Jump to content
spladle08

US OPEN-freestyle discussion

Recommended Posts

Let's change the topic to a bit of US Open  trivia.  It is possible I missed someone, but I counted 3 wrestlers who won 6 matches at the Open (on the mat, so forfeit wins don't count).  Who are they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's change the topic to a bit of US Open  trivia.  It is possible I missed someone, but I counted 3 wrestlers who won 6 matches at the Open (on the mat, so forfeit wins don't count).  Who are they?

 

I'll give a hint:  they all did it differently. 

 

One won 3 in the championship bracket and 3 in consolation

One won 2 in champ and 4 in consolation

And one lost their first match, but then won 6 straight after that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mods, can you please start deleting these types of posts? There are (probably) dozens of similar claims floating around and they're all making a false parallel. You don't seem people crying on the college boards because Zain Retherford had an "easier" road to the NCAA finals while the Lock Haven kid had to battle his way through the field. 

 

I fail to see why this needs deleted? Many people feel the same way, thus the changes after years of clamoring for it. Most likely the process will change again in 2024 or sooner.

 

Lol they always go with the most extreme examples right. 

Take the (At the time maybe still now) 2 guys considered #1 and #2 in the world, change the qualifier to the Olympic finals, and have the guy who won the previous matchup... and the one we care about most as Americans,  losing... Yeah I guess under those circumstances sure, I think we would cry out it is the craziest system ever that they consider Saduleav so good he is guaranteed an Olympic Silver before the tourney even starts, despite having done nothing to be given that spot. 

 

I guess now that I typed it out, it is the exact same as earning a world medal or winning an NATIONAL OPEN tournament and getting a benefit for your accomplishment that everyone else also had a chance at.... 

 

You people r wild . 

 

 

 

 

I'll just draw an easy comparison because I'm lazy, but what about Dake/ Burroughs. JB is the best of this generation until proven otherwise, and Dake is not quite #2 in the world, but Dake did win a single match and one could reasonably assume that in 2016 he was top 4-ish in the world. So in my opinion, they are parallels. Extreme? Yes. Similar? Also yes, given the relative performance of the US at any given weight over the last 20 years internationally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fail to see why this needs deleted? Many people feel the same way, thus the changes after years of clamoring for it. Most likely the process will change again in 2024 or sooner.

 

 

I'll just draw an easy comparison because I'm lazy, but what about Dake/ Burroughs. JB is the best of this generation until proven otherwise, and Dake is not quite #2 in the world, but Dake did win a single match and one could reasonably assume that in 2016 he was top 4-ish in the world. So in my opinion, they are parallels. Extreme? Yes. Similar? Also yes, given the relative performance of the US at any given weight over the last 20 years internationally.

2016 Dake was up a weight vs Cox right for the Olympics?

But 2017 yes 6-6 Dake, then like 5-3/7-4 or something Burroughs. 

 

Yes they're both good, yes he possibly could've won, I know he had a match vs Imar and one vs Ringer earlier in the day with only 4 hours to recoup... 

 

I guess in that circumstance it was too much in a day, I don't see it being a bad deal to be able to "earn" your spot in the finals and elite wrestlers being able to enjoy the benefits of being the nations "best guy" to that point, the spots aren't just handed out, they are awarded for stellar performance. 

 

That said, with this new system I'm just curious what the newest excuses will be for the guys who don't make it... ohhh the outrage 

 

** I just think the fact that a guy had to wrestle 2 matches over an 8 hour period to earn a spot to challenge the incumbent, isn't that big of a deal...  but again its fixed so, thats enough

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was placed on the clock due to being passive. But it does make a good excuse (never ending)for him losing.

In a match where it was two push outs for Dake to Burrough's one, Dake was passive? Ok. It hardly takes a conspiracy to argue that if you implement a selection process that is fundamentally unfair to protect the incumbent, that this creates a level of official favoritism that will leak into everything. One bad Olympics did not suddenly cure the problem, especially given the stakes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a match where it was two push outs for Dake to Burrough's one, Dake was passive? Ok. It hardly takes a conspiracy to argue that if you implement a selection process that is fundamentally unfair to protect the incumbent, that this creates a level of official favoritism that will leak into everything. One bad Olympics did not suddenly cure the problem, especially given the stakes.

I re watched that match and all those matches on that day.

Dake had one good 4 pointer that he was fortunate time ran out on Burroughs. Congrats to him, he beat Burroughs...

 

He was passive second match, and was steam rolled in third.

No conspiracy ...just beat by a superior wrestler. He had a chance to steal one from best modern day wrestler. Blew it by being non agressive(passive.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll give a hint:  they all did it differently. 

 

One won 3 in the championship bracket and 3 in consolation

One won 2 in champ and 4 in consolation

And one lost their first match, but then won 6 straight after that.

 

Should have posted this in another thread, but in case anyone was curious, here are the answers and some comments on each:

 

Graff won 3 (one was a pigtail), lost to Garrett, then won 3 more, then lost 10-0 to Mega.  Mega's performance was outstanding against him, but here's a thought:  Mega has always been known for his exceptional gas tank and he was going up against a guy in his 8th match (most of anyone in Senior FS) who just had a very tough win vs. Wright while Nico had a bye due to Gross forfeiting out.  So not sure if they meet at WTT it will necessarily look the same as it did here.

 

Steiber won 2, lost to Eierman 6-5, then teched Ashnault, Simmons, Henderson, and Dardanes by a combined 44-2.  That's super impressive.  I still think he will be the guy at 65 when all is said and done.

 

Reenan lost 6-2 to Perry (talk about a terrible draw!) but won 6 straight to come back for 3rd.  He was impressive in those wins with 4 techs and a 6-2 win over Downey.  (Interesting note... the 6th win was a tight 8-6 vs. Evan Hansen in the very first round of wrestlebacks.  With a different bracket, Hansen likely would have placed, but instead he lost to David Taylor and Reenan and that was it)

Edited by rpm002

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mods, can you please start deleting these types of posts? There are (probably) dozens of similar claims floating around and they're all making a false parallel. You don't seem people crying on the college boards because Zain Retherford had an "easier" road to the NCAA finals while the Lock Haven kid had to battle his way through the field.

 

Horrible comparison. Zain wrestled the same amount of matches as Perry did at NCAAs and did not get to sit out until the finals. Do actually disagree with what bnwtng said though? I think USA Wrestling would flip it's lid if what he described actually happened!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a match where it was two push outs for Dake to Burrough's one, Dake was passive? Ok. It hardly takes a conspiracy to argue that if you implement a selection process that is fundamentally unfair to protect the incumbent, that this creates a level of official favoritism that will leak into everything. One bad Olympics did not suddenly cure the problem, especially given the stakes. 

You keep ignoring the fact that Burroughs wasn't the incumbent and had no advantage (unfair or otherwise) in the 2017 qualification.  The fact that you keep ignoring this exposes what this argument is all about for you.  

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...

×
×
  • Create New...