174

[nhs67]

1 hour ago, jajensen09 said:

Labbs is for sure not tier  3. AA every year. Beat Kemmer easily last year, has taken starocci to one of his toughest matches ever, beat lewis. Tier 1 or 2. Nor e

Lewis is Tier 2 and he is alone there.

He is the only 174lber in the country that stands more than a fart's chance in a shit storm against Starocci at a D1 NCAA collegiate folkstyle match this season.

Now the only two 174lbers that can beat Lewis, aside for Starocci, are Labriola and Foca.  Interesting, right?  I don't see Lewis or Romero or Lautt beating Lewis.  Those three could certainly beat Labriola or Foca, though and there would be zero surprise there.

Lewis is the better, more accomplished wrestler and he did lose when they met again.  I absolutely would favor him in a rematch if/when it happens, though.

[BAC]

Starocci aside, I'm surprised to see so many guys putting Foca in the same tier as Labs and Lewis.

Lewis is a NCAA champion and 2x finalist.  Labriola is 3x AA, unbeaten this year with a win over Lewis.  Foca?  He's a 0x AA with only one win in his *career* over a top 10 guy (ranked #8).  

He's a solid wrestler and may well AA this year, but jeez, lets let him get on the podium at least once before we start putting him in the same "tier" as NCAA champs.  

[nhs67]

47 minutes ago, BAC said:

Starocci aside, I'm surprised to see so many guys putting Foca in the same tier as Labs and Lewis.

Lewis is a NCAA champion and 2x finalist.  Labriola is 3x AA, unbeaten this year with a win over Lewis.  Foca?  He's a 0x AA with only one win in his *career* over a top 10 guy (ranked #8).  

He's a solid wrestler and may well AA this year, but jeez, lets let him get on the podium at least once before we start putting him in the same "tier" as NCAA champs.  

I put him on Tier 3 with Labriola, not Tier 2 with the previous champ.

[BigRedFan]

1 hour ago, BAC said:

Starocci aside, I'm surprised to see so many guys putting Foca in the same tier as Labs and Lewis.

Lewis is a NCAA champion and 2x finalist.  Labriola is 3x AA, unbeaten this year with a win over Lewis.  Foca?  He's a 0x AA with only one win in his *career* over a top 10 guy (ranked #8).  

He's a solid wrestler and may well AA this year, but jeez, lets let him get on the podium at least once before we start putting him in the same "tier" as NCAA champs.  

How many just "solid" wrestlers have taken Lewis to OT, and also lost by just a point in another match?  How many just "solid" wrestlers have lost to Starocci by a single point?

[wrestlingphish]

48 minutes ago, BigRedFan said:

How many just "solid" wrestlers have taken Lewis to OT, and also lost by just a point in another match?  How many just "solid" wrestlers have lost to Starocci by a single point?

17

[Wrestleknownothing]

1 hour ago, BigRedFan said:

How many just "solid" wrestlers have taken Lewis to OT, and also lost by just a point in another match?  How many just "solid" wrestlers have lost to Starocci by a single point?

 

1 hour ago, wrestlingphish said:

17

Heck, one even beat him.

[nhs67]

25 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

 

Heck, one even beat him.

Let's forget how scared my ThugMassa G had him last year, too.

[Le duke]

Let's forget how scared my ThugMassa G had him last year, too.

So scared that he beat Massa 5-1 in the B1G final, in fact.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nhs67]

57 minutes ago, Le duke said:

 

So scared that he beat Massa 5-1 in the B1G final, in fact.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Terrified for his life, apparently.

[BAC]

20 hours ago, nhs67 said:

I put him on Tier 3 with Labriola, not Tier 2 with the previous champ.

Yeah I don't understand that.  I'd have Foca with the group you have in tier 4.  What has Foca ever done to outshine the guys in your tier 4?  Lewis and Starocci are defensive-minded wrestlers.  Wrestling them close is no great accomplishment; beating them is.  Foca's elite-win list is paper thin, with one career win at NCAAs.  Its debatable whether he even deserves to be in O'Malley's tier, a guy who's owned Foca for years.

I'd also have Labs in the same tier as Lewis.  The guy is a 3x AA including a 3rd place finish, is unbeaten this year, has a win over Lewis barely a month ago, countless other top-10 wins (including Kemerer), and is the undisputed #2 ranked guy behind Starocci.  What else does he have to do to show he's enough in the same ballpark as Lewis to be in the same "tier"? 

Edited January 13, 2023 by BAC

[nhs67]

16 minutes ago, BAC said:

Yeah I don't understand that.  I'd have Foca with the group you have in tier 4.  What has Foca ever done to outshine the guys in your tier 4?  Lewis and Starocci are defensive-minded wrestlers.  Wrestling them close is no great accomplishment; beating them is.  Foca's elite-win list is paper thin, with one career win at NCAAs.  Its debatable whether he even deserves to be in O'Malley's tier, a guy who's owned Foca for years.

I'd also have Labs in the same tier as Lewis.  The guy is a 3x AA including a 3rd place finish, is unbeaten this year, has a win over Lewis barely a month ago, countless other top-10 wins (including Kemerer), and is the undisputed #2 ranked guy behind Starocci.  What else does he have to do to show he's enough in the same ballpark as Lewis to be in the same "tier"? 

Tiers is much simpler than you are trying to make it.  You belong in a tier where you can beat the tier above you and lose to the tier below you.  You won't be beating people two tiers above or losing to people two tiers below you.  Exceptions should be made when considering illness, injury, or a lucky deck (which can actually happen to anyone - See Hidlay/Lautt).

Reasoning for Labriola being Tier 3:
- He is not sniffing Starocci - Tier 1 (two tier jump, ergo - not happening)
- He can beat Lewis, who is a tier above him. *
- He can beat to Foca, who is the same tier as him. *
- He can beat Plott, O'Malley, Smith, and Romero, who are the tier below him *
     * He can also lose to all of these guys, and I would not be surprised
- I do not see him losing to Lautt, Mocco, Ruth, and Brands - or others in their tier (my tier list was unfinished, just roughly put together)

Reasoning for Lewis being Tier 2:
- He absolutely can beat Starocci, although I would favor Starocci
- He can beat Labriola and Foca *
     * He can also lose to Labriola and Foca
- He is not losing to Plott, O'Malley, Smith, and Romero - or any others in this tier or below (my tier list was unfinished, just roughly put together)

Reasoning for Foca being in Tier 3:
- See every reasoning for Labriola being in Tier 3 as well, just replace where it says 'Foca' with 'Labriola' and you will have it

Bear in mind that these are opinion driven and you are welcome to have a differing opinion that mine.  Better yet, I would welcome your own tier list to be able to compare.

[nhs67]

25 minutes ago, BAC said:

Yeah I don't understand that.  I'd have Foca with the group you have in tier 4.  What has Foca ever done to outshine the guys in your tier 4?  Lewis and Starocci are defensive-minded wrestlers.  Wrestling them close is no great accomplishment; beating them is.  Foca's elite-win list is paper thin, with one career win at NCAAs.  Its debatable whether he even deserves to be in O'Malley's tier, a guy who's owned Foca for years.

I'd also have Labs in the same tier as Lewis.  The guy is a 3x AA including a 3rd place finish, is unbeaten this year, has a win over Lewis barely a month ago, countless other top-10 wins (including Kemerer), and is the undisputed #2 ranked guy behind Starocci.  What else does he have to do to show he's enough in the same ballpark as Lewis to be in the same "tier"? 

Also, stop losing to guys in Tier 4.  That would do it.

[BAC]

3 hours ago, nhs67 said:

Tiers is much simpler than you are trying to make it.  You belong in a tier where you can beat the tier above you and lose to the tier below you.  You won't be beating people two tiers above or losing to people two tiers below you.  Exceptions should be made when considering illness, injury, or a lucky deck (which can actually happen to anyone - See Hidlay/Lautt).

Reasoning for Labriola being Tier 3:
- He is not sniffing Starocci - Tier 1 (two tier jump, ergo - not happening)
- He can beat Lewis, who is a tier above him. *
- He can beat to Foca, who is the same tier as him. *
- He can beat Plott, O'Malley, Smith, and Romero, who are the tier below him *
     * He can also lose to all of these guys, and I would not be surprised
- I do not see him losing to Lautt, Mocco, Ruth, and Brands - or others in their tier (my tier list was unfinished, just roughly put together)

Reasoning for Lewis being Tier 2:
- He absolutely can beat Starocci, although I would favor Starocci
- He can beat Labriola and Foca *
     * He can also lose to Labriola and Foca
- He is not losing to Plott, O'Malley, Smith, and Romero - or any others in this tier or below (my tier list was unfinished, just roughly put together)

Reasoning for Foca being in Tier 3:
- See every reasoning for Labriola being in Tier 3 as well, just replace where it says 'Foca' with 'Labriola' and you will have it

Bear in mind that these are opinion driven and you are welcome to have a differing opinion that mine.  Better yet, I would welcome your own tier list to be able to compare.

It seems to me you're using a definition of "tiers" that no one else uses, and you're allowing your subjective opinion of who's likely to beat who override the actual facts of who's beaten who.  But the last time I checked the internet wasn't giving out prizes for winning arguments, so lets agree to disagree.

I'd have Starocci/Lewis/Labriola tier 1, and the guys ranked #4-12 in tier 2.  I could be convinced to give Starocci his own tier, but there's not enough separation between the others to create any other tier levels within the top 12 or so.

[Wrestleknownothing]

32 minutes ago, BAC said:

It seems to me you're using a definition of "tiers" that no one else uses, and you're allowing your subjective opinion of who's likely to beat who override the actual facts of who's beaten who.  But the last time I checked the internet wasn't giving out prizes for winning arguments, so lets agree to disagree.

I'd have Starocci/Lewis/Labriola tier 1, and the guys ranked #4-12 in tier 2.  I could be convinced to give Starocci his own tier, but there's not enough separation between the others to create any other tier levels within the top 12 or so.

I beg to differ. I get the prize for winning every internet argument. Just ask me.

[nhs67]

59 minutes ago, BAC said:

It seems to me you're using a definition of "tiers" that no one else uses, and you're allowing your subjective opinion of who's likely to beat who override the actual facts of who's beaten who.  But the last time I checked the internet wasn't giving out prizes for winning arguments, so lets agree to disagree.

I'd have Starocci/Lewis/Labriola tier 1, and the guys ranked #4-12 in tier 2.  I could be convinced to give Starocci his own tier, but there's not enough separation between the others to create any other tier levels within the top 12 or so.

I clearly said that it was my opinion, so well done there.  Also I challenged you to give me yours and you have - so thank you.

I didn't think we were arguing though?  I like talking this stuff.  I am also addicted to wrestlestat, so I can assure you I am not ignoring actual results.  Hence Labs being 3 and not 2 - he lost to a tier 4 guy at B1Gs last year.

All this said, keeping 4-12 as one is also understandable, if that is how you view it.  I just don't.

[BAC]

On 1/13/2023 at 7:41 PM, nhs67 said:

I clearly said that it was my opinion, so well done there.  Also I challenged you to give me yours and you have - so thank you.

I didn't think we were arguing though?  I like talking this stuff.  I am also addicted to wrestlestat, so I can assure you I am not ignoring actual results.  Hence Labs being 3 and not 2 - he lost to a tier 4 guy at B1Gs last year.

All this said, keeping 4-12 as one is also understandable, if that is how you view it.  I just don't.

Happy to discuss. The results you are ignoring are wins. If a guys tier is only as good as his worst loss, that means Brooks and Griffith are tier 3. Smith is no worse a loss than Coleman or the ND State kid — and Smith was LAST year. It makes no sense. Labriola’s wins are way too impressive and recent to put him anywhere other than tier 1, or at worst just below Starocci. 

[nhs67]

13 hours ago, BAC said:

Happy to discuss. The results you are ignoring are wins. If a guys tier is only as good as his worst loss, that means Brooks and Griffith are tier 3. Smith is no worse a loss than Coleman or the ND State kid — and Smith was LAST year. It makes no sense. Labriola’s wins are way too impressive and recent to put him anywhere other than tier 1, or at worst just below Starocci. 

Okay, so his wins against whom?

He beat Lewis.  We have established that.  Lewis is one tier higher, which is fine for the way my tiers are stacked.

Who else has he beat that would warrant he move higher?  Has he beaten anyone in Tier 3 or 4?

No.  You can try to discredit last seasons postseason all you want, but those were peak performance results - supposedly.  They still matter for the sake of tiers, at this point.  Especially since Labs hasn't shown anything to prove he has separated himself.  That 5-3 O'Reilly(~tier 5?) win doesn't help prove that.

Edited January 15, 2023 by nhs67

[Le duke]

While I’m inclined to point out that Labriola lost to Nachohouse last year, Starocci has, arguably, just as bad of a loss as any other top level guy, losing to DJ Washington his first time out as a varsity wrestler.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BAC]

4 hours ago, nhs67 said:

Okay, so his wins against whom?

He beat Lewis.  We have established that.  Lewis is one tier higher, which is fine for the way my tiers are stacked.

Who else has he beat that would warrant he move higher?  Has he beaten anyone in Tier 3 or 4?

No.  You can try to discredit last seasons postseason all you want, but those were peak performance results - supposedly.  They still matter for the sake of tiers, at this point.  Especially since Labs hasn't shown anything to prove he has separated himself.  That 5-3 O'Reilly(~tier 5?) win doesn't help prove that.

Well he beat Kemmerer. Hopefully you don’t have him buried down in tier 4 too.

He and Lewis are easily the two best 174bers in the past 2 years and Labriola has wins over both.

And wins over other top 10 guys like Lautt, Smith, Truax, Romero, Bullard, Massa, etc., with 3 AA finishes including a 3rd. 

So yeah… those wins. (That, and he is undefeated this year and ranked #2 by all ranking services.)

The only guy he is arguably not on the same tier as is Starocci, and even that is debatable as Labriola has wins over every guy to have ever beaten Starocci (Kemmerer, Washington) or taken him to OT (Lewis), and Labriola himself took Starocci to OT. That suggests they are in reaching distance of each other, which is what a tier system is about. 

Trying to find a marginal bad loss or two for Labriola from prior seasons does not magically pull him out of a tier of guys he has *proven* on the mat he can beat. Especially when, as someone pointed out, Starocci lost to Washington, which by your “bad loss” theory should drop Starocci to tier 3.

[D3UC157]

5 hours ago, Le duke said:

While I’m inclined to point out that Labriola lost to Nachohouse last year, Starocci has, arguably, just as bad of a loss as any other top level guy, losing to DJ Washington his first time out as a varsity wrestler.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In Labriola’s defense, that’s an entire house of nacho he was up against. 

[Ban Basketball]

3 minutes ago, D3UC157 said:

In Labriola’s defense, that’s an entire house of nacho he was up against. 

That's nacho determination to make.

[Le duke]

Well he beat Kemmerer. Hopefully you don’t have him buried down in tier 4 too.
He and Lewis are easily the two best 174bers in the past 2 years and Labriola has wins over both.

I am confused by this.

Lewis and Kemerer are better than Starocci?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nhs67]

19 minutes ago, Le duke said:

 

I am confused by this.

Lewis and Kemerer are better than Starocci?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I believe he means aside for Starocci.

[nhs67]

2 hours ago, BAC said:

Well he beat Kemmerer. Hopefully you don’t have him buried down in tier 4 too.

He and Lewis are easily the two best 174bers in the past 2 years and Labriola has wins over both.

And wins over other top 10 guys like Lautt, Smith, Truax, Romero, Bullard, Massa, etc., with 3 AA finishes including a 3rd. 

So yeah… those wins. (That, and he is undefeated this year and ranked #2 by all ranking services.)

The only guy he is arguably not on the same tier as is Starocci, and even that is debatable as Labriola has wins over every guy to have ever beaten Starocci (Kemmerer, Washington) or taken him to OT (Lewis), and Labriola himself took Starocci to OT. That suggests they are in reaching distance of each other, which is what a tier system is about. 

Trying to find a marginal bad loss or two for Labriola from prior seasons does not magically pull him out of a tier of guys he has *proven* on the mat he can beat. Especially when, as someone pointed out, Starocci lost to Washington, which by your “bad loss” theory should drop Starocci to tier 3.

These are all good things.  I will reply soon.

[BAC]

33 minutes ago, Le duke said:

 

I am confused by this.

Lewis and Kemerer are better than Starocci?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I meant to say apart from Starocci. Hopefully that was evident when you got to the part about Starocci arguably being on his own tier.