Cross bracket and follow the leader

[eazymoney]

Having the semis cross and still have it be follow the leader to the finals seems counter productive. With four qualifiers if the guy that beats you makes the semis and gets crossed in a loss there is no way you would see them until the third place match. If you want a walkover do it in the third place match, both kids are already going anyway. Being as four qualify I say cross the quarter finals with no follow the leader, like IHSA does, and if the 6th match comes into play it wouldn't be until the 3rd place match and the kid is already going anyway. Venues would need four mats though. And no, my kid did not get screwed by this but I saw a lot of bad draw halves of brackets where the 3 of the four best kids were on one side and one of them weren't getting a wrestleback.

[cccoach]

Agree! I saw a regional final rematch in the blood rounds of sectionals. When IMO they were the third and fourth-best kids. When #1 and #2 are separated from one regional they shouldn't see each other again unless it is for a medal. 135 CC Grant and Peotone Finnegan is the example I'm using. Just my opinion.

[MMSTrojans]

Having the semis cross and still have it be follow the leader to the finals seems counter productive. With four qualifiers if the guy that beats you makes the semis and gets crossed in a loss there is no way you would see them until the third place match. If you want a walkover do it in the third place match, both kids are already going anyway. Being as four qualify I say cross the quarter finals with no follow the leader, like IHSA does, and if the 6th match comes into play it wouldn't be until the 3rd place match and the kid is already going anyway. Venues would need four mats though. And no, my kid did not get screwed by this but I saw a lot of bad draw halves of brackets where the 3 of the four best kids were on one side and one of them weren't getting a wrestleback.

There's two problems with your assessment:

1. If your guy loses in the semifinal, you aren't getting a wrestleback anyway.

2. If three good wrestlers are on the same side of the bracket, one of them is not getting out under the old format because if your guy makes the finals, you have to wrestle who they beat. They could, however, all get out under this format.

A good example of number 2 would be last year's heavyweight bracket at Dekalb The #1 and #2 heavyweights were on the same side of the bracket. Only one could make the finals. If you lost to the #1, your wrestleback was against the #2 to qualify for state. The #3 heavyweight could have been on that side of the bracket but we'll never know.

Before the crossbracketing happened, the two sides of the brackets didn't meet until the medal round. It was essentially two mini brackets and you had to be in the top 2 of the six on your side to qualify for state.

The only way to make everyone happy would be to have two day sectionals with full wrestlebacks. I like the change even if it hurt my team more than it helped. I feel like it does a better job at getting the 4 best wrestlers to state when you compare it to the old way.

[eazymoney]

no need for two day

There's two problems with your assessment:

1. If your guy loses in the semifinal, you aren't getting a wrestleback anyway.

2. If three good wrestlers are on the same side of the bracket, one of them is not getting out under the old format because if your guy makes the finals, you have to wrestle who they beat. They could, however, all get out under this format.

A good example of number 2 would be last year's heavyweight bracket at Dekalb The #1 and #2 heavyweights were on the same side of the bracket. Only one could make the finals. If you lost to the #1, your wrestleback was against the #2 to qualify for state. The #3 heavyweight could have been on that side of the bracket but we'll never know.

Before the crossbracketing happened, the two sides of the brackets didn't meet until the medal round. It was essentially two mini brackets and you had to be in the top 2 of the six on your side to qualify for state.

The only way to make everyone happy would be to have two day sectionals with full wrestlebacks. I like the change even if it hurt my team more than it helped. I feel like it does a better job at getting the 4 best wrestlers to state when you compare it to the old way.

I still say there is no need to have a two day tournament when 4 qualify. Just cross bracket the quarters like the IHSA does. If a wrestler makes the 3rd place match and it is going to be their 6th match then they get 4th, but they still qualify. Im sure that most people would be in favor of this rather than follow the leader. 4 mats would be required though.