Understanding State Seeding

[takdwn2]

I blame this on the coaches and the WWCA. No blame should be put on the WIAA. The adults in charge screwed up again. Why make this so difficult and confusing?
For division 2 and 3
Seed the sectional champs only.
Put the 2nd and 3rd place finishers on the other side of the bracket.
Finished!!!
Sectional champs should earn a bye.
Sectional opponents shouldn't have to face each other first round at state.

[Coach Lu]

Hey Chad,

That is simply not the case.  The WWCA membership voted overwhelmingly to seed the state tournament.  There was a committee within the WWCA formed to investigate seeding criteria and make a recommendation to the WWCA board.  Many factors were looked at including models used by states who seeded their state tournaments.  Conversations were had with coaches from other states, conversations with trackwrestling occured, models were played with and different ways of seeding were debated and discussed.  Ultimately in the end, this system seemed to give us the best starting spot.  We didn't think designing our own model was the best when we could use an existing model that was well received and tweak in years to come. 

You can be upset with me if you want -- I was on the committee which is why I am writing to inform you this was NOT a WIAA behind the scenes initiative.  I am sorry if I failed you.  I worked hard to provide something that allows for our finals to more often than not showcase the two best wrestlers.  I have always been aware that heading something like this is tricky.  People will always open brackets and be upset.  No seeding will ever be perfect.  We ridicule NCAA seeds when they come out too...  I challenge you to look at the seeding in this light across all three divisions...

Are the perceived #1 and #2 kids on opposite sides of the bracket more often than two years ago with the random draw?  If the answer is yes, then we may have made things a little better AND we are in year 1...  We knew we would want to look at this heavily after year one.  After the completion of this year we have the ability to play around with criteria and order of importance and see what it produces or would have produced (due to coaches not having data in trackwrestling in previous years, playing around with outcomes from criterias was difficult).

For others that have asked questions, I will try to answer your questions if I can.  For now I am trying to stay on top of things while I also spend a few minutes with my two girls before I begin trying to prepare my own team for state.  This is a busy time of year for everyone. 

Last thought...Many of us think there needs to be a few changes in our sport.  When changes are made, we slam the idea instantly before the process has even completed and before tweaks can be had.  People, we need time to digest changes before we slam them.  How willing is leadership to change if everything we do is slammed before we even get to digest it?  If we want to arrive at the best for our sport we need to be patient, learn procedures, and find proactive ways to improve.  Most of you in this thread have provided good input.  I thank you for that.  Best of luck to everyone!

[Coach Lu]

Takedown,

Also I am sorry if I failed you.  I am an adult in this conversation you speak of.  We considered your suggestion.  When the two best guys are in the same regional or sectional, and the sectional champs get seeds and the next best guy lands on the 1 or 2 seed side will people be angry?  Your idea seems very similar to what we had which is what coaches overwhelmingly voted to get rid of.  I guess I don't know what is best but I want you to know I tried.

[Chad Steldt]

Lullof,

I think you are misreading my comment. The WWCA committee really did not fully understand the "details" of the OPC. Just go look at Chris Hansen's (WWCA long standing member) post, just talk to the coaches (WWCA members) and they will all tell you they did not understand the head to head point accumulation. Once again, fixing the head to head will solve majority of the problems.

To most, head to head would supersede any point system.

Another point; being a part of the WWCA I have to say the messaging and transparency on this was subpar. When was a clear defined email ever sent out about how the OPC worked? Last week....

I agree with you that we will make it better, but we need to hear and listen to the constructive criticisms so we can do so. Look forward to our continued work on making WI Wrestling the best it can be.

Good Luck to all.

[MNbadger]

I agree with you about head to head but are you willing to live and die by it?  What is your position if a kid who is 11-11 and he pins the returning section champ?

Head to head win should supersede any point system. Bottom line. This is not the case. Or the point system you have identified greatly undervalued head to head.

I do not think the WWCA ever really knew about the details of the seeding. This is a system that the WIAA copied from several states (not the WWCA) and ran with it.

[Chad Steldt]

I would say he gets seeded higher the next day.

Records are meaningless because of quality.

This whole system devalues quality and pushing my kids to wrestle the best.

Furthermore, if we do not fix this before next year, I guarantee you we will have a devalued sectional meet.

[takdwn2]

Lu, the prior system wasn't totally broken.
The coaches voted to completely through that system in the garbage.
In previous years everyone's number 1 problem was getting the two best kids in the finals at state, right?

To do that you only have to seed the 4 sectional champs and then put their 2 sectional opponents on the other side of the bracket. If the two best kids came from the same sectional, fine, then they are on opposite sides of the bracket in this system and can meet in the finals.
That's it!!!

You guys voted to burn the old system to the ground.

[Coach Lu]

The main issue here is the fear of letting any humans involved in seeding. Humans are not the evil everyone wants them to be in seeding. This computer system can be the important step for the main starting point. 

I am sure this process will be tinkered with but this should be the process.

1) Tinker with the computer formula
2) On Saturday night/Sunday morning all coaches should be given the opportunity to provide information about their wrestler in regards to the other wrestlers in the field.
3) A 3 person human committee should be appointed for each division.  They review the computer seeds and look of clear and obvious errors and are allowed to make changes. Mainly reviewing the top 4 seeds
4) Release the brackets Sunday evening.

This gives the best of both humans and computers.  Keep the committee confidential and have it be retired coaches.

Tinkering with computer formula
1) margin of victory cannot matter.  That leads to a lot of bad things.
2) Sectional matches have to matter more.  I don't care if kids have to re-wrestle at state in first round.  We already make them wrestle at conference, regionals, and sectionals so why not state also. BUT....  sectional results have to carry weight or why wrestle it.  Tweak it so NO wrestler can be seeded ahead of a wrestler at state that they finished behind at sectionals. That makes it a true part of the state tournament.  Otherwise it is just another random tournament and in fact then we might as well get rid of regionals and sectionals and invite the top 12 or 16 seeded wrestlers in state based on regular season.

DocWrestling, Thanks for the suggestions.  You bring forward some good points.  Based on how angry people get over seeds, not sure humans want to be involved (even if we think they are anonymous, my guess is people will assume who is involved and blast away)??  But maybe we do want them involved?  Either way its a suggestion without tearing things apart and I appreciate that.  It seems like WIAA is moving more towards computer seeds in many sports (I can imagine they get heat often from all ends when seeds get released in any sport). 

I am curious what information coaches would provide that trackwrestling can't pull?  I don't think we want emotion involved do we?  Data does get pulled in relation to everyone in the field.  The margin of victory suggestion could be a very easy tweak that might fix many problems without creating more.  Something I already planned to look into -- thanks for that suggestion.

I also think your suggestion about the sectionals is creative.  I want to bounce this back at you and see what you think... 

Wrestler A, B, and C are in a sectional

Wrestler A has had a really strong season beating many top finishers from a year ago.  Wrestler B is very good because they have an awesome headlock.  Wrestler B loses to good wrestlers often but pins good wrestlers as well.  Wrestler C is solid as well.

Sectionals happens and Wrestler A is perceived to be the best of the 3.  He loses to wrestler B by pin in a headlock.  Wrestler C then beats wrestler B because they avoid the headlock.  Wrestler C is the least accredited wrestler.  His seed comes back as 7-9.  Are we ok putting a wrestler below that who has beaten many guys in the bracket because a guy with a great headlock go him?  Or do we prefer to look at the entire season body of work?  That's really the question that drives many decisions...  I could argue for both honestly and either way people will see the seeds and be upset.

I am not attacking you one bit.  I like your suggestion...I am just thinking it through outloud...  I keep coming back to the idea that no matter what you decide, there will always be outliers that make things tough...

[Coach Lu]

Hey Chad,

Sorry if I misread what you wrote.  My apologies.  That's why this is all tough because communicating through a keyboard is tough.  The system we are currently using is very similar to team state seeding.  I did speak with Chris, and he is very well spoken and has amazing thoughts.  He is a guy I love bouncing ideas off of.

As far as communication goes, that's always an area that can be improved.  No doubt.  I will not argue that with you.  I will say though that there were many times state seeding criteria was communicated and nobody ever asked for a detailed explanation on how things would be actually be applied.  Everyone just heard it was Iowa model (very close to MN model) and it was done on trackwrestling.  People stopped asking questions... Coaches weren't worried about it until after seeds got released (myself included).  Oversight?  Sure I will wear that.  I was so busily working on what to do, once it was done, I wasn't following up on the communication because I understood it maybe?  Also not to make excuses, but this was something started with previous leadership of WIAA and inherited by new leadership.  Either way, point taken...Communicate.

Head to head supercedes everything else makes us diminish an athletes body of work throughout the season (meaning only the matches wrestled with people who qualified in that bracket would matter for seeding rather than looking at all the quality people they have wrestled and beaten.  With kids dropping weights, etc. I wonder how that would look in a bracket?)..If that's what we all want, we can work towards that.  Again, my personal opinion is that spin it either way there will be cases in the brackets that raises eyebrows.  I am open to looking at things after this year to make things better.  That is my main goal.

Thanks for the input.

[Coach Lu]

Lu, the prior system wasn't totally broken.
The coaches voted to completely through that system in the garbage.
In previous years everyone's number 1 problem was getting the two best kids in the finals at state, right?

To do that you only have to seed the 4 sectional champs and then put their 2 sectional opponents on the other side of the bracket. If the two best kids came from the same sectional, fine, then they are on opposite sides of the bracket in this system and can meet in the finals.
That's it!!!

You guys voted to burn the old system to the ground.

If I seed the sectional champs, it may not be possible to put the 2nd and 3rd on the opposite side of the bracket.  If two of the sectional champs would have been 6 seeds or lower, then you still have problems somewhere don't you?  What would you do for D1?  I can tell you that the 8 sectional champs are not always the 8 best wrestlers in D1...I am guessing doing something different for D1 than 2/3 would instantly cause problems as well.

I will agree with you that D2 and D3 would be easier to seed the top than would be D1 (being 2/3 have that natural break with byes).  When talking to almost every other state they said if you seed it, seed all of it.  Most states that started seeding top 4 or 8 a year later starting seeding it all...

I am not disagreeing with you by the way.  Trying to enlighten you on some things we learned as to why decisions were made. 

Do you believe this forum would have been quiet if your suggestion was a reality?  We will most certainly need to survey coaches in the near future...Again thanks for the suggestion.

[justwrestle]

Did the WIAA/Coaches' Association look at what other states are doing? Illinois has been seeding Sectional Champions only for quite some time. The seeds are based on a points' system like is being used here, but there is no subjectivity. If you aren't a sectional champion, you cannot be a top-four seed.

Returning state champions at any weight class ........................30 points
Returning 2nd or 3rd place winner at any weight class .................25 points
Returning 4th, 5th, or 6th place winner at any weight class .20 points
Returning state qualifier at any weight class ...................................10 points
37 or more wins .................15 points
32 to 36 wins......................10 points
27 to 31 wins........................7 points
22 to 26 wins........................5 points

If tied for a place, flip of a coin would determine  the seed of the wrestlers for placement of that seed on the bracket, except for the number one (1) seed and if the returning champ at that weight class is tied for the number one (1) seed, the returning champ will be seeded number one (1).

[The Last Ride]

I would say he gets seeded higher the next day.

Records are meaningless because of quality.

This whole system devalues quality and pushing my kids to wrestle the best.

Furthermore, if we do not fix this before next year, I guarantee you we will have a devalued sectional meet.

100%

[shouldvewrestled]

What is the separation/tie-breaking criteria when 3 or more kids have the same amount of seed points?

[littleguy301]

Head to head win should supersede any point system. Bottom line. This is not the case. Or the point system you have identified greatly undervalued head to head.

I do not think the WWCA ever really knew about the details of the seeding. This is a system that the WIAA copied from several states (not the WWCA) and ran with it.

This whole new seeding works for 16 man brackets but it doesn't work in a 12 man bracket plain and simple. D1 wanted this way more than other divisions this here we go.

The problem is especial in 2 and 3. Families get to drive to Madison and watch the same match that took place hundreds of miles away the weekend before the Thursday night at state and if they are lucky enough to win they get to wrestle the third kid of the previous week tournament..

Would basketball set it up to play the same team 4 times in a few weeks. Please we just cannt get out of the way of ourselves

Drive over to Minnesota and ask how they do their point system and use that, it isnt that hard!

[Tims]

Coach Lullof,


You stated what information would coaches provide that trackwrestling can't pull.  Isn't that part of the larger problem?  Not everyone uses track wrestling and not all of the results are there to be pulled.  Wouldn't having coaches enter head to head before the brackets are made or WIAA enforcing the use of a database such as track be a better idea?

I would imagine it wasn't meant to be this way but this almost feels like the certain seeding criteria was withheld from the coaches.  Such as the margin of Victory.

To me this is more of the WIAA's Responsibility to roll this out to the coaches with detailed information of how this would be.