Jump to content
IronChef

141 Rankings

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, TBar1977 said:

Your argument is better than his. I will add one other thing. Brooks has only 1 college loss coming to Venz two weeks after an injury to his knee that would require post season surgery. Otherwise all W's. But Flo has him 5th? 

Come On Fifa GIF by Major League Soccer

You're arguing for Brooks ranking to be higher due to an existing 'asterisk' yet not allowing for the other 'asterisk' to be valid, for Starocci?  Seems legit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TBar1977 said:

Your argument is better than his. I will add one other thing. Brooks has only 1 college loss coming to Venz two weeks after an injury to his knee that would require post season surgery. Otherwise all W's. But Flo has him 5th? 

Come On Fifa GIF by Major League Soccer

I don't hate Brooks at 5 based on the results.  

Bolen hasn't lost to anyone currently at the weight in the last 2 years

Hidlay only lost to Bolen & Deprez (and has also beat Deprez)

I could see putting Brooks ahead of Deprez because Brooks beat Weiler and Deprez split with him, but that's about it.  I guess you could extrapolate that out to putting him ahead of Hidlay but that's a stretch.  I don't see any way to put him ahead of Bolen though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, portajohn said:

So using last years results. Brooks won the Big Ten's.  I believe it was deeper last year than EIWA's.  

not necessary to figure out which conference was deeper. just factor in wins and losses. 

9 hours ago, portajohn said:

Weiler beat DePerez last year in a dual.  DePerez got pinned by Taylor Venz.  Also, Trent Hidlay lost to DePerez last year.  

compare all of Brooks wins and losses against DePrez and Hidlay's wins and loses. Brooks best win last year was probably Caffey, currently #8 at 197. DePrez has wins over #3 Hidlay and Bonaccorsi, currently #6 at 197. DePrez has worse losses than Brooks but a loss to #11 Venz by Brooks means its tougher to give him the benefit of the doubt. some still do though in their rankings and that's cool. 

9 hours ago, portajohn said:

But somehow you have Brooks behind both of them and Myles Amine who has never wrestled a match at 184.  

You can figure out why three time top 4 finishers Myles Amine is #1 on your own, that one is pretty obvious to me. 

If we're talking predictions though, I'm guessing Amine wrestles 197 and Brooks wins 184 at NCAAs. I don't think Bolen and Hidlay will be easy matches but I give Brooks the edge right now. 

2 hours ago, calot said:

I understand all that but he did that at opens with no pressure.Now that he's in the lineup he lost to a guy with not a great resume.Going to a open every other weekend is different then facing big 10 competition every week.Not taking away his wins from last year but I think that's gotta be taken into consideration.

thats a fair point. not one that gets factored into the rankings but totally worth considering if you're making picks or setting odds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

I don't hate Brooks at 5 based on the results.  

Bolen hasn't lost to anyone currently at the weight in the last 2 years

Hidlay only lost to Bolen & Deprez (and has also beat Deprez)

I could see putting Brooks ahead of Deprez because Brooks beat Weiler and Deprez split with him, but that's about it.  I guess you could extrapolate that out to putting him ahead of Hidlay but that's a stretch.  I don't see any way to put him ahead of Bolen though

I will grant that this is an inexact science, plus in the long run it hardly matters. But all the ACC guys and Deprez basically had a round robin thing going on last year. I think Bolen took a loss to Lujan but did not wrestle Big10 guys like Amine, Venz or Brooks. No biggie, NCAAs will sort this out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We all know Brooks is going to win this weight, we all also know that his loss to Venz last year was a fluke and likely related to his injury.  Brooks could wrestle Venz 50 times right now and would not lose a single match.  This is why rankings are silly, absolutely nobody believes that Brooks isn't making the finals this year.  Spoiler alert - he's winning it, comfortably.  Maybe a 5-3 win if Amine wrestles 184 but he won't.  Willie is right with his "gut feeling" rankings, best way to do it - screw the math. 

I'm not splitting hairs with Flo or anyone else - ranking foster discussion.  But it's all silly as you know when some guys are better than their ranking and it isn't worth the time arguing.  So why am I doing it?  I'm an idiot of course...

First person who wants to bet me $20 to the wrestling charity of their choice - you can have the field, I have Brooks.  Easy money unless he gets sick/hurt...

Share this post


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

We all know Brooks is going to win this weight, we all also know that his loss to Venz last year was a fluke and likely related to his injury.  Brooks could wrestle Venz 50 times right now and would not lose a single match.  This is why rankings are silly, absolutely nobody believes that Brooks isn't making the finals this year.  Spoiler alert - he's winning it, comfortably.  Maybe a 5-3 win if Amine wrestles 184 but he won't.  Willie is right with his "gut feeling" rankings, best way to do it - screw the math. 

I'm not splitting hairs with Flo or anyone else - ranking foster discussion.  But it's all silly as you know when some guys are better than their ranking and it isn't worth the time arguing.  So why am I doing it?  I'm an idiot of course...

First person who wants to bet me $20 to the wrestling charity of their choice - you can have the field, I have Brooks.  Easy money unless he gets sick/hurt...

I will take the field in any bet like this!

Share this post


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

 

I'm not splitting hairs with Flo or anyone else - ranking foster discussion.  But it's all silly as you know when some guys are better than their ranking and it isn't worth the time arguing.  So why am I doing it?  I'm an idiot of course...

 

The foundations of Sports forums were built upon arguing about rankings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, nhs67 said:

You're arguing for Brooks ranking to be higher due to an existing 'asterisk' yet not allowing for the other 'asterisk' to be valid, for Starocci?  Seems legit.

Btw, can you show me where I made comment regarding Starocci's ranking? 

Share this post


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

You can figure out why three time top 4 finishers Myles Amine is #1 on your own, that one is pretty obvious to me. 

No, if we are to be as objective as possible then the results at a given weight supersede all other factors. Putting Myles Amine at #1 at a weight he's never wrestled at is purely speculative.  And heck, it's a decent projection if he's to wrestle at 184.  But, in other sports like boxing or MMA the fact that there's a returning champ in his own conference would put Amine behind Aaron Brooks. This is common ranking doctrine. Also, given the fact that Aaron Brooks is a conference champ and Hidlay is not then Brooks should be ranked ahead. Also given the fact that the last time DePerez and Hidlay wrestled it was DePerz who won. So, Hidlay should also be ranked behind him. If we are to be purely objective then Hunter Bolen should be ranked #1. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

Btw, can you show me where I made comment regarding Starocci's ranking? 

Remind me later.  Busy.

When I said 'you' I meant the general conversation was bashing Washington moving up past Starocci to 6 and Brooks meanwhile has a crap ranking still.  It very well was likely not you, pacifically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, nhs67 said:

Remind me later.  Busy.

When I said 'you' I meant the general conversation was bashing Washington moving up past Starocci to 6 and Brooks meanwhile has a crap ranking still.  It very well was likely not you, pacifically.

Yeah, that had nothing to do with me. 

Share this post


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

No, if we are to be as objective as possible then the results at a given weight supersede all other factors. Putting Myles Amine at #1 at a weight he's never wrestled at is purely speculative.  And heck, it's a decent projection if he's to wrestle at 184.  But, in other sports like boxing or MMA the fact that there's a returning champ in his own conference would put Amine behind Aaron Brooks. This is common ranking doctrine. Also, given the fact that Aaron Brooks is a conference champ and Hidlay is not then Brooks should be ranked ahead. Also given the fact that the last time DePerez and Hidlay wrestled it was DePerz who won. So, Hidlay should also be ranked behind him. If we are to be purely objective then Hunter Bolen should be ranked #1. 

You saying over and over again "it's common ranking doctrine" doesn't make it so.  Like, should the second place person in the Big 10 at 133 automatically be ranked behind the SoCon champion?  And why should results at a lower weight be automatically superseded by results at a current weight?  Under that logic, people moving up from lower weights shouldn't be ranked at their new weights at all.  Should Cael have been unranked at 197 when he moved up?  I'm pretty sure Flo ranked Bo Nickal #1 at 197 lbs when he moved up, which was right and I bet you didn't complain about that.

Share this post


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

No, if we are to be as objective as possible then the results at a given weight supersede all other factors. Putting Myles Amine at #1 at a weight he's never wrestled at is purely speculative.  And heck, it's a decent projection if he's to wrestle at 184.  But, in other sports like boxing or MMA the fact that there's a returning champ in his own conference would put Amine behind Aaron Brooks. This is common ranking doctrine. Also, given the fact that Aaron Brooks is a conference champ and Hidlay is not then Brooks should be ranked ahead. Also given the fact that the last time DePerez and Hidlay wrestled it was DePerz who won. So, Hidlay should also be ranked behind him. If we are to be purely objective then Hunter Bolen should be ranked #1. 

this is all motivated reasoning. you start with the result that you want to see in the rankings and then you come up with your reasoning afterwards. It's all terribly inconsistent and not worth taking the time to refute. appreciate the passion though. that kind of dedication, however misguided, is good for the sport!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Jaroslav Hasek said:

this is all motivated reasoning. you start with the result that you want to see in the rankings and then you come up with your reasoning afterwards. It's all terribly inconsistent and not worth taking the time to refute. appreciate the passion though. that kind of dedication, however misguided, is good for the sport!

Ranking Brooks 5th and DePerez behind Hidlay despite the fact that DePerez beat  Hidlay in their last match is misguided bud

Edited by portajohn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Jaroslav Hasek said:

this is all motivated reasoning. you start with the result that you want to see in the rankings and then you come up with your reasoning afterwards. It's all terribly inconsistent and not worth taking the time to refute. appreciate the passion though. that kind of dedication, however misguided, is good for the sport!

 

You seem equally motivated to dismiss objections out of hand as anyone else is to similarly dismiss your rankings. Motivated reasoning. 

Share this post


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

Ranking Brooks 5th and DePerez behind Hidlay despite the fact that DePerez beat  Hidlay in their last match is misguided bud

sorry, anonymous toilet avatar. don't have anymore time to keep explaining how rankings work. feel free to tune into Who's #1 the Show though, the topic will be discussed in depth!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

 

You seem equally motivated to dismiss objections out of hand as anyone else is to similarly dismiss your rankings. Motivated reasoning. 

Disagreeing with somebody is not the same thing as dismissing them.  Just because he's not changing his rankings because of some message board posts doesn't mean he's dismissing anybody.  He's on here politely giving his reasoning and has been met with pretty open dismissiveness and hostility.

Anyway, as previously stated, I didn't see any Penn State fans complaining when Bo was given the #1 197 ranking when he moved up.

Share this post


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

Disagreeing with somebody is not the same thing as dismissing them.  Just because he's not changing his rankings because of some message board posts doesn't mean he's dismissing anybody.  He's on here politely giving his reasoning and has been met with pretty open dismissiveness and hostility.

Anyway, as previously stated, I didn't see any Penn State fans complaining when Bo was given the #1 197 ranking when he moved up.

Looks like a two way street to me.

Share this post


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

pretty open dismissiveness and hostility.

I have absolutely no hostility towards Spey. But he still cannot answer how he has Hidlay ranked ahead DePerez despite the fact that DePerez beat Hidlay last time they wrestled and they have comparable resumes in quality wins. I think it's pretty fair to question him on that

Edited by portajohn

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...