My tiebreaker proposal

[wosbodog]

Just an idea I wanted to throw out - maybe the tiebreaker criteria for dual matches could be simplified, significantly. As it stands now, and I'm quoting directly from this year's rulebook, "in the dual-meet competition, if teams identical scores, the following team tie-breaking system shall be used to determine the winner.

a. The team whose opposing wrestlers or team personnel has been penalized the greater number of team points for flagrant or unsportsmanlike conduct shall be declared the winner.

b. The team whose opposing wrestlers or team personnel has been penalized the greater number of team point deductions shall be declared the winner.

c. The team whose opposing wrestlers were penalized the greater number of match points for unsportsmanlike conduct during a match shall be declared the winner.

d. The team having won the greater number of matches (including forfeits) shall be declared the winner.

e. The team having accumulated the greater total number of falls, defaults, forfeits and disqualifications shall be declared the winner.

f. The team having the greater number of technical falls shall be declared the winner.[..etc...]"

 

Continues all the way down to

"p. If none of the above resolves the tie, a flip of a disk will determine the winner."

 

My idea is what if instead of using a possible sixteen articles to determine the winner in case of a tie, there could simply be one decisive method. Which is: the last match of a dual meet shall serve as a tiebreaker during the event that the two teams have reached identical scores at the conclusion of the meet. So you start at a random weight, when you get to match number 14 and it results in the two team scores being tied, then whoever has won that last match gets an extra team point and the win for the dual. In the situation that two opposing coaches have decided to start the dual at a mutually agreed upon weight (for allowing time for exhibitions, etc.), then a random draw would decide which weight is the tiebreaker.

 

Don't know if this has been proposed or rejected before, but it seems to be a more reasonable and effective method, in my opinion, to resolve a tie. If you've got Baylor and McCallie going head to head and they end up tied, which looks better? Reviewing the score records and declaring a winner, or letting them settle it in one final dramatic match?

[ghouse]

I see what you are getting at here in trying to add a little drama to the dual meets from the fans perspective but I am not sure I like it. I can see a lot of reasons why coaches might not want to go for this idea but I will leave that up to others to espouse.

 

However, the one thing I will state is that I particularly like the way that the current tiebreak criteria puts a premium on sportsmanship. That is something often missed in sports and I particularly like the fact that it can cost you a dual meet if you can't compete "cleanly." Just my half cent.

[PRTiii]

I see what you are getting at here in trying to add a little drama to the dual meets from the fans perspective but I am not sure I like it. I can see a lot of reasons why coaches might not want to go for this idea but I will leave that up to others to espouse.

 

However, the one thing I will state is that I particularly like the way that the current tiebreak criteria puts a premium on sportsmanship. That is something often missed in sports and I particularly like the fact that it can cost you a dual meet if you can't compete "cleanly." Just my half cent.

Ill have to agree with you here Garrett, I dont like putting all the pressure on one child any more than its already being put on them. I think the team who performs better on the mat the entire match, and shows the best sportsmanship should be declaired the winner. By having it come down to the last match and then an extra point just be awarded to the winner of that match your telling the child, "Win or we lose" and thats not good for children.

 

 

 

PRTiii

[PUMMELKING]

Ill have to agree with you here Garrett, I dont like putting all the pressure on one child any more than its already being put on them. I think the team who performs better on the mat the entire match, and shows the best sportsmanship should be declaired the winner. By having it come down to the last match and then an extra point just be awarded to the winner of that match your telling the child, "Win or we lose" and thats not good for children.

 

 

 

PRTiii

That was what always happened to heavy weight wrestlers in duals and tournaments. The draw for oder was the best thing and would be better if tournaments did the same thing for individuals. not alwys put the pressure on the big guys who are last to compete.

[silverpie]

The only flaw in the sportsmanship criteria that I can see is the use of match points. This would mean that a UC's importance to the tiebreakers depends on when in the sequence it happened--one committed as the third penalty is doubled in value, while one committed on the fourth penalty is less significant (assuming the wrestler would have dropped 6 points anyway). I would instead prefer that the criterion be the number of UCM calls.

 

The criterion is also a little fan-hostile. Specifically, it's not that hard from the stands to note that Team A had a 6 and a 3 after cancelling out matching results, and Team B had a 5 and a 4, so Team A wins. Harder to explain that B wins the dual because an A wrestler had a shoulder strap down or went to one knee a time too many...

 

That said, outside of dual tournaments, I really don't see the need to break ties at all...

[mtnrasslin]

 

Don't know if this has been proposed or rejected before, but it seems to be a more reasonable and effective method, in my opinion, to resolve a tie. If you've got Baylor and McCallie going head to head and they end up tied, which looks better? Reviewing the score records and declaring a winner, or letting them settle it in one final dramatic match?

It doesn't really matter. I am pretty sure that Baylor and McCallie won't be tied at the end of regulation.

Edited October 14, 2010 by mtnrasslin