MassWrestling.com
Welcome
Username:

Password:


Remember me

[ ]
[ ]
Online
Guests: 14, Members: 0 ...

most ever online: 859
Members: 9967
Newest: Matthew Allen
Support MassWrestling. Click a link!







Forums
MassWrestling.com :: Forums :: Results

MA 2015 All-States: Some data from Day 1 
deepbrook
Sat Feb 28 2015, 07:19AM
Registered Member #11658
Joined: Fri Feb 10 2012, 04:45PM
Posts: 59
No idea if others do this analysis, or if this analysis is even valid, but I thought I'd throw it out there for comment. Disclosure: my sons wrestled D3.

I took a look at all of the Day 1 matches--there were 334. Of these, 85 were upsets, where I defined an upset as a match where a lesser seeded wrestler beat a better seeded wrestler regardless of division. That is, it would be an upset if D1_4 beat D2_3.

Of these upsets:
  • 50 had a D1 or D2 wrestler beat a D2 or D3 wrestler (that is, the higher division won)

  • 19 had an upset within a division

  • 16 had a D2 or D3 wrestler beat a D1 or D2 wrestler (that is, the lower division won)


This would appear to confirm the hypothesis that, on average, the higher the division, the better the wrestler.

There were 37 matches in which wrestlers of equal seed faced off. Of these matches:
  • 23 had the higher division win

  • 14 had the lower division win


This too would appear to confirm the "higher division hypothesis."

Again, I'd love feedback on the validity of this analysis or how to improve it. I'll do it again for Day 2--perhaps the effect lessens as we get closer to the podium, which might suggest not that the higher divisions are better overall, but rather, simply deeper.
GrayDawg
Sat Feb 28 2015, 08:40AM
Registered Member #4288
Joined: Thu Sep 07 2006, 09:05PM
Posts: 530
Deepbrook, thanks for the stats.... a very unique insight behind the wrestling occurring in Salem this weekend. Would you consider removing, from your "upset" numbers, all the matches where a 4 Seed beat a 3 Seed and see how the numbers then shake out?

I request this, because in most people's eyes, the difference between a 4 seed and a 3 seed in most cases is SO SLIM, we really shouldn't categorize a 4 beating a 3 as an upset.

Also, for your consideration- if we are headed down the road of "D1 wrestling weights are deeper than D3", then i would submit that for increased validity of this calculation, ANY victory by a D3 wrestler seeded 4th, 5th or 6th over ANY D1 wrestler be considered as an upset. As normalization of these criteria prior to analysis and after initial data collection is standard statistical protocol. I'm sure NB135 would have NO PROBLEM with that!
Medic5392
Sat Feb 28 2015, 09:25AM
Registered Member #6539
Joined: Tue Dec 11 2007, 04:11PM
Posts: 847
I think you have to keep some "variables" in mind when comparing the quality of the divisions.

1.) Division 1 has the majority of the traditional powers in it-Lowell, Chelmsford, SC, etc...and now even Franklin.

2.) Division 2 has the rest of the traditional powers in wrestling-North Andover, Central Catholic, Tewksbury, etc...

3.) Division 3 does not have the traditional powers and a culture and tradition of wrestling helps a lot in this sport.

4.) Depth is the same as overall quality if a D1-6 consistently beats a D3-3, but it should all be irrelevant to me since that is not an argument for taking away D3 entries.

The only thing might make some people stop complaining is to increase the numbers of All State qualifiers to top 8 per division, but then you have to factor in the usual culprits that hold up anything in life-Time and Money.

If you had 24 kids in the All States would it be feasible in terms of money and time?

There is no valid reason for having fewer kids from D3 to go to All States, there is a valid reasoning for increasing participation, but that comes right back to that logistics issue.

I think participating in the All States gives kids a wake up call for the next year and helps gain more interest in the sport while also ensuring we have ONE champ as opposed to 3. It is a great system.

People also have to remember that a lot of kids might lose early in the season and peak towards the end, that happens a lot with both individuals and teams. It is called improving yourself by correcting mistakes, increasing your conditioning, etc...so, while a D1 kid might win over a D3 kid early on, maybe that kid comes back and wins at the end of the year, it happens with teams all the time too. It is the fairest sport in the world, can't blame someone else for your mistakes, conditioning, etc...it is all on you. Once in a while a Ref makes a bad call, but 99% of the time it is on you and on the coach to have the team improve over the year and All States is where the improvement can shine through.

So, the only thing that I think should be changed about the All State is make top 8 from each division a qualifier and if people still complain then they are the types who would complain that the bags of gold they are carrying are too heavy. Again, just MHO, but no matter what happens with changes they would have to be weighed against the factors of time and money like everything else in life. And everything else in life is not perfect either.

BLUF: It is a good system, we are lucky to have it (I wish the NCAAs would go back to when D3-1 and D2-1&2 Qualified for D1s). Only thing that might make it better is a bigger venue, more fans and more participants, everything else is settled on the mat. That goes for the team title too.

deepbrook
Sun Mar 01 2015, 05:13PM
Registered Member #11658
Joined: Fri Feb 10 2012, 04:45PM
Posts: 59
GrayDawg, good suggestion about defining an upset as a difference of at least two seeds (that is, it's an upset if a 4 beats a 2 but NOT if a 4 beats a 3).

Here's the updated analysis for Day 1 (I'll look at Day 2 and overall separately):

334 Day 1 matches
43 upsets
  • A higher division (1 or 2) upset a lower division (2 or 3) 28 times

  • A lower division upset a higher division 7 times

  • There were 8 upsets within a division
deepbrook
Sun Mar 01 2015, 05:16PM
Registered Member #11658
Joined: Fri Feb 10 2012, 04:45PM
Posts: 59
Day 2: 140 matches, 13 upsets (9% of matches, vs. 13% on Day 1)
  • A higher division (1 or 2) upset a lower division (2 or 3) 7 times

  • A lower division upset a higher division 0 times

  • There were 6 upsets within a division
deepbrook
Sun Mar 01 2015, 05:37PM
Registered Member #11658
Joined: Fri Feb 10 2012, 04:45PM
Posts: 59
I took a look at the number of programs in an "alignment" document from May 2013 (prior to the beginning of LAST season). That document shows the following number of programs by division.
  • Div1: 63

  • Div2: 58

  • Div3: 97


So, while it may be true that wrestlers from higher divisions are more likely to beat better seeded wrestlers from lower divisions, the equal apportionment of slots at All-States short-changes Div3.
deepbrook
Sun Mar 01 2015, 05:50PM
Registered Member #11658
Joined: Fri Feb 10 2012, 04:45PM
Posts: 59
Several other pieces of information:
  • Of the 42 wrestlers placing in the top 3, 39 were 1 or 2 seeds

  • Of the 84 wrestlers placing in the top 6 (and therefore advancing to New Englands), there were

  • - 5 seeds: 2 (1 Div1 placed 6th and 1 Div2 placed 5th)

  • - 6 seeds: 1 (1 Div1 placed 6th)

  • - 7 seeds: 2 (2 Div1 placed 6th)


So, while it's possible that a shift to more higher division wrestlers at All-States might result in an occasional advancement of one of these wrestlers to New Englands, these would likely be few and far between. And, these additions wouldn't threaten the top steps of the podium.
Chase112
Sun Mar 01 2015, 06:19PM
Registered Member #13675
Joined: Sun Dec 22 2013, 12:54PM
Posts: 39
I'd use the term upset very conservatively. At this stage of the postseason, everyone is so good that the talent levels are close, save for your elites (Viruet, Hoehn, Ryan etc...). The only true upset, I believe, was Jacobson pinning Aquino. Don't call something an upset just based on the numbers attached to the names.
Medic5392
Sun Mar 01 2015, 06:41PM
Registered Member #6539
Joined: Tue Dec 11 2007, 04:11PM
Posts: 847
deepbrook wrote ...

I took a look at the number of programs in an "alignment" document from May 2013 (prior to the beginning of LAST season). That document shows the following number of programs by division.
  • Div1: 63

  • Div2: 58

  • Div3: 97


So, while it may be true that wrestlers from higher divisions are more likely to beat better seeded wrestlers from lower divisions, the equal apportionment of slots at All-States short-changes Div3.



Are there actually 97 wrestling programs in D3? Or are you going by schools in D3?
t3chfa11
Sun Mar 01 2015, 07:30PM
Registered Member #14186
Joined: Tue Dec 09 2014, 06:48AM
Posts: 71
Only 63 in D1?
t3chfa11
Sun Mar 01 2015, 07:32PM
Registered Member #14186
Joined: Tue Dec 09 2014, 06:48AM
Posts: 71
Looking at the numbers:
Champs:
D1- 6, D2- 4, D3- 4
Finalist:
D1- 12, D2- 8, D3-8
New England Qualifiers ( Top 6 )
D1- 38, D2- 24, D3- 22
Placers ( Top 8 )
D1- 48, D2- 35, D3- 29

To help prove the "higher division hypothesis".
t3chfa11
Sun Mar 01 2015, 07:33PM
Registered Member #14186
Joined: Tue Dec 09 2014, 06:48AM
Posts: 71
t3chfa11 wrote ...

Looking at the numbers:
Champs:
D1- 6, D2- 4, D3- 4
Finalist:
D1- 12, D2- 8, D3-8
New England Qualifiers ( Top 6 )
D1- 38, D2- 24, D3- 22
Placers ( Top 8 )
D1- 48, D2- 35, D3- 29

To help prove the "higher division hypothesis".

Not that that i necessarily agree with it, but I see where the people who do are coming from.
speedkills
Sun Mar 01 2015, 07:37PM
Registered Member #8281
Joined: Sat Dec 27 2008, 10:44AM
Posts: 305
GrayDawg wrote ...

Deepbrook, thanks for the stats.... a very unique insight behind the wrestling occurring in Salem this weekend. Would you consider removing, from your "upset" numbers, all the matches where a 4 Seed beat a 3 Seed and see how the numbers then shake out?

I request this, because in most people's eyes, the difference between a 4 seed and a 3 seed in most cases is SO SLIM, we really shouldn't categorize a 4 beating a 3 as an upset.

Also, for your consideration- if we are headed down the road of "D1 wrestling weights are deeper than D3", then i would submit that for increased validity of this calculation, ANY victory by a D3 wrestler seeded 4th, 5th or 6th over ANY D1 wrestler be considered as an upset. As normalization of these criteria prior to analysis and after initial data collection is standard statistical protocol. I'm sure NB135 would have NO PROBLEM with that!




Sorry, completely disagree. a 3rd place finisher I would include. In many tournaments, a 3rd place finisher, may beat the # 2nd place, but didn't have a chance to wrestle that side of the bracket. I consider a 3rd finish = to a 2nd place finisher in many tournaments. They have to wrestle back and beat both sides of the bracket to get this result. Just my opinion.
GeorgeTheAnimal
Sun Mar 01 2015, 08:53PM
Registered Member #2426
Joined: Tue Nov 08 2005, 02:21PM
Posts: 54
Have to agree with speedkills, the path to third can be very difficult, I'd like to see the result comparisons on 2-seeds compared to 3-seeds.
deepbrook
Mon Mar 02 2015, 06:36AM
Registered Member #11658
Joined: Fri Feb 10 2012, 04:45PM
Posts: 59
@Medic5392, good question, I'm not sure whether those numbers are schools or programs. Is there any place that lists programs and wrestlers within those programs? That would be interesting to see.
CoachB
Mon Mar 02 2015, 07:16AM
Registered Member #303
Joined: Fri Apr 09 2004, 08:24PM
Posts: 486
deepbrook wrote ...

@Medic5392, good question, I'm not sure whether those numbers are schools or programs. Is there any place that lists programs and wrestlers within those programs? That would be interesting to see.

There is no way there are that many programs in D3. D3W has around 20 teams and is by far the largest section in the state. Look at past sectional results and add up the number of schools.
There are probably around 64 D3 programs in MA.
coachskp
Mon Mar 02 2015, 07:31AM
Registered Member #847
Joined: Wed Dec 15 2004, 11:37AM
Posts: 909
CoachB wrote ...

deepbrook wrote ...

@Medic5392, good question, I'm not sure whether those numbers are schools or programs. Is there any place that lists programs and wrestlers within those programs? That would be interesting to see.

There is no way there are that many programs in D3. D3W has around 20 teams and is by far the largest section in the state. Look at past sectional results and add up the number of schools.
You are probably looking at around 64 D3 programs in MA.

you may be looking at "participating schools" which would include co-ops as two or three even if it is only one team
At one point I looked and one of the Boston teams was co-oped with like 12 schools
youthwrestlingdad
Mon Mar 02 2015, 08:16AM
Registered Member #11006
Joined: Tue Feb 08 2011, 02:32PM
Posts: 152
speedkills wrote ...

GrayDawg wrote ...

Deepbrook, thanks for the stats.... a very unique insight behind the wrestling occurring in Salem this weekend. Would you consider removing, from your "upset" numbers, all the matches where a 4 Seed beat a 3 Seed and see how the numbers then shake out?

I request this, because in most people's eyes, the difference between a 4 seed and a 3 seed in most cases is SO SLIM, we really shouldn't categorize a 4 beating a 3 as an upset.

Also, for your consideration- if we are headed down the road of "D1 wrestling weights are deeper than D3", then i would submit that for increased validity of this calculation, ANY victory by a D3 wrestler seeded 4th, 5th or 6th over ANY D1 wrestler be considered as an upset. As normalization of these criteria prior to analysis and after initial data collection is standard statistical protocol. I'm sure NB135 would have NO PROBLEM with that!




Sorry, completely disagree. a 3rd place finisher I would include. In many tournaments, a 3rd place finisher, may beat the # 2nd place, but didn't have a chance to wrestle that side of the bracket. I consider a 3rd finish = to a 2nd place finisher in many tournaments. They have to wrestle back and beat both sides of the bracket to get this result. Just my opinion.


WRONG> it is statistically impossible for a #3 finisher to beat a #2 finisher in a double elimination bracket. By definition, the # 2 finisher had only 1 loss to the bracket winner in the final.

tri_cyclist
Mon Mar 02 2015, 08:36AM
Registered Member #11553
Joined: Sun Jan 29 2012, 08:24AM
Posts: 18
You missed what he was saying. In many cases the 3rd place finisher was on the other side of the bracket from the 2nd place finisher so they never wrestled and each only lost to the winner. Meaning 2nd and 3rd place are equivalent. This is why some places in the mid west and elsewhere have started wrestling for "real 2nd" after the finals if 2 and 3 haven't wrestled in the bracket they wrestle to determine real 2nd place.
Carlascooz
Mon Mar 02 2015, 08:50AM
Registered Member #11519
Joined: Sun Jan 22 2012, 09:43PM
Posts: 250
youthwrestlingdad wrote ...

speedkills wrote ...

GrayDawg wrote ...

Deepbrook, thanks for the stats.... a very unique insight behind the wrestling occurring in Salem this weekend. Would you consider removing, from your "upset" numbers, all the matches where a 4 Seed beat a 3 Seed and see how the numbers then shake out?

I request this, because in most people's eyes, the difference between a 4 seed and a 3 seed in most cases is SO SLIM, we really shouldn't categorize a 4 beating a 3 as an upset.

Also, for your consideration- if we are headed down the road of "D1 wrestling weights are deeper than D3", then i would submit that for increased validity of this calculation, ANY victory by a D3 wrestler seeded 4th, 5th or 6th over ANY D1 wrestler be considered as an upset. As normalization of these criteria prior to analysis and after initial data collection is standard statistical protocol. I'm sure NB135 would have NO PROBLEM with that!




Sorry, completely disagree. a 3rd place finisher I would include. In many tournaments, a 3rd place finisher, may beat the # 2nd place, but didn't have a chance to wrestle that side of the bracket. I consider a 3rd finish = to a 2nd place finisher in many tournaments. They have to wrestle back and beat both sides of the bracket to get this result. Just my opinion.


WRONG> it is statistically impossible for a #3 finisher to beat a #2 finisher in a double elimination bracket. By definition, the # 2 finisher had only 1 loss to the bracket winner in the final.




I think he meant "the 3rd place finisher *could* beat the 2nd place finisher".
FMS
Mon Mar 02 2015, 07:46PM
Registered Member #156
Joined: Sat Mar 27 2004, 08:20AM
Posts: 539
How does the "regional" qualifier proposal work to even out the qualifiers for all states? Theoretically, do D1 and D2 get more qualifiers? Please explain this proposal…
nawrestler
Mon Mar 02 2015, 08:47PM
Registered Member #4570
Joined: Thu Nov 30 2006, 06:08PM
Posts: 80
There would be no divisions. South region includes all schools in geographic area. D123 all in one region
speedkills
Mon Mar 02 2015, 09:03PM
Registered Member #8281
Joined: Sat Dec 27 2008, 10:44AM
Posts: 305
tri_cyclist wrote ...

You missed what he was saying. In many cases the 3rd place finisher was on the other side of the bracket from the 2nd place finisher so they never wrestled and each only lost to the winner. Meaning 2nd and 3rd place are equivalent. This is why some places in the mid west and elsewhere have started wrestling for "real 2nd" after the finals if 2 and 3 haven't wrestled in the bracket they wrestle to determine real 2nd place.



Exactly.
Catfish
Tue Mar 03 2015, 07:02AM
Registered Member #11436
Joined: Mon Nov 14 2011, 07:52AM
Posts: 109
[quote]
Looking at the numbers:
Champs:
D1- 6, D2- 4, D3- 4
Finalist:
D1- 12, D2- 8, D3-8
New England Qualifiers ( Top 6 )
D1- 38, D2- 24, D3- 22
Placers ( Top 8 )
D1- 48, D2- 35, D3- 29


I think it is safe to say that generally their is more quality at higher divisions - the greater number of students just lends probability to the equation. The stats above show that D3 achieved at a consistent rate as D2. Since D3 has more schools with smaller programs having an equal number of particpants in state tournament expands the number of towns with a particpant. Honestly I am surprised that D3 is not getting more props for what was achieved at All State.
waf475
Tue Mar 03 2015, 07:35AM
Registered Member #11119
Joined: Sun Feb 20 2011, 09:40AM
Posts: 20
Smaller programs definitely have their challenges re wrestling.It's safe to say the stats speak volumes FOR D3. Their numbers were achieved with the top D3 wrestler unfortunately sidelined due to injury. It is safe to say they will represent Mass. quite honorably this upcoming weekend. I, for one, would like to congratulate the coaches, wrestlers, schools,clubs and D3 reps for a job well done. Congrats to D1 & D2 too! Catfish Thx for the plug
Go to page:          << Previous thread | Next thread >>

Jump:     Back to top



Moderators: Mike Atlas, CoachMiller, The Rankings Team, JMode, Shvarts, eoghanjames, Jim Maher, plm_77, jubele135, Hill Billy, psch, tourneygeek, NE_07, Sam Shames, Chicken Wing Coach, New England Rankings, matchamp99, Nuge
Click to see our RSS feeds available -->
Recent Wrestling Boxscores
see all | submit | rss

02/09/2017----------
Barnstable-40
Plymouth North-15
02/08/2017----------
Weymouth-17
Walpole-52
02/08/2017----------
North Attleboro-51
Oliver Ames-12
Newest Posts
Re: UWW WTT and Jr Nationals
Don McNeill in the qrtrs at Sr FS 97KG
Posted by coachskp
Apr 28 17 : 13:59

Re: UWW WTT and Jr Nationals
I also see Vic Avery and Mizam Tamaradze part...
Posted by coachskp
Apr 28 17 : 13:26

Re: Kevin Ward (U.S. Military Academy, West Point) Wrestling Clinic @ S.T.C.C. on Sat. May 6, 2017
Bump
Posted by Chicken Wing Coach
Apr 28 17 : 11:23

Re: AAU ATLANTIC COAST CLUB DUALS 2017, h.s., youth & women's 6/28-7/1, 2017
CJA, Easton, PA, Dungeon, Darkhoarse, NC, Sil...
Posted by Coach C
Apr 28 17 : 10:42

Re: AAU ATLANTIC COAST CLUB DUALS 2017, h.s., youth & women's 6/28-7/1, 2017
ACCD, Community& National Div.,2-day even...
Posted by Coach C
Apr 28 17 : 10:35

Re: Little Help
Steve if you get Kapwrestling to run it I wou...
Posted by OACoach
Apr 28 17 : 09:41

Re: Little Help
I would happily donate to make this a thing t...
Posted by MrBlastdoubles
Apr 27 17 : 15:04

Support MassWrestling. Click a link!