wrestlenewbie

There is just so much quality writing and true "pun"ditry in this preview I look forward to it every year.
 
Impossible to pick a favorite nickname, there are just too many great ones.
 
But I especially loved the line "you can bet your sweet bippy the restrooms will be empty for this one". Never mind how you knew my bippy was sweet.
 
Great job. The volume and quality of work is much appreciated.

They also suggested winning a single class title held more weight. Uh oh, add another server to the system to handle the debate.

They also suggested winning a single class title held more weight. Uh oh, add another server to the system to handle the debate.

I, for one, felt that looked at a certain way Nick Lee should have been flattered by Chad Red's reaction to winning (lets face it, even though you don't way it we know who you are talking about). 
 
While an element of his reaction was certainly in response to the cumulative effects of four years of pressure finally and forever being lifted, there had to be an element of relief as well that he overcame his greatest challenge yet. If he had reacted as though it was another day at the office you can argue that would have been more disrespectful to Lee than the over the top reaction we witnessed.
 
You can imagine a scenario where he had serious doubts pre-match given the quality of the competition he faced. Through that prism perhaps Nick should be flattered.

Advisability?

Amen. This is about Chad Red. Bringing Nick Lee into the article would have required way too much technical explanation. This was about 179-0 and getting more eyes on wrestling.
 
If Nick Lee pulls off the upset, then they have a second article to write that is set up by this article. If Chad Red wins the second article is confirmation of the first.
 
Seems like basic storytelling to me.

Amen. This is about Chad Red. Bringing Nick Lee into the article would have required way too much technical explanation. This was about 179-0 and getting more eyes on wrestling.
 
If Nick Lee pulls off the upset, then they have a second article to write that is set up by this article. If Chad Red wins the second article is confirmation of the first.
 
Seems like basic storytelling to me.

Does that mean that by the transitive property no matter who wins Saturday, 2007 Paul Konrath is the 2016 132 champ?
 

you got your math wrong
 
Lee/Red = 3/3 = 1

Does that mean that by the transitive property no matter who wins Saturday, 2007 Paul Konrath is the 2016 132 champ?
 

Does that mean that by the transitive property no matter who wins Saturday, 2007 Paul Konrath is the 2016 132 champ?
 

Does that mean that by the transitive property no matter who wins Saturday, 2007 Paul Konrath is the 2016 132 champ?
 

Amen. That is probably why this collision course is set. Two champions looking for the toughest competition.

Sorry about the late addition, but it has been a busy day at work.  Not pumped to see it? I could wet my pants I'm so excited. 
 
As for re-arranging, I think there is a strong pro argument that it actually respects the other wrestlers too. You can only come to that conclusion if you acknowledge the reality that the late matches are more poorly attended. By putting the marquee match-up last you have a consistent crowd throughout the night. You force the fans to see the other matches which will invariable feature some amazing moments that they may miss otherwise. In that way you can make fans of partisans.
 
If, however, you want to believe that the late wrestlers only having their core constituency around is more respectful, then you arrive at the conclusion that re-arranging is disrespectful.
 
It is true that there is a great deal of subjectivity in the decision process, particularly if you have a year where there could be equally strong arguments for which match should be most marquee. But, on balance I still think it has merits.

I am a huge Lee fan and even I find this argument to be the purest of speculation based on what you want to believe. There is no way you can know any of what you claim to know. Pulling for one wrestler does not mean you have to put down another wrestler or minimize his achievements.  

That's not a funny punchline. It is a hateful punchline.

That's not a funny punchline. It is a hateful punchline.

That's not a funny punchline. It is a hateful punchline.

Speaking of analysis I took the liberty of updating the much not-maligned maligned's earlier post to compare the work he did on the prior 5 years to 2015:
 
Round 1:
 
 
 
2010-2014 average, #1's go 51-5 against #4's
 
2015 #1’s went 49-7 against #4’s
 
 
 
2010-2015 average, #2's go 35-21 against #3's
 
2015 #2’s went 29-27 against #3’s
 
 
 
Quarterfinals:
 
 
 
#1: 2010-2014 (74% quarterfinal win percentage; 67% of all #1's advance to semi-finals)
 
            2015 (78% quarterfinal win percentage; 68% of all #1’s advance)
 
#2: 2010-2014 (31% quarterfinal win percentage; 20% of all #2's advance to semi-finals)
 
            2015 (31% quarterfinal win percentage; 16% of all #2’s advance)
 
#3: 2010-2014 (25% quarterfinal win percentage; 9% of all #3's advance to semi-finals)
 
            2015 (22% quarterfinal win percentage; 11% of all #3’s advance)
 
#4: 2010-2014 (46% quarterfinal win percentage; 4% of all #4's advance to semi-finals)
 
            2015 (43% quarterfinal win percentage: 5% of all #4’s advance)
 
 
 
2010-2014 #1 vs. #2: 114-44 (72%)
 
            2015 72%
 
2010-2014 #1 vs. #3: 73-23 (76%)
 
            2015 83%
 
2010-2014 #2 vs. #4: 11-6 (65%)
 
            2015 50%
 
2010-2014 #3 vs. #4: 3-6 (33%)
 
            2015 33%
 
 
 
Semi-finals:
 
 
 
2010-2014 #1’s: Represent 81% of the advancers to the finals
 
            2015 82%
 
2010-2014 #2’s: 13% of the advancers to the finals
 
            2015 14%
 
2010-2014 #3’s: 5% of the advancers to the finals
 
            2015 4%
 
2010-2014 #4’s: 1% of the advancers to the finals
 
            2015 0%
 
 
 
Finals:
 
 
 
2010-2014 #1’s: exactly 13 every year (93% of all champions)
 
            2015 12
 
2010-2014 #2’s: exactly 1 champ every year (7% of all champions)
 
            2015 2
 
2010-2014 #3’s: 0-7 record (no champions)
 
            2015 0
 
2010-2014 #4’s: 0-2 record (no champions)
 
2015 0

 
 
Other than a very modest uptick in first round upsets (and that is probably well within the range of the prior five years) this year played out almost exactly true to form.
 
If Vegas ever posts lines on IHSAA Finals the Indianamat readers will clean up.

Lee. Gave up his first points of the season in quarterfinals...and looked like he could spit nails after. No one else ever looked close to scoring, never mind winning.

Reading through the thread again I am struck by a different thought.  I don't think it is about sissification or political correctness. I think it is about self centered-ness.
 
The pro-booing statements often center around "I paid my money", "I have a right to" and "I am toughening them up".  These fans seems to think the competition is for them and about them. I have a different opinion. It is okay to have an unexpressed thought when watching other people compete.
 
You are not paying your money to the athlete in this case. You are paying the barely comprehensibly small sum of $8 to defray some of the cost of holding the event at an NBA arena. So do not use the payment argument as justification. Admit it to yourself and us. It is about you.

Reading through the thread again I am struck by a different thought.  I don't think it is about sissification or political correctness. I think it is about self centered-ness.
 
The pro-booing statements often center around "I paid my money", "I have a right to" and "I am toughening them up".  These fans seems to think the competition is for them and about them. I have a different opinion. It is okay to have an unexpressed thought when watching other people compete.
 
You are not paying your money to the athlete in this case. You are paying the barely comprehensibly small sum of $8 to defray some of the cost of holding the event at an NBA arena. So do not use the payment argument as justification. Admit it to yourself and us. It is about you.

Reading through the thread again I am struck by a different thought.  I don't think it is about sissification or political correctness. I think it is about self centered-ness.
 
The pro-booing statements often center around "I paid my money", "I have a right to" and "I am toughening them up".  These fans seems to think the competition is for them and about them. I have a different opinion. It is okay to have an unexpressed thought when watching other people compete.
 
You are not paying your money to the athlete in this case. You are paying the barely comprehensibly small sum of $8 to defray some of the cost of holding the event at an NBA arena. So do not use the payment argument as justification. Admit it to yourself and us. It is about you.

I have to play devil's advocate here. What is wrong with stalling and then winning by a point in overtime? It seems to me that it is a viable (though boring) strategy. We may not find it terribly entertaining (actually got bored during some of the first few finals where it seemed no one wanted to take a shot and get caught making a mistake). But it is perfectly legal (to a point). And if it is deemed excessive by the ref, then there is a remedy proscribed by the rules.
 
What it seems to come down to is whether you personally think the ref should have administered the remedy. No one booed at Dean Smith's funeral or at the next NC basketball game even though he invented the four corners "offense". Given the rules of the game at the time it was perfectly legal. Since it was boring, they changed the rules. But, there is a key difference between top level NCAA revenue sports and high school sports. High School sports are not true big revenue generators with compensated athletes (and the courts are now determining the right level of compensation) like NCAA basketball.
 
Correct me if I am wrong here, but if an athlete uses his brain along with his brawn to win within the rules, then they should be applauded even if the win does not please our sense of aesthetics. 

Lee. Gave up his first points of the season in quarterfinals...and looked like he could spit nails after. No one else ever looked close to scoring, never mind winning.