Jump to content
Elevator

Hodge Voting and Timing

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Le duke said:

I don't see how it could be Lee over Steveson. Gable wrestled FAR better competition. It's harder to dominate better competition, but he did just that.

Truth be told, most weight classes had better competition that 125. Just using this as example, but 184 had multiple world winners and medalists in it. And despite Brooks being in the running, I wouldn't put him at anywhere near the same level as Gable because he didn't come close to dominating like Gable did, against opponents who also dominate. As far as I know, Gable gave up ONE takedown all year.

Hadn't thought of that perspective, it's a very good point.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Le duke said:

I don't see how it could be Lee over Steveson. Gable wrestled FAR better competition. It's harder to dominate better competition, but he did just that.

Truth be told, most weight classes had better competition that 125. Just using this as example, but 184 had multiple world winners and medalists in it. And despite Brooks being in the running, I wouldn't put him at anywhere near the same level as Gable because he didn't come close to dominating like Gable did, against opponents who also dominate. As far as I know, Gable gave up ONE takedown all year.

 

 

As previously stated, that's not the only criteria.

Share this post


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

Using the criteria for the award & cleaning up Flo’s article on the subject:
1. Record: Both undefeated
2. Pins: Lee 5/12, 41.7%; Steveson 4/16, 25%. Advantage Lee
3. Dominance: Lee 5.0 avg; Steveson 4.88 avg. Advantage Lee
4. Past Credentials: Lee 3x chap; Steveson 1x champ. Advantage Lee
5. Quality of Competition: Paris/Kerk stronger than Lee’s. Advantage Steveson
6. Sportsmanship/Citizenship: Lee never been accused of a crime. Advantage Lee
7. Heart: Call it a tie.

Score: Lee takes the Hodge based on 4 wins, 1 loss, and 2 ties


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Just for the sake of argument, let's apply a little spin and some T-I-C-ness and maybe some left-field faux logic to the subject, because we all know there are lies, damn lies and statistics. 

1. Record: Both undefeated. Push. Simple enough. 
2. Pins: a 5-4 margin in a season with a much smaller pool of matches, make it a tough distinction. Gable also had one AA heavy (Hillger) not wrestle him and another ranked heavy default in one second rather than compete in the B1G semis (Lance), who he teched earlier in the year. 
3. I like applying percentage of opponents (like the pin percentage), but that also seems to cancel out #5. If Gable had better competition, of course Lee SHOULD be more dominant in categories 2 and 3.
4. Another way to look at this: Gable's lost to one guy in his career, twice, an eventual NCAA champion in the Big Ten finals and the NCAA semis. Lee's lost five times to four different wrestlers - of them, one was an NCAA champion and the other four never made an NCAA final. So another thing to MAYBE consider is are we looking at credentials wrong? Ok, we've got titles, Spencer also has one extra year on Gable, so he's got that added chance for another accolade - this is also why I personally never liked the category because it dings underclassmen. 
5. Hard to argue this point, although Lee didn't wrestle as many backups as Steveson did. 
6. Lee's never been falsely accused of a crime. Is that still playing in his favor? We all know ol' Royce Alger is the Sheriff around those parts ... 
7. Heart. What is this, Captain freaking planet, but seriously, I think wind and water might be better categories. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Record: Both undefeated
Tie

2. Pins: Spencer 5; Gable 4. But, competition for Gable was better - perhaps enough to offset the slight difference. Very close here.
Slight advantage Spencer

3. Dominance: Gable dominated world-class wrestlers who dominated the rest of the field. Lee dominated the rest of the field, for most of the year until injured
Advantage Gable

4. Past Credentials: Spencer 5 losses in 4 years. Gable 2 losses in 3 years (using record as primary reference since it is the #1 criteria)
Advantage Gable

5. Quality of Competition: Hwt competition was better
Advantage Gable

6. Sportsmanship/Citizenship: Not acknowledging unfounded rumors here - so no clear advantage for either
Tie

7. Heart:
Tie

Criteria #4 is a hard one to break down, and could likely be twisted to match anyone's preference. Even so, it won't make the difference.

It was a two horse race. Spencer is a close 2nd, but Gable deserves to win it this year.

Share this post


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

1. Record: Both undefeated
Tie

2. Pins: Spencer 5; Gable 4. But, competition for Gable was better - perhaps enough to offset the slight difference. Very close here.
Slight advantage Spencer

3. Dominance: Gable dominated world-class wrestlers who dominated the rest of the field. Lee dominated the rest of the field, for most of the year until injured
Advantage Gable

4. Past Credentials: Spencer 5 losses in 4 years. Gable 2 losses in 3 years (using record as primary reference since it is the #1 criteria)
Advantage Gable

5. Quality of Competition: Hwt competition was better
Advantage Gable

6. Sportsmanship/Citizenship: Not acknowledging unfounded rumors here - so no clear advantage for either
Tie

7. Heart:
Tie

Criteria #4 is a hard one to break down, and could likely be twisted to match anyone's preference. Even so, it won't make the difference.

It was a two horse race. Spencer is a close 2nd, but Gable deserves to win it this year.

You're cross-pollenating the criteria to give your preferred person advantages.  There is a category for quality of competition.  You can't give Gable the win there, and then start using the quality of competition in other categories.  It is set out, separate, on purpose.

1.  Record:  Tie.

2.  Pins:  Spencer

3.  Dominance:  Spencer he scored more points and a higher percentage of bonus in his matches.

4.  Past credentials:  Again, you're cross-pollenating.  There is a category for his record.  Spencer has better past credentials.

5.  Quality of Competition:  Gable.

6.  Sportsmanship/Citizenship:  Leaving aside the arrest/accusations, as no charges came from that.  Gable is a lot of things.  He's obviously physically talented and and incredibly technical wrestler.  Great displays of sportsmanship?  Did you watch the Big 10 Finals against Parris?  He parties on guys all the time, mocking them.  And, personally, I love it.  But good sportsmanship it is not.

7.  Heart:  This is where Spencer's knee injury is going to play well.  It's not an argument that Gable doesn't have heart, but what SPencer did on two torn ACLs is about as gritty a display of heart as you'll ever see.

 

Now let me play Devil's Advocate here on the quality of competition.  I don't actually believe this, I've been pretty clear that Gable had a tougher weight class.  However.  Heavyweight is often discussed as the least skilled class every year.  Gable himself is highly skilled, but the disparity is made more glaring by his opponent's lack of skill.  There's a reason we see guys bump up from lower weights and do extremely well, much better than they did at the lower weights.  Look at Jacob Kasper.  Look at Derek White.  And yes, look at Anthony Cassar.  The only guy who beat Gable in college, true, but look at what Cassar was before he bumped up the the least skilled weight.  He was a guy who couldn't really make the Penn State line up.  He lost to Shakur Rasheed, a good wrestler but hardly a dominant shootign star.

The gentlemen Spencer has taken a loss to are all multiple All American and a national champ.

Share this post


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

You're cross-pollenating the criteria to give your preferred person advantages.  There is a category for quality of competition.  You can't give Gable the win there, and then start using the quality of competition in other categories.  It is set out, separate, on purpose.

1.  Record:  Tie.

2.  Pins:  Spencer

3.  Dominance:  Spencer he scored more points and a higher percentage of bonus in his matches.

4.  Past credentials:  Again, you're cross-pollenating.  There is a category for his record.  Spencer has better past credentials.

5.  Quality of Competition:  Gable.

6.  Sportsmanship/Citizenship:  Leaving aside the arrest/accusations, as no charges came from that.  Gable is a lot of things.  He's obviously physically talented and and incredibly technical wrestler.  Great displays of sportsmanship?  Did you watch the Big 10 Finals against Parris?  He parties on guys all the time, mocking them.  And, personally, I love it.  But good sportsmanship it is not.

7.  Heart:  This is where Spencer's knee injury is going to play well.  It's not an argument that Gable doesn't have heart, but what SPencer did on two torn ACLs is about as gritty a display of heart as you'll ever see.

 

Now let me play Devil's Advocate here on the quality of competition.  I don't actually believe this, I've been pretty clear that Gable had a tougher weight class.  However.  Heavyweight is often discussed as the least skilled class every year.  Gable himself is highly skilled, but the disparity is made more glaring by his opponent's lack of skill.  There's a reason we see guys bump up from lower weights and do extremely well, much better than they did at the lower weights.  Look at Jacob Kasper.  Look at Derek White.  And yes, look at Anthony Cassar.  The only guy who beat Gable in college, true, but look at what Cassar was before he bumped up the the least skilled weight.  He was a guy who couldn't really make the Penn State line up.  He lost to Shakur Rasheed, a good wrestler but hardly a dominant shootign star.

The gentlemen Spencer has taken a loss to are all multiple All American and a national champ.

Nice try with the "cross pollenating" angle, but nope - it's not that easy. (Also, the "give your preferred person advantages" is comical - given that is coming from you.)

You're oversimplifying it like many do every year. For some reason, because there is a "criteria" and it has a clear order, so many people make the mistake of thinking a mathematical formula can simply calculate the answer. It isn't a "criteria" in the sense it can, step by step, resolve a tie as we see in other applications of the word "criteria" in wrestling.

All elements are interweaved, and there are outside influences (ie: Covid pauses, Ivy's not at NCAA, shortened schedule) that are also taken into account that aren't specifically in the criteria. Something an attorney should clearly understand, although others with simpler mindsets may struggle with.

Regardless of how it goes. This year isn't new - past choices aggravated some fans when their preferred wrestler didn't win. The post-choice bickering was essentially the same each year. I paraphrase here, but basically the griping is "If they don't follow the criteria, its just a popularity contest".

It's not a popularity contest at all. It's a difficult decision most every year and will be this year as well. Spencer had a really good year but...

This year Gable deserves and wins it. 

 

Share this post


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

Just for the sake of argument, let's apply a little spin and some T-I-C-ness and maybe some left-field faux logic to the subject, because we all know there are lies, damn lies and statistics. 

1. Record: Both undefeated. Push. Simple enough. 
2. Pins: a 5-4 margin in a season with a much smaller pool of matches, make it a tough distinction. Gable also had one AA heavy (Hillger) not wrestle him and another ranked heavy default in one second rather than compete in the B1G semis (Lance), who he teched earlier in the year. 
3. I like applying percentage of opponents (like the pin percentage), but that also seems to cancel out #5. If Gable had better competition, of course Lee SHOULD be more dominant in categories 2 and 3.
4. Another way to look at this: Gable's lost to one guy in his career, twice, an eventual NCAA champion in the Big Ten finals and the NCAA semis. Lee's lost five times to four different wrestlers - of them, one was an NCAA champion and the other four never made an NCAA final. So another thing to MAYBE consider is are we looking at credentials wrong? Ok, we've got titles, Spencer also has one extra year on Gable, so he's got that added chance for another accolade - this is also why I personally never liked the category because it dings underclassmen. 
5. Hard to argue this point, although Lee didn't wrestle as many backups as Steveson did. 
6. Lee's never been falsely accused of a crime. Is that still playing in his favor? We all know ol' Royce Alger is the Sheriff around those parts ... 
7. Heart. What is this, Captain freaking planet, but seriously, I think wind and water might be better categories. 

 

Out of curiosity-do you know that the accusations were false? I’m asking because you may be more privy to details than the rest of us. Obviously, the lack of charges simply means there was not enough evidence to prosecute. The fact that he was arrested/accused of rape could be serious enough to warrant not giving him an award like this. 
 

if you are a voter who cares about the hodge trophy and you have two seemingly equally qualified candidates, why not go with the athlete without the arrest/accusation given that character is a criterium. 

Edited by Billyhoyle

Share this post


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

Out of curiosity-do you know that the accusations were false? I’m asking because you may be more privy to details than the rest of us. Obviously, the lack of charges simply means there was not enough evidence to prosecute. The fact that he was arrested/accused of rape could be serious enough to warrant not giving him an award like this. 
 

if you are a voter who cares about the hodge trophy and you have two seemingly equally qualified candidates, why not go with the athlete without the arrest/accusation given that character is a criterium. 

The "accusation" of wrongdoing has been carefully processed by our system of justice and nothing came of it.

The result is innocence (as in "innocent until proven guilty", a pillar of our society that protects those falsely accused.) 

Quite frankly, this is hitting below the belt. Implying there may have been some serious offense when our justice system already closed the case is disgusting on your part.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Nice try with the "cross pollenating" angle, but nope - it's not that easy. (Also, the "give your preferred person advantages" is comical - given that is coming from you.)
You're oversimplifying it like many do every year. For some reason, because there is a "criteria" and it has a clear order, so many people make the mistake of thinking a mathematical formula can simply calculate the answer. It isn't a "criteria" in the sense it can, step by step, resolve a tie as we see in other applications of the word "criteria" in wrestling.
All elements are interweaved, and there are outside influences (ie: Covid pauses, Ivy's not at NCAA, shortened schedule) that are also taken into account that aren't specifically in the criteria. Something an attorney should clearly understand, although others with simpler mindsets may struggle with.
Regardless of how it goes. This year isn't new - past choices aggravated some fans when their preferred wrestler didn't win. The post-choice bickering was essentially the same each year. I paraphrase here, but basically the griping is "If they don't follow the criteria, its just a popularity contest".
It's not a popularity contest at all. It's a difficult decision most every year and will be this year as well. Spencer had a really good year but...
This year Gable deserves and wins it. 
 


I haven't portrayed that I'm unbiased. Anybody who posts here regularly knows I'm an Iowa fan.

I do enjoy you speaking in absolutes. "You're oversimplifying....all elements are interweaved..." as if this is a fact that you know and the rest of us don't. Why are the criteria interwoven? Because you say so?

However, if you're feeling so confident, we could place a little wager....

Which reminds me, I owe some money somewhere after a pre-NCAA bet with@Gantry . Gantry, if you could remind me how much I owe on our Aaron Brooks vs. The Field bet?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heavy is deeper than 125, but it's not as tough as folks are making it sound. After Parris the drop off is huge and without the top two, the weight would be unwatchable. Lee has had tougher competition in years past, they have all just graduated, moved up to 133, or were not wrestling this season. They are both deserving and I don't care who wins (my vote would be Lee) but the quality of competition should not be the deciding factor here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This debate lacks clarity. Some of you are arguing about who will win the Hodge (Vak) and others are arguing about who should win the Hodge (everyone who is arguing in favor of Gable). Every person in team “should” is really arguing to redefine the Hodge criteria. Like it not that’s what you’re doing. This happens. It’s understandable and it also explains why no one is giving an inch. The criteria are pointing to the wrong person (in their minds) so there must be something wrong with the criteria. The shoulds (team Gable) are going to say I’m not understanding what they are saying etc etc. I accept that too. 

Let me score if for you. Vak is right. Spencer will win it. The rest of you Gable lovers are right, Gable should win something. Problem is, that something is not the Hodge, at least not as its presently constructed. A more interesting topic therefore would be “what’s wrong with the Hodge that Gable isn’t going to win it?” Or “when the rules give the wrong answer, for goodness sake, change the rules”. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Crotalus said:

Heavy is deeper than 125, but it's not as tough as folks are making it sound. After Parris the drop off is huge and without the top two, the weight would be unwatchable. 

Lol “without the two all time greats....” 

What weight was tougher?

At least 6 junior world team qualifiers. 4 of which were junior world finalists. 2 of which were junior world champs. 2 more were cadet world champs. 

At least two former AA’s that didn’t place. One of which was a top 4 guy.

I think Spencer will win, but stop the hwt slander.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, BigTimeFan said:

This debate lacks clarity. Some of you are arguing about who will win the Hodge (Vak) and others are arguing about who should win the Hodge (everyone who is arguing in favor of Gable). Every person in team “should” is really arguing to redefine the Hodge criteria. Like it not that’s what you’re doing. This happens. It’s understandable and it also explains why no one is giving an inch. The criteria are pointing to the wrong person (in their minds) so there must be something wrong with the criteria. The shoulds (team Gable) are going to say I’m not understanding what they are saying etc etc. I accept that too. 

Let me score if for you. Vak is right. Spencer will win it. The rest of you Gable lovers are right, Gable should win something. Problem is, that something is not the Hodge, at least not as its presently constructed. A more interesting topic therefore would be “what’s wrong with the Hodge that Gable isn’t going to win it?” Or “when the rules give the wrong answer, for goodness sake, change the rules”. 

There is Hodge Criteria, and there is Hodge voting.  The latter determines the Hodge winner, the first one is a guide which may or may not be followed by the voters.

Share this post


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

Lol “without the two all time greats....” 

What weight was tougher?

At least 6 junior world team qualifiers. 4 of which were junior world finalists. 2 of which were junior world champs. 2 more were cadet world champs. 

At least two former AA’s that didn’t place. One of which was a top 4 guy.

I think Spencer will win, but stop the hwt slander.

For what it’s worth Amar Dhesi was a junior world champ — awarded after Geno’s title was stripped - I don’t recall anyone saying that Snyder deserves the Hodge because a junior world champ only took fifth in his weight class (understand, I’m implying Dhesi took fifth that year) and Snyder beat him 18-5 in the quarter finals. Or that the weight class was so tough that Coon who was placed third pinned Dhesi in the consolation rounds.  

In 2013 when Tony Nelson won NCAAs I don’t recall anyone gushing that his win was especially awesome because Dom Bradley - also a junior world champion - only took fourth.

I think the difference is we never saw Bradley or Dhesi at the same level as Parriss and so didn’t find it especially interesting that they lost or see it as especially significant in assessing the quality of the weight class.

in fact I don’t recall anyone ever rating Zahid highly because he beat Mark Hall who was a two time JR World Champ. By this time people were downgrading Hall and perhaps downgrading his wins. 

The fact is that Jr Worlds as awesome a title as it is is not entirely consistent in its meaning. Not all Jr World champs go on to ever make senior worlds. Sometimes the best international guys are already on the Sr World teams and don’t compete in the Jr Worlds.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

For what it’s worth Amar Dhesi was a junior world champ — awarded after Geno’s title was stripped - I don’t recall anyone saying that Snyder deserves the Hodge because a junior world champ only took fifth in his weight class (understand, I’m implying Dhesi took fifth that year) and Snyder beat him 18-5 in the quarter finals. Or that the weight class was so tough that Coon who was placed third pinned Dhesi in the consolation rounds.  

In 2013 when Tony Nelson won NCAAs I don’t recall anyone gushing that his win was especially awesome because Dom Bradley - also a junior world champion - only took fourth.

I think the difference is we never saw Bradley or Dhesi at the same level as Parriss and so didn’t find it especially interesting that they lost or see it as especially significant in assessing the quality of the weight class.

in fact I don’t recall anyone ever rating Zahid highly because he beat Mark Hall who was a two time JR World Champ. By this time people were downgrading Hall and perhaps downgrading his wins. 

The fact is that Jr Worlds as awesome a title as it is is not entirely consistent in its meaning. Not all Jr World champs go on to ever make senior worlds. Sometimes the best international guys are already on the Sr World teams and don’t compete in the Jr Worlds.

 

 

 

 

Those are all great examples one person in a weight at a time. Now go find a weight that compares to hwt this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Those are all great examples one person in a weight at a time. Now go find a weight that compares to hwt this year.
Literally the first weight he referenced had at leat four (Snyder, Gwiz, Coon, and Dhesi).

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Share this post


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

A more interesting topic therefore would be “what’s wrong with the Hodge that Gable isn’t going to win it?” Or “when the rules give the wrong answer, for goodness sake, change the rules”. 

Good point.  Steveson should get extra consideration due to his awesome beard - but that doesn't fit into the current criteria.  Such a system is inherently flawed.

Share this post


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

Literally the first weight he referenced had at leat four (Snyder, Gwiz, Coon, and Dhesi).

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 

Four what? Gwiz never even wrestled at junior worlds did he?

Share this post


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

Lol “without the two all time greats....” 

What weight was tougher?

At least 6 junior world team qualifiers. 4 of which were junior world finalists. 2 of which were junior world champs. 2 more were cadet world champs. 

At least two former AA’s that didn’t place. One of which was a top 4 guy.

I think Spencer will win, but stop the hwt slander.

I can't do it. As BTF points out, Jr. world team/placement/champion is overrated as a predictor of how tough a weight class is. After Parris, none of those heavies are impressive. Hell, Ferrari could probably jump up and place 3rd. The weight is still tougher than 125 this year, but it's not as wide a gap as it is being made out to be. And Spencer is tied or has the advantage in other categories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope they wait until after the upcoming Sr. Level event to hold the Hodge vote. Not that those results count, but you can't un see what you have seen and that event could illustrate where Steveson and Lee truly are. 

At least some debate will occur if they give the Hodge to a guy whose fans think he is the best in the world and he gets beat while the other guy whose fans might also think he's one of the best in the world crushes it. 

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...