Why does Flo hate Rocky Elam?

[JimmyBT]

3 hours ago, Crotalus said:

Is it really ducking if you have lost to someone and are ranked behind them? There's no real advantage to skipping the match, ranking/seeding wise.

There is an advantage to skipping matches against someone you have beaten and are ranked ahead of because the rankers and seeding criteria don't penalize for doing so.

Unless you want to move ahead of them 

[JimmyBT]

3 hours ago, Crotalus said:

Is it really ducking if you have lost to someone and are ranked behind them? There's no real advantage to skipping the match, ranking/seeding wise.

There is an advantage to skipping matches against someone you have beaten and are ranked ahead of because the rankers and seeding criteria don't penalize for doing so.

Yes it really is. 

[PortaJohn]

1 minute ago, nhs67 said:

I also heard in ten minutes the same thing.

I don't think good so I had to hear it twice.

Maybe one day Kozak and Willam of Saylor can form an allegiance at the Rankings of Bannockburn 

[Jon_Kozak]

4 minutes ago, steamboat_charlie said:

This is exactly my problem.  At what point do you stop talking about quality wins and losses and start looking at who actually produces results?  You're valuing transitive property over hardware. 

Burroughs techs Gamkrelidze, but Marsteller beat Burroughs.  Therefore, Marsteller is > Gamkrelidze, and since Mykhailov lost to Gamkrelidze, he's even worse.  Never mind the fact that he undeniably has a better resume than Marsteller, and that you're giving Marsteller credit for a domestic series in which he had over a year to prepare for a known opponent.  

Respectfully, you're missing the point. Not only did Marsteller beat Burroughs, he also beat Kentchadze and Savadkouhi. Savadkouhi has wins over Burroughs, Sidakov, Nokhodi, and Gamkrelidze. 

Mykhailov also lost to Evan Wick in the past year. His hardware does not mean near as much as his head-to-head results in which it's undeniable that Chance Marsteller has better wins. If Marsteller was on the same side as Mykhailov, he would have been the favorite to make the finals. 

[JimmyBT]

2 hours ago, KCMO2 said:

Shhhh......you're messing with his alternate reality.  He apparently has an ax to grind, and no amount of logic will change that.

Go ahead axe me a question 

[JimmyBT]

Sure was nice if mr Kozak to come on here and politely give the reasons why he did what he did.  Seems to have quieted the restless Tigerettes. 

Edited December 7, 2023 by JimmyBT

[JimmyBT]

On 12/6/2023 at 2:04 PM, KCMO2 said:

You're either joking, or clueless.  Maybe both.

You calling me clueless is a badge oh honor.  You seem to have written the book on being clueless.  

[steamboat_charlie]

19 minutes ago, Jon_Kozak said:

Respectfully, you're missing the point. Not only did Marsteller beat Burroughs, he also beat Kentchadze and Savadkouhi. Savadkouhi has wins over Burroughs, Sidakov, Nokhodi, and Gamkrelidze. 

Mykhailov also lost to Evan Wick in the past year. His hardware does not mean near as much as his head-to-head results in which it's undeniable that Chance Marsteller has better wins. If Marsteller was on the same side as Mykhailov, he would have been the favorite to make the finals. 

I'm not missing your point, I'm disagreeing with it. You value three wins outside of major international competition over two world bronze medals and a Euro gold during that same time period.  This is your stance, yes?

If I have time over the weekend I'll give you a few other examples of egregious ranking jumps based on h2h results, but it does appear clear to me you're married to your methodology.  So be it.  

[Jon_Kozak]

15 minutes ago, steamboat_charlie said:

I'm not missing your point, I'm disagreeing with it. You value three wins outside of major international competition over two world bronze medals and a Euro gold during that same time period.  This is your stance, yes?

If I have time over the weekend I'll give you a few other examples of egregious ranking jumps based on h2h results, but it does appear clear to me you're married to your methodology.  So be it.  

Ok then - I honestly cannot believe you think Mykhailov should be ranked ahead of Marsteller because he placed higher at a tournament while having worse head-to-head results against the field.

[steamboat_charlie]

11 minutes ago, Jon_Kozak said:

Ok then - I honestly cannot believe you think Mykhailov should be ranked ahead of Marsteller because he placed higher at a tournament while having worse head-to-head results against the field.

If it were one tournament I would agree with you, I'm talking about over a year of results.

If you honestly think Marsteller is the 4th best 79kg in the world, ignoring what you think about rankings, then I trust your opinion far, far less than even your rankings. 

[Jon_Kozak]

2 hours ago, steamboat_charlie said:

If it were one tournament I would agree with you, I'm talking about over a year of results.

If you honestly think Marsteller is the 4th best 79kg in the world, ignoring what you think about rankings, then I trust your opinion far, far less than even your rankings. 

So you value finish at the tournament more than quality of competition? Mykhailov was on the objectively easier side of the bracket at worlds...it's not close. Usmanov, Nokhodi, and Marsteller were all on the other side. I had them ranked #1, #2, and #3 respectively coming into worlds - Usmanov won and Nokhodi took bronze. Mykhailov was ranked 10th and Gamkrelide was 19th. So Mykhailov should rise in the rankings for losing to #19?

Honestly, Abasov kind of came out of nowhere because he had been wrestling primarily at 86kg. I can understand the perspective thinking Marsteller should drop slightly because of his loss to Abasov. I chose to keep him higher because Marsteller's quality wins over the past year are far better than anyone ranked from 5-20.

[FanOfPurdueWrestling]

3 hours ago, Jon_Kozak said:

So you value finish at the tournament more than quality of competition? Mykhailov was on the objectively easier side of the bracket at worlds...it's not close. Usmanov, Nokhodi, and Marsteller were all on the other side. I had them ranked #1, #2, and #3 respectively coming into worlds - Usmanov won and Nokhodi took bronze. Mykhailov was ranked 10th and Gamkrelide was 19th. So Mykhailov should rise in the rankings for losing to #19?

Honestly, Abasov kind of came out of nowhere because he had been wrestling primarily at 86kg. I can understand the perspective thinking Marsteller should drop slightly because of his loss to Abasov. I chose to keep him higher because Marsteller's quality wins over the past year are far better than anyone ranked from 5-20.

I have no horse in this race, at the end of the day rankings are just rankings and the results are what matters.

 

With that said, what is this methodology you follow that everyone keeps mentioning? Is it a legit “formula” or no? 
 

I’m a fan btw!!

[steamboat_charlie]

12 hours ago, Jon_Kozak said:

So you value finish at the tournament more than quality of competition? Mykhailov was on the objectively easier side of the bracket at worlds...it's not close. Usmanov, Nokhodi, and Marsteller were all on the other side. I had them ranked #1, #2, and #3 respectively coming into worlds - Usmanov won and Nokhodi took bronze. Mykhailov was ranked 10th and Gamkrelide was 19th. So Mykhailov should rise in the rankings for losing to #19?

Honestly, Abasov kind of came out of nowhere because he had been wrestling primarily at 86kg. I can understand the perspective thinking Marsteller should drop slightly because of his loss to Abasov. I chose to keep him higher because Marsteller's quality wins over the past year are far better than anyone ranked from 5-20.

I don't only value tournament placement, but you seem to ignore it entirely.  Using your logic, the best thing a wrestler could ever do is upset your #1 ranked guy, jump to #1, and then sit out the rest of the year.  

Abasov "came out of nowhere," because he had been competing at 86kg for some time, and you have him ranked #3 in the world at 79kg now, why exactly? What did he do to deserve that ranking?  Oh, that's right, he beat Marstellar.  That's the beginning and end of it. 

The bottom side of that specific bracket had the Asian and European champs in it.  You can claim Marsteller would've been favored to make the finals, would he have been there, but it's complete fantasy.  And that gets back to my issue with your rankings--they rely far too much on fantasy.  Theoretical matchups.  Laddered transitive properties.  Not enough tangible results. 

It's a self-perpetuating methodology that relies upon itself to decide if a result is meaningful or not.  If somebody wins gold at the European or Asian championships, but they don't have to wrestle against guys that you've ranked ahead of them, you assign essentially zero value to that championship.  I don't think that's appropriate.  

[Jon_Kozak]

49 minutes ago, steamboat_charlie said:

I don't only value tournament placement, but you seem to ignore it entirely.  Using your logic, the best thing a wrestler could ever do is upset your #1 ranked guy, jump to #1, and then sit out the rest of the year.  

Abasov "came out of nowhere," because he had been competing at 86kg for some time, and you have him ranked #3 in the world at 79kg now, why exactly? What did he do to deserve that ranking?  Oh, that's right, he beat Marstellar.  That's the beginning and end of it. 

The bottom side of that specific bracket had the Asian and European champs in it.  You can claim Marsteller would've been favored to make the finals, would he have been there, but it's complete fantasy.  And that gets back to my issue with your rankings--they rely far too much on fantasy.  Theoretical matchups.  Laddered transitive properties.  Not enough tangible results. 

It's a self-perpetuating methodology that relies upon itself to decide if a result is meaningful or not.  If somebody wins gold at the European or Asian championships, but they don't have to wrestle against guys that you've ranked ahead of them, you assign essentially zero value to that championship.  I don't think that's appropriate.  

Your statements are once again an exaggeration and simply not true. You're digging your heels in on this one example and extrapolating it to the rest of the rankings without providing any other examples. To say, "they rely far too much on fantasy" ignores why Marsteller, Burroughs, Savadkouhi, Nokhodi, etc were/are ranked high in the first place at 79kg. It's not fantasy - it's results...exactly what you said there's not enough of. 

Also, earning a ranking is relative to the competition you defeat. Your logic is similar to saying that someone who wins a Maine State Championship should be ranked ahead of someone who wins PIAAs.

Once again, I'm fine with having a friendly dialogue about rankings but you seem to be putting a lot of your own opinion here without backing it up with data.

[nhs67]

Rankings aren't an opinion based thing.  They should be based off actual results, not necessarily placement(s).

[Jon_Kozak]

10 hours ago, FanOfPurdueWrestling said:

I have no horse in this race, at the end of the day rankings are just rankings and the results are what matters.

 

With that said, what is this methodology you follow that everyone keeps mentioning? Is it a legit “formula” or no? 
 

I’m a fan btw!!

It'd be nice if it were a legit formula - then I could just blame it on that.

The "methodology" we use is based on head-to-head results and a wrestler's "overall resume". There's increased subjectivity at the beginning of every season because we have to weigh this year's results against prior years.

Ranking gets especially chaotic/subjective when early season results contradict results from last year's NCAA tournament or the season in general.

Nico Provo is a great example - he just had an incredible tournament beating 4 ranked guys including last year's NCAA Runner-up. But last year Provo went 0-2 at NCAAs and even suffered a loss during the regular season to a non-qualifier. We chose to bring Provo to #1 while Earl kept him #4. Who's right and wrong here? It's very subjective now but will likely clear up as the year progresses and we have more data (at least I hope so!).

[JimmyBT]

3 hours ago, steamboat_charlie said:

I don't only value tournament placement, but you seem to ignore it entirely.  Using your logic, the best thing a wrestler could ever do is upset your #1 ranked guy, jump to #1, and then sit out the rest of the year.  

Abasov "came out of nowhere," because he had been competing at 86kg for some time, and you have him ranked #3 in the world at 79kg now, why exactly? What did he do to deserve that ranking?  Oh, that's right, he beat Marstellar.  That's the beginning and end of it. 

The bottom side of that specific bracket had the Asian and European champs in it.  You can claim Marsteller would've been favored to make the finals, would he have been there, but it's complete fantasy.  And that gets back to my issue with your rankings--they rely far too much on fantasy.  Theoretical matchups.  Laddered transitive properties.  Not enough tangible results. 

It's a self-perpetuating methodology that relies upon itself to decide if a result is meaningful or not.  If somebody wins gold at the European or Asian championships, but they don't have to wrestle against guys that you've ranked ahead of them, you assign essentially zero value to that championship.  I don't think that's appropriate.  

You a Florida st football fan ?????

[steamboat_charlie]

3 hours ago, Jon_Kozak said:

Your statements are once again an exaggeration and simply not true. You're digging your heels in on this one example and extrapolating it to the rest of the rankings without providing any other examples. To say, "they rely far too much on fantasy" ignores why Marsteller, Burroughs, Savadkouhi, Nokhodi, etc were/are ranked high in the first place at 79kg. It's not fantasy - it's results...exactly what you said there's not enough of. 

Also, earning a ranking is relative to the competition you defeat. Your logic is similar to saying that someone who wins a Maine State Championship should be ranked ahead of someone who wins PIAAs.

Like I said before, when I have more time I'll give you some more examples.  

You can say I'm "digging in my heels" and try to paint me as the illogical one, but you just equated the European and Asian Championships to the Maine State Championship.  Who's the one exaggerating?  If we follow your example, what is PIAAs?  World's?  That doesn't track with your methodology either, because you seemingly don't value performance at the world championships.  Instead you pick and choose which matches are relevant, because their relevance is entirely dependent upon whether an opponent is presently ranked higher than them in your rankings.  

What I was asking you to consider, and you're choosing to ignore, is this: in order to keep Marsteller at #4 you had to slingshot Abasov up to #3.  Otherwise Marsteller would surely have to drop with his loss.  But outside of his victory over Marsteller, what has Abasov done to deserve that ranking?  Can you not recognize the circular logic there?  

 

[Jon_Kozak]

18 minutes ago, steamboat_charlie said:

Like I said before, when I have more time I'll give you some more examples.  

You can say I'm "digging in my heels" and try to paint me as the illogical one, but you just equated the European and Asian Championships to the Maine State Championship.  Who's the one exaggerating?  If we follow your example, what is PIAAs?  World's?  That doesn't track with your methodology either, because you seemingly don't value performance at the world championships.  Instead you pick and choose which matches are relevant, because their relevance is entirely dependent upon whether an opponent is presently ranked higher than them in your rankings.  

What I was asking you to consider, and you're choosing to ignore, is this: in order to keep Marsteller at #4 you had to slingshot Abasov up to #3.  Otherwise Marsteller would surely have to drop with his loss.  But outside of his victory over Marsteller, what has Abasov done to deserve that ranking?  Can you not recognize the circular logic there?  

 

No, I equated that to your logic of ignoring quality of competition in favor of tournament placement. No one would say a Maine State champ should be ranked ahead of a PIAA state 7th place because of placement at a tournament. Unless of course that Maine state champ defeated a bunch of nationally ranked wrestlers.

That logic doesn't work at any level - high school through senior level. It's especially problematic at the senior level when there's 1 tournament a year with all of the best wrestlers and there's a random draw. You have to take into account other results outside of that tournament to properly rank a wrestler. Otherwise, a wrestler will rise unjustifiably in the rankings for defeating poor competition.

I already acknowledged Marsteller could drop slightly but his results (wins and losses) over the past year are objectively better than Mykhailov's.

Again, saying I don't value placement at worlds is just wrong. Since you won't look into what you're saying I did it for you. Below are all the senior world medalists from 2023 with their rankings:

57:

Gold: #1 Stevan Micic

Silver: #4 Rei Higuchi

Bronze: #5 Arsen Harutyunan

Bronze: #2 Zelimkhan Abakarov

61

Gold: #1 Vito Arujau

Silver: #2 Abasgadzhi Magomedov

Bronze: #4 Taiyrbek Zhumashbek Uulu

Bronze: #13 Shota Phartenadze

65

Gold: #1 Ismail Musukaev

Silver: #15 Sebastian Rivera

Bronze: #4 Shamil Mamedov

Bronze: #16 Vazgen Tevanyan

70

Gold: #1 Zain Retherford

Silver: #2 Amir Yazdani

Bronze: #3 Ramazan Ramazanov

Bronze: #4 Arman Andreasyan

74

Gold: #1 Zaurbek Sidakov

Silver: #2 Kyle Dake

Bronze: #14 Khetik Tsabolov

Bronze: #6 Daichi Takatani

79

Gold: #1 Akhmed Usmanov

Silver: #11 Vladimeri Gamkrelidze

Bronze: #2 Mohammad Nokhodi

Bronze: #12 Vasyl Mykhailov

86

Gold: #1 David Taylor

Silver: #2 Hassan Yazdani

Bronze: #3 Myles Amine

Bronze: #6 Azamat Dauletbekov

92

Gold: #3 Rizabek Aitmukhan

Silver: #4 Osman Nurmagomedov

Bronze: #7 Feyzullah Akturk

Bronze: #5 Zahid Valencia

97

Gold: #1 Akhmed Tazhudinov

Silver: #10 Magomedkhan Magomedov

Bronze: #3 Kyle Snyder

Bronze: #11 Givi Matcharashvili

125

Gold: #1 Amir Zare

Silver: #3 Geno Petriashvili

Bronze: #2 Taha Akgul

Bronze: #4 Mason Parris

Of the above 40 medalists only 8 are ranked outside of the top 10. Those 8 wrestlers all have recent losses to someone ranked above them or outside of the top 20. If you think using wins and losses to establish a ranking is terrible, then I don't know what to tell you. Again, I say this all respectfully and to try to help you understand the ranking process.

[steamboat_charlie]

1 hour ago, Jon_Kozak said:

Since you won't look into what you're saying I did it for you.

Thanks, that's helpful.  Traveling this weekend, will take a look on Sunday.