Topic: Seeding the state tournaments

[rugged rick]

samdog77

please take this as no disrespect, but I don't think there are many "who's #1, or 2?" situations that hinges on criteria #6.

I'm sure there are exceptions (and by the way, thanks for posting the criteria, planbe), but anything is better then the "dart board" approach we currently have.

I really hope this is the last year we have to go through this

[samdog77]

samdog77

please take this as no disrespect, but I don't think there are many "who's #1, or 2?" situations that hinges on criteria #6.

I'm sure there are exceptions (and by the way, thanks for posting the criteria, planbe), but anything is better then the "dart board" approach we currently have.

I really hope this is the last year we have to go through this

No disrespect taken...and your point is well made.

[steviewonder]

This is a fair statement,,,,Especially if a 4 seed should have been a 2 or a 3....yet, for instance, out here in Wisconsin we have two very good defending state champs meeting in the quarterfinals, and both won their sectionals. They are clearly the front runners, but after they separate the sectional finalists out here, then they blind draw.

Looking back personally, whether you take second or third is beside the point, you both lost your match with the eventual champ. Does it affect a "legacy"?  Maybe, but not in the true sense of the term.

Just my two cents.

I am not against seeding the state tournament, but how do you make that fair?  When someone from the northeast, southeast and west part of the state have never wrestled but all are outstanding kids and have nearly identical records?  Then it basically would come down to a popularity contest....   Also who determines the seeds?   I think that there are too many faults with seeding.  That is the reason I lean towards the way it is.  If you are going to win the tournament and be state champion, you have to beat everyone in your way.  Plain and simple.

[v.o.r.]

I would kind of like to see it seeded also. But I am interrested in the question rugged rick asked in the the first post. Does anyone know why the SDHAA does it this way? And I don't necessarily believe it is because the SDHAA does not care about wrestling. I would like to believe they want to put on the best tourney possible NO MATTER what  the sport is. I am not saying there is...but there may be some valid reasons they do it this way.

[dean]

Many have mentioned how this system robs athletes who deserve to be in the finals, which is an absolute travesty!  I however see another problem with this joke of a system... The luck of the draw also affects team points and all you have to do is look back at last year when 1st 2nd and 3rd in the team race was a difference of something like 11 points to see that this system could very well help decide a team championship.

[Millerman]

I have been in too many seeding meetings not to think that politics doesn't come into play.   Who would do the seeding?  Where do you find an impartial panel that has the required knowledge to do this seeding.  Will it be all 50 or so of the coaches?   
The system that is in place is FAIR, it may not be perfect, but it is FAIR.    There are no back room deals, no politics, no favorites, no you vote for mine and I'll vote for yours......
The 2 best kids are going to meet in the semi's 25% of the time, but I've been to enough tournaments to state that I'd be surprised if much over 75% of the time, the #1 and #2 seeded wrestlers were in the finals.   One thing I can say with certainty, is that I've Never seen a tournament seeded 100% correctly.  Someone is going to gripe that the seeding was NOT fair, and you will never convince them that it was, especially when they go out and prove your seeding was wrong, and believe me the seeding will be wrong many, many times.

If the top two guys wrestle in the semi's, its not perfect, but they both did get a shot at the title,   Now if you feel bad for that loser and the fact that he can only wrestle back to third, then just allow wrestle backs to a true 2nd.   Because I guarantee you, that you can do all the great seeding in the world,  and if the 3rd place wrestler didn't get beat by the second place wrestler he certainly feels that he could well have been the 2nd best wrestler in the bracket.   But I don't know of a single state that does that, as they all want a " BIG Finals Show" not the finals and then true 2nd wrestle backs.   

I guess what I'm saying is that I think the system SD uses has its faults, ( Kocer and Dolen in the semis, what the heck...) but I'm not sure their really is a better alternative.      Well.... come to think of it, SDHSAA could Hire me on as their Czar of wrestling seeding.   (Czar or maybe Grand Poobaa)   Then things would be done perfectly and no one would have anything to complain about.     But that wouldn't be much fun, I'd seed the tournament and then there would only be the formality of watching it play out.

[Hoss]

I think seeding meetings have changes a lot over the years with criteria like listed for ND state, and as many tournaments(common opponents are more likely) as kids wrestle there is hardly room for arguments they almost seed themselves.

[Millerman]

Ok, so lets start with 106.   Haneke just beat Loudenberg, but the way I read the Criteria, Loudenberd gets the #1 seed.   I've seen other CRITERIA, from other tournaments, that states that most recent HEAD to HEAD win should get the seed.   WHO determines the Criteria?   Oh, people will come up with arguments.

[steviewonder]

We use Trackwrestling.com here in Wisconsin....it has an automatic seeding program in it....which is put up on the white screen for all coaches to view...as the referees head up the meeting. From thence, seeds can be brought up for debate.

Its fair most of the time...of course there will be the occasional hose job....I guess winning will always be the mantra, not that it will always be done on the mat.

Anyhow, this trackwrestling.com site has been adopted by many tournament directors. I'm sure some here have been around it too.

[planbe]

I have been in too many seeding meetings not to think that politics doesn't come into play.   Who would do the seeding?  Where do you find an impartial panel that has the required knowledge to do this seeding.  Will it be all 50 or so of the coaches?   
The system that is in place is FAIR, it may not be perfect, but it is FAIR.    There are no back room deals, no politics, no favorites, no you vote for mine and I'll vote for yours......
The 2 best kids are going to meet in the semi's 25% of the time, but I've been to enough tournaments to state that I'd be surprised if much over 75% of the time, the #1 and #2 seeded wrestlers were in the finals.   One thing I can say with certainty, is that I've Never seen a tournament seeded 100% correctly.  Someone is going to gripe that the seeding was NOT fair, and you will never convince them that it was, especially when they go out and prove your seeding was wrong, and believe me the seeding will be wrong many, many times.

If the top two guys wrestle in the semi's, its not perfect, but they both did get a shot at the title,   Now if you feel bad for that loser and the fact that he can only wrestle back to third, then just allow wrestle backs to a true 2nd.   Because I guarantee you, that you can do all the great seeding in the world,  and if the 3rd place wrestler didn't get beat by the second place wrestler he certainly feels that he could well have been the 2nd best wrestler in the bracket.   But I don't know of a single state that does that, as they all want a " BIG Finals Show" not the finals and then true 2nd wrestle backs.   

I guess what I'm saying is that I think the system SD uses has its faults, ( Kocer and Dolen in the semis, what the heck...) but I'm not sure their really is a better alternative.      Well.... come to think of it, SDHSAA could Hire me on as their Czar of wrestling seeding.   (Czar or maybe Grand Poobaa)   Then things would be done perfectly and no one would have anything to complain about.     But that wouldn't be much fun, I'd seed the tournament and then there would only be the formality of watching it play out.

I don't think that it will ever be 100% accurate, but I feel seeding will get you a LOT closer than the current draw system.  To point to ND again, and you can look back over the years and see that this is very consistent, the top two seeds wrestled in the finals 9 out of the 14 classes.  Again, not perfect (that is why they actually wrestle out the tournament), but over 64% for the top two to meet where they should have.  If you go through our brackets you will see some very, very clear cut arguments for seeding.  170 screams out what the problem is.  Amo and Havlick separated themselves from the field early in this season and here they are on the same side of the bracket.  Never, never should have happened.  There are several other examples as well, but 170 illustrates the problem in a nutshell.  Seeding, with a good set of criteria, would not be perfect, but would be much closer to accurate than we are now.

[5PtThrow]

 I was alllll for the seeding idea. I had been for a long, long time. Then a couple years back, for his Senior year, my son Tim drew on the same side a Seth Lange. I was ranting and raving about the draws and the seeds...just plain acting like a fool (in private).    Tim calmly stated to me: "Dad! To win State, Seth is the guy to beat...1st round, 2nd, Finals, parking lot, who cares...I probably have to beat Seth to win it...the seed is irrelevant" Then he went out and wrestled his ass off before losing a great match.  Seeing this as well as hearing Tim look at it this way changed my perspective.  Seeds...don't mean near as much to me as they used to, win all your matches at State and you'll be the State Champion.

[hacky 22]

Just set hard criteria and use it! Almost anything is better than what we have now!

P.S. 5ptThrow that match was a classic. Definitely one of my favorites.

[Millerman]

After additional thought, and with the reservation that some clear objective criteria must be used, I think SD should try Seeding the state tournament.   If after a few years you see problems with seeding the tournament, such as unfair seeding, then you could always go back to the current system.   But its going to be a lot more work, the criteria requires 4 copies of your wrestlers Stat book, etc, etc and that  is just the start.  Who is going to make up the committee?   
 
Do it right, don't let it turn into politics as usual.     

[my2wrestlers]

We actually seat wrestlers which begins at districts/regions.  Sometimes you may have the #1 &#2 wrestlers rated in state come from came region. 
Then should the 2nd place wrestler from a region get a higher seed over a 1st place wrestler from another region.  That answer would be NO. 
You could seat a state tournament by seating them how they place coming out of regions, for example region champs are seated 1-4, 2placers 5-8, 3rd place winners 9-12 and 4th placers 13-16.  This would be the most reasonable way if we wanted to seat wrestlers.  So if they want a higher seat at state, then win regions.
This a kinda the way it is done now where #1 from a region will wrestler a #4 from another region and #2 vs #3.    The draw system works because now you take all human factors/bias opinions out there and no one can points fingers at someone.
Sometimes draw system doesn't work in our wrestlers favor, but sometimes it does.  Just my opinion.
Good luck to all wrestlers in both State A and State B wrestlers tournament. 

[Dead Weight]

We actually seat wrestlers which begins at districts/regions.  Sometimes you may have the #1 &#2 wrestlers rated in state come from came region. 
Then should the 2nd place wrestler from a region get a higher seed over a 1st place wrestler from another region.  That answer would be NO. 
You could seat a state tournament by seating them how they place coming out of regions, for example region champs are seated 1-4, 2placers 5-8, 3rd place winners 9-12 and 4th placers 13-16.  This would be the most reasonable way if we wanted to seat wrestlers.  So if they want a higher seat at state, then win regions.
This a kinda the way it is done now where #1 from a region will wrestler a #4 from another region and #2 vs #3.    The draw system works because now you take all human factors/bias opinions out there and no one can points fingers at someone.
Sometimes draw system doesn't work in our wrestlers favor, but sometimes it does.  Just my opinion.
Good luck to all wrestlers in both State A and State B wrestlers tournament.

Yes! Especially if they have the head to head criteria against that other wrestler. If #1 and #2 are in the same region, why should #3 be seated ahead of #2?