Any predictions for today at Henry Clay?  Woodford blond again?  LaRue back to good health?

This team looks tough with 8 in top 25 Jan 24 rankings

Weight           School-Name-Year School             Sch Indiv 

                                                                          Rank Rank 

103 Pounds NO Taylor South N/A North Oldham 21 15

119 Pounds NO Andre Zeppa 11 North Oldham 21 6

125 Pounds NO Antonio Zeppa 12 North Oldham 21 9

130 Pounds NO Tom Kusnir 12 North Oldham   21   8

140 Pounds NO Chris Martorana 11 North Oldham 21 13

145 Pounds NO Chris Dudley 11 North Oldham   21   17

152 Pounds NO Jeff Thomson 10 North Oldham 21 18

160 Pounds NO Kyle Forbes 10 North Oldham   21   19

This team looks tough with 8 in top 25 Jan 24 rankings

Weight           School-Name-Year School             Sch Indiv 

                                                                          Rank Rank 

103 Pounds NO Taylor South N/A North Oldham 21 15

119 Pounds NO Andre Zeppa 11 North Oldham 21 6

125 Pounds NO Antonio Zeppa 12 North Oldham 21 9

130 Pounds NO Tom Kusnir 12 North Oldham   21   8

140 Pounds NO Chris Martorana 11 North Oldham 21 13

145 Pounds NO Chris Dudley 11 North Oldham   21   17

152 Pounds NO Jeff Thomson 10 North Oldham 21 18

160 Pounds NO Kyle Forbes 10 North Oldham   21   19

North won't get in the top 12.

North won't get in the top 12.

You sound a little bitter

LaRue looking to win again after beating Woodford in 2nd round.  Great/close match-up with LaRue still missing some great wrestlers.  North Hardin looking good, too, as well as Trinity and Dunbar.

You sound a little bitter

Just being truthful.

any good individual match-ups

fuller and mastrovich went into ot with nfuller winning 9-7

Mastrovich and byrd went in to ot with byrd winning 6-4

fuller and mastrovich went into ot with nfuller winning 9-7

Mastrovich and byrd went in to ot with byrd winning 6-4

Wow, 2 overtime matches in one day for a heavyweight, with scores that high? Man he must be exhausted, haha.

Pretty sure this is the final order:

Larue County

Paul Dunbar

North Hardin

Seneca

Trinity

Woodford County

S. Oldham

Ryles

PS.  I was told North Oldham outscored Harrison County and Sheldon Clark.

So LaRue won it all again. Congrats to those guys who work hard day after day, and who worked through so many ups and downs this year. Great Job Guys

NORTH TOOK 9TH. HOW DO YOU FEEL NOW penguin thing. haha. nice call.

to penguinskillkids: we placed 9th. you said we wouldnt place in the top 12. how are you feeling now?

You've gotta be kidding, the only difference between 9th and 12th is that you lost a little bit later by luck of the draw, good going.

nah bro. it means we did better tahn you expected.

seneca looked good having the closest dual with larue all day

32-26(it was very heated at parts of the dual)

yeah woodford did the yellow as well as seneca. there were some really good matches in there.

Bottom line is if Woodford and Union can lose, any team that puts 110% can come out on top like Larue did today.  Great coaching job, too, by the way.  Looking forward to possible three-peat next year.

yeah i watched that match. it was a good one. LaRue stepped up to the plate and popped woodford.

Bottom line is if Woodford and Union can lose, any team that puts 110% can come out on top like Larue did today.  Great coaching job, too, by the way.  Looking forward to possible three-peat next year.

I'm not saying a threat peat isn't possible but larue is a dominantly senior team so it will be tough to fill all the gaps

Pretty sure this is the final order:

Larue County

Paul Dunbar

North Hardin

Seneca

Trinity

Woodford County

S. Oldham

Ryles

PS.  I was told North Oldham outscored Harrison County and Sheldon Clark.

North Oldham did beat Harrison by 3. here were the results.

103= Lenz over South  (maj dec)    4

112= harrison forfeited    6

119=zeppa over ward  (pin)     6

125= zeppa over maxwell   (pin)     6

130= NO over moss   (pin)      6

135= NO forfeited to Berry(JV)    6

140= Ashbrook over NO   (maj dec)     4

145= Sanders over NO       (maj dec)   4

152= NO over Cordray     (dec)    3

160= Ward over NO    (pin)      6

171= NO over Vanarsdaile   (pin)     6

189= NO over Hatfeild  (pin)     6

215= Hall forfeited           6

285= Murdock over NO   (pin)    6

                          Harrison=== 36

                          North Oldham===== 39

Agree with you there.  Was the roar I heard at the Trinity/Woodford Co mat Coty Lewis Losing?  Also, I think Seneca's Elliott Martin bit the bullit, too, against North Hardin in another upset.

it all came down to Tom Kusiner and he got the win. Great job by him

Were there any big upsets? What were the best dual and individual matches of the day?

yeah woodford's losses were some pretty big upsets. i didnt see them coming at all. i didnt really watch many other matches than that. when LaRue went on a pin streak during the woodford match it was pretty crazy in there. but other than that i didnt notice any.

yeah woodford's losses were some pretty big upsets. i didnt see them coming at all. i didnt really watch many other matches than that. when LaRue went on a pin streak during the woodford match it was pretty crazy in there. but other than that i didnt notice any.

Yeah that pinning streak was pretty intense

yeah there was about a 5 minute stretch of nothing but the start. people yelling. woodford people gettin upset and then the slap for a pin and a roar from LaRue. it was awesome actually. i didnt think that there could possibly be a winning streak that long on a team like woodford co.

Congrats to Larue, i knew they would win! Any body have the Larue/Woodford results?

Think it was 37-35 with Larue forfeiting last match against Woodford.  LaRue's 103 looked good in a tough match at the end.  Carmen (125?) had a tough day but looked weak.  Expect him to do damage now in States.  Woodford started strong (unlike last year) and got worse as the score got closer.  Complete opposite of last year when Larue blew a 25+ point lead and hung on to win.

Larue's day went like this:  Harrison Co, Woodford, Wayne, Seneca, Dunbar.

PS Another good match was Dunbar's Nick Leddy (I think) and Larue's Matt Miller.  Leddy caught Miller napping and had him inches from losing until Miller got his feet moving.  Close but no cigar and proves anything can happen anytime....Proved to be a turning point in the match, too.

Last wrestling match I've been to (here in KY) was last years Duals.  Both have been great entertainment and Henry Clay runs a good tournament.

Eric Hupp wrestled Leddy it was Nick Quigley that miller wrestled

Think it was 37-35 with Larue forfeiting last match against Woodford.  LaRue's 103 looked good in a tough match at the end.

Yeah larues 103 is going to make a suprise run at state i do believe, coming on strong from haveing an early ankle injury and wrestling 112 most of the year......i think he should probably take regions....

what were some good matchups between wrestlers?

ya how do's ever another feel that noth oldham that everone thought that they would not get in to the top 10 ands they got 9th and they put there A game on and even there 285 put in his A game in the last macth.  :mrgreen:

oa by the gosh dorn way Fern creek 285 quite the team to join a step them so tell my what is going on Fern Creek  :evil:

ya how do's ever another feel that noth oldham that everone thought that they would not get in to the top 10 ands they got 9th and they put there A game on and even there 285 put in his A game in the last macth.  :mrgreen:

oa by the gosh dorn way Fern creek 285 quite the team to join a step them so tell my what is going on Fern Creek  :evil:

He had a shoulder injury and couldn't wrestle, so he decided to do something else. Thanks for trying to say something about Fern Creek.

I don't see why everyone is so hyped over North getting 9th when they snuck in past a team that was favored to take everything.

Matt Baker - Doug Winter

Jordan Dockery - Matt Baker

Doug Winter - Jake Shipp

Adam Dials - Doug Winter

Jordan Dockery - Jake Shipp

Those were some good matchups at 215

who is this kid from harrison at 125? he lost a combined points of 5 aginst carmen and daniels. the score of carmen and him was 2-0 and daniels 7-4. this kid is looking tough come regionals.

Matt Baker - Doug Winter

Jordan Dockery - Matt Baker

Doug Winter - Jake Shipp

Adam Dials - Doug Winter

Jordan Dockery - Jake Shipp

Those were some good matchups at 215

No

Winter beat baker

Dockery beat baker

Shipp beat winter

Dials beat winter

Dockery beat shipp

Agree with you there.  Was the roar I heard at the Trinity/Woodford Co mat Coty Lewis Losing?  Also, I think Seneca's Elliott Martin bit the bullit, too, against North Hardin in another upset.

Are you saying Elliott Martin beating Coty Wood was an upset?? How can he upset someone when he is undefeated? He manhandled wood. Elliott face wipped him to his back, wood cryed off his back. Then Elliott cradled him and stuck him, in the first period...................

The Harrison Co 125 is Trevor Maxwell.  He wrestled the last 2 years and quit earlier this season.  He came back last week.  He had been to 4 practices and was a little out of shape (understatement).  If he gets his head on straight (that will be the tough part) he could scored some points at the state tournament.  But that is a HUGE IF.

Was that the varsity Hwt for Union co. or was he just a fill in?

Did Shehan and banks meet up

yeah but it wasnt really a good match...i mean it only lasted about a period after blake tried to arm spin or something and ended up getting caught on his back for a pin...it would have been really good, but i mean everyone makes a mistake like that every now and then

i agree with jdub on larue 103

did he have a good day at state duals? I only saw him get pinned my martin. Who else did he wrestle?

Does anyone have the results from the finals?  I'd like to see how Dunbar did against Larue (as well as the rest of PLD's duals, if it's possible).

103-Larue by dec? not sure

112-PLD by pin

119-PLD by pin

125-PLD by pin

130-Larue by pin

135-PLD forfeit(last match larue had it won)

140-Larue by pin

145-Larue by pin

152-Larue by pin

160-Larue bt tech

171-PLD by maj dec

189-PLD by pin

215-Larue by dec

Hwt-Larue by dec

The end score was 41-34 for Larue.

what were the pools

Pool two which had the fourth seeded team consisted of

Seneca(#Seed)

South Oldham

Campbell COunty

Henry Clay

Pool 1

woodford

Larue

Harrison

wayne

Pool 2

Seneca

Campbell

Henry Clay

South Oldham

Pool 3

North Hardin

Union

Trinity

Prp

Pool 4

Dunbar

Ryle

sheldon clark

North Oldham

How does Larue and Woodford get put in the same pool?  Are they not seeded?  Also, am I understanding Woodford could have won if Sheehan wouldn't of got stuck?

And, who did Lewis lose to?  That's not surprising if he did lose. 

Sorry for all the questions, I missed this weekend.  thanks

ya how do's ever another feel that noth oldham that everone thought that they would not get in to the top 10 ands they got 9th and they put there A game on and even there 285 put in his A game in the last macth.  :mrgreen:

oa by the gosh dorn way Fern creek 285 quite the team to join a step them so tell my what is going on Fern Creek  :evil:

i could not agree more. ive never seen billows actually excecute a move! i was proud of him. it was amazing. i wish i could have wrestled.

Lewis lost to Ohlman from trinity

Pool 1

woodford

Larue

Harrison

wayne

Pool 2

Seneca

Campbell

Henry Clay

South Oldham

Pool 3

North Hardin

Union

Trinity

Prp

Pool 4

Dunbar

Ryle

sheldon clark

North Oldham

Pool 1 with Larue and Pool 3 with North Hardin were by far the toughest pools. Region 2 was well represented. North Hardin was hoping to make it to the finals for a region 2 show down. Congratulation to PD for there win, but 1st and 3rd isn't bad for 1 region to win.

How does Larue and Woodford get put in the same pool?  Are they not seeded?  Also, am I understanding Woodford could have won if Sheehan wouldn't of got stuck?

And, who did Lewis lose to?  That's not surprising if he did lose. 

Sorry for all the questions, I missed this weekend.  thanks

The coaches decided to only seed the #1 teams from each region.  Then blind draw the rest of the pools being sure to seperate the region teams.  Some coaches voted against it and some coaches voted for it but then I think they were a little dissappointed when they saw how the pools were drawn out.  That is why we had Woodford and Larue wrestling each other in the first round of the tournament.  Coming out of their pool in second place automatically gave them no higher than 5th place.  Seems to me like we could come up with some other type of seeding even if the seeding meeting had to be held the night before.

I couldn't agree more.  Just seed them 1-16.  Who cares what region they are from.  Or at least seed 1-4 and blind draw the rest.  Makes sense.

There were two votes taken by the coaches. The first was rather to seed or do a blind draw. The coaches voted to seed the tournament. The next vote was rather to seed all teams or only seed the number 1 team from each region. The coaches voted to only seed the #1's. The vote and decision was left up to the coaches so it was done in a way that was decided by the majority of the coaches.

103-Larue by dec? not sure

112-PLD by pin

119-PLD by pin

125-PLD by pin

130-Larue by pin

135-PLD forfeit(last match larue had it won)

140-Larue by pin

145-Larue by pin

152-Larue by pin

160-Larue bt tech

171-PLD by maj dec

189-PLD by pin

215-Larue by dec

Hwt-Larue by dec

The end score was 41-34 for Larue.

103-LaRue by pin

Yea it was Union's varsity heavyweight. Union was without 4 varsity guys due to illness and 3 more got sick up there. They was without Jarvis Elam, Isaac Ervin, Luke Ervin, and Joe Belt all day. At one point Aaron Carr, Carson Chambliss, and Levi Griggs during the day got sick. They only lost to North Hardin by 3.

Yea it was Union's varsity heavyweight. Union was without 4 varsity guys due to illness and 3 more got sick up there. They was without Jarvis Elam, Isaac Ervin, Luke Ervin, and Joe Belt all day. At one point Aaron Carr, Carson Chambliss, and Levi Griggs during the day got sick. They only lost to North Hardin by 3.

Sheldon Clark had the same problem.  Our 103, 112, and 135 were all sick.  Our 171 and 125 are both injured so we were starting each dual giving up 30 points in forfiets.  We lost to Dunbar by 8, North Oldham by 5, and Ryle by 15.

Sheldon Clark had the same problem.  Our 103, 112, and 135 were all sick.  Our 171 and 125 are both injured so we were starting each dual giving up 30 points in forfiets.  We lost to Dunbar by 8, North Oldham by 5, and Ryle by 15.

I think all the teams had some problems.  I watched some of the Sheldon Clark duals and they did not forfeit 5 weight classes.  They may not have had all their starters but they didn't forfeit them.  If I remember right, they only forfeited 2 weight classes.  If I also remember right, North Oldham forfeited 2 weights as well (I'm sure they had others varsity wrestlers out too).

I think all the teams had some problems.  I watched some of the Sheldon Clark duals and they did not forfeit 5 weight classes.  They may not have had all their starters but they didn't forfeit them.  If I remember right, they only forfeited 2 weight classes.  If I also remember right, North Oldham forfeited 2 weights as well (I'm sure they had others varsity wrestlers out too).

Sheldon Clark forfeited 103, 112, 125, and 135 every dual they wrestled, they also forfeited 171 for 3 out of the 4 so yeah they did forfiet more than two weight class.

He had a shoulder injury and couldn't wrestle, so he decided to do something else. Thanks for trying to say something about Fern Creek.

I don't see why everyone is so hyped over North getting 9th when they snuck in past a team that was favored to take everything.

I did not think they had a 103 or a 112 all year,  so they do and they have just been sick?

CCHS also forfeited at 103 for 3 out of the four duals and at 112 171 and 215 in every other dual

I couldn't agree more.  Just seed them 1-16.  Who cares what region they are from.  Or at least seed 1-4 and blind draw the rest.  Makes sense.

Seeding the tournament 1-4 is pretty much what they did with the top teams in the four pools...

Why can't all 16 be seeded?  Or at least the top 8?  Use the same type of criteria as individuals, record and head to head and commom opponents.  It seems pretty simple to me.  You have to do something to avoid setting up pools like this.  North Hardin, Trinity, and Union in the same pool?  That was rediculous.  And Woodford and Larue in the same pool?  Come on.

Gotta agree Ranger. Also there has to be a way to have "wrestle backs." When an injustice such as Woodford and Larue are in the same daggone pool, it's hard to believe the best you can do if you lose is fifth. Pretty stupid to me. Run this thing like a 16 man bracket and these problems should be resolved.

how did campbell county individuals do.

Fuller:

Pin over Cody Hall Seneca in around 30

DEc. over Mastrovich 9-7 OT

Forfeit from Henry Clay

Pin over Union

Fuller:

Pin over Cody Hall Seneca in around 30

DEc. over Mastrovich 9-7 OT

Forfeit from Henry Clay

Pin over Union

good job "fullrock" , how about the skinny kids. dienlein,schneider,shotwell and griffith.

The first years of state duals(91-92?), were seeded like a 16 man bracket is.  You could wrestle back for third.  Pretty cool.

I think everyone pretty much agrees about this, should be easy to fix.

good job "fullrock" , how about the skinny kids. dienlein,schneider,shotwell and griffith.

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

there seems to be a lot of complaining that woodford got beat in their pool and could only go for 5th but people are forgetting that they didnt even win 5th, they got beat by trinity

there seems to be a lot of complaining that woodford got beat in their pool and could only go for 5th but people are forgetting that they didnt even win 5th, they got beat by trinity

That is a very good point

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.

isaac ervin was sick and didnt wrestle

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?

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

No some other kid

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Thank you. We did make mistakes that no one really saw or was aware of and we do know how to fix them for next year. I was a coach that was present that did not get to vote. I do however feel like it was done fairly and not just one person making the decision. I would have done a blind draw due to the growing succees of KY wrestling and how tough it could get to seed the tournament period.

Ok, either way, the only problem is woodford couldnt place second ( im guessing thats the big complaint). First of all they lost to larue, whether it be early in the day or later, they would have lost anyway, second they lost to trinity, therefore a runner up state duals title is still out of the question for woodford. Im not taking anything away from their program but a loss is a loss. Deal with it, work hard next year to win your pool, thats all that can be said!!!

Ok, either way, the only problem is woodford couldnt place second ( im guessing thats the big complaint). First of all they lost to larue, whether it be early in the day or later, they would have lost anyway, second they lost to trinity, therefore a runner up state duals title is still out of the question for woodford. Im not taking anything away from their program but a loss is a loss. Deal with it, work hard next year to win your pool, thats all that can be said!!!

I'm not making the argument from Woodford's perspective at all.  I couldn't care less if they finished 2nd or 16th.  I'm probably arguing more from Trinity and Unions perpective.  If you put Union in the pool with Dunbar or Seneca they would likely have finished in the top 8.

PintoWin, I still think you give every region the chance to send 2 teams and allow Henry Clay to take a wild card for hosting.  But I wouldn't guarantee anyone a #1 just for being the top team out of their region.

Here is the one thing that most of you are missing.

If you have ever been in a regional seeding meeting you know it takes hours to complete.  This is why they do it the day before or eirlier in the week.

Can you imagine how long it would take to figure out the top 8 seeds at the state duals?  Let alon etry to seed all 16. 

If you took 1 team from every region then you could run an 8 man bracket (no 5 match rule would occur)

If you ran a 16 man bracket then the 5 match rule comes into effect.  You would need to have a 2 day tourney.  I think this would cause even more schools to back out because of cost.

The only true fair way IMO is a blind draw like they have at the state tourney.  Have all the possibilities already made up and pick a blind bracket. 

Example.

pool 1                       

Region 1 (1)

Region 2 (1)

Regon 3 (2)

Region 4 (2)

Pool 2

Region 5 (1)

Region 6 (1)

Region 7 (2)

Region 8 (2)

Pool 3

Region 3 (1)

Region 4 (1)

REgion 5 (2)

Region 6 (2)

Pool 4

Region 7 (1)

Region 8 (1)

REgion 1 (2)

Region 2 (2)

There are many other possibilities. Draw them all out label them and randomly choose one each year.

Here is the one thing that most of you are missing.

If you have ever been in a regional seeding meeting you know it takes hours to complete.  This is why they do it the day before or eirlier in the week.

Can you imagine how long it would take to figure out the top 8 seeds at the state duals?   Let alon etry to seed all 16. 

If you took 1 team from every region then you could run an 8 man bracket (no 5 match rule would occur)

If you ran a 16 man bracket then the 5 match rule comes into effect.  You would need to have a 2 day tourney.  I think this would cause even more schools to back out because of cost.

The only true fair way IMO is a blind draw like they have at the state tourney.  Have all the possibilities already made up and pick a blind bracket. 

Example.

pool 1                       

Region 1 (1)

Region 2 (1)

Regon 3 (2)

Region 4 (2)

Pool 2

Region 5 (1)

Region 6 (1)

Region 7 (2)

Region 8 (2)

Pool 3

Region 3 (1)

Region 4 (1)

REgion 5 (2)

Region 6 (2)

Pool 4

Region 7 (1)

Region 8 (1)

REgion 1 (2)

Region 2 (2)

There are many other possibilities. Draw them all out label them and randomly choose one each year.

How do you handle the wild cards?  Are they put into the spots of the teams that dropped?  What about years when no teams come from a specific region (3)?  Does that mean a wildcard gets a #1 spot?  Maybe I'm just an optimist, but I still think seeding can be done.

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.

I agree that a pool compiled of Larue, Seneca, Trinity, and Woodford would have been a beast, but it didn't exist!  And I do not believe a pool that rough will exist as the coaches have agreed to seed the top 4-6. 

I also disagree with everyone making out that pool 1 was sooo rough.  Pool 1 placed 1st, 6th, tie 11th, and tie 13th.  Pool 2 placed 4th, 7th, tie 11th, and tie 15th (probably the weakest), Pool 3 placed 2nd, 8th, tie 9th, tie 15th, Pool 4 placed 3rd, 5th, tie 9th, tie 13th.

Overall, this is fairly even.  I would say pool 1 and 4 were the toughest, but not by much as P1 = (1+6+11+13)/4 = 7.75, P2 = (4+7+11+15)/4 = 9.25, P3 = (2+8+9+15)/4 = 8.5, P4 = (3+5+9+13)/4 = 7.5.  This shows that Pool 4 was the toughest, followed by pool 1, then pool 3, then pool 2.

This leads me to the teams you called out:  PRP was in P4 (toughest), Harrison was in P1 (2nd toughest), and both North Oldham and Sheldon Clark were in P3 (third toughest - which, with 2 of the teams you listed, you would think it would rank lower unless they are not as bad as you make out.)

I agree that a pool compiled of Larue, Seneca, Trinity, and Woodford would have been a beast, but it didn't exist!  And I do not believe a pool that rough will exist as the coaches have agreed to seed the top 4-6. 

I also disagree with everyone making out that pool 1 was sooo rough.  Pool 1 placed 1st, 6th, tie 11th, and tie 13th.  Pool 2 placed 4th, 7th, tie 11th, and tie 15th (probably the weakest), Pool 3 placed 2nd, 8th, tie 9th, tie 15th, Pool 4 placed 3rd, 5th, tie 9th, tie 13th.

Overall, this is fairly even.  I would say pool 1 and 4 were the toughest, but not by much as P1 = (1+6+11+13)/4 = 7.75, P2 = (4+7+11+15)/4 = 9.25, P3 = (2+8+9+15)/4 = 8.5, P4 = (3+5+9+13)/4 = 7.5.   This shows that Pool 4 was the toughest, followed by pool 1, then pool 3, then pool 2.

This leads me to the teams you called out:  PRP was in P4 (toughest), Harrison was in P1 (2nd toughest), and both North Oldham and Sheldon Clark were in P3 (third toughest - which, with 2 of the teams you listed, you would think it would rank lower unless they are not as bad as you make out.)

First, I "called out" teams from every pool.  I wasn't picking on one pool.  My point was that if you only seed the top 4, then a random draw could have placed any #1 with PRP, Henry Clay, and Sheldon Clark.  And another #1 with Trinity, Union, and Woodford.  Not exactly fair when you have to continue to advance through a long day of wrestling.  No it isn't likely to happen, but it could, especially in a year like this with so many really good teams.  And just because something isn't likely to happen doesn't mean we shouldn't plan for it and try to prevent it.  If none of the coaches are concerned about it then by all means let's quit debating.  But I guarantee the first time it happens and it hurts one of the coaches "in power" then we will see it change.

First, I "called out" teams from every pool.  I wasn't picking on one pool.  My point was that if you only seed the top 4, then a random draw could have placed any #1 with PRP, Henry Clay, and Sheldon Clark.  And another #1 with Trinity, Union, and Woodford.  Not exactly fair when you have to continue to advance through a long day of wrestling.  No it isn't likely to happen, but it could, especially in a year like this with so many really good teams.  And just because something isn't likely to happen doesn't mean we shouldn't plan for it and try to prevent it.  If none of the coaches are concerned about it then by all means let's quit debating.  But I guarantee the first time it happens and it hurts one of the coaches "in power" then we will see it change.

You called out the teams, that in your great and wise opinion, are poor.  Some showed to be quite tough.  As you keep promoting Union, but Union was not one of the top teams at state duals due to their illness.  I wouldn't doubt North Oldham (a team that you called out) which tied for 9th with Union could have beat Union on that day.  Sure, Union when healthy would most likely beat North Oldham, but not on that day.  Also, Paul Dunbar got second (course you believe that to be because they got an easier pool, but they did beat Woodford on the road to state duals) and only beat the North Oldham team 43 to 26 with North Oldham forfeiting 3 weights against them.  That is only 17 points and they were given 18. 

All I am saying is don't call out teams.  Every team that went to state duals was a good team that was trying to get better by getting good competition.  No, I don't think this way of seeding will cause a problem.  I don't think Woodford is sweating it as they knew it could go against them when they voted the way they did.  The coaches do not need to be in the meeting for 2 or more hours trying to seed the bracket.  Top four will do just fine.  The team that shows up that day will prevail anyway.

I know that this issue has been dead for a while, but I have been away so I couldn't put my 2 cents in until now. This so called vote that was taken, was also said to go in effect next year. I thought the coaches agreed that we couldn't change a standing rule (seeding the tourn.) the day of the duals. Everyone got so wrapped up in the idea to not seed this thing that they forgot what they had previously said. The state duals has to be seeded and ran like a 16 man bracket with the wrestle backs if people really want to see a true tourn. I know this also causes the five match rule to be in affect, but that's a totally different subject. All I'm saying is if a kid loses the first round of the state tourn. and wrestles all the way back through the conso's, doesn't he still get to wrestle for third? Of course he does, because he earned it, this same idea needs to be understood for the state duals. This isn't sour grapes about how Woodford did or any other team for that matter, it is about having "true" thirds and fifths and sevenths and so on and so on and so on. Ok, my face is blue, so I'll stop now. Just think about it, Ok?

It's kinda hard to determine the hardest pool based on taking the placements and dividing them out by the number of teams in the pool.  If the best the 2nd place team in the pool can do is 5th then it automatically pulls the pool down even if they could beat the other top teams in the other pools, so it doesn't measure the toughness of the pools only the average placement of the poos which really means nothing.  the amount of time spent in the seeding meetings throughout the year just seed all the teams that are going to be there and spread them out that way.1-4, 5-8. 9-12,etc.  That way the teams would come out like the "are supposed to" according to numbers.