I understand 152 is a crowded weight, but what kind of dad would I be if I didn't go to bat for Hunter Mullin. Obviously his loss to Hensley Saturday created a ranking situation where somebody was going to have to be ranked above somebody they had lost to. It appears you chose Madl and Luellen for those honors. I understand Mullin's head to head loss, but Hunter is a combined 3-0 against those two. If you have to pick a reason a kid should be ranked higher than someone who has beaten him, then it would make sense to look at common opponents. In regard to Hensley Mullin has beaten Killham, Purtle, Luellen and Madl, all who have beaten Hensley. He has also beaten Luellen twice and has beaten Purtle who has beaten Luellen. With regard to Madl, I don't see a common opponent (other than both lost to Frame) and thus you only have their head to head match. Therefore, I make the argument that if anyone still can justify being ranked over somebody they have lost to, Hunter definatly has the criteria to remain at #2 despite a loss. Actually, I want him to be ranked #1, I just can't come up with a logical argument with regard to Frame:) I in no way intend this argument to be a knock on any of the guys I've mentioned. This is a great group of athletes and obviously not much separates them.