New Math: Division & Multiplication Problems
July 25, 2017
By Jack Roberts
MHSAA Executive Director
This is the second part in a series on MHSAA tournament classification, past and present, that will be published over the next two weeks. This series originally ran in this spring's edition of MHSAA benchmarks.
High school tournament classifications went viral before there was social media and most of us knew what “viral” meant.
Much as a virus infects computers today or has created epidemics of disease around the world for centuries, high school tournament classification – once introduced – tends to spread uncontrollably. Once started, it tends to keep expanding and rarely contracts.
While we are still some distance from providing every team a trophy as a result of expanding high school tournament classification across the country, there is criticism nevertheless that we are headed in that direction – a philosophy which is supposed to exist only in local youth sports for our youngest children.
Michigan could be blamed for all this. Michigan is generally accepted as the first state to provide different classifications for season-ending tournaments for different sized schools. It started a century ago. Today, every state has various classifications for its tournaments in most if not all sports. And it is a bit ironic that Michigan – creator of the classification chaos – more than most other states has kept the number of tournament classes or divisions under control.
Yes, there is evidence that tournament classifications have expanded over the years in Michigan, especially with the relatively recent introduction of tournaments in football and the late 1990s’ move from classes to divisions in most MHSAA tournaments. But the MHSAA Representative Council has held true to its word when it expanded the playoffs for football from four classes to eight divisions: this is needed because of unique factors of football, factors that exist in no other sport; and all other sports should be capped at a maximum of four classes or divisions.
Kentucky is the preeminent defender of single-class basketball. All of its 276 high schools compete for the single state championship for each gender. In Indiana, there are still open wounds from its move in 1998 from one to four classes for its 400 schools in basketball.
Multi-class tournaments have tended to increase the number of non-public school champions, which some states are trying to lower through enrollment “multipliers,” and also tend to increase the number of repeat champions, which some states are trying to affect with “success factors” which lift smaller schools into classifications for larger schools if they take home too many trophies.
While there is considerable evidence that state tournaments do as much bad as good for educational athletics, state associations persist in providing postseason tournaments because, on balance, the experiences are supposed to be good for student-athletes. And once we reach that conclusion it is just a small leap to believe that if the tournaments are good for a few, they must be better for more – which leads to creating more and more tournament classifications. One becomes two classes, then three, then four and so forth.
While the argument is that more classifications or divisions provides more students with opportunities to compete and win, it is undeniable that the experience changes as the number of tournament classifications expands. It is not possible for state associations to provide the same level of support when tournament classifications expand to multiple venues playing simultaneously. For example, there is less audio and video broadcast potential at each venue, and less media coverage to each venue. Focus is diluted and fans diminished at each championship.
No one can argue reasonably that today's two-day MHSAA Football Finals of eight championship games has the same pizazz as the one-day, four-games event conducted prior to 1990.
In some states the number of divisions has grown so much that it is difficult to see much difference between the many season-ending state championship games and a regular-season event in the same sport.
It is a balancing act. And Michigan has been studying that balance longer than any other state, and charting a steadier course than most.
Addition by Division
The shift to Divisions for MHSAA Tournament play in numerous sports has added up to a greater number of champions for teams and individuals across the state. Following are the sports currently employing a divisional format, and the procedures for determining enrollment and classification.
In 23 statewide or Lower Peninsula tournaments, schools which sponsor the sport are currently divided into nearly equal divisions. They are:
- Baseball - 4 Divisions
- Boys Bowling - 4 Divisions
- Girls Bowling - 4 Divisions
- Girls Competitive Cheer - 4 Divisions
- LP Boys Cross Country - 4 Divisions
- LP Girls Cross Country - 4 Divisions
- LP Boys Golf - 4 Divisions
- LP Girls Golf - 4 Divisions
- Ice Hockey - 3 Divisions
- Boys Lacrosse - 2 Divisions
- Girls Lacrosse - 2 Divisions
- Boys Skiing - 2 Divisions
- Girls Skiing - 2 Divisions
- LP Boys Soccer - 4 Divisions LP
- Girls Soccer - 4 Divisions
- Girls Softball - 4 Divisions
- LP Boys Swimming & Diving - 3 Divisions
- LP Girls Swimming & Diving - 3 Divisions
- LP Boys Tennis - 4 Divisions
- LP Girls Tennis - 4 Divisions
- LP Boys Track & Field - 4 Divisions
- LP Girls Track & Field - 4 Divisions
- Wrestling - 4 Divisions
Lists of schools for each division of these 23 tournaments are posted on MHSAA.com approximately April 1. Listings of schools in Upper Peninsula tournaments for their sports are also posted on MHSAA.com. The lists are based on school memberships and sports sponsorships in effect or anticipated for the following school year, as known to the MHSAA office as of a date in early March.
In football, the 256 schools which qualify for MHSAA 11-player playoffs are placed in eight equal divisions annually on Selection Sunday. Beginning in 2017, the 8-player divisions will be determined in a like manner on Selection Sunday as well, with 32 qualifying schools placed in two divisions.
Schools have the option to play in any higher division in one or more sports for a minimum of two years.
The deadlines for "opt-ups" are as follows:
- Applications for fall sports must be submitted by April 15
- Applications for winter sports must be submitted by Aug. 15
- Applications for spring sports must be submitted by Oct. 15
Subsequent to the date of these postings for these tournaments, no school will have its division raised or lowered by schools opening or closing, schools adding or dropping sports, schools exercising the option to play in a higher division, or approval or dissolution of cooperative programs.
When the same sport is conducted for boys and girls in the same season (e.g., track & field and cross country), the gender that has the most sponsoring schools controls the division breaks for both genders.
No Just-Miss This Time: Groves Breaks Through with 1st Finals Win
By
Greg Chrapek
Special for Second Half
October 16, 2021
HOLLAND – This year’s Lower Peninsula Division 2 Boys Tennis Finals had a new look.
Along with the return to their traditional format after last year’s COVID-driven changes, the tournament featured a new champion, several new competing schools and some brand new names to the Division 2 tennis scene.
Birmingham Groves, a five-time Finals runner-up, broke through and claimed the first boys tennis team title in school history. Groves finished the two-day tournament Saturday with 27 points to edge a familiar name, two-time reigning Division 2 champion Grand Rapids Forest Hills Northern, by one point. Last year’s Division 1 champion, Okemos, had moved into Division 2 this season and tied for third place with Midland Dow as both teams totaled 20 points.
For Groves and coach Dave Farmer, the title meant the end of a chase lasting a decade.
“I’ve been coaching here since 2010 and we’ve had several second and third-place finishes,” Farmer said. “This one is very special because it’s the first high school title I’ve ever won. I won three titles at Eastern Michigan University, but this is my first in 12 years of coaching high school tennis.
“We have a veteran team this year, and that is a big reason why we won it. We had great senior leadership and a lot of good juniors as well.”
Groves came into the tournament with nine seniors on the team and seven in the starting lineup. The Falcons were paced by their singles lineup but received big efforts from doubles down the stretch.
“We have a good group of singles players that carried us for the bulk of the year,” Farmer said. “Our doubles teams really picked it up in the tournament and really helped solidify the team.”
The Falcons also had a talented freshman in the singles lineup, and he made his high school Finals debut in a big way. Groves freshman Michael Liss won the No. 3 singles title as he defeated Will Seymour of Detroit U-D Jesuit 6-4, 6-3.
“It feels absolutely amazing,” Liss said. “I just tried to stay calm and not get upset at anything at all. I feel that as a team we were a cohesive unit, and we all pushed each other to get better. I’m just a freshman, but I know we’ve been really close to winning it as a team. We’ve finished second and third a lot so we really wanted to win it this year.”
Liss was not the only freshman to win an individual flight championship. Okemos freshman Suchir Nagisetty arrived on the Finals stage in a big way as well as he defeated Andrew Williams of Mattawan 7-5, 6-1, to clinch at No. 4 singles.
The win was especially meaningful for Nagisetty as he followed in the footsteps of his older brother Sid who won an individual flight title during his freshman season at Okemos in 2017. Sid was in attendance cheering and supporting his brother and has played his own role in Suchir’s development as a player.
“My brother coached me and trained me this summer,” Suchir said. “I wanted to follow in his footsteps and win a state title in my freshman year. It is something I’ve thought about for a long time. There is some pressure, but once you start playing the match your love of tennis takes over and you just concentrate on playing the game. Winning the title feels great, and it’s nice to have something in common I can share with my brother.”
A new name to Division 2 tennis but a familiar face on the state scene, Okemos sophomore Ethan Portnoy, came away with the No. 1 singles championship. Portnoy, who played doubles last season, moved up to No. 1 singles and defeated Connor Stafford of Grosse Pointe South 6-3, 6-4.
Like Nagisetty, Portnoy had a good example of what it takes to win an individual championship under his own roof as his older brother Josh Portnoy was a two-time Finals flight champion during his high school career at Okemos.
“It’s really cool to follow in my older brother’s footsteps,” Portnoy said. “I had a lot of confidence that I could do it. I played a lot of USTA (United States Tennis Association) tournaments in the summer and had a lot of tough matches, and I knew I could bring that experience to high school tennis.”
At No. 2 singles, senior Owen Goodrich of Forest Hills Northern wrapped up his career in a memorable way by outlasting Okemos senior George Fan in a grueling, three-set struggle 6-2, 3-6, 6-4.
“I just took it one point at a time,” Goodrich said. “I’ve played him before, and I knew it was going to be a tough match. I knew he’s a great player, but he’s not invincible.”
Winning his final match as a senior was a fitting way to go out for Goodrich, who lost in the final at No. 4 singles as a freshman.
“I lost in the state finals to a player from Okemos as a freshman,” Goodrich said. “Now I win my final match in the state finals against a player from Okemos. I couldn’t ask for a better way to finish my senior year. It’s amazing.”
In doubles competition, winners came from four schools.
Grosse Pointe South, in Division 2 for the first time after having played in Division 1 for years, finished in a tie for sixth place and was led by seniors Blake Discher and Alex Prather. Discher and Prather teamed up to stop Thomas Ladwein and Aaron Li of Midland Dow 6-4, 6-3, at No. 1 doubles.
“We played really good,” Prather said. “It was one of our best days ever. This is the second year that we’ve played as partners, and we do a great job of supporting each other.”
The duo was determined to bring home a title for South, and even though they believed they could win, there was an element of awe when it was over.
“I thought we could take it with how much we put into it,” Discher said, “but in the end we were kind of shocked that we actually did it.”
The Jesuit No. 4 doubles team of Sam Owens and Stephen Cibulas won a tough struggle against Andrew Weitzman and Gabe Klein of Groves 7-5, 7-6 (2). The win was made even harder considering the duo had just spent plenty of energy getting past a tough Forest Hills Northern team in the semifinal round.
“We had a real tough match with Forest Hills Northern, and it drained a lot of our energy,” Owens said. “We had to be more mentally tough in this match. They were up 4-1 in the second half so we had to come back to win it.”
“We just played with more energy,” Cibulas added. “It was all about the energy. We also support each other really well.”
At No. 2 doubles, the Forest Hills Northern duo of Aaryan Singh and Anderson Halland were pushed to the limit before claiming a 3-6, 6-1, 6-3, victory against Dylan Wolf and Alexandras Abarius of Groves.
Birmingham Seaholm, which tied for sixth with Grosse Pointe South, was paced by its No. 3 doubles team of Alex George and Alex Lewis. The Seaholm duo won the No. 3 doubles title by stopping Kyle Wang and Joey Lamberg of Forest Hills Northern 6-3, 6-3.
PHOTOS (Top) Birmingham Groves' Michael Liss returns a volley Saturday during his run to the No. 3 singles championship. (Middle) Okemos' Ethan Portnoy drives a shot during a No. 1 singles match. (Click for more from High School Sports Scene.)