1. 16 placement + 4 advancement = 20 points
2. 12 placement + 4 advancement = 16 points
3. 10 placement + 3.5 advancement = 13.5 points
4. 9 placement + 3.5 advancement = 12.5 points
5. 7 placement + 3 advancement = 10 points
6. 6 placement + 3 advancement = 9 points
7. 4 placement + 2.5 advancement = 6.5 points
8. 3 placement + 2.5 advancement = 5.5 points
9-12 2 advancement = 2.0 points
13-16 1.5 advancement = 1.5 points
Rankings aren't perfect. They aren't something to be taken as law for one wrestler being better than another. However, I do believe they are good for the sport of wrestling in terms of prompting discussion and promoting athletes. Many articles and press releases will boast what a school's team and athletes have achieved in the latest rankings and this is well-deserved praise. Friends and families of wrestlers deserve to boast not only of their athlete's individual victories, but that those victories have been validated with a spot in the polls. And while rankings are constantly contradicted week after week as lower or non-ranked wrestlers defeat those above them in the polls, any flaws in the rankings are only so damaging, since the sport of wrestling allows for everything to be settled with postseason tournaments.
Obviously, individual rankings are only part of the equation. In wrestling, the performance of each individual adds up to the performance of a team. However, wrestling is unique in that it is two vastly different forms of team competition: dual meet and tournament. A strong dual meet team doesn't necessarily equal of strong tournament team and vice versa. Ranking teams in terms of dual meet strength is relatively easy as the squads face off against each other week after week, painting a reasonably clear picture of which team is stronger than which. It's not perfect as some squads happen to match up perfectly against teams that do better against the same competition. Moreover, some teams face each other more than once during the season with different results. But any difficulties in ranking teams dual-meet-wise are very minor when compared to ranking teams in terms of tournament strength. Yes, teams compete in tournaments throughout the season in which points are kept, but the problem with each of these tournaments is that they aren't against the whole field.
At this season's Southern Scuffle in December, Missouri beat out Minnesota to claim the title. It would be easy to say that Missouri should then be ranked as a stronger tournament team. Maybe, but it's not quite as simple as that. Missouri got 10 placement points from Ashtin Primus at 141 pounds … as did Minnesota from Jayson Ness at 125 pounds. Ness is currently ranked fifth in the nation and Primus is unranked (RevWrestling.com). If those rankings held up at the NCAA's (and obviously, they often do not), Ness would get 7 placement points and Primus would get none.
The NCAA tournament is filled with unpredictability, but two things are certain: placement points and (to a lesser extent) advancement points. An NCAA champion will, with one-hundred percent certainty, get 16 placement points and at least 4 advancement points for a total of at least 20 points. If the weight class has a pigtail round and/or the athlete scores bonus points along the way, there's some room for more, but 20 is the minimum. Calculations for the other finishers can be made using the same method, although there is some room for error depending on when a wrestler entered the consolation round. If a wrestler lost in the opening round and then battled back to the consolation finals, 3 advancement points would be earned along the way. If the same wrestler made the semis, then lost and won again to make the consolation finals, 3.5 advancement points would be earned.
Any pollster will tell you that ranking individuals becomes increasingly difficult after you get past the top 12 or so wrestlers and in terms of team tourney calculating, wrestlers who finish lower than the Round of 16 score only a negligible amount of team points.
The problem with this system, as mentioned before, is that it doesn't take into account bonus points. It gives the same 20 points to a pinning machine like Ben Askren of Missouri as it does to a Dustin Schlatter of Minnesota, who wins consistently, but often only by very narrow margins. While it might be possible to come up with some sort of prediction of bonus points based on the percentage of major decisions, technical falls, and pins that a wrestler scores throughout the season, such calculations would not only be cumbersome, but only worth so much. It's very difficult to know who's going to go on a rampage for the Big Show. At the Big 12's, Oklahoma State won the event, but really didn't do much in terms of bonus points with only 4. However, at the NCAA Championships, they truly went to town, amassing a whopping 26.5. Therefore, I find it more prudent to just leave bonus points alone. And go with point estimates that will probably be lower than actual points earned at the Big Show, but equally lower for each team."
The total points from all the ranked wrestlers on each team will determine the team rankings. These totals will also be included in the rankings.
Recommended Comments
There are no comments to display.
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now