Sunday Senior WTT Trial Thread

[headshuck 2,607]

If Dake claims he's injured now, can he wrestle off Burroughs at a later date?

[wrestlingphish 1,029]

When Borroughs loses to Tsargush again you will have a shining example. 

 

So you don't have any?

[wrestlingphish 1,029]

Looks like Russell is forfeiting to Kennedy to give Kennedy a shot at true 3rd. If Russell would have beaten Kennedy he would not have received the same opportunity since he already lost to Steiber. If Kennedy wins he better split that national team stipend with his teammate.

[manyak 184]

When Borroughs loses to Tsargush again you will have a shining example. 

 

 

Tsargush isn't going to worlds.

[supyall46 7]

I don't necessarily agree that Dake is the better representative than Burroughs, but what I'm saying - and what I think straggler is saying - is that there should be a fair medium for that to be determined.  Sorry, but wrestling an entire mini-tournament full of the country's best just hours before you have to wrestle for the actual spot vs. a fresh guy is 100% going to have an impact on performance and the ability of the competitors to wrestle on an even footing.  These are people's careers and life goals we are talking about, and wrestling is a sport that prides itself upon equal grounds and opportunity; two men, one mat.  To have this severe systemic flaw that heavily tips the scales shouldn't simply be accepted.

[VakAttack 4,016]

When Borroughs loses to Tsargush again you will have a shining example.

 

If Burroughs loses to Tsargush at the 2015 World Championships, it will be a truly incredible feat.

[straggler 65]

So you don't have any?

No because it would be completely speculative as you know in asking the question. But the bigger issue is you have absolutely no response to the fact that the format is ridiculously stacked, which comes into play at very competitive weights. You have no answer, so you attempt to change the question. Sorry but I won't play along. Is this format fair or not? Answer: Hell no. That's it. Doesn't matter about your hypothetical. This is a highly unfair, stacked format. I don't care if the "better" wrestler makes it through 100 percent of the time. That is meaningless. The format makes little sense.

Edited June 14, 2015 by straggler

[wrestlingphish 1,029]

Supyall, I get where you are coming from. I just disagree. 

[wrestlingphish 1,029]

No because it would be completely speculative as you know in asking the question. But the bigger issue is you have absolutely no response to the fact that the format is ridiculously stacked, which comes into play at very competitive weights. You have no answer, so you attempt to change the question. Sorry but I won't play along. Is this format fair or not? Answer: Hell no. That's it. Doesn't matter about you hypothetical. This is a highly unfair, stacked format. 

 

You made a claim that the system sent wrestlers who weren't our best. I asked for specific examples. If it happens as much as you say it does it shouldn't be hard to back up your stance with some actual examples. 

 

Don't get all up in a tizzy because you were asked to support your argument.

[supyall46 7]

Supyall, I get where you are coming from. I just disagree. 

I respect that.  What parts do you mostly disagree with?

[straggler 65]

You made a claim that the system sent wrestlers who weren't our best. I asked for specific examples. If it happens as much as you say it does it shouldn't be hard to back up your stance with some actual examples. 

 

Don't get all up in a tizzy because you were asked to support your argument.

An unfair format is an unfair format. To say "well you cannot prove that the best wrestler didn't make it through" is not a valid response. Am I going to claim if Metcalf or Borroughs win that they are not the best? No. How could I? But the format is unfair and a format should be constructed that eliminates a needlessly issue. 

 

EDit-You didn't ask me to support the argument, you tried to evade the argument by a speculative hypothetical. Who is "better"? But the format is unfair, and that is all that matters. 

Edited June 14, 2015 by straggler

[manyak 184]

Our system itself is obviously flawed and highly unfair. Anyone with a brain who isn't a totally delusional homer can see this. No other countries do this, Iran does a round robin world team trials that you have to qualify for. Russia does a regular tournament and uses the European games as a test run and if anyone looks terrible a coach may make a decision.

[straggler 65]

And I said this before. Borroughs is the clear No. 1. If he wins I have no basis to say he is not "the best." But the system is flawed. 

[Axe_Spartan 205]

Our system itself is obviously flawed and highly unfair. Anyone with a brain who isn't a totally delusional homer can see this. No other countries do this, Iran does a round robin world team trials that you have to qualify for. Russia does a regular tournament and uses the European games as a test run and if anyone looks terrible a coach may make a decision.

 

Yes, about the russian part, do you think Tsabolov can represent Russia at the Worlds if Magomedrasul Gazimagomedov doesn't win his weight at the European Games?

[wrestlingphish 1,029]

I respect that.  What parts do you mostly disagree with?

 

I think that USA Wrestling needs to put the guys out there that have the best shot of winning a world medal. To me, one of the best predictors of future success is past success. There should be a reward for performing at the biggest stage. Now, I don't agree with US Open winners getting a bye to the best of three but you do need to give people an incentive to show up to that tournament.

 

Do I think the system is perfect? No. Do I think that it gets it right 98% of the time? Yes. And that was my original point of contention. I never said the system was perfect. I just disagreed with the claim that we were routinely sending guys who weren't our best representatives for that weight.

[Katie 1,076]

The US Open is a tournament format where everyone has an equal shot. The US Open is what determines a national champion. 

 

The WTT is a different beast. It is not designed to determine who performs the best in a single elimination bracket, but rather who would be the best world team member. The problem the WTTs format tries to get around the issue of guys winning because they scout their domestic competition even though they would not do as well against a series of national champions they cannot scout as well. The format is not perfect, but I think it's better than any alternative I can think of.  

 

I note that Burroughs actually went to the US Open in 2012 and 2013 and 2014, which means he waived the advantage he had earned three years in a row. Now people are howling because after four years he finally decided not to waive the advantage he earned. Give me a break. 

Edited June 14, 2015 by Katie

[wrestlingphish 1,029]

Looks like we will have Howe vs Taylor for true third. It will be interesting to see how Taylor comes back from that defeat to Dake. 

[straggler 65]

Have the challenge tournament on Saturday and the championship match on Sunday. That would be a marked improvement. 

[supyall46 7]

The US Open is a tournament format where everyone has an equal shot. The US Open is what determines a national champion. 

 

The WTT is a different beast. It is not designed to determine the best wrestler in the country, but rather the best world team member. The problem the WTTs format tries to get around the issue of guys winning because they scout their domestic competition even though they would not do as well against a series of national champions they cannot scout as well. The format is not perfect, but I think it's better than any alternative I can think of.  

 

I note that Burroughs actually went to the US Open in 2012 and 2013 and 2014, which means he waived the advantage he had earned three years in a row. Now people are howling because after he finally accepted the advantage he earned for the first time in four years. Give me a break. 

I agree, I'm glad the US Open determines who should be sitting in the finals.  I think that's totally fair; that's why you don't see me debating that Joe Colon having to wrestle Tony Ramos after the tournament last night wasn't fair.  T-Ram won the US Open fair and square, outplacing Joe Colon.  Everyone who enters the US Open has equal opportunity to win on a fair footing.  Therefore, he was allowed to sit in the finals.  The US Open is a fair way to determine this.  Except that it doesn't, in the case of 74 kgs.  Burroughs didn't wrestle in the US Open.  

 

But can you not think of any better alternative, at all?  It doesn't take a superb amount of creativity to think of possible alternatives that could be considered.  Perhaps waiting until the next week for all of the best of three finals?  Giving the athletes who won the challenge tournament and earned the right to wrestle in the finals time to recover instead of thrusting their exhausted bodies in a best of three versus an entirely fresh guy?  If not a week, just a day?  There's no reason to take the approach that "it isn't perfect, but we have to deal with it because it's the best we can do".  It's not the best we can do to offer these athletes a fair shot at earning a place on the World team.

 

I'm sorry that you feel I'm howling and that I need to give you a break.  And I applaud JB for wrestling in the US Open in previous years, even though he didn't have to.  And I'm not mad at Burroughs at all; he's simply doing what's best for him given the current system.  But I'm talking about this year: 2015 World Team Trials.  Not the past.  Not 2014, or 2013, or 2012.  Right now.  Even if Kyle Dake had won the US Open, he would not have been in the finals.  He was not offered that opportunity.  Nor was David Taylor.  Their only option to have a shot at making a world team is to compete at a marked disadvantage.  The current system does not give the competitors an even footing to put forth their best wrestling, and is flawed. 

Edited June 14, 2015 by supyall46

[pamela 1,334]

Alo with the late TD!

[Billyhoyle 2,480]

So the reason we want to get rid of the bye is so that the guy who has taken 3 golds and 1 bronze the last four times in the WC/Olympics may have an unfair advantage to make the team?  Damn right we want him to have an advantage to make the team.  He's the best wrestler our country has produced since John Smith, and while Dake and Taylor may have more fans because of their NCAA results, that means nothing against international competition. 

 

With that said, Dake looks great, and this looks to be JB's best opponent yet in a domestic competition. 

[Katie 1,076]

I agree, I'm glad the US Open determines who should be sitting in the finals.  I think that's totally fair; that's why you don't see me debating that Joe Colon having to wrestle Tony Ramos after the tournament last night wasn't fair.  T-Ram won the US Open fair and square, outplacing Joe Colon.  Everyone who enters the US Open has equal opportunity to win on a fair footing.  Therefore, he was allowed to sit in the finals.  The US Open is a fair way to determine this.  Except that it doesn't, in the case of 74 kgs.  Burroughs didn't wrestle in the US Open.  

 

But can you not think of any better alternative, at all?  It doesn't take a superb amount of creativity to think of possible alternatives that could be considered.  Perhaps waiting until the next week for all of the best of three finals?  Giving the athletes who won the challenge tournament and earned the right to wrestle in the finals time to recover instead of thrusting their exhausted bodies in a best of three versus an entirely fresh guy?  If not a week, just a day?  There's no reason to take the approach that "it isn't perfect, but we have to deal with it because it's the best we can do".  It's not the best we can do to offer these athletes a fair shot at earning a place on the World team.

 

I'm sorry that you feel I'm howling and that I need to give you a break.  And I applaud JB for wrestling in the US Open in previous years, even though he didn't have to.  And I'm not mad at Burroughs at all; he's simply doing what's best for him given the current system.  But I'm talking about this year: 2015 World Team Trials.  Not the past.  Not 2014, or 2013, or 2012.  Right now.  Even if Kyle Dake had won the US Open, he would not have been in the finals.  He was not offered that opportunity.  Nor was David Taylor.  Their only option to have a shot at making a world team is to compete at a marked disadvantage.  The current system does not give the competitors an even footing to put forth their best wrestling, and is flawed. 

 

The WTT format is intended to give returning medalists (from only nine months ago) the same edge US Open champs otherwise get. That edge is intended to compensate for the top dog also being the most heavily scouted wrestler in the bracket.

 

Like I said already, the WTT is intended to determine the best representative at worlds (not the best wrestler at a domestic tournament). I think it would be foolish to not recognize returning medalists, and do something about the fact they will be the most heavily scouted.

 

Disagree if you must, but I have a feeling Dake fans would be okay with the format if Dake was the returning medalist. 

[BigTimeFan 1,141]

Otis: Regarding the WTTs it's the fact that one guy gets to relax all day while the other wrestlers two or three matches in quick succession. It should be a more level playing field.

[BigApple 86]

Zeke Jones went to Russia for about a month taking notes of how they run their system. He implemented as much of itbas he could. One thing he emphasized was they keep sending back guys who've performed the best in the past, even though they might have bern beaten at the Russian nationals. Even if Dake beats Burroughs today he'll still have to place higher that Jordan at a desginated international event. That being said I think the best 2 out of 3 should be the day after the mini-tournament.

[wrestlingnerd 3,004]

I don't mean to be mean but basing an entire system on JB, arguably a top 4 ever US wrestler is idiotic. The system is flawed. The top guy should have an advantage in being allowed to wrestle off for the spot he last held without having to qualify for the right to wrestle for his spot. That makes sense. But the top guy should NOT be given a physical advantage. That is just stupid.

Edited June 14, 2015 by wrestlingnerd