Author Topic: Rule changes?  (Read 7496 times)

Offline brycemus

  • LXP
  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 32437
    • View Profile
Re: Rule changes?
« Reply #30 on: September 15, 2011, 12:07:31 PM »
I still think we should weight it based on how difficult the weight is at that conference tourney.
Corey Clark: 2016-2017 Hawkeye Hammer

Offline AKIN

  • LXP
  • Moderator
  • Get a Job
  • *****
  • Posts: 16187
    • View Profile
Re: Rule changes?
« Reply #31 on: September 15, 2011, 02:23:26 PM »
So basically you want to wait until the conference tournaments before deciding what the bonus will be? We would need to have some sort of system to determine how the bonus would be determined. Sounds like a cluster to me, unless you already have something in mind.
If you want respect, be respectful.

Offline brycemus

  • LXP
  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 32437
    • View Profile
Re: Rule changes?
« Reply #32 on: September 15, 2011, 02:30:26 PM »
example:

turns out 125 is toughest in the Big 10
2nd tougest in Big 12
3rd Eiwa.

so the guy that wins the Big 10 gets 5 bonus, Big 12, 4, Eiwa 3.
2nd in the Big 10 gets 4, Big 12, 3, Eiwa 2.

and so on through all the weights.

use the final TOM preconference rankings to weight the weights per conference so every one knows ahead of time.  I know it sucks for people drafting at the beginning, but it might work.
Corey Clark: 2016-2017 Hawkeye Hammer

crablegs

  • Guest
Re: Rule changes?
« Reply #33 on: September 15, 2011, 03:02:00 PM »
I kind of like the idea, but how do you determine toughest.  # of guys ranked in TOM top 20?  What if the Big 12 had 3 in the top 10 while the Big 10 had 4 in the top 20 but 3 of the 4 are 11-20?  You would need a system for this as well. 

Offline AKIN

  • LXP
  • Moderator
  • Get a Job
  • *****
  • Posts: 16187
    • View Profile
Re: Rule changes?
« Reply #34 on: September 15, 2011, 03:05:15 PM »
If someone wants to come up with a complete plan for the bonus, I have no problem implementing it.
If you want respect, be respectful.

Offline brycemus

  • LXP
  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 32437
    • View Profile
Re: Rule changes?
« Reply #35 on: September 15, 2011, 03:23:16 PM »
that's an excellent point Crab and something I was thinking about.  could we weight it and give a points system per ranking spot.  that way you could see it a little better.  say the number one guy gets 50???  #2 48, #3 45, #4 41, #5 37, #6 33, #7 32, #8 31, #9 30, #10 28, #11 21, #12 20, #13 19, #14 13, #15 12, #16 10, #17 9, #18 8, #19 7, #20 6.

I mean every five spots there's a drop in points awarded for ranking spot.  and there's more points giving to having 2 guys in the top 10 than having 4 guys all ranked from 10 to 20. 

I don't know I'm not good with math it was just an idea.  we can always just stay the same even though the Big 12 is a triangular this season.
Corey Clark: 2016-2017 Hawkeye Hammer

Offline Cicero

  • Conference Champ
  • ***
  • Posts: 834
    • View Profile
Re: Rule changes?
« Reply #36 on: September 15, 2011, 03:45:45 PM »
Average the rankings? It would seem like that would work out well. 

Test case was 165 from last year.  Big 12 had all 5 guys in the top 12 (1,2,5,10,11).  Big 10 had 3 guys in the top 8 (6,7,8 Howe not ranked).  Big 12 average 5.8, Big 10 average 7. 

If it isn't a whole number difference I would suggest giving them both the same points.

 
"The kinds of moves Oliver can hit are well beyond the kinds of moves I have the wrestling knowledge to describe" - LoSt

Offline AKIN

  • LXP
  • Moderator
  • Get a Job
  • *****
  • Posts: 16187
    • View Profile
Re: Rule changes?
« Reply #37 on: September 15, 2011, 04:22:49 PM »
That could be do-able, I guess. There is a two week window, basically, between the last competition and the conference tournaments. So I should have enough time to get the averages figured out and post the bonuses per conference. This will be for all qualifying tournaments, correct? I could see the bonus points being the same:

Top avg rank: 16-12
2nd best: 12-8
3rd: 10-6
others: 8-4
If you want respect, be respectful.

Offline brycemus

  • LXP
  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 32437
    • View Profile
Re: Rule changes?
« Reply #38 on: September 15, 2011, 04:53:16 PM »
that's why instead of just averaging the rankings you weight them so the top 10 counts more than the 11-20 range.  and the top 5 counts more than the 6-10 range.  just my thought.
Corey Clark: 2016-2017 Hawkeye Hammer

Drooke

  • Guest
Re: Rule changes?
« Reply #39 on: September 15, 2011, 09:11:10 PM »
We totally need to score the keystone classic this season.... check out the thread...  http://forum.theopenmat.com/index.php/topic,15886.0.html

Offline TehGratest

  • State Champ
  • **
  • Posts: 209
    • View Profile
Re: Rule changes?
« Reply #40 on: September 16, 2011, 07:06:25 AM »
I still think we should weight it based on how difficult the weight is at that conference tourney.

So your suggestion is to rank every weight of every conference?

That won't get confusing and/or subjective.

I don't think much needs to be changed from last year personally.

Offline ViseGrip

  • LXP
  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 34575
    • View Profile
Re: Rule changes?
« Reply #41 on: September 16, 2011, 12:49:39 PM »
So would it be better to have 3 tiers of bonus for the conference tournaments?

Big 10  16-1st/ 12-2nd

Big 12  12-1st/ 8-2nd

All others 10-1st/ 6-2nd

All of this will most likely not be an issue in a season or two, as the Big 12 is on life support and has one foot in the grave.

I think this is fair.
"The first lesson of economics is scarcity: There is never enough of anything to satisfy all that want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics" -Thomas Sowell

Offline brycemus

  • LXP
  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 32437
    • View Profile
Re: Rule changes?
« Reply #42 on: September 16, 2011, 01:03:44 PM »
I feel that if there isn't an absolute consensus we should just leave the rules the same.
Corey Clark: 2016-2017 Hawkeye Hammer

Offline herbp

  • World Champ
  • *****
  • Posts: 2917
    • View Profile
Re: Rule changes?
« Reply #43 on: September 16, 2011, 01:07:03 PM »
I like ALL events scored with a uniform bonus point allotment . i.e.-Reno champion-+15-2nd +10-Midllands same -SS-same (if held this year )-then

Big 10==1st-+20-2nd +10
Big -12 -same
 ALL other conferences  1st-+10 2nd +5-this way the two top conferences (usually), receive extra points for being tougher .DRAFT Big 12 at your own risk knowing your wrestler might score you only 10 points in the conference tournament..
You know, I think I would rather be a man than a god . We don't need anyone to believe in us. We just keep going anyhow. It's what we do.
N.Gaimann

Offline AKIN

  • LXP
  • Moderator
  • Get a Job
  • *****
  • Posts: 16187
    • View Profile
Re: Rule changes?
« Reply #44 on: September 16, 2011, 01:16:45 PM »
We totally need to score the keystone classic this season.... check out the thread...  http://forum.theopenmat.com/index.php/topic,15886.0.html

I remember this conversation, and I will add this tournament. We still need a consensus as to whether we score every match wrestled for the whole season, as well.
If you want respect, be respectful.