Kansas Wrestling Forums General Discussion High School State Bracketing

How impossible would it be to seed the brakets for state to see the best possible match ups for the finals? Similar to how college does nationals. I mean sometimes the best matches are in the semis and then the finals match isn't even close...

Too subjective to seed. Too many kid in each bracket spread over to large an area. The KSHSA random pairing is fair and eliminates the squabling between coache (and people on this forum). If you look at the surrounding state's procedure I think they also use the random/pre established process.

There has been a great proposal presented to the KWCA about this very issue, by Coach Alley, I believe. It is a written procedure for separating only the regional champs based on certain factors (previous year state finishes, etc.). The idea is to be sure to not have the standout top 2 kids meet in the semis if at all possible. And if none of the criteria applied, then the bracket did the random placement as the brackets are done now.

I am not sure what happened to the proposal at the KSHSAA level??

Any help anyone?

Still to objective. Region first place finishers have to be considered equals. If not, a dog and cat fight to seed. Could do a ticket sellout-standing room only at the seeding meeting. After Chief's rankings, ever read the comments, questions, ifs, ands, buts, bitches, why nots, howevers, so and so beat charley-but jimmy john beat so and so, in kids wresatling johnny 2 years ago.........., etc.

KISS principle: KEEP IT SIMPLE S....D Thats what the KSHSAA random seeding does, and that's why you have not heard that it is or has been considered by KWCA or KSHSAA.. Too much diddling around---and last year does not count for this year!

I think Kit's proposal makes perfect sense.. IF there is no criteria met then they go to random placement.. Chiefs rankings have more questions and ifs due to them being ALL class rather than 4 divisions split up.. If you set the criteria in stone then what ifs, buts, and why nots will be irrelevent..

Nothing gets set in stone. Chief's class rankings generate the same ifs, ors and buts.

What do you say to the regional 4th placer who gets switched to wrestle a supposedly higher ranked regional first placer. Criteria is criteria--like b..t holes, every on has one.

If random seeding is bad, why do other states use it. Why, to take out the subjectivity.

Bad idea.

Again I repectively disagree.. And I would tell the 4th place finisher that gets swapped to train/wrestle harder! I would rather cater to a 1st place finisher than a 4th place finisher as would most fans/spectators of the sport..

10-4 to that, concur.
If we are going to cater, it should definitely be to the 1st place finisher.

Found it!

Proposal presented by Coach Alley. I think it is a good one to consider. The "outstanding record" criteria would need some definition, or be removed. The point is to avoid those situations were we have 2 returning state champs, finalists, etc., meet in the semis when they have proven themselves (by said criteria listed) to be the top two standout wrestlers. All other placers will still work themselves out in the bracket as they do now.

=============================

State Wrestling Championship Seeding

In order to make the State Wrestling Tournament more competitive for the athletes as well as more exciting for the fans, we need to seed the participants. Many times, the most evenly matched competitors are paired in the semifinals, which takes some of the excitement from the finals.

The KSHSAA could resolve this by seeding the regional finalists and still use the current formula for all remaining placers. I realize this has been discussed in the past, but with a few specific seeding criteria, this could be accomplished without delaying the pairings. The result will be a more evenly balanced semifinal round and the opportunity for returning state finalists to meet in the finals match.

Proposed Seeding Criteria
Unlike the criteria for an invitational tournament, these criteria are specific and listed in order of preference. Only the regional champions will be seeded and all other placers from their regional will follow the formula according to their champion’s placement.

Seeding Criteria
1. Returning state champion at same weight
2. Returning state champion
3. Previous state placer
4. Regional championship over a state placer
5. Outstanding record

These criteria suggestions could easily separate opponents and help showcase our state finals. There will be individuals who meet these criteria, but may not be the regional champion. They are not seeded. They lost their seeding criteria by not placing first in their regional.

Seeding Procedure
All regional tournaments will report results to the KSHSAA and have them placed into the formula as in the past. Once pairings are made, they will be reviewed by a panel of three former coaches for each classification. This would require 12 individuals to be assigned by the KSHSAA. These 12 would meet for approximately two hours, review the pairings and make necessary adjustments to the A, B, C & D assignments in order to separate the seeds.

In some weight classes, the computer program will take care of things automatically. In most cases, it would be a simple matter of switching two regional placements into the formula.

The brackets would still show no preference to a specific location of the first through fourth seed. The goal is to separate the top competitors by use of the criteria.

The seeding criteria are only suggestions and with review, might need to be revised. We should limit the number of criteria to no more than five.

At the end of the day though to be a state champion you have to beat everyone in the bracket. I think separating and trying to seed would hurt the small programs that don't have a great budget and have to stick to low tier tournaments. You may have a stud kid that wins a tough regional, but gets the shaft due to "strength of schedule" Teams that are in a title hunt and see they have a "bad draw" may throw tantrums and try to dodge and duck guys they know are superior. Leave it as is... I think one of the NCAA divisions does the same way.

Colorado STATE TOURNAMENT BRACKET SEEDING
In all classes, the four regional champions will be seeded into the bracket on the four top locations using a criteria based on points for previous state placing.
Champ 6 pts. Example: A regional champion was a
2nd 5 pts. 4th place finisher as a sophomore, a
3rd 4 pts. 2nd place finisher as a junior. He
4th 3 pts. would have 8 points toward seeding
5th 2 pts. for this tournament.
6th 1 pt.
The location of these four wrestlers would set the bracket location for all other competitors.

Kansas proposed State Tournament Seeding Criteria of four regional bracket champions
1. Returning state champion at same weight
2. Returning state champion
3. Previous state placer
4. Regional championship over a state placer
5. Outstanding record

Recommend the Colorado criteria. Has only one criterion---previous state tournament results. Kansas proposed criteria similiar but has criteria other than state top 6 placings, plus I like the simple point system. Regional championship over a state placer and outstanding record are superflurous----makes Kansas proposed criteria too subjective and open to dispute and arguements. KISS!!!

Still do not see the need. If top two meet in a semi--so what? Best man still wins---and should win the championship. Crowd does not come to see just one match. Too much diddling around.

Would the above hurt a stud freshman that obviously is in 1st year of high school and hasn't been to state? Example: Some kid was a 5th place finisher last year as a junior, then you have a freshman like Taegen Lambotte that comes to mind. Does the junior have 2 and Taegen 0? Assume they haven't wrestled as well.

That is false. To be a state champion you have to beat the opposing wrestler advancing on the winning wrestler's side of the bracket. In a sixteen (16) person bracket the champion will wrestle and win four (4) matches.

No system is going to provide for every scenario.

Point well taken.