State Duals

[sk dusty brown 0]

Not sure on every match but i know a few:

Deinlien lost by 2 to Fuller of Seneca

Deinlien Pinned South oldham

And i think he also beat henry clay and union not sure on union

Shotwell Won all of his that were wrestled(union and i believe south oldham maybe more)

Schnieder lost a few close ones and pinned south oldham

Griffith Beat South Oldham i believe, Henry Clay and i believe union and maybe seneca

did shotwell beat isaac ervin from union or who did he wrestle.

[littleschool130 0]

isaac ervin was sick and didnt wrestle

[EMS Coach Cardwell 17]

Nobody is disputing their sixth place finish, but the tournament has to be run differenly in order to see who really falls where. I think it silly that tournaments like the Five Star is basically ran the same way. If you lose one match wheather it be duals or individual, there is no way that the best you can do is fifth. If this was truley a superior way of running tournaments, wouldn't the State Tournament be ran the same way?

[CCFullerHWT 1]

did shotwell beat isaac ervin from union or who did he wrestle.

No some other kid

[Guest cmccoy]

Let me comment on a few things:

1. The coaches voted on how the tournament would be seeded so no one can complain because it was done in a way that was left up to the coaches. It was a moajority vote that came down to a 11-5 vote to seed.

2. The Five Star wrestles the second best kid for fifth to give kids more matches. In the beginning only the best came out. We are trying to give more kids matches. Until you run a tournament or two, DW, think about what you are saying. Again when it comes to how things are done, say what you know, not what you think.

[Ranger123 43]

Let me comment on a few things:

1. The coaches voted on how the tournament would be seeded so no one can complain because it was done in a way that was left up to the coaches. It was a moajority vote that came down to a 11-5 vote to seed.

2. The Five Star wrestles the second best kid for fifth to give kids more matches. In the beginning only the best came out. We are trying to give more kids matches. Until you run a tournament or two, DW, think about what you are saying. Again when it comes to how things are done, say what you know, not what you think.

Regarding the 5 star Coach McCoy is right.  The purpose of regular season meets and tournaments is to gain experience and prepare for the post season.  So getting matches is high on the priority list.  And I have come around and believe this to be one of the best ways to run a tournament.

Now the state duals is another beast.  This is essentially a post season event and the coaches association is crowning the dual state champs.  So shouldn't we go to the effort of seeding it correctly?  But I also understand that this is what the coaches agreed on.  I wonder if Coach Carr and Coach Walls would like to have those votes back?

[Happy Pappy 0]

Perhaps the way to do the state duals is just to take the top team from each region and comprise a blind draw eight team bracket. I haven't put this together on paper, but you could perhaps even make it double elimination. If the five match rule came into play then just start on Friday night and finish up on Saturday. When you have a situation like they did in Region 5 this year, then set up a criteria method for determining who the actual number 1 team is (number of pins, number of takedowns...etc.. versus common opponents...etc...). It seems to me the problem this year stems mostly from Woodfords spot in the tournament and the lack of Fern Creek being there. Woodford was not the #1 team out of their region (Dunbar was and made it to the finals) and Fern Creek may not have been the number 1 out of their region, but everything I've gathered on them is based on the loss to North Oldham only. The negative side of this of course is you reduce your crowd size by maybe half. Using this method for this year then the teams should have been:

Union - Region 1

Larue - Region 2

PRP - Region 3 (had Bullitt Central still opted out)

Seneca - Region 4 (this is my guess only, I get confused about the standings in Louisville)

South Oldham, Fern Creek, North Oldham - Region 5 (the above mentioned tie breaker criteria)

Campbell, Ryle or Simon Kention - Region 6 (I'm still not sure who won NKAC which I think determined their number 1 team)

Paul Dunbar - Region 7 (no question here)

Wayne - Region 8 (my assumption only)

Now if we did do this for this year, and assuming my picks are right, then your third and fifth place finishers are not even in the tournament.

[Ranger123 43]

Perhaps the way to do the state duals is just to take the top team from each region and comprise a blind draw eight team bracket. I haven't put this together on paper, but you could perhaps even make it double elimination. If the five match rule came into play then just start on Friday night and finish up on Saturday. When you have a situation like they did in Region 5 this year, then set up a criteria method for determining who the actual number 1 team is (number of pins, number of takedowns...etc.. versus common opponents...etc...). It seems to me the problem this year stems mostly from Woodfords spot in the tournament and the lack of Fern Creek being there. Woodford was not the #1 team out of their region (Dunbar was and made it to the finals) and Fern Creek may not have been the number 1 out of their region, but everything I've gathered on them is based on the loss to North Oldham only. The negative side of this of course is you reduce your crowd size by maybe half. Using this method for this year then the teams should have been:

Union - Region 1

Larue - Region 2

PRP - Region 3 (had Bullitt Central still opted out)

Seneca - Region 4 (this is my guess only, I get confused about the standings in Louisville)

South Oldham, Fern Creek, North Oldham - Region 5 (the above mentioned tie breaker criteria)

Campbell, Ryle or Simon Kention - Region 6 (I'm still not sure who won NKAC which I think determined their number 1 team)

Paul Dunbar - Region 7 (no question here)

Wayne - Region 8 (my assumption only)

Now if we did do this for this year, and assuming my picks are right, then your third and fifth place finishers are not even in the tournament.

I'm okay with the number 1's being seeded near the top within some reason.  Obviously, PRP is not equal to North Hardin or Woodford.  Take the top 2 (as we do now) and set up a 16 team bracket or place the seeds in pools so that they are nearly equal in strength.

[Teresa Baker 0]

I agree with Ranger.

North beat a good Trinity and Seneca team, as well as an ill but still competitive Union team to place third.  No fluke there.  But it was a shame to see Woodford get put in Larue's pool early on.  MAINLY BECAUSE I WAS CHEATED OUT OF A STARKS AND JONES STATE DUALS REMATCH.

[ARealWrestlingFanatic 1]

I have to say I am puzzled by the forgone conclusion that Woodford would have won any of the 4 pools regardless of the method of seeding.  They lost to Larue and got beat by Trinity rather handily as well.    I think Union, even with a number of key wrestlers out due to illness, would have been extremely competitive as well against Woodford and given them a run for their money.  Finally, Seneca is extremely strong overall.  I think Woodford would have ended up in the consolation pool regardless.

I agree with Ranger.

North beat a good Trinity and Seneca team, as well as an ill but still competitive Union team to place third.  No fluke there.  But it was a shame to see Woodford get put in Larue's pool early on.  MAINLY BECAUSE I WAS CHEATED OUT OF A STARKS AND JONES STATE DUALS REMATCH.

[Teresa Baker 0]

Good point.  I see what you mean.  No foregone conclusion though, on my part.  Just wanted to see Jones and Starks wrestle.  Heck, North Hardin got stuck with Woodford in our pool two years in a row, I believe.  It was definitely someone else's turn to have them! ha!

[Guest cmccoy]

I apologize if I seem a little bothered by these posts. I absolutely agree with Ranger that it should be seeded from top to bottom or at least the top 8 no matter what seed you are out of your region...BUT...my point is that it was voted upon by the coaches and yes Ranger I bet they would like their votes back also. So again I apologize but I see what Ranger feels like when people question him a million times about why this team is higher than this team becasue we beat them in a dual. It just gets frustrating.

[Cmlswrstlng 0]

Schnieder lost to Chui by 2 (he would have went into ot with him but the ref was being very one sided and would not award him a takedown at the end of the second but gave on in the exact same situation to chui in the third) and lost to Carr by 3 and then he also lost to Zarth by like 8 or 9

And Deilien did beat Wempe by two

Griffith lost to Seneca again on what i saw as a bad call but he did screw up a few times majorly in the match

[PinToWin 0]

This a topic that can be debated forever and not just in wrestling. As an example there was an article in today's Courier Journal concerning Central Hardin

"The Lady Bruins will face a tough road to reach their first Sweet 16 since 2004 as the Fifth Region features three other Top 20 teams -- No. 2 North Hardin, No. 8 Elizabethtown and No. 19 Nelson County.  Central Hardin and North Hardin will meet in the semifinals of next month's 17th District Tournament, meaning one of them won't even qualify for the regional. "

Is it fair that at a minimum two of the top eight teams in the state will not be at the state tournament or for that matter even in the regional tourname, no its not but it is a fact of life.

As coaches, fans, and wrestlers seedings are too subjective i.e. we are going to be biased in how we seed; and nobody has created a mathematical model that can perfectly predict who will win. I was not at the duals this year but is not the case that each group of 4 contains two number one seeds and two number two seeds, and that the only way that you can meet the number two team from your region (if both teams win out) is in the finals.  I think that is probably the fairest fromat, look the cream usually rises to the top, you have to win 5 matches to be crowned champ.  Sure luck has something to do with it but the better you are the more good luck you create for yourself.

[Ranger123 43]

This a topic that can be debated forever and not just in wrestling. As an example there was an article in today's Courier Journal concerning Central Hardin

"The Lady Bruins will face a tough road to reach their first Sweet 16 since 2004 as the Fifth Region features three other Top 20 teams -- No. 2 North Hardin, No. 8 Elizabethtown and No. 19 Nelson County.  Central Hardin and North Hardin will meet in the semifinals of next month's 17th District Tournament, meaning one of them won't even qualify for the regional. "

Is it fair that at a minimum two of the top eight teams in the state will not be at the state tournament or for that matter even in the regional tourname, no its not but it is a fact of life.

As coaches, fans, and wrestlers seedings are too subjective i.e. we are going to be biased in how we seed; and nobody has created a mathematical model that can perfectly predict who will win. I was not at the duals this year but is not the case that each group of 4 contains two number one seeds and two number two seeds, and that the only way that you can meet the number two team from your region (if both teams win out) is in the finals.  I think that is probably the fairest fromat, look the cream usually rises to the top, you have to win 5 matches to be crowned champ.  Sure luck has something to do with it but the better you are the more good luck you create for yourself.

Yes, there are theoretically two #1s and two #2s in each pool.  But all #1s and #2s are not equal.  On top of that you always have the wild card picks.  Not to beat up on Region 3 or PRP, but they were the #1 from that region and that just isn't the same as even #2 in most regions.  And yes, the cream usually rises to the top.  But I bet if you put Larue in a pool with Seneca, Trinity, and Woodford and assuming they survived that meatgrinder they had to face Dunbar and North Hardin in the semis and finals.  And those teams wrestled against PRP, Harrison, Henry Clay, Sheldon Clark, North Oldham, and Campbell to advance.  I think Larue would probably struggle a bit and likely not win the title that they deserved.  I'm just saying with a little effort it can be a lot more evenly distributed.

[Ranger123 43]

I apologize if I seem a little bothered by these posts. I absolutely agree with Ranger that it should be seeded from top to bottom or at least the top 8 no matter what seed you are out of your region...BUT...my point is that it was voted upon by the coaches and yes Ranger I bet they would like their votes back also. So again I apologize but I see what Ranger feels like when people question him a million times about why this team is higher than this team becasue we beat them in a dual. It just gets frustrating.

If those coaches didn't learn their lesson this time maybe this discussion will get a few whispers in their ear.  But like you said, they voted on it and have to live with it.  Although I think a vote can be deceiving.  Unless you are confident that you are one of the top few teams and seeding will benefit you then why not vote for more of a random draw.  That increases your chances of getting an easy pool and finishing 1st or 2nd in the pool.

[kdsmith27 14]

If those coaches didn't learn their lesson this time maybe this discussion will get a few whispers in their ear.  But like you said, they voted on it and have to live with it.  Although I think a vote can be deceiving.  Unless you are confident that you are one of the top few teams and seeding will benefit you then why not vote for more of a random draw.  That increases your chances of getting an easy pool and finishing 1st or 2nd in the pool.

There is something that no one has addressed yet. In the coaches meeting at the state duals it was also discussed that what ever vote was decided, it could not change for the next four years.

[Ranger123 43]

There is something that no one has addressed yet. In the coaches meeting at the state duals it was also discussed that what ever vote was decided, it could not change for the next four years.

That's too bad.  Maybe it won't be an issue for the next few years, but in a season like this one with 8 really, really solid teams you shouldn't randomly draw 3 of them into the same pool.

[Lowsingle 9]

Well we will see this problem for the next few years because it was said that whatever decision was made would stick for the next four years.  I'm not sure that the teams and coaches that were at state duals this year should have the right to speak for the teams that will be there for the next three years.  I know that it is usually the same teams every year but the way competition is growing in Kentucky who knows what teams will slip in next year or the following year.  I don't think that a decision like that should be made by only the coaches present this year.  So for the next three years we will seed the top four teams and blind draw the rest.

[Ranger123 43]

Well we will see this problem for the next few years because it was said that whatever decision was made would stick for the next four years.  I'm not sure that the teams and coaches that were at state duals this year should have the right to speak for the teams that will be there for the next three years.  I know that it is usually the same teams every year but the way competition is growing in Kentucky who knows what teams will slip in next year or the following year.  I don't think that a decision like that should be made by only the coaches present this year.  So for the next three years we will seed the top four teams and blind draw the rest.

Good point.  Since this is a coaches association sponsored event shouldn't all members get a say?  Or is your membership not worth as much if your team doesn't make it?

[kdsmith27 14]

Good point.  Since this is a coaches association sponsored event shouldn't all members get a say?  Or is your membership not worth as much if your team doesn't make it?

Well, All the head Coaches are members, in fact if you weren't, you had to join to bring your team to the state duals. there is new leadership in the KWCA and I like what I heard. May be what we need to grow the association to better serve coaches in KY.

[I-pinned-em-all 0]

Congrats to Larue winning state duals. Just like last year, they won duals but weren't close to winning the state championship. Woodford is still the likely favorite. They have the real horses to carry the tournament points. Larue points will get nibbled away by other not placing many in the finals or even consolation finals. I look for Larue having no more than 2 in the finals. Wheeler and Banks should make it unless they are up against Cooper or Wolsifer. If so, I believe neither will make it into the finals.

Given Voth and Lewis are in the same region, this only helps Woodford as Coty will very likely make it to the finals. Coty will, if he wants, pin his way through the first 4 matches. A win against Voth is no way guaranteed.

[Guest cmccoy]

Coach Fizer and myself put alot into this years state duals to make it one of the best events of the year and one of the best events for years to come. We tried to do things in a diplomatic way that I feel will set the tone for years to come. All coaches are invited to the meetings that we will have in the future. This is a growing thing that can only continue to get better.

[PinToWin 0]

I don't disagree with you Ranger that would make the road more difficult for LaRue or whomever if you stack a bracket but that is the same thing that happens with basketball, baseball or anyother sport.  That is what I was eluding to in my post about Central Hardin's girls basketball team, i.e. to win their district let alone win state they are going to have to defeat the number 2 and number 8 team in the state. There might a team that makes the state from another district that does not have to play a top 20 team untill they reach the state tourney. 

I have a couple of questions do you seed all 16 teams, if so what is the point of being the number one seed out of your region if a number two seed can be seeded ahead of you? I am about to argue out of both sides of my mouth here, if you don't do this you penalize the stronger regions where the top two teams are better than the number one seeds from other regions.  If you want the best 16 teams seeded than we should scrap the two regions per team and just have all of the coaches nominate the best 16 teams to go.  However, some coaches might find it in their best interest not to nominate a team for state duals.  I am not saying this would happen it is just a possibility. 

I think the best solution is you seed the top 8 seeds first with the requirement that they must be the number 1 seed from their region.  There needs to be some firm criteria here like record against teams participating in the state duals (remember this is a duals tournament individual wrestler records should not be used), overall duals record, average margin of victory, etc... remember these are just a suggestion.  After the top 8 teams are seeded, the number 2 seeds from each region are seeded.  This is were it gets a little tricky because you don't want a number 1 seed and a number 2 seed from the same region having to wrestle each other in the initial poll.  For example with LaRue and North: ff LaRue was the number 1 seed and North was the number 9 seed (the top number two team from all regions), theoretically North and LaRue should be in the same pool but given that they are from the same region you would want to swap them out with the number 10 seed as long as the number 8 seed (the lowest seeded number 1 team from any region) was not from the same region as the number 10 seed.  It could get really complicated in a hurry.  I am interested to see what everybody thinks is an appropriate criteria for seeding the state duals. 

I am sure this argument will resurface after the state tournament draws are announced.

[Lowsingle 9]

Coach Fizer and myself put alot into this years state duals to make it one of the best events of the year and one of the best events for years to come. We tried to do things in a diplomatic way that I feel will set the tone for years to come. All coaches are invited to the meetings that we will have in the future. This is a growing thing that can only continue to get better.

Well Coach McCoy the hard work paid off.  I do believe that state duals was ran very good this year.  The rounds were ran smoothly and there wasn't a lot of time lost in between.  The facilities were great and I must say that is was probably one of the better ran touraments I have been to in a long time.  The only thing I think was done wrong was that 16 coaches spoke for the whole state.  There are plenty of teams out there that could very well make it to state duals over the next few years.  I think that a topic like that could be discussed among all members of the coaches association.  As far as the tournament itself I think you guys did an outstanding job.  You set high standards for yourselves though, now I'm going to expect it to run just as smooth in the years to come  :-D