ugarles

is this about Nasir Bailey? I loved the way he took the fight to Vito in the UALR-Cornell dual last year and cheered his run to 4th but this tournament has been all backing up. He beat Ferrara because a first period jammed thumb gave Bailey a free escape point and the ref was slow to call stalling in the third.

i am a bitter atheist but i don't have a problem with religion, per se. but i know a bs-er when i see one.

I guess it can't be Wolak if he pulls it off two years in a row.

125: #18 Moran over #15 Renteria (Pablo: Moran) 133: #23 Spidle over #10 Shawver (Pablo: Shawver) #21 Rini over #12 Oakley (Pablo: Rini) #18 Farber over #15 Noto (Pablo: Noto*) 141: #18 Tagg over #15 Olivieri (Pablo: Olivieri) #20 Saunders over #13 Carter (Pablo: Saunders) #21 Chappell over #12 Latona (Pablo: Latona) 149: #33 Travis* over #32 Denkins (Pablo: Travis, but...) #29 Gioffre over #4 Johnson (Pablo: Johnson*) #19 Rutgers over #14 Lamer (Pablo: Lamer) #17 Abas over #16 McDaniel (Pablo: Abas) 157: #23 Saldate over #10 Miller (Pablo: Miller*) #20 Chumbley over #13 Hill (Pablo: Chumbley) 165: #33 Amaker over #32 Keslar (Pablo: Keslar) #19 Thomsen over #14 Rhodes (Pablo: Rhodes) #18 Mayfield over #15 Ruiz (Pablo: Ruiz) 174: #33 Wilson over #32 McGill (??? - Pablo had the UALR guy) #25 Harkins over #8 Pinto (Pablo: Pinto) #24 Wolak over #9 Karchla (Pablo: Karchla) #23 Gaitan over #10 Cramer (Pablo: Gaitan*) #21 Ogunsanya over Takats (Pablo: Ogunsanya) #18 Sax over #15 Augustine (Pablo: Augustine) 184: #20 Fine over #13 Bockman (Pablo: Bockman) 197: #26 Zurawski over #7 Voelker (Pablo: Voelker) #25 Brophy over #8 Surber (Pablo: Surber) #24 Sollars over #9 Braunagel (Pablo: Braunagel) #23 Shumate over #10 Salazar (Pablo: Salazar) #19 Smth over #14 Glazier (Pablo: Glazier) 285: #33 Filipovich over #32 Monchery (Pablo: Filipovich) #22 Colbert over #11 Mullen (Pablo: Colbert) Obviously, this is one sided. Pablo picked 8 seed-upsets but I am not doing the work of looking for Pablo-upsets. I threw a few asterisks on matches where, whether Pablo got it right or wrong, it indicated that the higher seed that lost was seeded far too high.

waiting for Flo to (re)post the session 1 upsets to compare Pablo to seeds...

stout on stout action comin'

So Bailey got hit for stalling 4 times in the third and won on RT? yuck

Love that Milani won his 125 prelim. Wasn't a starter at the beginning of the year, wasn't supposed to be the starter with Ungar trying to move down. Upset Sotelo to get into the tournament, avoids the BBQ. Sure, he's getting tossed into a woodchipper against Lilledahl, but that's not the point!

Fernandez v Whelan first round is a rematch of an upset in the Ivy semis Ramirez 3x R12 has another tricky path to the podium. Barraclough in the QF and the blood round is always tough but potential candidates (aside from the top-12 seeds that are a danger to everyone) are Paddy Gallagher and Ivy rival Cesar Alvan (who he has beaten, but has put real scares into him).

It's true. There are plenty of people who wrestled the same four pre-2025 seasons as Starocci. The difference between Starocci and the others is that Starocci is undefeated in the postseason.

Removing placement points: Penn St.: 150 (-3.5) Iowa: 87 (0 - Pablo has Iowa with 7 AAs who all lose medal round matches lol) Ok. St.: 76.5 (-1) Nebraska: 69 (-1.5) Ohio St.: 59 (-1.5) Minnesota: 46 (-1.5 leapfrogs Illinois) Illinois: 45.5 (-2.5) N. Iowa: 41.5 (-2) Cornell: 34 (-1) Mizzou: 32.5 (-1) I keep thinking about what a miserable Saturday that would be for Iowa fans. You get 7 guys going in the afternoon and evening and it's just loss after loss from Ayala to Buchanan.

almost certainly not. i mean, it's america - anyone can sue for anything - but i don't know what damages anyone can claim they suffered that you could assign a monetary value to. it's more likely that you could convince a judge to issue an injunction but it's probably already too late to sue for that since you've had days to think about it and the tournament starts tomorrow.

It was meant to be back-of-a-napkin; all of the flaws you point out are ones I was aware of - that's why I put all the methodology (lol) up front. This is the same thing unless you mean "did I award advancement points in the consolation bracket." I did. I learned from reading another thread today that my calclations are already a little off because I gave an advancement point for winning the title match and that's apparently wrong. My scoring was: 1: 5+16=21 2: 4+12=16 3: 3+1+10=14 4: 3+.5+9=12.5 5: 2+1+7=10 6: 2+.5+6=8.5 7: 2+1+4=7 8: 2+.5+3=5.5 I am not going to go back and fix it, but if medal rounds do not get advancement points, all champs would lose a point for team score and all 3/5/7 would lose .5 for team score.

Please, I beg you. Go to the cities you think are on fire. They are fine. We are fine. I have no other comment on this because I have no interest in getting into political arguments on a college wrestling board. I'm with @NormMacDonald (RIP).

I would be stunned if they rescore the season. Any effect it might have on seeding would be swamped by the risk that they learn something that alters the scoring of the at-large pool. They aren't even letting the guy he beat in the conference tournament take his automatic bid.

hell, can't anyone? Using standard tournament scoring, assuming everything is chalk according to Pablo rating, nobody gets bonus points, and I only account for medal winners (no advancement points for anyone Pablo-ranked below top-8), here are the top 10: Penn St.: 153.5 Iowa: 87 Ok. St.: 77.5 Nebraska: 70.5 Ohio St.: 60.5 Illinois: 48 Minnesota: 47.5 N. Iowa: 43.5 Cornell: 35 Mizzou: 33.5 I did this by hand, so the odds I screwed up a little are incalculable.

Did you post projected team standings based on the revamped Pablo? Could you?

You're thinking in terms of how it affects the ultimate accuracy; I was thinking more like a dreary bean counter. It isn't much of a concern; I'm bored at work.

AJ (because he's a cornball and also, reasons) and Gable (because it would be shocking and also, reasons) are the two I'd want to see go down.

No worries! I was more interested in figuring out where the sources diverged than casting blame for the divergence. This isn't for publication in pursuit of tenure. I wouldn't run down and sort out the redshirts either!

Re: Orine https://www.wrestlestat.com/wrestler/56908/orine-kai/profile

I'm trying to translate the rankings and ratings in my head, @Pablo, so please let me know if I have this correct: 1) The Rankings column is literally in the order of the odds but they are numbered by the "objective" rating. I'm curious how/why these would diverge. I have an instinct (a "bad" draw by the Pablo numbers) but wouldn't mind a more fulsome explanation. 2) I quoted 133 because Kai Orine is NR but by my count he had 10 matches at 133 by the end of tournament season. 3) Again, looking at 133, I see that (a) there are 33 wrestlers, so I'm going to assume this is the tournament field and (b) there is no 4 or 8 (and probably others). Should I assume one of those missing is Ryan Crookham, and the full numerical list includes wrestlers who are either redshirting, backup or injured? Thanks again for the work

i'm going to need you to reread my post and consider how much i thought about redshirt standards

I want to be there for Ferrari Festivus.

UCF maybe a wierd rendering of some abbreviation/rendering of "unattached"?