Territories Bracket

[KrisZ]

Ditching Southwest and keeping Central States would be insane. Hell Southwest was a bigger promotion than Continental and Portland too and at it's height was drawing well enough to compare with some of the other regional staples on the list.

 

I will also say that if we are going purely on footage in particular territories in terms of voting no one from Florida, Georgia, Montreal, et has any business getting very far because there is so little of it. I think the guys should be voted on for their 80's careers, with relative regions being their "home team" for lack of better term but that's just me.

 

I don't hate any of Kris's picks but it feels wrong leaving Choshu out and I have a hard time leaving Hayes out from WCCW just because I thought he was arguably the best guy on the Texas Set.

Yeah I totally blanked on Choshu....he would definitely be in Kengo's spot.

[Guest Nell Santucci]

One way you could set up the brackets is to begin with essentially 16 mini-tournaments--a 4 man WWF tournament, 4 man AWA tournament, 4 man Crockett tournament, etc., until you have a "Final 16", with each territory having one representative in the main tounament. This would guarantee no one or two territories dominate the whole tournament. If you want to get really ambitious, the individual territory tournaments could be made up of 16 guys as well ("The First 16") and we could have a 256 man mega-territory tournament! Of course, it would probably be tough to come up with 16 names for places like Central States, Stampede, etc.

 

And I'll just say this: some of the absolute worst wrestling I've ever seen was a disc of 86-87 era Central States. I'm sure the area had better days, but that stuff was really shitty.

Yes, I think that's much better. So the question is how do we get a mini-tournament set up? I think we should do it by seeds based off of a territory's drawing ability. For example,

 

Mini-tournmant 1 (4 territories, 16 men)

Mini-tournament 2 (4 territories, 16 men)

...

Mini-tournament 4 (4 territories, 16 men).

 

Those "16 men" will be obvious, but the territories won't be. So I propose the following:

 

Each mini-tournament gets a top drawing territory and a weak drawing territory. So Mini-tournament 1 gets WWF as the top drawing territory and gets, say, Central States for its weakest drawing territory. Mini-tournament 2 gets the second best drawing territory and the second-worst drawing territory. Mini-tournament 3 gets the third and 14th draws. Mini-tournament 4 gets 4th and 13th. So we're left with 8 different territories that can be randomly distributed between the 4 without a particular criteria. My hope is that would force the initial round to be weak but with a few possible surprises, and it'll get more exciting as the tournament progresses rather than, say, having a chance that the tournament is most exciting in the first round.

 

 

 

I was watching some TV show that pits the French Foreign Legion v. the Gurkas and simulate their battles based off of arbitrary points on a host of factors and conditions. I think what would be neat is that we do a scale on 1-10 on a host of factors like charisma, workrate, selling, the relative difficulty of their opponents (with the idea being that the better the opponents, the harder it will be for you to stand out, so the more competitive territory basically gives you more points), cardio, and strength (so some kayfabe, some smark). I can run a host of simulation battles between the two measured opponents and post the results here with pictures. But rather than just let those simulations determine the winner, we'll all consider that simulation as an influence on our vote but vote how we feel. That does three things. First, it will force people to give more consideration to people who haven't been seen as much and, as such, this doesn't become a WWF-centric and JCP-centric thread. Second, it can influence those who've seen both to change their minds. Third, people who are dismissive of a certain wrestler will have to watch them in order to get their numbers considered. In the abstract, we might up seeing Rufus R. Jones in the semi-finals and have "mathematical proof" to justify that to those outside this circle. That will weed out lazy voting and those who will vote lazily at least have this simulation to consider.

 

The math itself shouldn't be difficult. We have our criteria. Voters rate them 1-10 in each category that they will qualified to judge. We choose a way to weight each category in an actual contest. I run a 100 simulations to see who wins. That will give a breakdown to who is winning on sheer numbers alone.

 

I think that's a super idea.

 

EDIT: If that poll can't be fixed, as one is left with one vote only, change the question to "Pick the territory you don't want in the top 16".

[jpchicago23]

Whoa that was too much for my brain to handle lol. I think what they meant was to have mini tournaments for each territory to figure the top four guys from each then from there have a 64 man tournament. I could've mistaken it but that's what I got from it

[Guest Nell Santucci]

Whoa that was too much for my brain to handle lol. I think what they meant was to have mini tournaments for each territory to figure the top four guys from each then from there have a 64 man tournament. I could've mistaken it but that's what I got from it

Hmm, that seems unnecessary since most of the top 4 guys would be obvious. I think we could do votes on competitive matches battled by arbitrary candidates. For example, I think André the Giant should be given a shot to qualify for Team WWF.

 

I do think the stats part is necessary. It'll be easy for everyone. I'll be the one simulating the battles, which might require a little bit of work. It'll prevent what I call the "Lou Thesz Syndrome", i.e. people vote for, say, Roddy Piper over Lou Thesz simply because people have a greater post-1984 bias and that Thesz' matches aren't as available.

[jpchicago23]

Yes he would be given a chance if voted onto team wwf. There would be a poll of say ten guys and the top four would advance

[Ricky Jackson]

16 mini tournaments, one for each territory. 4-8 wrestlers in each mini tournment, depending on how big you want this to be. The winners of each mini tourney, ONE wrestler from each territory, advance to the 16 man main tournament. 16 wrestlers, 16 different territories represented.

 

This tournament could be fun, or it could be a complicated clusterfuck.

[jpchicago23]

How u just described it is the easiest and most fun way I'd say

[Guest Nell Santucci]

16 mini tournaments, one for each territory. 4-8 wrestlers in each mini tournment, depending on how big you want this to be. The winners of each mini tourney, ONE wrestler from each territory, advance to the 16 man main tournament. 16 wrestlers, 16 different territories represented.

 

This tournament could be fun, or it could be a complicated clusterfuck.

So I was reading a biography entitled Vince Russo: A Portrait of the Autist as a Young Man and got inspired to resolve these booking difficulties by having a reverse battle royal for each territory, with the first four guys eliminated to make the cut. That'll deliver big ratings. fuh fuh fuh

[jpchicago23]

So does this still have legs? Or should it be an after thought?

[Ricky Jackson]

I say go with the territories/groupings as they are and try to come up with names for the mini tournaments. Just use this thread and see what happens.

[Guest Nell Santucci]

The pessimist in me suspects that this whole idea resonated from a drunken mind. Whiskey for my men and beer for my horses.

[jpchicago23]

Nah I rarely ever drink it came from extreme boredom at work actually.