District Brackets are posted

DoubleBoots said:
Once you start letting tournament officials decide which #1's are the best two to be separated, you invite the possibility of--at best subjectivity that can be questioned, and at worst outright favoritism/corruption.
It's more important to ensure the appearance of integrity and propriety, than give fans what makes them happy. It's not laziness--it's ensuring fairness and objectivity.
Click to expand...
Why not separate the brackets that have head to head results and remove subjectivity? If no head to head results then random draw
 
350zjk said:
It's more important to ensure the appearance of integrity and propriety, than give fans what makes them happy. It's not laziness--it's ensuring fairness and objectivity.

In my humble opinion I don't just want the APPEARANCE of integrity and propriety I want the REAL thing. When ALL the logistics point to the best 2 wrestlers in a wt. class, then separate them, if it's NOT obvious then don't. This is ONLY my opinion, but I believe it has merit. Don't want to argue, but when it's a simple chore to separate the OBVIOUS cream of the crop I endorse it.
Click to expand...
but again you are using your opinion to separate and you can;t just be selective as a ex coach i would say what is good for 106 is now good for my 132.. or my 152.. etc... chaos then follows.. if those two wrestlers are that good.. they will make it to the state and we know anything can happen regardless where you are seeded
 
Jim Behrens said:
Using logic like that, why wrestle the match at all?? After all you know who won the last time, right?
Just my opinion but complete randomness, based on where you finished the week before, seems pretty fair.
Click to expand...
??? Of course I want the match wrestled, I just want it wrestled in the final vs semi final. Pretty clear for separation purposes. At 106 you have the #1 and #2 in the same half. The #2 has a couple decisive victories over #3 and a very close 1-0 loss to #1. I’m just saying when it’s this clear why not separate the #1 and #2. It doesn’t bother me as much at districts but when it happens at state...??‍♂️
 
GWF said:
??? Of course I want the match wrestled, I just want it wrestled in the final vs semi final. Pretty clear for separation purposes. At 106 you have the #1 and #2 in the same half. The #2 has a couple decisive victories over #3 and a very close 1-0 loss to #1. I’m just saying when it’s this clear why not separate the #1 and #2. It doesn’t bother me as much at districts but when it happens at state...??‍♂️
Click to expand...

Not sure what your ??? are for. Is there a question there?
To be perfectly clear, I have zero idea who the 106's you speak of are and it doesn't matter to me.
What difference does it make whether it is a final or a semi-final match? One is going to be first and one will be second or third. So what? At least finishing third means you won your final match so there is that.
Once again, these rankings are just someone's opinion. They mean absolutely nothing when the match starts. They certainly should not have a bearing on how the bracket is set.
From the standpoint of someone who has officiated these matches, I will tell you that in the vast majority of cases the harder more intense matches are in the semi's.
 
Jim Behrens said:
Not sure what your ??? are for. Is there a question there?
To be perfectly clear, I have zero idea who the 106's you speak of are and it doesn't matter to me.
What difference does it make whether it is a final or a semi-final match? One is going to be first and one will be second or third. So what? At least finishing third means you won your final match so there is that.
Once again, these rankings are just someone's opinion. They mean absolutely nothing when the match starts. They certainly should not have a bearing on how the bracket is set.
From the standpoint of someone who has officiated these matches, I will tell you that in the vast majority of cases the harder more intense matches are in the semi's.
Click to expand...
The ??? was confusion. Didn’t understand the why wrestle the match at all comment. I wasn’t suggesting using rankings to separate wrestlers. I was suggesting using head to head results. And I think we all can agree you want the finals to be your premier matches. I love the semi’s as well but a lot of effort is made to put the spotlight on the final.
 
If we were going to take the top 5 at the districts to the state meet, this would be the year to do it.
20 kids at each wt class would be easier to manage in a single division tournament than all together at the Schott.
Double-elimination, 2-day, place 8 at each weight.
How many times would a 5th make the podium? I’m guessing 2 or 3 in each division.
Let’s see how many #5’s could make an impact.
 
jjaf said:
Wow why the heck would they put Joy and D'Alessandro together at Hoover???? Good lord are those seeding living in a closet? McBurney basically shut out with ease against Joy twice including 8-0 yesterday and I believe lost to D'Alessandro also basically gets a free ride to the District final. Joy and D'Alessandro likely then state finals match. D'Alessandro a squeaker over Joy early in the season. Worst seeding I've seen so far based on the season results. McBurney should have needed to earn that placement.
Click to expand...
Mcburney never wrestled d,alessandro this year, dalessandro bumped to 113 when the dueled this year .
 
Don't see the big deal. You wrestle sectionals to get to districts, and districts to get to state. I can see separating previous state placers in brackets but you gotta beat the next up on the mat whomever it is. How many say "I would have placed higher if" ????
 
If you're prioritizing reforms for bracketing at district, true 4th goes higher than "ranking" district champs. Having the true 4th would solve many of the issues that come about when you have these right side/wrong side half-brackets.

106 at Hoover is not the best example of this. Though the top two kids are in the upper half-bracket, the "on paper" 4th and 5th kids are meeting in the quarter of the opposite half - it's just that there is a de facto go-to match is on the first day instead of a real go-to on the second day. I would point to 170 at Hoover as an example of a stilted bracket, with the perceived top four kids occupying three state spots.
 
Bucksman this is explained well on the true fourth situation. If this is incorporated (very very unlikely) I think it would be best to have the match Thursday at the state tournament. I think it would be a very entertaining aspect to that day. It ensures the 4 deserving kids get in and alleviate the rare instance of someone losing a match or defaulting to drop opposite of an opponent. I would like to say you rarely see that happening.
 
bucksman said:
If you're prioritizing reforms for bracketing at district, true 4th goes higher than "ranking" district champs. Having the true 4th would solve many of the issues that come about when you have these right side/wrong side half-brackets.

106 at Hoover is not the best example of this. Though the top two kids are in the upper half-bracket, the "on paper" 4th and 5th kids are meeting in the quarter of the opposite half - it's just that there is a de facto go-to match is on the first day instead of a real go-to on the second day. I would point to 170 at Hoover as an example of a stilted bracket, with the perceived top four kids occupying three state spots.
Click to expand...
yeah! in troy at 113 gavin caprella and cooper shore have to wrestle eachother (3+4 ranked) in the quarters , although they both will still qualify
 
It will be interesting to see how often a true fourth situation occurs after this week. You could have the round before the prelims on thursday I willing to bet between the 3 divisions more the 20 would be a lot. I think the state needs to consider this. A 5 vs 4 rat tail round would be really awesome it might bring up attendance a little bit also.
 
GWF said:
Why not separate the brackets that have head to head results and remove subjectivity? If no head to head results then random draw
Click to expand...
Best to leave things alone, stick with the champs being separated(1,2,3,4). Most of the time, random draw won't stop the cream from rising to the top. A sectionals or district will show it's dominance and find the podium. Like that St. Ed team that scored the point record and how many guys made the podium; look at the other teams from that district and how many more made the podium.
 
Take top 5 from each district would be much more impactful if we are going to make some changes. PA runs a 20 man bracket iirc.

Those 5th and 6th place matches would be fire!
 
Cjlewis01 said:
Take top 5 from each district would be much more impactful if we are going to make some changes. PA runs a 20 man bracket iirc.

Those 5th and 6th place matches would be fire!
Click to expand...
My only thought is... we all ready have three divisions and give a medal to half of the competitors. At what point are you diluting the quality?
 
Coach Root said:
My only thought is... we all ready have three divisions and give a medal to half of the competitors. At what point are you diluting the quality?
Click to expand...

It's either that or a true 4th in my opinion. This is easier and doesn't add matches at the end of a tournament.

In high school, our district was Akron Firestone. I have never seen a kid take 5th that wasn't a state level kid imo. That was many years ago though. What I mean by state level is a kid that routinely can wrestle with, or has beaten state ranked kids.

During my coaching career we began at alliance, and I once again have never seen a kid take 5th that wasn't a very good wrestler. Multiple years I had a 5th place kid who had beaten state qualifiers in all three divisions.

Now maybe those were anomalies. But in my short time at Garfield Hts, I have yet to see a kid take 5th that wasn't a state level kid.

I've also seen too many kids not wrestle that 5th/6th match because they were crushed.

Maybe we are diluting it... it would be interesting to see how many of those 5s make it to the podium if it ever happens.
 
Another part of the problem here is that a lot of people on here are using the rankings that Borofan creates as a justification for their arguments. This is a flawed method of basing an argument on. It is one man's opinion on who he thinks are the best 20-40 wrestlers per weight division. It's not his fault and I'm not here to trash his rankings, but it's not even possible to create an accurate set of rankings when one man is pulling all the strings. Now, I'm sure he gets input from a variety of places, but still, no way those rankings are an accurate representation, from top to bottom, of who's who in each weight class. I think it's pretty obvious who the top 2-5 wrestlers are in each weight class, and nobody needs someone creating a ranking to figure that one out. Given the fact that this year there was very little if any wrestling that took place between different areas of the state, for example Cincinnati kids versus Cleveland or Columbus kids, who is to say who is better? One thing is for sure, we will find out over the next couple weekends. The cream will always rise to the top as my grandmother used to say.
 
Coach Root said:
Personally, I love the way they do it... It's post season. If you want to be the man, then beat the man. And before you yapster's start telling me that being a district finalists is the kids goal... I call BS... The goal is to get to state and then get as high on the podium as possible. I understand that some are happy getting to the district tournament, and I'm not putting them down, but those guys aren't usually making the podium and advancing to the next week... The wrestlers whose goal is usually more focused on the last weekend of the season not the second to last will find a way. Because of that it really doesn't require any seeding... if a wrestler didn't win their sectional, they don't deserve separation, if they did, then they would at least separate until the semi's. Separating 1,2,3, and 4's from each sectional allows fairness. Finishing second is not much different than finishing third... it all washes out the next week with the luck of the draw as second and third are on the opposite side of the champion in the state bracket. Just my opinion.

I also want to point out, that while I have all the respect in the world for borofan and bucksman, and I love what they do... it's just their opinion (be it a more valid opinion than most).... It's not a crystal ball. So saying a kid should be separated based on rankings is putting a lot of clout in rankers hands... If they had a crystal ball, they'd be spending their time playing the lottery.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I was thinking. Take the next best thing which would be third. You'll be separated from 1 at the state tournament which ultimately is all that matters. Nobody is ever going to remember a kid taking first, second, third, or fourth in the district tournament. They'll talk about how he (or she) did at the state tournament.
 
BrightLight said:
Exactly what I was thinking. Take the next best thing which would be third. You'll be separated from 1 at the state tournament which ultimately is all that matters. Nobody is ever going to remember a kid taking first, second, third, or fourth in the district tournament. They'll talk about how he (or she) did at the state tournament.
Click to expand...

^^ This. Two years in a row my son was ranked #2 in the district and got a district draw with the #1 in his half. He took 3rd twice and still made it on the podium the next week at state. Life's not fair.
 
Cjlewis01 said:
It's either that or a true 4th in my opinion. This is easier and doesn't add matches at the end of a tournament.

In high school, our district was Akron Firestone. I have never seen a kid take 5th that wasn't a state level kid imo. That was many years ago though. What I mean by state level is a kid that routinely can wrestle with, or has beaten state ranked kids.

During my coaching career we began at alliance, and I once again have never seen a kid take 5th that wasn't a very good wrestler. Multiple years I had a 5th place kid who had beaten state qualifiers in all three divisions.

Now maybe those were anomalies. But in my short time at Garfield Hts, I have yet to see a kid take 5th that wasn't a state level kid.

I've also seen too many kids not wrestle that 5th/6th match because they were crushed.

Maybe we are diluting it... it would be interesting to see how many of those 5s make it to the podium if it ever happens.
Click to expand...

I think you have great points...

I am an advocate of the true fourth...
I am also a firm believer that the 5 match rule is a joke...

I will be the first to state that the system is not designed to take the top 16 wrestlers to the state. I think most would be surprised to hear me say that I'm actually a fan of this. Not because I come from an area that is generally beat out by the North. My reasoning is this... you HAVE to have a system in place that allows a representation of the entire state... even though some years will have lopsided results (actually most years leaning heavily towards the abundance of talent and quality coaching up North.). If you don't the sport starts to die a slow death and becomes regionalized. It may not seem fair to that 5th place wrestler, but it does give us a true representative of our state.

I have never been a fan of placing 8 at State. I prefer the old days of top 6... but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. I could handle qualifying 5 and placing 8... but I don't see the folks at the OHSAA changing things...

As a coach, I have seen a huge trend in defaults at the district tournament. I have been on both sides of it... trying to keep a kid as healthy as possible for the next week and watching other coaches do the same. Personally, I think there are a lot of rules that need to be changed... I think we are killing off our sport with a number of actions that we take as competitors and coaches. I guess time will tell what the affects will be... I know that for better or worse, the sport looks way different than it did when I was competing, and I would venture to guess it will change even more in the next 30 years. Time will tell.
 
Coach Root said:
I think you have great points...

I am an advocate of the true fourth...
I am also a firm believer that the 5 match rule is a joke...

I will be the first to state that the system is not designed to take the top 16 wrestlers to the state. I think most would be surprised to hear me say that I'm actually a fan of this. Not because I come from an area that is generally beat out by the North. My reasoning is this... you HAVE to have a system in place that allows a representation of the entire state... even though some years will have lopsided results (actually most years leaning heavily towards the abundance of talent and quality coaching up North.). If you don't the sport starts to die a slow death and becomes regionalized. It may not seem fair to that 5th place wrestler, but it does give us a true representative of our state.

I have never been a fan of placing 8 at State. I prefer the old days of top 6... but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. I could handle qualifying 5 and placing 8... but I don't see the folks at the OHSAA changing things...

As a coach, I have seen a huge trend in defaults at the district tournament. I have been on both sides of it... trying to keep a kid as healthy as possible for the next week and watching other coaches do the same. Personally, I think there are a lot of rules that need to be changed... I think we are killing off our sport with a number of actions that we take as competitors and coaches. I guess time will tell what the affects will be... I know that for better or worse, the sport looks way different than it did when I was competing, and I would venture to guess it will change even more in the next 30 years. Time will tell.
Click to expand...

If we're on a five-match a day rule then by all means if we have matches to give let them wrestle for 7th/8th. Being top 8 in anything is impressive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top