Jump to content

gsmith58

Gorillas
  • Content Count

    89
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1
  • Bananas

    2,020 [ Donate ]

 Content Type 

Articles

Coach

Teams

Team History

Wrestlers

Wrestler Accomplishments

Dual Results

Individual Results

Team Rankings

Individual Rankings Master

Individual Ranking Detail

Tournament Results

Brackets

College Signings

Media

State Bracket Year Info

Team Firsts

Wrestler Seasons

Family

Schedule-Main

Schedule-Details

Forums

Calendar

Store

Gallery

Posts posted by gsmith58


  1. 9 hours ago, Galagore said:

    "Nice try little fella, now get out of the way so we can see who the best 8-year-old is today."

    It's my observation that those little "ISWA" fella's become darn good wrestlers 8 years later (many start making the top of the ladder 1 to 2 years later). It's the kids that enter late middle school and freshman year that struggle a bit.


  2. 2 hours ago, JMILL said:

    I can provide you with my login information to view the videos for lets see.......  (IHPO entry fee $35, gas money for my son's ride up $20, lodging fee for my son Sat night $30, food and drinks during tourney $20, video stream $10) ..........  $115 sound good ????, awe heck lets split it as I am a nice guy ($57.50)   

    Hey people its called the free enterprise system and this stuff isn't cheap  !!!!   kidding

    Mr. Miller, I'm just shaking my head just like I used to do. Why is it always you...and you know what I mean.


  3. On 8/20/2019 at 1:50 PM, Sig40 said:

    106: Goin/Bahl
    113: Frazier/Goin
    120: Bettich/Frazier/Roberson
    126: Roberson/Tattini/Carter/Bettich
    132: Taylor/Mendez/Roberson/Tattini
    138: Mendez/Taylor/Tattini
    145: Goodwin/Cruz
    152: Cruz/Goodwin
    160: Willems/Hollendoner
    170: Hollendoner/Willems
    182: Taborski/Ayala
    195: McElroy/Ayala
    220?285?

    It appears to me their JV is going to be a Top 20.


  4. On 8/6/2019 at 10:56 AM, Champ725 said:

    I believe this years incoming class of 6th graders will be full of some top level talent including kids who have been wrestling for years in big tournaments. You have kids like Kyle Harden...

    I can say without any hesitation, Kyle would win well over 30 matches as a 106 right now. He is going to be a beast in High School.


  5. 12 hours ago, graham said:

     

     

    Dillon who???  Never heard of him ;)

    Yeah I saw Ocampo at GRR.  He looked tough. Last time I remember seeing him, he was smaller than Dillon, I think. 

    He was a shorter for sure, but he's been pretty muscular for few years even as a younger kid.


  6. On 7/24/2019 at 10:21 AM, graham said:

    Yeah when gsmith asked earlier in the thread if I had any input, this is why I said I will leave it to those who know better! 🤪

    You need to be promoting that Dillon Graham kid instead of monkeying around promoting Freshman. Seems that Graham kid has beaten several of the kids that made the list.

    On a related note have you seen the size of Mr. Ocampo? He used to be in my son's weight class for years. He's a tad bigger these days ;)

     


  7. On 3/23/2019 at 5:42 PM, Leftenant Luers said:

    I have a reason behind it.  I never was seeded in any tournament in high school. I won several invites. I wasn't seeded at conference my senior year because i dropped down 2 weights.  I won. I was seeded third at sectional. i defeated an undefeated foe in the finals. My son was seeded 4th at preseason nationals: He won. My history in the sport tells me seeds only matter if you think they do. to win you have to beat everyone anyways. I will go to the grave with that philosophy,

    I wouldn't disagree that cliches and anecdotes can be helpful motivation, but fact-based evidence is more important for actual results. Of course, upsets happen, but for every upset, there are tens, if not hundreds that that didn't happen. Upsets stick in our mind, because...well they're upsets...and less frequent. Seeds matter; otherwise they wouldn't be so prevalent across all sports.

    Pick any particular bracket, at say, the NCAA DI finals this year. Count up how many they got right and how many they got wrong. For example, look at the 125 bracket. I believe the higher seed won 28 of 29 matches. That's fact-based evidence.


  8. No, I wouldn't want that. It is what it is. I think your proposed jump is too drastic, and would simply reallocate, what you perceive, as 'unfairness.' I thought wrestling prided itself on being a level playing field where the outliers could compete.

    While there are no doubt a number of very good upperclass wrestlers sitting because of circumstances (Brownsburg, Perry, Mater Dei, etc), I would bet they're a number sitting simply because they have not put in the time and effort that their varsity counterpart has. 

    I am only pointing out it depends on your perspective, and asking you to recognize there are a number, not just my son, of smaller underclass wrestlers that have some talent, have put in as much, if not more, time and effort, and are equally deserving as any upperclass backup. And, I'm pretty certain that if one could to equalize weight, Cernus and Cotty could compete with, say, the HWT finalists.

    As far as cutting, you and I are of like mind, but I don't see that changing anytime soon.

     

    55 minutes ago, Rookies03 said:

    Think of it this way... suppose there was a proposed rule change to remove 138 and add 95 with the reasoning that we already have 132 and 145 and having a wt class in the middle was too much AND adding 95 would give more opportunities to smaller kids.  Would you be for this change?

    These are all big "What Ifs" so not a lot of reality of them happening but the lowest weight class has evolved from 98 to 103 to 106 because kids are getting bigger not smaller. I think kids cut too much weight (not all but some) and maybe this could help.  

     

     


  9. I have a small 106 son and so I'm, admittedly, biased and a bit prickly about this. Being that he's in a room(s) year-round, I'd sure like the idea of my son being able to compete against kids 'nearly' his size before he's a senior. 

    Not that I think it's a swell idea, but couldn't we apply this logic and similar 'generalization' to the heavyweight class?

     

    23 hours ago, Rookies03 said:

    So maybe I'm not explaining my view very well.  106 generally has one of the highest forfeit rates.  A lot of schools just try to find any kid who weighs less than 106 (usually a freshman who hasn't started growing yet) to get forfeits.  If we started at 113 and added a weight in the middle or upper weights now that Varsity spot would be filled by a bigger and in a lot of cases a more "varsity" ready athlete.  

    And to answer your questions...

    If they’re great, why throw them on jv? Not throwing them on JV.  If they are a JV level wrestler then yes they could be great at the JV level (maybe this is a philosophical difference as I don't see greatness measured in Ws and Ls but rather everything else gained from being a wrestler - hard work, dedication, sacrifice, discipline, etc.  You can achieve greatness in these areas without being a state placer or champ).  Putting a 100 lb kid with no muscle tone on varsity seems more like throwing them on varsity rather than throwing them on JV if they are truly JV caliber.

    Would you rather have guys like Cernus and Cottey on jv? No. They would most likely be on varsity just at 113.  They could cut less weight and I'm pretty sure they would still be great.  

    What I would really rather see is upper classman get more opportunities to be a varsity athlete.  100 lb freshman getting to be a varsity athlete because he is the only one that weighs less than 106 over a junior or senior who is a back up wrestler in the middle or upper weights but is still pretty good.  

     

     

     


  10. I stand corrected. Nevertheless, he was a lot of fun to watch. He talked about in the same way the four-timers are today. 

    14 hours ago, piscis1956 said:

    I think I read an interview with Randy May in which he said he wasn’t the varsity 98 pounder as a freshman because he was a very much underweight for the weight class a freshman.

     

     


  11. I don't know how widespread it was, but Bloomington South didn't have freshman wrestle in the early 70s, otherwise, Randy May would have been on the list of four-time champs. Freshmen were wrestling at least by 74.


  12. I get your point, but I think the degree of difficulty is different. It's my observation that a talented freshman 171 can hold his own with 'most' upperclassmen, but I agree he is likely going to take some lumps.

    Southridge has a 90lb freshman. I could tell from watching he had some skill, and if he sticks with it he'll do well; but, I don't believe he was able to win a match all year. As mentally tough as a youngster may be, that's hard.

    I do agree with your larger point and although it was hard, it was a good experience for my son. My main point was and still is, "I" wouldn't do it differently, but I certainly understand why some parents consider it.

     

    3 hours ago, doctorWrestling said:

    That is significant for sure.  My point is that an undersized 106's disadvantage is the same as a good 171 pound freshman.  Both will take their lumps because both have a disadvantage which all freshmen do.  Why does it seem there are more 106 in the list of top incoming?

    At 106, you will probably never see a senior.  So if you wait a year and make 106, you have basically ensured you will not struggle.  You start your career like a senior at the upper weights because you would rarely see anyone older than you.  You really should dominate at that point.  So I think there is a perceived incentive for those kids to repeat a grade because they see a chance at a title immediately.  What I am saying is that it is still worth it to let the kids struggle despite the lure of a 106 title as a freshman.  Other kids struggle and still succeed as they mature. I just don't think the carrot justifies holding kids back because they will at least be facing kids their age to start.

    1

     


  13. Yeah, you're probably right. I hadn't really thought of it in that way.

    14 minutes ago, Y2CJ41 said:

    The social stigma wouldn't be seen at an academy or wrestling practice, but in the halls of the school. Kids are cruel, especially at the middle school level. It is an awkward time for kids...now add to it you are being held back to become a "better" wrestler.

     


  14. There are probably 5 or 6 middle schoolers I know of that could arguably fit in the top, lets say, 30. There are also several that have been held back and are soon to be in that top 12 list. I also know of about 4 or 5 freshmen that fit into that category; outside of Evan Dickey (New Castle Semi-State), they're invisible.


  15. 1 hour ago, Y2CJ41 said:

    So you would trade off the social stigma of being held back versus some more wins on the wrestling mat?

    Nope. That's why we didn't hold him back. It wasn't even a consideration; I couldn't justify it developmentally or academically. That said, I get why folks whose sons (and daughters) are very small do. Of course, I want him to do well, but wins and losses are secondary to just being able to compete and compete safely.

    It may just be my perception since my son is training at academies, but there are a lot of kids being held back. And, I haven't noticed the social stigma. It is certainly feasible, but I haven't noticed.

     

     


  16. I recall being at a Middle School tourney in West Virginia. Ike lost a tough match to another very good Indiana kid. What struck me was instead of sulking, he grabbed a tablet and studied his match. As he watched it, he would occasionally purse his lips with a slight shake of his head. I can recall thinking this is a kid that is bound for success. I often remind my own son of that scene and how you conduct yourself.


  17. 20 hours ago, AlaskanMountie said:

    I don't doubt it but Silvertone's write-up indicated Bettich lost to Seltzer at the Al Smith. 

    Gotcha. I wasn't disagreeing with your post, just noting where he actually lost to Seltzer.


  18. In addition to 4U2NV's list at the lighter weights, I'd add

    75 - Linser, Haines

    80 - LaRocca, Schaefer, Ocampo

    85 - Billerman

    90 - Lowery, Stebbins, Morton, Foster, Marcum

    95 - Wolf

    It's getting good 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.