One of my readers sent me some private e-mail with a question he says has received some conversation on another site and he would like to see how it develops over here so I have agreed to put it up.
The Question has to do with whether it would be ethical for a coach or a wrestler to intentionally default a match in the quarter final match of a regional tournament in order to cross over to a side that would significantly improve that wrestlers chances of qualifying to the state tournament.
I have conferred about this with a few good sources, and I have come to a conclusion through logical progression that deviates from the seemingly ethical standard. No surprise really, unlike many, I am able to divorce my personal feelings on matters and look at things objectively and logically and formulate an opinion or a conclusion based on the greater good rather than on subjective moral and ethical standards; that said, lets examine the question.
Would defaulting in the quarters of a tournament to cross over to a more favorable side be unethical? The simple answer I have concluded is NO! And here are my reasons why?
Why should the individual be punished because the establishment can’t develop a better strategy to select an accurate representation of the top four individual in a weight class?
It is the coach’s responsibility to get his wrestler as far as possible. If the wrestler is a senior and it is his last chance to qualify it might be a life altering experience to face an opponent that is clearly superior and have to witness one that is clearly inferior advance in your stead.
If a wrestler is an underclassmen and qualifying would give him the experience this year that could put him over the top next year it would be a disservice to let that opportunity slip away merely because a less than perfect formula dictated that it be so.
If you wrestle in Dade County, your odds of placing in the state tournament are greater simply because you come from a tougher region. Leaving a better wrestler at home simply because the formula screwed the wrestler is wrong. Get your kid to state and he has a goods chance to place, he is from Dade for God’s sake. Leave him at home and send a lesser representative and you will have someone less capable of representing the county, not to mention that someone will likely be atop the podium from some other region that is less deserving.
Finally, lets not be all self righteous about this thing, we all know that there are injustices in the world, and if it is within our power to overcome one, it is not merely our right, but our duty to do so. How many of you pay every penny of your taxes? There are people starving in the world after all, those extra tax dollars that you save with loopholes is unethical and might be keeping food, medical attention, and other social services from those less fortunate, but for you it means your family can have a little more. Besides, the government will likely misspend the money anyway right? So that makes you feel better about not paying the full amount of your tax burden even though it is unethical.
Well guess what, the situation I described is no different. Don’t pay the full price if you don’t have to, (a little more for your family i.e. Team), and guess what the government (FHSAA) will like misspend it anyway (a lesser representative will take a medal home). So do what you can for yours and let the rest figure it out for themselves.
So is it ethical to default a match to get to the other side of the bracket and make your way to state like you deserve? Who gives a $hit? Do what is right for your wrestler and get him to state so he doesn’t have to sit in the stands a see a lesser but more fortuitous opponent wrestle in the Lakeland center when he know it should be him.
The Question has to do with whether it would be ethical for a coach or a wrestler to intentionally default a match in the quarter final match of a regional tournament in order to cross over to a side that would significantly improve that wrestlers chances of qualifying to the state tournament.
I have conferred about this with a few good sources, and I have come to a conclusion through logical progression that deviates from the seemingly ethical standard. No surprise really, unlike many, I am able to divorce my personal feelings on matters and look at things objectively and logically and formulate an opinion or a conclusion based on the greater good rather than on subjective moral and ethical standards; that said, lets examine the question.
Would defaulting in the quarters of a tournament to cross over to a more favorable side be unethical? The simple answer I have concluded is NO! And here are my reasons why?
Why should the individual be punished because the establishment can’t develop a better strategy to select an accurate representation of the top four individual in a weight class?
It is the coach’s responsibility to get his wrestler as far as possible. If the wrestler is a senior and it is his last chance to qualify it might be a life altering experience to face an opponent that is clearly superior and have to witness one that is clearly inferior advance in your stead.
If a wrestler is an underclassmen and qualifying would give him the experience this year that could put him over the top next year it would be a disservice to let that opportunity slip away merely because a less than perfect formula dictated that it be so.
If you wrestle in Dade County, your odds of placing in the state tournament are greater simply because you come from a tougher region. Leaving a better wrestler at home simply because the formula screwed the wrestler is wrong. Get your kid to state and he has a goods chance to place, he is from Dade for God’s sake. Leave him at home and send a lesser representative and you will have someone less capable of representing the county, not to mention that someone will likely be atop the podium from some other region that is less deserving.
Finally, lets not be all self righteous about this thing, we all know that there are injustices in the world, and if it is within our power to overcome one, it is not merely our right, but our duty to do so. How many of you pay every penny of your taxes? There are people starving in the world after all, those extra tax dollars that you save with loopholes is unethical and might be keeping food, medical attention, and other social services from those less fortunate, but for you it means your family can have a little more. Besides, the government will likely misspend the money anyway right? So that makes you feel better about not paying the full amount of your tax burden even though it is unethical.
Well guess what, the situation I described is no different. Don’t pay the full price if you don’t have to, (a little more for your family i.e. Team), and guess what the government (FHSAA) will like misspend it anyway (a lesser representative will take a medal home). So do what you can for yours and let the rest figure it out for themselves.
So is it ethical to default a match to get to the other side of the bracket and make your way to state like you deserve? Who gives a $hit? Do what is right for your wrestler and get him to state so he doesn’t have to sit in the stands a see a lesser but more fortuitous opponent wrestle in the Lakeland center when he know it should be him.
32 comments:
Great topic. I have to agree that it is not unethical. A coach has to find a way to get his wrestlers into the state tournament. The wrestler will still have to earn his way in by having to beat several opponents so he is not getting a free ride. The way Dade county wrestles at regionals with everyone being prepared and bringing it, he still might not get in by crossing over.
Agreed. No ethical issues. A coach has a responsibility to help his athletes move forward into the best position to succeed.
Devils advocate,
I would think that by your name title you should alwyas have a contrarian point of view.
I am glad you agree but it would have been more fun to start a debate with you on the other side of this. LOL!!!
Was this question posted so that anyone who finds Columbus on their side of the bracket can forfeit, avoid the beating, and not feel bad about it. Just trying to make a joke since Columbus is saying they are going to destroy everyone come regionals.
It was funny, I think Columbus did a pretty good job of destroying themselves at G.M.A.C. Lets see if they can avoid that in a few weeks.
Two people believe that this practice would be unethical on the Poll question, yet neither has decided to write an opinion as to why that is so. I'm sure there will be many morethat also believe it is unethical. I find that interesting, how can you support something without being able to explain why. There are studies that show that people often conform to morals and values that are not their own, but rather those of their relatives, peers, or time periods. I find it fascinating, I should be an anthropologist.
Spider,
We have all been taught that doing things right will eventually pay off. Here we have a situation in which that mentality comes into question. To me it is no different than scheduling a bunch of soft tournaments and duals in order to have each of your kids compile an impressive record while never given them the chance to compete against the best. In the end it will always come back to hurt you. Eventhough it seems logical that a kid should be able to default in order to give him a better chance of qualifying it will hurt him in the end. There is nothing better than to exhaust yourself in an endevor and walk away knowing that you did things right.
IF this is ok to do then , how would you as a coach explain it to your wrestler? You are not good enough to beat this kid so we will fake an injury that way you can make it to states? That seems to be kinda contradictory to what as coaches we try to instill in our kids. Overcoming the obstacles will make the kids better men in the long run, showing them to be sneaky will only have a negative effect in the long run. If the ultimate goal of a coach is to win a State Championship then he is not doing his job, because we all know that out of all the kids in your wrestling rooms only a small percentage will ever acheive that goal. What about the rest? What lesson are they learning? Next thing you know you will be teaching your kids to stay down when they are slammed but not hurt. That will get them to advance also. Back in the days, the brackets were even more messed up and we all came out ok, nowadays the brackets are fairer and we are all complaining and finding the short cuts. The is no honor in that kind of victory!
Moonie,
I respect your position, however, in the case as described the individual is penalized through no action of his own based on an erroneously conceived formula that is supposed to determin the best four individuals in a weight class. When the government(FHSAA) does not work for the people, then the people have the right nay the duty to revolt and bring about change. If more coaches did praticed this act of breaking a code, then maybe the FHSAA would be duty bound to change a flawed system and make sure that the true top four were represented.
Ethics be damned if they do not serve the greater good.
Lobo,
Never mind the fact that if you are going to take a fall you will have to do it against a wrestler that everyone knows you are supposed to beat. That in and of itself will cause internal decent within the team and not to mention ruin that coaches credibility with his kids and his ability to coach. Most kids don't understand strategy and they all feel as if they can beat anyone at any given time so to lose on purpose to someone not as good just seems more than unethical just plain wrong.
Spider,
I am sorry but I can't it that way. It is bad enought that a kid is not good enough to advance thru his own skill now you are asking him to take the fall against a weaker less significant opponent? How does that work on the mind of the kid. We all want the best kids to advance but I can't see Balmaceda telling a kid to lose on purpose so he can advance. He is more likely to push that kid to do amazing things instead.
Lobo,
You miss the point. The point is, how do you tell your kid that he can't beat this kid and will be eliminated and yet there is a kid going on the other side which he would surely beat.
I conferred with the Zebra about this, and he tells me that the coach or the wrestler may default a match at any point and for any reason without penalty.
Therefore, a wrestler would not have to fake an injury or any such thing, merely make the official and the table in charge of the match aware that the match is being defaulted.
I believe overcoming the obstacle of a poorly conceived system is the coach’s greater duty in this case.
How could a coach allow a flawed system to summarily eliminate his wrestler who happens to be superior to some other wrestler that due to a flawed formula will qualify in his stead?
Honor is for the Dead, rewards are for the living.
The complacent are doomed by their acquiescence to the unjust, and therefore complicit in their own subjugation.
Moonie,
You are confused, I am not saying walk out on the mat got to your back and get pinned, I am saying the coach goes to the table and tells the official that the match is being defaulted. I would not speak for Balmedeca were i you, He is the master of Strategy, and I'm certain he would imploy this very tactic if it were to better serve his wrestler and his team. I am actually quite positive of it.
what are you talking about? balmeceda has done this, he has forfeited in the regional finals to land on the weaker side of the bracket away from oviedo. how about when osorio did last year to stay away from rat at regionals. that did not work out well.
Anonymous,
I can't speak about those two incidents but I can't see why they would do that or why they would take such a risk. As you say it didn't pan out to well for Osorio and maybe it did go well for Balmaceda but I still doubt that they would do such a thing.
Spider,
Think of the awful mess such a mindset would cause. Now everyone will try to strategize a loss here and there and make it thru the backdoor where they will find another wrestler who was also trying that very same maneuver. it just seems to open up a world of hurt and it sucks.
Why is it so hard to believe. Balmeceda had Baldwin take second to stay away from Fraga at the states.
I believe we are discussing strategy,more than ethics in this argument
Moon Knight:
1st post:giving,not given.
Endeavor,not endevor.
2nd post:
Through,not thru.
Balmeceda,not Balmaceda.
3rd post:
Too, not to.
Balmeceda & through again.
Mr. Grammar,
Thank you once again. Sometimes I lose my ability to speak or write simple sentences. This problem seems to be augmented when I get passionate about a subject. I will try to spell and grammar check my post next time. Great job by the way but I am sure that I am not the only one screwing up the English language. LOL
Spider,
Is it strategy, Yes. Is it ethical, No. There are four spots for the big dance and if your kid isn't good enough to beat three of those kids then why should he lose on purpose just to meet the only kid on that list that he does have a chance with. I still find it hard to see a coach lose on purpose just to allow their kid to have a different side of the bracket at a tournament, as anonymous stated, or just to get them to qualify. Coaches have other ways in which they can strategize such as weight classes and exploiting an opponents possible weakness. Those seem like better alternatives than asking your kid to take a dive.
Moonie,
I get the feeling you are either playing dumb or you have replaced the Devils advocate as contrarian speaker. I will address your points briefly and succinctly to see if we can put them to rest.
Is it strategy, yes? Correct on this one
Is it ethical, No?
That is an ambiguous precept. Ethics and Morals are subjective, flexible, regional, situational, and personal. It seems we as human beings are always more concerned with the Morals and ethics of others than we are with our own. I don’t think it is unethical; it is survival of the fittest, smartest, most prepared, most willing to use a flawed system to their advantage. What is unethical here is for the FHSAA to implement a formula that clearly does not assure that the best most deserving competitors advance to the final battle.
There are four spots for the big dance and if your kid isn't good enough to beat three of those kids then why should he lose on purpose just to meet the only kid on that list that he does have a chance with.
You miss the point here, your kid is good enough, in fact given the opportunity he would likely be the fourth best kid in the bracket, but an erroneously conceived formula prohibits your very supposition; and that is that the best four kids get to go.
I still find it hard to see a coach lose on purpose just to allow their kid to have a different side of the bracket at a tournament, as anonymous stated, or just to get them to qualify.
A coach does not tell his wrestler to go out and throw the match, as in taking a punch in boxing, or laying out to get pinned in wrestling; instead the coach merely announces to the table that the match is a default. No need to even lie and say it’s an injury default, just a default, the book says it is permissible to do so (According to the Zebra).
Coaches have other ways in which they can strategize such as weight classes and exploiting an opponent’s possible weakness. Those seem like better alternatives than asking your kid to take a dive.
Work hard as a kid may, he may be limited in his ability and there may be three wrestlers he just is not talented enough to beat, but he can certainly beat the other guy that is going to slide by as a gift of the system.
To be honest, I think the coaches are performing a service for the FHSAA and using this tactic to assure that the best 4 wrestlers advance. I think the FHSAA and all you haters out there owe these coaches a debt of gratitude for looking out for our sport. So the next time you are aware that a coach defaults a match to have his kid cross over and take his rightful 4th spot, go up to that coach and thank him for having the balls to do what is right and just.
Spider,
Although your point is well taken and seems as if that is the correct path there is still the argument of ethics. You brush those words aside in favor of strategy and sending your kid to the state tournament. Yes, the kid may not be able to beat the best or even the second best kid in the bracket but it is his right to try to do so. As a parent I would feel incredibly uncomfortable to see my son’s coach asking him to forfeit a match just to see if he can come back in the consolation bracket.
There is something to be said about honor and respect for the sport. You are trained and sent out there to do your best and perform to your best abilities. If by chance your abilities are not enough then you must go back to the drawing board and work harder and smarter. Hell you can even try to have yourself recruited to a better program (that was and is a joke). As coaches I am sure we all see when a kid takes a dive or when a kid defaults for the better side of the bracket and feel uncomfortable with that situation.
When do we cross the line of strategizing? Is it strategy to have a kid suck down massive amounts of weight to get him to be bigger and stronger than his opponents? How about using performance enhancing drugs to best your competition? Sucking a kid down to competition weight and then having him drink enough water to appear hydrated so as to pass the hydration test? Where do we cross the line between strategy and cheating?
I know you are going to say that these topics are not the same and should not be considered when discussing this topic but I beg to differ. All the topics and situations above are prevalent in our sport and when asked many coaches say that it is their strategy and they are doing it for the kids and their abilities to compete successfully. There is no right answer to your question because in a perfect world we would not need any of the above tactics. Unfortunately we live in a biased, wicked, cheating, world where people are worshiped for winning even if they cheated to do so. Given that mentality of today’s youth and the people leading those youths then your argument will always find a proponent and supporter.
moon night
what if a kid is injured and he continues to wrestle with the injury. he has been cleared to do so. is it unethical then. you know the injury might not let him wrestle to his potential and beat someone he is clearly superior to. would you default to not risk further injury and wrestle a kid you know your wrestler can beat on one leg.
Moonie,
We are arguing in circles now, I guess we will just agree to disagree.
Spider,
I guess on this matter I will agree with you.
Anonymous,
There are too many angles that we can go to from here. Your question posses some more interesting possibilities but too many to find a true answer.
By any means nesessary
Spidey you owe me shirts form last year when i won ur contest been on a binge since then welcome me back and remember I know all the secrets. Hall is a stud first GMAC then next year BCAA. heard it here first
Ho out
Is Sanders dropping to 140? Is Jake dropping to 119 and why, he won't win it there either. Jake is good but he is cutting to much and that leads to gasing out.
CHWR,
I wish I could pay up, I was the architect of that contest, but I was not the sponsor. Last I heard, the Sponsor(Mysterio), had in fact mailed out the Tee-Shirts to the winners. I am thinking of having a similar contest this year, but this year I will be responsible for the award.
As for the Hall thing, I will believe it when I see it, however, should it happen I will be here to give you credit, but don't disappear if your prediction falls through.
I don't think Jake Rio is dropping to 119 (I mean 121). First of all he has not wrestled nor weighed in at 119 all season.
Second of all, I think he learned his lesson from last year when the weight cutting caught up to him at states and went 0-2 in Lakeland last year. He beat many good wrestlers at 119 last year including state champ From Sunset Moreira. At 112 he was just a different wrestler.
Third, Rio got beat by Josh Williams at a dual meet at 125, and Gabe Chandler from Braddock beat Josh Williams 12-6 at the GMAC finals. Not sure 119 may be a smart move either.
Fourth, Louie Nodar is doing fine for Columbus at 119, where I doubt he will do as good or even qualify for states at 125. Heck, this kid took 3rd at GMAC at 119.
I guess we will have to see how this will play out. I don't think it will be a good move to drop him to 121, hopefully Columbus will learn from last years mistake of cutting lower than he should've been. Or, this may be another example of Columbus's crumbling come post season like last year.
Anonymous,
Both good questions.
My spidey sense is tingling, but I think it's just a draft.
I agree that Jake at 119 is a stretch, but the Godfather does like them light. Mike Rio (Jakes older brother)weighed 160 3 days after the state tournament, so what does that tell you.
As far as Sanders at 140, ask yourself this, Who benefits, who losses, does it improve SD's line-up? Do they qualify one more kid to state with that move. I think you have all the pertinent information to come to an accurate conclusion.
Did anyone go to the middle school tournament at the Reef yesterday? There was some bad a$$ wrestlers! Dade is just gonna get tuffer every year!
Anonymous,
And Tougher too.
Post a Comment