Mesenbrink Ranking: enough is enough

[ugarles]

18 minutes ago, Truzzcat said:

I feel like they have to account for margin of victory which imo is not a great metric for ranking criteria but thats the only thing i can think of that would rationalize him being 1 given his bonus victories over guys they have highly ranked at the time. this is just me head cannoning it though they have pat mckee at 8 which I think is almost equally as shocking given hes 9-4 with one ranked win.

This has to be it. We are discussing on the Cornell forum that WS has Greg D. at #10 for 125 and that has to be because he pinned Terukina and just majored Sotelo. His profile isn't otherwise all that great (three losses to Ungar, Miller and Lujan) for someone in the top 10.

2 minutes ago, Pish said:

Shapiro is only in his first year..and that's why this one has me stumped.  I mean Levi has 1 1/2 yrs of data, more wins and the same amount of losses as Shapiro (Haines lost twice last year)

Not a world-beater schedule or anything but he did go 15-0 last year wrestling for SCRTC. And, in keeping with the "bonus points matter" thesis, a lot of falls and techs in that record.

 

Edited January 29 by ugarles

[Pish]

16 minutes ago, Truzzcat said:

I feel like they have to account for margin of victory which imo is not a great metric for ranking criteria but thats the only thing i can think of that would rationalize him being 1 given his bonus victories over guys they have highly ranked at the time. this is just me head cannoning it though they have pat mckee at 8 which I think is almost equally as shocking given hes 9-4 with one ranked win.

See..McKee not a headscratcher to me as like Vak said..their algo takes into account past season results and McKee has some very good wins over the years.

 

Shapiro is only in his first year..and that's why this one has me stumped.  I mean Levi has 1 1/2 yrs of data, more wins and the same amount of losses as Shapiro (Haines lost twice last year)

[Dogbone]

I thought regardless what the formula spits out, the committee can move a guy a spot or two.

To me, the committee should be splitting up Carr and O'Toole (i.e. don't let them be the #2 & #3 seeds or the #1 and #4 seeds).

If a formula splits out MM #1, I am okay with it as long as the B12 runner up isn't on the same side as the B12 champion.

[Pish]

13 minutes ago, ugarles said:

This has to be it. We are discussing on the Cornell forum that WS has Greg D. at #10 for 125 and that has to be because he pinned Terukina and just majored Sotelo. His profile isn't otherwise all that great (three losses to Ungar, Miller and Lujan) for someone in the top 10.

Not a world-beater schedule or anything but he did go 15-0 last year wrestling for SCRTC. And, in keeping with the "bonus points matter" thesis, a lot of falls and techs in that record.

 

You may be right with the bouns thing..also, I didnt even realize he had 15 college matches last year (wasn't he in HS)?  Were they all D1 opponents last year?  I wouldn't think wrestlestats would use D2 or D3 guys

Edited January 29 by Pish

[Caveira]

3 hours ago, PortaJohn said:

He won't struggle with Caliendo's strength.  And @Jimmy Cinnabon.  Messenbrink is not undersized.  Stop with that nonsense 

I don’t know if he is or isn’t undersized but in 2022 he was wrestling 152 in high school.  

[VakAttack]

17 minutes ago, billyhoyle said:

Are we going to ignore that he won junior world’s?

For the purposes of this conversation?  Mostly yes.  It's a different sport.  Vito just won senior worlds, and he's not maintaining a ranking based off that, and he's got a much bigger body of work in this (folkstyle) sport.  He's beating guys by big numbers, but none of the best guys in his weight class...yet.  Again, I anticipate he's going to be the B1G champ and have a top 3 seed, but he still has to actually do it.  

 

Quote

This guy isn’t coming out of nowhere and has demonstrated success at a level only matched by KO and Carr.
 

Sure you can’t count that in the criteria, but the margin of victory in his ranked wins along with his undefeated record put him to #4 ranking-wise in my opinion. 

This is just not true.  He hasn't demonstrated success at a level ONLY matched by KO and Carr, and his ranked wins are over guys ranked 10th or lower.  Rankings are based on results, not predictions.

[MPhillips]

1 minute ago, VakAttack said:

Mostly yes.  It's a different sport.

[Pinnacle]

2 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I was thinking about Bo Nickal when reading that too. They do not come much more jacked than Patrick Brucki, yet this happened.

 

And previously at that same weight, Quentin "Deadlifts won't get you off bottom" Wright vs Dustin Kilgore. 

[Pinnacle]

32 minutes ago, billyhoyle said:

Are we going to ignore that he won junior world’s? This guy isn’t coming out of nowhere and has demonstrated success at a level only matched by KO and Carr.
 

Sure you can’t count that in the criteria, but the margin of victory in his ranked wins along with his undefeated record put him to #4 ranking-wise in my opinion. 

 

While not caring all too much about rankings, I'm on your side on this. There have been so many guys over the years that everyone knew coming in and after only a handful of NCAA matches were the best guys at their respective weights while the rankers had them 10th or lower.

Keep preaching it. If you think someone should be higher then there is nothing wrong with that. But that rankers will rank however they want.

[Truzzcat]

4 minutes ago, Pinnacle said:

 

While not caring all too much about rankings, I'm on your side on this. There have been so many guys over the years that everyone knew coming in and after only a handful of NCAA matches were the best guys at their respective weights while the rankers had them 10th or lower.

Keep preaching it. If you think someone should be higher then there is nothing wrong with that. But that rankers will rank however they want.

by this criteria Meyer would have been ranked top 5 before the season started and then people would have complained he was overhyped after CKLV (he's my pick to win 157 and has been but just a comparison). Yes, we know these guys are good, but they have the opportunity to prove that and then they will be ranked accordingly. 

Edited January 29 by Truzzcat

[BigRedFan]

31 minutes ago, Pish said:

See..McKee not a headscratcher to me as like Vak said..their algo takes into account past season results and McKee has some very good wins over the years.

 

Shapiro is only in his first year..and that's why this one has me stumped.  I mean Levi has 1 1/2 yrs of data, more wins and the same amount of losses as Shapiro (Haines lost twice last year)

Shapiro went 15-0 (12 by bonus) last year as a high school senior wrestling D1 opponents.  So, he's actually 29-2 as far as wrestlestats is concerned.  Two wins over Andonian and all the rest has his ELO high enough for a #1 ranking.

[Pinnacle]

2 minutes ago, Truzzcat said:

by this criteria Meyer would have been ranked top 5 before the season started and then people would have complained he was overhyped after CKLV (he's my pick to win 157 and has been but just a comparison). Yes, we know these guys are good, but they have the opportunity to prove that and then they will be ranked accordingly. 

 

I'd rather enjoy all the complaining vs the bad rankings. 

[billyhoyle]

23 minutes ago, Pinnacle said:

 

While not caring all too much about rankings, I'm on your side on this. There have been so many guys over the years that everyone knew coming in and after only a handful of NCAA matches were the best guys at their respective weights while the rankers had them 10th or lower.

Keep preaching it. If you think someone should be higher then there is nothing wrong with that. But that rankers will rank however they want.

I wouldn't say anything if the people above him were also undefeated, but they've taken losses.  At a certain point, the people doing the ranking should trust their ability to watch the matches, otherwise, why are there even humans ranking these guys?

35 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

For the purposes of this conversation?  Mostly yes.  It's a different sport.  Vito just won senior worlds, and he's not maintaining a ranking based off that, and he's got a much bigger body of work in this (folkstyle) sport.  He's beating guys by big numbers, but none of the best guys in his weight class...yet.  Again, I anticipate he's going to be the B1G champ and have a top 3 seed, but he still has to actually do it.  

 

This is just not true.  He hasn't demonstrated success at a level ONLY matched by KO and Carr, and his ranked wins are over guys ranked 10th or lower.  Rankings are based on results, not predictions.

I'm not saying to put him #1. I'm saying put him #4 above the guys with losses who haven't looked nearly as impressive.  Only KO and Carr proved it against world-level competition with similarly impressive results. And of course, I wouldn't say rank him solely based on that, but if you watch his matches, it's so obvious that having him at #7 is a joke.  

[Pinnacle]

6 minutes ago, billyhoyle said:

I wouldn't say anything if the people above him were also undefeated, but they've taken losses.  At a certain point, the people doing the ranking should trust their ability to watch the matches, otherwise, why are there even humans ranking these guys?

I'm not saying to put him #1. I'm saying put him #4 above the guys with losses who haven't looked nearly as impressive.  Only KO and Carr proved it against world-level competition with similarly impressive results. And of course, I wouldn't say rank him solely based on that, but if you watch his matches, it's so obvious that having him at #7 is a joke.  

 

It's the eyeball test with Mitchell Messenbrink. It's obvious. But the thing I like about Messenbrink's resume is that Cam Amine has a trio of NCAA podium finishes and two of those are 4th places. Messenbrink wrecked him. 

Then you have his Junior Worlds which wasn't a leglace clinic, it was all TD's and running guys off the mat. He was on legs seconds after every whistle and converted just about all those attacks and that translates to folk more than anything in freestyle. 

Edited January 29 by Pinnacle

[VakAttack]

4 minutes ago, Pinnacle said:

 

It's the eyeball test with Mitchell Messenbrink. It's obvious. But the thing I like about Messenbrink's resume is that Cam Amine has a trio of NCAA podium finishes and two of those are 4th places. Messenbrink wrecked him. 

Then you have his Junior Worlds which wasn't a leglace clinic, it was all TD's and running guys off the mat. He was on legs seconds after every whistle and converted just about all those attacks and that translates to folk more than anything in freestyle. 

 

9 minutes ago, billyhoyle said:

I wouldn't say anything if the people above him were also undefeated, but they've taken losses.  At a certain point, the people doing the ranking should trust their ability to watch the matches, otherwise, why are there even humans ranking these guys?

I'm not saying to put him #1. I'm saying put him #4 above the guys with losses who haven't looked nearly as impressive.  Only KO and Carr proved it against world-level competition with similarly impressive results. And of course, I wouldn't say rank him solely based on that, but if you watch his matches, it's so obvious that having him at #7 is a joke.  

Rankings are about parsing who has the best resume, not predicting who will win.  Mesenbrink doesn't have a top 4 resume.  Yet.

[Richferg]

If O’toole has a loss, it’s no different then a 2x defending, 1 loss Aaron Brooks. And I am pretty sure he was seeded 3rd. An undefeated Mesenbrink gets seeded ahead of a 1 loss O’toole. 

[Hammerlock3]

3 minutes ago, Richferg said:

If O’toole has a loss, it’s no different then a 2x defending, 1 loss Aaron Brooks. And I am pretty sure he was seeded 3rd. An undefeated Mesenbrink gets seeded ahead of a 1 loss O’toole. 

but he doesn't right? You assuming carr is gonna knock him off again?

[BigRedFan]

8 minutes ago, Richferg said:

If O’toole has a loss, it’s no different then a 2x defending, 1 loss Aaron Brooks. And I am pretty sure he was seeded 3rd. An undefeated Mesenbrink gets seeded ahead of a 1 loss O’toole. 

Brooks was seeded third, IIRC, because he didn't have sufficient matches to earn an RPI, so he couldn't possibly have been seeded #1.  Apples and oranges.

[bnwtwg]

The record books won't look back on this bracket as fondly as deserved. A junior world champ is guaranteed to do no better than third place despite being head and shoulders above the competition. A previous NCAA champion is guaranteed to lose.

And these three may repeat this tournament multiple times for the next decade battling for world and olympic team spots.

[Lipdrag]

9 hours ago, nhs67 said:

Caliendo is like an aggressive version of Amine. 

Only 3 stalls per match?  

[Richferg]

3 hours ago, Hammerlock3 said:

but he doesn't right? You assuming carr is gonna knock him off again?

No, not assuming anything. But an undefeated wrestler, especially a big 10 champ with wins over multiple AA, gets seeded over a wrestler with losses, regardless of what he did last year. At least I would think he would. 

[Hammerlock3]

3 minutes ago, Richferg said:

No, not assuming anything. But an undefeated wrestler, especially a big 10 champ with wins over multiple AA, gets seeded over a wrestler with losses, regardless of what he did last year. At least I would think he would. 

but he doesn't have a loss. was that just a really general statement?

[Richferg]

Pretty much just a general statement.  My only point is last year doesn’t count this year. 

[flyingcement]

12 hours ago, nhs67 said:

I mean... he's not wrong.

With how these gents are wrestling right now and what results they have already put in... he cannot be Tier 1, as Ramirez is Tier 3.

The law of Tiers is that you cannot jump two and win a regular match.  Something would have to be off... illness, injury, or a deckfall for someone more than one tier away to defeat someone above them.

My tiers would have been different (better ), but I commend @flyingcement on a great effort.  He did well.

It was odd for me to put Hamiti on a tier above Amine who has routinely handled him, but otherwise it felt close to being accurate. 

On the other hand Hamiti has never lost to Ramirez.  And between the three of those chaps, it's Ramirez who seems more able to beat guys up a level (and lose to guys below)

Edited January 30 by flyingcement

[nhs67]

4 hours ago, Richferg said:

If O’toole has a loss, it’s no different then a 2x defending, 1 loss Aaron Brooks. And I am pretty sure he was seeded 3rd. An undefeated Mesenbrink gets seeded ahead of a 1 loss O’toole. 

It is different because of two things.

- We are assuming Mesenbrink remains undefeated in this scenario.  No 184lber was undefeated.

- Brooks 1 loss was to a guy who ended up being seeded 5th.  O'Toole's would presumably be to a guy who would be seeded no worse than third.

The scenarios aren't apples and oranges, but they aren't the same either.