Yep. Right after they get rid of the crazy out-of-bounds rule and replace them with a push-out, and right after they get rid of riding time.
Clark's illegal hold
- Thread starter nearfall2
- Start date
I have changed my mind on riding time. Sometimes it is the most exciting part of a match. There are too many 0-0 first periods with maybe 1 legit shot to realize that adding 2 more minutes of neutral won't fix the problem. Get the push out rule and get new officials that will call stalling.
It is sad. Zain is allowed to grab toes and twist the foot. His illegal bow and arrow is going to ruin a few kids knees. Watch him against Brandon and you can see him twist the foot rather than keeping the knee in flexion. The officials allowing Zain to do that should be fired on the spot. It is dirty and intentional.
The rule that needs to be looked at and enforced is allowing a wrestler to constantly be backing up the entire first two periods. Either to get the offensive wrestler to become more agressive pusing into him so he can set up a slide by or a snatch signal. Even worse just keeping the match close by backing up and then trying to get the winning take down in the third period. At which time the official invariably calls stalling on the wrestler who has been the agressor the entire match up to that point. Call it early and things will need to change.
What I don't like about riding time is that it's a double reward. In my mind the benefits you derive from riding include: (i) preventing the other wrestler from scoring, (ii) giving yourself the opportunity to turn/pin, and (iii) wearing out the bottom wrestler. Why should riding have an additional reward?
Also, I dislike how the riding time accrues. Too many times you will see a wrestler accrue riding time because he got a few takedowns, each of which had 20 seconds of "riding time" just because of the situation of the TD. Or even worse, you see the bottom man try to escape or reverse and get caught in what would be considered a neutral position had the two started in neutral, only to have "riding" time accrue for the "top" man, many times because the top man is just stalling and not trying to even improve his situation.
I could get behind the pushout if it were worth half a point. I think one point is too much.
Alternatively, make pushout 1, escape 2, TD 4, and NF 4 or 8.
Pushout 1, Escape 1, TD 3, NF 2/4
That's reasonable too, however giving a net +2 to guys who are great at takedowns might not be something the rules committee would want to do.
I don't think so. In freestyle, the push-out is 1 and a takedown is 2. I think that works quite well. Obviously, escapes don't exist, but I think it's a reasonable ratio.
The thing about the push-out that many fans don't realize is that it doesn't really come into play all that much in terms of scoring. Its main effect is to keep the action in the center, and I think it accomplishes that very well. Freestyle guys pretty much fight to stay in the center and generally want no part of the edge. Imagine if folkstyle guys actually fought to stay in the center. That would do wonders for the action and the legitimacy of outcomes, IMO. Too many guys make a living on the edge and scramble out of bounds to avoid giving up 2. The push-out pretty much does away with that nonsense.
We can agree to disagree on this one. . . until you come around.
I don't disagree with your second point.
As to your first, that's closer to what I'm suggesting precisely because there are no escapes in freestyle. Didn't takedowns use to be 1 point in freestyle? I think that's a bad rule when a step out is worth the same as a finished wrestling maneuver. As they rules currently stand, it takes two pushouts to equal 1 TD and I think that's reasonable.
On the other hand, because folkstyle has escapes, most takedowns are effectively a net +1 for the offensive wrestler. In that case, a pushout is the same as a takedown. So in folkstyle, I think you'd really have to have a pushout be worth less than whatever a wrestler gets for TD minus the escape point.
We just have different philosophies on this, and that's fine. You, like championhawk, still have time to come around.
I just don't have a problem with a push-out being worth the same as an escape. It rewards the offensive wrestler, so I'm cool with it. Anything that rewards aggression and keeps the action is the center is good by me.
I am waiting for you to explain to me how a few more minutes watching two guys not take a shot is more exciting than riding time.We just have different philosophies on this, and that's fine. You, like championhawk, still have time to come around.
I just don't have a problem with a push-out being worth the same as an escape. It rewards the offensive wrestler, so I'm cool with it. Anything that rewards aggression and keeps the action is the center is good by me.
. The push out rule is an obvious change that has to be made. The current "action" call that every official makes at NCAA's is a joke.It is not easy to push someone out. Not only that it's really easy to get scored on while trying to push out. 1 point would be fine. Would be nice to have a bigger mat too.
Exactly, which is why most guys don't bother making it a priority. You can get burned if you try to rely on it as a scoring tactic. That said, the action on the edge can be really exciting when a guy goes for it, because you have both guys struggling for position and often both flying out of bounds.
Easy is relative. I can remember Andy Rein of Ws underhooking IA's Scott Trizzino and pushing him around the mat. Didn't try to do much with it just kept getting stall calls. He would have scored 8-9 points or more with a push out call in place. To me pushing some one out isn't wrestling, its being taller or stronger. Understand you premise that hopefully it would make wrestlers stay in the middle of the mat, however, would hate to see it bcome an offensive motivator. Don't need to add suma wrestling. Just my opinion.
Agree, that's why I was a little surprised he did a similar move in the finals. (even though legal)
Why would he not be himself in the final (rhetorical). I'm just glad he rode the crap out of Seth - a bit pissed at the time when they stopped the match to let Gross get a breather and a chance for a fresh start.
The "sumo" concern is common, but it's unfounded. It just doesn't happen. Look at freestyle. There's no reason to believe the push-out wouldn't have a similar effect in folkstyle.
Plus, pushing a guy out has a lot more to do with technique than strength or height.
We just have different philosophies on this, and that's fine. You, like championhawk, still have time to come around.
I just don't have a problem with a push-out being worth the same as an escape. It rewards the offensive wrestler, so I'm cool with it. Anything that rewards aggression and keeps the action is the center is good by me.
Like you, I also don't have a problem with a push-out being worth the same as an escape. I DO have a problem with it being worth as much as a takedown, which it functionally is once you account for the escape that often follows.
Freestyle has TD - 2 (with no escape) and PO - 1, and I think that's the right ratio. If the NCAA adopted something similar, I'd probably be on board. Another way to do it is to perhaps have a warning for each man who steps out, which each subsequent oob being worth a point for the opponent.
Really the WORST rule freestyle has is the tiebreaker for highest-value maneuver scored or last point scored. That is infuriating and makes no sense, so I'd never be on board for that (nor do I think the NCAA would ever adopt it).
I'm not a fan of the highest-scoring move breaking ties, but the last man to score criterion has actually grown on me. It puts pressure on guys to keep scoring. Even if you're up 2, you can't get complacent, because a takedown still beats you if your opponent scores last. While I do agree that one man winning with a tie score is absurd on its face, that scoring system does have a way of incentivizing action for both guys. I'm not saying I'd push for it, but it doesn't annoy me anymore like it did in the past.
As for the ratio of the value of a takedown to that of a push-out, I'm still OK with it. One of the good things about the push-out is that it pretty much never pays to try and make it your primary method of scoring. It's too much work, for starters, and if your opponent stays in the center, it's really not an option. It's more of a deterrent to hanging out on the edge than anything. So I really don't think it would be a big factor in scoring. Still, the push-out attempt and push-out defense/counter offense is some pretty darn fun action to watch, in any case.
I guess I would have to disagree about 1 point push out, 2 point TD and 1 point escape. Once you get your opponents leg up in the air, there wouldn't be a whole lot of incentive to finish the TD - much easier to just push him out and not expend the energy or risk a counter.
If you can ride, there would be plenty of incentive to finish the takedown. If you can't ride, that's the price you pay for not being a complete wrestler. I realize that a lot of Iowa wrestlers have been takedown machines, but in folkstyle, riding and turning are also critical aspects of the sport. I don't mind a system that adds more incentive to turning guys -- especially if you get rid of riding time and take away most of the incentive to just hang out on top and waste time.
Furthermore, I think guys who have taken the risk to get to the leg and lift it should be in a position to score. How often do we see the aggressor get to the legs repeatedly and the more passive guy just throw in wizards and wait for stalemates? It gets frustrating watching one guy do all of the work and the other guy just defend and wait for stalemates. Knowing he could get run out of bounds and give up a point if he lets his opponent get to his legs, a guy is going to have more incentive to get to his own offense -- and possibly put himself in that situation where he can score 1 with a push-out.
Another option would be to treat the push-out like a stalling call. The first one is a warning, and 1 point for each call thereafter. That would de-emphasize scoring with the push-out a little. But I think it would be great in any case. Would love to see it tried out in some pre-season tournaments.
Good points. I wasn't disagreeing about the push out. That would be a very welcome addition.
For the record, it would also be pretty easy just not to allow a push-out point if you have a leg. It could easily be stipulated that a point is only awarded for a push-out if neither man has lifted a leg from the mat on a leg attack. However, I don't really think that would be necessary -- or even better than the alternative.
I guess I still think that being able to get to an opponent's leg and elevate it for a push out, it should be a point. If we are giving one for an escape, maybe the TD should be three.
I would agree. A 3-point TD wouldn't bother me, but some might argue that it's too much. I'd have no problem with it.
Let's make it happen!
I'm not a fan of a 3 pt. takedown. The numbers all have to change if you do that. It's harder to turn than takedown so those numbers would have to go up to 3 and 6 pts. (Imagine a ref trying to hold up 6)
The push out for 1 is fine or a modified version as you have talked about is good too. It's harder to push out than to escape if both wrestlers know what they are doing.
Greco and to a lesser extent freestyle have been pushing out for decades. That's how you got to par terre if you were good on top and couldn't get a takedown.
Step-out rule in neutral only (1 point)
Riding time awarded after 30 seconds (1 point) then either turn opponent or it's up to neutral (no cumulative riding time clock), drop below knee - it's an escape (1 point) [the 30 second ride or escape tie-breakers are exciting, just incorporate those into the entire match]
after a set or reset, if action goes out of bounds, it's an escape [top man has to ride 30 seconds, no dropping below knee, and must keep opponent in bounds]
Riding time awarded after 30 seconds (1 point) then either turn opponent or it's up to neutral (no cumulative riding time clock), drop below knee - it's an escape (1 point) [the 30 second ride or escape tie-breakers are exciting, just incorporate those into the entire match]
after a set or reset, if action goes out of bounds, it's an escape [top man has to ride 30 seconds, no dropping below knee, and must keep opponent in bounds]
It's not how the push-out relates to the escape that's the issue; it's how it relates to a takedown.
When freestyle instituted the push-out some 10 years ago or whenever, it was worth the same as a takedown and I thought that was a bad rule. Now a takedown is worth double, and I think that's a very fair ratio.
I'd be okay with the push-out if it were worth some amount less than a takedown, which in folkstyle is really a net +1 after allowing for an escape. I suggested half a point above and I think that works well.
The other way you could do it is to award the wrestler with more push-outs at the end of the match 1 point, though I'd have to think that through.
I don't think anyone is advocating a move towards freestyle. I would personally be very anti- that change. Folkstyle imo is a much better form of wrestling, and whenever I expose newbies to the sport, the almost universal opinion is that folkstyle is much more intuitive than freestyle, which is near impossible for new fans to follow -- heck even seasoned wrestling fans often have no idea what's going on at times in freestyle. The concept of "control" makes a lot more sense than "exposure", in my opinion and the opinion of others.
Having said all of that, I think it's hard to say that folkstyle doesn't have issues with judgment calls made by officials. They both do, though I'd agree that the concept of "control" mediates that a bit -- though in some sense the judgment calls just get transferred to the concept of what constitutes "control."
but it would still reward initiative/aggression. And it would fit with "controlling" the opponent, which is something the hardcore folkstyle lovers usually bring up defending the long, boring rides
Sarcasim...i do watch free style, don't like it nearly as well however...sort of like college basketabll and the nba...nba has canabalized the sport. Of course folkstyle relies on an officials judgement which never seems to be the same in any two matches or for any two wrestlers. My point is don't give the official more to use that judgement on.
I don't understand this line of thought at all. Assuming that a takedown is a net of 1. Mat wrestling and control are what define folk style. Why would we assume an escape is given? Clark didn't and that's how he won his national finals.
Don't want to make it a net of 1, ride and turn the guy. That is folk style wrestling. If you want to make it even more of a takedown release game than it has already become, I'd prefer to just get rid of mat wrestling and full out switch to freestyle.
Last edited:
You're really missing the point here.
You already have an incentive to ride and turn -- namely (i) preventing an escape point and (ii) getting points (and a possible pin) for turning.
I'm not suggesting we remove incentives for mat wrestling, at all. I'm saying that imo a push-out in the neutral position should not functionally be worth the same as a takedown. And I don't think making a push-out worth half a point instead of a full point does that. How does that provide an incentive to not ride following a takedown?
Many many takedowns are followed by an escape. Is there data on this? I'd be willing to bet that if you exclude SV and takedowns that occur in the last 10-15 seconds of a period, something like 75%+ of takedowns feature an escape, and that's especially true for tight matches between top-level competitors, where points are at a premium and push-outs can decide matches. Especially in those cases, a push-out should probably be worth less than a TD.
First off, I would not be opposed to making a pushout a half point. That seems like a great starting spot to me. A pushout is needed badly imo.
I'm completely against a move to make takedowns worth 3 points. I agree, that there is plenty of incentive to ride right now. I'm amazed that so few wrestlers focus on this position, with 4 point turns, riding time, and pins, the incentive is there. A 3 point takedown doesn't completely eliminate the incentive to ride, but it undoubtedly decreases it.
I would like there to be no escape point if the top guy releases upon restart. All other escapes are one point, including in 'choice' situations. The "no point" escape can only happen on a restart and if the release is announced beforehand. To me, there is too much of a reward for a guy being given the freebie as compared to all the work the top guy did in getting the TD in the first place.
Similar threads
