Should the kid that wrestles back to 3rd place get an opportunity to challange the 2nd place finalist if they did not meet in the tournament. I think so. At our High School regional I think we had 4 of the 14 weights where the 2nd & 3rd place finishers never met during the tournament. Some states do use this format mainly at their regional and/or sectional.

I agree with the true 2nd challenge.

i kind of like that idea. The problem would be when do you hold this matchup, if would have to be after the championship matches? kind of a letdown because a lot of places have a big production for the championship round. Presents problems like number of matches in a day(usually not a problem in 2 day tourney), 2nd place having huge letdown after losing championship, less time to rest for 2nd place, etc. I really like the idea though and would like to see it happen.

They do it at some of the kids nationals like Tulsa, but it is a huge dis-advantage for the kid who just lost in the finals. I don't have the exact number in front of me, but the 3rd place finisher wins like 70% of the challenge matches. It was put in place because there were so many kids in the bracket nobody ever heard of and it was impossible to seed. If we seeded the top 2 for HS state it would in a large part fix the issue. I don't like the best two kids getting put on the same side, but a challenge match is really not an equal playing field. You have one kids who is just coming off a 3rd place win and is fired up and ready to go, and another who just lost what is in most cases his life long dream of a state championship. The advantage is clearly to the wrestler who got 3rd and the stats I hear bear that out. Just my two cents.

24/7

i agree with 24/7. i would just like to see it happen for selfish reasons, another great match against 2 good wrestlers is never a bad thing to watch. There are many obstacles to overcome though and he presents a lot of good points. I think the regional is the only place it could ever work if it was implemented, i agree that once a kid loses the championship match in state he is so down that it would be unfair to have him wrestle again. If you lose a regional, it sucks, but you still have state to look forward to.

You wrestle the finals, 3rd&4th, 5th&6th at the same time.
Then any challange matches come immediately following. The rest problem is solved they get the same amount of time off between matches.

I agree, fix the seeding problem, which Coach Alley has proven is doable, and then the rest is not required.

what if you wrestled the challenge match before the finals but after 3rd and 4th; i guess that would be time consuming but it might work

It is psychologically unfair. My son has been in six such situations. When he has finished third and been able to challenge he has won every time (3) and when he has finished 2nd he has finished third twice and second once. It is just too much to ask at a state tournament. The matches are anticlimatic. Finals should be such, FINALS the FINAL matches of the bracket. Smokey, in Wisoonsin they use that to determine who gets to go to state since only the top two qualify from sectionals so maybe you can get some data there. If it is 70% of the time the third place kid beats the 2nd place kid it is obviously a huge disadvantage to the 2nd place finisher.

It sure makes the finals matches a little more aggressive - knowing if you lose you'll have another one. As far as psychologically unfair all the kids know this could happen even before the tournament starts. It takes OUT some of the luck of the draw in the pairings when they do the original brackets. I guess when you lose a semi-final match in double overtime and come back and win the consulation 3rd place convincingly and then if the other finalist gets stomped because of a good draw - a silver can taste a little better than bronze. I am very familiar with the sectionals in Wisconsin as well as winter temperatures. I have no idea on the percentages. I have been on both ends of this True 2nd method - I still think it is an appropriate way of determining 2nd place. No doubt the best way to avoid this situation is to take 1st. Heck - I do not like some of the procedures for qualifying for the Olympic Team at the Olympic Trials. I think some of the elite guys can pretty much sit out until the a champion of the bracket is determined and then the guy that wins the tournament still has to beat the "Elite Guy" 2 out of 3. Now that is psychologically tough knowing you may have 5 or 6 matches against the best guys in the country and when your done with that you have a round robin 2 out 3 with the top dog - while he sits and watches you grind it out all day or 2 days.

Wont ever happen in High School. It took them a century after all other states did, to give 6 medals in the state tourney. True second works in kids becuase there are so many matches and mass confusion most of the time but if anything that might and that is close to slim and none is at the region tournament for a true second. What to me would be the most acceptable and easiest for the state is to do the drawings as they do know but not to release them until a appropriate board, a different board from each classification (be a 321A, 4A, 5A, & 6A) they would know the kids the best, and to look at each wieght class and make changes only where needed and made the most sense. Have like 5 respected coaches or officials vote if to redraw or just realign the said brackets. Wouldnt take more then a day (that Sunday after regionals), then all would be good. The more I think of this the more I think could and would work just fine. Maybe with as slow as our state is could happen by my grandkids come around..

I'm not sure about that reasoning smokey. I would like to think that the last thing the guys that are in the finals are thinking about prior/during their state championship match is a potential "next match". If they are, then I'd say their in trouble from the first whistle. I don't beleive they should need any additional motivation (if thats what you're considering a possible challenge match?) to wrestle their hardest in a State Championship final. My son has experience being Challenged at Tulsa Natls. twice, and did win them both, but I didnt care for it and couldnt suppot it. It is extremely hard to get them emotionally ready in 30 minutes after losing something they wanted more than anything in the world at that time.
Heck, its very realistically possible that my son could benefit this year from a challenge match format the way his bracket is structured at State and I still wouldnt advocate it. I would prefer to see that it was structured correctly from the beginning with #1 and #2 on opposite sides. That I would support. I disagree with the arguement that "you have to beat them all anyway", and agree with you that a "silver tastes better than a bronze". But I think setting the bracket up properly in the beginning is better than having a challenge match to decide it.

Some guys will not even challange if they had the opportunity because they did and can not get first. I was just throwing the idea out for Kansans to ponder. It is used in other parts of the country and obviously some other people in the wrestling world found it to be useful in reginal/sectional qualifying tournaments, state and/or national tournaments.

What if the top 4 ranked are all from the same regionals. What do you tell the other guys who place 1st and second in their regionals. We reseeded.

Smokey- I would suggest the best two kids separated regardless of where they came from.

24/7

well if you guys like this "TRUE SECOND" idea then why not just have all tournaments as round robins. thats how you could really see the top dogs. but thats unrealistic. I know it sucks and theres not the anticipation of the top 2 meeting in the finals if one slips up or they're on the same side but to be the best and the top dog you've got to beat the best. sometimes you got to win the hard way or bite the bullet.