Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
PRyan2012

Bye to Finals

Recommended Posts

Is it the best system for our trials? It looks like a fresh Varner could have beaten Snyder without the mini tourney. Won the 1st match and then gassed in the last two and was just spent.

 

None of the other countries get this privilege . It is asking a lot to go through a grueling mini tourney and beat the world champ in 3 matches. The Burroughs spot would not have mattered but still it was incredibly unfair task for Howe.

 

I watched these guys wrestle four grueling matches at 97 and 74 and then get to face a fresh world champ. The mini tourney winner never wins it. Cael beat Fullhart in 04 trials but that is the only one I remember doing it.

 

Should we change this incentive? I think so...thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a defending world champ should be given tremendous consideration and advantage/benefit in the selection process--it was earned.  That said, I agree that it is nearly impossible to navigate a very tough prelim tournament and then get thrown into a best of three series.  I favor the returning champ drawing a bye into the semi-finals and having to win there before advancing into the best of 3.   If we believe that the defending champ should automatically bye into the finals, then the mini-tournament field would have to be reduced so the champ there actually has a viable chance in the best of the 3, but then #9 seeded guys like Molinaro or Cox wouldn't even be invited into the mix.

Edited by Coach_J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am happy that it is nearly impossible for our defending world champions to not make the team.  

 

If they don't deserve to make the team then they will certainly lose at Worlds and be vulnerable at next year's trials.  If they win the Gold again, they will remain nearly impossible to knock off.  I think it's a great system for Team USA, but a bad system if you root for a guy currently stuck in line at 74 or 97.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it the best system for our trials? It looks like a fresh Varner could have beaten Snyder without the mini tourney. Won the 1st match and then gassed in the last two and was just spent.

 

None of the other countries get this privilege . It is asking a lot to go through a grueling mini tourney and beat the world champ in 3 matches. The Burroughs spot would not have mattered but still it was incredibly unfair task for Howe.

 

I watched these guys wrestle four grueling matches at 97 and 74 and then get to face a fresh world champ. The mini tourney winner never wins it. Cael beat Fullhart in 04 trials but that is the only one I remember doing it.

 

Should we change this incentive? I think so...thoughts?

you should have been around in the 80's when there was a ladder for the trials.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there are enough examples of a wrestler coming through the mini tourney and then winning a best of 3 at junior and senior levels to make me ok with the process... i firmly believe we send our best reps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely thing both Snyder and Burroughs deserve an easier path to making the Olympic team.  The bye to the finals is fair, but not when the finals are the same day as the qualifying tourney.  I suggest USA Wrestling hold the qualifying mini-tournament one day, then the best of three finals the next day.  It would give the challenger a 18-24 hour break between wrestling his/her last match of the qualifier before challenging the returning world medalist.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely thing both Snyder and Burroughs deserve an easier path to making the Olympic team.  The bye to the finals is fair, but not when the finals are the same day as the qualifying tourney.  I suggest USA Wrestling hold the qualifying mini-tournament one day, then the best of three finals the next day.  It would give the challenger a 18-24 hour break between wrestling his/her last match of the qualifier before challenging the returning world medalist.

 

I agree with this 100%

I would have liked to seen a fresh Varner vs a fresh Snyder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ArmyFan nailed it.  Giving an advantage to a returning World champ makes perfect sense, but why not wrestle the next day, the next weekend, or whatever?  Granted, I think that posters are overrating the advantage given to a wrestler on bye.  Yes there is a net advantage, but part of competing better the second match for Snyder and Burroughs is that they're finally warmed up.  You're never at your best in the first match of a tournament.  It sort of depends on the wrestler as to how much of an advantage or disadvantage sitting or going through the mini tournament will be.  For the most part, yes, the wrestler with the bye is more fresh.  The easy fix is to delay the finals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah in other countries you can get a bye to the team spot without having to wrestle a match. 

 

I think the current system is fine but if you wanted to have a challenge tournament a day or several days or whatever before the best of 3 wrestle offs with returning medalists that would be fine too. 

 

there is no "best" way of doing it though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be in favor of giving consideration to any athlete in the top-20 of the world rankings, if the world rankings were any good but they have not been proven to be very good with constant shuffling.

 

Currently, I don't think there is a good system in place for deciding who deserves special consideration. I don't like the idea of giving too much weight to past years (such as including past World Team Members in the bye process) but when an athlete has proven themselves on the world stage (as a medal has proven) they should be given some consideration without having to wade through a lot of domestic matches.

 

Ideally, wrestling the finals on the following day would be solution if it weren't for the weight issues and the day prior weigh-ins. I have always had a problem with all of the senior level events that give weight allowances. I never understood why you would define a weight class and then constantly give weight allowances to the athletes that compete in that weight class. But that is another issue all together...

 

I am not sure there is an ideal system that can be developed right now and I think the current one is pretty good given all the information we have available to us...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think our system is pretty solid. The reason they get byes to the finals is because they have already proven that they are capable of obtaining a medal on the world stage. Why risk the possibility of your best guy getting stuck on a fluke in the quarters? I also firmly believe that this system sends our best guy about 90% of the time each year. With your logic of "A fresh Varner would have beat Snyder". I guess in the same breath you have to say a fresh Dake would have beat Burroughs. I'm a HUGE Dake fan, but I think we all know that it just doesn't work that way. It is a system that literally works as an advantage for our best guys and personally wouldn't have it any other way. A good example of this is the fact that Molinaro got a fluke win over Metcalf. Metcalf has straight up beat him 9/10 times but that one time just so happened to occur at the trials. Yes, Frank beat Brent but be honest when you say who you'd rather see rep us at the games between the 2. THAT is why we have this system.

Edited by broyles_152

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it the best system for our trials? It looks like a fresh Varner could have beaten Snyder without the mini tourney. Won the 1st match and then gassed in the last two and was just spent.

 

None of the other countries get this privilege . It is asking a lot to go through a grueling mini tourney and beat the world champ in 3 matches. The Burroughs spot would not have mattered but still it was incredibly unfair task for Howe.

 

I watched these guys wrestle four grueling matches at 97 and 74 and then get to face a fresh world champ. The mini tourney winner never wins it. Cael beat Fullhart in 04 trials but that is the only one I remember doing it.

 

Should we change this incentive? I think so...thoughts?

 

Is it so easy to forget how hard it is to become a wold champ?  They are not sprouting from our fields like dandilions.  If someone wants to be on the team and we've got the champ, they should need to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are the best option.  Moving the best of three to the second day causes two major problems, 1) weigh-ins 2) the challenger doesn't get the opportunity to show that they can run the full gauntlet on one day like they would have to at worlds or olympics.

 

I liked the change from last year that only world medalists got the bye instead of just whoever won the US Nationals. The ones with the bye have proven themselves at the highest level. I think it's fine to make it harder to take them out. 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it the best system for our trials? It looks like a fresh Varner could have beaten Snyder without the mini tourney. Won the 1st match and then gassed in the last two and was just spent.

 

None of the other countries get this privilege . It is asking a lot to go through a grueling mini tourney and beat the world champ in 3 matches. The Burroughs spot would not have mattered but still it was incredibly unfair task for Howe.

 

I watched these guys wrestle four grueling matches at 97 and 74 and then get to face a fresh world champ. The mini tourney winner never wins it. Cael beat Fullhart in 04 trials but that is the only one I remember doing it.

 

Should we change this incentive? I think so...thoughts?

I disagree that Varner would have won any best of 3 between him and Snyder. He's shown lots of times that his gas tank isn't his biggest strength. I think Snyder would have been a huge favorite in matches 2 and 3 after that first killer match no matter how fresh Varner was before the series. His gas tank is just much much better. Edited by maligned

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am assuming the point of the system is to pick the best team rather than to be fair.  Giving the challenge tournament winner time to rest is more fair, but it will not produce a better team.  Guys lose to guys they shouldn't.  Upsets happen.  

 

I would have been miserable if Marable represented the USA and Burroughs stayed home if Marable picked a more opportune time to beat him.  Marable would have totally deserved it and it would have been fair, but it would have made our team worse.  Just like I would have been miserable if Dake (a guy I love) beat Burroughs and then went on to lose at Worlds (and all evidence says he would lose at Worlds).  

 

The current system is designed to keep our Medalists from being upset by an inferior wrestler or a bad style matchup.  The only way to get the unfair advantage is by being a world medalist.  The only way to keep it going forward is by continuing to be a world medalist.  I think it's about the best system we could have for winning USA medals.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Army Fan 100% The next day would be the best bet. Would Snyder have beaten Varner then-probably but they are razor close and a mini tourney I think made the difference in that series when all wrestled on the same day-that is insane! Varner could barely shoot in that 2nd and 3rd match. Varner also outplaced him at Yairgan. But I do believe Snyder is our best rep just not so sure he would have beaten Varner if they were both fresh.  The Howe/ Burroughs would not have mattered one bit. But honestly we have never wrestled all the matches in one day and then placed a guy in the best of three finals against a world champ. Varner almost pulled it off if not for pure and utter fatigue.

Edited by PRyan2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think the system is good.  It's a compromise between what they initially implemented (having to win the best 2 out of 3 AND placing higher at an international event) and simply throwing evreryone into a bracket.  One consideration that isn't usually mentioned on this board is that it allows the #1 guy to spend more time focusing on international competition rather than spending all time leading up to the trials gameplanning for the other US wrestlers.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The world championships should be a mini tournament with the winner getting to face last years World Champ.  The mini-tournament winner should get at least 3 hours rest before facing last years champ.  

 

We only have this system in the US because we're so incredibly weak right now internationally.  We could very conceivably have 1 medal in Rio and USA is going to do whatever it can to sent whomever they think is the best.  Iron sharpens Iron.  Our system sucks, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could have an event several months before (like the US Open) determine the finalists -- then build up hype for the finals and market it like a fight card. 

 

Might make more sense from a marketing standpoint.  Marketing an event like the team trials is difficult if you don't know who will be in the finals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The championship series cannot be moved to a different day because the one who has not won a world medal has to prove he can 5 or 6 tough matches in a day.

Yes, this. The previous medalist has proven they can go through a meat-grinder of a tournament and beat the best in the world. If you are going to send someone else, wouldn't you like them to prove they can go through a grueling tournament and still get big wins? Not to mention the OTT is going to be much easier than a world championship tourney. If any part of the selection process needs to be revamped, it's probably the weights where we don't have a previous medalist. As single elimination could send our best option home on a fluke loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...