Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
dmm53

Head scratching seeds

Recommended Posts

How did Te'shan Campbell of Ohio State get the #13 seed?

 

• He has a 17-10 record that includes 2 medical forfeit wins.

 

• He lost 8 out of his last 11 matches (one of which was a medical forfeit win)

 

• He finished 9th at Big Tens and only won the 9th/10th place match by forfeit.

 

• The guys ranked below him include:

 

Ashworth (34-4) at #14

Valencia (25-8) at #15

Chavez (18-4) at #16

Bethea  (25-8)  unseeded in a pigtail

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How did Te'shan Campbell of Ohio State get the #13 seed?

 

• He has a 17-10 record that includes 2 medical forfeit wins.

 

• He lost 8 out of his last 11 matches (one of which was a medical forfeit win)

 

• He finished 9th at Big Tens and only won the 9th/10th place match by forfeit.

 

• The guys ranked below him include:

 

Ashworth (34-4) at #14

Valencia (25-8) at #15

Chavez (18-4) at #16

Bethea  (25-8)  unseeded in a pigtail

He smashed Valencia 14-0 and 165 Big Tens is an absolute meat-grinder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How did Te'shan Campbell of Ohio State get the #13 seed?

 

• He has a 17-10 record that includes 2 medical forfeit wins.

 

• He lost 8 out of his last 11 matches (one of which was a medical forfeit win)

 

• He finished 9th at Big Tens and only won the 9th/10th place match by forfeit.

 

• The guys ranked below him include:

 

Ashworth (34-4) at #14

Valencia (25-8) at #15

Chavez (18-4) at #16

Bethea  (25-8)  unseeded in a pigtail

Are you seriously in one thread saying guys should transfer to a weak conference so they can get an easy high seed, and then you start this thread in the total opposite direction?  Do you just like to complain that much?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you seriously in one thread saying guys should transfer to a weak conference so they can get an easy high seed, and then you start this thread in the total opposite direction?  Do you just like to complain that much?  

No, (a) the suggestion (which was not a separate thread!) about transferring to a weaker conference was a joke (an instance of *reductio ad absurdum* if you want to get technical; (b) this thread was about "head scratching seeds" (meaning one's that don't seem to make sense)  For example, Kemmerer at #6; and © critical engagement, discussion, and analysis is not equivalent to complaint.   Are you the kind of person who construes informed criticism as a kind of whining?   It's not.  

Edited by dmm53

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wick with the 10 seed and Massa with the 7 seed. Wick beat Massa twice this year. Massa 16-6 and Wick 23-6

Perhaps an instance of what seemed to happen widely:  punishing guys who medical forfeited.  Didn't Wick forfeit out in one of the consolation matches, or am I wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps an instance of what seemed to happen widely: punishing guys who medical forfeited. Didn't Wick forfeit out in one of the consolation matches, or am I wrong?

He MFF to Lewis in the third place match after just having beaten Massa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps an instance of what seemed to happen widely:  punishing guys who medical forfeited.  Didn't Wick forfeit out in one of the consolation matches, or am I wrong?

Wick forfeited out of the Consolation Finals. Looks like a case of trying to punish the MFFer actually punishes the guy who wrestled all the way through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marstellar beats Walsh earlier in the year and then loses in essentially a tie match with exactly 1:00 of riding time. Walsh gets #4 and Chance #9 at 40-2. I agree conference wins should be held higher, but that one second of riding time really cost Chance as he has a brutal draw now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marstellar beats Walsh earlier in the year and then loses in essentially a tie match with exactly 1:00 of riding time. Walsh gets #4 and Chance #9 at 40-2. I agree conference wins should be held higher, but that one second of riding time really cost Chance as he has a brutal draw now.

True, but I’m not confident he has any wins over 2018 AAs. He has a weak schedule, so that match mattered more than it would’ve otherwise. Plus he is in a stacked weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marstellar beats Walsh earlier in the year and then loses in essentially a tie match with exactly 1:00 of riding time. Walsh gets #4 and Chance #9 at 40-2. I agree conference wins should be held higher, but that one second of riding time really cost Chance as he has a brutal draw now.

brutal draws turn into nice runs if he takes someone’s bracket seed via upset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, (a) the suggestion (which was not a separate thread!) about transferring to a weaker conference was a joke (an instance of *reductio ad absurdum* if you want to get technical; (b) this thread was about "head scratching seeds" (meaning one's that don't seem to make sense)  For example, Kemmerer at #6; and © critical engagement, discussion, and analysis is not equivalent to complaint.   Are you the kind of person who construes informed criticism as a kind of whining?   It's not.  

It's not informed criticism to cherry pick only data that supports an argument and ignore everything else.  You chose record because it supported your stance, but there is nothing head scratching about a (17-10) guy being seeded ahead of a (25-8) guy he beat 14-0.  There is plenty of room to see this one in both directions without head scratching.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marstellar beats Walsh earlier in the year and then loses in essentially a tie match with exactly 1:00 of riding time. Walsh gets #4 and Chance #9 at 40-2. I agree conference wins should be held higher, but that one second of riding time really cost Chance as he has a brutal draw now.

That might be the worst seed I saw.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Record against common opponents has to be looked at closely if a seed looks weird. That's likely what caused it.  Keeping in mind that the formula punishes guys heavily for losing multiple times to the same opponent, and rewards them just as much for beating the same guy multiple times

 

The second most likely thing is quality wins, which are wins over guys who earned an allocation and then cashed it in last weekend (so not just a ranked guy, and not anyone who got an at large, only guys who earned an allocation and then auto-qualified).  Does a guy with a worse overall record have more quality wins?  That's probably why he's seeded higher.

 

Also keep in mind that losses to bad opponents don't matter outside of the +1 on your loss record.  Losing to the #1 seed hurts you immensely more than losing to a guy who didn't qualify. 

Edited by ThatLogSchuteWasCarrying

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...