Silence Dogood

Probably. They call 3 hour delay for everything.

I believe Jay County is on a perpetual 3-hour delay.

Pretty sure it was 2OT. I can see Carr's foot slipping out of Harper's grasp for the escape.

I might be misremembering, but it seems like Petrov scored right at the end of the 2nd period and from then on he had an unbelievable amount of confidence. He was on fire in the 3rd period.

There's an error in the 135 lb bracket in 1999. Beals beat Jones 12-1. And Cook beat Hoover 18-14. https://www.ihsaa.org/archive/b-wrestling/135pounds99.html

That was might thought. Not a great call to start with.

Not sure what point you are trying to make, but I'll take Levitz over the Carmel 160 every time.

I am saying that small schools as a group should not expect to have 25% of the qualifiers when they have 13% of the enrollment and presumably 13% of the people who have the talent to be a state qualifier. And I was trying to counter your earlier point that going to a big school causes an individual to be 4x as likely to become a state qualifier. As I said before, I think you are confusing the probability of a state qualifier coming from a big school with the impact that going to a big school has on an individual being able to qualify for state. They aren't the same thing. I used this example earlier to try to explain better what I am saying: "As an example, take 1000 people and randomly put 10% of them in Group 1, 25% in Group 2, 25% in Group 3, and 40% in Group 4. Then tell each group they can select their 100 fastest people and time them in a 100 meter dash. I would guess that of the top 100 finishers, 10 would come from Group 1, 25 would come from Group 2, 25 would come from Group 3, and 40 would come from Group 4. I wouldn't expect each group to have 25 simply because they had the same number of entrants. And being in a particular group didn't cause any individual to be more or less likely to be in the top 100." Because the numbers we are seeing for state qualifiers don't seem to be drastically out of line from what we would expect based on probability, it doesn't seem inequitable to me when speaking only about the individual competing in the one class individual tournament. So that's the point I am trying to make. On the other hand, you seem to be trying to make a case that classing the individual tournament would have benefits to small schools and we need to do that in order to save them. Since we are talking about two different things we are talking past each other.

Nobody is saying this.

Depends. Why haven't they had one? Do they have a club program? Lots of dedicated coaches, volunteers, and parents? There are big schools that aren't having success in producing qualifiers, too.

I may not be following the questions. But I'll take a crack at it. 1. In a single class system, all individuals are equal. They are competing against other individuals. 2. A multi-class system is trying to alleviate advantages that a big school would have over a small school (for example, a larger pool of athletes to create the team). For those reasons, I am in favor of a classing the team aspect and not in favor of classing the individual.

I think you are confusing the probability of a state qualifier coming from a big school with the impact that going to a big school has on an individual being able to qualify for state. They aren't the same thing. You are trying to use statistics that say that 41.1% of state qualifiers come from 4A schools and 9.8% of state qualifiers come from 1A schools, to say that going to 4A school will cause an individual to be 4x as likely to qualify for state. As an example, take 1000 people and randomly put 10% of them in Group 1, 25% in Group 2, 25% in Group 3, and 40% in Group 4. Then tell each group they can select their 100 fastest people and time them in a 100 meter dash. I would guess that of the top 100 finishers, 10 would come from Group 1, 25 would come from Group 2, 25 would come from Group 3, and 40 would come from Group 4. I wouldn't expect each group to have 25 simply because they had the same number of entrants. And being in a particular group didn't cause any individual to be more or less likely to be in the top 100.

We are talking about an individual tournament. The numbers don't seem to indicate that individuals from small schools are struggling. They are generally qualifying in same proportions we would expect based on the proportion of the enrollment that small schools have.

This one gets at that same argument, too.

I tried to address this 9 years ago...