Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
kgschalhoub

First RPI out

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, SetonHallPirate said:

None of them do. In fact, unless they attend an open, of those three, only Lee will have enough matches for the second RPI.

Note that the minimum to be included was dropped from 17 to 15 this year.

Got it. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SetonHallPirate said:

None of them do. In fact, unless they attend an open, of those three, only Lee will have enough matches for the second RPI.

Note that the minimum to be included was dropped from 17 to 15 this year.

Is the drop from a 17 to 15 match minimum for RPI just for this season or is it a permanent change ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if my line of thinking is correct:

Guys like Lee, Joseph, etc. won't qualify an allocation for their conference despite being former champs

Since they don't qualify a spot, they will take a spot from Wrestler X who did in the B10 tournament

Wrestler X doesn't qualify through the B10 tourney, but did qualify a spot/allocation, is then pushed into the at-large bids pool

Wrestler X most likely gets an at-large bid because they qualified a spot originally but got bumped out at the tourney - and honestly they are from the B10. 

In the end Lee,  Joseph, etc. not qualifying doesn't really matter????? Or does it? Does it only not matter because they are B10 or if Wrestler X is from the ACC or the B12 it might be different? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a very easy solution. Invite ALL TEAMS and ALL THEIR STARTING LINEUPS to NCAAs. Would little more than double the number of matches and no more worries about "qualifying" allocations. It's not as if it's actually elite to "qualify" for NCAAs, with 33 slots open per weight. Seriously, can you think of a guy ranked #21 that is an "elite" wrestler?

 

And end seeding as a personal favor to me, thanks in advance.

Edited by TobusRex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If those guys don’t get enough matches, the other B10 coaches would be pissed at their coaching staffs for mis-managing those guys.  Not publicly, but that really hurts the conference. 

Although wildcards usually bake in a good buffer of conference tourney landmines.  
 

it will work out.  Especially since, as an EIWA fan, I have seen weights in the EIWA that historically had more guys ranked than AQ slots.  Mainly because most 25-33 ranked guys get Beat by bubble guys OR straight upset by NR wrestlers.  
 

If you look at it spots at the big dance actually get stolen by more guys who ARENT ranked than top ranked guys who have too few matches.

interesting to see how Kolodzik (149) and Jared prince (157?) get seeded in their conference (last year doesn’t count) with single digit matches on the year.  If both are 149, they may crush hopes in an already “soft” weight class for the eiwa.  I am thinking 3 AQs are what the conf is gonna get at 149.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TobusRex said:

There is a very easy solution. Invite ALL TEAMS and ALL THEIR STARTING LINEUPS to NCAAs. Would little more than double the number of matches and no more worries about "qualifying" allocations. It's not as if it's actually elite to "qualify" for NCAAs, with 33 slots open per weight. Seriously, can you think of a guy ranked #21 that is an "elite" wrestler?

 

And end seeding as a personal favor to me, thanks in advance.

Better yet move to 4 region (qualifying) tournaments, top 8 go on to national, pre drawn national bracket based on placing out of the Q (similar to how most states tournament's do it).  Rotate teams to regions based on last year placing or current team rpi rank (similar to BB).  We have now generated enough interest in the NCAA tournament that we could hold these 4 Qs in 20k stadiums and give fans in other areas of the country a chance to see great wrestling and folks they don't normally see in their area.  Let's grow the sport!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SetonHallPirate said:

Permanent, until it's changed again, presumably. (the initial limit was 15, and was changed to 17 for 2011...stayed at 17 until this year)

Why was it reduced to 15 ?

17 data points makes the metric a more meaningful and relevant statistic.  Were  they concerned that too many wrestlers would not acquire 17 matches ?

I would rather see 20 matches as a RPI minimum since this is only one prong of three used.  Wrestlers can still receive an AQ spot without the RPI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Show_Me said:

Why was it reduced to 15 ?

17 data points makes the metric a more meaningful and relevant statistic.  Were  they concerned that too many wrestlers would not acquire 17 matches ?

I would rather see 20 matches as a RPI minimum since this is only one prong of three used.  Wrestlers can still receive an AQ spot without the RPI.

You want to provide the delta in statistical significance of n=15 vs n=17?  show me the math

:)

Edited by ionel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Show_Me said:

Why was it reduced to 15 ?

17 data points makes the metric a more meaningful and relevant statistic.  Were  they concerned that too many wrestlers would not acquire 17 matches ?

I would rather see 20 matches as a RPI minimum since this is only one prong of three used.  Wrestlers can still receive an AQ spot without the RPI.

Teams are wrestling less duals is the reason 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RPI isn’t statistical, it’s a ranking heuristic but intuitively a >10% sampling difference out of a population of ~75-150 or so seems like it could be significant. I wonder if the minimum was lowered because of all the RS/ORS and modified wrestling schedules this season?

Share this post


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

RPI isn’t statistical, it’s a ranking heuristic but intuitively a >10% sampling difference out of a population of ~75-150 or so seems like it could be significant. I wonder if the minimum was lowered because of all the RS/ORS and modified wrestling schedules this season?

This.

I also wondered about the change being due to the Olympic Year, hence, my original question to ThePirate about this reduction being a “1 year thing”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Idaho said:

So if my line of thinking is correct:

Guys like Lee, Joseph, etc. won't qualify an allocation for their conference despite being former champs

Since they don't qualify a spot, they will take a spot from Wrestler X who did in the B10 tournament

Wrestler X doesn't qualify through the B10 tourney, but did qualify a spot/allocation, is then pushed into the at-large bids pool

Wrestler X most likely gets an at-large bid because they qualified a spot originally but got bumped out at the tourney - and honestly they are from the B10. 

In the end Lee,  Joseph, etc. not qualifying doesn't really matter????? Or does it? Does it only not matter because they are B10 or if Wrestler X is from the ACC or the B12 it might be different? 

Wrestlers only need two out of three criteria (winning percentage, CP ranking, RPI ranking) to earn a pre-allocated spot for their conference.  So if a guy has eight bouts he can have a high enough WP and CP to earn the spot; doesn't need the RPI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paetzel of Lehigh sat out the Princeton open, But has wrestled 3 bouts at Journeyman individual,  10-2 in duals. but got a fft against Duke. He should get to 15 tonight at Bucknell. If it were still 17, he might not get there, good chance of a fft against Penn. Something wrong if you only miss one event and can't make it to the. 15 seems to make more sense. If it were 17 he would need to go to one of the Feb 23 opens, and wrestle until he gets a D1 bout

 Kutler would be in the same situation as Paetzell, sat out against duke. Except he was one of the few guys who got 4 bouts at journeyman

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Show_Me said:

This.

I also wondered about the change being due to the Olympic Year, hence, my original question to ThePirate about this reduction being a “1 year thing”.

Remember that in order to qualify for an RPI ranking the wrestler needs the 15 bouts at his tournament weight; the bouts also need to be against Div I opponents and forfeits don't count.

When you factor in that the NCAA has made it easier in the past few years to shift weights late in the season, they probably noticed that the number of wrestlers who were earning an RPI was in decline.  Take Ben Darmstadt as an example.  He has 27 bouts so far this season and they're all against Div I opponents; but just 10 are at 197 and one of those was a forfeit win.  So unless he attends one of the last chance tournaments next weekend he's not going to get to 15 wrestled bouts at his tourney weight.  But he won't need the RPI; his winning percentage and CP ranking are high enough that he's sure to earn a spot for the EIWA.

Share this post


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

RPI isn’t statistical, it’s a ranking heuristic but intuitively a >10% sampling difference out of a population of ~75-150 or so seems like it could be significant. I wonder if the minimum was lowered because of all the RS/ORS and modified wrestling schedules this season?

Still waiting on Show_Me to show me the math.  But yes this is not a sample.  And no I don't believe the population is like 75 to 150.  The entire population of matches for an individual might be only 15 or 17 or 25 or could be only 7.   But the guy with only 7 might've wrestled all against top 10 opponents and thus you could argue (especially if undefeated) he has better data for an RPI than the guy with 25 matches never having wrestled a top 15 opponent.  So 15 versus 17 is simply a cut off number to be included which the committee feels is acceptable.  And as others have said, you don't need an RPR thus don't need 15 matches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, TobusRex said:

There is a very easy solution. Invite ALL TEAMS and ALL THEIR STARTING LINEUPS to NCAAs. Would little more than double the number of matches and no more worries about "qualifying" allocations. It's not as if it's actually elite to "qualify" for NCAAs, with 33 slots open per weight. Seriously, can you think of a guy ranked #21 that is an "elite" wrestler?

 

And end seeding as a personal favor to me, thanks in advance.

End seeding that’s insane.  You want Lee and Pletcher to meet in the pigtail with Woods getting the winner?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/14/2020 at 8:51 AM, TobusRex said:

There is a very easy solution. Invite ALL TEAMS and ALL THEIR STARTING LINEUPS to NCAAs. Would little more than double the number of matches and no more worries about "qualifying" allocations. It's not as if it's actually elite to "qualify" for NCAAs, with 33 slots open per weight. Seriously, can you think of a guy ranked #21 that is an "elite" wrestler?

 

And end seeding as a personal favor to me, thanks in advance.

Unsure if you’re being snarky but I will say that I always think about this point when people want to add 10 to 20 teams to D1 wrestling. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Mokoma said:

End seeding that’s insane.  You want Lee and Pletcher to meet in the pigtail with Woods getting the winner?

Random draw should be how it's done. The goal is to determine champ, not who is the 8th best. Thus, what difference does it make what round they meet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, ionel said:

Better yet move to 4 region (qualifying) tournaments, top 8 go on to national, pre drawn national bracket based on placing out of the Q (similar to how most states tournament's do it).  Rotate teams to regions based on last year placing or current team rpi rank (similar to BB).  We have now generated enough interest in the NCAA tournament that we could hold these 4 Qs in 20k stadiums and give fans in other areas of the country a chance to see great wrestling and folks they don't normally see in their area.  Let's grow the sport!

I like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, TobusRex said:

Random draw should be how it's done. The goal is to determine champ, not who is the 8th best. Thus, what difference does it make what round they meet?

This is done in the Hoosier State, one class finals. And I works. 
Usually  you will see a better match ,when two highly ranked wrestlers meet earlier in the Saturday state final. Than if they met in the championship match. Most are out of fuel by that time, and it gets to be a dancing match. 

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...