New State Tournament format

[edwinhane]

In the "What's New" section of the home page there is a letter penned by Coach Bill Archer with information that at the WV State Tournament next winter (2020) there will be a mechanism in place to prevent the 1st and 2nd "ranked" wrestlers from meeting in the semis. The word used was "ranked" and not "seeded". The question now to be answered is: Who is doing the rankings? If it is a panel of "voters" such as the coaches who vote on this web site, I hope the participation goes up several fold. Also, I wonder if this will have any affect on the coaches who in the past have voiced that they have no use or interest in these rankings. I'm not saying that their opinions were incorrect before, but now maybe the rankings have some importance rather than just a source of contention for fans who respond in inappropriate fashions.

Bearhugger may need to keep polishing up his rankings and the mechanisms used in their calculations, as they may well be needed. If nothing else, they will be a helpful source for those that do vote to refer to for a summary of results and matches that have taken place. Many coaches have repeatedly voiced that they do not have time to keep up with the many matches happening around the state. Also, maybe this will lead to some form of mandatory reporting of results to the WVSSAC in order for the rankings to be considered more accurate. I'm guessing that the rankings will not be merely the first and second ranked wrestlers listed on a weekly basis. I'm also hoping that they surely don't actually just wait until after regionals and do some sort of quick poll on who's 1st and 2nd. Sometimes public opinion can have an effect on some mistaken decisions that can be made on the spur of the moment. Time will tell.

[TheBoxer]

That is not currently in use for the State Tournament. It was decided that year that it would be attempted. But the year had already started so it was then decided to wait until the following year. (2021)

2021 the season was moved and shortened state tournament split and moved a couple times. It wasn’t used then.

2022 is a mess when 42 athletes scratch the morning of day 1 of Winners Choice. (Just as an example). Plus the announcement of when it would be in use was not before this season started so it is safe to say rankings will not be in play.

As for the coaches participating in the rankings. They do. And they are active (according to admin). So if someone thinks they aren’t they are likely making assumptions based seasons from the past.

Bottom line. This year rankings are for fun (and second set is coming soon, first set published 1/13) but they will not be used for the state tournament (I’m assuming they will wait until this pandemic crap isn’t impacting seasons the way it is now)

[TheBoxer]

I will say I got excited with I saw this thread title. I was hoping there was some info or speculation of what the state tournament is going to look like after the 4A classification passes the trial period and is moved to all sports.

Will there be a 4A/3A combo along with a 2A/1A? Will there be 4A tournament a 3/A tournament and a 2A/1A tournament? Maybe all classifications? If it is all class do we qualify 32 and place 8? So many possibilities.

[Bearhugger]

1. Where there is a will, there is a way.

2. Bear Tracks has an established criteria used to rank all wrestlers equally and free of opinion. Significant matches used to change the ranking order is provided. The work is the rankings. I show my work by providing the significant matches. Nobody has argued the process for years. It is equal for all and based on head to head results. The rankings are not based on what I think with my brain or what I hope with my heart. WHO I think will win might go half the season ranked very poorly.

3. Regarding the WVMat polls, I believe the people who participate put in time and effort. I do NOT believe all or enough coaches participate!!!!

4. I have not done a thorough comparison and contrast of WVMat's rankings vs Bear Tracks. I am not in competition with anybody. Heck, the more you measure something, the more you know what is going on. I will add that certain wrestlers are ranked in the top 8 and I have seen said wrestlers IN PERSON at numerous events. They haven't won any significant matches. There are no scores that show any significant wins.

5. I understand coaches are busier now than ever before. I also know that some parents have told me they would enter the scores but the coaches won't let them borrow the book. Entering scores is data entry. Anybody could do it. The coaches could teach their wrestlers how to delegate. Learning to delegate is a bigger life skill than learning 17 different tilts. I haven't tilted anybody since the 80s. I have delegated plenty.

6. Here is a suggestion to facilitate a ranking system: A. IF a ranking system is implemented and used, delegate the data entry to a mat maid, a JV wrestler, a parent or a volunteer. B. Advise the wrestlers of the new ranking system and that it would be used for certain circumstances at the state tournament. The wrestlers should then have incentive to LOOK at the rankings. If they see a wrestler they have beat is ranked ahead of them, then they can raise the red flag. With the data entry delegated out and with the wrestlers watching the rankings, the Head Coach could then delegate again to one of his assistant coaches to inquire about the "red flag" ranking issue with the "Ranking Administrator". My suggestions might not be the best practice but it gets the job done and it takes away the EXCUSE from everybody that says it can't be done.

I was in Mooresville, North Carolina on December 4th to watch the Lake Norman Duals. Point Pleasant was down there in action. They had an army of fans down there. If a school can bring an army 5 hours from home, then they can find 1 to 2 data entry people. Point Pleasant always has their scores posted, they have wrestlers of the week on Facebook by the Grinder and a few farms. "Mat Time" was born out of the Point Pleasant community. Point Pleasant always has more JV than most teams too. HOW DO they get the JV kids to stick with it??? Perhaps some hard working kids see their efforts rewarded by a "wrestler of the week" award on Facebook or they at least get their name in a score on WVMat. Regarding Lake Norman, BEAR TRACKS was on site and gave Point Pleasant plenty of love on Facebook! Simply snap a few pictures + a little data entry + a little effort = Fun Times enjoyed by all.

I was in Charlotte, North Carolina for the Holy Angels Invitational. Cabell Midland was in action. They had an army of fans. AGAIN, if a school can get an army to travel 5 hours, then they should be able to get some data entry people to enter scores. BEAR TRACKS was on site and gave Cabell Midland plenty of love on Facebook. I had a blast. Despite competing 5 hours from home, Nick Giompalo and Loralei Smith got the first ever Mat Time Wrestlers of the Week. Congratulations!!!!!!!!!!!!

If a current coach was a state champion back in his day, are you telling me he can't figure out how to post his team's scores today? If he can't, then how can the NON-state champion coaches figure out how to post their scores?

Here is a challenge for all.

1. Look up and see what coaches are on the Coaches Committee. I am taking upon myself that these are the guys who are working toward making improvements to WV wrestling. Note their school.

2. Go find their school's scores listed on WVMat. To be fair, does the school post their scores elsewhere? Parkersburg has a Facebook page for their wrestling team. They miraculously post dual results right AFTER the dual concludes. Despite not posting on WVMat, the Big Reds do post and they do it FAST!

3. I have NOT looked at the current list of who is on the coaches committee. Thus, my recommendation to check coaches' committee members against scores posted could prove to be nothing. But, if coach Hank Gates of BugTussel High School is on the coaches' committee, then go on over and see how many BugTussel High School scores are posted.

In conclusion, how does football and basketball do their rankings in WV? How can basketball whip wrestling's butt in rankings?

[Bearhugger]

That is not currently in use for the State Tournament. It was decided that year that it would be attempted. But the year had already started so it was then decided to wait until the following year. (2021)

2021 the season was moved and shortened state tournament split and moved a couple times. It wasn’t used then.

2022 is a mess when 42 athletes scratch the morning of day 1 of Winners Choice. (Just as an example). Plus the announcement of when it would be in use was not before this season started so it is safe to say rankings will not be in play.

As for the coaches participating in the rankings. They do. And they are active (according to admin). So if someone thinks they aren’t they are likely making assumptions based seasons from the past.

Bottom line. This year rankings are for fun (and second set is coming soon, first set published 1/13) but they will not be used for the state tournament (I’m assuming they will wait until this pandemic crap isn’t impacting seasons the way it is now)

The Bear Tracks rankings are compiled from every score listed on WVMat. They are listed from every score found on team's Facebook pages. I have numerous people sending me results. FURTHERMORE, I was in attendance at the Cabell Midland Duals, the Point Pleasant Jason Eades Duals and the Army National Guard duals. I caught every significant match I could at Cabell Midland. At Point Pleasant and National Guard duals, I went through 100% of the bout sheets after each event was over. Thank you Coach Bonecutter and Coach Vincent for your cooperation and support. Based on the level of work put in, Bear Tracks and WVMat should be mirroring each other...........................which they do in many areas. There are also big discrepancies. MY POINT is I do not believe all or enough coaches are participating in the rankings. The big differences between the rankings and the absence of scores posted by many schools backs up my statements.

[Bearhugger]

In the "What's New" section of the home page there is a letter penned by Coach Bill Archer with information that at the WV State Tournament next winter (2020) there will be a mechanism in place to prevent the 1st and 2nd "ranked" wrestlers from meeting in the semis. The word used was "ranked" and not "seeded". The question now to be answered is: Who is doing the rankings? If it is a panel of "voters" such as the coaches who vote on this web site, I hope the participation goes up several fold. Also, I wonder if this will have any affect on the coaches who in the past have voiced that they have no use or interest in these rankings. I'm not saying that their opinions were incorrect before, but now maybe the rankings have some importance rather than just a source of contention for fans who respond in inappropriate fashions.

Bearhugger may need to keep polishing up his rankings and the mechanisms used in their calculations, as they may well be needed. If nothing else, they will be a helpful source for those that do vote to refer to for a summary of results and matches that have taken place. Many coaches have repeatedly voiced that they do not have time to keep up with the many matches happening around the state. Also, maybe this will lead to some form of mandatory reporting of results to the WVSSAC in order for the rankings to be considered more accurate. I'm guessing that the rankings will not be merely the first and second ranked wrestlers listed on a weekly basis. I'm also hoping that they surely don't actually just wait until after regionals and do some sort of quick poll on who's 1st and 2nd. Sometimes public opinion can have an effect on some mistaken decisions that can be made on the spur of the moment. Time will tell.

Coaches do not have to keep up with the many matches that are happening all over the state. They need to keep up with their team's matches. Report their team's results. The rankings can be compiled by whoever is keeping up with the reported results. If a mistake is made, I am sure every wrestler, every parent of said wrestler and every fan of said wrestler will point it out. The mistake can be quickly fixed. I do not see the big deal.

The problem might be the people who want changes back down from the loud mouth that says "I won 3 state titles back in 1977 and I know everything". Or perhaps it is the old school fool that says "I have been involved in WV wrestling for 53 years and we have never had a ranking system to separate #1 and #2 at the state tournament, we do not need one now".

[Pottstd]

I think the point here is that this rule change is not going to be used in every weight class, every single time. This is a rule of obviousness to a degree. If there are 3-4 guys who have beaten each other or are relatively close this rule is not coming into effect. Its for years and weights where there is obvious top contenders (2019 182 Carman/Lanham where they met in the semis and then Carman pinned his finals opponent in the early 2nd period and Lanham did the same in the 3rd place match). Its not going to be implemented this year at 182 where there is so much uncertainty.

[dontlikethelights]

In regards to Football and Basketball playoff rankings. Football uses a points system that awards points for wins. Winning against a team in a higher classification earns you additional points (i.e. AA beating AAA) and beating a lower classified score earns you less. It's a fair system in it's own way, but it lends itself to it's own problems. For instance Wheeling Central Catholic plays up every season and will have several losses making them let's say a 10 seed even though everyone knows they are a serious contender. Another good example is Fairmont Senior winning as a 16 seed. Their regular season losses were all to AAA schools (and Linsly). In AAA there is typically a 5-5 MSAC school who misses the playoffs that could blow out several playoff teams.

I believe basketball uses a seeding panel (I could be completely wrong here) but the 8 teams who make it are more likely to played each other or have common opponents. In 2021 they were pretty much spot on except for AAA where the semi's where 3 vs 7 and 5 vs 8.

I think the big issue with wrestling is having 16 wrestlers at 14 different weights, it makes it almost impossible for everyone to match up at some point. Obviously the pill has it's own issues as does seeding or having a rating system.

I'm not pushing for anyone one method, just stating the challenges with each. I think the most important thing is to have a system that is well laid out with a clearly documented procedure.

[standincoach]

Is it really hard to seed/rank the top 4 wrestlers in each class? place them as such and then random draw the rest? At least for a year or two to then work on criteria for the rest

[pensmat]

I don't understand why we can't just seed the 4 region winners. Even if 1-2 finishers in region whatever are ranked 1-2 in the state, they can still be separated easily in the bracket. Region winner and runner-up stay separated no matter where the winner gets seeded in the state bracket.
But the pill comes with plug and play...
Current format: work less harder not smarter.

[Campion]

I think the point here is that this rule change is not going to be used in every weight class, every single time. This is a rule of obviousness to a degree. If there are 3-4 guys who have beaten each other or are relatively close this rule is not coming into effect. Its for years and weights where there is obvious top contenders (2019 182 Carman/Lanham where they met in the semis and then Carman pinned his finals opponent in the early 2nd period and Lanham did the same in the 3rd place match). Its not going to be implemented this year at 182 where there is so much uncertainty.

Very good point.

For those that think WVMAT rankings should be used, that would only create more problems. Many of the rankings today have very little head to head matches and are biased towards how someone did at last years states. Nobody would have an idea who would or should win those matches.

Rankings are good for us fans of sports but not much else. Other criteria would definitely be needed. Head to Head being preferred when available.

[Bearhugger]

I don't understand why we can't just seed the 4 region winners. Even if 1-2 finishers in region whatever are ranked 1-2 in the state, they can still be separated easily in the bracket. Region winner and runner-up stay separated no matter where the winner gets seeded in the state bracket.
But the pill comes with plug and play...
Current format: work less harder not smarter.

You hit the nail on the head. Work less, not smarter. How is that working out for us now???

We could keep everything the way it is with the pill. For example, the pill selected is "pill 3". Then run the tournament with pill 3. However, that one situation comes along where the clear cut #1 and #2 are going to hit in the semi's. Then for only their weight class, in their classification, select a different pill. Select the one pill that puts #1 and #2 on opposite sides. Very simple and could be done THIS season.

The only challenge would be that there might be an argument as to who is #1 and #2. Perhaps the coaches' committee and the Hall of Fame could argue who is number 1 for a few days before the state tournament.

Also, in a tight, tight and crazy AAA team race like what we have now, team titles are going to be lost because #1 and #2 meet in the semis.

Enjoy!!!

[KDunbar]

I don't understand why we can't just seed the 4 region winners. Even if 1-2 finishers in region whatever are ranked 1-2 in the state, they can still be separated easily in the bracket. Region winner and runner-up stay separated no matter where the winner gets seeded in the state bracket.
But the pill comes with plug and play...
Current format: work less harder not smarter.

You hit the nail on the head. Work less, not smarter. How is that working out for us now???

We could keep everything the way it is with the pill. For example, the pill selected is "pill 3". Then run the tournament with pill 3. However, that one situation comes along where the clear cut #1 and #2 are going to hit in the semi's. Then for only their weight class, in their classification, select a different pill. Select the one pill that puts #1 and #2 on opposite sides. Very simple and could be done THIS season.

The only challenge would be that there might be an argument as to who is #1 and #2. Perhaps the coaches' committee and the Hall of Fame could argue who is number 1 for a few days before the state tournament.

Also, in a tight, tight and crazy AAA team race like what we have now, team titles are going to be lost because #1 and #2 meet in the semis.

Enjoy!!!

Well, time will tell, but unless the team title is as close as 3 points, then the team title is not the reason for moving the presumed #1 versus #2 matchup. In reality it is to give the wrestler beaten by the eventual #1 wrestler the spotlight on Saturday night and for the benefit of the fans, and much less with the issues of the team race, in my opinion. I personally have mixed feelings on the need for the change and the issues with picking the number 1 and number 2. Also, the issue then arises as to which wrestlers gets number 1 as opposed to number 2, because number 2 likely gets the toughest semifinal matchup. And that was not a random choice for those two wrestlers but based on human bias, unless the pick is made randomly, which may have been the plan.

[Bearhugger]

I think the point here is that this rule change is not going to be used in every weight class, every single time. This is a rule of obviousness to a degree. If there are 3-4 guys who have beaten each other or are relatively close this rule is not coming into effect. Its for years and weights where there is obvious top contenders (2019 182 Carman/Lanham where they met in the semis and then Carman pinned his finals opponent in the early 2nd period and Lanham did the same in the 3rd place match). Its not going to be implemented this year at 182 where there is so much uncertainty.

Very good point.

For those that think WVMAT rankings should be used, that would only create more problems. Many of the rankings today have very little head to head matches and are biased towards how someone did at last years states. Nobody would have an idea who would or should win those matches.

Rankings are good for us fans of sports but not much else. Other criteria would definitely be needed. Head to Head being preferred when available.

Head to head matches drive changes in the rankings.

Wrestling needs all the help it can get to get a few fans involved. Rankings does that.

I for one use rankings to watch for key match ups. I am sorry but I could care less about watching a dual between Stonewall Jackson vs Bugtussle High where 4 to 5 forfeits get collects and not one worth while match occurs. The top wrestlers pin the beginners and when we MIGHT have one good match up, a coach bumps one wrestler up in an effort to win a bye infested dual.

Rankings evaluate a given school's schedule and program. If you have few to zero wrestlers ranked, then it is because:

1. Your program doesn't post its scores. The coach thinks acting like North Korea is the way to go. Keep everything secret.

2. Your schedule is weak. The team never gets around to wrestle anybody, not even schools that have the lowest ranked wrestlers. If you are not ranked to begin with and you never wrestle other ranked wrestlers, then "iron cannot sharpen iron". It is "tin foil sharpens tin foil".

[Bearhugger]

I don't understand why we can't just seed the 4 region winners. Even if 1-2 finishers in region whatever are ranked 1-2 in the state, they can still be separated easily in the bracket. Region winner and runner-up stay separated no matter where the winner gets seeded in the state bracket.
But the pill comes with plug and play...
Current format: work less harder not smarter.

You hit the nail on the head. Work less, not smarter. How is that working out for us now???

We could keep everything the way it is with the pill. For example, the pill selected is "pill 3". Then run the tournament with pill 3. However, that one situation comes along where the clear cut #1 and #2 are going to hit in the semi's. Then for only their weight class, in their classification, select a different pill. Select the one pill that puts #1 and #2 on opposite sides. Very simple and could be done THIS season.

The only challenge would be that there might be an argument as to who is #1 and #2. Perhaps the coaches' committee and the Hall of Fame could argue who is number 1 for a few days before the state tournament.

Also, in a tight, tight and crazy AAA team race like what we have now, team titles are going to be lost because #1 and #2 meet in the semis.

Enjoy!!!

Well, time will tell, but unless the team title is as close as 3 points, then the team title is not the reason for moving the presumed #1 versus #2 matchup. In reality it is to give the wrestler beaten by the eventual #1 wrestler the spotlight on Saturday night and for the benefit of the fans, and much less with the issues of the team race, in my opinion. I personally have mixed feelings on the need for the change and the issues with picking the number 1 and number 2. Also, the issue then arises as to which wrestlers gets number 1 as opposed to number 2, because number 2 likely gets the toughest semifinal matchup. And that was not a random choice for those two wrestlers but based on human bias, unless the pick is made randomly, which may have been the plan.

I agree with you Dr. Dunbar. We should just leave everything how it has always been.

I recall a few years ago, we all talked on here about byes popping up at the state tournament. It was first addressed by playing with the words. "There are no byes at the state tournament". Ok, we called it a vacancy. Perhaps the concern of a "vacancy" filled State Tournament Thursday night would hurt fan interest?? Perhaps the concern of lost income got the attention. Anyway, after at least two seasons of the concern of Byes at the state tournament, a quick, simple, harmless change was implemented. If a given region couldn't produce 4 state tournament qualifiers, then the needed fourth qualifier was grabbed up from a different region. I believe winning % is used to determine which fifth placer moves on to the state tournament.

I recall one season where one particular weight class exhausted all regional wrestlers to fill the 16 spots in the state tournament bracket.

Now that this change WAS MADE, we get to see MATCHES on Thursday night rather than wrestlers collecting forfeits. We see enough forfeit collection during the season.

LOL, on that note, I actually witnessed a team this season that had a "forfeit collector" on their team. The wrestler didn't wrestle any matches when opponents were available. However, when there wasn't an opponent, then the "forfeit collector" walked out on the mat and grabbed their team 6 points. Actually, it is a smart tactic. It is also what wrestling has become. If I was a coach, I would recruit the smallest kid in the school and a kid ranging 230 to 285. I would tell these kids just to come to practice, play video games and then come with us to matches to collect forfeits.

[KDunbar]

You hit the nail on the head. Work less, not smarter. How is that working out for us now???

We could keep everything the way it is with the pill. For example, the pill selected is "pill 3". Then run the tournament with pill 3. However, that one situation comes along where the clear cut #1 and #2 are going to hit in the semi's. Then for only their weight class, in their classification, select a different pill. Select the one pill that puts #1 and #2 on opposite sides. Very simple and could be done THIS season.

The only challenge would be that there might be an argument as to who is #1 and #2. Perhaps the coaches' committee and the Hall of Fame could argue who is number 1 for a few days before the state tournament.

Also, in a tight, tight and crazy AAA team race like what we have now, team titles are going to be lost because #1 and #2 meet in the semis.

Enjoy!!!

Well, time will tell, but unless the team title is as close as 3 points, then the team title is not the reason for moving the presumed #1 versus #2 matchup. In reality it is to give the wrestler beaten by the eventual #1 wrestler the spotlight on Saturday night and for the benefit of the fans, and much less with the issues of the team race, in my opinion. I personally have mixed feelings on the need for the change and the issues with picking the number 1 and number 2. Also, the issue then arises as to which wrestlers gets number 1 as opposed to number 2, because number 2 likely gets the toughest semifinal matchup. And that was not a random choice for those two wrestlers but based on human bias, unless the pick is made randomly, which may have been the plan.

I agree with you Dr. Dunbar. We should just leave everything how it has always been.

I recall a few years ago, we all talked on here about byes popping up at the state tournament. It was first addressed by playing with the words. "There are no byes at the state tournament". Ok, we called it a vacancy. Perhaps the concern of a "vacancy" filled State Tournament Thursday night would hurt fan interest?? Perhaps the concern of lost income got the attention. Anyway, after at least two seasons of the concern of Byes at the state tournament, a quick, simple, harmless change was implemented. If a given region couldn't produce 4 state tournament qualifiers, then the needed fourth qualifier was grabbed up from a different region. I believe winning % is used to determine which fifth placer moves on to the state tournament.

I recall one season where one particular weight class exhausted all regional wrestlers to fill the 16 spots in the state tournament bracket.

Now that this change WAS MADE, we get to see MATCHES on Thursday night rather than wrestlers collecting forfeits. We see enough forfeit collection during the season.

LOL, on that note, I actually witnessed a team this season that had a "forfeit collector" on their team. The wrestler didn't wrestle any matches when opponents were available. However, when there wasn't an opponent, then the "forfeit collector" walked out on the mat and grabbed their team 6 points. Actually, it is a smart tactic. It is also what wrestling has become. If I was a coach, I would recruit the smallest kid in the school and a kid ranging 230 to 285. I would tell these kids just to come to practice, play video games and then come with us to matches to collect forfeits.

I'm guessing you were patronizing me or being sarcastic when you said you agreed with me. Either is okay, it's your right to have an opinion. But I don't believe you actually voiced an opinion about what I actually said. I never said to "leave everything how it has always been". You leapt to that statement on your own. You also leapt to the fear that the "presumed 2nd place" finisher finishing in 3rd place was going to determine the Team outcome and I merely said it would only happen if this was decided by 3 points. I'll say again, I'm on the fence about the need of changing the presumed number one and number two in the brackets, because there are always some negatives when you throw in the potential for human error. I believe you have really tried to do that in your rankings by leaving intuition and emotion out of them.

Also, I believe that the wrestler losing in the semifinals actually gets an extra match in the consolation bracket before wrestling for third place, so they may only actually score 2 points less than if they were to lose in the finals. Also the chance to score pins in their two consolation matches means that they actually may score the same as if they went on to lose in the finals. It actually isn't all that uncommon for a wrestler finishing in third place to outscore a wrestler finishing in second place if they pin all the way through and the other one doesn't. Over the last 20 years in AAA the closest team scores between 1st and 2nd teams under 20 points was 17.5 points in 2012 and 9 points in 2007. Historically it has never been an issue in this regard during that time frame and would only occur if it was the second place team that suffered this "injustice". So, as I said in my first post, I feel that maybe the only real "injustice" might be to the wrestler and his family and fans if he misses out on the spotlight of Saturday night.

[aacoach108]

2. Bear Tracks has an established criteria used to rank all wrestlers equally and free of opinion. Significant matches used to change the ranking order is provided. The work is the rankings. I show my work by providing the significant matches. Nobody has argued the process for years. It is equal for all and based on head to head results. The rankings are not based on what I think with my brain or what I hope with my heart. WHO I think will win might go half the season ranked very poorly.

Bearhugger, while I appreciate all the time and effort you put into your Beartracks rankings, I disagree that your "opinion" is not prevalent. A key point being the "significant matches" portion - the "significant matches" you list are only YOUR opinion of which matches you deem significant vs other results you believe are not worth mentioning.

I see a lot of results on WVMAT that I think are significant...and then I see Beartracks rankings where none of those results are listed, because they were not significant enough (in your opinion.)

There are also scenarios in which wrestler A beat wrestler B, B beat C, and C beat A. In that case, head-to-head necessitates an "opinion" be subjected to determine who is ranked higher vs lower.

Again - your rankings and hard work you put into them is appreciated - but declaring them "free of opinion" just isn't possible - there will always be some level of opinion involved.

[Bearhugger]

2. Bear Tracks has an established criteria used to rank all wrestlers equally and free of opinion. Significant matches used to change the ranking order is provided. The work is the rankings. I show my work by providing the significant matches. Nobody has argued the process for years. It is equal for all and based on head to head results. The rankings are not based on what I think with my brain or what I hope with my heart. WHO I think will win might go half the season ranked very poorly.

Bearhugger, while I appreciate all the time and effort you put into your Beartracks rankings, I disagree that your "opinion" is not prevalent. A key point being the "significant matches" portion - the "significant matches" you list are only YOUR opinion of which matches you deem significant vs other results you believe are not worth mentioning.

I see a lot of results on WVMAT that I think are significant...and then I see Beartracks rankings where none of those results are listed, because they were not significant enough (in your opinion.)

There are also scenarios in which wrestler A beat wrestler B, B beat C, and C beat A. In that case, head-to-head necessitates an "opinion" be subjected to determine who is ranked higher vs lower.

Again - your rankings and hard work you put into them is appreciated - but declaring them "free of opinion" just isn't possible - there will always be some level of opinion involved.

1. Bear Tracks is not up to date. It is possible that the significant matches you speak of that I didn't include occurred since the last edition of Bear Tracks. If you want to share one single example, I am sure we can figure it out. You can send in a private message.

2. There is not one situation in Bear Tracks where A beat B and B beat C and my opinion was used to sort it out. Those situations exist but they fell in the weight classes where Bear Tracks fell behind.

3. Why does Bear Tracks fall behind?? I drive 4.5 hours one way from where I live to WV. I then have to travel to the matches. Thursday, January 13th, I was driving up to WV for the Winner's Choice. I didn't make it. I was involved in a hit and run wreck involving a tractor trailer. For one second, I thought I was going to die! My vehicle was totaled and left on its side. I climbed out of the broken driver's window while the suv was laying on the passenger's side. Two days later while the Winner's Choice placement rounds are taking place, I am digging glass out of my face with tweezers.

4. Most important of all, there have been numerous notifications made with each edition of Bear Tracks where "your input is wanted and needed". Furthermore, I provided my cell phone number. So between contacting me by the forum, private message on WVMat, Facebook or my personal cell phone number, THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY SCORE any coach, parent or fan knows of that couldn't and shouldn't be reflected in Bear Tracks. If there is, it is because the person didn't communicate to me as I asked.

5. Prior to your post, did you contact me about a significant match that was included? I do not recall anything from aacoach108.

[mike.carman]

I don't understand why we can't just seed the 4 region winners. Even if 1-2 finishers in region whatever are ranked 1-2 in the state, they can still be separated easily in the bracket. Region winner and runner-up stay separated no matter where the winner gets seeded in the state bracket.
But the pill comes with plug and play...
Current format: work less harder not smarter.

You hit the nail on the head. Work less, not smarter. How is that working out for us now???

We could keep everything the way it is with the pill. For example, the pill selected is "pill 3". Then run the tournament with pill 3. However, that one situation comes along where the clear cut #1 and #2 are going to hit in the semi's. Then for only their weight class, in their classification, select a different pill. Select the one pill that puts #1 and #2 on opposite sides. Very simple and could be done THIS season.

The only challenge would be that there might be an argument as to who is #1 and #2. Perhaps the coaches' committee and the Hall of Fame could argue who is number 1 for a few days before the state tournament.

Also, in a tight, tight and crazy AAA team race like what we have now, team titles are going to be lost because #1 and #2 meet in the semis.

Enjoy!!!

Well, time will tell, but unless the team title is as close as 3 points, then the team title is not the reason for moving the presumed #1 versus #2 matchup. In reality it is to give the wrestler beaten by the eventual #1 wrestler the spotlight on Saturday night and for the benefit of the fans, and much less with the issues of the team race, in my opinion. I personally have mixed feelings on the need for the change and the issues with picking the number 1 and number 2. Also, the issue then arises as to which wrestlers gets number 1 as opposed to number 2, because number 2 likely gets the toughest semifinal matchup. And that was not a random choice for those two wrestlers but based on human bias, unless the pick is made randomly, which may have been the plan.

Actually, that is not entirely true. Advancing from the semis to the finals delivers a huge point boost to the team of the individual advancing. Conversely, falling in the semi finals denies the necessary team points to catch the leaders. Also, unbalanced brackets are definitely created by the pill, where half of the bracket can be very week and the other half brutally strong allowing for less talent to advance further in the bracket, thereby skewing team points as well as denying individuals the proper advancement.

[Bearhugger]

Here is a good exercise for all. Once the scores are posted for the Brooke and Williamstown tournaments, let's see how close or how spread apart the team scores are. Three points changes things.

Here are some from the Winner's Choice:

5. Washington 128.50
6. Cabell Midland 123.50
6. Independence 123.50
8. Berkeley Springs 121.00
9. Parkersburg 119.00
10. Fairmont Senior 114.00
11. Ripley 110.50


12. Buckhannon Upshur 88.00
13. Lewis County 83.00
14. George Washington 82.50
15. Oak Hill 81.50



17. Sissonville 61.00
18. Nitro 57.00
19. Preston 55.00
20. Greenbrier East 46.00
21. North Marion 45.00
22. East Fairmont 42.00
23. Bridgeport 39.00
24. Hedgesville 34.00
25. Ritchie County 33.00
26. Spring Valley 30.00

[dontlikethelights]

Actually, that is not entirely true. Advancing from the semis to the finals delivers a huge point boost to the team of the individual advancing. Conversely, falling in the semi finals denies the necessary team points to catch the leaders. Also, unbalanced brackets are definitely created by the pill, where half of the bracket can be very week and the other half brutally strong allowing for less talent to advance further in the bracket, thereby skewing team points as well as denying individuals the proper advancement.

The pill can definitely stack sides of a bracket and ruin placing beyond the finals, with that being said here is an example of 3rd outscoring 2nd.

Wrestler A: Runner-Up
Round of 16 wins by T-Fall - 2 adv + 1.5 T-Fall = 3.5 pts
1/4 Finals wins by M-Dec - 2 adv. + 1 mdec + 3 (1/4 bonus) = 6pts
Semis beats wrestler B by dec - 2 adv + 9 (semi bnonus) = 11 pts
Loses in finals, no additional points

Total Points 3.5+6+11+0 = 20.5

Wrestler B: Third
Round 16 wins by Fall - 2 adv. pts + 2 Fall = 4pts
1/4 finals wins by pin - 2 adv + 2 fall + 3 (1/4 bonus) = 7 pts
Loses to A in the semis, no points earned
Consi-Semis wins by fall - 1 adv. + 2 fall + 4 (consi/esmi top 6) =7 pts
3rd place wins by m-dec 1 adv + 1 m-dec + 2 (3rd palce) = 4 pts

Total Points 4+7+0+7+4 = 22

This is just an example, but I have seen 3rd place equal or outscore 2nd often over the years. The same can be said for 5th and 4th. One thing to note I awarded the "placement points" as I went along because that is what I am used to doing. You could award each match points then add 12 to second and 9 to third. This would make the math (3.5+3+2)+12 = 20.5 to (4+4+3+2)+9 = 22.

[Bearhugger]

2. Bear Tracks has an established criteria used to rank all wrestlers equally and free of opinion. Significant matches used to change the ranking order is provided. The work is the rankings. I show my work by providing the significant matches. Nobody has argued the process for years. It is equal for all and based on head to head results. The rankings are not based on what I think with my brain or what I hope with my heart. WHO I think will win might go half the season ranked very poorly.

Bearhugger, while I appreciate all the time and effort you put into your Beartracks rankings, I disagree that your "opinion" is not prevalent. A key point being the "significant matches" portion - the "significant matches" you list are only YOUR opinion of which matches you deem significant vs other results you believe are not worth mentioning.

I see a lot of results on WVMAT that I think are significant...and then I see Beartracks rankings where none of those results are listed, because they were not significant enough (in your opinion.)

There are also scenarios in which wrestler A beat wrestler B, B beat C, and C beat A. In that case, head-to-head necessitates an "opinion" be subjected to determine who is ranked higher vs lower.

Again - your rankings and hard work you put into them is appreciated - but declaring them "free of opinion" just isn't possible - there will always be some level of opinion involved.

Hello again aacoach108.

I have continued to monitor all of my contact numbers, email addresses, etc since responding two days ago to you. I have been working on Bear Tracks and I would really like to get the specifics on the significant matches you are referring to.

I would like to get this corrected before I launch the next version.

Thanks again.

[KDunbar]

You hit the nail on the head. Work less, not smarter. How is that working out for us now???

We could keep everything the way it is with the pill. For example, the pill selected is "pill 3". Then run the tournament with pill 3. However, that one situation comes along where the clear cut #1 and #2 are going to hit in the semi's. Then for only their weight class, in their classification, select a different pill. Select the one pill that puts #1 and #2 on opposite sides. Very simple and could be done THIS season.

The only challenge would be that there might be an argument as to who is #1 and #2. Perhaps the coaches' committee and the Hall of Fame could argue who is number 1 for a few days before the state tournament.

Also, in a tight, tight and crazy AAA team race like what we have now, team titles are going to be lost because #1 and #2 meet in the semis.

Enjoy!!!

Well, time will tell, but unless the team title is as close as 3 points, then the team title is not the reason for moving the presumed #1 versus #2 matchup. In reality it is to give the wrestler beaten by the eventual #1 wrestler the spotlight on Saturday night and for the benefit of the fans, and much less with the issues of the team race, in my opinion. I personally have mixed feelings on the need for the change and the issues with picking the number 1 and number 2. Also, the issue then arises as to which wrestlers gets number 1 as opposed to number 2, because number 2 likely gets the toughest semifinal matchup. And that was not a random choice for those two wrestlers but based on human bias, unless the pick is made randomly, which may have been the plan.

Actually, that is not entirely true. Advancing from the semis to the finals delivers a huge point boost to the team of the individual advancing. Conversely, falling in the semi finals denies the necessary team points to catch the leaders. Also, unbalanced brackets are definitely created by the pill, where half of the bracket can be very week and the other half brutally strong allowing for less talent to advance further in the bracket, thereby skewing team points as well as denying individuals the proper advancement.

I appreciate the input, but the discussion was not comparing a "seeded" state tournament versus a "pill" state tournament. It was about only separating the "supposed" number one wrestler from the "supposed" number two wrestler.

In reviewing the statement that winning the semis gives a huge point boost, that is a little misleading and the math would show the following: the winner of the semi would get 2 advancement points and 12 points as they could finish no lower than 2nd place, with 4 points to be gained if they win 1st place, That is an additional 18 points for finishing first and 14 points for finishing second. The loser of the semis goes into the conso. rounds and has a match to get to wrestle for third place and if won gets 1 point for advancing and 7 points for finishing no lower than 4th place. If they win for third place they get an additional 2 points, for a total of 10 points. So this is only a difference of 4 points between second place and third place. My initial statement of three points was incorrect because I mistakenly gave a point for advancing in the 3rd/4th bout. However, this "supposed " 2nd best wrestler does get 2 extra matches against supposed much poorer wrestlers in these consolation matches and could very well score two pins and gain back the 4 points they lost out on by not having the opportunity of placing second. That was the point I was trying to address in terms of deciding which team wins the state tournament.

[KDunbar]

Here is a good exercise for all. Once the scores are posted for the Brooke and Williamstown tournaments, let's see how close or how spread apart the team scores are. Three points changes things.

Here are some from the Winner's Choice:

5. Washington 128.50
6. Cabell Midland 123.50
6. Independence 123.50
8. Berkeley Springs 121.00
9. Parkersburg 119.00
10. Fairmont Senior 114.00
11. Ripley 110.50


12. Buckhannon Upshur 88.00
13. Lewis County 83.00
14. George Washington 82.50
15. Oak Hill 81.50



17. Sissonville 61.00
18. Nitro 57.00
19. Preston 55.00
20. Greenbrier East 46.00
21. North Marion 45.00
22. East Fairmont 42.00
23. Bridgeport 39.00
24. Hedgesville 34.00
25. Ritchie County 33.00
26. Spring Valley 30.00

I didn't think the discussion was regarding which team finished in 6th place or 30th place, but rather those 3 or 4 points deciding the team overall title in a close AAA state tournament this year. That was the comment you made that I was addressing and not the point you seem to be trying to make above.

PS. Sorry about your recent accident and trauma. I'm thankful that you survived it and are doing okay.

[aacoach108]

1. Bear Tracks is not up to date. It is possible that the significant matches you speak of that I didn't include occurred since the last edition of Bear Tracks. If you want to share one single example, I am sure we can figure it out. You can send in a private message.[/quote]
These "significant matches" to which I am referring occurred in Dec and are posted as results on WVMAT

4. Most important of all, there have been numerous notifications made with each edition of Bear Tracks where "your input is wanted and needed". Furthermore, I provided my cell phone number. So between contacting me by the forum, private message on WVMat, Facebook or my personal cell phone number, THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY SCORE any coach, parent or fan knows of that couldn't and shouldn't be reflected in Bear Tracks. If there is, it is because the person didn't communicate to me as I asked.
I did not send anything to you because they were already posted as results on WVMAT, they just weren't determined to be "significant enough" to be added to the BearTracks "significant matches" based on your opinion...which was my original point

5. Prior to your post, did you contact me about a significant match that was included? I do not recall anything from aacoach108.
I did not, since the results were already posted to WVMAT. I did however submit to the Coaches' Rankings, and those rankings correctly reflect the "significant matches" to which I am referring

[Bearhugger]

1. Bear Tracks is not up to date. It is possible that the significant matches you speak of that I didn't include occurred since the last edition of Bear Tracks. If you want to share one single example, I am sure we can figure it out. You can send in a private message.

These "significant matches" to which I am referring occurred in Dec and are posted as results on WVMAT

4. Most important of all, there have been numerous notifications made with each edition of Bear Tracks where "your input is wanted and needed". Furthermore, I provided my cell phone number. So between contacting me by the forum, private message on WVMat, Facebook or my personal cell phone number, THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY SCORE any coach, parent or fan knows of that couldn't and shouldn't be reflected in Bear Tracks. If there is, it is because the person didn't communicate to me as I asked.
I did not send anything to you because they were already posted as results on WVMAT, they just weren't determined to be "significant enough" to be added to the BearTracks "significant matches" based on your opinion...which was my original point

5. Prior to your post, did you contact me about a significant match that was included? I do not recall anything from aacoach108.
I did not, since the results were already posted to WVMAT. I did however submit to the Coaches' Rankings, and those rankings correctly reflect the "significant matches" to which I am referring[/quote]

1. I cannot fix what needs to be fixed. I cannot address what you continue to refuse to share specifics about.

2. Perhaps I overlooked something instead of deeming it insignificant.

3. I am not going to get involved in a comparison and contrast on here of the two different rankings.

An exercise for all is to use all rankings you want to use. Review the rankings against the big tournament's results.

[KDunbar]

1. Bear Tracks is not up to date. It is possible that the significant matches you speak of that I didn't include occurred since the last edition of Bear Tracks. If you want to share one single example, I am sure we can figure it out. You can send in a private message.

These "significant matches" to which I am referring occurred in Dec and are posted as results on WVMAT

4. Most important of all, there have been numerous notifications made with each edition of Bear Tracks where "your input is wanted and needed". Furthermore, I provided my cell phone number. So between contacting me by the forum, private message on WVMat, Facebook or my personal cell phone number, THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY SCORE any coach, parent or fan knows of that couldn't and shouldn't be reflected in Bear Tracks. If there is, it is because the person didn't communicate to me as I asked.
I did not send anything to you because they were already posted as results on WVMAT, they just weren't determined to be "significant enough" to be added to the BearTracks "significant matches" based on your opinion...which was my original point

5. Prior to your post, did you contact me about a significant match that was included? I do not recall anything from aacoach108.
I did not, since the results were already posted to WVMAT. I did however submit to the Coaches' Rankings, and those rankings correctly reflect the "significant matches" to which I am referring

Bearhugger's response:
1. I cannot fix what needs to be fixed. I cannot address what you continue to refuse to share specifics about.

2. Perhaps I overlooked something instead of deeming it insignificant.

3. I am not going to get involved in a comparison and contrast on here of the two different rankings.

An exercise for all is to use all rankings you want to use. Review the rankings against the big tournament's results.[/quote]

KDunbar's response:
I guess it's just more fun to keep the secret than to be helpful. Shoot, it might help the "validity" of the Bearhugger rankings and it seems like that is not the goal here.

[aacoach108]

Fine, here is an example:

Results posted on WVMAT way back on 12/1/21:

Parkersburg South 69 Ripley 3
Date: 12/1/2021
Location: Parkersburg South

106 Reese Kelley (PS) dec. Cayden Bissell, 3-2
113 Mackiah Claudio (PS) p. Kain Price, 1:18
120 Brent Bosley (PS) won via forfeit
126 Brady Roberts (PS) dec. Brock Matson, 5-3
132 Ryan Martin (PS) p. Ethan Kay, 3:43
138 Trent Jones (PS) p. Luke Matson, 3:41
145 Brett Haskins (R) dec. Kyle Wheeler, 7-0
152 Braeden Hamilton (PS) dec. Hunter Brown, 13-9
160 Robert Shockey (PS) p. Eli Koontz, 1:34
170 Gage Wright (PS) p. Cooper Darst, 1:10
182 Aydan Edwards (PS) won via forfeit
195 Ayden Morris (PS) p. Timothy Hall, 0:20
220 Brycen Arthur (PS) won via forfeit
285 Eli Wheeler (PS) p. Elias Gara, 1:04

The 132 results between two wrestlers who have both been ranked in each of the Coaches' polls (Ryan Martin vs Ethan Kay) have never been included within any of your "significant matches" in any edition of your Bear Tracks updates. Why? You had to have seen that result. It was from 12/1/21. Yet in your "opinion" it was not a "significant match" worth reporting. Again, I (along with many others) appreciate the time and effort you put into your rankings, but you cannot state your rankings are ONLY based on head to head with zero opinion when it is indeed your OPINION that decides which matches are significant enough to consider.

[Bearhugger]

Fine, here is an example:

Results posted on WVMAT way back on 12/1/21:

Parkersburg South 69 Ripley 3
Date: 12/1/2021
Location: Parkersburg South

106 Reese Kelley (PS) dec. Cayden Bissell, 3-2
113 Mackiah Claudio (PS) p. Kain Price, 1:18
120 Brent Bosley (PS) won via forfeit
126 Brady Roberts (PS) dec. Brock Matson, 5-3
132 Ryan Martin (PS) p. Ethan Kay, 3:43
138 Trent Jones (PS) p. Luke Matson, 3:41
145 Brett Haskins (R) dec. Kyle Wheeler, 7-0
152 Braeden Hamilton (PS) dec. Hunter Brown, 13-9
160 Robert Shockey (PS) p. Eli Koontz, 1:34
170 Gage Wright (PS) p. Cooper Darst, 1:10
182 Aydan Edwards (PS) won via forfeit
195 Ayden Morris (PS) p. Timothy Hall, 0:20
220 Brycen Arthur (PS) won via forfeit
285 Eli Wheeler (PS) p. Elias Gara, 1:04

The 132 results between two wrestlers who have both been ranked in each of the Coaches' polls (Ryan Martin vs Ethan Kay) have never been included within any of your "significant matches" in any edition of your Bear Tracks updates. Why? You had to have seen that result. It was from 12/1/21. Yet in your "opinion" it was not a "significant match" worth reporting. Again, I (along with many others) appreciate the time and effort you put into your rankings, but you cannot state your rankings are ONLY based on head to head with zero opinion when it is indeed your OPINION that decides which matches are significant enough to consider.

1. I was present at Parkersburg South on December 1 watching the matches.

2. It is true that after the smoke cleared on December 1st and 2nd, I didn't deem this match as significant. Neither Martin or Kay were on the radar on the season opening day. Neither went to the state tournament last season. Bear Tracks begins the preseason with only returning state tournament place winners and qualifiers. That has been explained multiple times and was explained again when the preseason rankings came out.

3. If you look at the latest version of Bear Tracks, Martin, Kay and Cochran are all together. This was put on WVMat before you finally brought forth the example you mentioned.

4. It has happened in previous seasons and it will happen next season where a few wrestlers start winning over noteworthy opponents and one must go back in history to review and rank them.

5. This is what bothers me. I am taking upon myself that you are a coach. I have stated repeatedly for viewers to provide feedback. I even posted my cell number. Earlier in the week, I took Bear Tracks to Facebook. When AAA 132 was posted, a lady did what you chose not to do. She simply stated that Martin defeated Kay. This is the very reason I took the rankings to Facebook. I knew I would target a larger audience that would be of more help. I was right.

Unfortunately, Cochran and John Marshall will not be at the WSAZ to help sort things out. Good luck to Martin and Kay.