Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
BigTimeFan

Sunday Senior WTT Trial Thread

Recommended Posts

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.

 

Bigapple, the requirement that he must also outplace him at an international tournament has been removed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed with wrestlingnerd.  I have to go so I'll respond with a longer post soon, but for now I'll say: it's fine to give them an advantage, but allowing them a PHYSICAL advantage is wrong.

 

I appreciate the debate guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think the system is fine. if you want the advantage, enter in the US Open and win. if you win the US Open but have a returning world medalist in your weight class, too bad. its one of the perks of winning a world medal, which happens pretty rarely these days. 

 

i wouldn't mind if they changed it though. i am a big fan of round robins. i think a single elimination knock out tournament is a worse way to determine a world team member spot. the US system is, in my view, somewhere in between the Russian and Iranian method. 

 

i would be curious what the competitors think about the idea of moving the 2 out of 3 matches to the day after the mini challenge. is the extra recovery time worth having to weigh in 2 days in a row? as a fan i'm agnostic to the idea. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do they have to weigh in again. Have the guy with the bye weigh in with the mini tournament guys and have them wait a day. If this is about determining the best guy then the more level the playing field the better.

 

The WTTs is an attempt to determine who would be the best representative at worlds. 

 

If you want to find out who would do the best in a single elimination bracket, check out the US Open. 

Edited by Katie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 four years he finally decided not to waive the advantage he earned. Give me a break. 

 

But after all isn't the wrestler number 1 at his weight in the country decided at the World Team Trials?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do they have to weigh in again. Have the guy with the bye weigh in with the mini tournament guys and have them wait a day. If this is about determining the best guy then the more level the playing field the better.

you could do that too. i dont think you need to. this is where i would get the competitor's opinions before making any changes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But after all isn't the wrestler number 1 at his weight in the country decided at the World Team Trials?

 

US Open determines the best wrestler in a single elimination bracket system. 

 

The WTT attempts to determine who would perform best at worlds. 

 

What "best" means in each tournament is slightly different. It's not that complicated. 

Edited by Katie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

US Open determines the best wrestler in a single elimination bracket system. 

 

The WTT attempts to determine who would perform best at worlds. 

 

What "best" means in each tournament is slightly different. It's not that complicated. 

 

I know, I was just questioning about the number 1 spot in the country, which is the winner of the WTT, not the Open. Like Ruth last year, who lost on the Open and beat Gavin in the WTT, therefore he was the number 1 at the USA ranking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The process in my view is filed with contradictions. We say past performance is important so give last years guy a bye but then don't allow past performance in any other way. We have a brutal mini tournament and then make the winner wrestle off a few hours later vs last years guy. The theory would be that the new kid on the block not only needs to beat last years guy but do some under adverse conditions like having wrestled all day vs a fresh guy. But then we have some mini tournaments have only a few guys and others a lot of guys and sometimes all of them are really high quality. So that adds an additional layer of randomness. JO ends up beating a 4x national champ etc etc to wrestle a well rested Metcalf. Dake beats two different NCAA champs one of whom is a 4x finalist and two time champ and hodge winner to wrestle a fresh JB. I'd rather have him wait till he's good and rested to see who the best guy is. As it is of Dake wins I am convinced he's the best guy. If JB wins, well he had quite a running start today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The process in my view is filed with contradictions. We say past performance is important so give last years guy a bye but then don't allow past performance in any other way. We have a brutal mini tournament and then make the winner wrestle off a few hours later vs last years guy. The theory would be that the new kid on the block not only needs to beat last years guy but do some under adverse conditions like having wrestled all day vs a fresh guy. But then we have some mini tournaments have only a few guys and others a lot of guys and sometimes all of them are really high quality. So that adds an additional layer of randomness. JO ends up beating a 4x national champ etc etc to wrestle a well rested Metcalf. Dake beats two different NCAA champs one of whom is a 4x finalist and two time champ and hodge winner to wrestle a fresh JB. I'd rather have him wait till he's good and rested to see who the best guy is. As it is of Dake wins I am convinced he's the best guy. If JB wins, well he had quite a running start today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The process in my view is filed with contradictions. We say past performance is important so give last years guy a bye but then don't allow past performance in any other way. We have a brutal mini tournament and then make the winner wrestle off a few hours later vs last years guy. The theory would be that the new kid on the block not only needs to beat last years guy but do some under adverse conditions like having wrestled all day vs a fresh guy. But then we have some mini tournaments have only a few guys and others a lot of guys and sometimes all of them are really high quality. So that adds an additional layer of randomness. JO ends up beating a 4x national champ etc etc to wrestle a well rested Metcalf. Dake beats two different NCAA champs one of whom is a 4x finalist and two time champ and hodge winner to wrestle a fresh JB. I'd rather have him wait till he's good and rested to see who the best guy is. As it is of Dake wins I am convinced he's the best guy. If JB wins, well he had quite a running start today.

 

JO had a shot to win the US Open and get the bye to the finals, but he lost to Metcalf. I'm not sure what is unfair about that.

 

If you have an issue with giving an edge to guys who won a world medal nine months ago, that's a different conversation. Personally, I think there are very good reasons for doing so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JO had a shot to win the US Open and get the bye to the finals, but he lost to Metcalf. I'm not sure what is unfair about that.

 

If you have an issue with giving an edge to guys who won a world medal nine months ago, that's a different conversation. Personally, I think there are very good reasons for doing so.

 

They are separate discussions, both worthy of their own thread.  IMO, both are too big of an advantage. 

 

Solutions:

 

1. Best-of-3 held on a different date.  Fargo in July perahps.

 

2. Wrestler only gets the bye to the best-of-3 if they win a medal the previous year AND win the US Open.  If they medal the previous year and get beat in US OPEN, no-one gets the bye.  So only they can earn that bye (reward for medaling), but its not automatic.

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...