maligned

It is because of travel. Also, only 3 sectionals have 8 schools. In these, they average 4 large, well-funded schools. There are then only 4 sectionals with 12 schools. All of these have either 4 or 5 large, well-funded schools. All other sectionals have 9-11 schools. Of course there are discrepancies in the quality of schools at different sectionals, but it's not as bad as it seems on the surface.

Thanks for the compliment, but this one was easy because I could simply use the Al Smith bracket results. It would take some more digging to find common opponents and such for the Perry/Mishawaka match. There are a some other top matchups that could be done more easily that I'll consider doing in the last couple weeks of the season depending on scheduled matches (team regional matches, for example).

It was 95 degrees today where I live...I was just waiting in the middle of the night for the national championship game.

There's been a lot of discussion about who might be able to knock off Mishawaka. Specifically, some have felt that, despite Merrillville's loss to CP, they match up well with Mishawaka. I think an easy comparison tool is to look at the Al Smith results weight by weight to see how the two teams match up: 103: Stevens-Merr (2nd place); Matsoff-Mish (8th place) Head-to-head result: Stevens, 6-4 Most likely future result: Merrillville 3-4 team points 112: Beck-Mish (1st place); Garcia-Merr (3rd place) Head-to-head result: Beck, 11-1 Most likely future result: Mishawaka 3-5 team points 119: Padilla-Merr (5th place); Binion-Mish (round of 12) Two common opponents, Padilla +4 per match, Binion -5 Most likely future result: Merrillville 3-4 team points 125: Napules-Merr (1st place); Wisler-Mish (3rd place) Head-to-head result: Napules, 10-5 Most likely future result: Merrillville 3 team points 130: Schrader-Mish (1st place); Valdivia-Merr (7th place) Two common opponents, Schrader +4.5/match, Valdivia +3.5 Most likely future result: Mishawaka 3 points 135: Guerra-Mish (2nd place); Pence-Merr (7th place) Two common opponents, Guerra pin/+2, Pence pin/-2 Most likely future result: Mishawaka 3 points 140: Delluna-Merr (6th place); Eddy-Mish (round of 12) Two vicarious common opponents, Delluna +2.5, Eddy +1.5 Most likely future result: Merrillville 3 points 145: Marshall-Mish (8th place); Avalos-Merr (round of 12) Two common opponents, Marshall +2/loss pin, Avalos loss pin/-1 Most likely future result: Mishawaka 3 points 152: Stahl-Mish (1st place); Barcenas-Merr (round of 16) Two vicarious common opponents, Stahl win fall, Barcenas loss fall Most likely future result: Mishawaka 6 points 160: White-Mish (5th place); Nzeata-Merr (round of 12) One common, one vicarious common, White -5/fall, Nzeata -7/loss fall Most likely future result: Mishawaka 3-4 points 171: Morin-Mish (3rd place); Wengel-Merr (5th place) Head-to-head: Morin, 8-4 Most likely future result: Mishawaka 3 points 189: Berry-Merr (6th place); Abu Shebab-Mish (7th place) Head-to-head: Berry, 8-3 Most likely future result: Merrillville 3-4 points 215: Lentz-Mish (2nd place); Nickson-Merr (round of 12) One common, one vicarious common, Lentz +7, Nickson -4.5 Most likely future result: Mishawaka 4-5 points 285: Travis-Merr (1st place); Thomas-Mish (2nd place) Head-to-head: Travis, 3-0 Most likely future result: Merrillville 3 points All matchups considered, this data would suggest that Mishawaka would be a 10 point favorite. However, there are obviously many potential close matches here that could lead to a Mishawaka blowout or Merrillville being very close to the upset.

Yeah, looking at their results, they've mostly wrestled cupcakes up until now. As I said, I was just looking at the brackets and was curious what results prompted the ranking. Thanks for the info.

Y2, sorry, I'm honestly just curious. I have no stake in this at all. I posted this before. Who has Adams beaten that keeps him in the rankings above others? Again, not trying to be difficult. Just curious.

Sorry, not trying to slight anyone, but did Carmel have all its starters in when losing to North Central, 39-22? I was surprised by this score. I didn't realize NC had this kind of team. Why haven't they had a little more success this year?

Agreed. When I said "swing" points I wasn't referring to bonus points "swinging the other way." I was referring to points earned by CP in close matches. CP earned more close match points than Merrillville did, so it seems as if a future match could definitely go Merrillville's way. There were 6 relatively close matches. If 3 of those go to each team, the meet is a toss-up. If one team wins 4, the match will be won by that team (as it was by CP).

Close match summary: CP takes an overtime victory, two 2-point victories, and a 3-point victory (4 total). Merrillville takes only a 2-point victory and a 3-point victory (2 total). It seems like a rematch has more swing points available to Merrillville than to CP. Should be exciting when/if it happens.

Actually, if you look at option C (the most likely scenario), there will be 8 weight classes between 122 and 167. Now, there are only 7 between 125 and 160. You're right, this is the area where most wrestlers fall. No class is being taken from that area...there is a shift slightly up in the bottom weights and a narrowing of gaps at the top. The research for this was taken from all the wrestlers in the country. No specific weight class would be eliminated or another added. Think of it this way: from 103 to 215 an average of 4.5 pounds is added to each weight and 285 stays the same. The effect is that you have that one extra spot for a quality kid between 122 and 167.

There's no law that the wrestlebacks have to be 5 minutes. It's allowable to maintain 6-minute matches for something as important as semi-state wrestlebacks would be.

This argument about the ticket round doesn't make sense to me, because do or die can come any time we want it. If there were wrestlebacks from the quarterfinals, the new do or die round would be in the matches to see who gets to wrestle for 3rd/4th. It would literally be one extra match for the kids that end up wrestling for 3rd and 4th (compared to now). Every reputable wrestling tournament in the world of any type has wrestlebacks or repechage rounds except the Indiana state tournament series. It's strange that we wouldn't want it in our most important tournaments.

In my opinion, the reason for a seeding system would not necessarily be to find the correct 3rd-8th. It would be to have matches like Cashe/Tsirtsis in the finals instead of the semifinals. If there was just a way to put the top two semi-state champions in opposite brackets, I would be content.

Outside of having highly informed athletic directors from multiple schools deciding the seeds by committee, it's not possible. I agree. And since there are very few ADs who would have the time to follow high school wrestling, it could never happen.

I couldn't agree more with this first part of your argument. I've always thought the proposals to the IHSAA got a little too watered down, asking for wrestlebacks at regional and state. The crime that continues to persist is not getting the best kids from given semi-states to the state finals. With the solid seeding system and full wrestlebacks at sectional and only two sectionals feeding into regionals, top kids have every chance to place what they deserve to place at regionals without wrestlebacks. There is no mathematical possibility whatsoever whereby (providing there are no upsets) the top kids don't have every chance to advance. Yes, upsets happen. But being upset once and not advancing is not the same as being the 3rd best kid in the state and not even wrestling at Conseco because you had to wrestle Indiana's best at your regional and then got drawn in against Indiana's second best at your semi-state. That's the tragedy. I've posted the math numerous times over the years. The Top 4 kids from a given semi-state only advance to state about 40% of the time without having to knock each other out earlier. The IHSAA has always said semi-state would take too much time if there were wrestlebacks. Wrestlebacks from the quarterfinals would have added a whopping ONE HOUR to the previous system (Top 3 from regionals) if coordinated correctly. Then out of thin air, without the request even being made, the IHSAA throws the 4th place kids from regionals into the semi-states so they can get a bunch more butts in the seats and earn more money. What a laugh! This adds at least two hours to the tournament length, doesn't do anything mathematically to ensure the best kids don't knock each other out (unless the Top 4 are all from the same regional...a rarity), and advanced only a couple kids through to state that otherwise would have been left behind at regional.

You can find most season results in the "High School Results" section of this page. 112 Kuhn ER Harvey CA Todd PH Davis RON Scott NC House CO Simpson ROCH Noe RI 119 Kieffer RON Troy FWS Moody ER Julin LEB McCord SD Woodall CO Burrellson TC Philbert PH

I said it on another string and I'll say it again: no one who suggests Yorktown should be ranked higher than Clay is saying that Clay didn't deserve to win the dual or somehow lucked into it. Upsets happen all the time in sports. Just because one team beats another on one particular day doesn't mean they are eternally better than the team they beat. They were better that day. Looking at the full body of work and the very impressive results Yorktown has had in every single dual and each tournament result, it's tough not to rank them where Decbell has them. I thought maybe they were overrated after losing as well, but they've come back and smacked all comers.

At 160: Possible addition is Francisco Garcia of Goshen. He was seeded 8th going into the Al Smith and came one match from placing. He lost 3-2 to the 8th placed kid from Jasper and a wild 13-11 decision to IndianaMat #8 Kunze. He pinned all his other opponents in 2:28 or less. Also, you currently have Adams of Jimtown ranked 7th. Garcia and others maybe should be above him since he got pinned by Hoffer of East Noble at the Al Smith and only had a forfeit to his credit. Hoffer was pinned in his other two matches at the Al Smith and Garcia and several others from the FW semi-state advanced further than either Hoffer or Adams. I don't know much about the results of Garcia and Adams other than this except that Garcia had enough previous success to be seeded at the Al Smith and Adams did not.

...unless you're 4th place at regional and your parents and friends will increase revenue at semi-state events. Then we love you and think you have a great shot at a title.

I have to be honest. I was going for a Top 10. So I did a quick look at school lists and chose about 35 to do full research on (I tracked numerous schools only partially, realizing they didn't have nearly enough to get in the top 10). If I'd wanted a Top 25, I would have had to research more like 75 schools to be sure I didn't miss anyone. Beyond this Top 12, it would be tough to give a much longer reliable list. I would have to research some more teams to be sure I didn't miss anyone. I will just say that Elkhart Memorial was #13 and there was a reasonably large drop off in points after that to all the others.

I also am not an LN apologist, but they had someone stand on the podium 37 times. That's 3 or 4 placers every year on average. Only Mater Dei was better. Just because they've been fringe Top 20 the past couple seasons doesn't mean they didn't have an incredible decade. Also, I would argue that any school that earns 11 individual state championships (Griffith) is one of the most noteworthy programs of the decade. Up until 15 years ago, Indiana used the individual state finals to determine its team state champion. The NCAA has always used this system. Don't we consider the college national champion the best "program." Griffith had the 4th most individual tournament points in the decade. They have to be on this list. If we want to evaluate who has the best feeder program or freestyle club or whatever, that's a different discussion. I just wanted to look at who had great success...and Griffith certainly had great success.

Very, very close to making this list. You're right.

What do you mean, "make the list less subjective"? Subjective means based on opinion or innate judgment. Objective means based on fact (or numbers) alone. This list is based on numbers only. Sorry if there was any confusion. If you want to know who's the best over the last 5 years, or maybe weight the numbers toward the past few years a little more than the early years of the decade; this is possible. I'm not sure what you mean by "on the rise."

It's a solid argument...I would just say that Mishawaka has been more consistent. They were in the final 4 just as often as LN, and LN was hurt by being somewhat down in '08 and '09.

By spending an embarrassingly large number of hours over the past few days mining the data from the IHSAA website. In other words, I calculated all of them myself.