All-Star Classic

NCcowboy

Junior
Dec 18, 2011
392
338
31
OK, I am with ya. Oklahoma State wins all ten weights. BUT...

In every case a Duke wrestler is the runner up. The problem is Oklahoma State won all 50 matches by decision. And Duke was the #33 seed at every weight, also winning 50 matches, but all of their wins were by pinfall.

Final score: Duke 260, Oklahoma State 200. The good news is that you now hold the record for champs and highest second place points.

If you need to ban me at this point, I understand.
Although this would be great for Coach Lanham, Duke will only qualify 2-4 people.🤣. But a couple could be 33 seeds.
 

Corby2

All-Conference
Jul 14, 2025
635
1,309
93
I don't think you can have under -1/2 champions
Why not ? You are betting the under saying they have 0. Or betting the over saying they have 1.

That's where I would set it at is - 1/2. I don't think there's a school I would set above -1/2 besides Penn st. And they're probably -4 1/2
 
  • Like
Reactions: OSUBigBadBob

chasepollard

Heisman
Nov 25, 2005
92,227
12,748
48
Why not ? You are betting the under saying they have 0. Or betting the over saying they have 1.

That's where I would set it at is - 1/2. I don't think there's a school I would set above -1/2 besides Penn st. And they're probably -4 1/2
Yup, gotta have the 1/2 in there for the line to work.

I’m bullish on over the 1 1/2.
 

Corby2

All-Conference
Jul 14, 2025
635
1,309
93
Yup, gotta have the 1/2 in there for the line to work.

I’m bullish on over the 1 1/2.
So who are your 2 champs. My opinion only 3 guys have a shot 125, 149 and 184. I'm leaning 125. 184 is loaded . And I think VanNess will be really good but 149 is the worst weight in the country so Casey won't have to beat many guys his caliber along the way .
 
  • Like
Reactions: SEKPoke

alephpoke

Junior
May 16, 2023
82
283
48
Why not ? You are betting the under saying they have 0. Or betting the over saying they have 1.

That's where I would set it at is - 1/2. I don't think there's a school I would set above -1/2 besides Penn st. And they're probably -4 1/2
Lol he’s just making a joke since you said -1/2 instead of 1/2 ya goof
 
  • Like
Reactions: okokzach and Corby2

chasepollard

Heisman
Nov 25, 2005
92,227
12,748
48
So who are your 2 champs. My opinion only 3 guys have a shot 125, 149 and 184. I'm leaning 125. 184 is loaded . And I think VanNess will be really good but 149 is the worst weight in the country so Casey won't have to beat many guys his caliber along the way .
Well, you’re putting words on my keyboard. I never said 2, I think we have 10 champs.

But, most likely to me (in order) is 49, 25, 57, 84, 74, 33, 65, 285, 97 then 41.

NCAAs are wild and outcomes fly all over the place. I think we have strong possibility to put 3-4 in the finals depending on draws. The bad thing, half of those have all-timers on the other side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Corby2

Howie_Fartz

All-Conference
Jan 29, 2024
747
2,640
93
If a lot of your argument centers around Penn State could get unlucky or hurt, that kind of proves my point. I don't think even the biggest homers could predict how quickly DT has turned this thing around. I truly believe OSU is winning one really soon.

This PSU team is unreal. They have 9 weights where you would be shocked if they didn't at least make the semis. They have 9 weights where you can make a compelling case, their guy can win it all.

We could wrestle an amazing tournament and still not come close to their point total. I don't think it is fair to say if you are realistic about the situation this team faces you are down on them. I promise you, I'm not remotely down on this team even though I don't think they have a chance in hell at winning it all.
Id be stunned if psu got 9 in the semis. 41 is Davis correct? He's not sniffing the semis. 285 will have his hands full as well. I think we could see someone like Rocco not make the semis for the simple fact he's in the B10. 184 is nuts in that conference and all those guys have to wrestle each other. If say, Rocco and Angelo get the 4 and 5 seed then meet in the quarters... etc etc.

So realistically imo they probably get 7 in the semis which is still insane. But, I think we can too. I mean its not out of the realm of possibility with the right seed/matchups that we put that many or more in the semis. We have the talent.
 

chasepollard

Heisman
Nov 25, 2005
92,227
12,748
48
Id be stunned if psu got 9 in the semis. 41 is Davis correct? He's not sniffing the semis. 285 will have his hands full as well. I think we could see someone like Rocco not make the semis for the simple fact he's in the B10. 184 is nuts in that conference and all those guys have to wrestle each other. If say, Rocco and Angelo get the 4 and 5 seed then meet in the quarters... etc etc.

So realistically imo they probably get 7 in the semis which is still insane. But, I think we can too. I mean its not out of the realm of possibility with the right seed/matchups that we put that many or more in the semis. We have the talent.
That’s how I see it. The PSU bump will generate lots of 1 seeds outside of 84, 33 and 41.

I don’t see them not making the finals at 25, 57, 65, 74 and 97. That’s really all I see as confident bets/really likely outcomes.

Of course, they will freaking bonus 90% of their matches and run 10 through the quarters. I also think they get one or two more through.
 

okokzach

All-Conference
Dec 18, 2024
504
1,403
93
Well, you’re putting words on my keyboard. I never said 2, I think we have 10 champs.

But, most likely to me (in order) is 49, 25, 57, 84, 74, 33, 65, 285, 97 then 41.

NCAAs are wild and outcomes fly all over the place. I think we have strong possibility to put 3-4 in the finals depending on draws. The bad thing, half of those have all-timers on the other side.
You're really high on Robideau. Love it. Has anyone heard whether he will be the one to take on Cardenas on Friday?
 

chasepollard

Heisman
Nov 25, 2005
92,227
12,748
48
You're really high on Robideau. Love it. Has anyone heard whether he will be the one to take on Cardenas on Friday?
Well, I am super pumped about him!

But, when going at the angle of winning the whole thing, you have to look at the angle of who’s in the bracket and how tough the field is.

57 is one that I think can be navigated. If I had rank through toughness and the favorites I’d rank the weights (hardest down)…184, 125, 165, 175, 141, 133, 285, 197, 157, 149
 
  • Like
Reactions: okokzach

okokzach

All-Conference
Dec 18, 2024
504
1,403
93
Well, I am super pumped about him!

But, when going at the angle of winning the whole thing, you have to look at the angle of who’s in the bracket and how tough the field is.

57 is one that I think can be navigated. If I had rank through toughness and the favorites I’d rank the weights (hardest down)…184, 125, 165, 175, 141, 133, 285, 197, 157, 149
I have 141 and 133 near the top for toughest weights
 

Corby2

All-Conference
Jul 14, 2025
635
1,309
93
Well, I am super pumped about him!

But, when going at the angle of winning the whole thing, you have to look at the angle of who’s in the bracket and how tough the field is.

57 is one that I think can be navigated. If I had rank through toughness and the favorites I’d rank the weights (hardest down)…184, 125, 165, 175, 141, 133, 285, 197, 157, 149
Antrell, Shapiro and Duke. The weight has some guys. Watters , Cardenas and Webster. It's definitely a good weight