Wrestleknownothing

It never ceases to amaze me that in a sport where 100% of athletes get injured, some do not want to believe it when an athlete says they are injured.

Should read 2-1

chef's kiss

Ok, I have wasted my entire lunch thinking about this. By weight the entrants in the MFS were: LARGE BRACKETS 57 kg, 65 kg, 74 kg, 86 kg, 97 kg, and 125 kg (the Olympic weights) are essentially 64 man brackets. In all cases when semifinals are complete, the repechage brackets can be constructed by best record, with tie breakers, to determine the six eligible wrestlers. Using 65 kg and 86 kg as examples, the records this year break down as follows: In both cases all wrestlers with 3-1 records make the repechage. We then use the current tie breaker system for places 7-10 to choose which two wrestlers at 65 kg, and four wrestlers at 86 kg, among those with 1-1 records makes repechage. Sticking with the easy example, 65 kg would result in Kazakhstan, Bahrain, and Belgium (all 0-1) being replaced with Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, and USA (all 3-1) in the repechage. This is probably the most egregious example, 37.5% of the wrestlers eligible to finish third got there by failing to win a match. Said another way, more than half of the wrestlers at 65 kg outperformed these three wrestlers, but were blocked from placing third by them. Silliness. Note: it is also possible Japan at 2-1 would be replaced, depending on the tie breakers. In 92 kg two 0-1 wrestlers would be dropped for two 2-1 wrestlers. And perhaps there would be some swapping of 2-1 wrestlers, again tie breaker dependent. SMALL BRACKETS For 61, 70, 27, and 92 the math works out differently because they are essentially 32 man brackets with different possible records. Using 92 kg this year it looks like this: Note: while it did not happen in these brackets, it is possible to be 5-0 in large brackets or 4-0 in small brackets after semis. In 92 kg this year it is not clear that anything would change as all repechage participants won at least one match in the championship brackets (2 in the Qualifying/Pig Tail round / 2 in the 1/8 Final round). It would depend on the aforementioned tie breakers.

But did either of you stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night?

The Sadulaev I saw looked like he was working on a move to 125, not 86.

I'll take some of that action.

..., methinks.

My initial reaction is, replacing the 0-1's with the quarterfinalists who lost to the semifinal loser (the 3-1's at 86 and 65 in my above example) would be an immediate improvement. I will spend some more time avoiding work later to think it through. P.S. I will take this to mean that you also say the magic word when not in a professional setting. No sense denying it. Shhhhh.

No buddy at all. He's a pos who can go f himself. Let him know I said so.

And even if you don't have full consis, since the repechage participants cannot even be determined until the semis are over, why not take the time to have the right partial consis? 0-1 should never trump 3-1.

Repechage is nonsensical in the way it is practiced at the World Championships. We have multiple wrestlers in the repechage who have a shot at 3rd place who are 0-1 in the championship bracket. Meanwhile, there are wrestlers in the same bracket that are 3-1 with no chance to advance beyond 7th place. There has to be a better way. In large brackets like 65kg and 86kg there is no good reason to include 0-1 wrestlers in the repechage simply because they had the good fortune to lose in the first round to a finalist. And that is what it is, fortune. The point of these tournaments is about earning, not fortune.

I didn't even know I wanted to be on an archipelago until just now, but now I really want it.

I am too disagreeable to agree even when we agree. Can we agree on that? If your answer is yes, then I disagree.

But even that is inconsistent. They changed the enforcement AFTER they were alerted to the situation and made the change retroactive to just before the violations occured while delaying revealing what happened until after their announced enforcement changes. They are ridiculously conflicted in this entire situation.

Agreed. But I also agree with myself that they are crappy rules. The NCAA, by the way, also agrees with me on that. We just differ in degree. If they did not agree with me they would not have changed the punishments retroactive to immediately before these crimes.

I prefer an

I think I am on an island here, but I think it is a bunch of crap that these guys got these punishments. The punishment does not fit the crime in my decidedly not humble opinion.

Good question. I do not know if the US has offered. It is possible that is has, but because of our government's travel restrictions with other countries that we have been rejected. Or we have not offered due to those same restrictions. Here are the rules for ranking events: https://cdn.uww.org/s3fs-public/2022-02/uww_ranking_rule_book.pdf?VersionId=gWyYUPkiTFNwpBoPZDtZNmn_5UbdEOse

You make two excellent points. And one of those points is sharper and more painful than the other.

go f yourself

The challenge is, I think, there is a cost benefit analysis that goes on here. And it does not favor attendance. For this World Championships the US wrestlers spent a week at Ramstein Air Base in Germany as part of an acclimation camp. Ramstein and Belgrade are in the same time zone (GMT+2). State College is 6 hours behind (GMT-4). To perform optimally requires getting over jet lag which takes time. And time is money. Attending these events costs USAW a lot of money. Which is why they send the athletes home as soon as they are done competing. No free vacations, no extra nights in a hotel. The four ranking series events were at Zagreb (GMT+2), Alexandria (GMT+3), Bishkek (GMT+6), and Budapest (GMT+2). From the east coast that is a six to ten hour time difference (and in the wrong direction for jet lag purposes). Eastern Europeans, Iranians, Russians, and to a small extent, Japanese all have a distinct advantage when travelling to these events. If you are going to the events to perform optimally, you would need to send your team a week ahead of time. And that does not take into account that you may not yet know who your team is given the US selection system. So, now you may need to send multiple athletes at every weight until the representative is nailed down. Puerto Rico has an advantage there. They have one guy and they already know who it is. Of course, you can also just choose to attend without optimizing your chances. Fly in a day or two before you wrestle and just pick up what you can. This will also put the athletes at higher risk of injury, both at and after the competition. You have to include that in the cost column when doing the analysis. Then there are the athletes. If you talked to any of them in Belgrade there was a common theme, "it seems like I have been gone a month, and I cannot wait to get back home". Living out of a suitcase is hard, doing it five times in eight months is brutal. And if they are still in college (Arujau, Snyder in the day, etc.) it may be impossible to do both and be any good at either. It should be no surprise that an organization headed by an eastern European has chosen a series of sites that favor eastern Europeans, so we should acknowledge that it is not as simple as just show up. The seeding system is supposed to be about rewarding performance, but the people in charge of the purse strings want to make it about rewarding attendance for the obvious, pocket-lining reasons. Saying everyone knows the rules ignores this basic fact. I would rather see a crappy rule changed. The rule should align with the goal of rewarding the best, not with rewarding the eager. I get that it can be hard to differentiate between best and most eager if the best do not compete. If they want greater attendance from the US, the current team champions (and it is not at all clear to me that they want this), then they need to be more geographically diverse with the location of the ranking series events.

So you come here looking for free help with betting markets, but will not say where they are? Sure I will help. But you will have to decide if you should bet based on what I tell you....or the opposite of what I tell you.

Where are you seeing these markets? There are a few I would be interested in betting.