Jump to content
CaliWrestler

Next year USA 74kg Olympic Trials

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, whaletail said:

Two matches prior to JB, or inclusive?

Assuming you mean the latter, I'm pretty sure that's how it works as well.

My interpretation is this, my man:

54 minutes ago, Lurker said:

He will have to beat two opponents on day 1 (this is assuming as in iron chefs example he goes 74). The semi is not the semi of the whole team trial, but of the day 1 challenge tournament. At 74 and 97, the challenge tournament will be a one match final, with the winner advancing to day 2 best of three. In the other weights the challenge tournament final will move to day two and be a best of three. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Dake would have to win two matches on day one to make the best of three final on day two provided both he and Jordan Burroughs go 74kg.  Burroughs only needs to make weight day 1.  

If Dake goes 86kg then he would only need to win one match on day one to make the best of three final on day two.   This is true whether or not Cox, Burroughs, Snyder or all three go 86kg.  Cox would get a bye to the semi final opposite Dake if that happens and be in the same situation.  Burroughs and Snyder would just get out into the bracket like anyone else though probably as the one and two seeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is seeding going to work in brackets where someone is sitting in the semi’s like 74kg next year? Will that person be seeded or automatically placed in the semi’s on the bottom side of the bracket so the #1 seed doesn’t have to see them until the finals of the mini-tournament? If that’s the case the difference between being the #1 seed and #2 seed (assuming the guy sitting in the semi’s isn’t seeded) is going to be huge. 

Think about the likely gauntlet for Nolf who, if it happened today, should be seeded 2nd or 3rd in the mini-tournament behind Imar (assuming KD isn’t seeded because he’s sitting in the semi’s). To make the team Nolf would have to beat Green, Dake, Imar, and then Burroughs twice. That’s insane. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, MDogg said:

How is seeding going to work in brackets where someone is sitting in the semi’s like 74kg next year? Will that person be seeded or automatically placed in the semi’s on the bottom side of the bracket so the #1 seed doesn’t have to see them until the finals of the mini-tournament? If that’s the case the difference between being the #1 seed and #2 seed (assuming the guy sitting in the semi’s isn’t seeded) is going to be huge. 

Think about the likely gauntlet for Nolf who, if it happened today, should be seeded 2nd or 3rd in the mini-tournament behind Imar (assuming KD isn’t seeded because he’s sitting in the semi’s). To make the team Nolf would have to beat Green, Dake, Imar, and then Burroughs twice. That’s insane. 

Below is the seeding criteria.  Presumably Burroughs will be in the best of three final on day 2.  The way I read it is that Dake should he go down will to 74 would be placed in the bottom semifinal of the day 1 challenge tournament as the 2 seed would (see c below).  Other wrestlers will be seeded according to the criteria.  No wrestler will get the 1 seed by the a criteria.  

In this would put Dake as the world medalist in the bottom semi-final in the bracket below.  So he would wrestle the winner of the bracket with the 2,3,6,7 seeds. 

https://bwi.forums.rivals.com/threads/olympic-trials-tickets.245568/page-4#post-4326500

Seeding Criteria 
a. A 2019 World Championship team member who qualifies the weight for the 2020 Olympic Games will automatically receive the #1 seed at the same weight category in which he qualified, with medalists earning an automatic berth to Part Two as explained below. 

b. Ranked criteria to be used when voting on seeds will be limited to the following: 

  1. i. Head to head within the last year.  The “last year” is defined as the April 2019 U.S. Open up to the 2020 U.S. Olympic Team Trials ‐ Wrestling.  
    1. 1. If there is a split in matches, the last win determines the top seed.  
  2. Common opponents within the “last year” as defined above. 
  3. Medalist at a United World Wrestling (UWW) calendar event within the “last year”. 
  4. Majority vote will decide the higher seed if there are multiple medalists from UWW calendar events within the “last year”. 

c. If there is one 2019 medalist from a UWW calendar event entering the Olympic weight category, that individual will be placed in the bottom semifinal (Part One). 
d.If there are two 2019 medalists from UWW calendar event(s) entering the Olympic weight, the seeding committee will determine which individual will be placed in both the top and bottom semifinal (Part One). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Fishbane said:

Below is the seeding criteria.  Presumably Burroughs will be in the best of three final on day 2.  The way I read it is that Dake should he go down will to 74 would be placed in the bottom semifinal of the day 1 challenge tournament as the 2 seed would (see c below).  Other wrestlers will be seeded according to the criteria.  No wrestler will get the 1 seed by the a criteria.  

In this would put Dake as the world medalist in the bottom semi-final in the bracket below.  So he would wrestle the winner of the bracket with the 2,3,6,7 seeds. 

https://bwi.forums.rivals.com/threads/olympic-trials-tickets.245568/page-4#post-4326500

Seeding Criteria 
a. A 2019 World Championship team member who qualifies the weight for the 2020 Olympic Games will automatically receive the #1 seed at the same weight category in which he qualified, with medalists earning an automatic berth to Part Two as explained below. 

b. Ranked criteria to be used when voting on seeds will be limited to the following: 

  1. i. Head to head within the last year.  The “last year” is defined as the April 2019 U.S. Open up to the 2020 U.S. Olympic Team Trials ‐ Wrestling.  
    1. 1. If there is a split in matches, the last win determines the top seed.  
  2. Common opponents within the “last year” as defined above. 
  3. Medalist at a United World Wrestling (UWW) calendar event within the “last year”. 
  4. Majority vote will decide the higher seed if there are multiple medalists from UWW calendar events within the “last year”. 

c. If there is one 2019 medalist from a UWW calendar event entering the Olympic weight category, that individual will be placed in the bottom semifinal (Part One). 
d.If there are two 2019 medalists from UWW calendar event(s) entering the Olympic weight, the seeding committee will determine which individual will be placed in both the top and bottom semifinal (Part One). 

I'm assuming c and d are intended to read "from UWW championships", not "UWW calendar event", or the semi-final is intended as semi-bracket.  It wouldn't make sense as that would mean (as writeen above) a bronze at yarigan gives you a bye to the semi, and that's not the case.  (I don't know if you copied and pasted or..., its just the language in c and d doesn't seem right)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Lurker said:

I'm assuming c and d are intended to read "from UWW championships", not "UWW calendar event", or the semi-final is intended as semi-bracket.  It wouldn't make sense as that would mean (as writeen above) a bronze at yarigan gives you a bye to the semi, and that's not the case.  (I don't know if you copied and pasted or..., its just the language in c and d doesn't seem right)

It was a copy and paste. I only changed how the outline was lettered/numbered for formatting.  That is the confusing thing, but I read it like you did that it should say championships given the context of the example bracket I think that is correct.

You can find the original text here - http://content.themat.com/forms/2020-OLY-MFS.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fishbane said:

It was a copy and paste. I only changed how the outline was lettered/numbered for formatting.  That is the confusing thing, but I read it like you did that it should say championships given the context of the example bracket I think that is correct.

You can find the original text here - http://content.themat.com/forms/2020-OLY-MFS.pdf

Yeah I've looked over it a bunch but somehow the language in there never stood out to me, until I read your post.  Interesting.....that has to mean something different than as its written.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I swear this statement does not serve to be snide: The presence of shoddy language in USAW policy ought not be a surprise. This year we've seen so much extraordinary stuff -- e.g., Taylor, Dake, Yianni proceedings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fishbane said:

Below is the seeding criteria.  Presumably Burroughs will be in the best of three final on day 2.  The way I read it is that Dake should he go down will to 74 would be placed in the bottom semifinal of the day 1 challenge tournament as the 2 seed would (see c below).  Other wrestlers will be seeded according to the criteria.  No wrestler will get the 1 seed by the a criteria.  

In this would put Dake as the world medalist in the bottom semi-final in the bracket below.  So he would wrestle the winner of the bracket with the 2,3,6,7 seeds. 

https://bwi.forums.rivals.com/threads/olympic-trials-tickets.245568/page-4#post-4326500

Seeding Criteria 
a. A 2019 World Championship team member who qualifies the weight for the 2020 Olympic Games will automatically receive the #1 seed at the same weight category in which he qualified, with medalists earning an automatic berth to Part Two as explained below. 

b. Ranked criteria to be used when voting on seeds will be limited to the following: 

  1. i. Head to head within the last year.  The “last year” is defined as the April 2019 U.S. Open up to the 2020 U.S. Olympic Team Trials ‐ Wrestling.  
    1. 1. If there is a split in matches, the last win determines the top seed.  
  2. Common opponents within the “last year” as defined above. 
  3. Medalist at a United World Wrestling (UWW) calendar event within the “last year”. 
  4. Majority vote will decide the higher seed if there are multiple medalists from UWW calendar events within the “last year”. 

c. If there is one 2019 medalist from a UWW calendar event entering the Olympic weight category, that individual will be placed in the bottom semifinal (Part One). 
d.If there are two 2019 medalists from UWW calendar event(s) entering the Olympic weight, the seeding committee will determine which individual will be placed in both the top and bottom semifinal (Part One). 

Thanks. I get the criteria for seeding, but I don’t understand how the brackets will actually be configured if Dake isn’t seeded. No matter how I play with the bracket the decision not to seed Dake (if that is in fact the decision) distorts the brackets. It really screws over the guy who winds up the 2 seed...who would’ve been the 3 seed if Dake had been seeded where he belongs in the mini-tournament (#1), but instead wound up the 2 seed and on the same side of the bracket as a fully rested Dake. 

Anybody in their right mind would rather be the 4 seed than the 2 or 3 seed. Assuming Imar is the 1 seed and Dake sits in the bottom half semi’s here is what the path for the 3 seed would look like compared to the 4 seed:

3 seed path to win the mini-tournament:

unseeded opponent 

2 seed

Dake (fully rested)

Imar

 

4 seed path to win the  mini-tournament:

Unseeded opponent

5 seed

Imar

Dake

 

It won’t effect the outcome at 74kg next year because I don’t see anybody even scoring on Dake in the mini-tournament. However, how’s this going to work at 86kg if Cox comes down and sits in the semi’s? Having the 1 seed in that mini-tournament is going to be HUGE next year.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MDogg said:

Thanks. I get the criteria for seeding, but I don’t understand how the brackets will actually be configured if Dake isn’t seeded. No matter how I play with the bracket the decision not to seed Dake (if that is in fact the decision) distorts the brackets. It really screws over the guy who winds up the 2 seed...who would’ve been the 3 seed if Dake had been seeded where he belongs in the mini-tournament (#1), but instead wound up the 2 seed and on the same side of the bracket as a fully rested Dake. 

Anybody in their right mind would rather be the 4 seed than the 2 or 3 seed. Assuming Imar is the 1 seed and Dake sits in the bottom half semi’s here is what the path for the 3 seed would look like compared to the 4 seed:

3 seed path to win the mini-tournament:

unseeded opponent 

2 seed

Dake (fully rested)

Imar

 

4 seed path to win the  mini-tournament:

Unseeded opponent

5 seed

Imar

Dake

 

It won’t effect the outcome at 74kg next year because I don’t see anybody even scoring on Dake in the mini-tournament. However, how’s this going to work at 86kg if Cox comes down and sits in the semi’s? Having the 1 seed in that mini-tournament is going to be HUGE next year.

 

I mean the point of seeding isn't necessarily to reward the wrestlers, but to try and make it work so that the top two wrestlers make the finals.  If returning world medalist moving up or down in weight (in this case Dake) is the true 1 seed then you would want to put him opposite of the 1 seed by criteria which is why I think they put him in the bottom.  This way 1 seed vs returning medalist can happen in the final.  This also makes it easier for Dake as he gets 2/3 in the semi instead of 1.  

I dunno. It can be an advantage to wrestle Dake a round earlier.  Two instances where I think sitting to the final provided an advantage that otherwise changed the outcome Koll-Monday in 1990 and Cox-Taylor in 2017 the wrestler who went through the tournament was able to win the first match in the best of three, but then dropped the next two.  When Kyle Dake took a match off Burroughs in the best of three in 2017 it was the first match.  He then dropped two straight.  Maybe it was that the sitting wrestler was more flat than the challenger was less tired.  I dunno but the fewer the matches you wrestle before you meet the guy who is resting the better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Fishbane said:

I mean the point of seeding isn't necessarily to reward the wrestlers, but to try and make it work so that the top two wrestlers make the finals.  If returning world medalist moving up or down in weight (in this case Dake) is the true 1 seed then you would want to put him opposite of the 1 seed by criteria which is why I think they put him in the bottom.  This way 1 seed vs returning medalist can happen in the final.  

Spot on 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, bnwtwg said:

If Nolf, or Dieringer, or Green don't like it then they can always go the Streebler route and pursue a non-olympic weight world championship. No one is stopping them from doing so.

Won't those wrestle offs take place at a separate date and time from the Olympic Trials?  So they can do both like Stieber did.  In 2016 the Olympic trials were in April and the WTT for the non-Olympic weights were in November.  Stieber lost to Molinaro in the semifinals of the April trials at 65kg and then beat Graff in the WTT finals for 61kg in November.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Fishbane said:

I mean the point of seeding isn't necessarily to reward the wrestlers, but to try and make it work so that the top two wrestlers make the finals.  If returning world medalist moving up or down in weight (in this case Dake) is the true 1 seed then you would want to put him opposite of the 1 seed by criteria which is why I think they put him in the bottom.  This way 1 seed vs returning medalist can happen in the final.  This also makes it easier for Dake as he gets 2/3 in the semi instead of 1.  

I dunno. It can be an advantage to wrestle Dake a round earlier.  Two instances where I think sitting to the final provided an advantage that otherwise changed the outcome Koll-Monday in 1990 and Cox-Taylor in 2017 the wrestler who went through the tournament was able to win the first match in the best of three, but then dropped the next two.  When Kyle Dake took a match off Burroughs in the best of three in 2017 it was the first match.  He then dropped two straight.  Maybe it was that the sitting wrestler was more flat than the challenger was less tired.  I dunno but the fewer the matches you wrestle before you meet the guy who is resting the better.

What about Snyder-Varner in 2016? I think Snyder probably would have won anyways, but Varner seemed like he used everything he had to win the first match by criteria. If he had a little more in the gas tank from not wrestling the tournament, he might have had a chance to take another one. I feel like wrestling the tournament was a much bigger impact on Varner than it was on Taylor in 2017. Taylor breezed through and barely broke a sweet. Once J'den got a feel for him in that first match and made adjustments, Taylor couldn't touch him (insert sweat joke here).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/24/2019 at 4:19 PM, Fishbane said:

I mean the point of seeding isn't necessarily to reward the wrestlers, but to try and make it work so that the top two wrestlers make the finals.  If returning world medalist moving up or down in weight (in this case Dake) is the true 1 seed then you would want to put him opposite of the 1 seed by criteria which is why I think they put him in the bottom.  This way 1 seed vs returning medalist can happen in the final.  This also makes it easier for Dake as he gets 2/3 in the semi instead of 1.  

“Reward” may not have been the right term to use, but seeds are earned. If the only goal of seeding was to make sure the #1 and #2 guys were in opposite brackets they would only seed 2 guys as opposed to the 8 they seeded last OTT. 

All that’s actually not relevant to my main point: why not just seed the guy who gets a bye to the semi’s? Why is that too hard? Next year Ringer is changing weights and going 86kg and they’ll have to seed him...so why can’t they seed Cox? There’s a reason I think this deserves more attention:

I’ve played with a few scenarios and automatically putting the guy sitting in the semi’s can distort the brackets to the point that sitting in the semi’s can be disadvantageous to somebody like Cox. Here’s what I mean: Let’s say the seeding for next year’s OTT mini-tournament is as follows

1) DT

2) Ringer

3) Downey

*Cox = unseeded but sitting in the semi’s of the bottom bracket.

If Cox sits in the semi’s his path to making the team would be beating Ringer in the semi’s then DT in the finals (2/3).

If Cox didn’t sit in the semi’s he should be the #1 seed. That means his path would likely be beating an unseeded guy, then Downey, then Taylor (2/3). And Cox would be facing Taylor after he had to deal with Ringer in the semi’s. 

In my opinion the second option (where he doesn’t utilize the “privilege” afforded to him as a returning world medalist) is hands down the easier path. It makes your path easier (no Ringer in the semi’s) and makes Taylor’s path tougher...as he gets Ringer in the semi’s.

This issue is really easy to solve while still rewarding returning medalists: just seed them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine they will actually seed them as the 1 seed, honestly, and have that top quarter be their bye to the semis  . For both Cox and Dake(unless they're both going 86 then I see them being the 1 and 2).

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...