Wrestleknownothing

The thing that always annoys me about that pic, is that they stole the idea from my wife and I.

ISU by the numbers @Crablegs two notes: I do not have the 11/15 intermat rankings and I updated the probabilities in early November so you see a slight change in 197 that has nothing to do with a rank change.

Good question. I calculated the probability any one seed ends as an AA based on results from 2010 - 2022. This is what that looks like: If you just count the wrestlers ranked 8 or higher, it ignores the fact, for example, that of the last 120 wrestlers seeded 8, only 60 finished in the top 8. Even a 1 seed is not a guarantee to finish as an AA, historically. So, I sum the probabilities associated with each team's current rankings (thereby equating ranking to seed). In that way you get expected AA. So a change of 0.1 can be thought of as a team increasing the probability that one of their wrestlers will AA by 10%. This is roughly the same as having a wrestler move from a 5 seed to a 4 seed. Thanks for asking @Crablegs, sometimes I rush to the final thought without posting all the ones that came before.

Which teams have made the biggest moves in the first few weeks of the season? Below is the difference between the expected AA's per team based on Intermat's pre-season rankings and the current expectation based on their 11/22 rankings. Iowa State, Michigan and Va Tech are making the biggest moves on the plus side. Meanwhile, Nebraska, Penn, and Ohio State are moving in the wrong direction early in the season.

Have I got good news for you. Based on expected points I have OSU at 25th in both Flo and Intermat rankings.

Careful, if you start using Dan techniques the mods may get confused and do something regrettable. Also, since my response was to a comment about 10 wrestlers, some of whom absolutely did have some of those, it absolutely was meaningful.

One caveat about wrestlestat bonus rate calcs, they do not include MFOR in the numerator, but they do include them in the denominator. They should either be included in both or excluded from both. But in their current form, wrestlestat occassionally understates bonus rate. It was probably most notable last year due to the large number of MFOR and small number of matches.

Your persecution complex is showing.

This train has no brakes. All steam, all the time.

I always go back to a comment RBY made after winning last year. He was talking about what Cael Sanderson said to him right before he went out for his first final. It was something along the lines of, "In ten years no one will remember this." I think it is a masterful way to diffuse the tension and let a wrestler just wrestle.

I think there is a lot to the complimentary theory. They have so many good coaches with different styles and approaches and no ego about who gets credit that it can be hard to tell from the outside who the greatest influence is on any one wrestler. I spoke to one multi-time champ that credits Cody, for example. Just like styles make matches, styles make matches.

I have been thinking about this very thing. Sadly my data on champions is not str4uctured well to do this (it is somewhat summary level), but I will attempt a work around.

This doesn't surprise me at all. He has always given off that vibe of servant leadership.

something about a horse and water?

Updates based on November 22 rankings from all three services (sorry, I missed last week): While all three services have PSU beating Iowa for the team title, there is virtually no consensus on the other two podium positions. INTERMAT Where Intermat had Mizzou and anOSU two weeks ago, they now have Michigan and Mizzou. FLO Meanwhile, Flo has Mizzou and Michigan after previously having anOSU and Mizzou. WRESTLESTAT And Wrestlestat really loves Virginia Tech. No, I mean they REEEEEEAAAALLLYYY love the Hokies. Where they had anOSU and Mizzou two weeks ago they now have VT and anOSU. By contrast, Intermat has VT at #12 and Flo has them at #9.

Amen, brother

I was just going to look for that. Thanks. It is what I read that made me re-think the idea that it is purely formulaic. If it is a formula, why do we have voters? So the explanation that made sense to me (though completely unconfirmed) is that is a two stage process. Stage one is the objective portion where the formula is applied to determine the list of finalists. Stage two is the subjective portion where voters are provided the results of the formula to guide their choice, but they are not bound by the formula (or else it would not even be a choice). And as I type that it occurs to me that for the fan vote I do not recall if WIN shares the formula result to guide our votes.

I do not think that is quite true. Though it is hard to be 100% certain given what I have seen written about the process, I think the formula is used to narrow down the field of finalists. Then voters choose among those finalists. Obviously, the voters can be instructed to given weight to certain factors, but of course some do and some don't. And the very presence of voters means that it is not formulaic.

I am basing it on what Jairus Hammond has posted on wrestlingstats.com

98-99

The weights over time play out like this:

And there are other 118s on the lis in spite of what @jerseywrestling said.

Are you suggesting they recruit an active starter off another team's roster after the start of the season?