Apparently Repechage is French for stupid

[Wrestleknownothing]

Repechage is nonsensical in the way it is practiced at the World Championships. 

We have multiple wrestlers in the repechage who have a shot at 3rd place who are 0-1 in the championship bracket.

Meanwhile, there are wrestlers in the same bracket that are 3-1 with no chance to advance beyond 7th place.

There has to be a better way. In large brackets like 65kg and 86kg there is no good reason to include 0-1 wrestlers in the repechage simply because they had the good fortune to lose in the first round to a finalist. And that is what it is, fortune. The point of these tournaments is about earning, not fortune.

[CHROMEBIRD]

I'm with you on this, repechage sucks. The current ruleset has picked up the pace of matches and thus the tempo of tournaments. Having a standard backside bracket wouldn't drag on like it did back in the day. There's no reason not to have a full consis.

[Wrestleknownothing]

2 minutes ago, CHROMEBIRD said:

I'm with you on this, repechage sucks. The current ruleset has picked up the pace of matches and thus the tempo of tournaments. Having a standard backside bracket wouldn't drag on like it did back in the day. There's no reason not to have a full consis.

And even if you don't have full consis, since the repechage participants cannot even be determined until the semis are over, why not take the time to have the right partial consis? 0-1 should never trump 3-1.

[Jason Bryant]

6 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

And even if you don't have full consis, since the repechage participants cannot even be determined until the semis are over, why not take the time to have the right partial consis? 0-1 should never trump 3-1.

Full consolations in combat sports is pretty much just an American concept. There isn't a push for this (and hasn't been) other than my published pitch for the repechage to expand to at least the semifinal losers to wrestle out to eight spots for potential qualification purposes back in 2013. 

Although I do find it amusing that you titled this the same way I explain repechage when not in a professional setting. "A French word that means ... completely stupid."

I'd prefer a full consolation, but it's not something the international federations seem interested in to even bring it up for consideration. From a timing situation, international matches average about 5 bouts an hour, so how many more matches are you going to add on the four mat (won't be changing) format? 

 

 

[Wrestleknownothing]

2 hours ago, Jason Bryant said:

Full consolations in combat sports is pretty much just an American concept. There isn't a push for this (and hasn't been) other than my published pitch for the repechage to expand to at least the semifinal losers to wrestle out to eight spots for potential qualification purposes back in 2013. 

Although I do find it amusing that you titled this the same way I explain repechage when not in a professional setting. "A French word that means ... completely stupid."

I'd prefer a full consolation, but it's not something the international federations seem interested in to even bring it up for consideration. From a timing situation, international matches average about 5 bouts an hour, so how many more matches are you going to add on the four mat (won't be changing) format? 

 

 

My initial reaction is, replacing the 0-1's with the quarterfinalists who lost to the semifinal loser (the 3-1's at 86 and 65 in my above example) would be an immediate improvement. I will spend some more time avoiding work later to think it through.

P.S. I will take this to mean that you also say the magic word when not in a professional setting. No sense denying it. Shhhhh.

[fishbane]

The repechage system seems like someone asked a mathematician what's the fewest matches you need to determine the top 3 wrestlers.  Then they decided that was one too many matches.

The thing is whilst this would be just fine if you are only interested in determining the top 3 the logic doesn't work below 3rd.  It's possible the 4th best wrestler is not even involved in the repechage.  And it's not like they don't care about the places after 3rd.  They give out a second 3rd, sometimes 5th and/or 6th get Olympic qualification, and they award rankings points based on more than just the top 3 placements.

[gimpeltf]

Repechage is very similar to the system used at NCAAs in the 30s. It had two names attached but I don't remember them. The losers to the champ wrestled up the line for 2nd. Then the losers to the second did the same for 3rd. You couldn't get pictures of all the placers together because the champs were home already.

[jchapman]

9 minutes ago, gimpeltf said:

Repechage is very similar to the system used at NCAAs in the 30s. It had two names attached but I don't remember them. The losers to the champ wrestled up the line for 2nd. Then the losers to the second did the same for 3rd. You couldn't get pictures of all the placers together because the champs were home already.

Wow, at that point might as well just do one big round-robin!

[Jason Bryant]

44 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

P.S. I will take this to mean that you also say the magic word when not in a professional setting. No sense denying it. Shhhhh.

No, because that word, too, is completely stupid. The difference is one of those stupid words is an actual term that I must say - the other isn't. 

Edited September 22, 2023 by Jason Bryant

[Wrestleknownothing]

6 minutes ago, Jason Bryant said:

No, because that word, too, is completely stupid. The difference is one of those stupid words is an actual term that I must say - the other isn't. 

..., methinks.

[neutral]

Very few of the pairing systems have truly made any sense.  I sort of liked the old A and B pool system of 30 years ago.  A single loss and you could still win the pool.  In fact Mark Coleman had two losses in 1991 and still won his pool.  I can't quite remember how though.

[Voice of the Quakers]

With 16 person brackets in the Olympics, you could easily run a true double elimination bracket. No one would wrestle more than three matches per day. Of course, when FILA tried to implement a double elimination bracket in the 1993-96 quad, let's just say the results were...interesting.

[MadMardigain]

I’ve said for awhile now I’d be fine if they pulled had a way to pull Quarter-Final loser from the opposite side.   But as JB basically said wrestlebacks at this level are brutal so unless they do them over multiple days it’s hard to add much more.  

[Jim L]

7 hours ago, Jason Bryant said:

Full consolations in combat sports is pretty much just an American concept. There isn't a push for this (and hasn't been) other than my published pitch for the repechage to expand to at least the semifinal losers to wrestle out to eight spots for potential qualification purposes back in 2013. 

Although I do find it amusing that you titled this the same way I explain repechage when not in a professional setting. "A French word that means ... completely stupid."

I'd prefer a full consolation, but it's not something the international federations seem interested in to even bring it up for consideration. From a timing situation, international matches average about 5 bouts an hour, so how many more matches are you going to add on the four mat (won't be changing) format? 

 

 

International Judo pulls losers to semi-finalists into the repecharge.

I know Olympic boxing just gives the semifinal losers each a bronze.

I think either of those options are preferable to the current wrestling repecharge. 

[Jim L]

7 hours ago, Jason Bryant said:

...

Although I do find it amusing that you titled this the same way I explain repechage when not in a professional setting. "A French word that means ... completely stupid."

....

 

 

Also reminds me of an old car mechanic joke - Carburetor is a French word meaning do not touch

[11986]

7 minutes ago, Jim L said:

International Judo pulls losers to semi-finalists into the repecharge.

I know Olympic boxing just gives the semifinal losers each a bronze.

I think either of those options are preferable to the current wrestling repecharge. 

random question, boxing and judo have awarded two bronze medals long before wrestling went to that. Did boxing or judo ever give out only one bronze in the Olympics?

[Jim L]

3 minutes ago, 11986 said:

random question, boxing and judo have awarded two bronze medals long before wrestling went to that. Did boxing or judo ever give out only one bronze in the Olympics?

Looks both have always had two bronzes

[OMW]

7 hours ago, Jason Bryant said:

I'd prefer a full consolation, but it's not something the international federations seem interested in to even bring it up for consideration. From a timing situation, international matches average about 5 bouts an hour, so how many more matches are you going to add on the four mat (won't be changing) format? 

 

 

Those matches can be wrestled in the small gym or cafeteria on split mats with coaches or parents ref'ing and the JV kids keeping time and score.

 

[CHROMEBIRD]

9 hours ago, Jason Bryant said:

Full consolations in combat sports is pretty much just an American concept. There isn't a push for this (and hasn't been) other than my published pitch for the repechage to expand to at least the semifinal losers to wrestle out to eight spots for potential qualification purposes back in 2013. 

Although I do find it amusing that you titled this the same way I explain repechage when not in a professional setting. "A French word that means ... completely stupid."

I'd prefer a full consolation, but it's not something the international federations seem interested in to even bring it up for consideration. From a timing situation, international matches average about 5 bouts an hour, so how many more matches are you going to add on the four mat (won't be changing) format? 

Thanks for this. My impression is that in many of the other sports sort it out in international competition with a group stage and qualifiers that advance to a bracket. Works for the World Cup, but I no one wants the individual championships to go back to a pod system. 

[Wrestleknownothing]

Ok, I have wasted my entire lunch thinking about this.

By weight the entrants in the MFS were:

 

LARGE BRACKETS

57 kg, 65 kg, 74 kg, 86 kg, 97 kg, and 125 kg (the Olympic weights) are essentially 64 man brackets.

In all cases when semifinals are complete, the repechage brackets can be constructed by best record, with tie breakers, to determine the six eligible wrestlers. Using 65 kg and 86 kg as examples, the records this year break down as follows:

In both cases all wrestlers with 3-1 records make the repechage.  We then use the current tie breaker system for places 7-10 to choose which two wrestlers at 65 kg, and four wrestlers at 86 kg, among those with 1-1 records makes repechage.

Sticking with the easy example, 65 kg would result in Kazakhstan, Bahrain, and Belgium (all 0-1) being replaced with Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, and USA (all 3-1) in the repechage. This is probably the most egregious example, 37.5% of the wrestlers eligible to finish third got there by failing to win a match. Said another way, more than half of the wrestlers at 65 kg outperformed these three wrestlers, but were blocked from placing third by them. Silliness. 

       Note: it is also possible Japan at 2-1 would be replaced, depending on the tie breakers.

In 92 kg two 0-1 wrestlers would be dropped for two 2-1 wrestlers. And perhaps there would be some swapping of 2-1 wrestlers, again tie breaker dependent.

SMALL BRACKETS

For 61, 70, 27, and 92 the math works out differently because they are essentially 32 man brackets with different possible records.

Using 92 kg this year it looks like this:

      Note: while it did not happen in these brackets, it is possible to be 5-0 in large brackets or 4-0 in small brackets after semis.

In 92 kg this year it is not clear that anything would change as all repechage participants won at least one match in the championship brackets (2 in the Qualifying/Pig Tail round / 2 in the 1/8 Final round). It would depend on the aforementioned tie breakers.

Edited September 22, 2023 by Wrestleknownothing

[ionel]

8 hours ago, fishbane said:

The repechage system seems like someone asked a mathematician what's the fewest matches you need to determine the top 3 wrestlers.  Then they decided that was one too many matches.

Wkn put together a data table on this very idea, the French adopted it and here we are. 

[gimpeltf]

Just so you guys can compare numbers between repechage and full double-

It's hard to give an exact number of bouts in repechage because it's dependent on whether the finalists had a pigtail or a bye. A championship bracket always generates 1 bout fewer than the number of wrestlers in each weight. Repechage would then add ~2x (R-2) where R is the number of possible rounds. So for example, if there are exactly 8 in the bracket, that's 3 rounds so 1 repechage bout on each side. Semi loser vs quarter loser.

In a full double, you would again have 1 fewer bout than wrestlers on the championship side. If you wrestle to 8 places, you would again have exactly 1 fewer bout than the number of wrestlers if you place to 8. If you place to 4 it would then be 2 fewer bouts per weight (lose the 7/8 and 5/6).

[Wrestleknownothing]

26 minutes ago, ionel said:

Wkn put together a data table on this very idea, the French adopted it and here we are. 

[Wrestleknownothing]

1 hour ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

We then use the current tie breaker system for places 7-10 to choose which two wrestlers at 65 kg, and four wrestlers at 86 kg, among those with 1-1 records makes repechage.

Should read 2-1

[WildTurk]

So is the USA hoping Snyder has Taz early on next year?  Either beat him early somehow or ride on Taz's back to a medal match after going 0-1? I don't think about it much, but repechage is a wild scoring system.