Toggle sidebar

Is Third The New First? - The "What Was PJ Duke Thinking?" Edition

J

jstross

Senior
Oct 28, 2005
251
566
93
I'm in favor of leaving it alone. Wrestlers going for bonus is exciting so reducing the incentive on the backside to go for bonus would be counter productive, IMHO. If wrestlers on the topside want more points go for it. 2-1 TB matches are boring, mostly. Let it fly. Don't punish a wrestler on the backside because he wrestled a SV, TB style opponent.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Headlock, Roar More, Bob_Anderson and 16 others
E

Efejle

All-Conference
Apr 30, 2023
890
2,089
93
Sorry but this smacks of MSU158 trying to postulate any way possible of beating Penn State. It reads like a freaking thesis/dissertation 😂.
 
Still in State Colllege

Still in State Colllege

Senior
Oct 12, 2021
581
987
93
This is definitely a solution in search of a problem. As the article states wrestling is trying to generate action. Action is take downs, turns and pins. If a guy goes through his bracket and everything is a decision, why should he have more points than a third-place finisher that bonuses their way to the semis and gets upset but wrestles back to third with more bonus. I say good for him, and he deserves to score more team points than a champ that wins every match 4-1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Headlock, NoVaLion, Roar More and 3 others
N

Nitlion1986

All-Conference
Apr 13, 2024
1,605
4,773
113
It is an article made to generate clicks and conversation. Nothing wrong with that.

Of course a 3 point takedown was a solution looking for a problem and it got instituted and solved nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: railbirrd
Psalm 1 guy

Psalm 1 guy

All-Conference
Nov 3, 2019
1,161
4,445
113
manatree said:
That was a Jimmy Cinnabon post with some math sprinkled in.
Click to expand...
Don't you put that on Wrestleknownothing!
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Headlock, Misalorales and Wrestleknownothing
W

Wrestleknownothing

All-Conference
Oct 30, 2021
1,711
4,552
113
B1gwheeze said:
This is a nice analysis, but for me the key issue is would this change the top 4 placing teams. Or, in general, how would this affect the team score.
Click to expand...
Halving consolation bracket bonus points would have changed the podium in 7 of the last 25 tournaments.
  • In 2004 Lehigh would have moved from a tie for third to solo third, Nebraska would have moved from fifth to fourth, and Ohio State would have dropped from a tie for third to fifth.
  • In 2005 Cornell would have moved up from fourth to a tie for third.
  • In 2008 Nebraska would have moved from fourth place tie with Ohio State to solo fourth.
  • In 2009 Ohio State would moved up from second into a tie for the title with Iowa.
  • In 2016 Iowa would have moved from fifth to fourth, swapping with Virginia Tech.
  • In 2018 Michigan would have moved from a tie for fourth to solo fourth, dropping NC State to fifth.
  • In 2024 Michigan would have moved from third to second, swapping with Cornell.

Overall, across the last 25 tournaments it would decrease scoring by 4.9%
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: B1gwheeze, BriantheLion, WPIALBrwnPSU and 2 others
1

1995PSUGrad

All-Conference
Nov 16, 2019
786
1,166
93
Wrestleknownothing said:
One to enjoy over your morning coffee.

Or get angry about.

wrestling.guru

Orange is the New Black and Third is the New First | Wrestling.Guru

FloWrestling's Kyle Klingman recently wrote an article examining NCAA tournament scoring anomalies (Is 3rd Better Than 1st...). One of the main concern ...
wrestling.guru wrestling.guru
Click to expand...
I found the article interesting. I don't think there should be a situation where it's impossible for the winner to score fewer points that the guy who finishes third. I know that it may happen often because of wrestling styles and our guys score more bonus points, but that's a different issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wrestleknownothing
E

Efejle

All-Conference
Apr 30, 2023
890
2,089
93
This post should go over much better on the Cowboy site, especially since that is the origin of the idea
 
B

B1gwheeze

Redshirt
Jan 5, 2020
6
11
3
Wrestleknownothing said:
Halving consolation bracket bonus points would have changed the podium in 7 of the last 25 tournaments.
  • In 2004 Lehigh would have moved from a tie for third to solo third, Nebraska would have moved from fifth to fourth, and Ohio State would have dropped from a tie for third to fifth.
  • In 2005 Cornell would have moved up from fourth to a tie for third.
  • In 2008 Nebraska would have moved from fourth place tie with Ohio State to solo fourth.
  • In 2009 Ohio State would moved up from second into a tie for the title with Iowa.
  • In 2016 Iowa would have moved from fifth to fourth, swapping with Virginia Tech.
  • In 2018 Michigan would have moved from a tie for fourth to solo fourth, dropping NC State to fifth.
  • In 2024 Michigan would have moved from third to second, swapping with Cornell.

Overall, across the last 25 tournaments it would decrease scoring by 4.9%
Click to expand...
Not insignificant if a team moves from no-trophy to trophy or vice versa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wrestleknownothing
M

mickpsu

Freshman
Jul 27, 2014
61
92
18
jstross said:
I love the 3 point take down. I still hate refs refusal to call stalling early and often. that's the problem, or a big part of it imo.
Click to expand...
From my perspective, I would like wrestling in general to move away from the concept of STALLING (negative word, most officials would rather not call) and move more to the freestyle philosophy of PASSIVITY (wrestler not 'engaging' offensively). Heck, the 2nd official at dual meets and tournaments could finally do something constructive rather than just circle around the mat opposite the match official.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: railbirrd and Psalm 1 guy
Headlock

Headlock

All-Conference
Dec 28, 2023
671
1,403
93
Wrestleknownothing said:
Halving consolation bracket bonus points would have changed the podium in 7 of the last 25 tournaments.
  • In 2004 Lehigh would have moved from a tie for third to solo third, Nebraska would have moved from fifth to fourth, and Ohio State would have dropped from a tie for third to fifth.
  • In 2005 Cornell would have moved up from fourth to a tie for third.
  • In 2008 Nebraska would have moved from fourth place tie with Ohio State to solo fourth.
  • In 2009 Ohio State would moved up from second into a tie for the title with Iowa.
  • In 2016 Iowa would have moved from fifth to fourth, swapping with Virginia Tech.
  • In 2018 Michigan would have moved from a tie for fourth to solo fourth, dropping NC State to fifth.
  • In 2024 Michigan would have moved from third to second, swapping with Cornell.

Overall, across the last 25 tournaments it would decrease scoring by 4.9%
Click to expand...
Before anybody is moved by the data, in each labeled year, teams were governed by the rules in place at the time. Naturally rule modifications can change outcomes. The typical rationale for rule change is to eliminate harm without "throwing the baby out with the H2O. No rules are without exceptions. Shall we govern by exception?
 
M

Misalorales

All-Conference
Jun 3, 2025
1,182
3,608
113
Smee said:
This^. Plus, it's Flo. Has anything good (or useful) ever come from there? Asking for a friend!
Click to expand...
The article posted only quotes and references of a flo article...The article, in my opinion, was a great deep dive into what others have referenced for quite a while. The oddity of placing lower and outscoring the guy or guys who placed ahead of you. Didn't seem to draw any conclusions, just laid out facts and stats. Just feels like you saw "flo" and didn't bother reading anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom