Wrestleknownothing

On the Iowa football roster.

The settlement still needs final approval. Hearing is set for April 7.

I was on top of those numbers, but then they got the best of me.

I would settle for one zero, with a positive number in front of it, instead of the 9 negative ones we have gotten.

Didn't Biden used to put out stuff like this? Call me skeptical of every politician's accounting ever. Meanwhile, in numbers that can be verified, the S&P500 has rallied to -9.2% since the start of the "Dumbest Trade War in History".

Well that was pretty dumb of me not to include that. You both make a good point. The number of decisions has a huge amount of volatility, even more than the smaller individual categories of bonus types, which complicates the analysis. But, using the same kind of trend does show exactly what you are talking about. Bonus, as a single category, has jumped from historical lows. Near MD have become MD, near TF have become TF, but PF have not increased. But the increase in Bonus is greater than the effect of shifting categories. This probably suggest there were a lot of matches finishing close to the barriers of both MD and TF.

It has only been two years and I am only looking at the NCAA tournament, so any conclusions are going to be a bit shaky. And bonus point scoring is notoriously volatile from year to year. Anyway... I have bonus by type going back to 1988. The only significant rule changes I can think of (other than the 3-point TD) over that time that affect bonus are changes in near fall possibilities. But I do not think they have a significant impact. The 2-point years are in blue (highlighted) and the 3-point years are in orange (faint). And I use percentage of matches rather than raw numbers because the number of contested matches was highly variable prior to 1998 (ranging from 547 to 636). Major Decisions With the advent of the 3-point TD, major decisions jumped last year and this, but they "jumped" from historically low levels. When looked at through the broader trend (dotted line) all they really did is return to the trend. It seems like the 3-point TD has had little effect on the amount of majors at the NCAA tournament so far. Pin Falls PF are generally down and have stayed that way with the 3-point TD. I have theorized in the past that this is a direct result of matches ending sooner in TF before they can become PF in the 3-point TD era. For now, I am sticking with this idea even though proof is thin. Tech Falls Now this is where we see a pretty big impact. I put two trend lines in all the graphs. The highlighted one is the trend without factoring in 2024 or 2025. For MD and PF you cannot tell that there are two lines because they are on top of each other. But for TF adding in the two years of 3-point TD significantly changes the trend upward. It is clear to me that the immediate effect of the 3-point TD is an appreciable increase in TF. Did the 3-Point TD "Work"? I also think (without the data to back it up) that this is (weak) proof that the desired effect of the 3-point TD was achieved. There are more TDs relative to trend. If it were simply the case that the same number of TD were occurring but 11-14 point MDs were now 15+ point TFs, and PF were being turned into TF, both with the same number of TD as before, then there would be a decrease in MD (there is not) and a decrease in PF (there is, but it also fits the trend). NOTE: What the hell happened in 2006? An absurd 16.9% of matches at the NCAA tournament ended in PF? What an outlier.

Impressive sleuthing, j. Thanks for this. I remember Askren on FRL a while back talking about going to opens with lesser competition on his own so he could fatten up his PF totals.

Any idea how many TF and MD in 2010?

This tracks.

AJ and Carter in a corner "training" with each other? Sign me up.

Med shirts are typically granted after all other eligibility is exhausted, so fair to guess the WS is guessing. By rule Ferrari does not qualify for a med shirt. But what use have we for eligibility rules at this point?

Are you trying to get me to change my avatar?

When I looked at last year's tournament it seemed like TF's and MD's were up and pinfalls were down. I theorized that PFs were down and TFs were up because the TF was happening too fast to allow for the PF.

Post 2014 that is easy (thank you, WrestleStat). Prior to that it is almost impossible (except for Cael Sanderson).

It is a real issue. I remember Ben Askren on FRL laughing about how he went to tournaments with lesser competition just so he could fatten up his pinfall stats.

Hint, hint

You needed to do this earlier in the day. We all know what day it is.

Sadly, yes. Without detailed match by match scores or scoring there really is no way to adjust

Take the exact rankings with a grain of salt. Also consider this a cry for help. I cannot find TF, or MD stats for 1999 Stephen Neal, 2001 Nick Ackerman, 2004 Emmett Wilson, 2007 Ben Askren, or 2010 Jayson Ness. Their dominance scores are higher than what I have hear, as a result. Any help with filling in the missing pieces would be appreciated. I also need breakdowns between TF and MD for 1995 TJ Jaworsky, 1998 Mark Ironside, and 2013 Kyle Dake. For these I know how many combined TF/MD they had, but not the split between TF and MD. I just used a 50/50 split. The net result is that Stephen Neal, and 2007 Ben Askren will be at or near the top if the data can be found.

Lee won the fan vote by a huge margin, 5:1 (25,712 to 5,202) They referenced multiple committee members voting for co-winners. Two years before they released the number of Nolf/Nickal co-votes, but not this year.

God, I hate pie charts

Not that I am aware of

Check your calendar