Separating #1 and #2

[Bearhugger]

This is the season where the #1 and #2 top wrestlers in each weight class are to be separated after the first pill draw.

How does everyone feel about the current #1 and #2's in each weight class?

[BsWrestler72]

If #1 and #2 are truly going to be separated at state, hopefully rankings will be done again after regionals and before state pairings are announced!

[admin]

If #1 and #2 are truly going to be separated at state, hopefully rankings will be done again after regionals and before state pairings are announced!

Yes, we will do a new set of rankings after the regional tournaments! The state tournament seeding meeting is at noon on February 19.

[BsWrestler72]

It should be a simple process, just seed the 4 regional winners and if true #1 and #2 are in same region, they will automatically be separated. Just my opinion!

[guard0544]

It should be a simple process, just seed the 4 regional winners and if true #1 and #2 are in same region, they will automatically be separated. Just my opinion!

The rankings are statewide and kids can shift around the rankings based on who they defeat at certain points in the season and what the opponents were ranked at the time.

Regional seeding obviously focuses on those entered in the regional tournament. If the top two kids are in the same region it’s highly likely they would end up on opposite sides of the regional bracket from each other. But in theory, if a region has 4 solid kids, the top two in the state could end up on the same side of the bracket based on regional seeding criteria. If #2 in the state loses to #1 in the state in the semi and places 3rd, while the 1 in the state goes on to win the region….we could have a #2 ranked kid that placed third in his region. …in theory.

[Bearhugger]

At a glance, the vast majority of the current #1s and #2s are legit based on head to head performance. Some of them are in the same region. The regular pill selection process will separate them.

Where the majority of the 1 and 2 separation could be needed is when #1 and #2 are in different regions and the pill places them on the same side of the bracket. I understand that a second pill for just that weight class will be drawn.

Where this will get sticky is if the current #2 in a given weight class is under dispute. Then the regional results do not change the current rankings, this the dispute carries over.

Lastly, we could have a few #1s or #2s that default their regional final match due to an injury.

At the end of the day, an old problem will get solved and a better foundation will be built for the future.

[KDunbar]

It should be a simple process, just seed the 4 regional winners and if true #1 and #2 are in same region, they will automatically be separated. Just my opinion!

The rankings are statewide and kids can shift around the rankings based on who they defeat at certain points in the season and what the opponents were ranked at the time.

Regional seeding obviously focuses on those entered in the regional tournament. If the top two kids are in the same region it’s highly likely they would end up on opposite sides of the regional bracket from each other. But in theory, if a region has 4 solid kids, the top two in the state could end up on the same side of the bracket based on regional seeding criteria. If #2 in the state loses to #1 in the state in the semi and places 3rd, while the 1 in the state goes on to win the region….we could have a #2 ranked kid that placed third in his region. …in theory.

I believe that any pill selected will place the 2nd and 3rd finishers from a region on the opposite side of the brackets from the 1st place finisher in that region, so the scenerio you describe is not the problem.
As bearhugger states in the post above, the issue is when #1 and #2 are from different regions and the pill places them on the same side of the bracket. As he also states, it is furhter complicated when there is a significant issue in who is #2 and #3. A solution to this is to not draw a pill, but merely use the pill that puts #2 and #3 on the same side of the bracket and both will be opposite #1, which is like partially "seeding" that weight class. If the issue is deciding between who is #1, #2, and #3, well I guess just flip a coin, or use the pill drawn which is the same thing.

[Jeremy_Callen]

KDunbar you are correct. Regardless of which region you are in the 2nd and 3rd place finishers in the same region will be on the same side of the bracket and opposite of their regional champion. Additionally, if there is not a clear cut ranked #2 I believe the intention is to leave that weight class alone without making any changes.

[guard0544]

KDunbar you are correct. Regardless of which region you are in the 2nd and 3rd place finishers in the same region will be on the same side of the bracket and opposite of their regional champion. Additionally, if there is not a clear cut ranked #2 I believe the intention is to leave that weight class alone without making any changes.

Well, obviously unlikely, but I can think of a few scenarios where the #1 or #2 wrestler finishes 4th at region without losing to anyone where they actually took the mat.

One example would be if there are only four kids in a weight class and a wrestler has a health issue or injury but weighs in knowing they can qualify without having to actually take the mat and wrestle. We’ve actually seen this scenario play out in recent years though it wasn’t one of the top 2 wrestlers. I know, unlikely, but it just takes a weight with four kids, one ranked top 2, and having an injury or Covid.

[mike.carman]

KDunbar you are correct. Regardless of which region you are in the 2nd and 3rd place finishers in the same region will be on the same side of the bracket and opposite of their regional champion. Additionally, if there is not a clear cut ranked #2 I believe the intention is to leave that weight class alone without making any changes.

Well, obviously unlikely, but I can think of a few scenarios where the #1 or #2 wrestler finishes 4th at region without losing to anyone where they actually took the mat.

One example would be if there are only four kids in a weight class and a wrestler has a health issue or injury but weighs in knowing they can qualify without having to actually take the mat and wrestle. We’ve actually seen this scenario play out in recent years though it wasn’t one of the top 2 wrestlers. I know, unlikely, but it just takes a weight with four kids, one ranked top 2, and having an injury or Covid.

This scenario actually occurred in 2021. As a result the #2 in the state at the time wrestled the #1 in the state first match of the tournament because of the pill and his finish at regionals. Never stepped on the mat at regionals. So it does happen.

[standincoach]

Question, what is the pill and who controls the pill or the information given to the pill?

[crochog93]

Another thing to keep in mind with this… 1 & 2 will only be separated where necessary, won’t necessarily happen in every weight class. If there isn’t a clear cut 1 and 2 in a weight class the class will be dealt the initial pill drawn and then the committee move onto the next one.

[crochog93]

Didn’t see where mr callen has said that above ^^

[Coach_Asbury]

Another thing to keep in mind with this… 1 & 2 will only be separated where necessary, won’t necessarily happen in every weight class. If there isn’t a clear cut 1 and 2 in a weight class the class will be dealt the initial pill drawn and then the committee move onto the next one.

I directly asked Mr. Callen about this at the OVAC. He checked with the coaches reps, and I was told it would be every case where 1&2 were in the same semi.

It was pitched as only taking place with a "clear" 1&2 (i.e 2 beat 3 head to head or common opponent win), but again, I was told it will be all cases where 1&2 are set to meet in the same semi by the pill. Hopefully that will not be the case, as in 5 of the current weight classes' rankings, 2&3 have not met, and 1 has beaten 2&3 -> essentially deciding a state final with a conscious decision rather than chance.

[Coach_Asbury]

KDunbar you are correct. Regardless of which region you are in the 2nd and 3rd place finishers in the same region will be on the same side of the bracket and opposite of their regional champion. Additionally, if there is not a clear cut ranked #2 I believe the intention is to leave that weight class alone without making any changes.

We need something official on record now with this, then. I inquired about this at the OVAC tournament and was told the opposite. I believe it should only be with a clear-cut #2.

[Bearhugger]

KDunbar you are correct. Regardless of which region you are in the 2nd and 3rd place finishers in the same region will be on the same side of the bracket and opposite of their regional champion. Additionally, if there is not a clear cut ranked #2 I believe the intention is to leave that weight class alone without making any changes.

We need something official on record now with this, then. I inquired about this at the OVAC tournament and was told the opposite. I believe it should only be with a clear-cut #2.

I agree. If #2 is not clear cut, then lets stay old school and run with the pill selection for that weight class.

Here are some good examples:

AAA 175: Wright and Felix are #1 and #2.

AA/A 190: Ours and Huffman are #1 and #2.

AA/A 144: Jarvis and Hamilton are #1 and #2.

[Mat Time]

Mr. Bill Archer joined Mat Time to discuss the new modified pill system and clarified #1 and #2 will be separated, when needed, not necessarily every single weight class.

Check it out on Facebook here:
https://fb.watch/iKG0irKIxj/?mibextid=cr9u03

or check it out on YouTube here
https://youtu.be/mzaG0i3QQdk

[KDunbar]

Mr. Bill Archer joined Mat Time to discuss the new modified pill system and clarified #1 and #2 will be separated, when needed, not necessarily every single weight class.

Check it out on Facebook here:
https://fb.watch/iKG0irKIxj/?mibextid=cr9u03

or check it out on YouTube here
https://youtu.be/mzaG0i3QQdk

I listened to what was said and my understanding is that a group, made up of coaches (the make-up of which is not a fixed group or committee but whoever is representing participating teams that decide to attend) will use the rankings posted on wv mat (which was voted upon by whichever coaches decide to participate in those rankings) and whatever other criteria the group decides to use at the time of the meeting, with this criteria having not been predetermined, and what ever else comes up in the discussion of that group and then using some part or all of that to decide if there is a clear and agreed upon #1 and #2 in each particular weight class. I believe the AAA caoches are the only ones involved in the AAA weight classes and AA/A coaches the only ones involved in the AA/A weight classes. I thought there was a mention of AA and A being done seperately, but I believe that was not really what was meant. In terms of the date of the "rankings" being used, it was not stated , but the most recent ones are out and dated today. However, I thought there was mention elsewhere, not by Coach Arthur, of rankings being done after regional results are available. If the meeting of coaches we are discussing is to be on Sunday, 2/19, then those new rankings would have to be completed about 12 hours or so after the completion of the regionals. The decision as to whether to "adjust" the original pill pairings for any particular weight class would not be influenced by who was 2nd or 3rd (if there was any thought that this was unclear) but only in the case where #1 and #2 were clear cut (based upon the above group of coaches decision) and they were both in the brackets where they would be meeting prior to the finals. Again, there was no mention of any intention to keep #2 and #3 both away from #1 when there was not a consensus that #2 was clearly better than #3.

This is what I heard and gleemed from what was said. I may have misunderstood some things and welcome any corrections. My comments are not meant to be positive or negative and certainly not critical. It does sound like it is possibly a somewhat "fluid" situation and maybe it is a learning process to get started on and work out the bugs as they go along. It sounds like we are dealing with a larger, more diverse and variable group involved in the decision making than I and possibly others were thinking of. Sort of like the group at a seeding meeting and not a seeding group or committee like being used at the OVACs the past few years. Again, I'm not trying to make a statement for one being better than the other.

[standincoach]

What about a true second in region and state until the rocket science task of figuring wrestling brackets out can be discovered

[SMC]

KDunbar you are correct. Regardless of which region you are in the 2nd and 3rd place finishers in the same region will be on the same side of the bracket and opposite of their regional champion. Additionally, if there is not a clear cut ranked #2 I believe the intention is to leave that weight class alone without making any changes.

Well, obviously unlikely, but I can think of a few scenarios where the #1 or #2 wrestler finishes 4th at region without losing to anyone where they actually took the mat.

One example would be if there are only four kids in a weight class and a wrestler has a health issue or injury but weighs in knowing they can qualify without having to actually take the mat and wrestle. We’ve actually seen this scenario play out in recent years though it wasn’t one of the top 2 wrestlers. I know, unlikely, but it just takes a weight with four kids, one ranked top 2, and having an injury or Covid.

This scenario actually occurred in 2021. As a result the #2 in the state at the time wrestled the #1 in the state first match of the tournament because of the pill and his finish at regionals. Never stepped on the mat at regionals. So it does happen.

Not exactly. In the particular scenario you are alluding to, #2 and #3 wrestled in the first round of the state tournament. #1 was in the other half of the bracket.