Jump to content

maligned

Gorillas
  • Posts

    4,692
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    85

 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 and Lasts

Family History

Schedule-Main

Schedule-Details

Team History Accomplishments

Current Year Dual Results

Current Year Tournament Results

Forums

Events

Store

Downloads

Posts posted by maligned

  1. 12 minutes ago, SIACfan said:

     

     

    Again based on the criteria you posted, his seed may be correct but I just don't agree with it. But I admit that past results prior to this year are playing into my thought process as well.

    This is 100% the issue. The seeding assumes there will be enough matches wrestled for the criteria to play itself out correctly. But often there aren't enough matches and the seeding ends up looking mechanical instead of intuitive--because we all know the past years' results.

     

    The seeding is determined by putting each guy's results against each other guy's results and seeing who wins the most head-to-head criteria "battles." If I were in charge, I would take some points away from a few criteria and include about 20% for a new element: if they were in the same weight as each other in the previous year and if at least one was AA, who placed higher? That simple piece of knowledge is what makes human rankings seem more intuitive than the seeds.

  2. 36 minutes ago, SIACfan said:

     

    But in Vito's case his only 2 losses are to undefeated & 2nd seeded Ryan Crookham. Yet he is seeded behind Orine, Shawver & Ragusin who all have 2 or more losses as well & to lower ranked guys.

     

    I understand him being ranked behind Fix & Crookham but not the other three.

    The criteria is biased against guys like Vito with limited matches wrestled also:

     

    Head-to-head competition — 25 percent

    Quality wins — 20 percent

    Coaches Ranking — 15 percent

    Results against common opponents — 10 percent

    RPI — 10 percent

    Qualifying event placement — 10 percent

    Win % — 10 percent

     

    If you put him up against Orine and Shawver, for example, Vito loses quality wins (20 percent), Win% (10 percent), Qualifying event placement (10 percent). He wins Coaches rank (15) and possibly RPI (10). There are no head-to-heads and common opponents are most likely a wash because Vito didn't face many guys. There are a couple nuances with how these things get applied, but you see how it's an uphill battle for a guy with the two negatives of 1) limited matches wrestled and 2) a loss or two on his record.

  3. 8 hours ago, Ahap88 said:

    Not Indiana related, but Mekhi Lewis' prize for getting the 1 seed is facing Starocci in quarters. They should have made Carter the 2 or 3 to keep that from happening. Borderline criminal.

     

    7 hours ago, Ahap88 said:

    Also, Vito the 6? Somebody's smokin' it.

    They're very rigid with their seeding formula because it's very intuitive in slotting guys correctly--IF the top guys have all wrestled a lot of matches and seen other top guys. But it rigidly considers MFFs at conference tournaments the same as regular losses, and it blindly ignores previous years' results or non-NCAA matches like the All-Star classic. So if Carr or Arujau haven't seen this year's top guys and theyve lost twice, they get put behind the undefeated or one-loss guys.

  4. 8 hours ago, Ahap88 said:

    I was told Northwestern by the guys I sat next to at the Big10s this weekend. Unofficial, but claimed to know.

    It's official. Northwestern in 2025; Penn St. in 2026 

     

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pennlive.com/penn-state-wrestling/2024/03/penn-state-wrestler-carter-starocci-earns-at-large-bid-to-ncaas-nittany-lions-to-host-big-tens-in-2026.html%3foutputType=amp

  5. 15 minutes ago, nk140 said:

    Washington has had a bad ankle injury ever since his MFF at the Army event.  Probably shouldn't be wrestling. 

    I wonder I he would have been better off going all MFFs at Big 10s. He'd have had a 25 ranking and he could have communicated to selection committee that he'll be recovered finally for nationals after 3.5 weeks off. Now, he's put 2 more performances out there way below his level and given them clear reasoning to leave him out of the tournament if they want since they know he's hurt.

  6. 30 minutes ago, ReformedPoster said:

    is Red still doing freestyle?  I don't recall him doing so.

    I just mentioned him because recent RTC info still lists him as a resident athlete (and the other guys mentioned are in fact still competing). You're right, though...not sure he's actually been at it.

  7. 30 minutes ago, SIACfan said:

    There is always going to be several perspectives. But the way I see it Rooks took advantage of the opportunity that the Teske seeding technicality offered him. While Boarman simply failed to take care of business & may pay a steep price because of it.

    100% agree.

     

    Starting with him winning one of his losses, there are actually about 12 scenarios around the country that would have gotten Boarman in if he indeed misses out.

  8. 7 minutes ago, Disco said:

    That’s a lot of if ands and buts, and always happens every year to more than one wrestler. I’m amazed at how you did all this placement diving to get to a conclusion! Did you graduate at  the top of your class?

    Ha, no. I just knew Boarman is 7th in line with 6 spots available, and I noticed Cayden would have faced Teske/Van Dee with normal seeding of Teske--but I wanted to spell it out if people didn't know how the system worked.

  9. Sadly, Blake Boarman, Chattanooga (Evansville Mater Dei) 133, got put to his back and pinned when he was leading 8-0 in a match that he needed to secure a spot at NCAA nationals this weekend. Double sadly, even though he was in a good spot in the Coaches' ranking and RPI to get an at-large bid if he lost, the 133 results went haywire across the country.  A full 8 of the 27 guys at that weight who earned automatic allocations for their conferences did not earn the automatic bids. There are only 6 at-large bids to be handed out, and, as it turns out, among those 8 unlucky losers, Blake is ranked 7th. He would be the final guy not to get into the tournament at 133 if the committee decides to stick to its pre-tournament assessments. Several of the other "losers" were ranked near him, and I'm not sure what's happening with the injury situation of Wells from Minnesota, so not all is lost. But it's not looking great.

     

    So here's a twist: In the Big Ten, Bouzakis of Ohio St. and Wells of Minnesota didn't earn their allocations and stand in front of Boarman in the line for that last NCAAs bid. One of the things that happened there was a seeding glitch: Brody Teske of Iowa didn't get a seed (well..automatically fell to 14th) because he won the Iowa wrestle-off too late for his information to be submitted for a seed. He takes out 3-seed Bouzakis, who falls into the wrestle backs and loses to 4-seed Van Dee. If Teske had been seeded, he would have been the #6, and he would have had a first round match with Cayden Rooks, who would have dropped a line from his given #10 to #11. Even if Cayden had wrestled lights out, he would have arguably lost that match to the hot Teske. Making a long story short...Bouzakis would have likely gotten 4th to 6th, even with how he wrestled this weekend; Teske would have placed about the same as he did; and Rooks would have had to face Van Dee of Nebraska in the Consi 2nd Round. Assuming he'd lost that match as he did this weekend (11-6), Bouzakis would have gotten the automatic bid and Rooks wouldn't have.  ....And Blake Boarman would be sitting in the final NCAAs bid position instead of one spot out. 

     

    Obviously, Cayden Rooks earned his spot, and Indiana wrestling fans who know his story--among whom I am one--are ecstatic. And obviously Blake Boarman put himself where he is by not finishing the job on Saturday. But what a twist of fate that one Indiana native who just lost 9-8 to another Indiana native just a couple weeks ago might have subbed in to his NCAAs spot in his last-gasp year--in part because of a seeding rule technicality!

  10. 3 hours ago, Disco said:

    Will be represented by at least 6 wrestlers, pending at large bids. Lee 157, Rooks 159,Fongaro 141, Lillard 165, Rooks 131, Willham 285, the most in several years. Great work by the coaches. Indiana finishing 12th in the conference Championship was not good, but it is more telling how good the rest of the Big Ten teams are. Hopefully Hoosier can continue to improve their personnel ,in their quest for more parody in the conference. 

    I agree with your thought that it's a big deal for IU to get this many too. Nothing would be better for recruiting and drawing attention to the RTC than if Lee and Rooks are All-Americans and Red, Moran, Lacey, and others keep banging on the freestyle circuit.

  11. 2 hours ago, Disco said:

    Will be represented by at least 6 wrestlers, pending at large bids. Lee 157, Rooks 159,Fongaro 141, Lillard 165, Rooks 131, Willham 285, the most in several years. Great work by the coaches. Indiana finishing 12th in the conference Championship was not good, but it is more telling how good the rest of the Big Ten teams are. Hopefully Hoosier can continue to improve their personnel ,in their quest for more parody in the conference. 

    Yeah, IU and Ohio St. are the two that stand out as being much better duals teams than tournament teams. OSU were 2nd in the duals standings and are going to end up with all 10 at nationals, but finished 5th. IU ends up 12th, but were tied for 7th in the duals standings and will end up as high as tied for 6th in number of qualifiers once things shake out.

  12. 2 hours ago, SIACfan said:

    Special Shout to Mendez!

     

    Winning the 141 Title by beating Woods & Bartlett on the way. His interview was sweet. It's clear he has bigger aspirations in mind.

     

    Here is a run down of all the Indiana native's that placed (please let me know if I missed anyone).

     

    133 - C. Rooks 7th

    141 - Mendez 1st, Lemley 4th

    149 - G Rooks 7th

    157 - Lee 5th

    174 - Baumann 8th

    197 - Allred 3rd

    HWT - Davison 3rd

     

    Brayton Lee could have been in the finals. He lost to Will Lewan in SV in the semifinals, but he had a TD all but secured in the final seconds of regulation. If he would have just covered Lewan's hips he would have gotten the 3. But he had Lewan almost on his back & went for that instead. Lewan was then able to scoot his hips out & square up. Hindsight is 20-20.

     

    Good luck to all these guys at Nationals.

    With the Willham correction, those match what I had on the other thread. Boarman out of the SoCon, Washington, Sollars, and Bates are all going to be in the at-large discussion too.

  13. 1 hour ago, julio said:

    You can see it in the schools as well, parents coming in a cussing out teachers and principals right in front of the student.  Parents are not trying to be parents anymore, in my opinion, but they rather be best friends with their kids.

    If we want to dig even deeper into this point: I think our whole culture teaches us that being happy is the meaning of life. Which is all well and good. But the way happiness is defined nowadays has evolved into this: "obsessively chase what you think should be yours so you can be happy for you." That's a counterfeit happiness--it's a rigid individualism and potentially narcissism. True happiness doesn't happen on an island. It happens in relationships and in respect of community. Relationships involve self-sacrifice--the opposite of "get mine for me." As a parent, I'm trying to learn better how to teach "chase your dreams" in a way that also involves celebrating others' successes. It's tough to do!!

  14. Conference tournament results for our 18 Indiana natives as of 2:45pm ET on Sunday:

     

    Alive for an at-large berth, but eliminated from an automatic bid:

    Boarman, 1-2 (As the 3-seed needing top 3, loses a 5-4 semi's heartbreaker to the #2 in the last minute...then was up 8-0 in the consi semi's and gets put to his back and pinned with 3 seconds left in the 2nd period. Both were guys he beat in the duals. He earned one of the 3 allocation slots for the SoCon, so he'll have a shot to get an at-large; but he'll be sweating it out for sure with a 1-2 SoCon performance. Sadly, he's one of 7 allocation guys that have lost so far at 133 nationally, and there are only 6 at-large bids. )

    Washington, 0-2 (As the 8-seed, falls 10-5 to the 9-seed and 8-0 to the 7-seed. He came in #24 in the Coaches' Rank, but he's struggled so much recently and forfeited out of the 9th place round. It could be dicey for him on selection day.)

    Sollars, 0-2 (As the 10-seed, falls 6-2 and 8-3 to the 7- and 8-seeds. He comes in #33 in the Coaches' rank and #31 in the RPI. The good news is that there's been a lot of chalk at 197 nationally, so he will be in the at-large discussion. But he's at the tail-end of that discussion, so he too will be sweating on selection day.)

    Bates, 8th place (As the 8-seed, goes 2-3 to pick up 8th. He's 32 in the Coaches' Rank and 26 in the RPI, and he finished where he was expected in Big 10s, so he's squarely in the middle of the at-large discussion. He'll be hoping for chalk results in the last couple conference tournaments so he stays in a good position.)

     

    Eliminated from NCAAs entirely:

    Wilson, 1-2

    Porter, 1-2

    Watson, SoCon 4th

    Filipovich, 0-2

    Barket 0-1, needed Top 2

     

    Advanced to NCAAs:

    Lee, going for 5th

    Lemley, going for 3rd

    Mendez, going for 1st

    Allred, going for 3rd

    Davison, going for 3rd

    Baumann, 8th place

    G. Rooks, 7th place

    C. Rooks, 7th place

    Willham, 7th place

  15. 4 hours ago, BIGCATSontheMAT said:

    Baumann is automatically qualified already

    Not saying that's wrong, but I don't understand why they're wrestling for 9th place when there are only 8 slots. I'm not sure what the protocols for injury backfill at nationals are, though, so it could be for that. (I'd thought injury backfills were determined nationally, not through the conferences; but I must be wrong.)

  16. 1 hour ago, Thor said:

    Brody Baumann will be advancing. He lucks out in having Carter Starrocci in the to go round, who is forfeiting out of Big Tens due to his knee. 

    He does get some luck there, but I'm not sure if they'll wrestle back to 9th and do a True 8th match at that weight. Otherwise, he goes loss-bye-forfeit...NCAA bid. Does anyone know if they wrestle back to 9th and do a True 8th at weights that have 8 allocations?

  17. Conference tournament status for our 18 Indiana natives as of 3:45pm ET:

     

    Alive for an automatic berth:

    Bates 1-1

    Baumann 0-1

    C. Rooks 0-1

    G. Rooks 1-1

    Sollars 0-1

    Washington 0-1

    Willham 1-1

    Barket (tomorrow)

     

    Alive for an at-large berth, but eliminated from an automatic bid:

    Boarman 1-2 (As the 3-seed needing top 3, loses a 5-4 semi's heartbreaker to the #2 in the last minute...then was up 8-0 in the consi semi's and gets put to his back and pinned with 3 seconds left in the 2nd period. Both were guys he beat in the duals. He earned one of the 3 allocation slots for the SoCon, so he'll have a shot to get an at-large; but he'll be sweating it out for sure with a 1-2 SoCon performance. Sadly, several other 133s that earned allocations have also fallen, meaning the at-large competition will be stiff. )

     

    Eliminated from NCAAs entirely:

    Wilson 1-2

    Porter 1-2

    Watson 2-1, wrestling for SoCon 3rd

    Filipovich 0-2

     

    Advanced to NCAAs:

    Lee 2-0

    Lemley 2-0

    Mendez 1-0

    Allred 2-0

    Davison 2-0

×
×
  • 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.