i agree with the dual rankings but think like many statistics, the further you go from the top, the more likely you will see larger swings in outcome. for instance this year, in every poll or ranking, danbury is 1st. the two rankings above and ctonline agree. no degree of uncertainty. then you get to #2 and you get three different teams, warde, b.e. and xavier. by the time you get to #5, there are 3 again. point here is, it's not scientific and is subject to opinion. when it comes to polling (asking coaches) which is unlike numerical ranking which simply looks at an equation(s). to that point - greenwich, staples, waterford, montville, and gilbert all got votes by coaches on ctwrestling's final rankings yet failed to make either the numerical list or the real list above, which casts fault in this particular method (opinion poll) of ranking. The best method would be numerical and the most accurate would be the top 3-5 teams. after that, too many variables.

when it comes to ranking a dual team, there should be something said about difficulty of schedule. an easy schedule can often be assessed by individuals who have big records that don't produce at states and especially not at the open. the record gets them a high seed but they lose in 1/4s. i noticed it mostly with the smaller schools but it happens at all the classes. while i understand that the team can gain momentum from a win throughout the season, shutting out teams and wrestling a soft team doesn't build much of a program. and the season usually ends a week or two sooner.

weiner @ 285 has an overhook from neutral and gets hit with a stalling call to lose in SV. not a good call.

that sure was a very loud crowd but i watched the twitter film from gametime and not sure i would have called it that way. not to take away from nodden or the ref, but i think the bad stalemate call just before this affected the ref's judgement. if you watch the film many times as i have, notice the ref coming into the frame at :21, he kind of stops in his tracks, like, what just happened? just a very tough call.

i'm not confident about the other half

Kum ba yah.

i think gilbert and canton had a soft schedule for the most part. so their records are a little distorted. maybe the 2 of them at 3 and 4. after all, a dual meet team tournament team not always the same thing. we won't have to wait long to find out.

montville, windham, maybe canton

likewise, i think since everyone has someone they root for, and you will likely know everyone there is to know for a weight class, you only need 14 guys to one weight each. from that data, you could extract the leaders by divisions. ie. i like 132 so i know the top kids and some of the new guys because i follow the entire weight class. maybe there's a guy from L and 2 from M and a freshman from LL. i make my top 3 or 4 guys and every body sends it to abdoshaban. we do the leg work and he provides the forum.

i agree - i see teams with huge win records and then look at their schedule and laugh. and those records influence team rankings. though the only thing that matters is the ability and not the record, i just have to remember back a couple years where the 106 (i think from st paul) was seated first because he had 50% forfeits. and he was out in 2.

he has been ranked other places - just not here. and you can see a couple people aren't in his weight class anymore. i would say #3 is where i would put him in class S. (and falcon was at the lyman tournament also so should be ahead of him). 145 1—Flemming, Granby (27-2) S-1 2—Kury, Montville (27-4) S-2 3--Korper, HK (24-12) S-4 4—Schwartz, Northwestern (25-6) S-5 5—Falcon, Bolton (16-2) S-6 5—Smith, Gilbert (29-9) Honorable Mention Machowski, East Catholic (23-7) Maloney, Somers (12-9)

not sure st paul should even be in the top 10. nonnewaug beat them and they only beat oxford on criteria. and both of these teams have been beaten by other berkshire league teams. if anything, terryville should be ahead of them and even northwestern, who beat both nonnewaug and oxford