WrestleStat Rankings - Week 11 2018-2019

[andegre_rivals]

Not much movement at the top of the rankings this week. Michigan moved down a couple spots in the rankings, it appears to be related to Embree no longer being the starter at 184.

Wisconsin moved up 8 spots this week in the dual rankings, while Iowa State moved up 4.

In tournament rankings, Virginia Tech moved up 5 spots to close at #9.

Wrestler Rankings: https://www.wrestlestat.com/rankings/starters

Dual Rankings: https://www.wrestlestat.com/rankings/dual

Tournament Rankings: https://www.wrestlestat.com/rankings/tournament

Statistical Rankings: https://www.wrestlestat.com/rankings/statistical

As always, you can create your OWN tournament rankings using the Tourney Projection Tool.

Tournament Projection Tool: https://www.wrestlestat.com/tourney/projection

One addition to the site in the last week, official roster links are now available. If it's saved for a school, there will be a link at the top of the school profile page in the white background area.

 

[Cypresspoke]

pic @ #6 and fix @ #6 ?? Stopped right there....how do you come up with these rankings?

 

[643Bsbl]

pic @ #6 and fix @ #6 ?? Stopped right there....how do you come up with these rankings?

Their rankings are stupid

 

[643Bsbl]

Fix would murder Desanto he beat Back pack already and RBY in front of Fix is a joke.

 

[lawpoke87]

Just glancing at 125 and 133 they have some serious issues with their ranking criteria. Glory ranked #2 at 125?

 

[ionel]

Their rankings are stupid

And they've received suggestions over the last couple years of simple ways to improve their formula, yet they make no change. It'd be better to just wait till mid Feb to come out with their first ranking because it really doesn't mean anything till then.

 

[OSUMatFan]

They weight previous years too high. After the Scuffle and Midlands the previous year just does not mean that much. Not sure how Glory could ever be ahead of Piccinini, but the kid is tough.

I do love the history of matches as that is great to look at before a dual.

 

[oberebo]

They weight previous years too high. After the Scuffle and Midlands the previous year just does not mean that much. Not sure how Glory could ever be ahead of Piccinini, but the kid is tough.

I do love the history of matches as that is great to look at before a dual.

I think wrestlestats is a great resource but the rankings are badly flawed to say the least and the same goes for SHP's rankings. I do commend both sites for statistics and in particular Andegre's site for making researching a match a breeze.

 

[andegre_rivals]

And they've received suggestions over the last couple years of simple ways to improve their formula, yet they make no change. It'd be better to just wait till mid Feb to come out with their first ranking because it really doesn't mean anything till then.

Far from that.

Here's a thread from TheMat forums where the OP created a scoring matrix to "Rank the Rankers". As you'll see, WrestleStat performed very poorly last year, dead last.

My algorithm guy and I made some MASSIVE changes to the algorithm over the summer, where I processed HUNDREDS of simulations (4 years X 20 weeks per year) of the rankings to improve those results.

We made massive improvements (the algorithm that is currently running for 2019). With the current algorithm, it goes from dead-last for 2018 season, to now #1 with a score of 572.

Obviously there are still some glaring anomolies, but we are continuing to improve it each and every year. It's those [bad] anomolies that make it look like the entire algorithm doesn't work, when that in fact is just not true.

http://board.themat.com/index.php?/topic/17133-rank-the-rankers/&tab=comments#comment-346140

 

[Wrassler17]

Far from that.

Here's a thread from TheMat forums where the OP created a scoring matrix to "Rank the Rankers". As you'll see, WrestleStat performed very poorly last year, dead last.

My algorithm guy and I made some MASSIVE changes to the algorithm over the summer, where I processed HUNDREDS of simulations (4 years X 20 weeks per year) of the rankings to improve those results.

We made massive improvements (the algorithm that is currently running for 2019). With the current algorithm, it goes from dead-last for 2018 season, to now #1 with a score of 572.

Obviously there are still some glaring anomolies, but we are continuing to improve it each and every year. It's those [bad] anomolies that make it look like the entire algorithm doesn't work, when that in fact is just not true.

http://board.themat.com/index.php?/topic/17133-rank-the-rankers/&tab=comments#comment-346140

You obviously invest a lot of time & effort in your website and I think the wrestling community as a whole really appreciates it. It's a great resource and I look at it often.

I think people are just trying to better understand the rankings piece. If the goal is to have the rankings that best predict NCAA results, then why not base them on the current season (or a rolling 12 months) rather than career results? Or maybe have 2 sets of rankings, season & career?

Just trying to provide some feedback, not looking to criticize...