Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
TBar1977

Ben Askren Claims Iowa Worst at Peaking for NCAA's (link)

Recommended Posts

 

As someone who is getting their PhD, and uses stats all the time- this is quite the poor analysis. 

 

It's a sampling issue. Not only is it not enough years, but he only samples two time points. 

 

If he wanted to correctly answer this question, he would compare preseason, mid season, prior to b10s, seeds to placement (Nationals rank) .  He could plot it in a simple XY graph where X= time and Y= Rank. 

 

It's a temporal issue of peaking. What if Minnesota's teams peaked in Jan, performed terrible at big 10s, and then only slightly better at nationals? You wouldn't say they have peaked if they are performing below their rank of Jan rankings.... 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article isn't really about Iowa at all, just some armchair statistical analysis.

 

As Ben himself mentions a highly ranked wrestler is disadvantaged in these kind of analysis because there is little room to move up. A top seed who wins gold gets a rating of zero while an 8th ranked guy who places 7th gets a + score. Yet who really preformed better?

 

Btw I have a per theory that wrestlers who rely a lot on fitness to win will slightly underpreform at big events on average, since their advantage (physical conditioning) is least when everyone else is peaking too. Dunno how to test this though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If seeds were/are a perfect representation of the wrestler's projected placement Ben's analysis might have some merit. Seeds like rankings are somebody's opinion and in all actuality wrestlers compete against each other not against the opinion of a committee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

peaking! my 2nd favorite wrestling topic!

 

altho i do like checking out the stuff Askren is doing. tough to draw much in the way of conclusions from it though. looks like random variation among the perennial title contenders to me. would need to see consistent under or over preforming of seeds before making any judgements about the programs. 

 

or call it peaking. whatever!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another way to look at Iowa's performance in this admittedly amateurish analysis is that the program has been so consistently successful at the national level over the past 35 years that perhaps some Iowa wrestlers have been  overseeded in a case of unintentional pro-Iowa bias from the seeding committee. Thus, when they wrestled to their true ability level, it appeared they underperformed. I'm not even sure the data would support this; I just thought it could be possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

peaking! my 2nd favorite wrestling topic!

 

altho i do like checking out the stuff Askren is doing. tough to draw much in the way of conclusions from it though. looks like random variation among the perennial title contenders to me. would need to see consistent under or over preforming of seeds before making any judgements about the programs. 

 

or call it peaking. whatever!

I just knew you would peek in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who is getting their PhD, and uses stats all the time- this is quite the poor analysis. 

 

It's a sampling issue. Not only is it not enough years, but he only samples two time points. 

 

If he wanted to correctly answer this question, he would compare preseason, mid season, prior to b10s, seeds to placement (Nationals rank) .  He could plot it in a simple XY graph where X= time and Y= Rank. 

 

It's a temporal issue of peaking. What if Minnesota's teams peaked in Jan, performed terrible at big 10s, and then only slightly better at nationals? You wouldn't say they have peaked if they are performing below their rank of Jan rankings.... 

 

 

I'd be interested in seeing this.  But wouldn't you need some kind of factor to account for a team with higher seeds being unable to improve as much as a team with lower seeds?

Edited by quanon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another way to look at Iowa's performance in this admittedly amateurish analysis is that the program has been so consistently successful at the national level over the past 35 years that perhaps some Iowa wrestlers have been  overseeded in a case of unintentional pro-Iowa bias from the seeding committee. Thus, when they wrestled to their true ability level, it appeared they underperformed. I'm not even sure the data would support this; I just thought it could be possible.

Good point. 

Also works in the opposite, sometimes wrestlers get seeded lower than they should be, for whatever reason - small school being overlooked, missing part of the season, lack of head to head compared to others in the weight, etc.

 

Just look this year:

Delgado is unseeded, if he places say 5th to 8th is he really over performing?  If Waters & Delgado do wrestle, the loser goes on to take 3rd, how much of an under performance is that really for Waters?  Or I guess potential over performance for Delgado.

 

Brewer is a 2xall-american but going by the seeding him placing would be an over performance.  Should another 7th or 8th place finish really be considered an over performance?  It isn't like he has had an underwhelming season, a loss heavy season. 

 

Schopp at #9, injury aside, if he makes it to the podium seeding wise that is an over performance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another way to look at Iowa's performance in this admittedly amateurish analysis is that the program has been so consistently successful at the national level over the past 35 years that perhaps some Iowa wrestlers have been overseeded in a case of unintentional pro-Iowa bias from the seeding committee. Thus, when they wrestled to their true ability level, it appeared they underperformed. I'm not even sure the data would support this; I just thought it could be possible.

distinct advantage of being over seeded is you are more likely to see an Iowa wrestler in quarterfinals. Better advance points in early rounds, perhaps bonus, and two steps closer to r12 than consolations. Championship teams place a lot of their wrestlers into the quarterfinals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

askren knows everything just ask him

 Very true, when he was on the World/Olympic team, his coaches said he wouldn't listen to them about anything, and that his technique was bad(look at his shots against Foster-head down shots with no set-up). When offered suggestions to improve set-ups, he just blew them off, like 'you can't help me'. With all his latest anti-Iowa banter, my respect for him has waned considerably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Askren is strangely obsessed with the Iowa program. It's almost Tbar-like. Hey, who started this thread again?

 

 

Actually, I found the Askren article on the Iowa Hawkeye Report where they already had a long thread devoted to the subject. Lot's of paranoia over there about Askren.

 

https://iowa.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=813&tid=179554259&mid=179554259&sid=940&style=2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I found the Askren article on the Iowa Hawkeye Report where they already had a long thread devoted to the subject. Lot's of paranoia over there about Askren.

 

https://iowa.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=813&tid=179554259&mid=179554259&sid=940&style=2

 

Are the individual wrestlers on your team so uninteresting that you feel the need to obsess over Iowa and this highly scientific article from Askren? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are the individual wrestlers on your team so uninteresting that you feel the need to obsess over Iowa and this highly scientific article from Askren? 

 

 

It is an interesting article that got some discussion going. Vak, you took the thread and made it something it is not. If you guys weren't so dang paranoid you'd talk about the article and leave it at that. 

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...