cowcards

Why not? It's wrestling, losses happen to everyone (but Cael). If everyone else has multiple losses during the season and one guy has 1 a single loss at their conference tournament and beat the other guys, why wouldn't they still deserve it? What happens if there are upsets at each of the conference tournaments? Does someone that won the tournament auto get it because they won, even if they aren't the "best" guy?

That is actually hilarious. Plott has 1 loss vs. a non-Keck opponent and 3 to Keck. By beating Plott so many times he has damaged his QW points. But if you want to do them all... Keck: Plot - 4.5 Brenot - .5 Heeg - .5 Robin - .5 Berge - 4.5 Olszko - .5 Allred - 3 Bockman - 2 Hawks - 1 Total = 17 Carter: McNelly - 6 Smith - 3 Washington - 1 Ruth - 2 Rogotzke - .5 Bullock - .5 Cartagena-Walsh - 2 Allred - 3 Hawks - 1 Ebert - .5 Wills - .5 Hoose - .5 Total = 21.5 You guys have proved me wrong on the QW. I'm also baffled there isn't some sort of multiplier for multiple wins vs. guys. That wins against Cartegena-Walsh, Allred, & Smith (No AA's) is seen as better than 3 wins against Plott (2, 6, 6 NCAA). Or said another way, you're better off beating 3 guys ranked 10th-15th than 1 guy ranked #2.

Mendez won a bracket that Hardy took 3rd in during the year. At least Mendez lost to the top seed in the country when taking 4th.

So to be clear, we are discounting the rest of the season when determining seeding? That's fine if so, but it's going to only cause coaches to weaken their schedule as much as possible and dodge more matches than they do.

Because he has losses to Jamison (who Mendez beat) and Happel. While good losses as they will both be top-8 seeds, they are still losses that Mendez doesn't have.

I don't know you're getting at with these... If you replace the coaches rank with the RPI you get this: Keck: #2 x3 #5 x 2 #6 x2 #15 x1 by fall #22 x1 by (MD 17-4) #24 x 2 Carter: #4 x1 #10 x2 #15 x1 by major #14 x1 #16 x1 #22 x1 by MD (10-1) #25 x11 Keck still comes out on top and actually looks even better. The 2 matchups that are the same wouldn't count towards quality wins, they would count towards common opponents. The only metric that is in favor of Starocci is the coaches rank. RPI, Common Opponents, Quality wins are in favor of Keck. Win %, H2H, Tourney finish are even.

The coaches might due to recency bias, but they shouldn't. RPI will still have Mendez ahead.

His losses to Happel, Jamison, and Bartlett aren't taken into consideration? Bartlett is going to come out on the formula ahead of Hardy. He may come out ahead of Mendez due to the H2H and conference finish criteria, but Mendez will be ahead in the ranks, common opponents, win %, and at least even with quality wins.

The RPI is going to favor Keckeisen. It's going to come down to Quality Wins (Last coaches rank). Keck: #3 x3 #5 x2 #6 x1 by fall #10 x 2 #11 x1 by (MD 17-4) Carter: #4 x1 #6 x1 by major #9 x2 #11 x 1 by MD (10-1) Keck clearly has more and better wins. He also has a better result against the Allred. I do agree that the committee won't change the order of whatever the calculation comes out with. Just think it will be Keck.

Alirez drops because of his loss to Jamison and not winning his conference. His highest quality win is Composto or Frost, which aren't abd by any means. I think Vombaur gets the 5, Alirez will get the 6, Happel the 7, Jamison the 8. Had Jamison won, he would've jumped Alirez. But I could see Happel above Alirez due to winning Big 12 and beating Jamison a couple times.

This. Happel won't end up top-4 because of them. Koderhandt has only lost to Mendez and Hardy while beating Frost, Lemley, Vombaur this season. He has the quality wins to be the 4 behind Bartlett, Hardy, and Mendez. Hardy's losses to Jamison and Happel keep him from any higher than 3.

- Even if the coaches have Starocci higher, every other metric favors Keckeisen without a head-to-head to use. - Seeding is based on the full body of work too. I don't think the coaches will have Lilledahl ahead of Ramos based off one win. Luke was 8th in the last one with Ramos first. Ventresca was ranked ahead of Luke with another win over Robinson who was also ranked ahead of Luke and won his tournament. Won't jump him. You could make a case Robinson wouldn't be jumped either. He should end up 3rd. The consequences are that there is a debate to whether Ramos should be the 1 seed vs. a clear yes. Fortunately , for Ramos, he didn't quite lose the seed. Why is there not consequences for Lilledahl's weaker season body of work vs. 1 match of work? LL wouldn't have been in contention for a top-4 seed without the win. Now he is 2nd. That's a great consequence. Got it. Thanks.

I think he will. He should be 2nd in line behind Edmond. He earned a bid, 2nd highest ranked of pool, and beat Scott, who is in the pool. His only losses are to the field, except Porter. He has no wins against the field, which will hurt. Although I don't know the criteria for selecting the at-large and there could be some insane rule to prevent it. I know there was something about being the first place outside of qualification having priority at one point. Even so, if Porter gets in, then Pucino has a win vs. the field and shifts his losses to all against the field.

- Keckeisen had higher quality of wins (Plott x3, Berge x2 vs. Allred, McEnelly) . Everything else was equal. - He had a win over Schultz, Luffman, and day x2. The Schultz win gets him here. - I get that everyone thinks that LL should be ahead of Ramos, but he does have losses to 2 guys that won't be top-12 seeds. Ramos has one loss to LL. - Kharchala was a product of elimination of everyone else. Anyone else in contention lost this weekend and had worse losses than Braunagel. Is that the sheet they actually use to seed? Even so, I think Ramos comes out ahead of everything else.

Not from this forum, but I did predict this back in May before Kraisser committed: 125 - Attasuauov [Fringe NQ depending on weight] 133 - Byrd (AA [Top-4]) 141 - Pucino (NQ) 149 - Webster (AA) 157 - Scoles (NQ) 165 - Moore (NQ) 174 - Braunagel (Blood Round/AA) 184 - Ruth (AA) 197 - Braunagel (Blood Round/AA) 285 - Luffman (Blood Round/AA) I thought they'd have 9 NQ's, but not 2 finalists. Would've just thought 1.

#1 - Ramos #2 - Lilledahl #3 - Ventresca #4 - Figueroa #1 - Byrd #2 - Ayala #3 - Bailey #4 - Romney #1 - Bartlett #2 - Mendez #3 - Hardy #4 - Koderhandt #1 - Henson #2 - Lovett #3 - Van Ness #4 - Parco #1 - Kasak #2 - Shapiro #3 - Taylor #4 - Blaze #1 - Messenbrink #2 - Caliendo #3 - Hall #4 - Ramirez #1 - O'Toole #2 - Hamiti #3 - Haines #4 - Kharchala #1 - Keckeisen #2 - Starocci #3 - McEnelly #4 - Plott #1 - Cardenas #2 - Buchanan #3 - Ferrari #4 - Beard #1 - Steveson #2 - Hendrickson #3 - Trephan #4 - Kerkvliet

McCray did D2-->D1-->JUCO-->NAIA (dropped)--> NAIA Noon did D1-->D2-->JUCO-->D1 Schmidlin did D2-->JUCO--> JUCO --> D1 Ullom did D3--> JUCO-->JUCO--D1 The answer to your question is to transfer to other divisions.

4 isn't as impressive in the last 5 years like it used to be. Before Downey was doing 5, and before Andrew Long was just an amateur transferee, Eddie McCray did 5. Brendt Noon, Mike Schmidlin, & Terry Ullom are some of the early leaders in the 4 team category. Some other 4 guys are Dustin May, Tyshawn White, Abner Romero, DeAndre Reed, Edwin Cooper, Justin Ransom, Cody Karstetter, and Jacob Mitchell. There are definitely more than that, but those are some quick ones I have data for.

Great work Pablo, I'm always a fan of more data. I would love to see what your model ranks if you didn't weigh pins. I think wrestling is unique in with these elo type models because pins can happen at any time with no regard to ability and that it doesn't matter if you win by 1 or 15. You just have to win. There are plenty of guys that don't stack up points even though they could if it was a first to 15 points instead.

Wrestlestat also has D2 and D3 results. I don't think it has all of them, but it looks like it has most of them. Really have expanded.

It's not regional qualifiers, but I'll be out at D3 Champs tweeting out stats and data live. Should be a great time and can't wait. (I'll also be out at the women's NCWWC championship this weekend doing the same thing.) You can follow me on Bluesky

If I was trying to answer this I would only count wins AFTER a wrestler won NCAAs. Beating Mike Macchiavello was way different as a SR than a FR. OR 2 separate categories. I can't answer this because I haven't started working on individual match results. If anyone wants to start compiling to be able to answer that in the future, let me know.

Anyone know how the pools are determined? The pools are here and there are a few (125, 133, 285) where ranked guys are in pool B instead of A and won't wrestle the other top guys.

He didn’t leave his shoes, but he did walk around the mat a few times and received a retirement gift on the mat from UWW after the match.

He wasn’t happy with Taylor’s celebration before time was out.