Someone in charge look at 16u 185 district 1. There are 5 kids from the south sub district listed in the district bracket. Hopkins was in the south sub and is listed as a north 3rd. Grubb is also listed as south 3rd. Erpelding placed third in the north and is not listed, IF he is not going on(don't know) then how can there be 5 kids from the south sub district in the district bracket???

Actually, if you check close, there are several instances where more than 4 go on. IF ... one sub only has 1, 2, or 3 ... we will pull finishers from the opposite sub.

A few years ago, a Ft. Scott kids, was invited as a 5th place finisher. And, he placed at State!

That is a very nice thing to do, we don't do that in District II. We have had 6 or 7 in a bracket before in one sub and only 1 or 2 in the other sub, we just go with bye's.

This brings up a good question, how come all the Districts do things different, this is for State, you would think that every DIstrict would have to do things the same way.

In all my years of being involved with kansas kids I've never heard of this! As JT said we've never to my knowledge done that in D2. At first blush, this would appear to violate the intent of the qualifying tournament.

It does seem fair that if there weren't 8 kids in the opposite sub district that there should be an allowance for them to wrestle again in the district tournament. I agree the same rules should pertain to all districts to keep things fair.

It sounds to me like District I applies the rule and some of the other Districts do not. It is not very difficult for the Sub-District Directors to work together on brackets that have less than four wrestlers.

Is there any rule for District to State in the same situations?

Hats off to District one for making sure wrestlers get to wrestle all they can!

Try six kids from 14 & under 265 qualifying for districts from the north sub district 1. don't know about that one...a bit overboard there

I agree that all districts should do things the same. This forum has pinpointed certain inequities. (drawing for byes in subs, taking alternates, etal) District 1, for years, has taken alternate wrestlers to have a full 8-man bracket, maybe that's one reason our tournaments last so long.

We do wrestle for 5th place in subs but this year voted NOT to wrestle for 5th place in Districts. This was done primarily as a time savings procedure. Plus, very seldom does a qualifier not go to the State.

This year we had an inordinate amount of qualifiers choose not to compete in the District tournament. Personally, I think if you commit to a series you should commit to all of it. Yes, Spring Break plays a huge part.

Another can-of-worms is we have a few wrestlers who will qualify for State without having wrestled a match in subs or district. I think these contestants lose their competitive edge.

I think all Districts should have to adhere to the same rules when starting the road to State. Why is it fair for a kid who placed 5th at Sub Dist 1 South to go on to the next step while the kid that placed 5th in District 2 or 3 has to go home? (This is the case in 14U 90lbs) Dist 3 East could have advanced 5 while Dist 2 North could've advanced 6 to fill their 8 man bracket for this week. Assuming they had enough wrestlers to do that? Didn't look like Dist 4 had enough to begin with at this weight. District competition should require a full 8 man bracket so that as many get the chance to go to state as possible! (of course provided that there are enough kids to fill the age/weight) Why wouldn't you do it that way to begin with?

what if, one sub takes 6 to district and the other takes 2. ? how do you set the bracket up. and what happens if the 5 or 6 seed out of the sub that has 6 ends up placing in the top 4 that go to state. that means subs didnt mean anything. so say the 5 beat the 4 from the same sub and goes to state. but the 4 beat 5 at subs to qualify for disrict. shouldnt they have to wrestle best out of 3 matches. it looks like the 5 and 6 wrestlers are getting a 2nd chance to qualify for state. i dont know anyone in this situation and im not try to say anything bad about anyone. just saying this scenario could happen. Jim Sicard Manhattan

That scenario HAS happened! In District 1, if there are only two wrestlers from one sub let's say the South. The Norths 5th place becomes S3 and the 6th placer becomes S4.

A few years ago we had a good wrestler that had a terrible day due to an illness. He placed 5th in the South. He became North 4 which seeded him on the bracket opposite S1. He beat him and went on to place in the top 4 at State.

D.Salyer or USAWKS1 Whats the rule about kids changing clubs and switching Districts in the middle of the wrestlig season. Could a wrestler change clubs after qualifying at subs.

There are no restrictions on changing clubs at any time during the regular season, regardless of the district.

Once the wrestler has entered subdistrict thru a specific club, he/she cannot change clubs until after the state tournament.

hmmmmm

Randy stated previously that historically a fifth place person has gone on to state when another district did not have 4 wrestlers.
After reading that, in my son's weight class 12/68 there are only 11 going to state. In our district there were 5 wrestlers and the 5th did not receive the option. Wouldn't you want a "full" bracket going to state?

My son is also in the under 12 68 pound weight class. I agree with Caton, in a situation where there are going to be 16 or less wrestlers in a weight division it would be nice to give them the experience. I believe it is of benefit to the young wrestler and to the sport. How to do this fairly for every wrestler in various divisions, I don't know. I do know at some of the weights like heavy's and lighter, that the more that are wrestling the better because it means more mat time which is where experience is gained. I don't like the option as was used in Oklahoma last year, that is eliminating a weight class or two. Lets find ways to allow as many kids as possible the opportunity to go to state without doing away with the weight classes. Maybe offering the opportunity for the top six in each division and district to go, thus a 24 man bracket or a combination of 24 wrestlers total from the districts depending on placement and qualifications. I would also challenge the need to allow for a challenge for 2nd since on a state level we should be assured of who deserves 2nd at a tournament other than just going on the luck of the draw. Use the same format used in most major National tournaments for the challenge, again this is for 2nd only.

Richard, I to believe that rules should be followed and we are in complete agreement with that. I also believe that when possible that rules should be changed if it is to benefit the sport and the kids in the sport. In the case where there are not enough kids to fill a bracket we can make a fairly safe assumption that those very kids are going through the season without many matches. I firmly believe that rules are intended to encourage and allow for a fair playing field. When you have smaller or heavier kids that receive half of the matches then we need to allow for additional mat time to encourage the kid to become a better wrestler. When a wrestler can not wrestle more than one division to get more mat time I believe that rules need to be looked at to allow for that option during the regular season. My son is smaller, and unless we wrestle in Oklahoma tournaments at the beginning of the year he never gets to wrestle more than 3 matches at any tournament and many times he will only get one. That is unless weights are combined then he might get three. I honestly don’t think that we had more than three matches all year, in our division outside of nationals unless there was combined weights.

We all know that mat time, in competition mode makes better wrestlers. I agree that the rule needs to be followed but in weights and divisions where the brackets are not filled, what harm is there in making a rule change, through proper methods, to allow more kids to wrestle so they can obtain more experience, especially at a state tournament? It is not as if we are advocating for more wrestlers, just a full bracket or opportunities for our children to get the same amount of experience wrestling, as do other kids. Yet, because of the size God made them, they are punished or forced to gain or loose weight and become something they are not. I have appreciated your posts over the time I have been here and find myself usually agreeing with you. On this matter, I agree, but I also believe that rules need to be changed when not providing the best opportunity for all of our kids, whether they are heavyweights or lightweights.