Wrestleknownothing

You are all ignoring that 11 days ago Benjamin Netanyahu announced he would address the UN, thereby creating a massive need for extra security. Maybe Netanyahu is a Democratic operative? Or maybe Hawley is trying to make a non-political demand on Secret Service resources seem like a political decision? Nah, not Josh Hawley. He is so pure of spirit, never mind all the dirt bag stuff he does.

A whole lotta pearl clutching going on here.

Those are very different things than what I commented on. You too are using a hammer for every problem. The secret service said they could not protect Trump at an outdoor rally when their resources are being sucked up by the UN meeting, and @Caveira said that seemed political. I think it is the opposite. It is a statement of fact.

has to be PSU in 2021 with four individual champs and a second place team finish

Same here

Yes, but the tournament was not wrestled in 2020. I fixed the wording.

While Marinelli was seeded first three times, one of those times was 2020. So he only wrestled two tournaments where he was the top seed. I found two guys who were #1 seeds three times and failed to win. Larry Zilverberg from 1974 to 1976, and Daton Fix in 2019, 2021, and 2024. There is a possibility I am missing someone as I looked at AA finishes vs seed. So, like Marinelli in 2021, if someone was a #1 seed and failed to even AA, then I missed him.

When all you have is a hammer, everything seems like a nail it’s politically motivated

Great video

If is doing a lot of work there, as that is not what was alleged at the time. The Chinese products tariff was because of theft of intellectual property. None of this has any bearing, though, on the question, which was really quite simple: "What was the result of his tariffs during his term as Presdident?"

Of course the devil is in the assumptions, but... Key Finding The Trump administration imposed nearly $80 billion worth of new taxes on Americans by levying tariffs on thousands of products valued at approximately $380 billion in 2018 and 2019, amounting to one of the largest tax increases in decades. The Biden administration has kept most of the Trump administration tariffs in place, and in May 2024, announced tariff hikes on an additional $18 billion of Chinese goods, including semiconductors and electric vehicles, for an additional tax increase of $3.6 billion. We estimate the Trump-Biden tariffs will reduce long-run GDP by 0.2 percent, the capital stock by 0.1 percent, and employment by 142,000 full-time equivalent jobs. Altogether, the trade war policies currently in place add up to $79 billion in tariffs based on trade levels at the time of tariff implementation and excluding behavioral and dynamic effects. Before accounting for behavioral effects, the $79 billion in higher tariffs amounts to an average annual tax increase on US households of $625. Based on actual revenue collections data, trade war tariffs have directly increased tax collections by $200 to $300 annually per US household, on average. Both estimates understate the cost to US households because they do not factor in the lost output, lower incomes, and loss in consumer choice the tariffs have caused. Candidate Trump has proposed significant tariff hikes as part of his presidential campaign; we estimate that if imposed, his proposed tariff increases would hike taxes by another $524 billion annually and shrink GDP by at least 0.8 percent, the capital stock by 0.7 percent, and employment by 684,000 full-time equivalent jobs. Our estimates do not capture the effects of retaliation, nor the additional harms that would stem from starting a global trade war. Academic and governmental studies find the Trump-Biden tariffs have raised prices and reduced output and employment, producing a net negative impact on the US economy. https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/federal/trump-tariffs-biden-tariffs/

That is the only Great White North worth listening to.

I think it is not unique, but it is an outlier. For example, a booster recently agreed to pay what is believed to be north of $1mm for the top softball pitcher to transfer to Texas Tech (https://www.on3.com/nil/news/texas-tech-red-raiders-softball-nil-collective-to-pay-nijaree-canady-upwards-of-1-million/) from 2x defending champs, Stanford. But that is a huge outlier for softball. And I think $500k is an outlier for wrestling. BTW, I say agreed above because I saw this story today. https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/41438172/matthew-sluka-nil-dispute-unlv-hinges-verbal-offer What is notable is that it is a QB and the verbal offer was only $100k. So far all he has gotten is $3k. So this idea that there are contracts and athletes can sue is not always true.

Don't look now, but it would seem JimmyBT's return is imminent. From Jagger's 7/19 Mailbag: Why would someone block someone (until the end of September) from your Intermat forum with no warning or notice of why it happened? I was told to take it to the zoo, which I did. Doesn’t make sense when it’s going to cost you a yearly premium subscription. Just wondering. Jim H (Cinnabon?) Is it my forum? I barely even go on there. I’m sorry this happened to you but I don’t believe you need a subscription to use the forum. Just like this mailbag. Which is a good thing since I doubt I’m moving the needle on subscriptions. Either way, I’ll make sure to wake you up when September ends. I assume Jagger added the parenthetical (Cinnabon?)

That is certainly true in every other sport. So, it is fair to assume that is true in wrestling.

Looks like PSU will struggle to make the podium

The results part is easy. I have that. What years do you have for transfers?

sounds like a job for the Transfer Portal King himself, @flyingcement

any accounts of the specifics of the workout?

You are getting it right. My Tableau filters got it wrong. See above.

Ahh. That was a Tableau thing. When I excluded Brooks and Nickal from 197 it dropped them from 184 , as well. Oops. It also affected Jake Rosholt at 177/184, Alex Dieringer at 158/165, Ed Ruth at 177/184, Greg Jones at 177/184, and Cael Sanderson at 177/184

And for fun, here is the list of multi-time winners at each weight in the time period

The good news is that it makes no difference. Both 142/149 and 150/157 had 22 unique winners in the 26 season span from 1998 to 2024. That put them 2 up on 190/197. Shorten it by a season and it is a one unique champ lead, but still a lead. You proposed unique champs as the definition of parity (and that is what I polled on), but you can also look at it more broadly through the lens of unique AAs. Viewed this way, 140/149 slides to second behind 167/174 while 150/157 plummets to seventh. But no matter how you look at it the weight extremes are also the dominance extremes. The heavies have the least amount of parity and the lights are not far behind regardless of whether you are counting unique champs or unique AAs. This, too, is unaffected by the choice of 1998 over 1999 as the start year.

@PortaJohn suggested 1998 to present, and I am a doer not a thinker.

Yes, but you also have to put an asterisk next to Hall on that front.