ADVERTISEMENT

Thoughts on Tournament Scoring

The-Dude-Abides

HR All-State
Jan 1, 2023
698
2,022
93
I was listening to Basch’s podcast previewing the Iowa-PSU dual the other day, and they got onto the topic of dual vs. tournament scoring. Fellers mentioned a team with ten 7th place finishers. He said that someone like RBY and another AA could outscore the entire ten in a tournament setting, but in a dual setting it’s going to be damn tough to beat the team with ten AAs. That got me wondering about the actual numbers so I decided to dig into all of the variations of points that AAs can score.

My initial thought was that champions/finalists are a bit over-rewarded vs. lower AAs, but after digging through it all I’m not sure what I would change. The most noticeable thing is that champs get three more points above the guy they defeat in the placement match vs. the 3rd-8th matches (i.e., four more points than the runner-up vs. only one more point for 3rd over 4th, etc.). That’s a big reward, especially if you have multiple champs, but I think it is probably deserved given how damn hard it is to win a title.

FWIW, Fellers overstated the extremes with his example. Ten 7th placers would be a minimum of 60 team points (excluding any bonus). To tie that with two guys, you would need two champs pinning their way through.

Anyway, after I crunched all the numbers, I figured I share it here to see what you all though about the way tournaments are scored vs. duals. I’m not sure I would change anything. Maybe dropping the placement points for first down a couple but that level of achievement also deserves something extra. This also makes me wonder the fewest number of qualifiers a team has ever had and won a team title. Can’t be less than eight right? Also, would a dual team championship ever be feasible? I think it would be insanely entertaining.

Long post alert, but I couldn’t figure a way to shorten this up. Here’s what I figured for total points for every possible route to each spot on the podium (errors certainly possible):


Placement Points

1st: 16 points
2nd: 12 points
3rd: 10 points
4th: 9 points
5th: 7 points
6th: 6 points
7th: 4 points
8th: 3 points

Advancement Points
Championship side: 1 point per match won
Wrestlebacks: 0.5 points per match won
(Excluding the final placement matches)
(For byes, points awarded for the bye if wrestler wins next match)

Bonus Points

Fall/default/forfeit/DQ: 2 points
Tech fall: 1.5 points
Major: 1 point

Possible Points by All-Americans
1st Place
-20 advancement and placement points (16 placement and 4 advancement) (max bonus 30 points)

2nd Place
-16 advancement and placement points (12 placement and 4 advancement) (max bonus 24 points)

3rd Place
-Lose in semis and win next two matches: 13.5 (10 placement and 3.5 advancement) (max bonus 23.5)
-Lose in quarters and win next four matches: 13.5 (10 placement and 3.5 advancement) (max bonus 25.5)
-Lose second round and win next six matches: 13.5 (10 placement and 3.5 advancement) (max bonus 27.5)
-Lose first round and win next seven matches: 13 (10 placement and 3 advancement) (max bonus 27)

4th Place
-Lose in semis, win in consi semis, lose in placement match: 12.5 (9 placement and 3.5 advancement) (max bonus 20.5)
-Lose in quarters, win next three matches, lose in placement match: 12.5 (9 placement and 3.5 advancement) (max bonus 22.5)
-Lose second round, win next five matches, lose in placement match: 12.5 (9 placement and 3.5 advancement) (max bonus 24.5)
-Lose first round, win next six matches, lose in placement match: 12 (9 placement and 3 advancement (max bonus 24)

5th Place
-Lose in semis, lose in consi semis, win placement match: 10 (7 placement and 3 advancement) (max bonus 18)
--Lose in quarters, win next two matches, lose in consi semis, win placement match: 10 (7 placement and 3 advancement) (max bonus 20)
-Lose second round, win next four matches, lose in consi semis, win placement match: 10 (7 placement and 3 advancement) (max bonus 22)
-Lose first round, win next five matches, lose in consi semis, win placement match: 9.5 (7 placement and 2.5 advancement) (max bonus 21.5)

6th Place
-Lose in semis, lose in consi semis, lose placement match: 9 (6 placement and 3 advancement) (max bonus 15)
-Lose in quarters, win next two matches, lose in consi semis, lose placement match: 9 (6 placement and 3 advancement) (max bonus 17)
-Lose second round, win next four matches, lose in consi semis, lose placement match: 9 (6 placement and 3 advancement) (max bonus 19)
-Lose first found, win next five matches, lose in consi semis, lose placement match: 8.5 (6 placement and 2.5 advancement) (max bonus 18.5)

7th Place
-Lose in quarters, win in blood round, lose in consi quarters, win placement match: 6.5 (4 placement and 2.5 advancement) (max bonus 14.5)
-Lose second round, win next three matches, lose in consi quarters, win placement match: 6.5 (4 placement and 2.5 advancement) (max bonus 16.5)
-Lose first round, win next four matches, lose in consi quarters, win placement match: 6 (4 placement and 2 advancement) (max bonus 16)

8th Place
-Lose in quarters, win in blood round, lose in consi quarters, lose placement match: 5.5 (3 placement and 2.5 advancement) (max bonus 11.5)
-Lose second round, win next three matches, lose in consi quarters, lose placement match: 5.5 (3 placement and 2.5 advancement) (max bonus 13.5)
-Lose first round, win next four matches, lose in consi quarters, lose placement match: 5 (3 placement and 2 advancement (max bonus 13)
 
Last edited:
War and Peace was a shorter read...

Joking aside, no I'm not changing a thing. I'm of the mindset that you're there to win. The scoring system recognizes and rewards high placement. Seventh place is nice but it's properly rewarded in scoring.

The dual tournament hasn't been relevant for over 20 years. If not all teams, and wrestlers, are competing it's not a real champion IMO.

Other sports that have an individual tournament championship (track, swimming, gymnastics) don't have a dual meet championship. I don't think wrestling wants one or needs one.
 
This also makes me wonder the fewest number of qualifiers a team has ever had and won a team title. Can’t be less than eight right?
Since 1976-77 (first year of the Gable era), only one team has won a national championship with fewer than eight qualifiers: Arizona State in 1988. The Sun Devils had seven qualifiers, all of whom finished as All-Americans (but no national champions and only one finalist). This was enough to edge out Iowa, 93-85.5. 1988 was an Olympic year so this probably had some impact.

During the same period, only four teams have won a national championship with eight qualifiers: Iowa (1979, 1986), Oklahoma State (2004), and Penn State (2011).

Also of note, maybe: from 1977-1998, no national champion team had fewer than six All-Americans, but it has happened six times since 1999: Iowa (1999, 2009), Minnesota (2007), Penn State (2011, 2013), Ohio State (2015).
 
Since 1976-77 (first year of the Gable era), only one team has won a national championship with fewer than eight qualifiers: Arizona State in 1988. The Sun Devils had seven qualifiers, all of whom finished as All-Americans (but no national champions and only one finalist). This was enough to edge out Iowa, 93-85.5. 1988 was an Olympic year so this probably had some impact.

During the same period, only four teams have won a national championship with eight qualifiers: Iowa (1979, 1986), Oklahoma State (2004), and Penn State (2011).

Also of note, maybe: from 1977-1998, no national champion team had fewer than six All-Americans, but it has happened six times since 1999: Iowa (1999, 2009), Minnesota (2007), Penn State (2011, 2013), Ohio State (2015).
Awesome info, thanks!
 
I'd love an official dual tournament champion, as long as they kept the current one, too. It's more wrestling.
At a minimum, I'd like to see the NWCA/ Cliff Keen national duals come back for D1. No one considered it a true national title, but there were some great team battles in those duals. Not sure why that event went by the wayside, but I loved it.
 
I was listening to Basch’s podcast previewing the Iowa-PSU dual the other day, and they got onto the topic of dual vs. tournament scoring. Fellers mentioned a team with ten 7th place finishers. He said that someone like RBY and another AA could outscore the entire ten in a tournament setting, but in a dual setting it’s going to be damn tough to beat the team with ten AAs. That got me wondering about the actual numbers so I decided to dig into all of the variations of points that AAs can score.

My initial thought was that champions/finalists are a bit over-rewarded vs. lower AAs, but after digging through it all I’m not sure what I would change. The most noticeable thing is that champs get three more points above the guy they defeat in the placement match vs. the 3rd-8th matches (i.e., four more points than the runner-up vs. only one more point for 3rd over 4th, etc.). That’s a big reward, especially if you have multiple champs, but I think it is probably deserved given how damn hard it is to win a title.

FWIW, Fellers overstated the extremes with his example. Ten 7th placers would be a minimum of 60 team points (excluding any bonus). To tie that with two guys, you would need two champs pinning their way through.

Anyway, after I crunched all the numbers, I figured I share it here to see what you all though about the way tournaments are scored vs. duals. I’m not sure I would change anything. Maybe dropping the placement points for first down a couple but that level of achievement also deserves something extra. This also makes me wonder the fewest number of qualifiers a team has ever had and won a team title. Can’t be less than eight right? Also, would a dual team championship ever be feasible? I think it would be insanely entertaining.

Long post alert, but I couldn’t figure a way to shorten this up. Here’s what I figured for total points for every possible route to each spot on the podium (errors certainly possible):


Placement Points
1st: 16 points
2nd: 12 points
3rd: 10 points
4th: 9 points
5th: 7 points
6th: 6 points
7th: 4 points
8th: 3 points

Advancement Points
Championship side: 1 point per match won
Wrestlebacks: 0.5 points per match won
(Excluding the final placement matches)
(For byes, points awarded for the bye if wrestler wins next match)

Bonus Points
Fall/default/forfeit/DQ: 2 points
Tech fall: 1.5 points
Major: 1 point

Possible Points by All-Americans
1st Place
-20 advancement and placement points (16 placement and 4 advancement) (max bonus 30 points)

2nd Place
-16 advancement and placement points (12 placement and 4 advancement) (max bonus 24 points)

3rd Place
-Lose in semis and win next two matches: 13.5 (10 placement and 3.5 advancement) (max bonus 23.5)
-Lose in quarters and win next four matches: 13.5 (10 placement and 3.5 advancement) (max bonus 25.5)
-Lose second round and win next six matches: 13.5 (10 placement and 3.5 advancement) (max bonus 27.5)
-Lose first round and win next seven matches: 13 (10 placement and 3 advancement) (max bonus 27)

4th Place
-Lose in semis, win in consi semis, lose in placement match: 12.5 (9 placement and 3.5 advancement) (max bonus 20.5)
-Lose in quarters, win next three matches, lose in placement match: 12.5 (9 placement and 3.5 advancement) (max bonus 22.5)
-Lose second round, win next five matches, lose in placement match: 12.5 (9 placement and 3.5 advancement) (max bonus 24.5)
-Lose first round, win next six matches, lose in placement match: 12 (9 placement and 3 advancement (max bonus 24)

5th Place
-Lose in semis, lose in consi semis, win placement match: 10 (7 placement and 3 advancement) (max bonus 18)
--Lose in quarters, win next two matches, lose in consi semis, win placement match: 10 (7 placement and 3 advancement) (max bonus 20)
-Lose second round, win next four matches, lose in consi semis, win placement match: 10 (7 placement and 3 advancement) (max bonus 22)
-Lose first round, win next five matches, lose in consi semis, win placement match: 9.5 (7 placement and 2.5 advancement) (max bonus 21.5)

6th Place
-Lose in semis, lose in consi semis, lose placement match: 9 (6 placement and 3 advancement) (max bonus 15)
-Lose in quarters, win next two matches, lose in consi semis, lose placement match: 9 (6 placement and 3 advancement) (max bonus 17)
-Lose second round, win next four matches, lose in consi semis, lose placement match: 9 (6 placement and 3 advancement) (max bonus 19)
-Lose first found, win next five matches, lose in consi semis, lose placement match: 8.5 (6 placement and 2.5 advancement) (max bonus 18.5)

7th Place
-Lose in quarters, win in blood round, lose in consi quarters, win placement match: 6.5 (4 placement and 2.5 advancement) (max bonus 14.5)
-Lose second round, win next three matches, lose in consi quarters, win placement match: 6.5 (4 placement and 2.5 advancement) (max bonus 16.5)
-Lose first round, win next four matches, lose in consi quarters, win placement match: 6 (4 placement and 2 advancement) (max bonus 16)

8th Place
-Lose in quarters, win in blood round, lose in consi quarters, lose placement match: 5.5 (3 placement and 2.5 advancement) (max bonus 11.5)
-Lose second round, win next three matches, lose in consi quarters, lose placement match: 5.5 (3 placement and 2.5 advancement) (max bonus 13.5)
-Lose first round, win next four matches, lose in consi quarters, lose placement match: 5 (3 placement and 2 advancement (max bonus 13)
Well thought out and conceived post, nicely done Sir!

Sooo you are saying we have a shot?
 
  • Like
Reactions: The-Dude-Abides
I think one of the answers is to start making more championships with more rewards.

For example, a dual meet champion team might be rewarded with sending all 10 guys to the NCAA tournament. This in my opinion would be a strong team building reward. I understand that a team might already get to send all 10 guys, but it is mostly uncommon. This year, if you used F*** st as an example of an unofficial dual meet team champion. Their 125 might not get in, so he would get in with an auto-bid. That is a whole team reward.

To add to this, I think you also reward the championship team with hosting a FINAL FOUR the following year.. This could be a great event with the top 4 teams wrestling, two winners meeting in finals and two losers wrestling for 3 and 4.

You then have the NCAA championships as usual which produces a winning team. Then you have an overall champion based on a combination of the two events. Now it could all be the same team, but It could also be there is better tournament teams and better dual meet teams. Plus if you extend trophies to the top 4 placing teams in all 3. It might get pretty interesting. Add to it, a team that wins all 3, wins the "Triple Crown!"

I think after some time, it might change how some teams recruit and build their teams. You might be able to continue to just focus on top elite guys, but a team also could shift to a strategy of a more solid 10 guy line-up. I think it brings many more teams into contention for winning a trophy. This would be good for the sport because it adds more meaning to the overall season.

It also makes it harder for guys to duck tough matches if something is on the line in each dual meet.
 
Last edited:
Well thought out and conceived post, nicely done Sir!

Sooo you are saying we have a shot?
Spencer and Woods winning with good bonus could be worth 50 points. Cass 3rd with a couple pins, 17.5. Intermat projects PSU at 114.5 excluding bonus, which they are going to get a lot of in early rounds. We would probably need about 60 points from the rest of the team, or the equivalent of everyone else on the podium and a few 6th or higher. It would be a legendary tournament, but not totally impossible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: el dub and IRONBIRD
IMO, there are a ton of reasons that duals are superior to tournaments, and the arbitrary nature of scoring in tournaments is one of them.

I agree that duals are now irrelevant, but I view that as a bad thing.
I agree that duals are irrelevant. Because of the current big prize of Nationals, you’re not seeing big matches because teams are gaming for the best seed at NCAA’s.
When you look back at how many matches guys used to have, it pales in comparison to today. There were 35-45 matches a year not long ago.
There are many reasons for this.
Limiting schedules,
With the advent of scrambling, more injuries.
Gaming as mentioned.

National Duals at the UNI Dome was an awesome event. Midlands used to be mini Nationals. Hawks vs. Clones twice a year. Etc. etc.
I miss all the action.
 
I looked into the Mat Stats podcast that jrod recommended, and there is some really interesting stuff there that I never heard of. Definitely worth checking out and full of detailed stats on scoring over the years.

They want duals and tournaments to be scored based on the margin of victory in each bout. 3-2 win is worth one point, 4-2 win worth two points, etc. They put pins at 20 and capped techs at 15 (so you couldn't exceed a pin with the rare 21 point tech fall). Wade Challes was on one episode, and he wants total match points scoring, so each guy gets the points he scored added to the team score. Not a fan of that at all (see Desanto gifting 10+ escapes while destroying a guy from neutral for the tech).

I'm not sure I prefer the MOV approach, but it is definitely intriguing. I think it could do a lot to combat the boring, defensive wrestling we're seeing so much if every point you scored mattered for the team battle. The higher value for pins and techs could also induce more action to actually turn guys instead of hook the ankle and collect riding time for one more point.

It would be interesting to try this out in a mid season tournament or maybe the collegiate duals and see if it changes the wrestling at all.
 
Spencer and Woods winning with good bonus could be worth 50 points. Cass 3rd with a couple pins, 17.5. Intermat projects PSU at 114.5 excluding bonus, which they are going to get a lot of in early rounds. We would probably need about 60 points from the rest of the team, or the equivalent of everyone else on the podium and a few 6th or higher. It would be a legendary tournament, but not totally impossible.
I like it, we are gonna win. thanks
 
  • Like
Reactions: The-Dude-Abides
I looked into the Mat Stats podcast that jrod recommended, and there is some really interesting stuff there that I never heard of. Definitely worth checking out and full of detailed stats on scoring over the years.

They want duals and tournaments to be scored based on the margin of victory in each bout. 3-2 win is worth one point, 4-2 win worth two points, etc. They put pins at 20 and capped techs at 15 (so you couldn't exceed a pin with the rare 21 point tech fall). Wade Challes was on one episode, and he wants total match points scoring, so each guy gets the points he scored added to the team score. Not a fan of that at all (see Desanto gifting 10+ escapes while destroying a guy from neutral for the tech).

I'm not sure I prefer the MOV approach, but it is definitely intriguing. I think it could do a lot to combat the boring, defensive wrestling we're seeing so much if every point you scored mattered for the team battle. The higher value for pins and techs could also induce more action to actually turn guys instead of hook the ankle and collect riding time for one more point.

It would be interesting to try this out in a mid season tournament or maybe the collegiate duals and see if it changes the wrestling at all.

Yep. The more I think about MOV scoring, the more I am liking it. I could easily envision wrestlers trying just a little bit harder to score a point or two more in match, especially if it is a closely contested meet/tournament.

As is, there is no difference in winning by 1-7 or 8-14 in the team scores. MOV would add incentive for both wrestlers to try and score until final whistle, which could/should lead to more action. Also rewards appropriately(think about a wrestler just missing on the major or tf).

Another big thing is that it's easy to keep score. Right now, we have so many scoring rules/metrics.

If you win in a dual its 3 points, unless x,y,z. Oh and a win in a tourny isn't worth the same as duals, because....reasons. And another thing, we have advancement and placement points at tournaments as well, can't forget about those. But they change, depending on the size of the tournament, and whether a wrestler is on championship or consolation side.

MOV creates a clean, easy to understand scoring system across both settings.

I used MOV to re-score the Iowa/PSU meet. Results were basically the same. PSU still wins, 42-22 and Iowa would have needed a pin at HWT to win the dual.

It's the what-ifs with this scoring that really peak my interest. Does Real chase for another takedown? Is Starocci content with grinding out a 1 point win? Does Max Dean release Warner after getting the riding time point to attempt a td that would put the dual out of reach?

Everyone is talking about boring wrestling, changing rules, stalling, reffing, etc. I would like to see if MOV is a possible answer to these issues. It certainly provides incentive to keep trying to score points until the final whistle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The-Dude-Abides
Some wrestlers get to their offense early and "coast to victory". Some hold off and try to win in the end. Both commonplace in today's wrestling. Winning at the end is exciting but only for ~20 seconds, the rest of the match is a snooze fest. I'd like to see more attempts at falls.

Re: Spencer's match vs the Vespa (like the scooter?) - it felt to me like the coaches told him to take the Tech or fall, whichever came 1st (earliest)...to minimize his time on the mat because there's no doubt in my mind he could have pinned that kid.

Anything to encourage more scoring is an improvement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The-Dude-Abides
Spencer and Woods winning with good bonus could be worth 50 points. Cass 3rd with a couple pins, 17.5. Intermat projects PSU at 114.5 excluding bonus, which they are going to get a lot of in early rounds. We would probably need about 60 points from the rest of the team, or the equivalent of everyone else on the podium and a few 6th or higher. It would be a legendary tournament, but not totally impossible.
Not impossible but improbable. I don’t see it happening based on past performances and results.

One of the issues is you threw bonus points at our guys in initial projection and not PSU. Then you have the wheels fall off their wagon while we hit on all ten cylinders.
 
Not impossible but improbable. I don’t see it happening based on past performances and results.

One of the issues is you threw bonus points at our guys in initial projection and not PSU. Then you have the wheels fall off their wagon while we hit on all ten cylinders.
True. I think we need 8-9 AAs to have any shot, and probably still need one or two of their guys stumble. Titles are just worth so many points.
 
ADVERTISEMENT