The GOATest GOAT of All GOATs.

[Nailbender]

1 hour ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Oh, you want to say it. You need to say it. Maybe start by going someplace remote and just whisper it into a cup. We can build slowly. Maybe use it at a party, or with the cashier at Starbucks. But it is probably best to start by saying both words with a pause in between and then work on shortening the pause by an imperceptible increment each day. It will be like watching a baby grow, but in reverse, Kyle Dake style. You won't even notice the tiny difference, but one day you will wake up and the two baby words have grown up into one big word. Trust me, it is liberating.

I have a five year plan where I expect to hear it on the PA at the 2028 NCAA tournament.

Good luck with that.

[Jason Bryant]

2 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Oh, you want to say it. You need to say it. Maybe start by going someplace remote and just whisper it into a cup. We can build slowly. Maybe use it at a party, or with the cashier at Starbucks. But it is probably best to start by saying both words with a pause in between and then work on shortening the pause by an imperceptible increment each day. It will be like watching a baby grow, but in reverse, Kyle Dake style. You won't even notice the tiny difference, but one day you will wake up and the two baby words have grown up into one big word. Trust me, it is liberating.

I have a five year plan where I expect to hear it on the PA at the 2028 NCAA tournament.

If you ever hear it over the PA, you can rest assured, it won't be me. 

[Nailbender]

15 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

After reading a thread on HR about where Spencer Lee stands in the pantheon of four timers I decided to take a look at 100%ers instead.

Since 1928 there have been 20 wrestlers who won all the titles they were eligible for (yes, I am including Spencer Lee and Yianni Dikomihalis because it is a 100%-slam dunk-guarantee they will win their fourth - you heard it here first). For these 20 I looked at a variety of metrics that I thought were important.

For dominance I looked at bonus points per NCAA match (using today's scoring system), pinfall %,  and career win %.

But I also wanted to measure permanence. In the early days they wrestled very few matches. And I think this matters. It is easier to win 25 straight matches than it is to win 100 straight. So I included total NCAA matches wrestled, total career wins, and total career pinfalls.

Some metrics favor the old and some favor the new. To adjust for this reasonable people might weigh these metrics differently than I did. Or include other metrics. Or exclude these metrics. There are choices.

What I did was count the number of times a wrestler appears in the top quartile and sort by that count. To break ties I sorted by the average rank.

 

 

I fully expect Iowa and Cornell fans to absolutely hate this post.

Homework:

How do you feel about where the two newest four timers stand?

Would you include three for three wrestlers in your list? Why or why not?

 

     Why the interest in only 100%ers? You leave some pretty unbelievable all time talent in this sport off your list right off the get go but include 2 that haven't even finished up yet. I do still appreciate it and it is interesting, just not sure what this really shows?

[Wrestleknownothing]

24 minutes ago, Nailbender said:

     Why the interest in only 100%ers? You leave some pretty unbelievable all time talent in this sport off your list right off the get go but include 2 that haven't even finished up yet. I do still appreciate it and it is interesting, just not sure what this really shows?

Starting with guys who never lost at the NCAA tournament is just a choice, and not purely accurate. For example Lowell Lange and Greg Johnson never lost at the NCAA tournament. They each lost a season due to injury. Perhaps they should be on the list.

Who would you include beyond the 100%ers? And where would you slot them?

[Nailbender]

Just now, Wrestleknownothing said:

Starting with guys who never lost at the NCAA tournament is just a choice, and not purely accurate. For example Lowell Lange and Greg Johnson never lost at the NCAA tournament. They each lost a season due to injury. Perhaps they should be on the list.

Who would you include beyond the 100%ers? And where would you slot them?

    I'm not sure I know enough to rank them. This kind of thing is only a recent interest of mine.

    I would say that I'd be just as interested to see where the two Gables would fit the list as I would SL and Yanni, maybe more so since they're careers are finished. I'm sure drawing the line is the rub.

[d_jizzle_05]

Is Ricky Bonomo a 3 for 3 candidate? Pretty impressive he accomplished it at tiny Bloomsburg University.

[Wrestleknownothing]

2 minutes ago, d_jizzle_05 said:

Is Ricky Bonomo a 3 for 3 candidate? Pretty impressive he accomplished it at tiny Bloomsburg University.

He was a 3 for 4 wrestler. He went 2-2 his redshirt freshman year at NCAA's and did not place. But you are right that winning three in a row at Bloomsburg is pretty darn impressive. And that he decided not to wrestle after high school, worked in a factory for a year, and then changed his mind, makes it more impressive to me.

[1032004]

1 hour ago, Nailbender said:

    I'm not sure I know enough to rank them. This kind of thing is only a recent interest of mine.

    I would say that I'd be just as interested to see where the two Gables would fit the list as I would SL and Yanni, maybe more so since they're careers are finished. I'm sure drawing the line is the rub.

I think drawing the line at never having lost at the NCAA tournament makes sense.  WKN, yeah I guess that would also include guys who missed seasons due to injury/suspension

[Nailbender]

2 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

I think drawing the line at never having lost at the NCAA tournament makes sense.  WKN, yeah I guess that would also include guys who missed seasons due to injury/suspension

That makes sense for a conversation about 100%ers. Does it still work for the thread title? That was more my question. 

[82bordeaux]

1 hour ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Who would you include beyond the 100%ers? And where would you slot them?

Jason Nolf would have to be on the extended list based on 3X Champ, 1X Runner-up, and only loss after freshman season was by injury default. His only losses over 5 years including red shirt year was twice to Imar by a combined 1 point and James Green his red shirt year. His dominance rankings are right up with the best of them.

[headshuck]

That takes Dan Gable off the chart. How about being an Olympic or World champion during college years getting back on the chart like Synder and Steveson?

[BerniePragle]

Sounds like more guys are going to make up lists. I look forward to seeing them.

[MPhillips]

Just now, BerniePragle said:

Sounds like more guys are going to make up lists. I look forward to seeing them.

Never a shortage of cats making stuff up around here...

[1032004]

10 minutes ago, Nailbender said:

That makes sense for a conversation about 100%ers. Does it still work for the thread title? That was more my question. 

IMO, yes.  I think by definition someone that lost at the NCAA tournament can not be the GOAT.  Can they maybe be ahead of a few guys on this list, I guess so

[Nailbender]

39 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

IMO, yes.  I think by definition someone that lost at the NCAA tournament can not be the GOAT.  Can they maybe be ahead of a few guys on this list, I guess so

I'd agree that it would be pretty difficult to be the greatest of all time with a loss but eliminating those athletes from the conversation all together doesn't seem right. Dan Gable had one and only one loss, so he doesn't even make the list of the greatest of all time? Doesn't seem right.

[ionel]

30 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

IMO, yes.  I think by definition someone that lost at the NCAA tournament can not be the GOAT.  Can they maybe be ahead of a few guys on this list, I guess so

By definition there can only be one GOAT and as such would have to be career undefeated. Thus no idea what a GOAT of GOATs would be much less the "GOATest GOAT of All GOATs."  

When I see threads like this from Wkn I assume he's had another skill saw incident or discovered a new Best of the Best bourbon and failed to share said information with his internet buddies!  

Whether the keyboard issue was due to the bourbon or the additional missing digit, I'm sure he meant to type: The BESTest BEST of All BESTs. 

[MPhillips]

20 minutes ago, ionel said:

Whether the keyboard issue was due to the bourbon or the additional missing digit

He's being influenced by a dark and sticky force and he believes it's okay...

[Wrestleknownothing]

1 hour ago, MPhillips said:

He's being influenced by a dark and sticky force and he believes it's okay...

dark, sticky, and benevolent.

[Wrestleknownothing]

1 hour ago, ionel said:

By definition there can only be one GOAT and as such would have to be career undefeated. Thus no idea what a GOAT of GOATs would be much less the "GOATest GOAT of All GOATs."  

When I see threads like this from Wkn I assume he's had another skill saw incident or discovered a new Best of the Best bourbon and failed to share said information with his internet buddies!  

Whether the keyboard issue was due to the bourbon or the additional missing digit, I'm sure he meant to type: The BESTest BEST of All BESTs. 

As long as there is more than one team/tribe there will be more than one GOAT.

[ionel]

21 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

As long as there is more than one team/tribe there will be more than one GOAT.

Well ... Jimmy has his goat of the week club so maybe we should focus who is the PASTRYiest GOAT of the WEEK?   

[Wrestleknownothing]

 

3 hours ago, 82bordeaux said:

Jason Nolf would have to be on the extended list based on 3X Champ, 1X Runner-up, and only loss after freshman season was by injury default. His only losses over 5 years including red shirt year was twice to Imar by a combined 1 point and James Green his red shirt year. His dominance rankings are right up with the best of them.

 

3 hours ago, headshuck said:

That takes Dan Gable off the chart. How about being an Olympic or World champion during college years getting back on the chart like Synder and Steveson?

 

2 hours ago, Nailbender said:

I'd agree that it would be pretty difficult to be the greatest of all time with a loss but eliminating those athletes from the conversation all together doesn't seem right. Dan Gable had one and only one loss, so he doesn't even make the list of the greatest of all time? Doesn't seem right.

If I expand the list to those who won 3 of 4 or 2 of 3 and those who never lost at the NCAA tournament but did not win the max due to injury, that adds another 82 names to the list. Obviously we can do better than that. We have nominations for Dan Gable, Gable Steveson, Jason Nolf (if you nominate him don't you have to include Nickal too?), Kyle Snyder, and any other Olympic/World Champ (I cannot think of any others not already on the list).

[headshuck]

Could add a redshirt record.

[Wrestleknownothing]

1 hour ago, headshuck said:

Could add a redshirt record.

I need a data volunteer. ???

[Nailbender]

2 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

 

 

 

If I expand the list to those who won 3 of 4 or 2 of 3 and those who never lost at the NCAA tournament but did not win the max due to injury, that adds another 82 names to the list. Obviously we can do better than that. We have nominations for Dan Gable, Gable Steveson, Jason Nolf (if you nominate him don't you have to include Nickal too?), Kyle Snyder, and any other Olympic/World Champ (I cannot think of any others not already on the list).

I get it. I'm not complaining or unappreciative. There isn't really a  right answer. The chart is still very interesting. 100% was just a curious metric to me. It removes from the conversation a guy who got 100% minus one match and replaces him with guys who have multiple career losses or guys who most people wouldn't even mention as in contention to be the best of all time.

 

I should've only mentioned it if I could give you a better metric.

[BerniePragle]

I can't help but wonder where all these goats are tied.