AQ projections?

[ugarles]

Paging SHP ... is the Pirate or anyone else projecting the preliminary AQ allocations? I'd love to see a list based on the current win % and the last RPI/CR adjusted for the guys who have reached the 15 match minimum in the interim but do not want to be the guy who compiles it. Because I said "not it" first, you can't make me do it.

[SetonHallPirate]

14 minutes ago, ugarles said:

Paging SHP ... is the Pirate or anyone else projecting the preliminary AQ allocations? I'd love to see a list based on the current win % and the last RPI/CR adjusted for the guys who have reached the 15 match minimum in the interim but do not want to be the guy who compiles it. Because I said "not it" first, you can't make me do it.

I never have...and jumping into the minds of 140 (counting all of them once for each weight they have) college coaches is not something I intend to do...

[ugarles]

10 minutes ago, SetonHallPirate said:

I never have...and jumping into the minds of 140 (counting all of them once for each weight they have) college coaches is not something I intend to do...

come on man, i said "not it." 

OK, at least can someone answer a technical question? Yianni is 12-1 ... is that enough matches for a conference allocation or is he going to steal someone else's bid?

Edited February 20, 2023 by ugarles

[SetonHallPirate]

32 minutes ago, ugarles said:

come on man, i said "not it." 

OK, at least can someone answer a technical question? Yianni is 12-1 ... is that enough matches for a conference allocation or is he going to steal someone else's bid?

He'll be fine...has the winning percentage and will have the coaches' ranking (unless the 14 coaches that rank 149 have sudden amnesia about who he is, minimum for both of those is 8 matches).

[ionel]

52 minutes ago, ugarles said:

come on man, i said "not it." 

OK, at least can someone answer a technical question? Yianni is 12-1 ... is that enough matches for a conference allocation or is he going to steal someone else's bid?

@Wrestleknownothing has a half dozen data tables on this but rumor is he sliced off a finger last weekend and can no longer copy/paste. 

[Wrestleknownothing]

10 minutes ago, ionel said:

@Wrestleknownothing has a half dozen data tables on this but rumor is he sliced off a finger last weekend and can no longer copy/paste. 

I can copy/paste fine, but all my numbers will be in base 9 from now on.

[nhs67]

Nomad has been doing it on the Twittersphere.

[nhs67]

 

[Idaho]

1 hour ago, ugarles said:

come on man, i said "not it." 

OK, at least can someone answer a technical question? Yianni is 12-1 ... is that enough matches for a conference allocation or is he going to steal someone else's bid?

Pretty sure you only need 8 D1 matches. 

[MPhillips]

1 hour ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I can copy/paste fine, but all my numbers will be in base 9 from now on.

High four!

[ionel]

3 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I can copy/paste fine, but all my numbers will be in base 9 from now on.

[Idaho]

12 minutes ago, ionel said:

Trevor Tinker? 

 

[Wrestleknownothing]

38 minutes ago, ionel said:

[ugarles]

Well, I couldn't help myself. Using Wrestlestat's RPI estimates, this spreadsheet has tabs for all of the weights and all of the people that could potentially earn a pre-allocation. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1g7fJRHTrJOg6q9Vx2ftxVYDFiJBEB3HMyic4IoGCLc0/edit?usp=sharing

Explanation of format: The first two columns - name and conference are self-explanatory. The third column lists the wrestlers winning percentage* and the fourth notes any wrestler who has a top 30 RPI or a winning percentage of .700 or better but was not in the top 30 of the last CR.

A caveat that there is a max of 29 pre-allocated spots and one has to go to EWL/MAC/Pac12/SoCon even if they don't have someone who meets the criteria, so there are more wrestlers who have 2 of 3 criteria than there are pre-allocated spots and this is before the last CR anyway, so the guys at the back of the top 30 who had a rough week or two may find themselves replaced. I also included some guys from weaker conferences who have a .700 winning percentage that technically need CR but don't have nearly a good enough RPI for the coaches to add them to the top 30 now, if they hadn't done it already, so no need to tell me that Palumbo or Stoltzfus are longshots.

That said, Here are the splits by weight, pending the new CR:

125: ACC 3, B10 9, B12 6, EIWA 4, EWL 1, MAC 2, Pac12 3, SoCon 2

133: ACC 3, B10 9, B12 6, EIWA 7, EWL 1, MAC 1, Pac12 3, SoCon 2

141: ACC 4, B10 10, B12 7, EIWA 5, EWL 2, MAC 1, Pac12 1, SoCon 1

149: ACC 5, B10 9, B12 7, EIWA 3, EWL 2, MAC 2, Pac12 2, SoCon 1

157: ACC 3, B10 11, B12 8, EIWA 3, EWL 2, MAC 2, Pac12 1, SoCon 1

165: ACC 5, B10 10, B12 7, EIWA 4, EWL 1, MAC 1, Pac12 2, SoCon 2

174: ACC 3, B10 7, B12 7, EIWA 5, EWL 3, MAC 2, Pac12 2, SoCon 2

184: ACC 6, B10 9, B12 6, EIWA 5, EWL 1, MAC 1, Pac12 1, SoCon 1

197: ACC 5, B10 9, B12 7, EIWA 6, EWL 1, MAC 1, Pac12 3, SoCon 1

285: ACC 4, B10 9, B12 8, EIWA 5, EWL 1, MAC 1, Pac12 1, SoCon 1

Feel free to comment here or on the spreadsheet if you think I made any mistakes (and I probably did).

* Also using Wrestlestat's calculations for win%, which can be off for these purposes if a wrestler moved up or down in weight. Looking at Patrick Glory's profile, they give the all-D1 winning % even though a handful of matches were at 133, so, grain of salt - especially for the guys right around .700.

Edited February 21, 2023 by ugarles

[ILLINIWrestlingBlog]

First off, bravo @ugarles! I'm already using these in my world-famous ILLINI B1G Tournament Preview. My questions:

The Big Ten seems to be shorted each year in terms of allocations at multiple weights. For example, there are usually multiple weights with only six automatic qualifiers. At the same time, there'll be weights with seven and eight spots. This year, you predict only one weight to have seven spots and all the other weights to have nine or more. What is your confidence level re: your numbers?

In my mind, the conference got stronger this year, especially in terms of the ILLINI, Indiana, Michigan State and the surprising Marylanders (LOL. Their mascot is food). Yet, Rutgers and Purdue seem to have taken a step back. I believe their steps back have been more than offset by the improvements in those other four teams. Is that what happened? Is that why you predict so many B1G allocations?

 

 

[nhs67]

Didn't the B1G qualify 14 at two weights last year?  Can't improve on 100%.

[ugarles]

2 hours ago, ILLINIWrestlingBlog said:

First off, bravo @ugarles! I'm already using these in my world-famous ILLINI B1G Tournament Preview. My questions:

The Big Ten seems to be shorted each year in terms of allocations at multiple weights. For example, there are usually multiple weights with only six automatic qualifiers. At the same time, there'll be weights with seven and eight spots. This year, you predict only one weight to have seven spots and all the other weights to have nine or more. What is your confidence level re: your numbers?

In my mind, the conference got stronger this year, especially in terms of the ILLINI, Indiana, Michigan State and the surprising Marylanders (LOL. Their mascot is food). Yet, Rutgers and Purdue seem to have taken a step back. I believe their steps back have been more than offset by the improvements in those other four teams. Is that what happened? Is that why you predict so many B1G allocations?

 

 

Thanks, @ILLINIWrestlingBlog. I don't have a strong feeling one way or the other! The fact is, most of the B1G has at least 2 criteria so they dominate the pre-allocations. The fact that the Pac 12 looks so weak probably goes a long way to explaining why the B1G and B12 look to get so many AQs. I haven't really paid attention to the internal dynamics of the B1G because I'm an EIWA guy (Let's go Red!)

All I did was take a look at the Wrestlestat compilation of CR/RPI and include everyone either in the top 30 in both criteria or in the top 30 in one with a win % over .700. Out of curiosity, I also included anyone over .700 outside of the top 30 CR because nobody's RPI can change until after the conference tournaments but the new CR can scramble the bottom of the pre-allocation list.

Edited February 21, 2023 by ugarles

[lightweight]

On 2/20/2023 at 1:45 PM, ionel said:

@Wrestleknownothing has a half dozen data tables on this but rumor is he sliced off a finger last weekend and can no longer copy/paste. 

Was he trying to make weight?  Seems kind of desperate to me.  

[ILLINIWrestlingBlog]

2 hours ago, nhs67 said:

Didn't the B1G qualify 14 at two weights last year?  Can't improve on 100%.

Talking about automatic qualification slots here, @nhs67. There was one weight last year where there were 12 AQ slots. There were four weights with only 7 and one weight with 8.

The year before that, the B1G received these AQ slots across the ten weights:

7, 7, 7, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 5, 6

That was bogus. I'm inclined to believe my theory for more potential B1G AQ slots this year (improvement among conference teams) and @ugarles theory about the relative low performance from PAC10 teams this season.

It's also possible that teams like Maryland and MSU added a bunch of individual wrestler wins by scheduling duals against more lower-tier teams. 

[bracketbuster]

I did a similar thing using Intermat coaches ranking, the wrestlestat RPI, and win percentage. Here is what I have. Again, these numbers change when coaches ranking differs from intermat or if the wrestlestat RPI is different than what the NCAA uses.

             25.   33.  41.  49.  57.  65   74.  84.  97   85.  TOT
ACC       2.    3.    4     3.    3.    4.    2.    5.    4.    3.    33 Total
Big 12.   5.    6     6.     7.    6.    7.     6.    5.    5.    8.    61 Total
Big 10.   9.    9.    9.     9   10.    9.    8.    9.   11.    8     91 Total
EIWA     6.    5.    5.     3.    3.    5.    6.    4.    4.    5.    46 Total
MAC.     2.    1.    2.     4.    4.    1.     3.    2.    1.     2.    22 Total
PAC12.  3.    3.    1.     2.     1.    2.    2.    1.     2.    1.    18 Total
SCon.    2.    2.    1.     1.     1.    1.     2.    1.     1.     1.    13 Total  
Totals.  29   29.  28.  29.  28.  29.  29   27.   28.  28.   284 Total

[ugarles]

57 minutes ago, bracketbuster said:

I did a similar thing using Intermat coaches ranking, the wrestlestat RPI, and win percentage. Here is what I have. Again, these numbers change when coaches ranking differs from intermat or if the wrestlestat RPI is different than what the NCAA uses.

I used the last official CR, which I think is what is on Wrestlestat. What do you use for win% and how do you whittle down to 28/29? I didn't want to do the work of the incremental steps from 30/30/.700 to find the actual bubble because that's the area most subject to change when the new rankings come out.

[bracketbuster]

1 minute ago, ugarles said:

I used the last official CR, which I think is what is on Wrestlestat. What do you use for win% and how do you whittle down to 28/29? I didn't want to do the work of the incremental steps from 30/30/.700 to find the actual bubble because that's the area most subject to change when the new rankings come out.

There was a document I saw that was an export of Division I winning percentages. I think to get down to no more than 29 per weight they just raise the standard 1 level for each, example level 2 is 29 CR, 29 RPI, 71%, 28 CR, 28 RPI, 72%, etc. unless you get at or below what you need.

For RPI I just looked at people who became eligible since the last release and added them around where wrestlestat had them. I did not move anybody based on wrestlestat so I am sure there will be some shifting from that.

[ugarles]

1 hour ago, bracketbuster said:

There was a document I saw that was an export of Division I winning percentages. I think to get down to no more than 29 per weight they just raise the standard 1 level for each, example level 2 is 29 CR, 29 RPI, 71%, 28 CR, 28 RPI, 72%, etc. unless you get at or below what you need.

For RPI I just looked at people who became eligible since the last release and added them around where wrestlestat had them. I did not move anybody based on wrestlestat so I am sure there will be some shifting from that.

RIght. That's the exercise I didn't want to do lol. I used the wrestlestat RPI as well because it is presumably more current than the last official NCAA release ... but who knows. 

[killdozer]

I did similar projections but I used wretlestat.com RPI rankings. So this maybe a little off. I know they only take a max of 29. Also, It had to meet two of the three criteria for it Ranked 30 or Below in RPI and Coaches Rankings and at least a 70% win percentage in that weight class against DIV I opponents. I used the latest coaches rankings so going by that it would be the following

 

[killdozer]

This is who earned the Conference Allocations per weight class: (Again this is using wrestlestat RPI rankings which are a tad different). Also, If they are in Red means they did not meet qualification standards. If a wrestler was not previously ranked in Coaches rankings cause of match amount and have since met the minimum amount of matches. I gave them the ranked they are placed in national rankings. (ie Rocky Elam has now met minimum match threshold and I have him down at #4)

- Ventresca would have RPI but hasn't wrestled. Flynn would have both RPI and WIN % So if they are entered  possibly ACC gains a qualifier and the MAC loses one. 

* As of now Henry Porter of Indiana doesn't meet the requirements. But after beating Brayden Palmer he will move up in the coaches rankings to give them an AQ.

 

 

* This weight had a few others that could be considered and actually met criteria (Petite of Buffalo needs to be included in the Coaches rankings.)

Alex Hornfeck of West Virginia and Andrew Clark of Rutgers

 

- Nelson Brands didn't meet the criteria He is 6-4 which doesn't qualify him for RPI and his win % is below 70%, So he would have to finish 7th or higher to qualify for nationals. Because, if he finishes lower than 7th his coaches ranking will probably drop (it is currently 20)

 

- Coaches Ranked Bernie Truax 33rd last rankings...  I think logic will take over and he will be ranked higher this rankings. So I made the adjustment