165 Rankings
- Thread starter 4INSBU
- Start date
I’d assume it’s because of finals results from last year. It’s a short term ranking IMO and will change Jan/Feb.
Hah, you mean the rankings you used to be able to see for free but now are behind a paywall? No thanks...
InterMat has Marinelli at #2/Wick #3. (And their rankings are still free to look at.)
What rankings are you looking at? Everything I see has Marinelli ahead of Wick.
I'm guessing he's talking about WrestleStat's.
When Marinelli beat Wick this year, be BARELY moved past him in ELO rating, therefore [Bull] was #2, and Wick #3. Then the very next week, Wick wrestles in a tourney where a bonused everyone and won, while Marinelli wrestled 1 match (vs Princeton). Because Wick got all those bonus wins, he's ELO rating moved up enough to jump Marinelli again.
If you look at weeks 4, 5, and 6 rank history for both wrestlers, you can see the flip-flop:
Wick: https://www.wrestlestat.com/wrestler/44730/wick-evan/profile
Marinelli: https://www.wrestlestat.com/wrestler/44574/marinelli-alex/profile
When Marinelli beat Wick this year, be BARELY moved past him in ELO rating, therefore [Bull] was #2, and Wick #3. Then the very next week, Wick wrestles in a tourney where a bonused everyone and won, while Marinelli wrestled 1 match (vs Princeton). Because Wick got all those bonus wins, he's ELO rating moved up enough to jump Marinelli again.
If you look at weeks 4, 5, and 6 rank history for both wrestlers, you can see the flip-flop:
Wick: https://www.wrestlestat.com/wrestler/44730/wick-evan/profile
Marinelli: https://www.wrestlestat.com/wrestler/44574/marinelli-alex/profile
These are the ONLY rankings I look at this year. They the only ones that take results, common sense and combine them
Wrestlestats the best for everything else, and is the best as far as non human rankings. Most innovative tool for wrestling fans in last 5 yrs IMO
I also think wrestlestat is a very cool tool
In two tries at NCAAs, Wick has finished ahead of Marinelli two times. That's got to count for something.
Rankings create conversation, which is good. Better when those discussions stay between the ditches. As the season wears on, they (the rankings) should start approximating NCAA Seedings, especially those published after the conference tourneys. Personally, never worth getting lathered up over, but do find the reasonable discussions they create interesting.
My pet abacus takes offense...
But I don't. I understand completely. Especially at this point in the year, where there is very little data to take into account. Certainly, the Dual Impact Index looks a lot better in February than it does in December.
