Filling Weight Classes-The 2021-22 Data

[asdf]

The most recent #'s I can find are from this article from the WIAA in 2018-2019 participation #'s.  So, the year before COVID I believe.

https://www.wiaawi.org/News/News-Article/wisconsin-ranks-14th-in-hs-sports-participation

Cut/pasted for those that prefer cliff notes version:

"Four of the top 10 boys sports registered increases in participation, topped by track and field with an additional 5,257 participants. Other top 10 boys sports that added participants last year were soccer (2,715), wrestling (1,877) and tennis (1,163). Among girls top 10 sports, volleyball was the front-runner with an additional 6,225 participants, followed by soccer (3,623) and lacrosse (3,164). "

I believe the phrase is confirmation bias.  You seek out flawed #'s to fit your opinion.  Trackwrestling is not accurate (Doc just railed on that on another post), coaches can't stay on top of it, and so many other variables as to why kids don't participate in certain weekends.  Fact is, per this article by the WIAA--participation in wrestling has grown.  This is even with new factors like new sports (Lacrosse, powerlifting, etc.) and the preference for single sport athletes.

Stand by your #'s all you want.  Until you stop looking at tournaments #'s as your standard, you are wrong.  Even if it was needed cutting weight classes is not the answer.  So many more things to do first to affect change if it is so important.

[MNbadger]

Track wrestling is a huge pain in the you know where.  I have an assistant who is the ULTIMATE 
in tech geeks.  He has regular, continual trouble with it and he is not the only one of my coaching counterparts having same.  If I had to do this track stuff myself, I would cease coaching yesterday.
It does NOTHING to make kids better wrestlers, or me a better coach, or make my work load lighter.  Seeding meetings for tournaments are maybe 15 minutes faster at the most on any given Saturday.  With glitch that won't allow kids to be entered, they can't be entered into the tournament which is nightmare that usually ends in a kid getting done a disservice. 

The most recent #'s I can find are from this article from the WIAA in 2018-2019 participation #'s.  So, the year before COVID I believe.

https://www.wiaawi.org/News/News-Article/wisconsin-ranks-14th-in-hs-sports-participation

Cut/pasted for those that prefer cliff notes version:

"Four of the top 10 boys sports registered increases in participation, topped by track and field with an additional 5,257 participants. Other top 10 boys sports that added participants last year were soccer (2,715), wrestling (1,877) and tennis (1,163). Among girls top 10 sports, volleyball was the front-runner with an additional 6,225 participants, followed by soccer (3,623) and lacrosse (3,164). "

I believe the phrase is confirmation bias.  You seek out flawed #'s to fit your opinion.  Trackwrestling is not accurate (Doc just railed on that on another post), coaches can't stay on top of it, and so many other variables as to why kids don't participate in certain weekends.  Fact is, per this article by the WIAA--participation in wrestling has grown.  This is even with new factors like new sports (Lacrosse, powerlifting, etc.) and the preference for single sport athletes.

Stand by your #'s all you want.  Until you stop looking at tournaments #'s as your standard, you are wrong.  Even if it was needed cutting weight classes is not the answer.  So many more things to do first to affect change if it is so important.

[DocWrestling]

In terms of wrestling numbers though trackwrestling is the only accurate number.  By my understanding every wrestler has to have fat test data entered on trackwrestling to be eligible.

Nobody has more of a self interest in reporting higher numbers than the WIAA and I would guess they get their numbers from schools on who might have shown interest.  Maybe they all did not get fat tested?

I am not sure what numbers are correct but I would trust trackwrestling numbers over the WIAA in this instance.  And we also know that a lot of the kids that fat tested did not even end up wrestling or quit early

[MNbadger]

Not accurate for our team......

In terms of wrestling numbers though trackwrestling is the only accurate number.  By my understanding every wrestler has to have fat test data entered on trackwrestling to be eligible.

Nobody has more of a self interest in reporting higher numbers than the WIAA and I would guess they get their numbers from schools on who might have shown interest.  Maybe they all did not get fat tested?

I am not sure what numbers are correct but I would trust trackwrestling numbers over the WIAA in this instance.  And we also know that a lot of the kids that fat tested did not even end up wrestling or quit early

[asdf]

In terms of wrestling numbers though trackwrestling is the only accurate number.  By my understanding every wrestler has to have fat test data entered on trackwrestling to be eligible.

Nobody has more of a self interest in reporting higher numbers than the WIAA and I would guess they get their numbers from schools on who might have shown interest.  Maybe they all did not get fat tested?

I am not sure what numbers are correct but I would trust trackwrestling numbers over the WIAA in this instance.  And we also know that a lot of the kids that fat tested did not even end up wrestling or quit early

I jump on this forum the once a year when this comes up.  It gets more fanciful and lacking of basic logic every time, so good luck, I'm out.  I mean seriously you have right in front of you the WIAA stating participation 2018-2019 #'s are up in wrestling, but you think it is the schools lying to the WIAA who also are lying out of self interest?  Maybe the best answer is the easiest answer---that the WIAA has better access to facts then 2-3 Forum warriors that by their own admission have self interest conflicts (how many years did you state Doc that you went without a 106er, 10 years you stated I think).   Doc on the other post about rankings talks about the unreliable nature of track, but yet for this subject it is the gold standard instead of the WIAA.  C'mon.  Instead of this crud every year we should be having posts on what to do to build on these gains, not knock it down.

[wrastle63]

In terms of wrestling numbers though trackwrestling is the only accurate number.  By my understanding every wrestler has to have fat test data entered on trackwrestling to be eligible.

Nobody has more of a self interest in reporting higher numbers than the WIAA and I would guess they get their numbers from schools on who might have shown interest.  Maybe they all did not get fat tested?

I am not sure what numbers are correct but I would trust trackwrestling numbers over the WIAA in this instance.  And we also know that a lot of the kids that fat tested did not even end up wrestling or quit early

I jump on this forum the once a year when this comes up.  It gets more fanciful and lacking of basic logic every time, so good luck, I'm out.  I mean seriously you have right in front of you the WIAA stating participation 2018-2019 #'s are up in wrestling, but you think it is the schools lying to the WIAA who also are lying out of self interest?  Maybe the best answer is the easiest answer---that the WIAA has better access to facts then 2-3 Forum warriors that by their own admission have self interest conflicts (how many years did you state Doc that you went without a 106er, 10 years you stated I think).   Doc on the other post about rankings talks about the unreliable nature of track, but yet for this subject it is the gold standard instead of the WIAA.  C'mon.  Instead of this crud every year we should be having posts on what to do to build on these gains, not knock it down.

Exactly. Way more important things to talk about to grow our sport in WI besides cutting weight classes.

[Ghetto]

I'm all for having discussions about building programs. I am now convinced that it revolves around having people in the building that can recruit. That's 1, 1a and 1b.

Does anyone have contacts at the new Flo/Trackwrestling? I used to email Justin Tritz every year and he would get me the raw data of bodyfat tests from Wisconsin each year. I was unable to do so in 2021. Here are the number of bodyfat tests in Wisconsin from the past few years:

   Kids Tested
2011-2012   8946
2012-2013   8985
2013-2014   8797
2014-2015   8357
2015-2016   8007
2016-2017   7737
2017-2018   7698
2018-2019   7543
2019-2020   7950
        Total         74020

The tournament data that I use is from Regionals. I do that for a few reasons:

1. We can go back all the way to 2005
2. Every team wrestles that weekend
3. Of all the weekends in the year, this is the one where MORE kids will be wrestling than any other. If anything, using this date skews the data on the opposite side of the argument.

Merry Christmas everyone. I hope you enjoy your time with your families and Santa is good to you.

[Handles II]

In terms of wrestling numbers though trackwrestling is the only accurate number.  By my understanding every wrestler has to have fat test data entered on trackwrestling to be eligible.

Nobody has more of a self interest in reporting higher numbers than the WIAA and I would guess they get their numbers from schools on who might have shown interest.  Maybe they all did not get fat tested?

I am not sure what numbers are correct but I would trust trackwrestling numbers over the WIAA in this instance.  And we also know that a lot of the kids that fat tested did not even end up wrestling or quit early

I jump on this forum the once a year when this comes up.  It gets more fanciful and lacking of basic logic every time, so good luck, I'm out.  I mean seriously you have right in front of you the WIAA stating participation 2018-2019 #'s are up in wrestling, but you think it is the schools lying to the WIAA who also are lying out of self interest?  Maybe the best answer is the easiest answer---that the WIAA has better access to facts then 2-3 Forum warriors that by their own admission have self interest conflicts (how many years did you state Doc that you went without a 106er, 10 years you stated I think).   Doc on the other post about rankings talks about the unreliable nature of track, but yet for this subject it is the gold standard instead of the WIAA.  C'mon.  Instead of this crud every year we should be having posts on what to do to build on these gains, not knock it down.

Exactly. Way more important things to talk about to grow our sport in WI besides cutting weight classes.

Currently the NFHS has offered change in weight classes for states, that's why this is important to look at. The NFHS goes off of recommendations from their Regional Reps. The Regional Reps have been crunching these same numbers for the past several years. Conclusion? Most schools in many states can't support 14 weight classes, thus a change is available. If it's really obvious that the numbers are doing well, then there isn't reason to change.

[drbrad]

Minnesota's allowance of capable Jr High athletes to participate is an interesting concept, and I think at least helps their state wrestling program to competitive success. While I used to think it was silly, I've really warmed up to the idea. Being from Western Wisconsin, we spent much if not most of our youth wrestling weekends over in Minnesota (my now 11th grade son has always been very light and we got MUCH better competition over there). I don't have the numbers, but anecdotally their rosters and tourneys are certainly more full as a rule than here in WI, especially in the lower weights. Too bad WIAA doesn't allow the same.

I'm not a diehard in keeping 14 weights- heck NCAA has only 10. My issue is that the immediate response is to eliminate/consolidate the lower weights. There are many, many great 106 and 113 pounders around the state. My son's experience in wrestling has always been colored with being outsized. As a Junior, he finally has "grown into" his weight class at 106 to where he is for once one of the bigger, stronger wrestlers. If weights started at say 115, he (and a significant number of other kids) would still be too outsized to be competitive at the highest levels. Remember that most sports are highly "discriminatory" against the smaller kids- wrestling has always been different. Some kids don't hit their growth spurts until their Sophomore/Junior years. I can't imagine those kids sticking around until they do grow into the lower weights. The Minnesota rule allows those lower weights to be filled while the Freshmen and Sophomores are waiting for their growth spurt.

Also, I found the stats by weight class interesting. Although 106 and 113 had lower % participation than most weights, it was not skewed nearly as much as I would have thought. The lack of participation numbers were for the most part spread out over the majority of weight classes. I can't remember what the weight class recommendations are for 12 and 13 class spreads, but perhaps it would be best to slightly spread most classes and perhaps raise the lowest weights by only a couple of pounds. (e.g. 108, 115, 122, 130, 138, etc.). Feel free to critique or share better ideas.

[Numbers]

Effective July 1 2023
Boys
12 weights  108/116/ 124/  131/  138/  145/  152/  160/170/190/215/285
13 weights 107/114/121/127/133/139/145/   152/   160/172/189/215/285
14 weights 106/113/120/126/132/138/144/150/157/165/175/190/215/285

[Numbers]

The other major NFHS rule change was to allow a 6th match (not including forfeits) in a day for state qualifying tournaments.  This should allow the coaches association to consider super regionals and/or super sectionals since all wrestling could be completed in one day instead of a Friday evening and Saturday.

Anyone want to guess if this happens in the next two years?

[Numbers]

Effective July 1 2023
Boys
12 weights  108/116/ 124/  131/  138/  145/  152/  160/170/190/215/285
13 weights 107/114/121/127/133/139/145/   152/   160/172/189/215/285
14 weights 106/113/120/126/132/138/144/150/157/165/175/190/215/285

The difference in 170/172 and 190/189 between 12 and 13 weight classes is baffling since the 3 weight classes before and two after are all exactly the same?  Any chance this gets cleaned up at the national level this Spring?

[DocWrestling]

I personally think that the highest any weight class before 285 should be 200.  215 and 285 is too much when so many kids fit middle weights.

I still cannot believe that college does not have 215 but if they do not then why would high school when you are looking at reducing weights.

[Handles II]

BIG tournaments, BIG numbers- best of the year. Didn't have time to break it down by weight classes but....
183 teams participated in indy tournaments and scrambles (scrambles often had teams bringing more than 14 wrestlers) and including the females in the Women's Bi-State showcase. 
2562 available slots for wrestlers based on # of teams participating. We filled 1793. That breaks down to 9.7 wrestlers per team.

[Hillbilly]

On The Water tournament had 63 teams.  None of the teams entered 14 wrestlers. 

Obviously there is a high demand, we need more opportunities available.   

Maybe less weight classes along with allowing 7th and 8th graders to compete could increase participation and fill more weights.   

NCAA has 10 weight classes.   I can't think of a sport where we have more spots on high school teams than we do on college teams.   We don't have 15 man football teams for big high schools just to have them play 11 man football in college.

Just to get this out there.   Less weight classes doesn't mean less opportunities.   Everyone is allowed to compete for a varsity spot.   Competition in a wrestling room is a real thing.   We don't make basketball teams bigger to increase opportunities.   5 people on the court per team, with kids competing to get one of those 5 spots.   

Anyway let the fight continue....  Teams filled with kids on varsity who have nobody at the same weight competing for the varsity spot is the equivalent to giving each kid a participation trophy.   Congrats for coming out here is your Letter!