Wrestleknownothing

Cuz he's cool...like The Fonz

I dug this up. It covers 2009 - 2022. if I update it to include 2023 then Iowa further separates itself from the non-PSU others. The line separating dark green from light green is the median placement (also see table below). The dots represent the individual years. The greens combined are the middle two quartiles. The whiskers are the lesser of 1.5x the inter-quartile range and the most extreme value. And on that note, I bow out for the week (at least from posting data) as I soon board my flight to Belgrade.

Just found this old one using % max points through time:

Well done

Did you listen to the "You don't like tough wrestling" diatribe in 2021, or watch the Flo doc where he wants to fight someone he bumped into?

Shouldn't this be in the separated at birth thread?

I watched the second plane hit live on TV. What is you theory for how that happened? The news media (multiple companies, no less) was in on the hoax, provided with advance footage to play as if live, agreed to do that and agreed to cover it up, and basically agreed to surpass a much bigger story (the government kills its own people), and ensured that they would never have a disgruntled employee ever reveal the hoax? This stuff is so dumb, I can't believe I even responded.

Oof. I am assuming it was NOT someone with a Princeton degree who wrote this sentence: FAST FACTS ABOUT CHRIS AYRES • after Princeton had eight All-Americans ever before 2016, has coached five different ones since (Brett Harner, Matthew Kolodzik, Patrick Brucki, Patrick Glory, Quincy Monday)

But what do you do when it is the state government making the price gouging decisions? https://www.newsweek.com/gov-abbott-ordered-price-gouge-during-outages-former-texas-energy-chief-1682112 https://sanantonioreport.org/texas-supreme-court-ercot-cps-energy-winter-storm-lawsuit/#:~:text=The decision effectively dismisses CPS,municipally owned utility %241 billion.

That was due to their isolation. Other power companies could not take advantage of high rates in Texas by shipping electricity there due to the relative lack of interconnectivity.

Who do you mean by they? The free market? Texas chose their system with intent knowing that extreme high prices were a possibility. And individual customers chose a market rate plan intentionally. They could have chosen fixed rate plans, but did not. They all made these decisions assuming Texas would never be short of energy sources with which to generate eletricity. They were just wrong. Nothing criminal, just bad choices.

Are you sure that is right? One of the hallmarks of the Texas power grid is that it has very liitle connection to other grids. And every post mortem I read referred to outages in Texas due to frozen equipment and the inability of natural gas producers to deliver to electricity producers. That, combined with their relative isolation from other grids resulted in a power generation shortfall. I believe the Eastern and Western grids had sufficient power and interconnectivity such that there were no midwest blackouts. As a midwesterner, I do not recall any that winter. I think the blackouts were isolated in Texas.

In 1973, the first year D2 teams could no longer score team points in the D1 tourney, Clarion would have scored 54.5 points, which would have been good enough for fourth, and knocked BYU off the list altogether. And to answer the first part would require hand scoring the D2 teams. Interested?

Over the last 89 tournaments (all of them): Twelve teams have won a title Nineteen teams have finished runner-up Twenty two teams have placed third Thirty six teams have placed fourth

What about wrestlers with Brands name?

I played around with a few ideas yesterday while trying to avoid watching my Chicago Bears. My definition of toughest tournament probably does not match what @Fadzaev2 is looking for, but that is because my data also doesn't match his definition. Instead I decided to go with what I can say given the data I have. To that end, I dug up some of the things I had done a while back and gave them a light refresh. When I was working on my definition of the eras in collegiate wrestling (some of you will recognize this from the old board) I settled on the idea of splitting the years into eras based on a combination of: 1.) how much of the team race emphasis was placed on individual first place points, 2.) the number of All-American places, and 3.) the number of weight classes. With that criteria I came up with this: The other idea I had a while back was that the many changes in scoring over the years/eras makes if very difficult to compare first place scores, or the level of dominance of the first place team, from one era to another without making some sort of adjustment. For example, probably the most dominant team of the first era, E.C. Gallagher's 1935 Oklahoma State squad, scored a modest 36 points on their way to the title, though that was double what the runner-up scored. Meanwhile, Dan Gable's 1997 Iowa squad lapped the field with 170 points (only" 49.8% more than the runner-up). Comparing those two scores straight up is meaningless given the scoring rule changes. In an attempt account for the scoring rule changes (i.e. normalize the data) I came up with the idea of converting the total team score by dividing it by the maximum total points a team could have scored using the scoring rules at that time. If all 10 (or 7, or 8, or 11) wrestlers won all of their matches by pinfall, that would lead to a maximum team score. (I also attempted to account for the variable bracket sizes in this metric, here things may get slippery, but it also typically contributes the least to the total). Dividing the actual team score by the maximum possible team score gives us the percentage of the maximum a team scored. Using that metric 1997 Iowa, at 56.7% of max total points, still outpaces 1935 Oklahoma State, at 47.4% of max total points. With this new metric one way to look at how "difficult" a bracket is would be to sort by the champs who won with the lowest % of max points. The result is not very satisfactory. The top 10 "toughest" years by this measure are mostly in the 1930's and 1950's, with none more recent than 1974. And while that may be accurate and true, it just does not pass the sniff test. As wrestling grew it had to have gotten "tougher" to win, whatever that means. So next I looked at all of the podium positions, rather than just the top of the heap. The idea here would be the opposite of above. High % of max points for second, third and fourth place teams would be an indication of toughness. But where do you draw the line and which place do you look at? There are no strictly correct choices, but perhaps some are better than others. I finally landed on the idea of looking at the spread across the podium. At first I just looked at the difference between the % of max points for fourth place versus first place (Top 4 Spread below). Fine, but still not really scratching my itch. I finally, settled on the standard deviation of these four measures (I know, I know, just four, but whadda ya gonna do?) Of course, this measure satisfies me the most because it has years years from each of the four eras I identified above. I mean, who doesn't love a little self-congratulatory, self-referential, ego-boosting confirmation of prior ideas? NOTE ON SCORING RECORD While Iowa's 1997 total of 170 points is recognized as the scoring record, I have my doubts. Based on % of max points it is only the sixth best total. I am not sure if it matters given that the five above it are also Dan Gable coached Iowa teams. The reason 1997 does not rank at the top of the % of max points is because in 1995 bonus points for a pinfall were increased from 1 to 2 points. This significantly impacts my max points estimate. The other bonus point categories also saw major overhauls. I have not rescored any of the top 5 years using 1997 bonus point rules. Perhaps someone would be interested in doing that. Hint. Hint.

My dad, my daughter, and my money all went to Villanova. I made Jay Wright laugh with that one. I can die a happy man.

He has a "do not contact" designation in the portal, so seems like he has already made up his mind where he is going. Iowa does seem logical. And an 80% transfer starting lineup would be wild. Even more wild is it still may not be enough to crack the podium. This post is brought to you by DraftKings.

It drives me crazy that it always seems to be for mediocre or worse basketball. The games on the B1G Network and the like are never marquee match ups. Those go to the bigger outlets. That said, I love basketball. V for Villanova, V for Victory.

Yes, the same advantage, but three times as much of it.

Ice cream does. I don't.

Frozen yogurt is a weak substitute for what they serve at the PSU Creamery. I went back three days in a row, and finished my wife's all three days, as well.

Any year they wrestled in the D1 tourney is included in the 130, even the years they also wrestled D2. The bar graph, too.

This is what I have. Across 10 tournaments, 14 total. Across 9 of the last 10 calendar years (i.e. excluding 2020), 12 total. I did it both ways because it was not clear what you mean by years. And for the trivia buffs in the crowd I have UNI with 130 total AA's (includes 1 in 2020).

Have I got a deal for you. I will enslave you, beat you, whip you until your back is in shreds, lynch you if you look at or talk to my woman or any woman I deem you should not look at or talk to, sell you to someone else who will do more of the same or maybe worse, house you in a hovel, feed you poorly, and take your woman for my pleasure. But you will learn skills that will aide in your ability to obtain a livelihood. Deal?