https://www.trackwrestling.com/predefinedtournaments/MainFrame.jsp?newSession=false&TIM=1645326098292&pageName=%2Fpredefinedtournaments%2FTournamentHub.jsp&twSessionId=rakrasrbpq
Wow... are these the actual seeds? This is some awful seeding.
Not sure why not how this change happened, but this may have been the dumbest rule change I have seen in my 40 years of being a fan. Wrestling the same kid you just did again next week to advance to wrestle the other kid from your bracket today, what the actual ....
How does a 1 loss 2x state champ get seeded 2 behind a 3 loss wrestler?
N
Can't be even close to being right
Not sure if it's possible but these seeds need to change. I really hope these are not legit.
Liam Neitzel Hudson 39-5 106 8th seed? Ranked 1st or 2nd all year (2nd at BiState) 4th at Cheesehead) Placed ahead of 2nd seed and 5th seed !I know rankings don't count but wow. Neitzel 8th seed finished 4th at Cheese and 5th seed finished 13th at Cheese. Ridiculous
Ryan Dolezal 160 41-3 5th seed?
All kinds of kids who placed 1st and 2nd in their sectional are wrestling in the first round at State Tournament..
I'm sure there are many more just looked at a few .
Great job messing up the state tournament. Have number 1, 2, 3 ranked guys all on the same side of the bracket. Absolutely stupid
Kole Marko D3 160 is the #3 seed. No offense to the other kids but that is crazy!
Quote from: scfcat on February 19, 2022, 09:37:02 PM
Kole Marko D3 160 is the #3 seed. No offense to the other kids but that is crazy!
Unreal.
Good god you guys are being a bunch of Dang babies! This is soooooo much better than what he had before. Lots of you just want something to complain about.
What's the old saying...be careful what you wish for because you might get it. Applies here I think.
In 3 weights the #2+#3 guys from Amery sectional meet 2st round. I know it's mathematically possible but come on.
Ben Askren this is worse than what we had. What are you even talking about!?
Quote from: heavy9278 on February 19, 2022, 09:18:55 PM
How does a 1 loss 2x state champ get seeded 2 behind a 3 loss wrestler?
N
This cannot be right. A returning 5th place at state does not move over a returning state champ without a head to head loss or loss to a opponent the returning 5th beat
I disagree strongly.
Give me a bracket where the CLEAR(not your biased opinion) #1 & #2 are on the same side.
Sure Greyson Clark being #2 is dumb, bc he is 1. But Hoyt is the relatively clear #2 and they are on opposite sides.
Ben
The wiaa and coaches screwed up the state tournament. Who the heck voted for this system. What a complete joke. Sectional finalists are wrestling each other in the first round at state. What were these guys thinking.....
Seed the 4 sectional champs and that should be it!
Greyson Clark got the 2 seed. Kole marko got the 3 seed.
Cash Stewart and Kole Marko are the obvious #1 & #2 at 160. They are on opposite sides and will wrestle in the finals.
Whole bunch of babies. Id rather have the seeds right(or close) than worry about kids who wrestled in sectionals wrestle again.
Give me a clear #1 & #2 on the same side or get lost.
Quote from: benaskren on February 19, 2022, 09:38:58 PM
Good god you guys are being a bunch of Dang babies! This is soooooo much better than what he had before. Lots of you just want something to complain about.
No, definitely some weird bugs. 3x State Champ Cole Marko, no losses this year = 3 seed. That one is bizarre......... What's difficult is some wrestlers have head-to-head or common opponent, others don't. Then throw in other stuff and??? The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of Sectional champs get the 4 byes, everyone else gets seeded 5-12. This way there is value in winning a sectional championship, but good 2nd and 3rd place wrestlers still wouldn't get screwed with a terrible draw.
Well I am going to predict bugs will be worked out by tomorrow (or there will be some explaining to do)
Yes you may wrestle the same kid today and early next week. If you do not like wrestling the same kids constantly, push hard to eliminate individual regionals.
How does one place higher at sectionals and gets seeded lower. Second place defeats third place. Second place has pinned third place two times. Bistate and sectionals. One loss in dual before Xmas to third by default(bang heads and default). 195 Div 3 needs fixed!!!!!!!
How about D3 113 we have a 3rd place finisher at sectionals with a first round bye.
Ben Askren
D2. 132
Koenig, Hart, Andersen all same side. 1,2,3 wrestlers not in that order same side.
Koenig 2X champ (113 last year)
Hart 120 state champ last year
Anderson- 3X place winner.
Feedsack
I missed that one. That is one to be pissed about.
But at least it is just 1. You guys are forgetting how many #1 vs #2 matches we used to have on Thursday night.
This is actually EASY by using an example. The concern with the old system is that "stacked" sectionals result in 2nd and 3rd at sectionals getting screwed in their draws at state. So let's look at D2 195 Amery Sectional as an extreme example: Top 3 ranked wrestlers in same sectional. If we placed 4 sectional champs as top 4 (bye) seeds and seeded them separately from 5-12, Ramberg gets # 1 seed. Hopke and Grewe likely get 5 & 6 seeds, so they both have to wrestle Thursday (as they would have under previous system) BUT they end up paired against 11th and 12th seed in pigtail round- which is fair. They would still (if it goes chalk) wrestle in the semifinals with Ramberg taking on the 4th seed (which is the way it would be if you simply seeded a 4 man bracket). So in the "worst case" scenario, the 2nd and 3rd place wrestlers in the "stacked" sectional would only have to wrestle two of the lowest seeds in the preliminary round in order to advance to the quarters. So it's not unfair to them, AND it would still give value to a sectional championship. If someone sneaks through a weaker sectional, they could still be seeded 4th (among the 4 sectional champs) and would face the # 1 seed in the semifinals even if they beat the pigtail winner. I would vote for this compromise between past and new systems in a heartbeat.
If you go on track and do a little digging none of the head to head matches have been entered if head to head is truly a criteria, these seeds would all likely change?
Quote from: Feedsack on February 19, 2022, 10:23:15 PM
If you go on track and do a little digging none of the head to head matches have been entered if head to head is truly a criteria, these seeds would all likely change?
Track does the head to head automatically from across the season. It compiles from all the matches entered into its system as all coaches are supposed to enter results into track throughout the season. Why coaches were told to be sure all their information for the season was entered before sectionals.
We all wanted a seeding of the state tournament. In most cases the top two wrestlers have been separated so it is a start. Sectional winners should not automatically be given the top for seeds. This is Shortsighted IMO, but there are surely some headscratchers.
Quote from: Feedsack on February 19, 2022, 10:10:22 PM
Ben Askren
D2. 132
Koenig, Hart, Andersen all same side. 1,2,3 wrestlers not in that order same side.
They are ranked 1, 2 and 3 but the seeding is #1, 4 and 5. Rankings have nothing to do with seeding.
Trying to figure out D1 138
Only thing I can come up with is a miscalculation with the common opponents criteria. Maybe Track is using record vs kids in the bracket?
Blaskowski is 3-0 (all over Blake Heal)
Clark is 2-0 (both over Brady Gille)
No head to head between these two.
I think the only common opponent is Max Ronsman who they both beat. So then prior year champion would be next criteria to give Clark the 1 seed by earning a seed point vs each of 15 wrestlers in the bracket.
Everyone stop. You all need a life. To be the best, you have to beat the best. Conversation over.
Quote from: Nweiler on February 19, 2022, 09:33:04 PM
Great job messing up the state tournament. Have number 1, 2, 3 ranked guys all on the same side of the bracket. Absolutely stupid
Rankings are just from guy behind a computer ya dork. Stop complaining.
Quote from: benaskren on February 19, 2022, 09:38:58 PM
Good god you guys are being a bunch of Dang babies! This is soooooo much better than what he had before. Lots of you just want something to complain about.
Thanks Ben!
145 D 3 dodgeland sectional
Sect champ gets 1 seed at state
2nd at sectionals gets 8th seed at state
3rd at sectionals gets 4th seed at state and a bye
Explain the logic there.
Seeding is a move in the right direction for sure. But you would think that when the WIAA decided to make such a drastic change they would have did a better job of getting the bugs out. Couple examples: a 3 time defending (undefeated) state champ gets the 2 seed? Or how about this one. D2 120. Ackman lost to Lux 3 weeks in a row and gets a better seed? Not a good showing by the WIAA
Quote from: takdwn2 on February 19, 2022, 10:50:47 PM
145 D 3 dodgeland sectional
Sect champ gets 1 seed at state
2nd at sectionals gets 8th seed at state
3rd at sectionals gets 4th seed at state and a bye
Explain the logic there.
The 1 is easy to justify.
The sectional 4th seed looks to be justified by prior year state qualifier. While the sectional 2nd may earn 1 H2H seed point over the 3rd today. The sectional 3rd is likely earning 6 seed points over state bracket members by prior state qualifier criteria.
Not sure how he gets the 4 over the 5 who was a sectional champ but that might be possible. Maybe the same seeding points but a higher win percentage moved one to a 4 seed and the other to the 5?
Quote from: handsandtoes on February 19, 2022, 11:09:57 PM
Seeding is a move in the right direction for sure. But you would think that when the WIAA decided to make such a drastic change they would have did a better job of getting the bugs out. Couple examples: a 3 time defending (undefeated) state champ gets the 2 seed? Or how about this one. D2 120. Ackman lost to Lux 3 weeks in a row and gets a better seed? Not a good showing by the WIAA
Dux is #2, Ackman is #3.
Quote from: Numbers on February 19, 2022, 10:40:06 PM
Trying to figure out D1 138
Only thing I can come up with is a miscalculation with the common opponents criteria. Maybe Track is using record vs kids in the bracket?
Blaskowski is 3-0 (all over Blake Heal)
Clark is 2-0 (both over Brady Gille)
No head to head between these two.
I think the only common opponent is Max Ronsman who they both beat. So then prior year champion would be next criteria to give Clark the 1 seed by earning a seed point vs each of 15 wrestlers in the bracket.
Well on Track under seeding Clark is not listed as even a state qualifier. Not sure who was supposed to enter that State Champion minor detail.
Quote from: Numbers on February 19, 2022, 11:19:59 PM
Quote from: takdwn2 on February 19, 2022, 10:50:47 PM
145 D 3 dodgeland sectional
Sect champ gets 1 seed at state
2nd at sectionals gets 8th seed at state
3rd at sectionals gets 4th seed at state and a bye
Explain the logic there.
The 1 is easy to justify.
The sectional 4th seed looks to be justified by prior year state qualifier. While the sectional 2nd may earn 1 H2H seed point over the 3rd today. The sectional 3rd is likely earning 6 seed points over state bracket members by prior state qualifier criteria.
Not sure how he gets the 4 over the 5 who was a sectional champ but that might be possible. Maybe the same seeding points but a higher win percentage moved one to a 4 seed and the other to the 5?
Looks like the returning champion info was not entered but earned the 1 seed anyway.
Someone needs to check into state placements not being used for seeding.
Kole Marko 160 3 time state champ 39-0
Cash Stewart 3rd at state last year 40-1
No Head to head as per criteria 1
No common opponents as per criteria 3
State Place 2021 Marko 1 Stewart 3
And that is the criteria they say they are using.
But Stewart is 1 and Marko 3
I just hate it when adults can not do their jobs and kids pay the price. Absolutely unacceptable. And the worst part is I bet anything the WIAA will not say OK this is wrong lets fix it........
And this is by far not the only weight just the most clear one I found...
Someone explain this to us.
Quote from: scfcat on February 19, 2022, 09:37:02 PM
Kole Marko D3 160 is the #3 seed. No offense to the other kids but that is crazy!
I am glad they are at least on different side of this. We can talk on Sunday after state who is number 1.
My whole problem is that it is just a complete mash up with kids stuck on the same side and such. Looking at D1 you have some real messes of brackets seeing the sectional finalist wrestling again the next weekend.
Maybe BEN ASKREN I am a baby but let's think about this, if this is going to happen your going to see alot of FF in sectionals to get different seeds. They are creating an out in all of this that will completely be exposed in due time!
Quote from: benaskren on February 19, 2022, 09:53:25 PM
Cash Stewart and Kole Marko are the obvious #1 & #2 at 160. They are on opposite sides and will wrestle in the finals.
Whole bunch of babies. Id rather have the seeds right(or close) than worry about kids who wrestled in sectionals wrestle again.
Give me a clear #1 & #2 on the same side or get lost.
I get it Ben, name calling is real cool 8)
I can go back on your podcast and you talk about branching out and challenging kids to new competitions and new opponents and we have sectional matches replayed the first round of state. Maybe the chance this is the 7th time they wrestled.
Just like no one here wants to see your Jake Paul fight 5 times either. Be a little smarter on your comments mr askren. We are on to something with the seeding but man there is alot of bugs to work out on this first run at seeding state.
I absolutely understand some of the complaints about the seeding. Overall I despise Trackwrestling.
But exclusive of that, wrestlers having wrestled in the previous weekend sectional should have ZERO bearing on seeding (other than head to head or finishing higher in the sectional). If the seeding criteria /procedure puts them in the bracket so be it. It is not fair for other competitors and their seeding to be affected just because fans don't want to see them wrestle again.
So here is what we now know that nobody in the state knew prior. The second seed criteria of "competition against common opponent" is not just did you lose to a guy that another in your state bracket beat. It compares all mutual opponents that you both beat and the seed point goes to who beat him worse.
Kole Marko has the easiest example to follow.
Kole teched Tommy Quinn from Cameron in their dual while Piersson Czaplinski pinned him at the John Roberts Scramble.
Kole teched Cole Pfeiffer of Cadott in their dual while Tyson Bogacz pinned Pfeiffer in the Cadott - Bondual dual.
So Kole got just 9 of the 11 seed points. Note that Kole got the seed point over #1 seed Cash Stewart. But Stewart finished with 10 of the 11 seed points. And even though Kole lost the seed point to Bogacz, Kole is seeded #3 and Bogacz is #4 because Bogacz only got 8 go 11 seed points.
I honestly doubt that there is a single kid in the state who wrestled this season knowing that how "bad" you beat somebody was where your state seed would come from. If that one single sentence would have been told to coaches on December 1, there would be no argument right now. Here is that one single sentence: You will be measured against your state opponents (seeded) based on how bad you demolish the average kids throughout the season.
Quote from: scfcat on February 19, 2022, 10:07:44 PM
How about D3 113 we have a 3rd place finisher at sectionals with a first round bye.
Biba is not even close worthy of a 2 seed. horrible. and Rule vs Crapp 1st round, and they both beat Biba multiple times.
I don't understand how head to heads where not taken into account. Brackets where kids beat a kid at sectionals and then seeded below them.
Quote from: wrastle63 on February 20, 2022, 07:18:27 AM
I don't understand how head to heads where not taken into account. Brackets where kids beat a kid at sectionals and then seeded below them.
Read my example I posted just prior to this. Head to head is taken into account. But that only gives you one seed point against that one opponent. You're trying to get as many seed points as possible. Yes you got a seed point against that one guy you beat head to head but if he got more seed points than you overall, then he will be seeded higher than you.
1. The proposal to seed wrestlers using Track must have come from the WWCA, and not the WIAA.
2. Either there is a problem with the formula, or more likely not all the coaches completed the seeding criteria properly.
As much as we would all love to blame the WIAA for any mistakes in the bracket, I'm not so sure it is all their fault.
We live and learn.
Chris Hansen: thanks for the explanation or I guess the attempt. There's so many questions and I think if transparency was higher on trackwrestling's end it might alleviate some of the concerns.
The concerns we are hearing I guess to me fall into 2 categories
1) To some (many) it doesn't appear that WIAA and track are following their own stated criteria
2) The criteria are dumb
Your post helped a lot because it is awful hard to explain otherwise how an undefeated returning state champ would be behind anyone on head-to-head or common opponents, and he certainly isn't behind on any of the other criteria
JMO
I like seeing the state tournament but I believe the Sectional champs should get reward or sectionals is rather meaningless.
1 - margin of victory over common opponents was not disclosed (insert Judge x here) (might not have accurate brackets printed in the program this year).
2 - does margin of victory mean 7 points greater than 6 points or just major > decision? Pin > tech?
3 - if one wrestler wrestles the common opponent twice, is it the best beat down victory that counts or how are the margins averaged?
4 - margin should not be used in my opinion. It favors the wrestler who has a common opponent late in the season and knows what a margin of victory standard is.
All this being said, I 100% support seeding state going forward. Even this head scratching is an improvement. Either fix the margin of victory or disclose the parameters above. (Also disclose a 2 time champ is not greater than 1 time champ if that is indeed the case). Before I get off the soap box, make state double elimination next year!
Quote from: harley25 on February 20, 2022, 08:06:56 AM
JMO
I like seeing the state tournament but I believe the Sectional champs should get reward or sectionals is rather meaningless.
I assume you believe regionals are really meaningless?
This morning my son and I are looking through the seeds and getting very excited for Friday and Saturday night. So many matches that previously would've been second round on Thursday (or maybe even first round) are now going to be later in the tournament. This is a huge improvement!
The first run at seeding was bound to have flaws but that is how you make progress. You try something and make adjustments based on how it worked.
Quote from: Numbers on February 20, 2022, 08:12:12 AM
Quote from: harley25 on February 20, 2022, 08:06:56 AM
JMO
I like seeing the state tournament but I believe the Sectional champs should get reward or sectionals is rather meaningless.
I assume you believe regionals are really meaningless?
When there are 2 kids in a lot of brackets at regionals yes I do. Again JMO. Doesn't make me right.
Just don't get it. Full disclosure, I am a coach and a dad in this one, so obviously a homer. DII 120. How does a kid with a 40-4 record get the 12th seed when there are kids with 13, 14, and 7 loses ahead of him? All of them are third place finishers at sectionals and none of them have prior state appearances. Record should come into play then.
My 152 has beaten a kid twice in the last three weeks and still got seeded lower than him. Makes no sense.
I understand that we want to split up the top kids and get the top two in the finals, but when our tournaments are 1 and done for many kids it makes no sense.
As I look at the other brackets there are a lot of head scratches already stated on this thread.
Why have sectionals when you wrestle the same kids back to back at state. Way to mess it all up. 35 years of coaching and I can say the WIAA has always been a bunch of fools.
Quote from: South Coach on February 20, 2022, 08:19:57 AM
This morning my son and I are looking through the seeds and getting very excited for Friday and Saturday night. So many matches that previously would've been second round on Thursday (or maybe even first round) are now going to be later in the tournament. This is a huge improvement!
The first run at seeding was bound to have flaws but that is how you make progress. You try something and make adjustments based on how it worked.
Your right in terms of Division 1 it worked out for them and will get to see some great semis and finals. For D2 and D3 it's a little sketchy.... For example Jackson Ormund beat Sloan Welch yesterday in the sectional final and Welch got the 2 seed and 1st round bye and Ormund a sectional Champion now is wrestling Thursday night. To me that doesn't even make sense. So, in that case Welch never even had to wrestle that match yesterday to get the 2 seed. That's just silly! The criteria is flawed and I hope it can be revised and made better for next year.
My opinion - WIAA should have called this separation and not seeding. If you look at this as separation - for the most part it did pretty good. It is not seeding - you cannot have true seeds with no human interaction, Track isn't that good.
Just wondering if the WIAA may have been better off doing the tournament the "old way" for one more year, but creating/issuing the brackets of how they would have been if the seeding criteria had been used -> kind of a "here's what is going to happen next year". It could have helped tighten up the criteria where needed, and also reminded coaches about the importance of entering complete data if this is a problem. Maybe this would have only gone to coaches, but ideally the public could have viewed it also as it would have made things more interesting and given everyone something to consider, discuss, argue over, etc.
Quote from: madeyson on February 20, 2022, 08:51:40 AM
My opinion - WIAA should have called this separation and not seeding. If you look at this as separation - for the most part it did pretty good. It is not seeding - you cannot have true seeds with no human interaction, Track isn't that good.
Yess. In the Clark case, you'd rather see the accurate #2 vs #3 with Clark an obvious #1... but criteria was missing a few things, including a Sunday video coach's meeting where things are discussed.
and Ben Askren, you are wrong to name call others for stating things that can be appropriately stated. I see over a dozen brackets with obvious errors, but it'll be as it is. Next year will show improvements... and this tourney will still be a great one.
Wow this definitely is a swing and a miss....
Quote from: Redeemer on February 20, 2022, 09:03:49 AM
Quote from: madeyson on February 20, 2022, 08:51:40 AM
My opinion - WIAA should have called this separation and not seeding. If you look at this as separation - for the most part it did pretty good. It is not seeding - you cannot have true seeds with no human interaction, Track isn't that good.
Yess. In the Clark case, you'd rather see the accurate #2 vs #3 with Clark an obvious #1... but criteria was missing a few things, including a Sunday video coach's meeting where things are discussed.
and Ben Askren, you are wrong to name call others for stating things that can be appropriately stated. I see over a dozen brackets with obvious errors, but it'll be as it is. Next year will show improvements... and this tourney will still be a great one.
I believe the goal was to take all the adults/politics out of the process. Just need clear criteria that can be calculated by a computer. Adding subjectivity into the process is the wrong way to go in my opinion.
So maybe start another forum thread with ideas to improve state bracketing criteria. Let's share ideas to improve criteria. I believe other states use similar criteria to Wisconsin (and TrackWrestling). Some coaches association members read these boards.
I think yesterday may have been Iowa's third year of seeding state? I liked the way Iowa presented the stream of the state finals. It was on Flo last night.
It doesn't matter if you win your sectional that you should have a bye first round in division 2 and 3. The kids should be seeded for what they have earned on a cumulative season. That being said holy crap did the WWCA and the WIAA royally screw this up. Bi state doesn't seem to have any issues seeding their tournament which is comparable in size. Head to head match up only matters when two kids are seeded next to each other on a kid jumping the other kid for seeding. Not some crazy matrix of scoring points against common opponents.
It is like the people who put this together have never been to a seeding meeting or run a tournament. I am glad the tournament is seeded and expect it to be seeded correctly next year. But wow they really have egg all over their face with this one. So embarrassing inept do the people in charge of this look.
So the wrestlebacks at Sectionals for 2nd place were for what.....absolutley nothing. Dumb. It means more if you beat a kid at regionals or sectionals the past 2 weeks over what place each other took at last years state.
Question...
-Wrestler A beats wrestler B at sectionals in 2022
-Wrestler B finishes 3rd at state in 2021 while wrestler A places 6th in 2021
-who is seeded higher??
Quote from: Wrestling200 on February 20, 2022, 09:35:07 AM
So the wrestlebacks at Sectionals for 2nd place were for what.....absolutley nothing. Dumb. It means more if you beat a kid at regionals or sectionals the past 2 weeks over what place each other took at last years state.
Question...
-Wrestler A beats wrestler B at sectionals in 2022
-Wrestler B finishes 3rd at state in 2021 while wrestler A places 6th in 2021
-who is seeded higher??
Wrestler C
Let me preface this by saying I like the move to seeding. Let's not name-call and complain without ideas for "fixes". I'm seeing two main complaints in this thread. First, that wrestlers from same sectional are wrestling early at state (not separated). Second, that the system (whether in its design or by glitches) may seed SOME wrestlers in ways that appear grossly unfair and illogical to the naked eye (e.g. Marko 3x State Champ, undefeated this year, 3-seed). The problem is that these two issues are in direct opposition to each other. The more "fair" the seeding process, the more likely it is that sectional opponents will face each other 1st or 2nd round. With 3 (rather than 2) wrestlers from each sectional, there will always be a likelihood of sectional opponents rematching anyhow. I would also say there is a problem when a sectional championship can become pretty much meaningless when overridden by other criteria.
So let's go back to the original idea for 12-man brackets in D2 D3. 1) It allowed really good wrestlers who placed 3rd in a stacked sectional the opportunity to make it to state. (As an aside, in the early 80's I lost 8-5 in sectional semis to the eventual state champ. He lost in my sectional finals to the eventual state runner-up. No wrestleback or state for me, as happened to lots of others in the 8-man bracket days). So the move to 12-man gave otherwise deserving 3rd place finishers a state qualification. 2) The 12-man state bracket also REWARDED sectional champions, not just by separation, but also the 1st round bye.
How do we make the best of both worlds? I suggest going back to 1st round byes for sectional champions. Winning 1/4 of the state should mean more than a take-home bracket, nice as it may be. Taking away those byes removes one of the great things about the 12-man state bracket. I propose a compromise: Return to 1st round byes for sectional champions (thus keeping the value and importance of winning your sectionals). Seed these 4 champions (separately from 5-12) on quarterfinals line. Then, seed remaining 8 wrestlers (5-12 overall) on the first round line. This way, in cases where the top 2 wrestlers come from the same sectionals, sectional champ gets the bye. Runner up would need to wrestle 1st round, BUT would likely be seeded 5th and get to wrestle the 12th seed in preliminaries. Even if 6th seed (2nd among non-champs), he would face the 11 seed in preliminary round.
In my mind, this would strike a balance between rewarding sectional champions while also being fair to wrestlers from stacked sectionals. Any thoughts? Feel free to point out problems or issues, just please do it in a constructive way and share your own ideas.
Everyone is invited to share ideas after the Badger match. Time to head to Madison! Go Badgers!
Drbrad........I was under the impression that seed the top 4 and then the rest different like you pointed out.
I figured the wiaa would stop the ball just like they did in the girls basketball. Gove it some time and hopefully it gets worked out.
What makes me really concerned is how it will effect the sectionals match ups. First in d2 and d3, win your first 2 and then ff out to third might save your seed. Kids yesterday were better off not wrestling back to a true second due to that match had no bearing on your state seed. If you won or lost it was a record builder or made the record worse.
I want to make sure the matches count at every step of the way. Coach Hanson laid out an example of tf vs pins. Wow that is a deep way of thinking.
Like I said, this will work out in die time.
My solution to this was I was hoping the old way of seeding but at state we could of seen the new lai out and compare it and fix what it was and hopefully next year roll out the new seeding with the fixes. Just like in the summer the wiaa rolled out the new 14 events and sent the schools scrambling to re schedule.
Quote from: drbrad on February 20, 2022, 09:52:27 AM
Let me preface this by saying I like the move to seeding. Let's not name-call and complain without ideas for "fixes". I'm seeing two main complaints in this thread. First, that wrestlers from same sectional are wrestling early at state (not separated). Second, that the system (whether in its design or by glitches) may seed SOME wrestlers in ways that appear grossly unfair and illogical to the naked eye (e.g. Marko 3x State Champ, undefeated this year, 3-seed). The problem is that these two issues are in direct opposition to each other. The more "fair" the seeding process, the more likely it is that sectional opponents will face each other 1st or 2nd round. With 3 (rather than 2) wrestlers from each sectional, there will always be a likelihood of sectional opponents rematching anyhow. I would also say there is a problem when a sectional championship can become pretty much meaningless when overridden by other criteria.
So let's go back to the original idea for 12-man brackets in D2 D3. 1) It allowed really good wrestlers who placed 3rd in a stacked sectional the opportunity to make it to state. (As an aside, in the early 80's I lost 8-5 in sectional semis to the eventual state champ. He lost in my sectional finals to the eventual state runner-up. No wrestleback or state for me, as happened to lots of others in the 8-man bracket days). So the move to 12-man gave otherwise deserving 3rd place finishers a state qualification. 2) The 12-man state bracket also REWARDED sectional champions, not just by separation, but also the 1st round bye.
How do we make the best of both worlds? I suggest going back to 1st round byes for sectional champions. Winning 1/4 of the state should mean more than a take-home bracket, nice as it may be. Taking away those byes removes one of the great things about the 12-man state bracket. I propose a compromise: Return to 1st round byes for sectional champions (thus keeping the value and importance of winning your sectionals). Seed these 4 champions (separately from 5-12) on quarterfinals line. Then, seed remaining 8 wrestlers (5-12 overall) on the first round line. This way, in cases where the top 2 wrestlers come from the same sectionals, sectional champ gets the bye. Runner up would need to wrestle 1st round, BUT would likely be seeded 5th and get to wrestle the 12th seed in preliminaries. Even if 6th seed (2nd among non-champs), he would face the 11 seed in preliminary round.
In my mind, this would strike a balance between rewarding sectional champions while also being fair to wrestlers from stacked sectionals. Any thoughts? Feel free to point out problems or issues, just please do it in a constructive way and share your own ideas.
Yes! This makes more sense!
Everyone that wanted state to be seeded got what I knew would happen. More complaining did you really think the wiaa or track would get this right? The best wrestlers don't give a rats arse who they wrestle and when. They should have left it alone.
Here's a wild thought, use the rankings as seeds. The committee already has these kids in the most logical order.
If two guys in the bracket have a common opponent and they both pinned him, does the seed point go to whoever pinned him the fastest? I know that sounds like a silly question but in the light of how this has played out, that is no more silly than a pin in January being better than a tech fall in December. The reason I ask is because I got a few guys who are really going to lay the smack down on some JV caliber kids next season to improve our state seed. While a seven second pin should do the trick, we're shooting for six seconds.
Quote from: Rat on February 20, 2022, 10:44:52 AM
Everyone that wanted state to be seeded got what I knew would happen. More complaining did you really think the wiaa or track would get this right? The best wrestlers don't give a rats arse who they wrestle and when. They should have left it alone.
I don't think most of us are complaining (yes some exceptions). Seeding is the right direction. I think most of us are just trying to understand how it works, point out possible flaws or bugs, and toss around some ideas that maybe could improve it in the future.
Why doe's a computer or a committees opinion matter? Let the wrestlers decide where you rank next Saturday night. If Clayton Whiting were to lose do you think he cares if it's Friday or Saturday?
Quote from: Rat on February 20, 2022, 11:23:42 AM
Why doe's a computer or a committees opinion matter? Let the wrestlers decide where you rank next Saturday night. If Clayton Whiting were to lose do you think he cares if it's Friday or Saturday?
Thanks for your valuable input. Love seeing comments like this every year that seeding comes up. No one has ever heard this rebuttal before.
Quote from: drbrad on February 20, 2022, 09:52:27 AM
Let me preface this by saying I like the move to seeding. Let's not name-call and complain without ideas for "fixes". I'm seeing two main complaints in this thread. First, that wrestlers from same sectional are wrestling early at state (not separated). Second, that the system (whether in its design or by glitches) may seed SOME wrestlers in ways that appear grossly unfair and illogical to the naked eye (e.g. Marko 3x State Champ, undefeated this year, 3-seed). The problem is that these two issues are in direct opposition to each other. The more "fair" the seeding process, the more likely it is that sectional opponents will face each other 1st or 2nd round. With 3 (rather than 2) wrestlers from each sectional, there will always be a likelihood of sectional opponents rematching anyhow. I would also say there is a problem when a sectional championship can become pretty much meaningless when overridden by other criteria.
So let's go back to the original idea for 12-man brackets in D2 D3. 1) It allowed really good wrestlers who placed 3rd in a stacked sectional the opportunity to make it to state. (As an aside, in the early 80's I lost 8-5 in sectional semis to the eventual state champ. He lost in my sectional finals to the eventual state runner-up. No wrestleback or state for me, as happened to lots of others in the 8-man bracket days). So the move to 12-man gave otherwise deserving 3rd place finishers a state qualification. 2) The 12-man state bracket also REWARDED sectional champions, not just by separation, but also the 1st round bye.
How do we make the best of both worlds? I suggest going back to 1st round byes for sectional champions. Winning 1/4 of the state should mean more than a take-home bracket, nice as it may be. Taking away those byes removes one of the great things about the 12-man state bracket. I propose a compromise: Return to 1st round byes for sectional champions (thus keeping the value and importance of winning your sectionals). Seed these 4 champions (separately from 5-12) on quarterfinals line. Then, seed remaining 8 wrestlers (5-12 overall) on the first round line. This way, in cases where the top 2 wrestlers come from the same sectionals, sectional champ gets the bye. Runner up would need to wrestle 1st round, BUT would likely be seeded 5th and get to wrestle the 12th seed in preliminaries. Even if 6th seed (2nd among non-champs), he would face the 11 seed in preliminary round.
In my mind, this would strike a balance between rewarding sectional champions while also being fair to wrestlers from stacked sectionals. Any thoughts? Feel free to point out problems or issues, just please do it in a constructive way and share your own ideas.
They moved to 12 man when WISSAA joined the WIAA
Quote from: benaskren on February 19, 2022, 09:38:58 PM
Good god you guys are being a bunch of Dang babies! This is soooooo much better than what he had before. Lots of you just want something to complain about.
Stop. You are wrong. It is not sooooo much better. I tried to warn people as you can manipulate the system very easily but most had no idea.
It is simple though...seed top 4 sectional champs...2nd and 3rd go opposite side. Instead we get this mess....and yes Ben to many 5th or a 6th place at state means a lot.
Quote from: padre on February 20, 2022, 12:21:16 PM
Quote from: benaskren on February 19, 2022, 09:38:58 PM
Good god you guys are being a bunch of Dang babies! This is soooooo much better than what he had before. Lots of you just want something to complain about.
Stop. You are wrong. It is not sooooo much better. I tried to warn people as you can manipulate the system very easily but most had no idea.
It is simple though...seed top 4 sectional champs...2nd and 3rd go opposite side. Instead we get this mess....and yes Ben to many 5th or a 6th place at state means a lot.
Yep. We have seen kids major or TF kids in sectionals finals and the second place finisher get on podium and the other guy who pounded him have the top 6 kids on his side of bracket not place . Example Ben Provisor . Seeding was supposed to take care of that.
Quote from: Bob Garrou on February 20, 2022, 08:40:41 AM
Why have sectionals when you wrestle the same kids back to back at state. Way to mess it all up. 35 years of coaching and I can say the WIAA has always been a bunch of fools.
This!!!
Agree with you 100% Padre!!
The reason they have a regionals and a sectionals is to get the best kids from all the different areas of the state to meet up at "state"....they should not meet the first round if from the same region.
Why should sectional champs be automatically seeded? What if they come from a weaker section? Doing this negates at least part of the reason to have seeding in the first place.
Quote from: padre on February 20, 2022, 12:21:16 PM
Quote from: benaskren on February 19, 2022, 09:38:58 PM
Good god you guys are being a bunch of Dang babies! This is soooooo much better than what he had before. Lots of you just want something to complain about.
Stop. You are wrong. It is not sooooo much better. I tried to warn people as you can manipulate the system very easily but most had no idea.
It is simple though...seed top 4 sectional champs...2nd and 3rd go opposite side. Instead we get this mess....and yes Ben to many 5th or a 6th place at state means a lot.
Quote from: Chris Hansen on February 20, 2022, 07:36:46 AM
Quote from: wrastle63 on February 20, 2022, 07:18:27 AM
I don't understand how head to heads where not taken into account. Brackets where kids beat a kid at sectionals and then seeded below them.
Read my example I posted just prior to this. Head to head is taken into account. But that only gives you one seed point against that one opponent. You're trying to get as many seed points as possible. Yes you got a seed point against that one guy you beat head to head but if he got more seed points than you overall, then he will be seeded higher than you.
What if they have the same number of seed points and you beat that wrestler head to head and are still behind them?
Quote from: wrastle63 on February 20, 2022, 01:02:35 PM
Quote from: Chris Hansen on February 20, 2022, 07:36:46 AM
Quote from: wrastle63 on February 20, 2022, 07:18:27 AM
I don't understand how head to heads where not taken into account. Brackets where kids beat a kid at sectionals and then seeded below them.
Read my example I posted just prior to this. Head to head is taken into account. But that only gives you one seed point against that one opponent. You're trying to get as many seed points as possible. Yes you got a seed point against that one guy you beat head to head but if he got more seed points than you overall, then he will be seeded higher than you.
What if they have the same number of seed points and you beat that wrestler head to head and are still behind them?
Which wrestlers is this for?
It looks like head to head should be made a higher/more valuable criterion. But how many would complain when a wrestler gets what they might call a "lucky pin" against their favored wrestler? Are you willing to live by the seeding criteria you choose?
I see this in invitational tournaments all year. Often one of the seeding criteria are "sectional champ" and "sectional place winner" and "state entrant". Any of these have wildly different meanings when you look at relative strength of sections. I know many on here think there are issues with sectional balance (or lack thereof).
I despise trackwrestling overall but the seeding is a direct result of the input of seeding values.
Luck is subjective. A pin is fact.
Quote from: Chris Hansen on February 20, 2022, 11:10:05 AM
If two guys in the bracket have a common opponent and they both pinned him, does the seed point go to whoever pinned him the fastest? I know that sounds like a silly question but in the light of how this has played out, that is no more silly than a pin in January being better than a tech fall in December. The reason I ask is because I got a few guys who are really going to lay the smack down on some JV caliber kids next season to improve our state seed. While a seven second pin should do the trick, we're shooting for six seconds.
Going going to check them kids in the smackdown hotel at the end of jabroni Blvd? Also ask them if they know what Chris is cooking!
Your right this like what NCAA football did years ago. Beat up teams like 70 to 20. Boy that was fun.
Quote from: Chad Steldt on February 20, 2022, 01:36:10 PM
Luck is subjective. A pin is fact.
Can one be l
ucky to get a pin? ;)
I have to giggle about folks who 1) want seeding but 2) want a rule that prevents two wrestlers from the same sectional meeting first round at state. I mean, which is it? If the seeding says they are 1 seed and 8 seed - they are paired. To somehow super-impose preventing previous sectional experience into the recipe (possibly) sets in motion all sorts of other considerations once you adjust for the sectional interaction; all of other pairings might move because of this single accommodate, a cascade kind of effect.
If one wants seeding, this sort of outcome is certainly possible and exactly what folks have been clamoring for for years. Now, if we were amenable to seeding only the top four and drawing all of the rest, you might (and that's only a might) have the seeding freedom avoid this predetermined "A must meet B" in the first round; drawing all of the other wrestlers (outside of the top four) allows for the powers that be to "move some of the pieces around" to avoid undesired first round bouts.
All that said, keep in mind that I am one of those that saw nothing wrong with the automated slotting that was previously used for brackets. Yes, sometimes, justice wasn't served, but over all things were okay - just wanted kids to get their experience at the state meet. As long as the system was willing to allow wrestle-backs to fifth for first-round losses I was satisfied. But that's just me - with the value of hindsight of an old dog, I don't see a difference between fifth and third nor second and third...you get the champ and then everyone else, in no particular order.
Shush, Nat! Your old school logic is not sound enough for many of these johnnie-come-latelys!
Old dogs (I've reached that status, unfortunately 😎) like us are supposed to just lay in the corner and not bite people who bother us.....😁😁
Seeding was needed greatly. There is just too much imbalance in strength of sectionals overall and even more so within some weight classes. It is much better now even if some of the top seeds can be debated but having bottom seeds also brings fairness to brackets
Quote from: DocWrestling on February 20, 2022, 04:49:23 PM
Seeding was needed greatly. There is just too much imbalance in strength of sectionals overall and even more so within some weight classes. It is much better now even if some of the top seeds can be debated but having bottom seeds also brings fairness to brackets
Those sectionals that are so tough the can re wrestle the same match 2 or 3 weekends in a row.
Yes I dont mind the seeding, heck I am for it but not what I see at this time. Man like i said before how about the old way this year with showing the new way and figuring out some of the bugs and being able compare both.
Just like the whole wiaa 14 event thing that was rolled out in the summer and what a mess that became with AD and schools. Now this seeding thing that gets rolled out, sure is a start which is needed but it seems to me let's just take a crap on the side walk and clean it up latter.
I put it in quotes because I have seen people say this. I was clear that to me gphead to head is a top criterion in my opinion.
Quote from: npope on February 20, 2022, 04:13:13 PM
Quote from: Chad Steldt on February 20, 2022, 01:36:10 PM
Luck is subjective. A pin is fact.
Can one be lucky to get a pin? ;)
I have to giggle about folks who 1) want seeding but 2) want a rule that prevents two wrestlers from the same sectional meeting first round at state. I mean, which is it? If the seeding says they are 1 seed and 8 seed - they are paired. To somehow super-impose preventing previous sectional experience into the recipe (possibly) sets in motion all sorts of other considerations once you adjust for the sectional interaction; all of other pairings might move because of this single accommodate, a cascade kind of effect.
If one wants seeding, this sort of outcome is certainly possible and exactly want folks have been clamoring for for years. Now, if we were amenable to seeding only the top four and drawing all of the rest, you might (and that's only a might) have the seeding freedom avoid this predetermined "A must meet B" in the first round; drawing all of the other wrestlers (outside of the top four) allows for the powers that be to "move some of the pieces around" to avoid undesired first round bouts.
All that said, keep in mind that I am one of those that saw nothing wrong with the automated slotting that was previously used for brackets. Yes, sometimes, justice wasn't served, but over all things were okay - just wanted kids to get their experience at the state meet. As long as the system was willing to allow wrestle-backs to fifth for first-round losses I was satisfied. But that's just me - with the value of hindsight of an old dog, I don't see a difference between fifth and third nor second and third...you get the champ and then everyone else, in no particular order.
Quote from: whatever on February 20, 2022, 04:44:17 PM
Shush, Nat! Your old school logic is not sound enough for many of these johnnie-come-latelys!
Old dogs (I've reached that status, unfortunately 😎) like us are supposed to just lay in the corner and not bite people who bother us.....😁😁
Nice to see you still on the board, Ted.
I think the seeding fix for what was previously a D 1 problem of quarterfinal matches that should be happening in the semis or finals, has now created a problem for D2 and D3. Simply seeding the sectional champions is all that was needed. I am all for seeding the sectional champions - they won their sectional, they deserve it. That would include in Div 2 & 3, getting a bye on Thursday night. All other wrestlers, based on their 2nd or 3rd place finish are subject to the random draw based on a matrix like they use now. Can some sectional brackets have the top 3 kids in the state - sure can, but we don't know that for sure - until we wrestle the matches. With that said, I don't think we can/should penalize any wrestler for being in a so called "weaker sectional". The talent in every weight class in every sectional varies every year. At least with the current system in D2 and D3, the sectional champion and the 2nd /3rds are on opposite sides of the bracket. Wrestle your way to the podium. Win your sectional, then you don't have to worry about being one and done at state. I think we made a mess at least in D2 and D3, when their really wasn't that big of a problem. Heck, if we are that worried about leaving kids out, how often is the D1 3rd place wrestler at a sectional maybe good enough to make the podium at state, but in a "tough" sectional. Do we ever really have a true top 6 with the system we have? Maybe, maybe not - depending on who you ask. So, I say let's back things off, earn the right to be seeded by winning your sectional, if not, you have to fight your way through the bracket and to the podium.
OK, someone explain this one to me!!
Take 3rd at sectionals at get the Number2 seed at State :o
The 2nd place finisher at sectionals has a better Win percentage beat you at Sectionals and gets the 7 seed!!
Or this one
Two 3rd place finishers have the 2nd and 3rd seed while an undefeated Sectional champ is seeded 4th!!
Quote from: drbrad on February 20, 2022, 09:52:27 AM
Let me preface this by saying I like the move to seeding. Let's not name-call and complain without ideas for "fixes". I'm seeing two main complaints in this thread. First, that wrestlers from same sectional are wrestling early at state (not separated). Second, that the system (whether in its design or by glitches) may seed SOME wrestlers in ways that appear grossly unfair and illogical to the naked eye (e.g. Marko 3x State Champ, undefeated this year, 3-seed). The problem is that these two issues are in direct opposition to each other. The more "fair" the seeding process, the more likely it is that sectional opponents will face each other 1st or 2nd round. With 3 (rather than 2) wrestlers from each sectional, there will always be a likelihood of sectional opponents rematching anyhow. I would also say there is a problem when a sectional championship can become pretty much meaningless when overridden by other criteria.
So let's go back to the original idea for 12-man brackets in D2 D3. 1) It allowed really good wrestlers who placed 3rd in a stacked sectional the opportunity to make it to state. (As an aside, in the early 80's I lost 8-5 in sectional semis to the eventual state champ. He lost in my sectional finals to the eventual state runner-up. No wrestleback or state for me, as happened to lots of others in the 8-man bracket days). So the move to 12-man gave otherwise deserving 3rd place finishers a state qualification. 2) The 12-man state bracket also REWARDED sectional champions, not just by separation, but also the 1st round bye.
How do we make the best of both worlds? I suggest going back to 1st round byes for sectional champions. Winning 1/4 of the state should mean more than a take-home bracket, nice as it may be. Taking away those byes removes one of the great things about the 12-man state bracket. I propose a compromise: Return to 1st round byes for sectional champions (thus keeping the value and importance of winning your sectionals). Seed these 4 champions (separately from 5-12) on quarterfinals line. Then, seed remaining 8 wrestlers (5-12 overall) on the first round line. This way, in cases where the top 2 wrestlers come from the same sectionals, sectional champ gets the bye. Runner up would need to wrestle 1st round, BUT would likely be seeded 5th and get to wrestle the 12th seed in preliminaries. Even if 6th seed (2nd among non-champs), he would face the 11 seed in preliminary round.
In my mind, this would strike a balance between rewarding sectional champions while also being fair to wrestlers from stacked sectionals. Any thoughts? Feel free to point out problems or issues, just please do it in a constructive way and share your own ideas.
Bingo! We have a winner!
Quote from: Mwt22 on February 20, 2022, 09:25:17 PM
I think the seeding fix for what was previously a D 1 problem of quarterfinal matches that should be happening in the semis or finals, has now created a problem for D2 and D3. Simply seeding the sectional champions is all that was needed. I am all for seeding the sectional champions - they won their sectional, they deserve it. That would include in Div 2 & 3, getting a bye on Thursday night. All other wrestlers, based on their 2nd or 3rd place finish are subject to the random draw based on a matrix like they use now. Can some sectional brackets have the top 3 kids in the state - sure can, but we don't know that for sure - until we wrestle the matches. With that said, I don't think we can/should penalize any wrestler for being in a so called "weaker sectional". The talent in every weight class in every sectional varies every year. At least with the current system in D2 and D3, the sectional champion and the 2nd /3rds are on opposite sides of the bracket. Wrestle your way to the podium. Win your sectional, then you don't have to worry about being one and done at state. I think we made a mess at least in D2 and D3, when their really wasn't that big of a problem. Heck, if we are that worried about leaving kids out, how often is the D1 3rd place wrestler at a sectional maybe good enough to make the podium at state, but in a "tough" sectional. Do we ever really have a true top 6 with the system we have? Maybe, maybe not - depending on who you ask. So, I say let's back things off, earn the right to be seeded by winning your sectional, if not, you have to fight your way through the bracket and to the podium.
Wrong... several sectional brackets have 2 or 3 of the top 4 wrestlers within them. some sectional brackets do not have any highly ranked wrestlers. Simply, the seeding criteria needs updating and there needs to be a human component on Sunday to make any obvious changes to the seeding.
Some of the same kids will wrestle at Conf, Reg, Sect, and 1st round of State. Another reason why we don't need Regionals (and really, what is Conf other than bragging rights? There's 8 team individual tournaments that are tougher than some of the Conference tournaments) and we do need an actual Team format for going to State.
For those who wanted Seeding, we knew that this would happen, it was guaranteed to happen, so I'm not sure why there is any type of surprise that it is happening?
This is why all along I've been trying to push for Double Elimination at State, and keep the #1 from Sectionals apart. There will be, without a doubt, some bad first round match ups (as there always was, and as there currently are) but with DE, and wrestling back to third, everything typically will work itself out when the dust settles.
Obviously, this wouldn't work for D2 & D3 - but, for D1 ...
Seed the Sectional Winners ...
random draw for the other slots, while assuring no same-sectional match-ups in the same quarter-bracket ...
add double elimination
Quote from: Bob Garrou on February 20, 2022, 08:40:41 AM
Why have sectionals when you wrestle the same kids back to back at state. Way to mess it all up. 35 years of coaching and I can say the WIAA has always been a bunch of fools.
Or win you win your sectional and then have a wrestler that you beat seeded ahead of you, it kind of diminishes the sectional tournament
I will say here that I'm biased on this kid but can someone please tell me that Liam Netzel should be the 8th seed at 106 D1? No problem with Herm . Maybe even McDowel could be seeded higher even though Neitzel fished 4th at Cheese and 2nd at Bi-State and McDowell 5th at Cheese. Brayten Casey's only 3 losses were to Neitzel and is 39-3. Casey at 39-3 is 11 seed behind unranked 31-14 and unranked 41-11 kids . Guy seeded 5th placed 13th at Cheese and is 39-6 is above Neitzel who placed 4th. Explain that please..... I know the rankings don't come into play but these did not change much throughout the year. Herm and Neitzel should not be meeting in the quarter finals if they win their first match. D1 106 is really messed up.
1 1 Jacob Herm Neenah 9
2 2 Liam Neitzel Hudson 9
3 3 Colin McDowell Arrowhead 9
4 4 Mycah Beckett De Pere 9
5 5 Brayten Casey Menomonie 10
Quote from: The Last Ride on February 21, 2022, 10:44:55 AM
I will say here that I'm biased on this kid but can someone please tell me that Liam Netzel should be the 8th seed at 106 D1? No problem with Herm . Maybe even McDowel could be seeded higher even though Neitzel fished 4th at Cheese and 2nd at Bi-State and McDowell 5th at Cheese. Brayten Casey's only 3 losses were to Neitzel and is 39-3. Casey at 39-3 is 11 seed behind unranked 31-14 and unranked 41-11 kids . Guy seeded 5th placed 13th at Cheese and is 39-6 is above Neitzel who placed 4th. Explain that please..... I know the rankings don't come into play but these did not change much throughout the year. Herm and Neitzel should not be meeting in the quarter finals if they win their first match. D1 106 is really messed up.
1 1 Jacob Herm Neenah 9
2 2 Liam Neitzel Hudson 9
3 3 Colin McDowell Arrowhead 9
4 4 Mycah Beckett De Pere 9
5 5 Brayten Casey Menomonie 10
You're splitting hairs, especially in this weight class. I don't see a clear #2 in this bracket, basically a 1 seed and everyone else. Every round 2 match could be very competitive.
Most brackets have the clear top 2 kids on opposite sides which is a huge win over previous years.
Quote from: SayHey42 on February 21, 2022, 11:15:54 AM
Quote from: The Last Ride on February 21, 2022, 10:44:55 AM
I will say here that I'm biased on this kid but can someone please tell me that Liam Netzel should be the 8th seed at 106 D1? No problem with Herm . Maybe even McDowel could be seeded higher even though Neitzel fished 4th at Cheese and 2nd at Bi-State and McDowell 5th at Cheese. Brayten Casey's only 3 losses were to Neitzel and is 39-3. Casey at 39-3 is 11 seed behind unranked 31-14 and unranked 41-11 kids . Guy seeded 5th placed 13th at Cheese and is 39-6 is above Neitzel who placed 4th. Explain that please..... I know the rankings don't come into play but these did not change much throughout the year. Herm and Neitzel should not be meeting in the quarter finals if they win their first match. D1 106 is really messed up.
1 1 Jacob Herm Neenah 9
2 2 Liam Neitzel Hudson 9
3 3 Colin McDowell Arrowhead 9
4 4 Mycah Beckett De Pere 9
5 5 Brayten Casey Menomonie 10
You're splitting hairs, especially in this weight class. I don't see a clear #2 in this bracket, basically a 1 seed and everyone else. Every round 2 match could be very competitive.
Most brackets have the clear top 2 kids on opposite sides which is a huge win over previous years.
Missed my point. I did not say that Neitzel should be seeded 2nd for sure. But 8th seed? I hope he beats Herm if he wins first match but he should be meeting him in semis if he beats his opponents , not in quarters. It is totally wrong. I'm not related to the kid but have followed him most of the year.
Quote from: The Last Ride on February 21, 2022, 10:44:55 AM
I will say here that I'm biased on this kid but can someone please tell me that Liam Netzel should be the 8th seed at 106 D1? No problem with Herm . Maybe even McDowel could be seeded higher even though Neitzel fished 4th at Cheese and 2nd at Bi-State and McDowell 5th at Cheese. Brayten Casey's only 3 losses were to Neitzel and is 39-3. Casey at 39-3 is 11 seed behind unranked 31-14 and unranked 41-11 kids . Guy seeded 5th placed 13th at Cheese and is 39-6 is above Neitzel who placed 4th. Explain that please..... I know the rankings don't come into play but these did not change much throughout the year. Herm and Neitzel should not be meeting in the quarter finals if they win their first match. D1 106 is really messed up.
1 1 Jacob Herm Neenah 9
2 2 Liam Neitzel Hudson 9
3 3 Colin McDowell Arrowhead 9
4 4 Mycah Beckett De Pere 9
5 5 Brayten Casey Menomonie 10
You are correct that the seeding criteria screwed this one up.. as well as over half the other brackets. Nietzel will wrestle back for 3rd if loses to Herm.
Some D2 and D3 sectional brackets can hold the top 3 kids in the state. If the sectional winner is on then opposite side of the bracket with the 2nd and 3rd place sectional finishers on the other side, all of the placing works itself out as they wrestle their way through the bracket. If the 2nd and 3rd win their way forward in the bracket, they will meet in the semis for a chance to wrestle the number 1 in the finals. Does it really matter if the 2nd and 3rd were seeded - not at all. If they run into a sectional winner from a "weaker sectional", the 2nd or 3rd if they are better, will win and advance. In D2 and D3, the only thing that might happen without seeding is maybe getting a perceived "championship match" on Friday night in the semi-finals. Well, whoever is the loser of that semi-final match, still gets to wrestle back to 3rd. Often their are clear cut favorites to win, but many things can happen where high seeds and ranked kids, don't wrestle up to their "number". Again, they current systems for D2 and D3 was only slightly flawed - the seeding I think had made it a mess.
Quote from: Mwt22 on February 21, 2022, 04:30:17 PM
Some D2 and D3 sectional brackets can hold the top 3 kids in the state. If the sectional winner is on then opposite side of the bracket with the 2nd and 3rd place sectional finishers on the other side, all of the placing works itself out as they wrestle their way through the bracket. If the 2nd and 3rd win their way forward in the bracket, they will meet in the semis for a chance to wrestle the number 1 in the finals. Does it really matter if the 2nd and 3rd were seeded - not at all. If they run into a sectional winner from a "weaker sectional", the 2nd or 3rd if they are better, will win and advance. In D2 and D3, the only thing that might happen without seeding is maybe getting a perceived "championship match" on Friday night in the semi-finals. Well, whoever is the loser of that semi-final match, still gets to wrestle back to 3rd. Often their are clear cut favorites to win, but many things can happen where high seeds and ranked kids, don't wrestle up to their "number". Again, they current systems for D2 and D3 was only slightly flawed - the seeding I think had made it a mess.
Exactly and how I think most coaches thought it was going to be seeded...overkill.
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this, but what about the fact that if you are a wrestler that is a freshman. There are 3 criteria , "Returning State Champ, Returning place winner 2-6, and Returning State qualifier", that you are not able to earn points from. Not sure what the fix is, but if you are a freshman, you are handicapped in not being able to earn all possible criteria points to be properly seeded. I believe this will need to be, and should be, addressed before next year's State tourney .
On a side note, has anyone had a Truckercap Attack sighting this season?? Maybe he has some insight on how to make the seeding process more equitable :)
Quote from: 145Firemanscarry on February 22, 2022, 05:20:56 AM
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this, but what about the fact that if you are a wrestler that is a freshman. There are 3 criteria , "Returning State Champ, Returning place winner 2-6, and Returning State qualifier", that you are not able to earn points from. Not sure what the fix is, but if you are a freshman, you are handicapped in not being able to earn all possible criteria points to be properly seeded. I believe this will need to be, and should be, addressed before next year's State tourney .
On a side note, has anyone had a Truckercap Attack sighting this season?? Maybe he has some insight on how to make the seeding process more equitable :)
Yes! Freshman are almost (in theory) automatically denied a first round bye, regardless of sectional finish. You would need to have some significant wins under your belt prior to regionals/sectionals.
Quote from: takeDOWN1 on February 22, 2022, 06:17:03 AM
Quote from: 145Firemanscarry on February 22, 2022, 05:20:56 AM
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this, but what about the fact that if you are a wrestler that is a freshman. There are 3 criteria , "Returning State Champ, Returning place winner 2-6, and Returning State qualifier", that you are not able to earn points from. Not sure what the fix is, but if you are a freshman, you are handicapped in not being able to earn all possible criteria points to be properly seeded. I believe this will need to be, and should be, addressed before next year's State tourney .
On a side note, has anyone had a Truckercap Attack sighting this season?? Maybe he has some insight on how to make the seeding process more equitable :)
Yes! Freshman are almost (in theory) automatically denied a first round bye, regardless of sectional finish. You would need to have some significant wins under your belt prior to regionals/sectionals.
Pretty much what happened in D3-113 class
3 freshman Sectional champs behind two 3rd place sectional place winners, that alone shows a flawed system
Win Sectionals and get the 6th seed place 3rd in same sectionals and get the 2 seed head scratching to say the least
Agree on that one, Harley.
Also feel bad for Cournoyer in D3... win sectionals, get the 6th seed, and draw the #2 ranked wrestler in D3 in Nutter. Amryn is phenomenal and is my pick to make the finals vs Fitzpatrick.
Quote from: harley25 on February 22, 2022, 08:22:16 AM
Quote from: takeDOWN1 on February 22, 2022, 06:17:03 AM
Quote from: 145Firemanscarry on February 22, 2022, 05:20:56 AM
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this, but what about the fact that if you are a wrestler that is a freshman. There are 3 criteria , "Returning State Champ, Returning place winner 2-6, and Returning State qualifier", that you are not able to earn points from. Not sure what the fix is, but if you are a freshman, you are handicapped in not being able to earn all possible criteria points to be properly seeded. I believe this will need to be, and should be, addressed before next year's State tourney .
On a side note, has anyone had a Truckercap Attack sighting this season?? Maybe he has some insight on how to make the seeding process more equitable :)
Yes! Freshman are almost (in theory) automatically denied a first round bye, regardless of sectional finish. You would need to have some significant wins under your belt prior to regionals/sectionals.
Pretty much what happened in D3-113 class
3 freshman Sectional champs behind two 3rd place sectional place winners, that alone shows a flawed system
Win Sectionals and get the 6th seed place 3rd in same sectionals and get the 2 seed head scratching to say the least
Are you saying a sectional champ this year trumps returning place winner last year? I know a lot changed over the year, but these freshmen still have a lot to prove. I could see Kayne Johnson, the SCF sectional third-place finisher in the finals with this bracket.
Quote from: beastmode on February 22, 2022, 10:46:32 AM
Quote from: harley25 on February 22, 2022, 08:22:16 AM
Quote from: takeDOWN1 on February 22, 2022, 06:17:03 AM
Quote from: 145Firemanscarry on February 22, 2022, 05:20:56 AM
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this, but what about the fact that if you are a wrestler that is a freshman. There are 3 criteria , "Returning State Champ, Returning place winner 2-6, and Returning State qualifier", that you are not able to earn points from. Not sure what the fix is, but if you are a freshman, you are handicapped in not being able to earn all possible criteria points to be properly seeded. I believe this will need to be, and should be, addressed before next year's State tourney .
On a side note, has anyone had a Truckercap Attack sighting this season?? Maybe he has some insight on how to make the seeding process more equitable :)
Yes! Freshman are almost (in theory) automatically denied a first round bye, regardless of sectional finish. You would need to have some significant wins under your belt prior to regionals/sectionals.
Pretty much what happened in D3-113 class
3 freshman Sectional champs behind two 3rd place sectional place winners, that alone shows a flawed system
Win Sectionals and get the 6th seed place 3rd in same sectionals and get the 2 seed head scratching to say the least
Are you saying a sectional champ this year trumps returning place winner last year? I know a lot changed over the year, but these freshmen still have a lot to prove. I could see Kayne Johnson, the SCF sectional third-place finisher in the finals with this bracket.
I am saying that an individual that places 3rd at sectional with the 2 seed over a sectional champ is odd yes? I don't know any of the wrestlers i have no skin in the game and wish them all the best but yes I do find it strange
Quote from: Redeemer on February 22, 2022, 09:26:29 AM
Agree on that one, Harley.
Also feel bad for Cournoyer in D3... win sectionals, get the 6th seed, and draw the #2 ranked wrestler in D3 in Nutter. Amryn is phenomenal and is my pick to make the finals vs Fitzpatrick.
Yes Nutter at 11 is NUTS. Not so much the 6 seed for Cournoyer. My son won sectionals and got a 6 seed because he had only 1 non-sectional H to H and almost no common opponents. He did wrestle the 5 seed and lost in a dogfight 5-4. Difference is how the draw worked out- we were just fine with it, whereas I'm sure Cournoyer not so much. Other than the extra match, not actually terrible for Nutter. If he wins, he faces 3rd seed so it may end up similar matchup just reversed by seed number.
Why is Nutter #11 when ranked 2nd? Two "weaknesses" in the seeding system. I wouldn't call them flaws, because they make sense within normal parameters. First, he's a freshman (as has been mentioned before as freshmen have no opportunity for previous state points). Second, he dropped down late. Little opportunity for head-to-head or common opponent points, plus record based on higher weight class. Third, he happened to be at same sectional as top ranked Fitzpatrick, so no sectional champ criteria. Kind of a "perfect storm" scenario. But any seeding system will have a few outliers. None of these can really be "fixed". Can't make it fair to freshmen and still reward previous year's achievements. Dropping weight class late is a wrestler's choice. Not at all saying HE shoulda-coulda-woulda, but wrestlers in future years may look at seeding and decide to wrestle more matches throughout year at their final weight. And 1-2 in same sectional happens and was one of the forces behind the decision to seed in the first place.
So while it may suck for Cournoyer (let's hold of final judgment until after he wrestles Nutter) it's one of those weird things that will unfortunately happen whether you seed or matrix (although I still believe 4 champs have earned the 4 byes, could then seed 5-12)
Quote from: beastmode on February 22, 2022, 10:46:32 AM
Quote from: harley25 on February 22, 2022, 08:22:16 AM
Quote from: takeDOWN1 on February 22, 2022, 06:17:03 AM
Quote from: 145Firemanscarry on February 22, 2022, 05:20:56 AM
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this, but what about the fact that if you are a wrestler that is a freshman. There are 3 criteria , "Returning State Champ, Returning place winner 2-6, and Returning State qualifier", that you are not able to earn points from. Not sure what the fix is, but if you are a freshman, you are handicapped in not being able to earn all possible criteria points to be properly seeded. I believe this will need to be, and should be, addressed before next year's State tourney .
On a side note, has anyone had a Truckercap Attack sighting this season?? Maybe he has some insight on how to make the seeding process more equitable :)
Yes! Freshman are almost (in theory) automatically denied a first round bye, regardless of sectional finish. You would need to have some significant wins under your belt prior to regionals/sectionals.
Pretty much what happened in D3-113 class
3 freshman Sectional champs behind two 3rd place sectional place winners, that alone shows a flawed system
Win Sectionals and get the 6th seed place 3rd in same sectionals and get the 2 seed head scratching to say the least
Are you saying a sectional champ this year trumps returning place winner last year? I know a lot changed over the year, but these freshmen still have a lot to prove. I could see Kayne Johnson, the SCF sectional third-place finisher in the finals with this bracket.
.....I'm sure you could see that - IF they put the two kids whom placed ahead of him at Sectionals on the opposite side of the bracket.
Seeds aren't meant to be predictions, however. They are supposed to be an assessment of where wrestlers rank. The best determining factor is head-to-head competition. Using previous state tournament placings is required when you have a lot of wrestlers who have not wrestled each other and also don't have many common opponents. To take a tournament that happened less than a week ago and ignore that while using the placings from an entirely different tournament that took place OVER A YEAR AGO is a little odd for most people. (Especially when said freshmen were UNABLE to compete in that tournament from OVER A YEAR AGO)>
Quote from: whatever on February 22, 2022, 11:07:36 AM
Quote from: beastmode on February 22, 2022, 10:46:32 AM
Quote from: harley25 on February 22, 2022, 08:22:16 AM
Quote from: takeDOWN1 on February 22, 2022, 06:17:03 AM
Quote from: 145Firemanscarry on February 22, 2022, 05:20:56 AM
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this, but what about the fact that if you are a wrestler that is a freshman. There are 3 criteria , "Returning State Champ, Returning place winner 2-6, and Returning State qualifier", that you are not able to earn points from. Not sure what the fix is, but if you are a freshman, you are handicapped in not being able to earn all possible criteria points to be properly seeded. I believe this will need to be, and should be, addressed before next year's State tourney .
On a side note, has anyone had a Truckercap Attack sighting this season?? Maybe he has some insight on how to make the seeding process more equitable :)
Yes! Freshman are almost (in theory) automatically denied a first round bye, regardless of sectional finish. You would need to have some significant wins under your belt prior to regionals/sectionals.
Pretty much what happened in D3-113 class
3 freshman Sectional champs behind two 3rd place sectional place winners, that alone shows a flawed system
Win Sectionals and get the 6th seed place 3rd in same sectionals and get the 2 seed head scratching to say the least
Are you saying a sectional champ this year trumps returning place winner last year? I know a lot changed over the year, but these freshmen still have a lot to prove. I could see Kayne Johnson, the SCF sectional third-place finisher in the finals with this bracket.
.....I'm sure you could see that - IF they put the two kids whom placed ahead of him at Sectionals on the opposite side of the bracket.
Seeds aren't meant to be predictions, however. They are supposed to be an assessment of where wrestlers rank. The best determining factor is head-to-head competition. Using previous state tournament placings is required when you have a lot of wrestlers who have not wrestled each other and also don't have many common opponents. To take a tournament that happened less than a week ago and ignore that while using the placings from an entirely different tournament that took place OVER A YEAR AGO is a little odd for most people. (Especially when said freshmen were UNABLE to compete in that tournament from OVER A YEAR AGO)>
(1) Head-to-head competition
(2) Competition against common opponents (Remove this one) (Or remove margin of victory criteria)
(3) Returning state champion
(4) Returning second or third-place finisher in the previous season
(5) Returning fourth through sixth-place finisher from the previous season
(6) Sectional champion ( This should be higher)
(7) Returning state qualifier in the previous season
(8 Winning percentage in the current season
Could we stop using the rankings as whether the seeds make sense or not. Although the ranking committee does their best, they are far from perfect and they depend on information given to them from viewers. They dont have time to comb through every single result.
Are they going to be having how you can pick at each division
Quote from: The Last Ride on February 22, 2022, 12:02:08 PM
Quote from: whatever on February 22, 2022, 11:07:36 AM
Quote from: beastmode on February 22, 2022, 10:46:32 AM
Quote from: harley25 on February 22, 2022, 08:22:16 AM
Quote from: takeDOWN1 on February 22, 2022, 06:17:03 AM
Quote from: 145Firemanscarry on February 22, 2022, 05:20:56 AM
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this, but what about the fact that if you are a wrestler that is a freshman. There are 3 criteria , "Returning State Champ, Returning place winner 2-6, and Returning State qualifier", that you are not able to earn points from. Not sure what the fix is, but if you are a freshman, you are handicapped in not being able to earn all possible criteria points to be properly seeded. I believe this will need to be, and should be, addressed before next year's State tourney .
On a side note, has anyone had a Truckercap Attack sighting this season?? Maybe he has some insight on how to make the seeding process more equitable :)
Yes! Freshman are almost (in theory) automatically denied a first round bye, regardless of sectional finish. You would need to have some significant wins under your belt prior to regionals/sectionals.
Pretty much what happened in D3-113 class
3 freshman Sectional champs behind two 3rd place sectional place winners, that alone shows a flawed system
Win Sectionals and get the 6th seed place 3rd in same sectionals and get the 2 seed head scratching to say the least
Are you saying a sectional champ this year trumps returning place winner last year? I know a lot changed over the year, but these freshmen still have a lot to prove. I could see Kayne Johnson, the SCF sectional third-place finisher in the finals with this bracket.
.....I'm sure you could see that - IF they put the two kids whom placed ahead of him at Sectionals on the opposite side of the bracket.
Seeds aren't meant to be predictions, however. They are supposed to be an assessment of where wrestlers rank. The best determining factor is head-to-head competition. Using previous state tournament placings is required when you have a lot of wrestlers who have not wrestled each other and also don't have many common opponents. To take a tournament that happened less than a week ago and ignore that while using the placings from an entirely different tournament that took place OVER A YEAR AGO is a little odd for most people. (Especially when said freshmen were UNABLE to compete in that tournament from OVER A YEAR AGO)>
(1) Head-to-head competition
(2) Competition against common opponents (Remove this one) (Or remove margin of victory criteria)
(3) Returning state champion
(4) Returning second or third-place finisher in the previous season
(5) Returning fourth through sixth-place finisher from the previous season
(6) Sectional champion ( This should be higher)
(7) Returning state qualifier in the previous season
(8 Winning percentage in the current season
Good suggestions, Ride. The biggest fear I have with common opponent is the margin of victory. Now that everyone knows they may need that pin against a much lesser opponent do we risk an increase in injuries &/or humiliation? I know this system comes from other states, so hopefully I'm completely wrong about this. I've been discussing the idea of champs get byes and remainder get seeded 5-12. In large part, this is to preserve the importance and sanctity of sectional tournaments. But perhaps simply shifting its seeding value (order) would be an even more "fair" way to keep sectional championships valuable (and keep sectional finals matches so darn compelling). Especially D2&3 where only 1/3 of state participants won their sectionals. I think returning state champion deserves high regard, regardless of what weight class it was the year before. But is winning a couple matches at state and sliding onto podium last YEAR worth more than winning your sectional last WEEK? I don't know, but because kids often put it all together at different speeds, I think there should be SOME sort of recency bias placed within the system. Either move #6 after #3 or after #4 would, in my mind, be an improvement.
Quote from: drbrad on February 22, 2022, 02:09:09 PM
Good suggestions, Ride. The biggest fear I have with common opponent is the margin of victory. Now that everyone knows they may need that pin against a much lesser opponent do we risk an increase in injuries &/or humiliation? I know this system comes from other states, so hopefully I'm completely wrong about this. I've been discussing the idea of champs get byes and remainder get seeded 5-12. In large part, this is to preserve the importance and sanctity of sectional tournaments. But perhaps simply shifting its seeding value (order) would be an even more "fair" way to keep sectional championships valuable (and keep sectional finals matches so darn compelling). Especially D2&3 where only 1/3 of state participants won their sectionals. I think returning state champion deserves high regard, regardless of what weight class it was the year before. But is winning a couple matches at state and sliding onto podium last YEAR worth more than winning your sectional last WEEK? I don't know, but because kids often put it all together at different speeds, I think there should be SOME sort of recency bias placed within the system. Either move #6 after #3 or after #4 would, in my mind, be an improvement.
You ask some very good questions and make some very good points. That said, I still like the simplicity of the old system - everything is based on sectional finishes without seeding. I don't see the "tremendous" injustice done by seeing to top competitors meeting outside of the finals (I know many will disagree, but determining who exactly those "top two" competitors are is the "fly in the ointment"). The only significant improvement I would suggest over the old system is the full wrestle-back to fifth for first-round-losers. Just my opinion - I know many feel differently.
Quote from: npope on February 22, 2022, 03:35:32 PM
Quote from: drbrad on February 22, 2022, 02:09:09 PM
Good suggestions, Ride. The biggest fear I have with common opponent is the margin of victory. Now that everyone knows they may need that pin against a much lesser opponent do we risk an increase in injuries &/or humiliation? I know this system comes from other states, so hopefully I'm completely wrong about this. I've been discussing the idea of champs get byes and remainder get seeded 5-12. In large part, this is to preserve the importance and sanctity of sectional tournaments. But perhaps simply shifting its seeding value (order) would be an even more "fair" way to keep sectional championships valuable (and keep sectional finals matches so darn compelling). Especially D2&3 where only 1/3 of state participants won their sectionals. I think returning state champion deserves high regard, regardless of what weight class it was the year before. But is winning a couple matches at state and sliding onto podium last YEAR worth more than winning your sectional last WEEK? I don't know, but because kids often put it all together at different speeds, I think there should be SOME sort of recency bias placed within the system. Either move #6 after #3 or after #4 would, in my mind, be an improvement.
You ask some very good questions and make some very good points. That said, I still like the simplicity of the old system - everything is based on sectional finishes without seeding. I don't see the "tremendous" injustice done by seeing to top competitors meeting outside of the finals (I know many will disagree, but determining who exactly those "top two" competitors are is the "fly in the ointment"). The only significant improvement I would suggest over the old system is the full wrestle-back to fifth for first-round-losers. Just my opinion - I know many feel differently.
I agree it's not the "end of the world" if the (maybe) top 2 meet in semi's. There are 12 wrestlers in each bracket (16 in D1). I don't think the "bottom" 10 (or 14) consider state to be any less important than the top 2. And is 3rd vs. 2nd for the "2nd" best wrestler really THAT big a deal? I would consider a kid placing vs not placing a bigger differential. I understand the desire to have the most blockbuster matchups in the finals, but I don't think we should be disregarding the rest of the wrestlers and their draws JUST to get the presumptive 1 vs 2 finals. This also makes the assumption that most brackets have 2 "best" wrestlers. Sometimes there's one dominant stud. Sometimes there are 3 or 4 equally matched at the top. Sometimes a bracket is "wide open" and someone comes out of nowhere. So, I didn't have a big problem with the matrix- at least it gave clear value to sectional championships. I don't have a problem with seeding either, although it should always be improved if in any way it can be. But like you I am less than thrilled if the objective is simply to pair the PRESUMPTIVE best 2 wrestlers in the finals without consideration to how it affects all of the other wrestlers who earned their qualification.
Simply--- use a better seeding criteria, and then have coaches vote on obvious adjustments during a Sunday video call.
What really gets my goat is that they can't separate guys with similar last names...I saw a Hanson versus a Hansen first round and a Switzer versus a Schweitzer first round...come on people, this isn't that hard, a simple multi regressional algorithm would fix this whole mess.
I like it. Makes the seeding a totally objective and comprehensive event. I disagree with sectional champs getting first round byes. If a kid comes from a weak sectional why should he get preference? If a sectional final has wrestlers who are seeded 8 and 9 in the state tournament they should wrestle first round. I would imagine that some of the seeding "problems" come from coaches not entering the information completely. That is not the systems fault. If a kid has a great season but has a bad match in the sectional finals I don't think his state first round match up should be affected as it always has in the past.
Steve
Quote from: stbird on February 23, 2022, 09:21:03 AM
I like it. Makes the seeding a totally objective and comprehensive event. I disagree with sectional champs getting first round byes. If a kid comes from a weak sectional why should he get preference? If a sectional final has wrestlers who are seeded 8 and 9 in the state tournament they should wrestle first round. I would imagine that some of the seeding "problems" come from coaches not entering the information completely. That is not the systems fault. If a kid has a great season but has a bad match in the sectional finals I don't think his state first round match up should be affected as it always has in the past.
Steve
Steve, I am going to strongly disagree with you. If we take away the importance of Sectionals, we're going to see a bunch of kids in D2 & D3 forfeit in the finals. If that finals match has no impact on where they end up in the State Bracket, why risk the chance of getting injured in a match that means nothing. There has to be some meaning behind the matches, or they won't end up being wrestled.
Here's another scenario to look at as well. With the way the State Tournament is now seeded. If wrestler A beats wrestler B in a tough back and forth match at regionals, and now wrestler A and B are set to square off again in the Sectional Finals. Wrestler A defaults to Wrestler B, which doesn't count as a loss, and then gets the seeding point for head to head at state because Wrestler A beat B at Regionals. If there is no emphasis put on Sectional Champions, it opens a giant can of worms that people are not going to like.
Quote from: bulldog24 on February 23, 2022, 10:32:39 AM
Quote from: stbird on February 23, 2022, 09:21:03 AM
I like it. Makes the seeding a totally objective and comprehensive event. I disagree with sectional champs getting first round byes. If a kid comes from a weak sectional why should he get preference? If a sectional final has wrestlers who are seeded 8 and 9 in the state tournament they should wrestle first round. I would imagine that some of the seeding "problems" come from coaches not entering the information completely. That is not the systems fault. If a kid has a great season but has a bad match in the sectional finals I don't think his state first round match up should be affected as it always has in the past.
Steve
Steve, I am going to strongly disagree with you. If we take away the importance of Sectionals, we're going to see a bunch of kids in D2 & D3 forfeit in the finals. If that finals match has no impact on where they end up in the State Bracket, why risk the chance of getting injured in a match that means nothing. There has to be some meaning behind the matches, or they won't end up being wrestled.
Here's another scenario to look at as well. With the way the State Tournament is now seeded. If wrestler A beats wrestler B in a tough back and forth match at regionals, and now wrestler A and B are set to square off again in the Sectional Finals. Wrestler A defaults to Wrestler B, which doesn't count as a loss, and then gets the seeding point for head to head at state because Wrestler A beat B at Regionals. If there is no emphasis put on Sectional Champions, it opens a giant can of worms that people are not going to like.
There is an emphasis on Sectional Champs. It's part of the seeding criteria. One could argue it needs to be higher on the list, but that is a different argument.
Quote from: bulldog24 on February 23, 2022, 10:32:39 AM
Quote from: stbird on February 23, 2022, 09:21:03 AM
I like it. Makes the seeding a totally objective and comprehensive event. I disagree with sectional champs getting first round byes. If a kid comes from a weak sectional why should he get preference? If a sectional final has wrestlers who are seeded 8 and 9 in the state tournament they should wrestle first round. I would imagine that some of the seeding "problems" come from coaches not entering the information completely. That is not the systems fault. If a kid has a great season but has a bad match in the sectional finals I don't think his state first round match up should be affected as it always has in the past.
Steve
Steve, I am going to strongly disagree with you. If we take away the importance of Sectionals, we're going to see a bunch of kids in D2 & D3 forfeit in the finals. If that finals match has no impact on where they end up in the State Bracket, why risk the chance of getting injured in a match that means nothing. There has to be some meaning behind the matches, or they won't end up being wrestled.
Here's another scenario to look at as well. With the way the State Tournament is now seeded. If wrestler A beats wrestler B in a tough back and forth match at regionals, and now wrestler A and B are set to square off again in the Sectional Finals. Wrestler A defaults to Wrestler B, which doesn't count as a loss, and then gets the seeding point for head to head at state because Wrestler A beat B at Regionals. If there is no emphasis put on Sectional Champions, it opens a giant can of worms that people are not going to like.
I'm not to concerned about wrestlers forfeiting in the finals. It would hurt their seeding. If that was an issue add true second.
Quote from: stbird on February 23, 2022, 06:18:39 PM
Quote from: bulldog24 on February 23, 2022, 10:32:39 AM
Quote from: stbird on February 23, 2022, 09:21:03 AM
I like it. Makes the seeding a totally objective and comprehensive event. I disagree with sectional champs getting first round byes. If a kid comes from a weak sectional why should he get preference? If a sectional final has wrestlers who are seeded 8 and 9 in the state tournament they should wrestle first round. I would imagine that some of the seeding "problems" come from coaches not entering the information completely. That is not the systems fault. If a kid has a great season but has a bad match in the sectional finals I don't think his state first round match up should be affected as it always has in the past.
Steve
Steve, I am going to strongly disagree with you. If we take away the importance of Sectionals, we're going to see a bunch of kids in D2 & D3 forfeit in the finals. If that finals match has no impact on where they end up in the State Bracket, why risk the chance of getting injured in a match that means nothing. There has to be some meaning behind the matches, or they won't end up being wrestled.
Here's another scenario to look at as well. With the way the State Tournament is now seeded. If wrestler A beats wrestler B in a tough back and forth match at regionals, and now wrestler A and B are set to square off again in the Sectional Finals. Wrestler A defaults to Wrestler B, which doesn't count as a loss, and then gets the seeding point for head to head at state because Wrestler A beat B at Regionals. If there is no emphasis put on Sectional Champions, it opens a giant can of worms that people are not going to like.
I'm not to concerned about wrestlers forfeiting in the finals. It would hurt their seeding. If that was an issue add true second.
I'm not concerned about wrestlers forfeiting in the finals, either. I AM concerned about sectional Championship losing its drama and meaning. It seems like we've all decided that there are only 2 best wrestlers in each weight class and the only thing that matters is getting the "top 2" on opposite sides of the bracket. True 2nd would solve a lot, as would 16 man double elimination, but I don't know if WIAA would be willing. People are so concerned about a sectional champ from a "weak" sectional "stealing" a bye from a wrestler who just lost at sectionals. What about the wrestler that wins a tough sectional but didn't go to state last year and has a difficult schedule without a lot of common opponents? Sectional Championship needs to be higher on list than sneaking onto the podium last year. Period.
There are 450 kids who are gonna weigh in tomorrow at the state tournament and there are 9 pages of crying about seeding. Super disappointing.
How bout we continue this discussion AFTER state?
I know that no kid is reading this back and forth garbage about stuff they can't control, but if they are, good luck. The only thing that matters this week is that you give it your all.
There are thousands of kids who would like to be in your place, regardless of seed.
Quote from: Ghetto on February 23, 2022, 10:18:28 PM
There are 450 kids who are gonna weigh in tomorrow at the state tournament and there are 9 pages of crying about seeding. Super disappointing.
How bout we continue this discussion AFTER state?
I know that no kid is reading this back and forth garbage about stuff they can't control, but if they are, good luck. The only thing that matters this week is that you give it your all.
There are thousands of kids who would like to be in your place, regardless of seed.
When the leaders of wrestling do such a poor job of communicating and changing the way state brackets were created, (which will negatively impact dozens of kids) there could be at least 30 pages of comments. IMO brackets should have been "fixed" Sunday or Monday.
The boys and girls have two years of practice with adults changing rules at school and just having to deal with it. This weekend will be no different. But it may be OK to not wear a mask in Madison starting next Tuesday. So be extra safe this weekend while the best wrestlers in the state control all that they can on the mats.
Quote from: Ghetto on February 23, 2022, 10:18:28 PM
There are 450 kids who are gonna weigh in tomorrow at the state tournament and there are 9 pages of crying about seeding. Super disappointing.
How bout we continue this discussion AFTER state?
I know that no kid is reading this back and forth garbage about stuff they can't control, but if they are, good luck. The only thing that matters this week is that you give it your all.
There are thousands of kids who would like to be in your place, regardless of seed.
This is a discussion forum, created for people to express their opinions. If they want to express their disappointment or disagreement with the seeding criteria or seeding they can. Just as you can choose to criticize their opinions. If you don't want to be a part of the so called "garbage" you have the option of not participating in the forum.
To the wrestlers participating at state this weekend: "I hope you all wrestle your best tournament of the year, and that no one suffers an injury."
Quote from: rmk12175 on February 24, 2022, 08:37:26 AM
Quote from: Ghetto on February 23, 2022, 10:18:28 PM
There are 450 kids who are gonna weigh in tomorrow at the state tournament and there are 9 pages of crying about seeding. Super disappointing.
How bout we continue this discussion AFTER state?
I know that no kid is reading this back and forth garbage about stuff they can't control, but if they are, good luck. The only thing that matters this week is that you give it your all.
There are thousands of kids who would like to be in your place, regardless of seed.
This is a discussion forum, created for people to express their opinions. If they want to express their disappointment or disagreement with the seeding criteria or seeding they can. Just as you can choose to criticize their opinions. If you don't want to be a part of the so called "garbage" you have the option of not participating in the forum.
To the wrestlers participating at state this weekend: "I hope you all wrestle your best tournament of the year, and that no one suffers an injury."
Thanks for letting me know how to use the forum. After 13000 posts, I'm glad it's been made clear.
My point was simply this. The amount of actual wrestling discussion is essentially zero, which is disappointing.
Quote from: stbird on February 23, 2022, 09:21:03 AM
I like it. Makes the seeding a totally objective and comprehensive event. I disagree with sectional champs getting first round byes. If a kid comes from a weak sectional why should he get preference? If a sectional final has wrestlers who are seeded 8 and 9 in the state tournament they should wrestle first round. I would imagine that some of the seeding "problems" come from coaches not entering the information completely. That is not the systems fault. If a kid has a great season but has a bad match in the sectional finals I don't think his state first round match up should be affected as it always has in the past.
Steve
I agree and like it too! The computer seeding removes subjectivity and bias. Perhaps tweaks can be made but please avoid any "committee" reviewing and modifying the computer seeds. That would only open a real can-of-worms for people to complain about.
You can't be the champ unless you win em all kids
Quote from: Big House on February 24, 2022, 07:16:32 PM
You can't be the champ unless you win em all kids
Absolutely incorrect!! I watched with my own eyes a state champ lose in the state finals as his opponent arm was even raised!!
Quote from: Big House on February 24, 2022, 07:16:32 PM
You can't be the champ unless you win em all kids
Big House in the house! It's been a long long time.
Boom 💥
Quote from: harley25 on February 24, 2022, 07:39:23 PM
Quote from: Big House on February 24, 2022, 07:16:32 PM
You can't be the champ unless you win em all kids
Absolutely incorrect!! I watched with my own eyes a state champ lose in the state finals as his opponent arm was even raised!!
Wrong 😑
Quote from: harley25 on February 24, 2022, 07:39:23 PM
Quote from: Big House on February 24, 2022, 07:16:32 PM
You can't be the champ unless you win em all kids
Absolutely incorrect!! I watched with my own eyes a state champ lose in the state finals as his opponent arm was even raised!!
Impossible.. Who?
Quote from: ankle pick on February 24, 2022, 08:19:55 PM
Quote from: harley25 on February 24, 2022, 07:39:23 PM
Quote from: Big House on February 24, 2022, 07:16:32 PM
You can't be the champ unless you win em all kids
Absolutely incorrect!! I watched with my own eyes a state champ lose in the state finals as his opponent arm was even raised!!
Impossible.. Who?
Some little dudes just don't have a firm grasp on reality ... usually the state champ wins his last match 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Usually was the correct word in your sentence but not always!!!
Quote from: harley25 on February 24, 2022, 08:47:35 PM
Usually was the correct word in your sentence but not always!!!
You gotta explain to me your warped reality
Quote from: Big House on February 24, 2022, 09:11:24 PM
Quote from: harley25 on February 24, 2022, 08:47:35 PM
Usually was the correct word in your sentence but not always!!!
You gotta explain to me your warped reality
Think way back, ok only 16 years ago.... Tomahawk...
Quote from: bigoil on February 25, 2022, 05:49:17 AM
Quote from: Big House on February 24, 2022, 09:11:24 PM
Quote from: harley25 on February 24, 2022, 08:47:35 PM
Usually was the correct word in your sentence but not always!!!
You gotta explain to me your warped reality
Think way back, ok only 16 years ago.... Tomahawk...
Anthony Lampe
My point is proven on D1 106 Seeds. Good luck everyone
Ghetto, I agree. Where is the talk about tonight's wrestling? Or any talk about the prior rounds?
Very disappointing.
To those who say the seedings are objective, they are wrong. The criteria used is very subjective therefore the whole seeding process is subjective. Everyone on the charts has an opinion on which criteria should be used and in which order. I personally think that this is the 21-22 state tournament therefore what you did in past tournaments should have no bearing on the seeding. Others may disagree, but no one should say the seeding is objective.
Quote from: The Last Ride on February 25, 2022, 07:25:35 PM
My point is proven on D1 106 Seeds. Good luck everyone
Hi Chris, I agree with your point that the seeding for D1 106 was off. That said, the way it
was seeded and the way it seems the placements will go (Neitzel is in wrestlebacks and can take third if he wins out) would seem to suggest that all is (largely) "right with the world" with respect to seeding at 106 (and probably other weights). Neitzel lost to Herm in the quarters and went to consolations. Assuming those two are indeed the top two at 106, they may still both place first and third, respectively. Whether Neitzel is the second best wrestler in that weight remains to be seen. But IMO, second or third, doesn't much matter in the bigger scheme of things. I understand that it may matter to some people, e.g., Neitzel and his family, but I think to most disconnected folks, that slight difference in placement is "six-of-one, half-dozen of the other." The time and energy (even if the seeding committee were prescient and could see the future) to ensure that match up could only occur in the finals is simply too much to hope for - who really knows that those are the top two guys going into the meet until the dust settles? For the most part, I don't think the audience is "cheated" out of seeing a "final quality" match occurring in the quarter finals - if they really cared about that specific match up they could watch it during the quarters.
It would seem to me that the only real goal of seeding at state should be to keep the first and second (and maybe third and fourth) best kids away from each other in the first round to ensure that the loser has a chance in wrestlebacks - where they can prove their relative placement at the meet (again presuming no real difference for the most part between placing second and third).
There is a big difference in the tournament experience and memories of a guy that finishes 2nd or 3rd.
The guy that finished 2nd got to wrestle in the finals and participate in the march of champions which is the highest honor for any wrestler.
The next best experience of the state tournament is wrestling in the semifinals. Neitzel also lost out on this opportunity. Losing out on both opportunities to wrestle in prime time.
This could be just one of those unlucky instances for Neitzel and the seeding did screw him over. He was seeded 8th. The guy he beat in regular season and at regionals and again at sectionals was seeded higher than him and got placed in opposite side and is wrestling in the finals and gets all the above listed experiences. If Neitzel was seeded 2nd, 3rd, 6th, or 7th he would have had shot to make finals opposite Herm so that is bad luck. Even if he got 4th or 5th seed he would have been able to wrestle in semifinals
I hope he gets his chance next year
Neitzel will finish 3rd knowing he beat the guy who will likely take 2nd all three times they faced each other. Who knows, maybe Casey will have the match of his life tonight but at least he gets the chance.
Quote from: DocWrestling on February 26, 2022, 12:12:56 PM
There is a big difference in the tournament experience and memories of a guy that finishes 2nd or 3rd.
The guy that finished 2nd got to wrestle in the finals and participate in the march of champions which is the highest honor for any wrestler.
The next best experience of the state tournament is wrestling in the semifinals. Neitzel also lost out on this opportunity. Losing out on both opportunities to wrestle in prime time.
This could be just one of those unlucky instances for Neitzel and the seeding did screw him over. He was seeded 8th. The guy he beat in regular season and at regionals and again at sectionals was seeded higher than him and got placed in opposite side and is wrestling in the finals and gets all the above listed experiences. If Neitzel was seeded 2nd, 3rd, 6th, or 7th he would have had shot to make finals opposite Herm so that is bad luck. Even if he got 4th or 5th seed he would have been able to wrestle in semifinals
I hope he gets his chance next year
Neitzel will finish 3rd knowing he beat the guy who will likely take 2nd all three times they faced each other. Who knows, maybe Casey will have the match of his life tonight but at least he gets the chance.
Take it from a guy who finished both third and second at the state - it took a heck of a lot more courage to come back and take third after a crushing defeat in the semi-finals. That said, I agree with you that it might mean a lot more to the kid to be in the finals, but the really valuable life lesson may come from taking third (or fourth...). But the seeding of a meet is bigger than just the dreams of one kid.
But perhaps to put a period behind my position on the matter, no matter how good people felt Neitzel (or other wrestlers in the same situation) might be, the fact is he ended up fourth at his weight, a placement that, had it been a seed, would have put him in virtually the same spot in which he was originally seeded (had it been an eight man bracket instead of 16). My point is that no one knows the absolute reality of eventual placement before the meet takes place; but the seeding committee endeavors to make an educated/informed estimate. In this particular case, despite all of the speculation to the contrary (mine too), the committee was pretty spot on. Pre-meet expectations don't always match post-meet results and in this particular case, I think it is a good example of the seeding committee doing a good job - in hind sight.
I think the seeding worked out pretty well for 42 weight classes. it will never be perfect and you could wrestle the brackets each weekend and the results would be different.
Past state experience has to matter in seeding but most recent result needs to be the most important. No wrestler should be seeded behind someone they finished ahead of at sectionals.
But Neitzel lost to McDowell who didn't even make it to Casey.
Quote from: wrastle63 on February 26, 2022, 01:40:11 PM
But Neitzel lost to McDowell who didn't even make it to Casey.
Obviously no one is saying McDowell and Casey should not have been top seeds. Casey was 11 seed and he should have been higher. Doesn't matter now . It is what it is. Good luck to everyone in the finals tonight.
In regards to 106. That is why they wrestle the matches!
Quote from: DocWrestling on February 26, 2022, 05:51:28 PM
In regards to 106. That is why they wrestle the matches!
Congrats to the young man Casey from Menominee !
Quote from: DocWrestling on February 26, 2022, 05:51:28 PM
In regards to 106. That is why they wrestle the matches!
indeed, a weight packed with talented and competitive wrestlers.
Quote from: npope on February 26, 2022, 06:30:26 PM
Quote from: DocWrestling on February 26, 2022, 05:51:28 PM
In regards to 106. That is why they wrestle the matches!
indeed, a weight packed with talented and competitive wrestlers.
I always tell people that 106 is loaded every year with young studs who will go on to put their mark on the sport. Dierenger (103), Barnett, Crass (103) Henning (106), Koontz, Halter, etc.
Watched the finals last night. I would say the best finals I have ever seen. Every match and division was amazing! I think the seeding worked amazingly well overall! Congrats to WI for getting it right finally!
So many are concerned about the top 2 kids getting separated. What you don't understand is that it's not only about the top 2 kids. For some kids, making the podium is a life long dream and frankly a great accomplishment. When you got a bad draw in the old system, it was easier to accept because it was random. Now when you get a bad draw, it is harder to accept because it is supposed to be seeded. Since you have been talking about 106, I'll use it as an example. Cael Zelinski from Muskego was seeded 4th. He did not make the podium because on Friday morning he had to wrestle Neitzel in the consolation round. Neitzel was not the only one affected by his poor seed.
Quote from: dforsythe on February 28, 2022, 07:22:38 AM
So many are concerned about the top 2 kids getting separated. What you don't understand is that it's not only about the top 2 kids. For some kids, making the podium is a life long dream and frankly a great accomplishment. When you got a bad draw in the old system, it was easier to accept because it was random. Now when you get a bad draw, it is harder to accept because it is supposed to be seeded. Since you have been talking about 106, I'll use it as an example. Cael Zelinski from Muskego was seeded 4th. He did not make the podium because on Friday morning he had to wrestle Neitzel in the consolation round. Neitzel was not the only one affected by his poor seed.
Neitzel was seeded 8th and finished 4th far from the worst seeding in the tournament or even the top 10 worst. Neitzel also benefitted by a MF. Anderson majored McDowell before getting hurt which is who Neitzel lost to. This is far from the seeding issue people should be complaining about.
Quote from: DocWrestling on February 26, 2022, 12:12:56 PM
There is a big difference in the tournament experience and memories of a guy that finishes 2nd or 3rd.
The guy that finished 2nd got to wrestle in the finals and participate in the march of champions which is the highest honor for any wrestler.
The next best experience of the state tournament is wrestling in the semifinals. Neitzel also lost out on this opportunity. Losing out on both opportunities to wrestle in prime time.
This could be just one of those unlucky instances for Neitzel and the seeding did screw him over. He was seeded 8th. The guy he beat in regular season and at regionals and again at sectionals was seeded higher than him and got placed in opposite side and is wrestling in the finals and gets all the above listed experiences. If Neitzel was seeded 2nd, 3rd, 6th, or 7th he would have had shot to make finals opposite Herm so that is bad luck. Even if he got 4th or 5th seed he would have been able to wrestle in semifinals
I hope he gets his chance next year
Neitzel will finish 3rd knowing he beat the guy who will likely take 2nd all three times they faced each other. Who knows, maybe Casey will have the match of his life tonight but at least he gets the chance.
Casey was not seeded higher than Neitzel. Casey was the 11th seed.
I don't understand how the WIAA just continues to screw everything up. It often makes me think there are other motives at play. For starters, the fact that they refuse to take the time to properly distribute the best teams to different sectionals is an absolute joke. Now, the coaches and fans asked for a very simple seeding procedure to ensure top ranked guys would be on opposite sides of the bracket and the WIAA could not even come close to making this happen.
I want to be clear...brackets will never be perfect and that needs to be understood
How hard is it to do this:
1) D1 Sectional Champions wrestle D1 runner-ups in the first round (NO EXCEPTIONS)
2) Seed the top 4 Sectional champions in D1 (1. head to head 2. previous state place 3. record)
3) IF YOU WIN SECTIONALS IN D2 and D3 YOU GET A BYE!!! HOLY inappropriate term3 THIS IS INSANE!!!! Seed the top 4 sectional champions in d2 and d3....Put the 2nd place finisher on the opposite side of the sectional champ and the third place finisher on the same side as the sectional champ but they wouldn't face each other until semifinals
I don't know maybe I am missing something here, but this does not seem like a difficult thing to do and I hate that grown men making way too much money continue to make lazy decisions that impact hard working young men and women. FIGURE IT OUT!!!
This was not a WIAA thing. The coaches voted that the most fair thing to do was to seed ALL wrestlers due to differences amongst strength of sectionals and weight classes.
Nobody can debate that some sectionals have much less depth than others and have less success at state tournament
Well to be honest, the coaches got what they deserved then...Keep it simple and seed the top 4
Seed them all, with head to head the first criteria, with a few other important criteria after that.
Seeding only the top 4 would just be kindergartner's work.
You need to reward the sectional champions though...that is my point! You can't have a sectional champ wrestling on Thursday night and a kid that he beat getting a bye!!! THAT CAN NOT HAPPEN!
Quote from: WIWRESTLING1010 on February 28, 2022, 01:36:11 PM
You need to reward the sectional champions though...that is my point! You can't have a sectional champ wrestling on Thursday night and a kid that he beat getting a bye!!! THAT CAN NOT HAPPEN!
Totally agree. Never heard one coach all weekend not think this is how it should be.
I'm also not sure why it keeps going back to the coaches did this...literally no coaches in our sectional knew anything on how kids would be seeded.
Quote from: WIWRESTLING1010 on February 28, 2022, 11:46:14 AM
I don't understand how the WIAA just continues to screw everything up. It often makes me think there are other motives at play. For starters, the fact that they refuse to take the time to properly distribute the best teams to different sectionals is an absolute joke. Now, the coaches and fans asked for a very simple seeding procedure to ensure top ranked guys would be on opposite sides of the bracket and the WIAA could not even come close to making this happen.
I want to be clear...brackets will never be perfect and that needs to be understood
How hard is it to do this:
1) D1 Sectional Champions wrestle D1 runner-ups in the first round (NO EXCEPTIONS)
2) Seed the top 4 Sectional champions in D1 (1. head to head 2. previous state place 3. record)
3) IF YOU WIN SECTIONALS IN D2 and D3 YOU GET A BYE!!! HOLY inappropriate term3 THIS IS INSANE!!!! Seed the top 4 sectional champions in d2 and d3....Put the 2nd place finisher on the opposite side of the sectional champ and the third place finisher on the same side as the sectional champ but they wouldn't face each other until semifinals
I don't know maybe I am missing something here, but this does not seem like a difficult thing to do and I hate that grown men making way too much money continue to make lazy decisions that impact hard working young men and women. FIGURE IT OUT!!!
So in 2009 Thielke, a returning champ and eventual 4-timer, shouldn't have been seedable because he lost in the sectional finals? Two years ago Max Meeuwsen (another returning champ) lost to Cullen Quick in sectionals only to beat him in the state finals, Whiting (a returning champ as well) lost in sectionals to a eventual non-placer, and Scoles lost to Medora at sectionals after winning at the TKO and before going on to beat him again at the state finals; should none of them have been seedable either? Either seed all of them or none at all.
Quote from: mpordon on March 01, 2022, 05:57:51 AM
Quote from: WIWRESTLING1010 on February 28, 2022, 11:46:14 AM
I don't understand how the WIAA just continues to screw everything up. It often makes me think there are other motives at play. For starters, the fact that they refuse to take the time to properly distribute the best teams to different sectionals is an absolute joke. Now, the coaches and fans asked for a very simple seeding procedure to ensure top ranked guys would be on opposite sides of the bracket and the WIAA could not even come close to making this happen.
I want to be clear...brackets will never be perfect and that needs to be understood
How hard is it to do this:
1) D1 Sectional Champions wrestle D1 runner-ups in the first round (NO EXCEPTIONS)
2) Seed the top 4 Sectional champions in D1 (1. head to head 2. previous state place 3. record)
3) IF YOU WIN SECTIONALS IN D2 and D3 YOU GET A BYE!!! HOLY inappropriate term3 THIS IS INSANE!!!! Seed the top 4 sectional champions in d2 and d3....Put the 2nd place finisher on the opposite side of the sectional champ and the third place finisher on the same side as the sectional champ but they wouldn't face each other until semifinals
I don't know maybe I am missing something here, but this does not seem like a difficult thing to do and I hate that grown men making way too much money continue to make lazy decisions that impact hard working young men and women. FIGURE IT OUT!!!
So in 2009 Thielke, a returning champ and eventual 4-timer, shouldn't have been seedable because he lost in the sectional finals? Two years ago Max Meeuwsen (another returning champ) lost to Cullen Quick in sectionals only to beat him in the state finals, Whiting (a returning champ as well) lost in sectionals to a eventual non-placer, and Scoles lost to Medora at sectionals after winning at the TKO and before going on to beat him again at the state finals; should none of them have been seedable either? Either seed all of them or none at all.
Correct JT should not have been seeded as he lost his Sectional final match and if he was good enough he would come back and win it all just like he did.
Quote from: harley25 on March 01, 2022, 06:19:17 AM
Quote from: mpordon on March 01, 2022, 05:57:51 AM
Quote from: WIWRESTLING1010 on February 28, 2022, 11:46:14 AM
I don't understand how the WIAA just continues to screw everything up. It often makes me think there are other motives at play. For starters, the fact that they refuse to take the time to properly distribute the best teams to different sectionals is an absolute joke. Now, the coaches and fans asked for a very simple seeding procedure to ensure top ranked guys would be on opposite sides of the bracket and the WIAA could not even come close to making this happen.
I want to be clear...brackets will never be perfect and that needs to be understood
How hard is it to do this:
1) D1 Sectional Champions wrestle D1 runner-ups in the first round (NO EXCEPTIONS)
2) Seed the top 4 Sectional champions in D1 (1. head to head 2. previous state place 3. record)
3) IF YOU WIN SECTIONALS IN D2 and D3 YOU GET A BYE!!! HOLY inappropriate term3 THIS IS INSANE!!!! Seed the top 4 sectional champions in d2 and d3....Put the 2nd place finisher on the opposite side of the sectional champ and the third place finisher on the same side as the sectional champ but they wouldn't face each other until semifinals
I don't know maybe I am missing something here, but this does not seem like a difficult thing to do and I hate that grown men making way too much money continue to make lazy decisions that impact hard working young men and women. FIGURE IT OUT!!!
So in 2009 Thielke, a returning champ and eventual 4-timer, shouldn't have been seedable because he lost in the sectional finals? Two years ago Max Meeuwsen (another returning champ) lost to Cullen Quick in sectionals only to beat him in the state finals, Whiting (a returning champ as well) lost in sectionals to a eventual non-placer, and Scoles lost to Medora at sectionals after winning at the TKO and before going on to beat him again at the state finals; should none of them have been seedable either? Either seed all of them or none at all.
Correct JT should not have been seeded as he lost his Sectional final match and if he was good enough he would come back and win it all just like he did.
Why bother seeding anyone then? "If he was good enough he would come back and win it all" is pretty much the system we just had where we only cared about crowning a champ and the rest be inappropriate term08.
So if one of the best wrestlers in the state loses a sectional final match, punish the second or third best kid in the bracket with a round of 16 or quarterfinal surprise ???
They do need to reward sectional results.
Seed everyone but...
No wrestler can be seeded ahead of a guy that finished in front of him at sectionals.
So in the Thielke case he would likely get seeded one seed below the guy that beat him.
You take away margin of victory and put in that sectional rule and you have an improved seeding criteria that would work better.
I still think humans should review computer seeds for blatant errors but nobody else seems to like that. I could see errors occurring with maybe a wrestler that missed a lot of the season due to injury. This could correct some possible supposed errors with freshman but I am not too worried about them because they will have time to earn it over the course of their careers.
Quote from: padre on February 28, 2022, 11:20:29 PM
Quote from: WIWRESTLING1010 on February 28, 2022, 01:36:11 PM
You need to reward the sectional champions though...that is my point! You can't have a sectional champ wrestling on Thursday night and a kid that he beat getting a bye!!! THAT CAN NOT HAPPEN!
Totally agree. Never heard one coach all weekend not think this is how it should be.
I'm also not sure why it keeps going back to the coaches did this...literally no coaches in our sectional knew anything on how kids would be seeded.
Coach Lu in many post appeared at least to me that some coaches knew about this and explained the seeding stuff.
I went back and couldn't find anything. I asked our AD and he never got much about this. I am in the process of reaching out to our board of control member to see what he got.
Padre, in January I had a coach say that how bad you beat someone may have an impact but wasnt sure.
This whole 14 events and seeding was rolled out late and their was alot of confusion on all of this. Glad it got done now to tweak it and make it work.
Quote from: littleguy301 on March 01, 2022, 07:34:36 AM
Quote from: padre on February 28, 2022, 11:20:29 PM
Quote from: WIWRESTLING1010 on February 28, 2022, 01:36:11 PM
You need to reward the sectional champions though...that is my point! You can't have a sectional champ wrestling on Thursday night and a kid that he beat getting a bye!!! THAT CAN NOT HAPPEN!
Totally agree. Never heard one coach all weekend not think this is how it should be.
I'm also not sure why it keeps going back to the coaches did this...literally no coaches in our sectional knew anything on how kids would be seeded.
Coach Lu in many post appeared at least to me that some coaches knew about this and explained the seeding stuff.
I went back and couldn't find anything. I asked our AD and he never got much about this. I am in the process of reaching out to our board of control member to see what he got.
Padre, in January I had a coach say that how bad you beat someone may have an impact but wasnt sure.
This whole 14 events and seeding was rolled out late and their was alot of confusion on all of this. Glad it got done now to tweak it and make it work.
Agreed. Now everyone at least has a basic idea, and coaches can drill down to get as much further info as they like.
My final thought on the matter is this. ANY system to seed state brackets will benefit certain individuals and hurt others- every bracket, every year. Now that we have a year under our belts, and the new system has been explained (thank you for informing us fans, Coach Lu), it's time for the coaches to discuss and decide what if any tweaks should be made. It's my hope that ALL coaches, across divisions and region, provide their input and that their input is heard and considered. They must decide as a group what is most important: separating the best 2 wrestlers until finals; rewarding wrestlers for winning their Sectional Championship; minimizing unfairly low seedings for the best wrestlers, separating sectional wrestlers (I doubt this is high on the list, but); etc. There have been a number of thoughtful ideas on this thread. I hope that the improvements made are based upon agreement amongst coaches throughout the state and not just the few loudest voices. Thanks again, Coach Lu. We know that the change was made with the best intentions for our wonderful, hardworking high school wrestlers.
Quote from: DocWrestling on March 01, 2022, 06:58:49 AM
They do need to reward sectional results.
Seed everyone but...
No wrestler can be seeded ahead of a guy that finished in front of him at sectionals.
So in the Thielke case he would likely get seeded one seed below the guy that beat him.
You take away margin of victory and put in that sectional rule and you have an improved seeding criteria that would work better.
I still think humans should review computer seeds for blatant errors but nobody else seems to like that. I could see errors occurring with maybe a wrestler that missed a lot of the season due to injury. This could correct some possible supposed errors with freshman but I am not too worried about them because they will have time to earn it over the course of their careers.
The JT scenario is a good exception to consider when attempting to mandate how state will (should) be seeded. Suppose JT's loss was really a fluke kind of thing, the kid that won was significantly less talented but he just caught JT and stuck him - it happens sometimes. When the seeding for state rolls around the sectional champ, based on his record, etc, pulls a seventh seed (or there abouts). Any mandate that says a loser in the sectional finals cannot be seeded above that sectional champ means that some high seed from another section is going to draw JT early in the tournament. That too, is not fair. Any time there are absolute criteria for seeding there is a potential for inappropriate term9 someone. Doesn't often happen, but it could. Just like the previous bracketing pattern of pairing a sectional champ with a second placer from a different sectional. Not perfect, but largely rational and functional - especially when there are wrestlebacks to third.
No perfect solution and I think efforts to make it "more perfect" are folly.
Yes, that is why there must a coach's vote on any obvious changes. One example is Brayten Casey and Neitzel were not seeded properly and many said this before the tourney began. Many other cases that were pointed out before the tourney began came to fruition.
Still, a good start and good tournament. There's always studs falling just short of the podium.
Improvements can be obviously made and I hope to see positive progress.
Quote from: Redeemer on March 01, 2022, 05:55:49 PM
Yes, that is why there must a coach's vote on any obvious changes. One example is Brayten Casey and Neitzel were not seeded properly and many said this before the tourney began. Many other cases that were pointed out before the tourney began came to fruition.
Still, a good start and good tournament. There's always studs falling just short of the podium.
Improvements can be obviously made and I hope to see positive progress.
You know, maybe Casey was seeded correctly, but he just wrestled above his seed and had a great tournament - it happens. I don't think seeds should be interpreted as predictions as to the wrestler's expected finish but rather, the wrestler's relative position to others in the weight he earned with his season's results up to that point. I think part of our problem is that we aren't recognizing the "wild card" element of wrestling an actual tournament; unexpected things happen sometimes - it doesn't mean the seed was wrong. The seed is based on pre-meet results and the final placement is based on the actual tournament results. While there may typically be a correlation between the seed and placement, people should recognize that they are two separate experiences and that a perfect alignment between them is not the norm.
Quote from: npope on March 01, 2022, 06:09:04 PM
Quote from: Redeemer on March 01, 2022, 05:55:49 PM
Yes, that is why there must a coach's vote on any obvious changes. One example is Brayten Casey and Neitzel were not seeded properly and many said this before the tourney began. Many other cases that were pointed out before the tourney began came to fruition.
Still, a good start and good tournament. There's always studs falling just short of the podium.
Improvements can be obviously made and I hope to see positive progress.
You know, maybe Casey was seeded correctly, but he just wrestled above his seed and had a great tournament - it happens. I don't think seeds should be interpreted as predictions as to the wrestler's expected finish but rather, the wrestler's relative position to others in the weight he earned with his season's results up to that point. I think part of our problem is that we aren't recognizing the "wild card" element of wrestling an actual tournament; unexpected things happen sometimes - it doesn't mean the seed was wrong. The seed is based on pre-meet results and the final placement is based on the actual tournament results. While there may typically be a correlation between the seed and placement, people should recognize that they are two separate experiences and that a perfect alignment between them is not the norm.
Spot on. People saying that seeding is right or wrong based on what final placing is vs. their opinion (correct or not) of who should be there, don't account for what actually can happen on the floor of the Kohl Center in any given match.