Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
WillieBoy

World Championships should be double elimination

Recommended Posts

This baloney at Worlds of 'lose and you go home" - UNLESS the wrestler that beat you does well - is crap.

 

Make it a double elimination tournament. With seeding now for higher spots it only makes sense.

 

Traveling massive distances to wrestle one match is a waste of time, money and effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Traveling massive distances to wrestle one match is a waste of time, money and effort.

 

This.  For all of the complaining we here about the lack of funding for this sport here and worldwlde, the UWW tournament format does not help. Just because it is done at Worlds doesn't mean it has to be that way at other tournaments, particularly if one is arguing that all other tournaments are simply warm-ups for Worlds.

 

I should say I like the new 2-day format moving forward for the Olympics - one match per round per wrestler should maximize performance. 

Edited by Voice_of_the_Quakers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't mind at least seeing the quarter-final loser also being brought back in. If they advanced that far they have proven themselves to be one of the top wrestlers in the bracket and deserving at a shot at the Bronze. It would also help some in solve the unfortunate situation of three of the top wrestlers getting drawn into the same side of the bracket. At least the new seed program will eventually somewhat help with that last issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i've never been annoyed by repechage.

 

but with the massive wait time idk why they can't go full wb's.

 

and with OLY going 16-man, it even makes more sense to go full wb's.

While I am not a big fan of the "follow the leader" format I can see why its used, but like I said earlier there's absolutely no reason for there to be byes in the repechage especially when theres brackets with 20+ wrestlers. We always talk about things that are good or bad for the sport. That's one of the things that IMO is bad for the sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm guessing you are the one in another thread that complained about byes and I responded. I don't believe you mentioned this being in the repechage that time so I was more confused.

But the answer is still the same, unless you have a perfect power of two or with this form of repechage a coincidental same number of rounds wrestled by the finalists I'm not sure how you fill that.

So are you complaining about the fact that each round of repechage has a bye to one guy and the other guy comes up from previous round? Don't forget that each succeeding guy with the bye did have an extra round in the championships so it would be the same number of bouts although obviously the rest between previous bouts is different. 

In looking at MFS repechage threads, I see that 11 of the 16 were won by semi losers. I would expect a higher win ratio by semis as those guys should be better even with minimal seeding. Note:NCAA was 10 of 20 where the semi loser sits the 1st round of session 5 so similar to what happened here since only 2 guys from 1st rd of repechage made it through the 3 rds, in other words, not much of a difference in bouts wrestled recently at the time.

I'm not trying to bust chops here just trying to see what the actual complaint is. 

There's no perfect bracket other than a round robin but even that would be impractical in larger events. Imagine Fargo or Va Beach done as a round robin! We'd still be there!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not complaining about the repechage having a bye round to round.

 

I am talking about when a wrestler who has a bye in the championship bracket makes it to the finals and his bye falls into the repechage. There are wrestlers who lost to someone else who doesn't make the finals that could fill out those brackets.

 

65kg had 1 bye in the repechage

70 had 1

86k had 2

97k had 1

And 125 had 1

 

These byes could have been filled other round losers who's opponent didn't make the finals.

The title of this thread recommends fill double elimination wrestle backs. I was stating a reason in support of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming we can't go to double elimination, I think a good adjustment would be to cross bracket the semi-finalists.  This way, if the 3 best wrestlers in the event are in the same bracket and the 2nd an 3rd best both lose to the best, all 3 would/should medal.  The way it is now, the 2nd and 3rd would meet in the consi-semi's and only one could medal.  It's not perfect because the 2nd and 3rd may have met each other early in the tournament and one would be completely eliminated, but it would lessen the chance that the 3rd best wrestler would not medal at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You were also saying you understood why this method. But again, double elimination wouldn't solve the bye situation except in a power of two (or halfway between powers as in 24 wrestlers)

It was late when I was trying to explain so my thoughts weren't very clear. My main point is that with the current system there are wrestlers that are 1 and done mean while a bye "earns" a spot in the repechage instead of a wrestler. I feel that theres got to be a better way to ensure that the repechage is a more full bracket. To me it feels like a waste that a bye earns a spot over an actual wrestler. With double elimination the consolation bracket is as full as possoble so from that prospective it does solve the problem I mentioned.

 

As for commenting in a different thread, that wasn't me. This is the only thread regarding brackets that I posted in.

Edited by BigTenFanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm for 32 men bracket - more diverse. Double elimination format. I think they wanted this current format for time limitation. I think IOC is too greedy and doesn't see the picture. Wrestling must be one of the core sports which make it easier for wrestling to expand the format.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to throw out the numbers (which everyone generally acknowledges without specificity)-

 

As an example MFS 65

31 wrestlers- 30 championship bouts (same either format)

 

repechage - 5 bouts (add 1 with true 3rd- and add 2 more for 5th 7th) total 38.

 

double- 8 places 30 more bouts for a total of 60.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to throw out the numbers (which everyone generally acknowledges without specificity)-

 

As an example MFS 65

31 wrestlers- 30 championship bouts (same either format)

 

repechage - 5 bouts (add 1 with true 3rd- and add 2 more for 5th 7th) total 38.

 

double- 8 places 30 more bouts for a total of 60.

A system I would suggest to fill out the repechage completely is if a finalist had a first round bye, have the quarter final loser that did not lose to the finalist drop into the first round of repechage. So at 65k Adam Baitrov would be placed into the first round of the repechage. This does not create extra rounds, just fills out the repechage brackets completely.

 

So basically use the system that's in place now, but in addition to that use the next highest advancing wrestler to fill out the repechage if there ends up being byes in it.

Edited by BigTenFanboy

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...