs sectional bracket

Based on the explanation we were given at our conference seeding meeting it would be this order:

A, B, C, D, E, F for sectional.  22-0 doesn’t matter because he has no wins in the bracket.  Happened at 106 and 182 in our conference.  Completely off the reservation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Clint Gard said:

Based on the explanation we were given at our conference seeding meeting it would be this order:

A, B, C, D, E, F for sectional.  22-0 doesn’t matter because he has no wins in the bracket.  Happened at 106 and 182 in our conference.  Completely off the reservation.

Does it matter if 22 - 0 is a state qualifier?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, MattM said:

I would love to know how they determine the second part of the head to head criteria in their version of head to total sectional interpretation.   

 

"If they have beaten each other an equal number of times, then the winner of the last match gets the seed." 

 

This wording clearly indicates an individual vs. individual not a group head to head determination.

 

 

Well the field of wrestlers would certainly have beaten each other an equal number of times since there would be a winner and a loser in every head to head matchup... So whoever won the last head to head match against anyone in the field gets the seed.

 

Season 9 Nbc GIF by The Office

 

Steve Carell Comedy GIF by filmeditor

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NCGRAD2000 said:

Does it matter if 22 - 0 is a state qualifier?  

Not one bit.  That is what happened at 182 at our conference.  Not our wrestler but he had no wins in the bracket because he was dropping to 182 for the first time.  Had the best record. No head to heads or common and was a state qualifier. Ended up 4th seed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Clint Gard said:

Based on the explanation we were given at our conference seeding meeting it would be this order:

A, B, C, D, E, F for sectional.  22-0 doesn’t matter because he has no wins in the bracket.  Happened at 106 and 182 in our conference.  Completely off the reservation.

Page 77 of the Winter Bulletin states:

 

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

 

In an email I received, it stated that last night on the phone call that criteria does not need to be used if there is a 100% consensus for a seed. 

 

By my interpretation, in the above scenario, if Wrestler H at 22-0 deserves the 1 seed and there is a 100% consensus in the room, then he can get the 1 seed. If one coach disagrees, then we must follow criteria. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Clint Gard said:

Based on the explanation we were given at our conference seeding meeting it would be this order:

A, B, C, D, E, F for sectional.  22-0 doesn’t matter because he has no wins in the bracket.  Happened at 106 and 182 in our conference.  Completely off the reservation.

If you go look at 2020 Elwood Sectional, Robert Faulkens made us seed the whole sectional this way. I was coaching at Guerin Catholic at the time and our 145 Jeff Dunasky was 28-2 with losses to Viduya and bumped up and lost to Kervin, both state champs that year. Had also teched the 1 seed the week before in 1st period, but was made the 2 seed because he didn't have as many head to heads. The craziest seeding meeting I've seen. https://www.trackwrestling.com/predefinedtournaments/MainFrame.jsp?newSession=false&TIM=1674586934175&pageName=&twSessionId=ubusvatgld

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, NCGRAD2000 said:

So seed this:

 

Everyone lost to the wrestler (s) below them except wrestler H.  He has not beaten anyone in the bracket but has not lost to anyone in the bracket.  

 

Wrestler A 15-3 record 6-0 vs sectional bracket

Wrestler B 14-4 record 5-1 vs sectional bracket

Wrestler C 13-5 record 4-2 vs sectional bracket

Wrester D 12-6 record 3-3 vs sectional bracket

Wrestler E 11-7 record 2-4 vs sectional bracket

Wrestler F 10-8 record 1-5 vs sectional bracket

Wrestler G 9-9 record 0-6 vs sectional bracket

 

Wrestler H 22-0 record 0-0 vs sectional bracket

The only thing I would say is wrestler G has no "head to head" wins so I would say the next criteria would at least get H the 6th seed.... but then again how his commons determined with this mind set?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, bomber_bob said:

Page 77 of the Winter Bulletin states:

 

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

 

In an email I received, it stated that last night on the phone call that criteria does not need to be used if there is a 100% consensus for a seed. 

 

By my interpretation, in the above scenario, if Wrestler H at 22-0 deserves the 1 seed and there is a 100% consensus in the room, then he can get the 1 seed. If one coach disagrees, then we must follow criteria. 

Unfortunately coaches would rather "win" the seeding meeting and argue for crappy seeds than do the right thing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, a_fleenor171 said:

If you go look at 2020 Elwood Sectional, Robert Faulkens made us seed the whole sectional this way. I was coaching at Guerin Catholic at the time and our 145 Jeff Dunasky was 28-2 with losses to Viduya and bumped up and lost to Kervin, both state champs that year. Had also teched the 1 seed the week before in 1st period, but was made the 2 seed because he didn't have as many head to heads. The craziest seeding meeting I've seen. https://www.trackwrestling.com/predefinedtournaments/MainFrame.jsp?newSession=false&TIM=1674586934175&pageName=&twSessionId=ubusvatgld

So he beat the kid the week before and it still didn’t count…that’s how you know he has no clue.  If he shows up to anyones seeding meeting, he should not be allowed to enter.  He should have better things to do than go to a seeding meeting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, a_fleenor171 said:

If you go look at 2020 Elwood Sectional, Robert Faulkens made us seed the whole sectional this way. I was coaching at Guerin Catholic at the time and our 145 Jeff Dunasky was 28-2 with losses to Viduya and bumped up and lost to Kervin, both state champs that year. Had also teched the 1 seed the week before in 1st period, but was made the 2 seed because he didn't have as many head to heads. The craziest seeding meeting I've seen. https://www.trackwrestling.com/predefinedtournaments/MainFrame.jsp?newSession=false&TIM=1674586934175&pageName=&twSessionId=ubusvatgld

This is the meeting that I was referring to.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Y2CJ41 said:

Unfortunately coaches would rather "win" the seeding meeting and argue for crappy seeds than do the right thing. 

It wasn't the coaches that wanted to do this.  It was IHSAA that stated that we had to do it this way.  Nobody that I remember was happy about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Raven27 said:

It wasn't the coaches that wanted to do this.  It was IHSAA that stated that we had to do it this way.  Nobody that I remember was happy about it.

They have the seeding criteria in the bulletin. It's pretty straight forward, why do you need to contact them about it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, bbulldog152 said:

The only thing I would say is wrestler G has no "head to head" wins so I would say the next criteria would at least get H the 6th seed.... but then again how his commons determined with this mind set?

F would be the 6 seed.  H and G would not be seeded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • 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.