# Thread: 1/24/10 Dual Impact Index

1. ## 1/24/10 Dual Impact Index

http://themat.com/section.php?section_id=5&page=ranking_details&Rank ingID=1160

First question: Why is Iowa State ranked ahead of Iowa in the dual rankings when Iowa has beaten Iowa State twice? This is garbage!

Answer: Each team is compared to each other team, wrestler-by-wrestler, in the Dual Impact Index. Andrew Sorenson being ranked ahead of Aaron Janssen makes sense, considering that although Sorenson has lost to Janssen twice, he's also beaten Neil Erisman, Kyle John, and Tyson Reiner, all of whom Janssen lost to. Bonus points are given for differences of 40, 50, and 60 points, which would put the "mock dual" between Iowa and Iowa State at 17-16 (Varner teching Lofthouse, and Borschel majoring Burk). While Iowa certainly has Iowa State's number, these rankings are based on an entire body of work, and the Cyclones rank ahead as a result.

2. ## Re: 1/24/10 Dual Impact Index

how do you calculate the tournament team rankings? Maryland at 16th seems awfully low

3. ## Re: 1/24/10 Dual Impact Index

Wrestlers are given points based on their rankings place, on a 21-17-14.5-13.5-11-10-7.5-6.5-3-3-3-3-2.5-2.5-2.5-2.5-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1 basis.

4. ## Re: 1/24/10 Dual Impact Index

So...Since your formula predicts that Iowa State would beat Iowa 17-16 in a dual, I would conclude that your formula is flawed. If I were you I would go back to the drawing board. SHP, you have alot of facts and numbers rolling around in your noggin and I appreciate all of the time and effort you put into your rankings. But I find it hard to take this set very seriosly since it has an obvious kink.

5. ## Re: 1/24/10 Dual Impact Index

I would have assumed that a statistical projection like this would actually make you Iowa fans happy.

On paper and by the numbers Iowa State should win but because of "intensity", "desire to achieve domination", "real heart", or something else Iowa comes out on top.

6. ## Re: 1/24/10 Dual Impact Index

Originally Posted by JensenS
I would have assumed that a statistical projection like this would actually make you Iowa fans happy.

On paper and by the numbers Iowa State should win but because of "intensity", "desire to achieve domination", "real heart", or something else Iowa comes out on top.
It doesn't bother or make me happy. It just shows itself to be clearly flawed. When you beat "number 1 dual team" with 4 starters out...they probably arent the number 1 dual team.

Not to mention both teams wrestled full strength earlier in the year(save iowa having Danimal out) and Iowa won that. Do these rankings factor Gallick or Jensen as the starter right now?

7. ## Re: 1/24/10 Dual Impact Index

Jensen, he's ranked #11.

8. ## Re: 1/24/10 Dual Impact Index

You could move Dalton up to ten since Cody Cleveland is still ranked ahead of him and hasnt wrestled since Moses parted the sea.

9. ## Re: 1/24/10 Dual Impact Index

Maybe one reason Iowa State is ranked above Iowa is that he's got Luke Lofthouse at 197 instead of Chad Beatty. I could understand having Lofthouse in there instead of Beatty if SHP was consistent throught these rankings Why would he still have Cody Cleveland and Jordan Buroughs listed but not Chad? Why not put the guys that are actually wrestling for the mocs and huskers in this ranking?

Pound for Pound makes me laugh too. What kind of flawed formula has Jake Varner as the #1 PfP wrestler in the nation? He may very well be. He certainly has the potential to be. But only 14 of his 18 wins (8 falls) are with bonus points while Metcalf has 19 of his 22 wins (11 falls) by bonus points.