So, a third match this season between Mendez and Beau; boo!
NCAA brackets and seeds discussions (brackets out @8 pm)
- Thread starter wrestlingfan22
- Start date
Better Mendez then Alirez , I don’t think that’s a good match up for beau at all
The NCAA bracket reveal is a fabulous day. I pour over them for wishlist bouts and favorite u-dogs. As rounds pass, the fun re-racks as upsets and unforeseen wrestlebacks track AA dreams, like Tyler’s sizzling run to #3. Unlike aging hikers, this tournament never gets old.
As ever, Matness > Madness.
As ever, Matness > Madness.
If Kerk beat Gable it would be more likely they meet in the semis. Think about that.
It gives me a week’s worth of work jokes. “Did you fill out a bracket? Who were your final four at 149?” And they laugh….
That's not their records. It's how they rate against the other 32 opponents at that weight based on the matrix. LOL!
They are not records. It's how they rank against the other 32 competitors at the weight per the matrix. Hardy wins every time so he would be the 1 seed.
Huh? What? How about how they actually did on the mat? Hardy didn't win every time LMAO.
I do know that Hardy has 3 actual losses to the 32 while Bartlett only has 1.
That calls into question the accuracy of what "the matrix" is designed to predict, no?
Last edited:
I hired CJF to take the focus off me
They scrap pretty good. Not much offense but very physical matches. I think Arnold gets him this round.
So you think Smith trips backing up?
It's a formula based on multiple criteria.
Head to head 25
Quality wins 20
Conference tournament placement 15
win% 10
common opponent 10
Coaches rank 10
RPI 10
Hardy is ranked #1 in the coaches poll, Bartlett is #2, Hardy get 10 points. Hardy is #4 in RPI, Bartlett is #5, Hardy gets 10 more points. Hardy finished 1st at Big 10's. Bartlett finished 3rd. Hardy gets 15 points. Bartlett beat Hardy. Bartlett gets 25 points. Bartlett has a better win%. Bartlett gets 10 points. They are even with 35 points each and there is 20 left for quality wins and 10 for common opponents. Nomad has run the numbers and Hardy gets more quality win points so he gets 15 points and Bartlett gets 5. Now it's 50 for Hardy and 40 for Bartlett. They split 5 each for common opponents and Hardy's total is 55 and Bartlett's is 45. The matrix seeds Hardy higher than Bartlett
When you run the formula, Hardy gets more of the pie when compared to each of the other 32 qualifiers at the weight. This is how the NCAA seeds wrestlers. They do have discretion to move a competitor up to 3 seeds higher or lower.
So why isn't actual record against the 32 qualifiers part of the wonderful matrix? Actual record against qualifiers tells you way more than the stupid azz RPI or "coaches poll" [eye roll] - wrestlers don't control their own schedule.
Sounds like the "matrix" was created without any testing for statistical significance of the inputs used.
That's a completely different argument. You would need to contact the NCAA and petition to have it changed. There should be changes, in my opinion, but this is what the NCAA uses to try to take the subjectivity out of seeding.
The "coaches poll" isn't subjective? Why on earth would you not include the most important statistic which is 100% OBJECTIVE and 0% subjective - actual record against the field???
Again, I'm not advocating for the matrix. Just explaining. Here is who you need to contact
Mark Bedics Director, Championships and Alliances 317-917-6541 / Cell: 317-966-6762 / mbedics@ncaa.org
Strickenberger will clearly be over spratley he pinned him in the dual and just beat him in the big 12 finals
Oh God, can you imagine getting an email from CJF. Instant delete for that 12 page manifesto.
Just be glad you're not a Rutgers fan. They're grousing about which of their wrestlers are going to be fodder at NCAAs.
Too funny, I'm not calling a bozo at the NCAA who creates statistical models that are supposed to be "predictive" and they don't even test them and ignore the FACT that ACTUAL RESULTS against the ACTUAL FIELD contradicts their silly azz "model". Only a fool engages arrogant morons.
@jmadden1998 he has a point. Whether it's the intended point or not ...
Head to head is 25% of the puzzle. Based on the complete matrix, Spratley ranks higher. Again, they can move guys so they could put Strickenberger ahead of Spratley but no guarantees
This is near-ideal for Lilledahl. Would be hard-pressed to draw it up any better, unless Spratley were somehow in the other half too, or unless one thinks there's a cut/recovery advantage to getting Ramos or Figueroa in the semis instead of the finals.
Strickenberger did not get a top-33 RPI (did not qualify?). He's gonna lose some sim matches that he might have otherwise won.
Reminder that the simulation is a full round-robin. He would beat Spratley in their sim match, but could still end up with a worse overall sim W-L record and therefore get a lower seed.
I agree that if they are consecutive seeds, then they should flip. I also doubt the committee will care that far down unless it's to punish someone for conference tourney injury defaults.
Last edited:
This would be ideal. I do think LL matches up well with Figs but being opposite Ramos, Robinson, figs is damn good. Robinson is actually the one who kind of worries me the most with his length
If it was, that sucks for Mendez! Would have to go Vombaur, Bartlett, Hardy/Alirez. Talk about a meat grinder.
Last edited:
Strickenberger didn't have enough matches at 125 for an RPI. He wrestled 133 some
Similar threads
