Timchenko will be at 120 this post-season.

Dodson won against Coffman but not against Wooden.

knightflyer150;1376228 wrote:Timchenko will be at 120 this post-season.

Dodson won against Coffman but not against Wooden.

Thanks for the confirmation Knightflyer! Good to hear. Has he wrestled Thompson at all? I'm sure he knows he can beat Bavery from wrestling with him in the room when they were team mates.

bump_and_run;1376084 wrote:dodson beat wooden 3-0 http://www.baumspage.com/wr/regional/5/2012/Quarterfinal _m_ Del. Hayes.htm

^^^ Misprint. See Knightflyer's post.

Dust_E_Roads;1376239 wrote:^^^ Misprint. See Knightflyer's post.

huh? sorry for the mini-rant, but that's pretty unacceptable IMO when you're talking about misreporting on two comparable kids, particularly at a fairly big deal dual.

106
1.Norris (TW)
2.Johnson (PC)
3.Copas (RB)
4.Marek (W)

interesting weight in that there is a lot of "medium" level guys, the top two can flip between one another. As well as 3,4,5,6

113
1.Hines (OO)
2.Mcelwee (PC)
3.McGrath (HB)
4.Manarolla (DC)

Hines likely walks through, Mcelwee & McGrath could flip here.

120.
1.Timchenko (OO)
2.Terry (PC)
3.Leib (WM)
4.Ackley (TW)
5.Stratton (HB)
6.Kenderzski (O)

Timchenko will probably walk as well. I've seen Terry more this season & he is impressive, Leib is right there though, those two will fill 2/3. Will be an interesting, competitive race for the 4th spot.

126.
1.Hogue (PC)
2.(Watkins starter)
3.Coleman (TW)
4.Farmer (OO)

Hogue will be dangerous this post season, likely on a mission after finishing a match shy of placing at the district. Whomever watkins puts in at 26 & Coleman are your likely 2nd & 3rd.

170
1.Sunkle (PC)
2.Johnston (RB)
3.Muncreif (DC)
4.Stratton (HB)

Sunkle walks through here, the following 3 can be flipped around, but i'd be surprised if this wasnt the 4 we see move on to the following week.

182
1.Shackleford (TW)
2.Love (RB)
3.McDowell (PC)
4.Hall (O)

Shackleford has had an impressive season on paper, I say that because I havent seen him in person yet. Love has been fairly consistant & has improved from last season. Like at 70, 2-4 might be switched around, but I think this is the 4 moving forward.

iGranby;1376388 wrote:106

126.
1.Hogue (PC)
2.(Watkins starter)
3.Coleman (TW)
4.Farmer (OO)

Hogue will be dangerous this post season, likely on a mission after finishing a match shy of placing at the district. Whomever watkins puts in at 26 & Coleman are your likely 2nd & 3rd.

Watkins' 126 starter Bankes beat Hogue 10-2 at the state dual. This is hard to read but I think this says Hogue got one TD and Bankes got a reversal, two TD and two near falls: http://www.baumspage.com/wr/regional/6/2012/Quarterfinal%20-%20Pick.%20Central.pdf maybe Hogue wrestles tougher at the sectional? either way, should be a good match.

Looks nice iGranby, just s few side notes. 113, mgrath has a win over mcelwee 182, I think possibly Hall has a win over Shackleford but im not sure, and Mcdowell has a win over Love.

At 170, Heilman from Orange has a win over Muncrief and lost a competitive bout to Stratton last weekend.

bump_and_run;1376389 wrote:Watkins' 126 starter Bankes beat Hogue 10-2 at the state dual. This is hard to read but I think this says Hogue got one TD and Bankes got a reversal, two TD and two near falls: http://www.baumspage.com/wr/regional/6/2012/Quarterfinal%20-%20Pick.%20Central.pdf maybe Hogue wrestles tougher at the sectional? either way, should be a good match.

Hogue gets first takedown, right of the takedown Banks hits a very nice grandby roll for 2 reversal and 2 backs. 4-2 with about 20 seconds left in the 2nd Banks hits schuck by for 2 and gets 2 count off of Hogue switch. Banks picks down 3rd and reverses him. Final 10-2. Not trying to make excuses at all for Hogue but only his 5th match back after a long injury. Should be improved come post season and make for a good rematch if it happens. Banks is a pretty under looked kid in my opinion! Looks impressive going from 132 last year to 126 this year.

bump_and_run;1376389 wrote:Watkins' 126 starter Bankes beat Hogue 10-2 at the state dual. This is hard to read but I think this says Hogue got one TD and Bankes got a reversal, two TD and two near falls: http://www.baumspage.com/wr/regional/6/2012/Quarterfinal - Pick. Central.pdf maybe Hogue wrestles tougher at the sectional? either way, should be a good match.

I saw that, thanks for the input. Should've been more specific, they're predictions not rankings, just how I think they'll finish out. Bankes is definitely tough.

ptown3;1376390 wrote:Looks nice iGranby, just s few side notes. 113, mgrath has a win over mcelwee 182, I think possibly Hall has a win over Shackleford but im not sure, and Mcdowell has a win over Love.

Hall did beat Shackleford at the olentangy orange tournament it was a close match

iGranby;1376388 wrote:
113
1.Hines (OO)
2.Mcelwee (PC)
3.McGrath (HB)
4.Manarolla (DC)

I heard that McGrath was going up to 126. He has been there twice lately. If I were a betting guy (which I am not - sorry new casino), I would say the top 4 at 113 (in alphabetic order are): Hines, Johnson, Lennerman, McElwee

GregHines;1376467 wrote:I heard that McGrath was going up to 126. He has been there twice lately. If I were a betting guy (which I am not - sorry new casino), I would say the top 4 at 113 (in alphabetic order are): Hines, Johnson, Lennerman, McElwee

He has been weighing in at 120 so he still has the choice to drop if he wants.

Cthelites;1376538 wrote:He has been weighing in at 120 so he still has the choice to drop if he wants.

curious why hes been doing that and just not wrestling 113?! Maybe 113 is to hard of a cut and cant beat stratton so he just wrestles 126 until the post season!

GregHines;1376467 wrote:I heard that McGrath was going up to 126. He has been there twice lately. If I were a betting guy (which I am not - sorry new casino), I would say the top 4 at 113 (in alphabetic order are): Hines, Johnson, Lennerman, McElwee

If McGrath goes 113, then he replaces Lennerman - good young man, hard worker and good wrestler. I think makes districts at 113 or at 126 (I think 120 is pretty darn loaded).

ptown3;1376390 wrote:Looks nice iGranby, just s few side notes. 113, mgrath has a win over mcelwee 182, I think possibly Hall has a win over Shackleford but im not sure, and Mcdowell has a win over Love.

He is tough! Could possibly win the whole thing. I was very impressed with him for the first time seeing him at State Duals. Big strong kid.

USMCdevil2005;1376593 wrote:He is tough! Could possibly win the whole thing. I was very impressed with him for the first time seeing him at State Duals. Big strong kid.

Jr. high OAC state Placer in 8th grade (7th) its taken him a little bit to adjust to the highschool level but things are really starting to click with him his junior year! Excited to see how he does this post season.

The 120's here are tough, I initially had 6 of the 16 kids here in districts. I am picking Timchenko, Ackley, Lieb and Kenderzski. Ackley is a lot tougher than some of you give him credit for, I seen him at the Orange tourney. He pinned Gasca (WE) in 1:29, Majored Farmer (OO) and beat Myers (PN) by a good margin to win the tourney.
I have not seen much of Terry but I know Kenderzski did pretty good this year against some of the better wrestlers.

ptown3;1376641 wrote:Jr. high OAC state Placer in 8th grade (7th) its taken him a little bit to adjust to the highschool level but things are really starting to click with him his junior year! Excited to see how he does this post season.

Any relation to Tyler McDowell from Pick Central around 2004 era?

USMCdevil2005;1376836 wrote:Any relation to Tyler McDowell from Pick Central around 2004 era?

You're thinking of Tyler Dowell who was a couple time placer for Central. Same year as Josh Horne. Easy mixup.

TTT

The seeding (seating) meeting is next Wednesday.

Getcha sexy on!

cruiser_96;1381889 wrote:The seeding (seating) meeting is next Wednesday.

Getcha sexy on!

by next wednesday, do you mean the next wednesday on the calendar, which is tomorrow, or do you mean the wednesday after next wednesday? or is the next wednesday on the calendar this wednesday and next wednesday is actually the wednesday after this wednesday?

Excellent question. In my use of the phrase "next Wednesday" I am referencing not the Wednesday in this week, but rather the Wednesday in next week.

It would have been more accurate for me to type next week's Wednesday.

In conclusion, the seeding meeting will take place on Wednesday, February 13th, 2013.

The day before Valentine's Day - how sentimental.