New feature from WrestleStat

[andegre]

"Quality Matches"

There's an additional tab on a Wrestlers profile page. This will show the matches, as well as the Win% and Bns% vs opponents (starters) ranked in the top 16.

As requested by a fellow BWI poster.

Check it out: https://www.wrestlestat.com/wrestler/44839/hall-mark/profile

 

[psumacw]

please and thank you!

 

[Dogwelder]

Am I correct to assume ”Bns%” is on a scale of 100% = totally bananas, and 0% = sane/totally not bananas?

 

[CholleyVandine]

Nice addition to the site!

Completely unrelated question: Mark Hall only has one regular decision win all season. Shouldn't his bonus rate be 92.86% instead of 81.25%?

It looks like his wins over Joey Gunther by disqualification and Joe Grello by injury default not only don't count as bonus wins but actually count as non-bonus wins.

He was beating Gunther 19-6 plus riding time with 20 seconds left when Gunther was disqualified for stalling. But the match pulls down his bonus percentage.

Does that not seem insane?

 

[andegre]

Nice addition to the site!

Completely unrelated question: Mark Hall only has one regular decision win all season. Shouldn't his bonus rate be 92.86% instead of 81.25%?

It looks like his wins over Joey Gunther by disqualification and Joe Grello by injury default not only don't count as bonus wins but actually count as non-bonus wins.

He was beating Gunther 19-6 plus riding time with 20 seconds left when Gunther was disqualified for stalling. But the match pulls down his bonus percentage.

Does that not seem insane?

It does, but that's the way WIN and NCAA apparently count them as well.

Here's a twitter thread that was discussing this earlier this week/last week:

 

[CholleyVandine]

It does, but that's the way WIN and NCAA apparently count them as well.

Here's a twitter thread that was discussing this earlier this week/last week:

View embedded media

I think it was my response to the first Tweet in that thread that started the discussion ...

Everybody's answer seems to be, ""That's the way they do it over there." Nobody has been able to point me to the world where it makes sense for a wrestler to have his bonus percentage pulled down by a match he was leading by 14 points when his opponent was dq'd for stalling.

Going into the Gunther match, Hall's bonus rate was 90%.

After racking up 19 points and bludgeoning Gunther into a dq, Hall's bonus rate fell to 82%.

I just want someone to explain to me how that makes sense.

 

[psumacw]

I think it was my response to the first Tweet in that thread that started the discussion ...

Everybody's answer seems to be, ""That's the way they do it over there." Nobody has been able to point me to the world where it makes sense for a wrestler to have his bonus percentage pulled down by a match he was leading by 14 points when his opponent was dq'd for stalling.

Going into the Gunther match, Hall's bonus rate was 90%.

After racking up 19 points and bludgeoning Gunther into a dq, Hall's bonus rate fell to 82%.

I just want someone to explain to me how that makes sense.

it's just a default. only looking at the box score and seeing a DQ, you have no idea the reason. i have no idea what % of DQs are for stalling vs illegal moves or how many of the stalling DQs would have been decisions vs bonus, but it's hard to argue it's not easier to call all DQs either bonus or nonbonus.

i think it would make the most sense to drop the DQ from both the numerator and denominator for a win, but it is what it is. i doubt there are a ton of people splitting hairs over a few percentage points of bonus rate, maybe i'm wrong.

 

[SetonHallPirate]

I think it was my response to the first Tweet in that thread that started the discussion ...

Everybody's answer seems to be, ""That's the way they do it over there." Nobody has been able to point me to the world where it makes sense for a wrestler to have his bonus percentage pulled down by a match he was leading by 14 points when his opponent was dq'd for stalling.

Going into the Gunther match, Hall's bonus rate was 90%.

After racking up 19 points and bludgeoning Gunther into a dq, Hall's bonus rate fell to 82%.

I just want someone to explain to me how that makes sense.

I'll be happy to expla...HEY, LOOK, A PIRATE!

In all seriousness, I would think all victories that aren't three-point victories should count under bonus rate...after all, they do achieve bonus points for them. That said, I just provide the raw data (match results), and don't calculate these figures myself.

 

[CholleyVandine]

it's hard to argue it's not easier to call all DQs either bonus or nonbonus.

Why? It seems like it would be just as easy to not count it at all in the bonus point calculation. That's the solution I suggested. It seems simple and logical.

it is what it is.

What it is is goofy. What it easily could be is not goofy.

i doubt there are a ton of people splitting hairs over a few percentage points of bonus rate

If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right.

 

[Unbiased_football_fan]

"Quality Matches"

There's an additional tab on a Wrestlers profile page. This will show the matches, as well as the Win% and Bns% vs opponents (starters) ranked in the top 16.

As requested by a fellow BWI poster.

Check it out: https://www.wrestlestat.com/wrestler/44839/hall-mark/profile

Thank you! This is a fantastic feature, because it is information that has some of the highest predictive power for how a wrestler will do at nationals. I threw a bunch of advanced stats into some software that I use for making neural networks, and the variable selection algorithm that uses genetic algorithms returned Top 16 bonus rate as one of the most significant inputs. Of course after I got this result I thought about it and was like duh, I didn't need a computer to know that! (apparently I did though)

Why is Top 16 bonus rate important? Because if you are a higher end wrestler most of your matches (usually all but one) will be against top 16 guys at nationals. Yes, you can luck out and pull a Lugo like last year and beat three 20-something ranked guys to AA, but it is rare. If you can bonus Top 16 guys you score more for your team and you have a lower likelihood of something bad happening (some guy gets a massive sweat going and he slips out of your hand). These guys that wrestle one takedown / one point matches are the guys that get "upset".

For my fellow BWI posters (I didn't look up the data for everyone), here is a rough "Top Ten" based on career bonus rate for current wrestlers against Top 16 opponents:

Spencer Freakin Lee 55%
Zahid Valencia 43%
Rasheed Shakur 42% (Wow, I believe in you Shak!)
Nick Lee 31%
Seth Gross 30%
Kollin Moore 28%
Gable Stevenson 27%
Mark Hall 26%
Vincenzo Joseph 25%
Dom Demas 25%
Ben Darmstadt 25%

PSU has 4 guys in the top ten and an overall team rate of 25%. This bodes well for NCAAs! For comparison Nolf, Nickal, Cassar, and Retherford for their careers were 62%, 44%, 33%, and 52%. I haven't looked at it but I think it is harder for higher weights. The rate generally goes up over a career but drops at NCAAs during a season because you see a bunch of great guys in a row.

Iowa's team is 15%, and if you take away Lee it is 9.1%.

Lee 16/29
DeSanto 3/31
Murin 0/13
Lugo 1/35
Young 3/29
Marinelli 2/35 (surprising)
Kemerer 6/28 (0 for 3 at 174 so far)
Assad 0/2
Warner 3/21
Cass 0/4

Especially watch for young wrestlers who get bonus against highly ranked guys, those are your future stars. For instance Sasso is 2/8 (25%).

 

[psumacw]

Why? It seems like it would be just as easy to not count it at all in the bonus point calculation. That's the solution I suggested. It seems simple and logical.



What it is is goofy. What it easily could be is not goofy.



If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right.

i notice you didn't include my line "i think it would make the most sense to drop the DQ from both the numerator and denominator for a win". i'm agreeing with you.

i'm just trying to put forth some counterarguments as to why it's done the way it is. DQs don't necessarily mean that the winner was winning by a lot and therefore, it could be argued, that they should not be counted as bonus point victories (numerator). it could also be argued that all matches that start should be considered matches (denominator), even if they end in a DQ. in our current age, we can watch pretty much every match on video and determine whether the winner was winning by 8 points or more at the time of the DQ, but that wasn't always the case. i'm assuming this scoring formula is a relic from an earlier time.

again, because i'm not sure you saw it the first time, i think the most "fair" would be to remove the match completely from the calculation.