Hot take: Flo rankings are better than intermat

[MNRodent]

6 minutes ago, Pinnacle said:

But their feelings are also driven on data, they just choose to ignore some of that data. That choice to ignore some data causes them to overweight other data, thus it is only partially data driven and partially subjective.

I think you must prioritize the way you use data points.

[Pinnacle]

11 minutes ago, MNRodent said:

I think you must prioritize the way you use data points.

I agree, and I think the way you laid it out in your other post seems about right. You at least don't partition freestyle results altogether. 

[1032004]

9 hours ago, ionel said:

I don't check Flo much just because finding info on their web page is a mess.  However did just check it out.  The default ranking page is Pound for Pound.  They have AJ #5, Caliendo #6 and Hardy #11.  Believe both Caliendo and Hardy lost to tFr and all three are #3 at their respective weights.  How can any take these rankings seriously?

I believe they’ve stated the P4P rankings are a different criteria, and IIRC they might even be done by a different person.

[1032004]

9 hours ago, Truzzcat said:

Was this uproar brought up because Pj got put ahead of Rozynski or because Ohio state got put ahead of PSU? all that happened was Marcus and PJ moved up, and Mirasola was put in for Barr which moved their team total down. There did not seem to be this discourse when PJ was unraked to start the year. I agree that whatever the process is it has to be consistent so either only college results matter or you account for everything, just curious if this is an issue now because PSU fans are mad that they are ranked behind Ohio state while at the same time saying "December rankings don't matter" which they absolutely do not.

I think it was mostly because tOSU got ahead of PSU in the team tourney rankings.

Barr being replaced by Mirasola also caused Askren to complain about Mirasola’s ranking (and Blaze and Duke by extension).

Edited December 11, 2025 by 1032004

[happyvalet]

7 hours ago, Pinnacle said:

I hope you don't equate an opinion with freaking out. 

No the freakout refers to how people have overreacted on social media because they either won't take two seconds to consider what the rankings are based on or are just unable to comprehend. Mainly people cannot seem to get it through their heads that Flo's rankings are not projections and they are not opinions.

[1032004]

19 hours ago, maligned said:

Flo does things that aren't intuitive.

Example: #24 Carroll picks up wins over #11 Lanosga and #5 Ghadiali. He previously lost to #15 Mullen. 

Flo moves Mullen up a bit and Lanosga down a bit and puts Carroll between them (and drops Ghadiali one slot to 6). Now Mullen is 12, Carroll 13, Lanosga 15. 

Problem: Thats exactly where they would be WITHOUT Carroll's major over Ghadiali. You're entirely disregarding a huge result because you're distracted by thinking you need to slot Carroll behind Mullen.

In fact, the mathematically predictive (and logical) place to put someone who's beaten 6 and lost to 12 is the mid-point between them. Think of one match deserving a 5 rating and the other deserving a 13. Average is 9. That would be intuitive.

InterMat got the principle right. Ghadiali's down to 8, Mullen 14, Carroll between at 10. 

This is fair.  But again we’re not really talking much difference here.   Also Lanosga got pinned by Szuba so Carroll’s win over him doesn’t look as good yet he jumps all the way to 10 for intermat, based primarily on one win.  Which is interesting because I saw several people that complained when Flo ranked Brady Roark #6, with the difference there being that Roark didn’t have any losses before CKLV (and he did have a different win over a NC and even last year as a backup had no non-MFF losses and wins over multiple NQ’s). Yet Intermat only put him at 19 despite being undefeated with a win over someone who I believe was top 5 at the time.   They probably thought they were “right” because he only went 2-2 at CKLV, but I disagree.   Maybe 6 was too high too but I think he should have been closer to 6 than 19.  I feel like if Brady Roark wrestled for Penn State Intermat probably ranks him differently after the Volk win.

It just feels like there is more consistency to Flo’s process.   Intermat seems to put more on “eye test” IMO which is basically one guy’s opinion.  Even though it may turn out to be right that’s not really the point of rankings.

Is “mathematically predictive” what they did with Duke before the Lehigh dual?  “He should probably be #1, but so far he’s only earned #29, so we’ll put him at 15?”

[Pinnacle]

7 hours ago, happyvalet said:

No the freakout refers to how people have overreacted on social media because they either won't take two seconds to consider what the rankings are based on or are just unable to comprehend. Mainly people cannot seem to get it through their heads that Flo's rankings are not projections and they are not opinions.

 

So there is a social media freakout? Not aware of that 

Flo's rankings seem a combination of things, some of which is personal judgement, hence the wrestler with the 4-2 record being 4th at 125 and ahead of 17 wrestlers with a better record.

[happyvalet]

19 minutes ago, Pinnacle said:

Flo's rankings seem a combination of things, some of which is personal judgement, hence the wrestler with the 4-2 record being 4th at 125 and ahead of 17 wrestlers with a better record.

Going off record without context is maybe the worst approach you could take in a league with such a wide range of strength of schedule.

Records are a good measuring stick when there's quality parity and schedule parity like in the NBA and MLB. That is not the case college wrestling. 

[Pinnacle]

1 minute ago, happyvalet said:

Going off record without context is maybe the worst approach you could take in a league with such a wide range of strength of schedule.

Records are a good measuring stick when there's quality parity and schedule parity like in the NBA and MLB. That is not the case college wrestling. 

 

Absolutely true. Since any given wrestler has a limited schedule vs the entire field of wrestlers you must use other factors in creating any ranking "system". Some of the rankers use ELO which has flaws in sports like wrestling.

My main complaint isn't about ELO, though, it is the absurdity of partitioning off and ignoring data points that are obviously very well correlated to future success.

[GV4444]

19 hours ago, Interviewed_at_Weehawken said:

Devil's advocate: If there was no Blaze and Ono was PSU's only option at 133, should he be #1?

This is a great hypothetical, since Ono has no folkstyle record.  But, it isn't really a question of #1, it is whether the freestyle record should be considered in any degree.  The choice isn't #1 or unranked, but rather if freestyle should be one of several factors in ranking.  So, maybe he gets a ranking of #32 rather than nothing.   Maybe Jax starts wrestling next semester and gets an immediate #15 because he has more good data points than Ono because of folkstyle record.  

I find the biggest issue in rankings is the head to head competition weighting vs. overall body of work.   E.g. Schubert beats Wask.   Must Schubert be ranked ahead of Wask?   Intermat thinks yes, Flo thinks no.  You can twist your mind into crazy contortions over-thinking head to head.  Sometimes upsets are just upsets and not a demonstration of superiority.  

[1032004]

36 minutes ago, GV4444 said:

This is a great hypothetical, since Ono has no folkstyle record.  But, it isn't really a question of #1, it is whether the freestyle record should be considered in any degree.  The choice isn't #1 or unranked, but rather if freestyle should be one of several factors in ranking.  So, maybe he gets a ranking of #32 rather than nothing.   Maybe Jax starts wrestling next semester and gets an immediate #15 because he has more good data points than Ono because of folkstyle record.  

I find the biggest issue in rankings is the head to head competition weighting vs. overall body of work.   E.g. Schubert beats Wask.   Must Schubert be ranked ahead of Wask?   Intermat thinks yes, Flo thinks no.  You can twist your mind into crazy contortions over-thinking head to head.  Sometimes upsets are just upsets and not a demonstration of superiority.  

I’m sure Flo would say Ono should not be ranked at all because he has no folkstyle matches.  Intermat, who knows?

That’s why I prefer Flo.

Jax does have multiple wins in NCAA competition that would earn him a ranking, albeit not since the 2024 season.

Edited December 11, 2025 by 1032004

[Pinnacle]

38 minutes ago, GV4444 said:

This is a great hypothetical, since Ono has no folkstyle record.  But, it isn't really a question of #1, it is whether the freestyle record should be considered in any degree.  The choice isn't #1 or unranked, but rather if freestyle should be one of several factors in ranking.  So, maybe he gets a ranking of #32 rather than nothing.   Maybe Jax starts wrestling next semester and gets an immediate #15 because he has more good data points than Ono because of folkstyle record.  

I find the biggest issue in rankings is the head to head competition weighting vs. overall body of work.   E.g. Schubert beats Wask.   Must Schubert be ranked ahead of Wask?   Intermat thinks yes, Flo thinks no.  You can twist your mind into crazy contortions over-thinking head to head.  Sometimes upsets are just upsets and not a demonstration of superiority.  

 

This.

As you say, it does not have to be #1 or Unranked, it can be somewhere in between. The rankers watch team trials, worlds, olympics etc., so they understand the relative ability and predictive nature of the results.

The question is, What is a better predictor of NCAA success this year:

1. Wrestler A earning a 24-7 record and a R12 place finish at last years tournament or wrestler B going 135-0 in large school PIAA or CA or Ohio + winning senior team trials and earning a world bronze in freestyle.

Wrestler B results are a better predictor for NCAA Tournament this year than Wrestler A. 

The rankers are not uneducated, so why focus on lesser wrestling results st the complete exclusion of better results? 

 

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

9 minutes ago, Pinnacle said:

 

This.

As you say, it does not have to be #1 or Unranked, it can be somewhere in between. The rankers watch team trials, worlds, olympics etc., so they understand the relative ability and predictive nature of the results.

The question is, What is a better predictor of NCAA success this year:

1. Wrestler A earning a 24-7 record and a R12 place finish at last years tournament or wrestler B going 135-0 in large school PIAA or CA or Ohio + winning senior team trials and earning a world bronze in freestyle.

Wrestler B results are a better predictor for NCAA Tournament this year than Wrestler A. 

The rankers are not uneducated, so why focus on lesser wrestling results st the complete exclusion of better results? 

 

aka "I don't like it when PSU superstar freshmen aren't ranked #1 at the start of the year."

[1032004]

1 hour ago, Pinnacle said:

 

This.

As you say, it does not have to be #1 or Unranked, it can be somewhere in between. The rankers watch team trials, worlds, olympics etc., so they understand the relative ability and predictive nature of the results.

The question is, What is a better predictor of NCAA success this year:

1. Wrestler A earning a 24-7 record and a R12 place finish at last years tournament or wrestler B going 135-0 in large school PIAA or CA or Ohio + winning senior team trials and earning a world bronze in freestyle.

Wrestler B results are a better predictor for NCAA Tournament this year than Wrestler A. 

The rankers are not uneducated, so why focus on lesser wrestling results st the complete exclusion of better results? 

 

Going 135-0 in PIAA is pretty irrelevant, depending on who those wins are over.   I could maybe see the argument for using high school folkstyle head to head results for like a freshman who had beaten someone who is now a sophomore though.  

[Pinnacle]

32 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Going 135-0 in PIAA is pretty irrelevant, depending on who those wins are over.   I could maybe see the argument for using high school folkstyle head to head results for like a freshman who had beaten someone who is now a sophomore though.  

The h.s. record alone isn't enough, it is that + a senior world bronze. I am basically describing Jax Forest ( I knoe he has losses to guys). If he joins OSU semester 2 I would have him top 10 at a minimum from the start. I dont need to wait for him to start beating guys that I know he is better than.

[1032004]

18 minutes ago, Pinnacle said:

The h.s. record alone isn't enough, it is that + a senior world bronze. I am basically describing Jax Forest ( I knoe he has losses to guys). If he joins OSU semester 2 I would have him top 10 at a minimum from the start. I dont need to wait for him to start beating guys that I know he is better than.

Jax does at least have some folkstyle matches against NCAA guys that can get him a ranking - in 2024 he beat Stanich and Strickenberger.

[Pinnacle]

1 minute ago, 1032004 said:

Jax does at least have some folkstyle matches against NCAA guys that can get him a ranking - in 2024 he beat Stanich and Strickenberger.

So because of those two matches he's in, but without them but still having the trials win and senior world bronze and everything else he has he would remain out? That is silly. 

[alex1fly]

Rankings should be based on results, not predictions or wishful thinking. I have no problem with crystal ball lists but that is different than a ranking IMO

Edited December 11, 2025 by alex1fly

[1032004]

39 minutes ago, Pinnacle said:

So because of those two matches he's in, but without them but still having the trials win and senior world bronze and everything else he has he would remain out? That is silly. 

No I’m saying he has results that Flo would be consistent in their methodology as considering.   I’d guess he probably comes in somewhere around 10-15 (the year before he did also have a loss to Seymour).  

[Pinnacle]

12 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

No I’m saying he has results that Flo would be consistent in their methodology as considering.   I’d guess he probably comes in somewhere around 10-15 (the year before he did also have a loss to Seymour).  

It will certainly be consistent with Flo. He will quickly ascend towards a ranking of 1, 2 or 3, consistent with other wrestlers in years gone by with his prior full wrestling pedigree. 

[1032004]

1 hour ago, Pinnacle said:

So because of those two matches he's in, but without them but still having the trials win and senior world bronze and everything else he has he would remain out? That is silly. 

Sorry I misread this at first.  But yes that’s correct.  Freestyle doesn’t always translate to folkstyle so I’m OK with freestyle results not being considered for NCAA rankings.  And to my original post in this thread, if we’re considering freestyle results then PJ Duke should have started the season #1.  Doesn’t really make sense for intermat to just start him out in the middle.

Edited December 11, 2025 by 1032004

[Nak21]

None of these rankings matter. It’s December and even in March they don’t matter - coaches ranking does I believe for seeding, allocations, at large?

It would be nice to have up front stated, consistent criteria for rankings sure. Avoids some of the pitfalls we saw (and still do) in football where local or regional voters do some whacky things to benefit teams in their neck of the woods.

That said, there does need to be a human touch and some consideration for body of work that may include extrapolating some HS and freestyle data. It too can create problems, so it needs to be used specifically for a few situations (wrestler A and B, who’s 5th and who’s 6th because with the criteria we can’t decide - human touch - I think A would beat B head to head so I’m ranking them this way) OR for individuals, which I think is the debate here…when you have kids like Duke and Blaze and Jax, Bassett, Miller etc when they get here…your formula probably isn’t gonna work…so you enter the human touch and rank them high and piss off X ppl and make Y ppl happy OR you stick to your guns with your criteria and don’t rank them at all or low and probably piss everyone off.

Again, NONE of this matters. We have a sport that usually provides a big body of work for an end of the year official ranking that does matter and then there’s a tournament where this all gets worked out on the mat. Patience I guess…

[Dark Energy]

FRL made a good point today.  If going to include freestyle results for wrestler A, need to do for hundreds of others.  And freestyle results can get nuts when compared to college results.  It increases the complexity of a ranking system by a ton and would often result in very weird and off base NCAA rankings.

Many here want to pick and choose when to factor in and when to not.  I appreciate the need to be more consistent.  Is a tough job.

 

  

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

4 minutes ago, Dark Energy said:

FRL made a good point today.  If going to include freestyle results for wrestler A, need to do for hundreds of others.  And freestyle results can get nuts when compared to college results.  It increases the complexity of a ranking system by a ton and would often result in very weird and off base NCAA rankings.

Many here want to pick and choose when to factor in and when to not.  I appreciate the need to be more consistent.  Is a tough job.

 

  

But the PSU freshmen aren't high enough!!!!

[Pinnacle]

1 minute ago, Coastal said:

Including all freestyle may be a bit time consuming but there's a difference between a random tournament and the Sr. US Open.  Making the Sr team while still in high school should put a wrestler in the top 5 automatically their freshman year.

The same way that winning some local Christmas tournament isn't the same as winning Super 32 or Ironman when evaluating a recruit's ranking.

 

Exactly, there are levels to this. Why we shouldn't consider every freestyle results, just those few that make it very apparent that a certain wrestler is at a certain level. The Kyle Snyder, J'Den Cox, Mehki Lewis, Jax Forest, Bo Bassett, Marcus Blaze and PJ Duke types are pretty easy to identify yet no so numerous that it should complicate things.