Category Archives: CIF

Introducing the SoCalWrestlerGirl.com Southern Section Wrestler Ratings

Yes, you read that right, I am going to attempt to do ratings next season. It’s something I have been thinking about for the past four years and have been actively pursing for the past two. Some readers may be wondering, why? After all, there are plenty of individuals that do rankings every year – both officially and unofficially.

All the rankings that are put out include, to varying degrees, an amount of subjectivity – resulting from the creator’s experience, expertise, and/or bias. This is true regardless of whether it’s an individual or a team that produces the work. I am not disparaging the quality of the produced rankings, as subjectivity can absolutely prove itself a useful tool (when bias, the most insidious form of subjectivity, is kept at a minimum). Which led me to ask, what would the rankings look like if they were more objective?

The Rating System

The ratings I am now introducing will attempt to answer that question. They have no subjective input from me other than discriminating between datasets based on logistical reasons; more on that later. I have not created a rating system but instead will be using a modified form of a system that has been used be the United States Chess Federation since the 1960’s and which was created, by master-level chess player and physics professor Arpad Elo, to calculate the relative skill levels of chess players. Over the years, the Elo Rating System (which I will call ERS from here on out) has been applied to all sort of zero-sum games (games where, more often than not, one side wins and the other loses).

Unfortunately, the nature of wrestling matches prevented me from simply taking the system, as it is used in chess, and plugging in wrestlers.  Fortunately, two years ago, I came across a research article, shortly after its publication, titled Ranking and prediction of collegiate wrestling, by Kristina Gavin Bigsby and Jeffrey W. Ohlmann.  The article, “identifies potential biases in traditional ranking methodologies [as used in college wrestling] and offers alternatives based on the network-based PageRank and Elo ratings.” It also backs up my initial hunch, “that Elo presents an especially attractive alternative to current ranking systems.”

The article also included the exact formula needed to make the ERS work for wrestling. If you interested in reading the article and taking a closer look to the modifications made to the rating system formula in order to make it more applicable to wrestling, I have included the link to it above.

Dataset Processing

So, if I had come across the key component to producing an objective rating system, why did it take another two years before I produced results? I realized early in the testing of the ERS formula that inputting every match manually, even for a single tournament, was a tortuous endeavor. I would need to come up with a method to automate, at least a part of, the process if I intended to use the tool to track and rate wrestlers for an entire season.

Though I am not a programmer, I have been able to teach myself quite a bit of code and script writing both through my day-job and the running of this site. However, the act of writing a script to process the large number of datasets proved frustrating. I would figure out one piece of the puzzle only to later discover that I had broken something somewhere else. Finally, earlier this year, I admitted to myself that I needed help and I approached a coworker with far-superior coding skills. He generously gave my project some of his time and provided me with the assistance I so desperately needed. The ratings I present in this post, and all future ratings, are in no small way a result of his help. I would normally give him credit by name, but he has specifically asked me not to, as he is a very private person. Nonetheless, he has my sincerest thanks.

The second part of the puzzle, the most crucial when it comes to executing the formula, was solved. But there was one more issue that needed to be addressed, the same one hinted at earlier, and which I will touch on next, as I explain the considerations I will take, if I am to continue to do these ratings during the upcoming season.

Methodology and Process

There are some call outs I would like to make about how the ratings were done and some changes regarding how they will be done in the future:

  • For all intents and purposes, the rating presented here can be considered both postseason and preseason ratings.
  • Twelfth-grade wrestlers have been removed. However, there are some caveats:
    • The information I used for the wrestlers’ grades might not be correct
    • The information might have been missing and could not be found
    • I might have made a mistake when entering the information

If you notice any twelfth-grade wrestlers listed or believe a wrestler should be listed that is not, please let me know and I will make the correction, if appropriate.

  • For future ratings, only varsity tournaments where wrestlers represent their high school, during the regular and play-off season, will be used. As a result, the following types of tournaments will not be used.
    • Freestyle
    • Greco-Roman
    • Middle school
    • USA Wrestling sanctioned
    • Preseason
    • Independent
  • Though I have presently calculated ratings for Southern Section wrestlers only, I am not opposed to doing it for LA City and San Diego Section also, if enough information is available or provided in a manner that lends itself to the extrapolation of the necessary data. Which finally brings me to the third issue I had to contend with when calculating the ratings.The ratings that follow were calculated from information extrapolated from seven tournaments; the five regional qualifiers, the Masters tournament, and the CIF State Championships. That’s data from a total of 1,507 competitors and 6,718 bouts.Getting the information from those tournaments, though tedious, was straightforward; as all brackets were available and the information was typed. Moving forward, I will only use information that is available in a similar format. I understand that this will potentially eliminate smaller tournaments, where brackets are handwritten, from being used in the ratings. But I simply do not have the ability to type all the data from scratch. However, I am willing to work with anyone who wishes to have their tournament be part of the calculated ratings. All I need is a verifiable copy of the brackets and a spreadsheet listing each bout of the first round (including byes and double byes) for each weight in the following format:
WEIGHT NAME WRESTLER 1 SECTION SCHOOL
WEIGHT NAME WRESTLER 2 SECTION SCHOOL

I am also willing to use dual meets, if provided with a verifiable copy of the bout sheet and a spreadsheet with the information as shown in the example above, listed in the order the matches occurred (in cases of meets involving more than two schools).

  • I will rate to the top-twenty wrestlers in each weight.
    In the rating below there are less than twenty wrestlers at some weights, this is because of the limited number of tournaments used, which forced me to institute a six-match minimum in order to make the list.
    Moving forward, the minimum will be lowered to one match in order to be rated.
  • Ratings will carry over from season to season.
  • Making sure the correct wrestler gets credit for matches wrestled will be the most challenging part of this project. I promise I will to my best to ensure names are matched correctly (even when I come across spelling inconsistencies).

If anyone has any questions concerning the rating system, please feel free to contact me using the Contact Us Form.

Finally, ratings and rankings celebrate the accomplishments of the wrestlers that make the list and they get fans involved via healthy speculation. They do nothing more because matches and championships are won on the mat not on paper. Enjoy!

The Ratings

If you would like to download a copy of the ratings, you can do so here.

Tournaments used to calculate ratings:

  • 2019 Girls Central Regional at San Dimas HS
  • 2019 Girls Eastern Regional at Hillcrest HS
  • 2019 Girls Northern Regional at Camarillo HS
  • 2019 Girls Southern Regional at El Toro HS
  • 2019 Girls Western Regional at Downey HS
  • 2019 Girls Southern Section Masters at Eleanor Roosevelt HS
  • 2019 CIF Girls State Championships at Rabobank Arena
RANK NAME SCHOOL RATING
101 LBS
1 Rayna Prasad Santa Monica 1746.11
2 Angie Castaneda Cajon 1663.96
3 Angie Cervantes Walnut 1635.23
4 Brianna Gonzalez Arroyo 1550.27
5 Devyn Gomez Kennedy 1430.49
6 Jayden Von Moos Paloma Valley 1415.5
7 Florajane Solera Hillcrest 1389.48
8 Yvonnne Estrada Northview 1348.34
9 Kai’Li Oshiro South Torrance 1268.09
10 Kyndle Winchester Aliso Niguel 1217.24
11 Angeline Rivera Segerstrom 1170.89
12 Jordan Villagomez Foothill 1135.14
13 Samantha Reynaga Canyon Springs 1102.29
14 Melissa Estrada Cathedral City 1092.29
15 Alyah Cruz Mayfair 1087.26
16 Malia Requejo Cerritos 1074.82
17 Alyah Martinez Moreno Valley 1055.86
18 Brielle Acevedo Covina 1029.86
19 Sarine Mardirosian Hoover 1013.19
20 Akira Bua South Pasadena 972.32
106 LBS
1 Leah Gaitan Yucaipa 2351.28
2 Makayla Breceda Norco 1938.55
3 Emilie Gonzalez Arroyo 1749.78
4 Victoria Rodriguez Chino 1448.32
5 Francia Casas Diamond Ranch 1353.52
6 Makayla Rydbeck Esperanza 1297.38
7 Prethy Enriquez Kennedy 1285.65
8 Caley Ortiz San Dimas 1272.61
9 Sofia Gallardo Pioneer 1247.99
10 Yasmine Othman Foothill 1237.28
11 Itzel Hernandez Schurr 1218.25
12 Katie Rodriguez Capistrano Valley 1196.96
13 Onnalaya Aguilera Santa Ana 1196.9
14 Savannah Lewis Corona 1185.5
15 Stephanie Khamis-Hesar Highland 1114.87
16 Malayna Doucette Colony 1096.32
17 Gabriela Chavez Royal 1070.15
18 Malonas Lesslie Temescal Canyon 1051.28
19 Cecilia Lara Garden Grove 987.82
20 Trista Henderson Santiago 962.71
111 LBS
1 Tehya Ledesma Hillcrest 1566.75
2 Alyssa Guardiola Paloma Valley 1338.95
3 Jayani Bullock Foothill 1319.21
4 Alyssa Rodriguez Cerritos 1299.63
5 Loza Adela Canyon Springs 1271.34
6 Nicole De Masi John Glenn 1248.97
7 Joy Kastner Walnut 1210.57
8 Dana Sullivan Thousand Oaks 1182.47
9 Ashlyn Arias El Toro 1123.28
10 Julia Russell Canyon 1097.31
11 Angela Dela Cruz Edison 1060.93
12 Destiny Belonio Downey 1047.19
13 Stephany Zamora Santa Ana 1046.88
14 Elizabeth Carrillo Duarte 1037.27
15 Fatima Gonzalez Eisenhower 1027.13
16 Debbra Jedrysek Redlands East Valley 1021.78
17 Danae Merlo San Dimas 1016.89
18 Hailey Holland Cajon 995.25
19 Jessica Ho Peninsula 970.54
20 Al’Asha Aparicio Santa Barbara 952.62
116 LBS
1 Monica Garcia Norte Vista 2390.61
2 Juliana Cubias Aliso Niguel 1621.63
3 Jaylene Martinez Canyon Springs 1361.5
4 Isabelle Hawley Temecula Valley 1348.49
5 Xandra Edward Foothill 1337.11
6 Allison Doppenberg Millikan 1294.47
7 Cameryn Hulbert Kennedy 1292.3
8 Michaela Howe Ventura 1266.57
9 Jade Cavner-Rojas Paloma Valley 1252.2
10 Summer-Ray Baeza Santa Ana 1194.62
11 Tilly Garcia San Marino 1177.66
12 America Cano Paramount 1160.3
13 Cali Sheldon Mira Costa 1094.75
14 Vanessa Ramos Montclair 1081.27
15 Jenny Castaneda Duarte 1068.85
16 Arianna Runyan M.L. King 1060.85
17 Maria Garcia Nogales 1049.52
18 Jessica Mikhail Capistrano Valley 1039.86
19 Cameron Ortiz San Dimas 1039.79
20 Jacqueline Magana-Chavez Buena 1027.68
121 LBS
1 Samantha Barragan Hemet 2111.14
2 Kameron Sudol Yorba Linda 1851.77
3 Hailey Chapman Rim of the World 1759.81
4 Herminia Estrada El Monte 1521.76
5 Nayeli Maston Walnut 1502.07
6 Cheyenne Baltagi Norte Vista 1500.7
7 Isabela Tan M.L. King 1427.31
8 Katherine Cuellar Downey 1385.35
9 Teyah Guitierrez Redondo 1365.38
10 Andrea Dealmonte Aliso Niguel 1353.68
11 Alleaua Moore Victor Valley 1319.96
12 Alyssa Hernandez Northview 1274.71
13 Amanda Salcedo La Mirada 1219.22
14 Sarah Limon Glen A Wilson 1218.41
15 Maddie Wade Royal 1218.02
16 Ariianna Nava Chino 1217.38
17 Amara Juarez Citrus Valley 1182.09
18 Miiya Adames Cabrillo 1164.69
19 Lucy Guadarrama Orange 1127.7
20 Ariana Gonzalez Kennedy 1126.08
126 LBS
1 Nile Jernigan Cerritos 2110.15
2 Kelly Escamilla California 2082.31
3 Samantha Snow Los Alamitos 1504.94
4 Esperanza Dorantes San Dimas 1412.97
5 Devora Delgadillo Garden Grove 1411.91
6 Ally Arrington San Marino 1308.05
7 Kaili Ibarra San Clemente 1295.58
8 Sophia Miller Millikan 1294.32
9 Jeannie Gonzalez Paramount 1282.9
10 Ellisa Jimenez Xavier 1265.56
11 Niah Ledesma Hillcrest 1171.29
12 Antonella Benenati Aliso Niguel 1169.17
13 Nahomy Oliva Thousand Oaks 1136.67
14 Shaiann Cappellucci Pacifica 1114.41
15 Chloe Bruno Western 1094.44
16 Isabel Miranda Walnut 1092.67
17 Esmeralda Perales Canyon Springs 1090.79
18 Dulce Maldonado Duarte 1077
19 Lena Taylor Shadow Hills 1010.14
20 Giselle Guerra Downey 969.51
131 LBS
1 Cheyenne Bowman Rowland 2307.83
2 Tiera Jimerson Northview 2251.6
3 Athena Willden Oak Hills 1708.46
4 Solona Mottola Temecula Valley 1461.66
5 Jessica Valadez Rialto 1323.69
6 Sitlaly Sanchez Yucaipa 1303.65
7 Lea Mauhar Carter 1266.19
8 Mady Dow Walnut 1256.24
9 Karen Bello El Modena 1222.88
10 Genesis Saldivar Palm Springs 1220.8
11 Yuyu Reyes Lawndale 1172.17
12 Stephanie Carrillo Downey 1112.53
13 Jacquelynn Ochoa Bell Gardens 1111.28
14 Evie Mckaig West 1071.48
15 Madeline Santana Cajon 1068.79
16 Maya Guadarrama Warren 1058.26
17 Bridget Oregel Duarte 1057.87
18 Lydia Smith Murrieta Valley 1048.73
19 Joey Tully Excelsior Charter 1021.06
20 Monica Castaneda LB Wilson 949.05
RANK NAME SCHOOL RATING
137 LBS
1 Aine Drury Westminster 2246.54
2 Ana Rivas Hillcrest 1714.49
3 Sadie Forman Upland 1574.64
4 Jazmine Leivas Lakewood 1327.85
5 Janelle Gomez Paloma Valley 1319.12
6 Makayla Ybarra Cypress 1251.21
7 Maddie Perich West Covina 1216.33
8 Siouxsie Luna Warren 1207.05
9 Leilani Rodriguez Beaumont 1162.21
10 Hailey Green South Hills 1125.09
11 Celeste Molina Lawndale 1125
12 Estefania Horta Hueneme 1124.9
13 Aubrey Moore Highland 1104.1
14 Esmeralda Gracida Channel Islands 1076.81
15 Rickyani Henrey Savanna 1043.76
16 Lily Mckaig West 1000.7
17 Anna Luca Bronstrap Excelsior Charter 981.7
18 Andrea Perez Diamond Ranch 910.2
19 Natalie Rodriguez Santa Paula 885.48
20 Fatima Rosas Sierra Vista 863.19
143 LBS
1 Ava Lassiter Aliso Niguel 1791.06
2 Mariah Dow Walnut 1650.6
3 Serena Hinojosa Northview 1324.33
4 Becky Koehnlein Los Alamitos 1307.77
5 Lydia Monedero Cabrillo 1271.12
6 Ashley Maya Cypress 1229.46
7 Melody Santana Hillcrest 1212.68
8 Gracie Kirazian LB Wilson 1212.47
9 Laura May Calinaya Covina 1193.07
10 Paula Gavina Tustin 1162.73
11 Leslie Monterrosa Lawndale 1161.64
12 Ashley Gonzalez Coachella Valley 1142.23
13 Reyna Montenegro Hemet 1135.47
14 Andrea Medina Arroyo 1125.22
15 Briana Rivera Sultana 1092.26
16 Tiffany Anderson Paloma Valley 1059.62
17 Kylie Sharp Redondo 1052.44
18 Mandy Camacho Orange Vista 1032.31
19 Alexa Krumwiede West 1004.64
20 Janessa Beltran Pacifica 1002.76
150 LBS
1 Melanie Bacher Norte Vista 2250.98
2 Lauren Camp Kennedy 1402.38
3 Mariyah Casados M.L. King 1384.5
4 Christine Jane Yuson LB Poly 1328.37
5 Maijoy Wooten Cathedral City 1282.59
6 Maya Cruz Paloma Valley 1255.33
7 Emma Raya Yucaipa 1240.75
8 Diana Ventura Citrus Valley 1235.9
9 Stephanie Chavez Downey 1217.14
10 Esperanza Barretto Granite Hills 1173.98
11 Valeria Serrano Montclair 1106.3
12 Loren Lecona Dana Hills 1092.06
13 Fiona Thomas Mira Costa 1076.64
14 Kristena Nichols Santa Monica 1061.39
15 Diana Bonilla San Clemente 1019.6
16 Keana Valle Magnolia 1015.31
17 Samantha Carrasco Arroyo 902.09
18 Jasmine Hernandez Lompoc 698.39
19 Samantha Pina Godinez 630.95
blank
160 LBS
1 Katja Osteen Chaminade College Prep 1723.96
2 Janiece Alcocer San Dimas 1666.01
3 Jodie Hartlein Etiwanda 1573.41
4 Angelina Romero Gabrielino 1391.83
5 Lena Flores Cajon 1347.05
6 Miranda Koppi Corona 1308.41
7 Maria Ramirez Channel Islands 1249.77
8 Skyjulymar Sanchez Valley View 1234.9
9 Ariel Appello Knight 1230.35
10 Mariz Soliman Temescal Canyon 1222.19
11 Jenny Diosdiado Grand Terrace 1209.43
12 Valerie Garcia Hillcrest 1189.18
13 Amy Mijares Arroyo 1175.35
14 Jai Davis Santa Fe 1152.31
15 Teryika Fair Victor Valley 1124.9
16 Sarah Herrera (La Serna) La Serna 994.47
17 Clarise Martinez Brea Olinda 965.53
18 Mariana Villa El Modena 951.21
19 Serena Garcia Ventura 945.79
20 Mariana Rodriguez Montebello 888.18
170 LBS
1 America Lopez Valencia/V 1766.06
2 Sofia Rivera Mayfair 1592.38
3 Jaeleen Robledo Don Lugo 1405.6
4 Danielle Baca Etiwanda 1272.54
5 Daniella Dardon-Morales Highland 1255.82
6 Kelly Lacost Mission Viejo 1251.41
7 Charlie Speer Cypress 1236.77
8 Vanessa Carrillo Downey 1196.85
9 Ruby Casales Paramount 1150.64
10 Kylee Wohlwend Hillcrest 1086.57
11 Brittany Sanchez El Modena 1075.08
12 Olivia Bulganni Redondo 1036.98
13 Zahira Isaac Santa Paula 992.5
14 Mia Delgado South El Monte 972.17
15 Luz Hinojosa Arroyo 937.71
16 Paola Delacruz Dos Pueblos 844.41
blank
blank
blank
blank
189 LBS
1 Cianna Riley San Dimas 1637.16
2 Layla Donahoe Dana Hills 1352.09
3 Breanna Sanchez John Glenn 1342.89
4 Veronica Palmer Bonita 1317.47
5 Serena Proulx Hillcrest 1216.15
6 Kaycee Fitero Cerritos 1186.48
7 Alyssa Baracao Capistrano Valley 1159.64
8 Marlen Carillo Lompoc 1153.92
9 Bethany Aviles Warren 1118.15
10 Julianna Mattias Canyon Springs 1118.13
11 Daliyah Mcbride Foothill 1088.07
12 Erskine Swan Oxnard 1081.7
13 Khloey Zumwalt Excelsior Charter 1004.07
14 Jessica Ramirez Tustin 974.13
15 Kimberly Angeles Godinez 973.88
16 Sara Gaskin Walnut 962.19
17 Navaeh Delgadillo Santa Paula 956.04
18 Ajshane Custis Indian Springs 930.68
19 Iliana Ocampo Montebello 866.23
20 Ana Rangel El Monte 824
235 LBS
1 Isela Mendez Northview 1775.14
2 Ciara Boyd San Dimas 1702.32
3 Rebeca Camacho Cerritos 1643.33
4 Julia Richey NewBury Park 1432.21
5 Mayra Franco Santa Ana 1421.08
6 Sandra Farag LB Wilson 1187.35
7 Adamariz Badillo Paramount 1183.96
8 Alexandria Mccully Hillcrest 1171.48
9 Yuliana Vizcaino Cypress 1146.16
10 Laurelai Magana Hueneme 1138.28
11 Adriana Platas Moreno Valley 1128.55
12 Samyyra Blackwell Artesia 1122.47
13 Kassandra Ayard Paloma Valley 1096.52
14 Michelle Tapia Pacifica 1030.97
15 Josefina Medel Ventura 1000.63
16 Isabella Reyes Western 996.79
17 Virginia Marquez Palm Springs 955.2
18 Meysy Lujan El Monte 941.37
19 Karen Garcia Norte Vista 891.44
20 Cathleen Gomez Murrieta Valley 826.88

 

 

 

 

 

Rule Changes for the 2019-2020 Season

Rumor has it Head Coverings are a Thing of the Past… not so Fast

The NFHS, the organization that oversees the wrestling rules CIF uses, has released its rule changes for the upcoming 2019-2020 season. Below you will find the changes. Removed language will be crossed out. Added language will be in red.

4-1-1a

The rule that deals with what a legal uniform consists of will now read:

A one-piece singlet cut no lower in the back or front than the level of the armpits and under the arms no lower than one-half the distance between the armpit and belt line. A suitable undergarment, which completely covers the buttocks and groin area, shall be worn under a one-piece singlet. Any other undergarment worn under the one-piece singlet which extends beyond the inseam shall be tight-fitting and shall not extend below the knee. The one-piece singlet may be worn with full-length tights with stirrups. Any other undergarment worn under the one-piece singlet which extends beyond the inseam shall be tight-fitting and shall not extend below the knee. The one-piece singlet shall be school-issued.

NOTE: Female contestants wearing a one-piece singlet shall wear a form-fitted compression suitable undergarment that completely covers their breasts.

Reason: Currently, there is no specific requirement for what a wrestler wears under a singlet. Light colored or white singlets become transparent if an undergarment is not worn underneath. This creates a modesty concern that athletes are revealing more than is appropriate.

4-4-1b

A legal uniform consists of:

b. Compression shorts or shorts designed for wrestling shall…snaps, buttons or pockets. A suitable undergarment, which completely covers the buttocks and groin area must shall be worn under shorts designed for wrestling and compression shorts. Shorts designed for wrestling may be worn over the singlet. Compression shorts or shorts designed for wrestling may be worn with a form-fitted compression shirt. Compression shorts or shorts designed for wrestling shall be school-issued.

Reason: suitable undergarments are required to be worn under shorts designed for wrestling and compression shorts. The previous version of the rule did not require such undergarments.

4-1-1c

The next change adds language to the following rule:

NOTE: Female contestants wearing a one-piece singlet shall wear a suitable undergarment that covers their breasts and minimizes the risk of exposure. All contestants wearing a one-piece singlet shall wear a suitable undergarment which completely covers the buttocks and groin area.

Reason: By adding additional language to minimize the risk of exposure, it will raise the expectation that the suitable undergarment should provide coverage and support during competition.

4-1-3

Rule 4-1-3 has had changes to the language as well as a penalty added for violating the rule:

Wrestlers shall wear light heelless wrestling shoes, reaching above the ankles. If the shoes have laces, the laces shall either be taped to
the shoe or secured by a locking device on the wrestling shoe in an
acceptable fashion
. If laces are visible, they shall be secured in an acceptable fashion. If the shoe laces come undone the penalty would be an automatic stalling call.

(NOTE: acceptable secure fashion could be double knotting of the laces)

Reason: This rule holds the coach and wrestler accountable to verification that they have come to the mat properly equipped. This also allows the usage of double knotting of the laces as another way to secure the shoes.

4-1-4

The change deals with branding on ear guards. The rule now reads:

Wrestlers shall wear wrestling ear guards designed by the manufacturer for the sport of wrestling that are rigid and padded, which provide:

a. adequate ear protection;
b. no injury hazard to the opponent; and,
c. an adjustable locking device to prevent it from coming off or turning
on the wrestler’s head.

Any manufacturer’s logo/trademark/reference that appears on the wrestling ear guards including legal hair covering can be no more than 2 1/4 square inches with no dimension more than 2 1/4 inches and may appear no more than once on ear guards. No additional manufacturer’s logo/trademark or promotional reference shall be allowed on the wrestling ear guard.

Reason: The intent of NFHS Rule 4 is to maintain the sanctity of the wrestler’s uniform and ear guards by not allowing impractical images that detract from school-issued equipment and uniforms.

4-2-1

The rule deals with hair and will now read:

During competition all wrestlers shall be clean shaven, with sideburns trimmed no lower than earlobe level. Hair trimmed and well groomed The hair in its natural state, shall not extend below the top of an ordinary shirt collar in the back; and on the sides, the hair shall not extend below earlobe level; in the front, the hair shall not extend below the eyebrows. (Photos 2-3) A neatly trimmed mustache that does not extend below the line of the lower lip shall be permissible. If an individual has hair longer than allowed by rule, it may be braided, or rolled if it is it shall be contained in a cover so that the hair rule is satisfied. (Photo 4) Physical hair treatment items that are hard and /or abrasive such as (beads, bobby pins, barrettes, pins, hair clips, etc. or any other hair control device) shall not be permitted. A legal hair- controlled device such as rubber band(s) shall be secured so as not to come out readily during wrestling. The legal cover shall be attached to the ear guards…at the site. If an individual has facial hair, it must shall be covered with a face mask. All legal hair covers and face masks will be considered as special equipment. If an individual’s hair is as abrasive as an unshaved face, the individual shall be required to shave the head as smooth as a face is required, or wear a legal hair cover.

Reason: The terms trimmed and well-groomed, as well as the description the hair in its natural state, have been removed as the term well-groomed is extremely subjective and there is no standard to meet such an arbitrary expectation.

There has also been in addition to the rule, dealing with hair treatment: Physical hair treatment items that are hard and /or abrasive such as (beads, bobby pins, barrettes, pins, hair clips, etc. or any other hair control device) shall not be permitted. A legal hair- controlled device such as rubber band(s) shall be secured so as not to come out readily during wrestling.

There has been speculation, that this rule change does away with head coverings. This is not true as the requirement for hair covers is still present in the rule

4-3-5

The rule now bans leg and arm sleeves:

Wrestlers may shall not wear wristbands, sweatbands, bicep bands or leg or arm sleeves that do not contain a pad during a match.

Reason: There is no purpose or function for use of a leg or arm sleeve that does not contain a pad for protection. There is no peer review data or research to support their existence. They are intrusive and do not properly fit all wrestlers.

4-5-7

The rule now requires female wrestlers to wear a suitable form fitted compression undergarment that completely covers their breasts during weigh-ins.

All contestants shall weigh-in wearing a suitable undergarment that completely covers the buttocks and the groin area. Female contestants must shall also wear a suitable form fitted compression suitable undergarment that completely covers their breasts. Contestants may wear low cut socks that cannot be removed or added if the wrestlers do not make weight.

Reason: the NFHS believes females wrestlers should use a foundation garment that provides appropriate coverage and support.

5-25-2

A takedown shall be awarded when one or both knees of the defensive wrestler are touching the mat beyond reaction time or when the defensive wrestler’s legs or torso are controlled and the majority of the wrestler’s weight is supported by his hands. (photo 31) wrestler’s hand(s) touch the mat beyond reaction time.

Reason: the change eliminates a double standard that was created when the definition of a takedown was revised last year (majority of the wrestler’s weight is supported by his hands.) By removal of the “majority of the wrestler’s weight” criteria, the need for the official to make a judgmental call on weight bearing extremities is eliminated.

5-27-1a

There are five types of technical violations. Each is penalized without warning as outlined in Rule 7-3.

a. Intentionally going out of the wrestling area or forcing an opponent out of the wrestling area to avoid an imminent scoring situation.

Reason: The addition builds upon last year’s rule change, where pushing and pulling your opponent out of bounds in the neutral position is stalling. This year’s rule change will clarify that intentionally going off the mat or forcing your opponent off the mat to avoid wrestling would be stalling.)

7-3-1

Going out of the wrestling area or forcing an opponent out of the wrestling area, by either wrestler at any time as a means of avoiding wrestling an imminent scoring situation, is a technical violation fleeing the mat. Both wrestlers should make every effort to remain inbounds. When the referee feels that either wrestler has failed to make every effort to stay inbounds during an imminent scoring situation, the offending wrestler shall be penalized for fleeing the mat. There can be no technical violation of fleeing the mat if near-fall points have been earned.

Reason: With the language change if a wrestler leaves the wrestling area or forces the opponent off the wrestling area to avoid an imminent scoring situation the referee’s call must be fleeing and the offending wrestler will be penalized a point. Going out of bounds or pushing an opponent out of bounds when not in an imminent scoring situation would be stalling and only warrant a warning for the first violation and a point for the second violation.

7-6-6d

It is stalling when either wrestler:

Sub-articles a-c remain the same.

d. Shoelaces become undone

Reason: It is now considered stalling if a wrestler’s shoelaces become undone.

8-1-3

Penalties and Warnings are cumulative throughout the match. Each infraction has its specific penalty. The penalty for an illegal hold/maneuver, technical violation (except false start or incorrect starting position), unnecessary roughness and wrestler’s unsportsmanlike conduct in the match is awarding the opponent of the offender one match point on the first and second offenses and two match points on the third offense. A fourth offense shall result in disqualification. The first call for stalling will receive a warning prior to the opponent of the offender being awarded a match point. The first two calls for a false start or incorrect starting position will be receive cautions. Following the two cautions, one match point will be awarded to the opponent of the offender for each subsequent violation. (See Penalty Chart)

Reason: the change removes stalling from the progressive penalty sequence. Which will allow referees to call stalling more frequently without the complications that come with it, when combined with other penalties where four offenses will end in the wrestler’s disqualification.

8-1-4

Warnings and Penalties for stalling are cumulative throughout the match and are penalized independent of the progressive penalty chart. On the first offense the wrestler will receive a warning. The opponent of the offender will be awarded one match point on the second and third offense, two match points and choice of position on the next restart for the fourth offense. A fifth offense shall result in disqualification. (See Penalty Chart)

Reason: the new rule goes more into detail as to how stalling is penalized as its own independent violation: Warnings and Penalties for stalling are cumulative throughout the match and are penalized independent of the progressive penalty chart.

8-2-4a, b1,2,3

a. Any contestant who exhibit signs, symptoms or behaviors consistent with a concussion (such as loss of consciousness, headache, dizziness, confusion or balance problems) shall be immediately removed from the match and shall not return to competition until cleared by an appropriate health-care professional. (See NFHS Suggested Guidelines for Management of Concussion in Sports, in Appendix B.)

b. The following modifications to injury time-outs will be used in all competition regarding injuries to the head and neck involving cervical column and/or nervous system:

(1) In the absence of appropriate health-care professional, (physician and/or certified athletic trainer) all injuries to the head and neck involving the cervical column and/or nervous system will be covered by the same time frame as other injuries. (See 5-28-6, 8-2-1)

(2) When appropriate health-care professional(s) are present, they have jurisdiction to extend the allowed time limit to a maximum of five (5) minutes for evaluation of the injuries to the head and neck involving cervical column and/or nervous systems only, at which time the athlete would be required to prepare without delay for continuation or default the match.

(3) A second occurrence of injury to the head and neck involving cervical column and/or central nervous system in the same match shall require the wrestler to default the match.

NOTE: When this provision is used, the time consumed for the injury will in no way affect time used, or available, for other types of injuries.

Reasons: changes address new procedures when dealing with potential concussions:

9-2-2f

In dual-meet competition, if teams have identical scores, the following team tie-breaking system shall be used to determine the winner.

Criteria a-e remain the same.

f. The team giving up the least number of forfeits.

Criteria shall be re-labeled through q.

Reason: a sixth criteria has been added for deciding the winner of dual meets when both teams have identical scores.

Official Signal

28 Tapping the front of the head with a balled-up fist of either hand to indicate that the five (5) minute Head/Neck/Cervical Column Evaluation time is to begin.

Reason: a new signal has been introduced for officials to indicate that the head/neck/cervical column evaluation time has begun.

So what do you think about the rule changes for the upcoming season? If you would like a copy of the rule changes click here.

2019 CIF State Girls Wrestling Championships Placers

Well, wrestling at the CIF State Girls Wrestling Championships concluded a few minutes ago. The medal ceremonies should be taking place at the time that I am typing. Hopefully this year, as there were 32-wrestler brackets, all eight placer will receive a medal, and not just the top sic like in the past.

There were some surprises and some things that transpired exactly as expected, both on and off the mat. Some people seem to have loved this year’s format, while others hated every last bit of it. I’m sure there will be improvements made, if not outright changes. Whatever the state office decides to do next year, expect grumblings from all quarters.

As usual, the quality of wrestling has improved this year over last year’s. And yes, there is still a visibly apparent drop-off in skill level between the top-tier wrestlers and the rest. But I truly believe that the margin is shrinking.

There had been concerns that the addition of wrestlers to the brackets would dilute the quality of wrestling. But I think the opposite is true, just look at the LACS which last year, with 14 wrestlers, had five placers and this year with 42, finished with ten!

San Fernando Wins the Team Title!

As had been predicted by some quarter (California Girls Wrestling Podcast, I’m looking at you), this year’s winner came out of the LA City Section and it was in fact San Fernando with a total of 104 points. Second place went to Menlo Atherton with 92 points. Third place, went to the other candidate to win the team title, Birmingham, which finished with 76 points.

A list of team placement and points for the top twenty teams follows. SoCal teams are in blue font:

1 San Fernando (LACS) 104
2 Menlo Atherton (CCS) 92
3 Birmingham (LACS) 76
4 Albany (NCS) 71
5 Northview (SS) 61
6 Norte Vista (SS) 55

7 McClatchy (SJS) 54
8 Monroe (LACS) 49
9 Arroyo (NCS) 45
10 Corona (SS) 44

10 Selma (CS) 44
12 La Costa Canyon (SDS) 43
12 Walnut (SS) 43

14 Liberty (NCS) 42
14 Orland (SJS) 42
14 Silver Creek (CCS) 42
17 Beaumont (SS) 41
18 Mt Whitney (CS) 40.5
19 Westminster (SS) 39
20 Bella Vista (SJS) 38

Individual Results

Congratulations to all the placers! It’s been a long, hard road for all of the athletes that participated but the group listed below were able to push their bodies and wills that one additional moment and that may very well have made all the difference. Regardless of how you did it, you deserve the final outcome! Enjoy it while you can, CA-USA Wrestling Folkstyle and Freestyle State Championships are right around the corner.

101 Lbs
1 Cristelle Rodriguez – Buchanon (CS)
2 Sofia Martinez – Ayala (SS)
3 Hailey Ward – Turlock (SJS)
4 Mikayla Guevarra – Amador Valley (NCS)
5 Melissa Lee – Fremont (CCS)
6 Karen Salais – Calexico (SDS)
7 Chelsy Mendoza – Selma (CS)
8 Jacqueline Hernandez – Frontier (CS)

106 Lbs
1 Leah Gaitan – Yucaipa (SS)
2 Justine Barredo – Walnut (SS)

3 Adrienna Turner – Davis (SJS)
4 Viviana Garcia – San Fernando (LACS)
5 Artemisia Matera – Albany (NCS)
6 Genesis Quirarte – Ridgeview (CS)
7 Makayla Breceda – Norco (SS)
8 Miranda DiBenedetto – Folsom (SJS)

111 Lbs
1 Jennifer Soto – Orland (SJS)
2 Mikayla Vega – Escalon (SJS)
3 Aliyah Rollins – Birmingham (LACS)
4 Danielle Garcia – Corona (SS)
5 Alexis Medina – Northview (SS)

6 Valeree Ornelas – Clovis (CS)
7 Maya Letona – Santa Cruz (CCS)
8 Riha Prasad – Santa Monica (SS)

116 Lbs
1 Monica Garcia – Norte Vista (SS)
2 Desinee Lopez – Folsom (SJS)
3 Charlotte Kouyoumtjian – Monache (CS)
4 Rebecca Drown – Norco (SS)
5 Alisha Narvaez – Arroyo (NCS)
6 Kaiani Kenney – Durham (SJS)
7 Heavynne Jerez – Westminster (SS)
8 Juliana Cubias – Aliso Niguel (SS)

121 Lbs
1 Adriana Lopez – Upper Lake (NCS)
2 Ashley Venagas – Mt. Whitney (CS)
3 Evelyn Calhoon – Menlo Atherton (CCS)
4 Melanie Mendoza – Selma (CS)
5 Katie Gomez – Birmingham (LACS)
6 Cora Johnson-Woessner – La Costa Canyon (SDS)
7 Samantha Barragan – Hemet (SS)
8 Kameron Sudol – Yorba Linda (SS)

126 Lbs
1 Cindy Zepeda – Palm Springs (SS)
2 Kelly Escamilla – California (SS)

3 Emily Se – Oak Ridge (SJS)
4 Niya Gaines – Bear Creek (SJS)
5 Nile Jernigan – Cerritos (SS)
6 Angie Bautista – Menlo Atherton (CCS)
7 Dyanna Gutierrez – Armijo (SJS)
8 Natalia Urbas – Albany (NCS)

131 Lbs
1 Cheyenne Bowman – Rowland (SS)
2 Mary Lopez – Liberty (NCS)
3 Tiera Jimerson – Northview (SS)
4 Adaugo Nwachukwu – Silver Creek (CCS)
5 Mikaela Contreras – El Camino (CCS)
6 Athena Willden – Oak Hills (SS)
7 Phonisha Pruitt – Lincsoln (SDS)

8 Emily Alderman – Bella Vista (SJS)

137 Lbs
1 Dalia Garibay – Freedom (NCS)
2 Aine Drury – Westminster (SS)
3 Faalia Martinez – Oakdale (SJS)
4 Joanna Qiu – Albany (NCS)
5 Sophie Muse – Mcclatchy (SJS)
6 Anahi Moreno – Mt Whitney (CS)
7 Hazel Sunnarborg – Morro Bay (CS)
8 Sydney Barrios – San Pedro (LACS)

143 Lbs
1 Lillian Freitas – Pitman (SJS)
2 Gianna Anaya – San Fernando (LACS)
3 Francesca Lopresti – Albany (NCS)
4 Samantha Utter – Maria Carrillo (NCS)
5 Juliana Bricarello – Beaumont (SS)
6 Gracie Goldsmith-Ding – Argonaut (SJS)
7 Maicie Lockyer – Del Oro (SJS)
8 Paola Sanabria – Silverado (SS)

150 Lbs
1 Amit Elor – College Park (NCS)
2 Maddie Konopka – La Costa Canyon (SDS)
3 Melanie Bacher – Norte Vista (SS)

4 Shareni Donis – South (CS)
5 Michelle Kamyshin – River City (SJS)
6 Hannah Ricioli – El Molino (NCS)
7 Cheyenne Williams – Eleanor Roosevelt (SS)
8 Jazmin Segura – Tustin (SS)

170 Lbs
1 Alia Abushi – Arroyo (NCS)
2 Adelina Parra – San Fernando (LACS)
3 Baoanh Duncan – Clovis (CS)
4 Liliana Vergara – Gregori (SJS)
5 Amara Devericks – Corona (SS)
6 America Lopez – Valencsia/V (SS)

7 Xanaysis Real – Mclane (CS)
8 Vianeth Jimenez – Birmingham (LACS)

160 Lbs
1 Yelena Makoyed – Bella Vista (SJS)
2 Ariana Pereira – Newark Memorial (NCS)
3 Jerzie Estrada – Birmingham (LACS)
4 Tia Barfield – Bishop (CS)
5 Chamira Cooper – Cerritos (SS)
6 Alexa Garcia – Sierra (SJS)
7 Abby Ericson – Menlo Atherton (CCS)
8 Ehireme Ohens – Stockdale (CS)

189 Lbs
1 Folashade Akinola – Menlo Atherton (CCS)
2 Jasmin Clarke – Kelseyville (NCS)
3 Juliannah Bolli – Silver Creek (CCS)
4 Joanna Hendricks – Beaumont (SS)
5 Angela Buenrrostro – Monroe (LACS)
6 Melissa Moreno – Beckman (SS)

7 Aracely Rendon-gomez – Eureka (NCS)
8 Madlyne Navarro – El Camino (SDS)

235 Lbs
1 Tavi Heidelberg – Mcclatchy (SJS)
2 Cristina Santoyo – Monroe (LACS)
3 Tagivale Vaifale – Pacheco (SJS)
4 Sierra Adams-Gregory – Lakewood (SS)
5 Lillian Mccoy – Casa Grande (NCS)
6 Isela Mendez – Northview (SS)
7 Ciara Boyd – San Dimas (SS)

8 Jasmine Guerrero – Del Oro (SJS)

48 CIF State Placers for Socal in 2019

Congratulation to the wrestlers listed below on earning top-8 placings at the 2019 CIF State Girls Wrestling Championships. The exact placing they finish in will be decided today, Saturday, February 23rd, during the third and final day of competition at Rabobank Arena in Bakersfield.

196 SoCal wrestlers competed (42 from LACS, 42 to from SDS, and 112 from SS) a 42 wrestler increase from the 154 wrestlers (14 from LACS, 28 from SDS, and 112 from SS) that were sent previously; before the CIF making it 32-wrestler brackets this year.

Now, there’s some good news and some bad news. I’ ll start with the good. LACS’s placer count has doubled from 5 in 2018 to 10 this year! The bad news, both SDS and SS will see a drop in the number of placers they have this year. SDS drops from 8 to 5 and the SS drops from 38 to 33. in total SoCal will drop from 51 placers last year to 48 this year.

If nothing else, the drop in placers is an indicator of how tough the competition around the rest of the state is becoming and should be an exhortation to all the SoCal wrestlers to step up and work harder than ever.

Another thing that it does, is make placing so much mote meaningul because it is becoming more challenging to do so. So to those who are guarateed to do so today, Congratulations! You deserve the fruit of your labor!

101 Lbs
Semifinals: Sofia Martinez – Ayala (SS)
Consolation Semifinals: Karen Salais – Calexico (SDS)

106 Lbs
Semifinals: Justine Barredo – Walnut (SS)
Semifinals: Leah Gaitan – Yucaipa (SS)
Consolation Semifinals: Viviana Garcia – San Fernando (LACS)
7th Place Match: Makayla Breceda – Norco (SS)

111 Lbs
Semifinals: Alexis Medina – Northview (SS)
Semifinals: Danielle Garcia – Corona (SS)
Consolation Semifinals: Aliyah Rollins – Birmingham (LACS)
7th Place Match: Riha Prasad – Santa Monica (SS)

116 Lbs
Semifinals: Monica Garcia – Norte Vista (SS)
Consolation Semifinals: Rebecca Drown – Norco (SS)
7th Place Match: Juliana Cubias – Aliso Niguel (SS)
7th Place Match: Heavynne Jerez – Westminster (SS)

121 Lbs
Consolation Semifinals: Katie Gomez – Birmingham (LACS)
Consolation Semifinals: Cora Johnson-Woessner – La Costa Canyon (SDS)
7th Place Match: Samantha Barragan – Hemet (SS)
7th Place Match: Kameron Sudol – Yorba Linda (SS)

126 Lbs
Semifinals: Cindy Zepeda – Palm Springs (SS)
Semifinals: Kelly Escamilla – California (SS)
Consolation Semifinals: Nile Jernigan – Cerritos (SS)

131 Lbs
Semifinals: Cheyenne Bowman – Rowland (SS)
Semifinals: Athena Willden – Oak Hills (SS)
Consolation Semifinals: Tiera Jimerson – Northview (SS)
7th Place Match: Phonisha Pruiit – Lincoln (SDS)

137 Lbs
Semifinals: Aine Drury – Westminster (SS)
7th Place Match: Sydney Barrios – San Pedro (LACS)

143 Lbs
Semifinals: Gianna Anaya – San Fernando (LACS)
Consolation Semifinals: Juliana Bricarello – Beaumont (SS)
7th Place Match: Paola Sanabria – Silverado (SS)

150 Lbs
Semifinals: Melanie Bacher – Norte Vista (SS)
Semifinals: Maddie Konopka – La Costa Canyon (SDS)
7th Place Match: Jazmin Segura – Tustin (SS)
7th Place Match: Cheyenne Williams – Eleanor Roosevelt (SS)

160 Lbs
Semifinals: Jerzie Estrada – Birmingham (LACS)
Consolation Semifinals: Chamira Cooper – Cerritos (SS)

170 Lbs
Semifinals: Adelina Parra – San Fernando (LACS)
Consolation Semifinals: Amara Devericks – Corona (SS)
Consolation Semifinals: America Lopez – Valenica/V (SS)
7th Place Match: Vianeth Jimenez – Birmingham (LACS)

189 Lbs
Semifinals: Angela Buenrrostro – Monroe (LACS)
Semifinals: Joanna Hendricks – Beaumont (SS)
Consolation Semifinals: Melissa Moreno – Beckman (SS)
7th Place Match: Madlyne Navarro – El Camino (SDS)

235 Lbs
Semifinals: Sierra Adams-Gregory – Lakewood (SS)
Semifinal: Cristina Santoyo – Monroe (LACS)
Consolation Semifinals: Ciara Boyd – San Dimas (SS)
7th Place Match: Isela Mendez – Northview (SS)

SoCal WrestlerGirls Seeded at the 2019 CIF State Girls Wrestling Championships

State pairings have been released and I’m happy to announce that this year the seeding committee has seeded to eight. In the past they had always reported they would seed the top two or four. Now, we will have to see how many people are unhappy with who got the nod and who didn’t.

I will list the SoCal wrestlers that have received a seed If you would like to see the full pairing sheets, follow the link.

  • 101 Lbs
    • #3 Sofia Martinez – Ayala (SS)
  • 106 Lbs
    • #2 Leah Gaitan – Yucaipa (SS)
    • #3 Viviana Garcia – San Fernando (LACS)
    • #4 Cassidy Do – Gabrielino (SS)
    • #5 Justine Barredo – Walnut (SS)
  • 111 Lbs
    • #2 Danielle Garcia – Corona (SS)
    • #4 Alexis Medina – Northview (SS)
    • #5 Samantha Martinez – Ayala (SS)
    • #6 Savannah Kiddoo – Ramona (SDS)
    • #7 Aliyah Rollins – Birmingham (LACS)
  • 116 Lbs
    • #1 Monica Garcia – Norte Vista (SS)
    • #5 Rebecca Drown – Norco (SS)
    • #6 Juliana Cubias – Aliso Niguel (SS)
    • #7 Salama Morales – San Fernando (LACS)
    • #8 Heavynne Jerez – Westminster (SS)
  • 121 Lbs
    • #6 Katie Gomez – Birmingham (LACS)
    • #7 Samantha Barragan – Hemet (SS)
    • #8 Ariah Barragan – Imperial (SDS)
  • 126 Lbs
    • #1 Cindy Zepeda – Palm Springs (SS)
    • #2 Kelly Escamilla – California (SS)
  • 131 Lbs
    • #1 Cheyenne Bowman – Rowland (SS)
    • #4 Athena Willden – Oak Hills (SS)
    • #5 Phonisha Pruitt – Lincoln (SDS)
    • #8 Samantha Larios – San Fernando (LACS)
  • 137 Lbs
    • #1 Aine Drury – Westminster (SS)
  • 143 Lbs
    • #1 Gianna Anaya – San Fernando (LACS)
    • #4 Juliana Bricarello – Beaumont (SS)
    • #5 Sierra Rivera – Victor Valley (SS)
    • #7 Tiffany Calderon – Birmingham (LACS)
  • 150 Lbs
    • #2 Maddie Konopka – La Costa Canyon (SDS)
    • #3 Alyssa Arana – San Fernando (LACS)
    • #6 Melanie Bacher – Norte Vista (SS)
  • 160 Lbs
    • #1 Katja Osteen – Chaminade (SS)
    • #2 Jerzie Estrada – Birmingham (LACS)
    • #5 Chamira Cooper – Cerritos (SS)
  • 170 Lbs
    • #1 Adelina Parra – San Fernando (LACS)
    • #4 America Lopez – Valencia/Valencia (SS)
    • #6 Jessica Gutierrez – M.L. King (SS)
    • #7 Amara Devericks – Corona (SS)
    • #8 Sofia Rivera – Mayfair (SS)
  • 189 Lbs
    • #2 Madelyn Navarro – El Camino (SDS)
    • #3 Joanna Hendricks – Beaumont (SS)
    • #4 Lauryn Morales – Etiwanda (SS)
    • #5 Angela Buenrrostro – Monroe (LACS)
    • #7 Cianna Riley – San Dimas (SS)
  • 235 Lbs
    • #2 Cristina Santoyo – Monroe (LACS)
    • #3 Sierra Adams-Gregory – Lakewood (SS)
    • #6 Ciara Boyd – San Dimas (SS)
    • #7 Rebeca Camacho – Cerritos (SS)
    • #8 Mayra Franco – Santa Ana (SS)

May these seeds prove beneficial to everyone that has received them and to those who did not get seeded, remember seeds don’t win titles, wrestlers do. So, go out there and wrestle. Prove the seeding committee wrong just like those unseeded wrestlers I wrote about in the previous post did to the Southern Section seeding committee.

© 2013-2019 SoCalWrestlerGirl
%d bloggers like this: