Understanding State Seeding

[3wrestle]

Transparency regarding all of it is the key
Making wrestlers aware they must pin to retain a seed would have been valuable.
It also appears some coaches knew more then others - that is a failure on part of the committee and WIAA.

[Coach Lu]

Coach Lullof,


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

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

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

All the data is in trackwrestling this year.  Coaches had to do that before sectionals started.  Many communications instructing them how. 

[DocWrestling]

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

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

Wrestler A, B, and C are in a sectional

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

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

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

1) I do think a human panel would have obviously saw and error like Marko being a three seed.  This panel would be for each division so they only had to look at 14 brackets.  They may only change a seed or 2 in a couple brackets.  Is that worth it?  Not sure.  I look at like NFL refs.  Only make changes on something clear and obvious.
2) The scenario you describe is something that can happen but is rare and yes that could completely change a bracket.  Upset pins do happen but they also happen at regionals and sectionals and kids do not even advance to state that might have been predicted too.  To me if sectionals are truly part of the state tournament then those results have to matter.  If a wrestler gets caught in headlock at regionals we don't ignore that result and re-seed sectionals. Regional results matter for sectionals.  Sectional results should matter for state.  This new system starts an entirely new tournament.  At some point in the season all that matters is who won no matter how it happened.

I do think the WWCA should really push for 3 divisions of same amount of teams and each gets 16 to Madison and double elimination.  Seeding is such a hot topic in WI because it matters more when so many wrestlers only get to wrestle once.

Kudos to taking this step to seed the tournament.  It will only get better as it gets tinkered with and everyone understands more.  And even though it will get better the complaints won't stop.  You are a leader and leaders bring change and take the heat.  Kudos to you and all the other coaches that spent all the time working on this even if right now it might not seem like you are appreciated or even knowing you are a bullseye for everyone's comments at state.  Thank you for also being the leader of the coaches to come on here and help explain

[Coach Lu]

Transparency regarding all of it is the key
Making wrestlers aware they must pin to retain a seed would have been valuable.
It also appears some coaches knew more then others - that is a failure on part of the committee and WIAA.

No matter how well or poor communication is from any direction, there will always be coaches who know more than other coaches.  Some coaches don't go to meetings, read emails, go to clinics, or watch videos.  Some coaches choose to be more involved and their involvement gives them more opportunities to learn more about our sport.  Some coaches ask very detailed questions and get a better understanding or clarity.  This information about seeding wasn't with held from anyone.  We have been using this point process for team state seeding for a few years. 

The first time trackwrestling seeding was used at regionals or a tournament, do you think coaches understood exactly how the seeding process would work or do you think they understood it better after experiencing it?  Were there coaches the first year or first tournament that understood it better than others?  Do we like it now that we understand it?  I remember a whole lot of resistance year one...

The first time we used the new weigh in sheet there were coaches who understood it much better.  Some coaches didn't catch on until they realized they had to enter weights and couldn't add their guys to the next weigh-in until the entered actual weights from previous events.

The first time we changed 7 and 7 to 14 events and 50 matches, some coaches started changing their schedule.  Some coaches decided to wait a year to better understand it before making changes.

The first time we ran a girls state tournament, some coaches filled out seeding and some did not do a great job.  Info was requested multiple times.  It was the same process we have always used for bringing in data and still coaches failed to do it right.  I bet next time, coaches will get it correct.

I agree that we can always communicate better.  I will not take that away from you.  I will however admit that not all coaches are equal and that an experience with something one time is what makes us all better equipped (including fans).  Lets wait and see how all this plays out at the Kohl Center.  Some people who are disappointed now may actually like it when it's all said and done.  Some people hopefully appreciate the attempt and will continue to help us make tweaks to make it even better.

[Coach Lu]

DocWrestling,

Thanks for sharing.  Your insight is well thought out and noted. 

Anyone who knows me knows that I care and I work hard.  I don't have all the answers but I try to think of every angle when problem solving.  I hope people are inspired to take the next step next year rather than discouraged because something is different.  We fully intend to review everything after it's all done.

If I missed other's comments on this thread I apologize.  I am about the cash in from the forum and begin educating myself about all these super talented athletes who made the state tournament.  I noticed that there is a post about state brackets being out and little to no tribute to the wrestlers who will be participating.  I think I will post a thread in which we actually pay honor and excitement to those kids competing!

[littleguy301]

Also why is everything have to be enter before last Saturday? Was sectionals not included into trackwrestling? Some stinks to the high heavens here.

Also sounds like Chris Hanson in a post talking about December pins and January pins might has some points there.

I remember seeing some stuff about this and victory over common opponents but not the direct wording of it.

We needed a seeding system, we needed to change the 7 and 7 system. But let's just do it all at once and make it a one size fits all situation.

[SP Eagles]

I appreciate and applaud the efforts to make the state tournament a better experience for the kids participating.  I believe that one of the best things that could be done would be to make the tournament double elimination.  This would provide every wrestler a fair chance to earn a place on the podium, regardless of where they are placed in the bracket.  I cannot think of many other tournaments, other than the worlds or Olympics, that aren´t double elimination.  Even if you get the seeding just right, it appears that a 16th seed has a better chance, or at least a more fair chance, of placing than the 8th and/or 9th seed.  I hope that this is something that can happen in the near future.  Thanks to all those working hard to continue to improve this awesome tournament. 

[Coach Lu]

Also why is everything have to be enter before last Saturday? Was sectionals not included into trackwrestling? Some stinks to the high heavens here.

Also sounds like Chris Hanson in a post talking about December pins and January pins might has some points there.

I remember seeing some stuff about this and victory over common opponents but not the direct wording of it.

We needed a seeding system, we needed to change the 7 and 7 system. But let's just do it all at once and make it a one size fits all situation.

Sectionals were indeed included.  All sectionals are run through trackwrestling.  Coaches had until sectionals to get their duals and tournaments they didn't enter earlier in the season. 

[padre]

At the end of the day people were only looking to try to get the top 2 separated.  Seeding sectional champions would do this almost every time.  As much as you try to explain at the end of the day it's obviously easy to see many of the brackets are way off. 

I'm a pretty hands on coach that reads everything thoroughly all year long from the WIAA...we got basically 0 information on this.

You're being a stand up guy on this but a lot went wrong from beginning to end.

[rmk12175]

I would submit that when your seeding criteria doesn't identify a 2 time state champ with one loss on the season who has probably wrestled one of the toughest schedules in the state as the number one seed, and instead seeds a 3 loss wrestler, and 5th place finisher at state as the number 1 seed that the problem is with the seeding criteria, not those who point out the error.

[Fan1]

Thank you for the explanation on the seeding criteria.  I think a huge step into helping educate people and put them in a position to provide feedback, would be to allow coaches (or everyone) the ability to see a breakdown of how the criteria points were calculated for their wrestlers.  I'm not sure how feasible this is with the Track software but thought I'd ask. 

[panther93]

At the end of the day people were only looking to try to get the top 2 separated.  Seeding sectional champions would do this almost every time.  As much as you try to explain at the end of the day it's obviously easy to see many of the brackets are way off. 

I'm a pretty hands on coach that reads everything thoroughly all year long from the WIAA...we got basically 0 information on this.

You're being a stand up guy on this but a lot went wrong from beginning to end.

Totally again with this!  For DII and DIII, seed the sectional champs and then their 2nd and 3rd place kid would be opposite them in the matrix.  If the 1 and 2 are from the same sectional they are separated, if they are frim different sectionals they are separated.

[The Last Ride]

I would say he gets seeded higher the next day.

Records are meaningless because of quality.

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

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

There will be coaches that won't be wrestling in the Cheesehead and other big tournaments.

[Numbers]

I would submit that when your seeding criteria doesn't identify a 2 time state champ with one loss on the season who has probably wrestled one of the toughest schedules in the state as the number one seed, and instead seeds a 3 loss wrestler, and 5th place finisher at state as the number 1 seed that the problem is with the seeding criteria, not those who point out the error.

The seeding criteria is fine.  I cannot believe the WIAA and TrackWrestling have not corrected the error yet.

[shouldvewrestled]

I would submit that when your seeding criteria doesn't identify a 2 time state champ with one loss on the season who has probably wrestled one of the toughest schedules in the state as the number one seed, and instead seeds a 3 loss wrestler, and 5th place finisher at state as the number 1 seed that the problem is with the seeding criteria, not those who point out the error.

The seeding criteria is fine.  I cannot believe the WIAA and TrackWrestling have not corrected the error yet.

Computer likely didn't make a mistake, it computes it's parameters it's told to do.  Clark obviously lost a seed point to someone since he only has 14, if it was Blaskowski because of common opponent criteria Blaskowski would get the seed.  There in, it is a seeding criteria issue if strictly going by data computer uses. 

From what I see quickly the both faced Ronsman LC, Blaskowski won by Fall, Clark won by MD 13-0, there is the seeding point criteria so computer is correct and not an error.