|
|
Post by switch1 on Jan 28, 2013 7:55:00 GMT -5
Can someone address how seeding works at states? I heard that division II wrestlers can't seed higher than 3 or 4 even if they have the best record. Is that possible? thanks
|
|
|
|
Post by rulesguy on Jan 30, 2013 9:57:17 GMT -5
Can someone address how seeding works at states? I heard that division II wrestlers can't seed higher than 3 or 4 even if they have the best record. Is that possible? thanks This is not technically true. The state bracket is seeded by division and then slotted into pre-determined brackets. Division 1 is seeded by a seeding meeting based on Power Points earned during league dual meets. Division 2 is seeded by placement in the Division 2 Tournament (which is originally seeded by Power Points earned during league dual meets) Once both divisions are seeded the slot into the brackets. The D1-1 seed is placed at the very top of the bracket giving the illusion of an overall number 1 seed. The D1-2 and D1-3 are on the opposite side of the bracket in the normal 2 and 3 position. The D2-1 is slotted also on the opposite side of the bracket scheduled to meet the D1-3 in the quarters and the D1-2 in the semis if all plays out by seeding and no "upsets" occur. So although their position in the bracket can't show a true number 1 seed, you could easily manipulate the way the bracket looks, have all the same match ups and have the D2-1 at the top of the bracket. The bracket would still play out the same way and the match ups would be the same... They just don't do that because it would be a ton of extra work to put that information in the computer program that runs the tournament. So, no D2-1 cannot "get" the overall Number 1 seed in the tournament, but because bracket seeding is predetermined it does not matter except for the aesthetic of the bracket. |
|
|
|
Post by legcradle93 on Jan 30, 2013 10:41:06 GMT -5
Thank you rules guy for the clarification and switch for bringing this matter up.
|
|
|
|
Post by helper on Jan 30, 2013 10:55:36 GMT -5
Technically the D2-1 is a 6 seed if you look at a traditional bracket.
There are several ways to fix our system, the easiest is having 3 regional sectionals. We would then have enough cross division wrestling to sit and seed a state tournament by regional qualifiers.
As it is our predetermined bracket is still not the best done. My major issue is the 1-3 from both divisions and the 2-4 from both divisions should be together.
This way the bracket is evenly split by the top talents from each division. If not if a top 3 out of 4 come from one division one half of bracket becomes top heavy.
For example 160 last year. Schmeider got a huge advantage in the bracketing because 3 out of the 4 top kids all season were on 1 division (D1) so Gallagher had to go through the 3rd, 4th and then the finals where Schmeider had the 6th, 5th then the finals.
Even if its not a 3 to 1 split maybe its an all 4 top kids come from 1 division, the 1 should be better than the 3 and the 2 better than the 4. Like wise if top 4 kids are in 2 different divisions it'll be 2 to a side.
If we are not going to truly seed a bracket then we have to not do a traditional form of 1&4 on a side and 2&3 on the other.
We need to properly split up the talent 1 is 2 better than 3 and 2 is 2 better than 4, flip them.
|
|
|
|
Post by finalist on Jan 30, 2013 11:01:04 GMT -5
Agreed
When will some one wake up and fix this mess.
The fact that half the state uses power points and the other half uses a tournament is ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
Post by finalist on Jan 30, 2013 11:05:05 GMT -5
At one time a few years back somebody posted a bracket sheet where each seed would land.
Anyone still have that our know where it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by switchit on Jan 30, 2013 11:20:43 GMT -5
It's in the bracket section.
|
|
|
|
Post by granby on Jan 30, 2013 20:36:17 GMT -5
well, sounds like "a tough row to hoe" for the Div 2 kids at States this year.
what's the saying? that which does not kill you, makes you...strong!
|
|
|
|
Post by wiseowl on Jan 30, 2013 22:48:17 GMT -5
They are mirrored brackets, best D1 wrestlers are seperated, and the best D2 wrestlers are seperated, both seperated equally. Now the argument of the D2 1 having to beat the D1 3-2 then 1 only holds weight is you assume D1 has the best wrestlers. Which isn't the case, D1 traditionally has better teams, due to depth and school size's, but D2 can offer just as competitive a wrestler as D1. I see some D1 seeding as a farce as not always the best wrestler is in the 1 spot from bumping and running or missed matches ect... you could put the D2 1 on top D2 2 on 2 line and D2 3 on 3 line and put D1 in place and it's still the same bracket. D1 top 4 and D2 top 4 all have a shot for one div or the other to possibly have all 4 in the semis.
|
|
|
|
Post by rulesguy on Feb 1, 2013 12:33:22 GMT -5
Technically the D2-1 is a 6 seed if you look at a traditional bracket. Agreed, but that when the brackets are seeded they way that they are, that doesn't make him/her the #6 seed, it makes them the D2-1, flip the D2 and D1 seeds in the bracket and it's still the same bracket (more or less). Agree, again! But the only people who are going to fix that is the coaches. Finally to your point about 160 last year. It may not have been truly "fair" to Gallagher, but is readjusting the D2-2's seed, a kid who earned that seed through wrestling in the sectionals the way to solve it... just a counter point. |
|
|
|
Post by rulesguy on Feb 1, 2013 12:35:40 GMT -5
Agreed When will some one wake up and fix this mess. The fact that half the state uses power points and the other half uses a tournament is ridiculous. Yet that half of the state that uses a tournament, uses PowerPoints to seed that tournament. They were even given the option 2 years ago to use the Powerpoint system and chose not to use it. D1 has maintained the position that they are happy to use the PowerPoint system, and I don't think D2 can complain since they turned that option down. |
|
|
|
Post by rulesguy on Feb 1, 2013 12:45:58 GMT -5
They are mirrored brackets, best D1 wrestlers are seperated, and the best D2 wrestlers are seperated, both seperated equally. Now the argument of the D2 1 having to beat the D1 3-2 then 1 only holds weight is you assume D1 has the best wrestlers. Which isn't the case, D1 traditionally has better teams, due to depth and school size's, but D2 can offer just as competitive a wrestler as D1. I see some D1 seeding as a farce as not always the best wrestler is in the 1 spot from bumping and running or missed matches ect... you could put the D2 1 on top D2 2 on 2 line and D2 3 on 3 line and put D1 in place and it's still the same bracket. D1 top 4 and D2 top 4 all have a shot for one div or the other to possibly have all 4 in the semis. The one suggestion I would make is to use an ODD/EVEN system on opposite sides of the Bracket rather than a traditional bracket inverted. D1-Odd seeds up top with the D2-evens, D2-odds down low with the D1-evens. Then match the top half of the bracket with traditional seeding 1-8 and the same down low (i.e. D1-1 vs. D2-8, D1-2 vs D2-7 ignoring pigtails that would have to slot in) This would keep D2 Finalist (consi and Championship) away from each other. It would also allow for the brackets with top D2 talent the opportunity to be more spread out. However, in the years when the top 4 wrestlers are all in one division, it will make for "improper" semi-final match-ups. No system will ever be perfect when seeding a tournament like this. |
|
|
|
Post by helper on Feb 1, 2013 15:08:48 GMT -5
Correct no method is perfect but we should work to improve it. Like you said odds with odds even with evens.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikepeters on Feb 1, 2013 16:25:40 GMT -5
Who cares? If you want to be a state champion you should be able to beat EVERYONE in your weight class. If you're worried about seeding there is someone you don't want to face.
|
|
|
|
Post by rulesguy on Feb 5, 2013 15:58:44 GMT -5
Who cares? If you want to be a state champion you should be able to beat EVERYONE in your weight class. If you're worried about seeding there is someone you don't want to face. While I agree with you 100% that the only thing that matters for an individual champion is to beat the best in your bracket, there is more to a Wrestling tournament than 1 wrestler finishing first. Some wrestler's may never be that wrestler who will win the states, but proper seeding assures them the fairest chance to place their highest. If they see someone who they are not capable of beating too early in the tournament, it greatly diminishes their chance at placing. Being on the right side of a bracket may be the difference between 2nd and 3rd or even 3rd and 5th, and to some, being 2nd or placing as high as they can is an incredible achievement. Finally, for all of those reasons above, it makes a huge difference in the team standings. Placement points, advancement points, and bonus points all stem from favorable match-ups at favorable times. Losing in the first round and winning 2 underneath then losing again is less points than winning 2 up top and then losing two in a row. Seeding is paramount to a fair tournament for all competitors and teams during the biggest time of their season. You can't look past an imperfect system simply because "the best guy will win", because there is so much more to a wrestling tournament then the guy who comes in first. I know a system of seeding will never be perfect as long as head to heads don't happen with every wrestler, but working to get closer to perfect has to keep hapenning. |
|
|
|
Post by legcradle93 on Feb 5, 2013 20:21:42 GMT -5
The ducking issue could be avoided perhaps if wins in weight class were worth more in points than wins outside of weight class that wrestler is going at States.
|
|
|
|
Post by helper on Feb 5, 2013 21:10:32 GMT -5
They are. Wins in weight are worth 6 more power points than those out of weight. Maybe it should be a bit higher but then some teams are at huge disadvantages as well as kids who aren't allowed to get to minimum weights at the get go of the season.
Some teams that are in the hunt for division championships at times need to bump their lineups around to put out the strongest team possible that night, it's hard to penalize a kid too much for doing what is right for their team.
Likewise if the kids that are properly losing weight not cutting right before fat testing then often they are not allowed to wrestle at weight right away so are then penalized for following healthy dieting and weight management plans
|
|
|
|
Post by legcradle93 on Feb 5, 2013 21:16:45 GMT -5
Thank you for clarification helper!
|
|
|
|
Post by wiseowl on Feb 5, 2013 21:20:21 GMT -5
legcradle, that is the case now, 30 pts for win in weight, 24 pts for win out of weight
|
|
|
|
Post by helper on Feb 5, 2013 21:31:50 GMT -5
Thank you for clarification helper! No worries glad to clarify, and wiseowel posted the actual power points per win but remember the wrestler also accumulates bonus points just like in the match, decision=+3, major=+4 ect |
|
