Jump to content
CB

Conference Allocations + rankings + RPI

Recommended Posts

Yes they will wrestle thru to have a 13th and 14th placer just in case there might be a wild card given to the Big at that weight i believe. SHP  could answer just in case im wrong

This is crazy, Big 10(14) gets 12 at 133, every other (74-75 schools COMBINED get 13 allocations, make it  (if 77 schools) have 3 conferences (by geography) of 16, 1 conference of 15, and 1 of 14 (keep the best big 10 at 14) have top 6 in each weight go to NCAA so that makes 30 in each weight class, have 3 wild cards per weight so the most any conference could have from 1 weight is 9, that would be much fairer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dougp - you would have to split up the Big 10 then,  they got that many because of their performance during the season.

 

West Reg, EWL, Southern Conference have a lot less for a reason, they aren;t as strong.

 

I would not mind going to Regionals, but need to split up the Big 10 to make it fair and that will be a tough fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

doesn't there have to be true twelfth and thirteenth matches?

I don't believe the Big Ten has ever done true placing matches. What they will presumably do is wrestle for 13th place (one spot below an AQ), so they have that one additional wrestler with one of the two criteria needed to be eligible to be in the at-large pool (as a bronze-standard wrestler)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SHP - Do you know of a bylaw that requires them to wrestle those extra matches? Or is that just the method the conference decided to use to qualify those spots?

 

Could they, for instance, decide to award the addition spots based on conference records or some other manner? (Mobile)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if there is a specific bylaw to my knowledge, but I was pretty sure that they have to wrestle at least to place the number of automatic qualifier places (for instance, I was told that the first year they had those 9-12 matches, they had to place all ten of the wrestlers they qualified at 285, meaning that they'd have to wrestle that 9th-10th place bout despite both wrestlers qualifying automatically for nationals). They tack on the bronze-standard match to give another of their wrestlers a better shot at an at-large bid, presumably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe the Big Ten has ever done true placing matches. What they will presumably do is wrestle for 13th place (one spot below an AQ), so they have that one additional wrestler with one of the two criteria needed to be eligible to be in the at-large pool (as a bronze-standard wrestler)

 

So, somebody's goin 0-5 at B1G's...That's a tough way to end a season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

157 Allocations:

 

ACC (2): Brascetta, Kerr-Brown

Big Ten (8): Demas, Green, Kelly, Martinez, Murphy, Ness, Perrotti, Welch

EIWA (7): Blanco, Boyle, Minotti, Parsons, Realbuto, Scheidel, Staudenmayer

EWL (2): Flournoy, Walsh

MAC (3): Jensen, LaVallee, Miller

Pac-12 (3): Elder, Hernandez, Pierce

SoCon (1): Walker

West (1): Pack

 

Thrown by Big 12 (2): Collica, DeAngelis

 

Not that I think it will matter for seeding, but can any explain the math of how a 14-2 (based on D1wrestling win/loss) Realbuto is #1 in rpi over a 27-0 Martinez?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 In its current formulation, the index comprises a team's winning percentage (25%), its opponents' winning percentage (50%), and the winning percentage of those opponents' opponents (25%). The opponents' winning percentage and the winning percentage of those opponents' opponents both comprise the strength of schedule (SOS). Thus, the SOS accounts for 75% of the RPI calculation and is 2/3 its opponents' winning percentage and 1/3 its opponents' opponents' winning percentage

I am not sure why everyone has such a hard time understanding RPI.  It is a mathematical calculation based on who you wrestle and how they have done.  It is very simple.  Your RPI can be significantly higher than someone who you have lost to.  It doesn't mean you are better.  It just means you have wrestled a much tougher schedule, at least by the factors used to measure such things.

 

 

NOTE:  The above quote is based off of the standard used for many NCAA sports.  The Wrestling format, which obviously factors individuals instead of team, may be somewhat different.

Edited by MSU158

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 In its current formulation, the index comprises a team's winning percentage (25%), its opponents' winning percentage (50%), and the winning percentage of those opponents' opponents (25%). The opponents' winning percentage and the winning percentage of those opponents' opponents both comprise the strength of schedule (SOS). Thus, the SOS accounts for 75% of the RPI calculation and is 2/3 its opponents' winning percentage and 1/3 its opponents' opponents' winning percentage

I am not sure why everyone has such a hard time understanding RPI.  It is a mathematical calculation based on who you wrestle and how they have done.  It is very simple.  Your RPI can be significantly higher than someone who you have lost to.  It doesn't mean you are better.  It just means you have wrestled a much tougher schedule, at least by the factors used to measure such things.

 

 

NOTE:  The above quote is based off of the standard used for many NCAA sports.  The Wrestling format, which obviously factors individuals instead of team, may be somewhat different.

 

 

Note, didn't say its hard to understand or that it has to work out perfectly with head to head etc.  However, since Realbuto only has 16 matches, compare Martinez 16 toughest matches to Realbuto.  I know the math works given their formula construction and it won't matter for these guys, but if allocations are based on this, one can then see how there is a bit of flaw in the SOS and overall RPI math and might matter for those on the bubble or tournament allocation break point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RPI is VERY necessary as it can protect wrestlers in super tough conferences, like the B1G or teams like Cornell who schedule many top teams.  Having to wrestle top5 guys multiple times makes the likelihood of losses much higher while someone in a less challenging conference may take less losses wrestling a much easier schedule.

 

184 seeding could be a very big example of this.  Dean has 2 losses.  Thomusseit, Dechow and Stauffer all only have 1.  After their respective qualifiers, Dean will have to beat 2 more top 10 wrestlers in Brown and Thomas. Stauffer just beat Meeks for the 3rd time.  Dechow has to beat Miklus, his only loss.  Thomusseit has no one in the ACC ranked top 20.  Dean had a two loss weekend quite a while ago.  He has wrestled and beaten many quality opponents since.  Without RPI, it would be very difficult for him to be seeded higher with 2 losses to the other wrestlers' 1, other than Thomusseit, whom he beat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note, didn't say its hard to understand or that it has to work out perfectly with head to head etc.  However, since Realbuto only has 16 matches, compare Martinez 16 toughest matches to Realbuto.  I know the math works given their formula construction and it won't matter for these guys, but if allocations are based on this, one can then see how there is a bit of flaw in the SOS and overall RPI math and might matter for those on the bubble or tournament allocation break point.

 

Your point is valid that he would need 17 matches to be ranked, however, somebody goofed and he actually has exactly 17 as of now. He's 15-2, so whoever had him at 14-2 screwed up. Not sure where you saw that but they gave you incorrect info!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your point is valid that he would need 17 matches to be ranked, however, somebody goofed and he actually has exactly 17 as of now. He's 15-2, so whoever had him at 14-2 screwed up. Not sure where you saw that but they gave you incorrect info!

 

Wasn't my point, I referenced the 14-2 from D1 wrestling, easy info to find, they missed one match not a big deal, wasn't the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why do we have this RPI question every year. It's not subjective, it's straight numbers they don't tell the value of the wrestler, rather the value of their competition. I have no idea why the RPI is always complained about when it's a constant in a lot of college sports. Because the best wrestler isn't ranked #1 in the RPI doesn't mean it's not a reality.

In fact, shouldn't the top guy NOT have the best RPI? He's not wrestling himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can easily be the top guy and have the best RPI.  It all comes down to how many quality opponents you have wrestled and how they have done against other highly ranked opponents.

 

  With only 77 programs vs. the hundreds in other sports like Football and Basketball you don't have issues as often like Boise State being undefeated in football with a much softer schedule or a MAC team doing the same.  WIth only 77 programs there is a higher likelihood that wrestlers with very good records have run across some quality competition.  Still, a wrestler shouldn't be penalized for having to wrestle a top 5 opponent 4 times, losing once or twice, while another highly ranked opponent hasn't wrestled either guy.

Edited by MSU158

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully no errors, below are Realbuto & Martinez best 17 matches with win over RPI opponent.  Note IM gets an xx over Miller as he had no RPI (only 16 matches).  Realbuto with two Ls against no RPI opponents.  I realize RPI is not subjective but are straight number/equations.  

 

Again point is that it doesn't really matter for Realbuto or Martinez but the fact that the RPI doesn't appear to factor SOS correctly (proper weighting, differential, however you want to call it)  indicates it may not be the best equation when dealing with number of qualifiers for conferences or those on the bubble of being in/out.  Its not part of equation (think their best 17 matches tells the story) but included their TFs and MDs over RPI at end.  

 

It appears Martinez gets penalized in the RPI equation from wrestling more matches. 

 

BR  IM

 2   5

 5   5

 8   6

 8   8

11 10

11 14

12 18

25 19

33 19

xx 20

xx 22

xx 26

xx 27

xx xx

xx xx

 L  xx

 L  xx

 

 

IM:  TF 5   MD 5, 8, 14, 26, 27

BR:  MD  25

Edited by ionel

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...