First of all, there are too many wrestlers to keep track of all the wins and losses. Also records carry very little weight in my book, as far as using it for rankings. As someones signiture says on this forum, "If you've never been beaten, you've never been far away enough from home."

I don't think making more choices is the best option either because again once you get past the top two or three ratings, it is again open to subjectivity. Five choices may be valid. Making a AA for State Champion. But as far as National placings, that may just be overkill. Unless of course you are seeding for a national tournament, then it becomes relavent.

I think this is this best choice.

AA - State Champion
A - State Placer
B - State Qualifier
C - Advanced wrestler
D - Novice or beginner

Either you are or aren't a state champion
Either you are or aren't a state placer
Either you are or aren't a state qualifier
And either you've been wrestling for a while or you are just beginning. It rates the wrestler according to the facts and not on what someone thinks. (On the top three list the year.)

As far as parents sandbagging in order to get an easier bracket, they are just hurting themselves. Because as this ranking system shows, when it comes down to the end of the season you are going to have to wrestle some tough matches to get to state, place at state, and win state. There is no easy way through it. TRAVIUS talked about a system similar to the one used for subs. At subs you have a seeding meeting and look at how wrestlers have faired throughout the season. Both head to head and against common opponents. So again wrestling an easy schedule is going to hurt you come subs.

And lastly, you can't have seeding meeting for every tournament. So doing it the way we do it at subs is out of the question.