Jump to content
FishfinderAK

Weights w no medalists

Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, FishfinderAK said:

 

So in the Olympic weights that there were no US medalist, who gets the “bye” to the best of 3 wrestle off on day 2 of the Olympic trials?

 

Nobody, they will wrestle out the "trials challenge" tournament day one.  74 and 97 the winner of the challenge tournament will wrestle JB/Snyder in best of three on day 2, in the others the finalists of the challenge tournament will wrestle a best of 3 day two.

Share this post


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

Nobody, they will wrestle out the "trials challenge" tournament day one.  74 and 97 the winner of the challenge tournament will wrestle JB/Snyder in best of three on day 2, in the others the finalists of the challenge tournament will wrestle a best of 3 day two.

Won’t the winner of the US open sit in the finals like wtt years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Ogalthorpe Haywood said:

Won’t the winner of the US open sit in the finals like wtt years?

I’d have to double check the procedures but if memory serves no. The new twists were the non Olympic weight medalists get a bye to semi, and (I believe) challenge tournament finals in 74 and 97 would be one match, and that the open winner will not get the auto bye. All other weights they will wrestle day one to the finals then best of three day two. 

Edited by Lurker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose Dake could go 125 or 97 and Cox could go 74 or 125.  They can go anywhere.  I agree that Dake at 74 or 86 and Cox at 86 or 97 are the most reasonable.  But you just never know where these guys will go unless they have so stated.  I haven't heard that they have done this.

mspart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, mspart said:

I suppose Dake could go 125 or 97 and Cox could go 74 or 125.  They can go anywhere.  I agree that Dake at 74 or 86 and Cox at 86 or 97 are the most reasonable.  But you just never know where these guys will go unless they have so stated.  I haven't heard that they have done this.

mspart

They can’t go anywhere, it has to be an adjoining weight class...one weight up or down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Lurker said:

Nobody, they will wrestle out the "trials challenge" tournament day one.  74 and 97 the winner of the challenge tournament will wrestle JB/Snyder in best of three on day 2, in the others the finalists of the challenge tournament will wrestle a best of 3 day two.

Perhaps semantic, but I don't think it's the same challenge tournament system in place (in the US) prior to 2018.

I'm pretty sure the Olympic Trials Tournament is simply a 2 day event, with any returning Olympic weight medalists gifted a bye to the best 2 out of 3 finals.

Returning non-Olympic weight medalists are gifted a bye to semifinals at an adjacent weight.

So, at 74kg, Dake will receive a bye to the semis, and if he wins that match, he'd face JB the next day, in the best 2 out of 3 finals.

How they handle seeding, however, I don't know, and that impacts who Dake might have to beat to reach JB.  I assume in this respect it is very much like a challenge tourney, and he'd face the winner, for the opportunity to wrestle JB.

Most importantly, I think he'll only have to win a single match to face JB the next day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, whaletail said:

Perhaps semantic, but I don't think it's the same challenge tournament system in place (in the US) prior to 2018.

I'm pretty sure the Olympic Trials Tournament is simply a 2 day event, with any returning Olympic weight medalists gifted a bye to the best 2 out of 3 finals.

Returning non-Olympic weight medalists are gifted a bye to semifinals at an adjacent weight.

So, at 74kg, Dake will receive a bye to the semis, and if he wins that match, he'd face JB the next day, in the best 2 out of 3 finals.

How they handle seeding, however, I don't know, and that impacts who Dake might have to beat to reach JB.  I assume in this respect it is very much like a challenge tourney, and he'd face the winner, for the opportunity to wrestle JB.

Most importantly, I think he'll only have to win a single match to face JB the next day.

You’re missing Something here. Dake’s  semi final match is a semi final to the challenge tournament. If he wins the semi, he has one more match in the challenge tournament final on day one. If he wins that one, THEN he faces JB on day two. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kinda amazing that USAW expects to win medals year after year but yet the protection-selection policy so darn complicated. Gonna be a long seven months!

Too bad Bender's idea that all Olympic weights be different from Worlds weights has not yet gained steam.

Edited by jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, jon said:

Kinda amazing that USAW expects to win medals year after year but yet the protection-selection policy so darn complicated. Gonna be a long seven months!

Too bad Bender's idea that all Olympic weights be different from Worlds weights has not yet gained steam.

I have two points to respond to. #1 is that the procedure is not at all complicated if you read the selection procedure. Now if you try to figure it out by reading a bunch of misinformed posts on a message board, yes it can be very confusing. #2 what data can you display that shows this system has failed us in winning medals year after year. What years and weights would a different system have produced better results. (Looking for factual data, not merely and opinion that Gable would have done better at worlds and the only reason he didn’t make the team was because Gwiz had a bye...for example)

Edited by Lurker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the thoughtful response.

6 minutes ago, Lurker said:

#2 what data can you display that shows this system has failed us in winning medals year after year.

Maybe there are data out there but I sure don't have 'em! Before now I've not even considered that question. My angle/bias here is friendliness to fans. I find the protection provisions superconfusing.

On one hand: You're correct to say that forum cacophony does not make for a good source. But on the other hand: When a rulebook/roadmap is needed then maybe--not necessarily but yes maybe--the policy has room to be streamlined?

I find the whole 'medalist protection serves to incentivize longevity' idea really interesting. Team USA may well be deep enough that medalist protection not necessary for success at Worlds/Olympics -- i.e., backups may well be good enough to win medals. But of course the ongoing involvement of past medalists (e.g., past medalists attend training camps) a good thing!

I wonder why Bender's idea that Olympics weights be different from Worlds weights has not yet gained steam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, jon said:

Thank you for the thoughtful response.

Maybe there are data out there but I sure don't have 'em! Before now I've not even considered that question. My angle/bias here is friendliness to fans. I find the protection provisions superconfusing.

On one hand: You're correct to say that forum cacophony does not make for a good source. But on the other hand: When a rulebook/roadmap is needed then maybe--not necessarily but yes maybe--the policy has room to be streamlined?

I find the whole 'medalist protection serves to incentivize longevity' idea really interesting. Team USA may well be deep enough that medalist protection not necessary for success at Worlds/Olympics -- i.e., backups may well be good enough to win medals. But of course the ongoing involvement of past medalists (e.g., past medalists attend training camps) a good thing!

I wonder why Bender's idea that Olympics weights be different from Worlds weights has not yet gained steam.

I don’t understand what you mean with your last sentence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some time ago, Rich Bender pitched the idea that during each Olympics year weight classes be changed across the board. I think the motivating factor for this idea is that, currently, Oly weights thought to be more prestigious than non-Oly weights. It's relevant to this thread though because if a wholly different set of weights were in place during Oly years then perhaps there'd be no protection for Worlds medalists.

In other words: 57kg changes to something close to- but not exactly 57kg. Same for 65kg, 74kg etc. In this scenario everyone has to shift weights (as compared to Worlds weights) not just, for instance, guys who compete at 61kg or at 79kg.

Edited by jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jon said:

Some time ago, Rich Bender pitched the idea that during each Olympics year weight classes be changed across the board. I think the motivating factor for this idea is that, currently, Oly weights thought to be more prestigious than non-Oly weights. It's relevant to this thread though because if a wholly different set of weights were in place during Oly years then perhaps there'd be no protection for Worlds medalists.

In other words: 57kg changes to something close to- but not exactly 57kg. Same for 65kg, 74kg etc. In this scenario everyone has to shift weights (as compared to Worlds weights) not just, for instance, guys who compete at 61kg or at 79kg.

Oh okay I gotcha. 

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...