Question on tournament Team scoring vs. regular season scoring in college wrestling

[Bob78]

Hello College Wrestling Fans and Historians -

I'm curious as to why the team scoring system is as it is for Nationals, and even for Conference and other tournaments. Example - 1 point for a decision, 2 for a pin, as opposed to 3 for a decision and 6 for a pin in the regular season. I've tried to google for an answer, and cannot find the reasoning behind this. I can understand the added Team bonus points for progressing through the bracket, and which on the surface isn't clear to me that it would change the standings if the regular individual scoring were in place.

My guess is that the individual bout scoring change has something to do with how the math would play out over the longer run, but I'm just guessing.

Doubling the score for a pin over a decision is the same in either case. The half-points for majors and techs is a semi-wash. I'm thinking it would be easier for the average fan to follow if the Team scoring system was consistent with the dual meet system. I'm not sure if it would tilt the scoring for stronger teams too far to one side, although it seems to me it would give more teams a better chance to rise in the standings with some of their better wrestlers won by MD or TF. Or.... maybe the math works out so there is no difference. I don't know, and I have not put in the time to play it out pencil-to-paper.

Any true insight on this is appreciated. Thanks!

 

[GregPickel]

Bob, apologies, I saw your DM and completely forgot to respond to it. I still don't have a good answer for you now just like I didn't last year beyond the fact that there has always been tournament scoring and dual meet scoring. My best guess is that the fact that points are awarded for advancement is why the number awarded for the outcome (pin, tech, etc.) is lower.

 

[Bob78]

Bob, apologies, I saw your DM and completely forgot to respond to it. I still don't have a good answer for you now just like I didn't last year beyond the fact that there has always been tournament scoring and dual meet scoring. My best guess is that the fact that points are awarded for advancement is why the number awarded for the outcome (pin, tech, etc.) is lower.

Thanks, Greg. My curiosity gets to me each tournament season. I've not found any answers online or from people who closely follow the sport! Maybe it's George Carlin-esque... there's no reason for it, it's just our policy!

As for the advancement points, you're right in that that is a likely reason. My thought, and I need to quit thinking about it, is that you could simply reverse that and go with usual scoring and take away from the advancement points. Or not even touch the advancement points. I guess I'd have to go back to past tournaments and sketch it out bout by bout almost to see what the impact would be. My whole thing here is trying to make it easier for the average fan (like me) to follow more intuitively.

I appreciate your response.

 

[NoSoup4U]

Thanks, Greg. My curiosity gets to me each tournament season. I've not found any answers online or from people who closely follow the sport! Maybe it's George Carlin-esque... there's no reason for it, it's just our policy!

As for the advancement points, you're right in that that is a likely reason. My thought, and I need to quit thinking about it, is that you could simply reverse that and go with usual scoring and take away from the advancement points. Or not even touch the advancement points. I guess I'd have to go back to past tournaments and sketch it out bout by bout almost to see what the impact would be. My whole thing here is trying to make it easier for the average fan (like me) to follow more intuitively.

I appreciate your response.

Well the thinking behind it could be because number and quality of participants and teams --- Dual meet scoring is an either you win or lose scenario each match and how you win gets points--- so you score for your team and its only 10 matches against only one other team so how you win a match matters much more than just winning a match--- but a tourney its a different ball game you could lose 1st match but you get to keep on wrestling? and say you pin your way back to the semis finals in the consi's (amongst all the losers) is it fair to say a pin is worth 6 or does/should it matter more that your team has as many wins as possible [thus advancement points] not type of win??? since there are many teams and many wrestlers

 

[Bob78]

Well the thinking behind it could be because number and quality of participants and teams --- Dual meet scoring is an either you win or lose scenario each match and how you win gets points--- so you score for your team and its only 10 matches against only one other team so how you win a match matters much more than just winning a match--- but a tourney its a different ball game you could lose 1st match but you get to keep on wrestling? and say you pin your way back to the semis finals in the consi's (amongst all the losers) is it fair to say a pin is worth 6 or does/should it matter more that your team has as many wins as possible [thus advancement points] not type of win??? since there are many teams and many wrestlers

Thanks.
I hear ya on the raw number of wins building up; however, they already reward the type of win on a progressive scale. 2 team points for a pin and 1 for a decision is the same 2-to-1 team score ratio as in regular season Team scoring.
A deeper team with 4 wins by decision gets 4 team points. A team with just a few entrants can tie that with 2 falls... same as regular season scoring.

I'm just curious and want to understand the reasoning behind the different scoring systems. It doesn't matter in any way, because eventually the cream rises throughout the tournament. Personally, I'd find the scoring easier to follow and project just because of it being consistent with the regular season.

 

[GregPickel]

Thanks, Greg. My curiosity gets to me each tournament season. I've not found any answers online or from people who closely follow the sport! Maybe it's George Carlin-esque... there's no reason for it, it's just our policy!

As for the advancement points, you're right in that that is a likely reason. My thought, and I need to quit thinking about it, is that you could simply reverse that and go with usual scoring and take away from the advancement points. Or not even touch the advancement points. I guess I'd have to go back to past tournaments and sketch it out bout by bout almost to see what the impact would be. My whole thing here is trying to make it easier for the average fan (like me) to follow more intuitively.

I appreciate your response.

I hate it because I know this is something you definitely would prefer a better answer to, but I do think that is the simplest explanation.