Jump to content
BobDole

Semi-Finals Stats

Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, NJDan said:

Yes, but they were the higher seed in 33 of 40.

Here are the stats sorted by higher/better seed winning percentage.

Team W/L %
Penn State 38-0 100.00%
Illinois 6-0 100.00%
Nebraska 4-0 100.00%
South Dakota State 2-0 100.00%
Boise State 2-0 100.00%
Iowa State 2-0 100.00%
Rutgers 1-0 100.00%
North Carolina 1-0 100.00%
Virginia 1-0 100.00%
Indiana 1-0 100.00%
Oklahoma State 17-2 89.47%
North Carolina State 6-1 85.71%
Iowa 11-2 84.62%
Arizona State 5-1 83.33%
Minnesota 7-2 77.78%
Cornell 13-5 72.22%
Ohio State 14-6 70.00%
Michigan 7-3 70.00%
Oklahoma 2-1 66.67%
Edinboro 2-1 66.67%
Pittsburgh 3-2 60.00%
Missouri 7-7 50.00%
Lehigh 2-2 50.00%
Wisconsin 2-2 50.00%
Wyoming 1-1 50.00%
Maryland 1-1 50.00%
Princeton 1-1 50.00%
Kent State 1-1 50.00%
Northern Iowa 1-1 50.00%
Northwestern 2-4 33.33%
Virginia Tech 1-2 33.33%
American 0-2 0.00%
Central Michigan 0-2 0.00%
Stanford 0-1 0.00%
Cal Poly 0-1 0.00%
Utah Valley 0-1 0.00%
Bucknell 0-1 0.00%

Here are the stats sorted by the lower/worst seeds

Team W/L %
West Virginia 1-0 100.00%
Lock Haven 1-0 100.00%
Stanford 4-1 80.00%
Lehigh 5-3 62.50%
Penn State 7-6 53.85%
Oklahoma 2-2 50.00%
Edinboro 2-2 50.00%
Wyoming 1-1 50.00%
Rider 1-1 50.00%
Northwestern 2-3 40.00%
Iowa 7-14 33.33%
Rutgers 2-4 33.33%
North Carolina 2-4 33.33%
Iowa State 1-2 33.33%
Princeton 1-2 33.33%
Cal Poly 1-2 33.33%
Virginia 1-3 25.00%
Kent State 1-3 25.00%
American 1-3 25.00%
Minnesota 2-7 22.22%
Ohio State 3-12 20.00%
Cornell 2-8 20.00%
Virginia Tech 2-8 20.00%
Arizona State 1-4 20.00%
Wisconsin 1-5 16.67%
Michigan 1-9 10.00%
Oklahoma State 1-10 9.09%
North Carolina State 0-7 0.00%
Missouri 0-7 0.00%
Northern Iowa 0-4 0.00%
Nebraska 0-3 0.00%
Oregon State 0-3 0.00%
Duke 0-3 0.00%
Illinois 0-2 0.00%
Indiana 0-2 0.00%
Pittsburgh 0-2 0.00%
Utah Valley 0-2 0.00%
Old Dominion 0-2 0.00%
Boise State 0-1 0.00%
Central Michigan 0-1 0.00%
North Dakota State 0-1 0.00%
Hofstra 0-1 0.00%
Columbia 0-1 0.00%
Clarion 0-1 0.00%
Citadel 0-1 0.00%
Appalachian State 0-1 0.00%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BobDole said:

Are you blind? Goodness I'm dead and can see it.

 

Sorry, but you still have a problem with Princeton, which is the only one I checked. First you had Princeton at 0-3. You say that you did not include this year. But the update has Princeton at 1-1, which is what they did this year. Shouldn't the update have Princeton at 1-4?

Share this post


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

Sorry, but you still have a problem with Princeton, which is the only one I checked. First you had Princeton at 0-3. You say that you did not include this year. But the update has Princeton at 1-1, which is what they did this year. Shouldn't the update have Princeton at 1-4?

He has Princeton at 2-3 overall as of this year, an improvement form 0-3 overall as of last year.

Share this post


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

Sorry, but you still have a problem with Princeton, which is the only one I checked. First you had Princeton at 0-3. You say that you did not include this year. But the update has Princeton at 1-1, which is what they did this year. Shouldn't the update have Princeton at 1-4?

You need to learn to read

Princeton 2-3 40.00% 1-1 50.00% 1-2 33.33%

They are 2-3 in ALL semi-finals matches

They are 1-1 when they are the higher/better seed

They are 1-2 when they are the lower/worse seed

 

Share this post


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

He has Princeton at 2-3 overall as of this year, an improvement form 0-3 overall as of last year.

He clearly does a lot of work, but needs to do a tiny bit more. Just make clear headlines and there will be less confusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NJDan said:

He clearly does a lot of work, but needs to do a tiny bit more. Just make clear headlines and there will be less confusion.

It was clear to me. It was clear to others. It was unclear to you, even though it was clearly stated.

 

15 minutes ago, BobDole said:

Here are the stats sorted by higher/better seed winning percentage.

 

15 minutes ago, BobDole said:

Here are the stats sorted by the lower/worst seeds

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the risk of confusing one person on this board, I like to look at @BobDole's excellent presentation of the data with another twist.

  • PSU win % in the semis when they are the higher seed = 100% (sample size = 38)
  • The field win % in the semis when they are the higher seed = 69.23% (sample size = 182)

A difference of 30.77%

  • PSU win % in the semis when they are the lower seed = 53.85% (sample size = 13)
  • The field win % in the semis when they are the lower seed = 23.67% (sample size = 207)

A difference of 30.17%

Those differences are not random luck.

To come back to the field PSU would need to lose their next 17 semis when higher seeds and when lower seeds. Remarkable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

At the risk of confusing one person on this board, I like to look at @BobDole's excellent presentation of the data with another twist.

  • PSU win % in the semis when they are the higher seed = 100% (sample size = 38)
  • The field win % in the semis when they are the higher seed = 69.23% (sample size = 182)

A difference of 30.77%

  • PSU win % in the semis when they are the lower seed = 53.85% (sample size = 13)
  • The field win % in the semis when they are the lower seed = 23.67% (sample size = 207)

A difference of 30.17%

Those differences are not random luck.

To come back to the field PSU would need to lose their next 17 semis when higher seeds and when lower seeds. Remarkable.

The Penn State factor adds a 30% boost to your chances in the semis!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:
  • PSU win % in the semis when they are the higher seed = 100% (sample size = 38)
  • The field win % in the semis when they are the higher seed = 69.23% (sample size = 182)

A difference of 30.77%

  • PSU win % in the semis when they are the lower seed = 53.85% (sample size = 13)
  • The field win % in the semis when they are the lower seed = 23.67% (sample size = 207)

A difference of 30.17%

That's a large enough sample size to be statistically significant.  This basically says that Penn State is 30% more successful than the average.  That's an anomaly that can't be explained by random chance.  This is clear evidence that something is a little bit different at Penn State compared to the average successful division 1 wrestling program.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Updated through 2007 aka the last 15 years. If there are any errors please notify me as I believe all the coaches are correct, however there might be some wrong ones.

Also I did find a kink in Cael's armor! He lost two matches in the semi-finals as a higher seed in 2009. Jarrod King beat Jon Reader and Konrad Dudziak beat David Zabriskie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, BobDole said:

Here is the spreadsheet with the data. I did have one wrong input and thus it bumped the higher seed to winning exactly 75% of the matches.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gZ030P7DrwfC_wPYLLIRU9L07yMgyCAzd8ses67L89E/edit?usp=sharing

Appears Bob has an eternity of time on his hands.  :)

Share this post


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

Updated through 2007 aka the last 15 years. If there are any errors please notify me as I believe all the coaches are correct, however there might be some wrong ones.

Also I did find a kink in Cael's armor! He lost two matches in the semi-finals as a higher seed in 2009. Jarrod King beat Jon Reader and Konrad Dudziak beat David Zabriskie.

This is not as insignificant as it might seem. No knock on Cael or PSU, that kind of success doesn’t happen without outstanding coaching, but does anybody remember 9,10,11 years ago when PSU starting landing absolutely ridiculous recruiting classes? Multiple top 10 quality kids. We were amazed. These stats prove that the cream definitely rises to the top, and quickly. How many of those wins came from Fr/soph? A team like Missouri can make a living training up lower tier recruits, but getting thru the semis is a tall order. Mizzou’s true blue chippers during this period were Cox and O’Toole. What’s their combined semis record? Taking nothing away from Cael and co., there’s a significant difference (apparently) between the #1 HS kid at a given weight and a kid ranked #3, 4, 5, etc. Not always of course, but over time, with good coaching, those blue chippers are delivering as promised. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, tigerfan said:

This is not as insignificant as it might seem. No knock on Cael or PSU, that kind of success doesn’t happen without outstanding coaching, but does anybody remember 9,10,11 years ago when PSU starting landing absolutely ridiculous recruiting classes? Multiple top 10 quality kids. We were amazed. These stats prove that the cream definitely rises to the top, and quickly. How many of those wins came from Fr/soph? A team like Missouri can make a living training up lower tier recruits, but getting thru the semis is a tall order. Mizzou’s true blue chippers during this period were Cox and O’Toole. What’s their combined semis record? Taking nothing away from Cael and co., there’s a significant difference (apparently) between the #1 HS kid at a given weight and a kid ranked #3, 4, 5, etc. Not always of course, but over time, with good coaching, those blue chippers are delivering as promised. 

How many number 1’s has Cael had?  I bet it’s less than 10.

Share this post


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

This is not as insignificant as it might seem. No knock on Cael or PSU, that kind of success doesn’t happen without outstanding coaching, but does anybody remember 9,10,11 years ago when PSU starting landing absolutely ridiculous recruiting classes? Multiple top 10 quality kids. We were amazed. These stats prove that the cream definitely rises to the top, and quickly. How many of those wins came from Fr/soph? A team like Missouri can make a living training up lower tier recruits, but getting thru the semis is a tall order. Mizzou’s true blue chippers during this period were Cox and O’Toole. What’s their combined semis record? Taking nothing away from Cael and co., there’s a significant difference (apparently) between the #1 HS kid at a given weight and a kid ranked #3, 4, 5, etc. Not always of course, but over time, with good coaching, those blue chippers are delivering as promised. 

There is a major difference between Missouri and Penn State, otherwise Missouri would land as many #1 and #2 recruits as Penn State. That difference is Cael Sanderson. The very best want to wrestle for Cael because they know he will get the best out of them at that critical time when it is required. 

tYxofqIl.jpg

 

Edited by TBar1977

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...