Author Topic: Wrestling Rules Committee recommends making two experimental rules permanent  (Read 5047 times)

Offline DiMaria

  • LXP
  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 7389
  • Sardinia Pride
    • View Profile
"Find something you love to do and you'll never have to work a day in your life."

-Confucius

Offline RYou

  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 17881
  • 3 out of 4 voices in my head want to sleep
    • View Profile
Interesting discussion. 

This one really caught my eye:

"......using dual meet scoring in individual tournaments instead of tournament scoring."

That could have significant impact in the team scoring if they start awarding 6 for a pin instead of 2, and 4 or 5 for a near fall instead of 1.5.

Offline brycemus

  • LXP
  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 32402
    • View Profile
I wonder how that would have affected last season's scoring ...

SHP ???
Corey Clark: 2016-2017 Hawkeye Hammer

Offline OkieSpladle

  • LXP
  • I Need More Hobbies
  • *****
  • Posts: 3803
    • View Profile
Oddly, a move to dual scoring would de-emphasize bonus points.  As it stands now a decision win on the front is worth 1/3 what a fall is.  Under these rules it would be 1/2.   I'm assuming you'd do away with advancement and just award 3-6 per win, but there are many details not addressed here.  You'd have to score half the points on the back, right?  Either that or make placement points BIG to offset the extra matches.  I really don't see a way to use dual scoring that would accomplish their goals (making it easier to understand) and keep a fair system that doesn't have massive loopholes or make bonus points irrelevant (if they made placement points, especially 1st and 2nd, huge).

As to the others, some of them are okay (the delay between set and whistle, control of the mat area though I thought this seemed to be in much better control this year at NCAAs already), but quit proposing these stupid little minor tweaks to scoring!  If you want to encourage back points do it, but why change it to a 4 count?  Why not just add a point to the 5 count?  3 point takedowns would also neuter that rule change.  These rules are full of those inconsistencies (I realize they won't all be implemented, but shouldn't there be a clear goal here?).  We want NF to be worth more, but no more need for NF to get a 5 point tech (unless I'm reading that wrong...its a little unclear)?  The scoring rules are not the problem anyway, IMO, but if the committee thinks they are they ought to decide what they want to encourage rather than some scattershot vague idea of offense=more points.

The pushout stalling rule is also a cop-out.  Either make it a stall or don't.  Don't give the refs a cop-out call! 

I don't mean to sound like Rock, but who is running the show over there?!  They either don't understand wrestling or they have no concept of how rule changes incentivize some actions while doing the opposite to others.  This is a mess.  Hopefully very few of these will ever see the light of day.

Offline ViseGrip

  • LXP
  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 36925
    • View Profile
Quote
the referee should immediately begin a five-second count for stalling once the offensive wrestler positions himself with one or both hands below the buttocks of the defensive wrestler.

So a cradle is stalling now??
"The first lesson of economics is scarcity: There is never enough of anything to satisfy all that want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics" -Thomas Sowell

Offline SetonHallPirate

  • I Need More Hobbies
  • *****
  • Posts: 3728
    • View Profile
I wonder how that would have affected last season's scoring ...

SHP ???
Iowa would have won this past year, primarily due to points earned in consolations. If you think Bobby Telford should have earned more points than both Nathan Tomasello and Logan Stieber, and the same number of points as Bo Jordan, that system is for you.

Halving points earned in consolations puts scoring much more into line, however.

Offline RYou

  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 17881
  • 3 out of 4 voices in my head want to sleep
    • View Profile
Quote
the referee should immediately begin a five-second count for stalling once the offensive wrestler positions himself with one or both hands below the buttocks of the defensive wrestler.

So a cradle is stalling now??

You have to go down 2 paragraphs.

"Additionally, if the offensive wrestler lifts the defensive wrestler’s leg off the mat and both wrestlers reach the standing position, the referee will stop his five-second count."

Both have to be standing, most cradles are on the mat. If a leg is elevated the count stops.  Presumably a standing cradle is still considered an offensive hold.

Offline RYou

  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 17881
  • 3 out of 4 voices in my head want to sleep
    • View Profile
Oddly, a move to dual scoring would de-emphasize bonus points.  As it stands now a decision win on the front is worth 1/3 what a fall is.  Under these rules it would be 1/2.   I'm assuming you'd do away with advancement and just award 3-6 per win, but there are many details not addressed here.  You'd have to score half the points on the back, right?  Either that or make placement points BIG to offset the extra matches.  I really don't see a way to use dual scoring that would accomplish their goals (making it easier to understand) and keep a fair system that doesn't have massive loopholes or make bonus points irrelevant (if they made placement points, especially 1st and 2nd, huge).

If keeping the bonus points, 4-6 on the backside, it appear a first round loser could potenially out score the champ if he pinned his way to 3rd given the extra consi bouts.

Offline SingletSlinger

  • World Team
  • ****
  • Posts: 1685
    • View Profile
Quote
the referee should immediately begin a five-second count for stalling once the offensive wrestler positions himself with one or both hands below the buttocks of the defensive wrestler.

So a cradle is stalling now??

That's now going to be referred to as the Gilman rule
Bunch of snowflakes run this board, sad how the mods cater to people that support one political party.

Offline brycemus

  • LXP
  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 32402
    • View Profile
I hate hate hate hate hate hate hate the count.  there is no consistency and it's a freaking joke.
Corey Clark: 2016-2017 Hawkeye Hammer

Offline OkieSpladle

  • LXP
  • I Need More Hobbies
  • *****
  • Posts: 3803
    • View Profile
Oddly, a move to dual scoring would de-emphasize bonus points.  As it stands now a decision win on the front is worth 1/3 what a fall is.  Under these rules it would be 1/2.   I'm assuming you'd do away with advancement and just award 3-6 per win, but there are many details not addressed here.  You'd have to score half the points on the back, right?  Either that or make placement points BIG to offset the extra matches.  I really don't see a way to use dual scoring that would accomplish their goals (making it easier to understand) and keep a fair system that doesn't have massive loopholes or make bonus points irrelevant (if they made placement points, especially 1st and 2nd, huge).

If keeping the bonus points, 4-6 on the backside, it appear a first round loser could potenially out score the champ if he pinned his way to 3rd given the extra consi bouts.

Indeed. 

After having given it some more thought, the bonus on the back isn't hugely out of line if you adjust the placement points, but it does inflate something that already is potentially problematic (wrestlers who drop down early having a chance to score more points than if they'd stayed on the winners side).  Under the current rules, each two match set on the back (equal to 1 round on top) a wrestler can score 5 points which is 5x what a winner on top scores for a decision and 1.6x what a wrestler on top has the potential to score (without placement).  Under dual scoring, each two match set on the back a wrestler can score 12 points which is 4x as much as a top side winner by decision scores (which is ok) and 2x what a top side wrestler has the potential to score.    The potential score is where the problem lies, but its not quite as bad as I first thought it would be.  If you scale up the placement points by 2x-3x it might come out alright.

I still don't like matches on the front and back being the same, though.  It already doesn't really make sense to have the bonus be the same, this makes that illogical hole in the scoring even worse.  If we really want to make it easy and go all 'MERICA!!! on it we should go dual scoring, but have double points on the top side, adjusting placement points of course.  'Merica loves points!  We could even give each team a "money ball" ankle band to be used once per round that doubles the points earned in that match once again.  We could have a 24 point pin in the first round!  Scoring records would be shattered after day 1!  The record books would be re-written!  When that stopped happening we could index the point table to inflation!  MORE POINTS! MORE POINTS! MORE POINTS!

At some point there I stopped being serious, see if you can figure out exactly where...

Offline Gantry

  • National Champ
  • ****
  • Posts: 1218
    • View Profile
I admire them trying, but you can't fix stalling.  Get rid of it. 

Offline Ray Brinzer

  • Ipse Dixit
  • Administrator
  • Get a Job
  • *****
  • Posts: 7622
    • View Profile
    • http://ray.brinzer.net/
Leaving aside, for the moment, the legitimate concerns voiced above:

  • If the fans have learned a system for scoring dual meets, they shouldn't have to learn another system for tournaments.  The motivation behind this change is a good one.
  • A system with half-points is silly.  Just doubling everything would make more sense.

I hope we do a good job of working out the details.

Offline Rockhard

  • LXP
  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 21051
    • View Profile
    • http://www.theowf.net
I admire them trying, but you can't fix stalling.  Get rid of it.

Sure you can. Make the refs finally call it.
"Really? Well please tell your father-in-law that he is a freaking idiot."

Offline RYou

  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 17881
  • 3 out of 4 voices in my head want to sleep
    • View Profile

[A system with half-points is silly.  Just doubling everything would make more sense.[/li][/list]

I hope we do a good job of working out the details.

The lower the point differential, the closer the score will seem to be.  Which score seems to be more competitive  90-95 or 100-90?   Theres really no diiference if the scoring is 1 point per win at  90-95 versus 2 points per win at 90-100.  But in the eyes of a novice the 90-95 score appreas to be a close score,