every kid and every path is different.
Losing on purpose
- Thread starter tennman
- Start date
When the choice is 4th vs. 5th, the dive/not dive conversation is a somewhat easy one to me. The hardest piece is the psychological/ethical around either "intentionally losing" or admitting to be lesser than an opponent(s). It gets much, much harder when it's a 2nd vs. 5th type situation.
That is 100% true, play stupid games win stupid prizes! I’m sure absolutely no on here really cares what I think, anyway. Maybe just get better at wrestling.
That is exactly where I’m at, noway my kid is dodging or intentionally losing to anyone, its not in his DNA.
DubStat
Ohio wrestling analytics
I don’t think I would have my kid drop a first round match for a better draw but I don’t blame anyone for doing it. I’ve seen it work out quite a few times. I have also seen where the clear 4th best kid in the bracket chooses to wrestle through and ends up 5th. Unfortunately that’s just how the brackets shake out sometimes.
Many of Those that have kids that are state champs don't see the reality that for many/most kids being a sq as a senior is a monumental accomplishment. Those kids are just as important as the state champs
Last edited:
One needs to weigh the pros and cons of throwing a wrestling match versus watching a kid you really believe in your heart you can beat, get to go to state while you watch him from the stands at the Schott.
The only thing unethical is going out there to wrestle in a match that you intend to lose. If you want to take a different path in the brackets, the ethical thing would be to arrive at the table and formally forfeit the match to your opponent. Doing it any other way is deceitful to fans and unsportsmanlike to the sport wrestling.
The only thing unethical is going out there to wrestle in a match that you intend to lose. If you want to take a different path in the brackets, the ethical thing would be to arrive at the table and formally forfeit the match to your opponent. Doing it any other way is deceitful to fans and unsportsmanlike to the sport wrestling.
Let me reframe this for you: It’s not about “the easier path.” It’s about knowing you’re in the top 4 best wrestlers at your District and not allowing a kid that you believe is 5th best or worse taking your ticket to State from you.
One time about 20 years ago I saw a kid take a “strategic” loss in the first round in order to get what he thought was a better chance at making State. It backfired because the kid he was hoping to get in the blood round upset the #1 Seed, and that kid was now his blood round opponent. Sometimes you can’t plan these things out.
10 Inch Falcon
Well-known member
I can kind of get on board with this. I still think it's manipulating the bracket but there is a competitive aspect here that I'm okay with. Toeing the line and purposely losing to an inferior opponent is not okay. Waste of everybody's time
Buckeye454
Member
Well said.
Same principle as a kid cutting to 113 to win a state title because he doesn't think he can do it at 120 or 126.
"Level of accomplishment" may be different, but at the end of the day you are still putting yourself in the best position to reach YOUR goal.
I think the people who are complaining the loudest had a son at Districts who was not in the top 4 beast wrestlers in his bracket, but had a great draw ruined for him because the true #4 decided to face him in the blood round.
I don’t want to argue or downplay a SQ that is a big deal but, to me if you have dive is it really qualifying for state really? This will be a dead horse conversation, like holdbacks and recruiting.
ASpecialOne
Well-known member
What if I would prefer to forfeit as well, then - because I, as the inferior wrestler to my round 1 opponent also would prefer the other path in the brackets? As it was my only chance to get to state. Why is it only ok for 'the clear 4th best guy' ? Why is it ok to alter the given path of others and not give them the same option?
I know exactly what you are saying, but it is the easier path because he knew he wouldn’t beat the 1 in his qrt bracket if he lost his first match instead of the qtr, it put him on the easier side of the wrestle backs, where he could avoid another guy better than him in the consi semis. Any way you polish a turd you still have a turd. We can agree to disagree. They did it thats their story, I think its stupid. We can all go about our day.
Cincy Wrestling
New member
I think this reflects poorly on the Mason program. It wasn't that many years ago that they were competitive year in and year out. I don't know what's happened but having a wrestler take a dive and a team finishing in 17th place is pretty rough.
Wouldn’t “toeing the line” in this context mean beating the kid you’re told to wrestle even though doing so may reduce or eliminate your chance to advance to the next tournament? I think if the rules and structure remain as is the honorable thing to do is to formally forfeit at the table.
tennman
Active member
Hopefully I'm not in that category, I started the thread but didn't complain at all. My son will be in cbus next weekend for his third time..... hopefully on the podium again
All of the wrestlers who doubt they are in the top 3 in their bracket have the same choice. They could all try it and in the end, they will have to face each other in the consolation and only the best among them will survive to punch that 4th ticket to state.
The only time it might get a little awkward is if two wrestlers are trying to forfeit to each other at the same time
Don’t forget - we don’t live in a fake world of theory here. Many kids know where they stand but many do not. If they don’t know, they just wrestle to win. If they know they are not in the top 6, they are either hoping to get a win or two or just happy to be there. They aren’t going to be thinking about strategic forfeits. Then you got kids who are already on the correct side of the bracket. Those kids are going to NEED to win because losing puts them in a bad spot in the consolation. Wbat we are talking about is a rare scenario - a kid who thinks they are in the top 4 but pretty sure they are not in the top 3, AND is in a spot on the bracket that requires them to upset one of the top 3 to make it to state. That’s a pretty narrow range of possibilities. This is precisely why strategic losses don’t happen very often.
I think it’s all good - the two top remaining wrestlers in a bracket that contains Aiden Allen, Konner Lambers and Jayden Cochran, got to wrestle each other for the last remaining ticket. It didn’t work out for the kid who had to make it happen but he took his best shot. The best man won this time and that’s what we should all want to see. We should not like to see one of the two get there without facing the other.
Do they put an asterisk by your name on the state bracket for this?
If so the asterisk should say “*True 4th Placer” because that person actually beat the person who came in 5th place.
darthmalice
Well-known member
My older son had the opportunity to throw his first match, his freshman year; it would of been nice if a true 4th was possible. High school out of bounds rules flirt with college rules, so go ahead a let the 5th place match be like that. Don't dip one toe in the pool, jump in.
ASpecialOne
Well-known member
Idk. I just cant put myself in a head space that justifies it. I have no interest in seeing 'strategic losses' occurring more in a high school sport that is ultimately meant to teach bigger/more important lessons to everyone (whether you are good/bad/best/4th/or 5th best).All of the wrestlers who doubt they are in the top 3 in their bracket have the same choice. They could all try it and in the end, they will have to face each other in the consolation and only the best among them will survive to punch that 4th ticket to state.
The only time it might get a little awkward is if two wrestlers are trying to forfeit to each other at the same time
Don’t forget - we don’t live in a fake world of theory here. Many kids know where they stand but many do not. If they don’t know, they just wrestle to win. If they know they are not in the top 6, they are either hoping to get a win or two or just happy to be there. They aren’t going to be thinking about strategic forfeits. Then you got kids who are already on the correct side of the bracket. Those kids are going to NEED to win because losing puts them in a bad spot in the consolation. Wbat we are talking about is a rare scenario - a kid who thinks they are in the top 4 but pretty sure they are not in the top 3, AND is in a spot on the bracket that requires them to upset one of the top 3 to make it to state. That’s a pretty narrow range of possibilities. This is precisely why strategic losses don’t happen very often.
Theres a reason we dont see this very often as you put it, even thought the situation that creates this scenario is not nearly so rare - and it is not because one coach/kid/team or a few coaches/kids/team are that much smarter/ or more enlightened on when its ok to choose where to win/lose or essentially give your draw to someone else.
Don’t care!
Hammerdrill
Well-known member
It’s the smart path. Silly to frame it any other way. Double elimination means you get a mulligan which can be used how you see fit, should you need it. Following a path that doesn’t get the best kids to state is counter to the entire point of the tournament.
Soft "like Charmin"
Hammerdrill
Well-known member
Only if in your world wrestling more matches against better competition is soft. Because losing early and not making it to state is exactly that. When the luck of the draw sees you in a easy path, do you look for a way to make it more difficult? If not, then I would say you are not being consistent.
galewrestling
Active member
When you do not do true seeding at a tournament, I have no issues with this. The random draw stuff can really screw over a good kid, so do what you need to do to keep your season alive.
That is not the case, he took a dive in the first because he couldn't beat the kid in the qrts, and it setup an easier consi semi than losing in the qrt would have where he would have been beaten again. You call it what you want, I call it soft. We dont ever worry about the path!