Wrestleknownothing

But your fact pattern only suggests flipping Foca to #3 and Lewis to #4, not bumping either to #2. So we still don't know what happens in #2 Labriola v #3 Foca. BTW, I agree that seeds absolutely do matter.

There isn't enough information there to say it is meaningful, either. We don't know if Foca would have beat Labriola to make it to the final. If not, then he is right back in that third place match with Lewis or Starocci. And then maybe he comes in fourth.

You got that one backward. The person who wrestles more, with the same number of loses, will have the higher winning percentage, helping their seed.

Thanks, @gimpeltf. I appreciate the detailed response. Your recollection of events that long ago is absolutely amazing.

And Musk, of all people, should not be caught off guard by it as a co-founder of OpenAI.

As mentioned in the last post, it is in the original post. But to save you scrolling time, here it is again.

Just what I posted in the first post. One other thing I forgot to mention. The UNI bracket lists it as a match termination. https://ncaa-wrestling.uni.edu/brackets/150.html

Lets start with 24-8. The match description was 10 take downs and a reversal. That is 22 points. Say he finished two periods on top. That means only 8 escapes. And with 10 take downs there had to be a riding time point too. Now we are at 23. There are no 1 point back moves. So assuming the match description on the UNI website is accurate, that looks like an MT.

Placement points have been decreased in value without pause since the beginning of NCAA wrestling. First, with advancement points added in 1955. Then again when bonus points were added in 1972. Bonus points have been increasing in importance since they were first introduced until they got to their current configuration in 2016. And within placement points, first and second have been devalued the most. They used to be worth as much as 89% of all points available, now they are not even worth 42% of placement points alone. It has always been the case that a team can win with a small number of wrestlers doing very well, it is just harder now than it has ever been to do that.

The tricky part that I foreshadowed in the original post: Match Termination Finding an accurate bracket has proven trickier than I thought. I have found two sources that have some contradictions between them. One of the sources even has contradictions within the source. We all know about wrestlingstats and their brackets. They only list two match terminations for the entire tournament, Chris Bono in the quarterfinal at 150 and Joe Williams in the semifinal at 158. But rescoring Iowa using this bracket implies they had three match terminations of their own. Northern Iowa, where the tournament was hosted, also has the brackets on a website dedicated to the 1997 tournament (https://ncaa-wrestling.uni.edu/). That website has Lincoln McIlravy winning round 2 by match termination based on a score of 24-8. This site also has match descriptions. The description for this match reads, “McIlravey of Iowa got 10 takedowns and 1 reversal to to score a technical fall over Jason Peters”. So, we have a misspelling, a typo, and a claim it was a tech fall, but the 10 TD plus one reversal suggest it was a match termination (assuming an escape and a riding point). That gives us one of the missing MT. The other one is probably McIlravy’s next match. Both wrestlingstats and UNI have him winning 20-5 in their brackets. Wrestlingstats has this as a TF. UNI has nothing. But the UNI match description reads, “#1 seed Lincoln McIlravy of Iowa scored 10 points over Tim Harshaw of Virgina in the first round. The final score of the match was 21-5 in favor of the Hawkeye McIlravy”. Assuming they meant 10 take downs rather than 10 points then maybe this is our other missing MT. The extra point in the description also makes sense if it was a riding time point. So, it was either a 21-5 tech fall, a 20-5 tech fall, a 21-5 MT, or a 20-5 MT. Treating both of McIlravy’s 15-point wins as match terminations, rather than tech falls, gets us to the magic 170 point total.

With all the talk on Happy Valley Insider and Go Iowa Awesome about whether Penn State will break Iowa’s all-time NCAA team scoring record it is time to put some stuff straight. The first thing is that Iowa fans are more fatalistic than PSU fans are optimistic. Each site ran a poll asking if this PSU team could reach 1997 Iowa’s team scoring record of 170 points. While only 18.8% of voters (13 of 69) on the PSU site thought it would happen, 30.8% of voters (45 of 146) on the Iowa site had that uneasy feeling. Both fan bases surprise me with their takes. But the real issue is… What is the team scoring record? Well, why do you ask? Can’t you just look it up? Seesh, this guy really does know nothing. I did look it up. And what I found was Lee Corso standing in my way saying, “Not so fast, my friend”. When Iowa put up their 170 team points in 1997 the rules for scoring the results of a match, for advancement, and for placement were different than they are now. Scoring 1997 v 2024 There are differences between then and now in all three elements of team scoring. Bonus - In 1997 they distinguished between a tech fall without back points (called a match termination) and one with back points (called a tech fall). A match termination was worth 1 team point, while a tech fall was worth 1.5 team points. Today they are all worth 1.5 team points. So, we need to adjust Iowa’s total by adding a half point to any match terminations (foreshadowing – this will get tricky). Advancement – In 1997 the tournament was scored as a 64-man bracket whenever there was a pig tail. Not every weight had pigtails though. Today it is always scored as a 32-man bracket with a pigtail. So, what is the difference? In a 64-man bracket everyone who wins a first round match in the championship (or consolation) bracket gets an extra point (or half point). For example, in a 64-man bracket the winner gets 5 advancement points instead of the current 4 points. Placement - Placement points for third through eighth place were also different in 1997. We will also need to adjust Iowa’s total for these differences. Putting It All Together The 1997 Iowa team loses the extra 4.5 advancement points available in their 64-man brackets at 142, 158, 177, 190, and 275. But they get an extra bonus point at 150 as Lincoln McIlravy’s 1-point match terminations become 1.5-point tech falls. They also pick up an extra 5 placement points for their sixth and fifth place finishes. Adding it all up and 1997 Iowa now has 171.5 points. That is the real point record PSU needs to shoot for.

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

too late to edit but MSU was 2015, not 2017

Come on. Now you are just being silly to be silly. Take the L and move on

Why don't you just read the thread where all of this was discussed already? Rhetorical question. I already know the answer.

MSU 2017 had -0.5 at the NCAA tournament. Northern Colorado 2016 had -1. Chattanooga 2017 had -0.5.

yawn

Now I want a doughnut

I am that person and I agree. But this has taken on a life of its own.

Those kinda guys are the worst.

Dude knows his shit.

Flo? What's that?

Twice. Excellent point. What is my penance?

What? No, I am not.

They lift cats?