This was on one of the podcasts last week, and the conversation started with a reasonable premise - it doesn't feel right that a one-point win is worth as many team points as a solid five or six point win - but then wandered into silliness with suggestions that cumulative scores were kept rather than the current method. I veered way off track by suggesting that since a tech-fall would now be worth fifteen points, a fall would need to be twenty points. One could quickly see that a team could easily a meet with just two wins, and would make a fall worth 20 times (!) as much as a one point.
It did, however, make me start re-thinking majors and tech-falls. As difficult as it is to score at the higher levels, I wonder if it would be better and more exciting if a Major were a five point win rather than eight, and instead of a tech fall we awarded a "Super Major" for a margin of ten points. But rather than stopping the match once a "Super Major" had been awarded, they keep wrestling so somebody can still win by fall.
Hear me out. I've never liked tech falls, it seems wrong that with one wrestler dominating another, a scoring move could actually cause them to forfeit their chance to use the remaining time to achieve a pin. This is sort of a side issue, but if we awarded five teams points for victories over ten points, it would be pretty much required that the match not stop and tech-falls go away.
But I like the 5 and 10 margins instead of the 8 and 15 points because it would, imo, add excitement. Currently if a guy is carrying a solid 3 or 4 point margin into the last minute there is every incentive to just "sit" on the lead -- because 8 points is out of reach. We'd see more guys trying to score right up to the end, with team points on the line. It also more accurately reflects the notion than a solid five point win is a significantly better achievement than a one or two point win.
Likewise, today once a wrestler achieves the eight point margin in the third period they are also likely shut down and coast to the end -- a tech fall being out of reach. But with ten points awarding another team point, there again would be potentially more excitement and more meaningful action in the third period of a one-sided match.
Crazy?
It did, however, make me start re-thinking majors and tech-falls. As difficult as it is to score at the higher levels, I wonder if it would be better and more exciting if a Major were a five point win rather than eight, and instead of a tech fall we awarded a "Super Major" for a margin of ten points. But rather than stopping the match once a "Super Major" had been awarded, they keep wrestling so somebody can still win by fall.
Hear me out. I've never liked tech falls, it seems wrong that with one wrestler dominating another, a scoring move could actually cause them to forfeit their chance to use the remaining time to achieve a pin. This is sort of a side issue, but if we awarded five teams points for victories over ten points, it would be pretty much required that the match not stop and tech-falls go away.
But I like the 5 and 10 margins instead of the 8 and 15 points because it would, imo, add excitement. Currently if a guy is carrying a solid 3 or 4 point margin into the last minute there is every incentive to just "sit" on the lead -- because 8 points is out of reach. We'd see more guys trying to score right up to the end, with team points on the line. It also more accurately reflects the notion than a solid five point win is a significantly better achievement than a one or two point win.
Likewise, today once a wrestler achieves the eight point margin in the third period they are also likely shut down and coast to the end -- a tech fall being out of reach. But with ten points awarding another team point, there again would be potentially more excitement and more meaningful action in the third period of a one-sided match.
Crazy?