Beating a Dead Semistate Horse

[AndyStJ]

I will have to say that this was done during lunch break, so may have errors, but this shows my objections to the current semistate setup. Let's say that we want the best 4 wrestlers to qualify from each weight in each semistate. (If we don't, then why not?)

Under the current setup with random draws, assuming that the better wrestler always wins, the odd of the top four wrestlers actually qualifying for state is:

100% all 4 qualify if all 4 are from different regionals. Because they are in different pods.
33% all 4 qualify if 2 of top 4 are from one regional.
50% all 4 qualify if 2 of top 4 are from regional A and 2 of top 4 are from regional B. 16.7% chance that only 2 of 4 will qualify. This is horrible.
33% all 4 qualify if 3 of top 4 are from one regional.
100% all 4 qualify if all 4 are from same regional. This is unlikely.

I think that these odds are stupid. If you had wrestlebacks, the chance of top 4 qualifying goes way up, although I have not done the math.

[rookie78]

My question is, what constitutes the 4 best wrestlers?

[AndyStJ]

7 minutes ago, rookie78 said:

My question is, what constitutes the 4 best wrestlers?

The 4 wrestlers who would beat the other 12 wrestlers in the bracket, if given a chance. Or have already beaten them.

[CFleshman]

How about the best wrestler that day. He wins he advances. The best have bad days. Not separating so called best kids to please the big programs. Separating big programs only helps them and takes away from smaller programs ability ro have success.

[AndyStJ]

7 minutes ago, CFleshman said:

How about the best wrestler that day. He wins he advances. The best have bad days. Not separating so called best kids to please the big programs. Separating big programs only helps them and takes away from smaller programs ability ro have success.

I am also in favor of this. And the best way to find out the best wrestler on the day is to have wrestlebacks. Now it is to some the degree the wrestler whose dice roll best.

 

And it might surprise you that I am also in favor of evening the playing field for small schools.

[Thor]

24 minutes ago, CFleshman said:

How about the best wrestler that day. He wins he advances. The best have bad days. Not separating so called best kids to please the big programs. Separating big programs only helps them and takes away from smaller programs ability ro have success.

What people fail to realize when discussing bad ticket round matchups is that this is how we class wrestling and benefit small schools. With the current setup, it's a lot easier for a kid to pull one upset, or get one good draw, and make it to state. The odds of that kid going to state go way down if he pulls that upset or advances with a good draw, loses in the semis, and then has Tommy Gibbs in the new blood round. 

[Mattyb]

6 minutes ago, Thor said:

What people fail to realize when discussing bad ticket round matchups is that this is how we class wrestling and benefit small schools. With the current setup, it's a lot easier for a kid to pull one upset, or get one good draw, and make it to state. The odds of that kid going to state go way down if he pulls that upset or advances with a good draw, loses in the semis, and then has Tommy Gibbs in the new blood round. 

And here we go!!! Ding ding ding… class wrestling debate starts now!!! 

[julio]

You can have class wrestling and still have a bad draw in the ticket round.  Then what would be the excuse?

[julio]

Remember the IHSAA only worries about the best, not the 3rd or 4th best.

 

[AndyStJ]

21 minutes ago, julio said:

Remember the IHSAA only worries about the best, not the 3rd or 4th best.

 

In that case, single elimination everywhere is the way to do it None of these weak top 4 moving on. Send on the one champion from semistate and the other 15 can watch from the stands. At least only the best wrestler on the day would go on, and everyone would have an equal chance to advance as champion. Single elimination is harsh, but is actually more fair than the way IHSAA does wrestling now.

[awill0352]

16 minutes ago, AndyStJ said:

In that case, single elimination everywhere is the way to do it None of these weak top 4 moving on. Send on the one champion from semistate and the other 15 can watch from the stands. At least only the best wrestler on the day would go on, and everyone would have an equal chance to advance as champion. Single elimination is harsh, but is actually more fair than the way IHSAA does wrestling now.

Bring up a great point.   In the last 5 years how many state champs didn’t get 1st at every level prior to state (sectional, regional, SS)? 

[The Professor Morgan]

Off top of my head I can think of Hockaday Asa Garcia Joe Walker Danny Williams Trent Pruitt

[awill0352]

Purdy from Castle got beat at SS last year and then won State 195

[Galagore]

14 hours ago, julio said:

You can have class wrestling and still have a bad draw in the ticket round.  Then what would be the excuse?

 

Class wrestling > wrestlebacks

[JayinSTL]

16 hours ago, AndyStJ said:

The 4 wrestlers who would beat the other 12 wrestlers in the bracket, if given a chance. Or have already beaten them.

That's subjective.  By that definition, you wouldn't need sectional, regional, or SS.  Just a ranking system.  But the individual rankings are done by individuals.  There's not really a statistical analysis conducted that can define who the best 4 are.  There's a reason they wrestle the matches.

The only right answer is wrestlebacks.  The pod system works at all levels.  Wrestlebacks promote the team aspect as well as get the closest thing to the "Top 8" possible. 

There's always gonna be multiple someones ranked in the top 16 that don't qualify for one reason or another.  SS only takes top 4, so & so had a bad/good day, etc.  Even with wrestlebacks, there will always be a complaint from someone, somewhere. 


But that's why they wrestle the matches.  

[MatTime]

Could the pin system ever be used to decide these things? Something that is more transparent then the formulas that are being used currently? Would be more objective. 

[AndyStJ]

12 minutes ago, JayinSTL said:

That's subjective.  By that definition, you wouldn't need sectional, regional, or SS.  Just a ranking system.  But the individual rankings are done by individuals.  There's not really a statistical analysis conducted that can define who the best 4 are.  There's a reason they wrestle the matches.

The only right answer is wrestlebacks.  The pod system works at all levels.  Wrestlebacks promote the team aspect as well as get the closest thing to the "Top 8" possible. 

There's always gonna be multiple someones ranked in the top 16 that don't qualify for one reason or another.  SS only takes top 4, so & so had a bad/good day, etc.  Even with wrestlebacks, there will always be a complaint from someone, somewhere. 


But that's why they wrestle the matches.  

I agree with almost everything you said, but it is not subjective if the top wrestlers wrestle enough of each other at the SS to determine who is the best on the day. That is what I meant. Right now, the pod system only determines who is best in the pod, which is not the same as the best 4 in the SS bracket. When you have state top 10 meeting in one pod, and no top 10 in another pod, and no wrestlebacks, I don't think that is fair.

 

And I am also a huge proponent of wrestlebacks. There is a reason that all other 49 states in the United States have wrestlebacks. I see no good reason why IHSAA does not.

[SIACfan]

1 hour ago, AndyStJ said:

There is a reason that all other 49 states in the United States have wrestlebacks. I see no good reason why IHSAA does not.

 

Because there is no good reason why they don't. Unfortunately, good reasoning isn't a part of their decision making.

 

There are always going to be upsets whether you have wrestlebacks or not. But there is a difference between an upset on the mat verses a horrible draw. When you have a matchup like Gibbs-May where both should be on the podium at the State Finals yet one won't even get to attend, it is a travesty IMO.

[takemtothemat]

16 hours ago, AndyStJ said:

In that case, single elimination everywhere is the way to do it None of these weak top 4 moving on. Send on the one champion from semistate and the other 15 can watch from the stands. At least only the best wrestler on the day would go on, and everyone would have an equal chance to advance as champion. Single elimination is harsh, but is actually more fair than the way IHSAA does wrestling now.

The way it was till I believe late 60’s.  Not sure when they started taking top 2

[julio]

Let's just go back to the old vertical pairing system, where you are not eliminated until you lose 2 matches and sometimes 3.

[Silence Dogood]

5 hours ago, MatTime said:

Could the pin system ever be used to decide these things? Something that is more transparent then the formulas that are being used currently? Would be more objective. 

 

Not sure what you mean by more transparent than the formulas currently being used. The "formulas" are just all of the possible combinations of matching up the 1vs4 and 2vs3 from the 4 different regionals such that no pod (the group of 4 wrestlers that could meet up in the quarters) has the same regional represented and the 1 and 4 from the same regionals are on the same side of the bracket. There are only so many combinations that meet that criteria and one of them gets applied to each weight class. It's also completely objective. 

 

But it does result in bad matchups. The PIN system could help alleviate that but could potentially be pretty controversial in its own right.

 

 

 

 

 

[Wrestling Scholar]

23 hours ago, AndyStJ said:

I will have to say that this was done during lunch break, so may have errors, but this shows my objections to the current semistate setup. Let's say that we want the best 4 wrestlers to qualify from each weight in each semistate. (If we don't, then why not?)

Under the current setup with random draws, assuming that the better wrestler always wins, the odd of the top four wrestlers actually qualifying for state is:

100% all 4 qualify if all 4 are from different regionals. Because they are in different pods.
33% all 4 qualify if 2 of top 4 are from one regional.
50% all 4 qualify if 2 of top 4 are from regional A and 2 of top 4 are from regional B. 16.7% chance that only 2 of 4 will qualify. This is horrible.
33% all 4 qualify if 3 of top 4 are from one regional.
100% all 4 qualify if all 4 are from same regional. This is unlikely.

I think that these odds are stupid. If you had wrestlebacks, the chance of top 4 qualifying goes way up, although I have not done the math.

In a much more concise simpler way, wrestlebacks main purpose is to get the best wrestlers in the proper placing.

 

[Y2CJ41]

It's always been that way, why change it now? It's a part of our history and the lore of wrestling. If we change it we will never have the topics such as the worst ticket round matches. No one here is smart enough to figure out cross bracket consolations with potential "blood round" matches.

 

It's the most exciting round, if we change to wrestle-backs then it's just a normal boring round of wrestling. I probably wouldn't even go to semi-state if they had wrestle-backs.

 

Just work harder and be the bad draw.

 

Life isn't fair, sometimes you're the hammer, sometimes you're the nail. Deal with it.

[Banks]

3 minutes ago, Y2CJ41 said:

It's always been that way, why change it now? It's a part of our history and the lore of wrestling. If we change it we will never have the topics such as the worst ticket round matches. No one here is smart enough to figure out cross bracket consolations with potential "blood round" matches.

 

It's the most exciting round, if we change to wrestle-backs then it's just a normal boring round of wrestling. I probably wouldn't even go to semi-state if they had wrestle-backs.

 

Just work harder and be the bad draw.

 

Life isn't fair, sometimes you're the hammer, sometimes you're the nail. Deal with it.

The idea that “ it’s always been this way why change it now” is an odd way to look at it to me. I get the excitement about the “worst ticket round matches”. But this isn’t about spectator excitement. this is about the best 16 kids making it. Until there is a change you’ll never have the top 16 of each weight on the state floor. I can appreciate you love for the randomness and exciting semi state matches. But just because it has been this way doesn’t mean it shouldn’t ever change. 

[Y2CJ41]

6 minutes ago, Banks said:

The idea that “ it’s always been this way why change it now” is an odd way to look at it to me. I get the excitement about the “worst ticket round matches”. But this isn’t about spectator excitement. this is about the best 16 kids making it. Until there is a change you’ll never have the top 16 of each weight on the state floor. I can appreciate you love for the randomness and exciting semi state matches. But just because it has been this way doesn’t mean it shouldn’t ever change. 

It's tradition, why make it easier to qualify for state? Are we really wanting all these kids to be soft and have wrestle-backs? Man up and work harder, then you don't have to worry about a supposed bad draw.