Renegade spends a great deal of time on the rankings. He does a pretty good job for the most part and is very proud of his work. It can be very difficult to rank those wrestlers that never wrestle common opponents especially if they are from completely different regions. However,I have noticed that his presumptions on "who would be better than whom" do not take into account for wrestler's improvement from a previous year's result, assume that the "big" name is always better than the "lesser" known wrestler and that he does at times show bias with certain individuals. Is this wrong? No, it is his choice and we can choose not to get worked up over it and let the boys settle it on the mat. But I do take issue with the fact that he has stated that he sends "his" rankings in to national rankings as if they were "official" rankings. While I appreciate at least someone for taking the initiative, his bias could taint a wrestler's future recruitment opportunity. Just a thought.
By the way Cokeley, Zack lost on January 31 at SMN to James Wauer from Washington, an unranked opponent.
Once again...
Every living person has a bias whether it's their world view or their opinion of a wrestler's ability. These rankings reflect the information that I receive. In the absence of that information, I rank the wrestlers based on the data that I personally find through my own research. As is usually the case, most cries of bias come from those that have not done the research. To be clear, if anyone has criteria that would erase a perceived bias, please state that criteria on this board or PM me with the info. Just claiming bias without any proof cannot be taken seriously.
