Turns vs Catch and Release

[el dub]

The other day I did some ciphering on the topic at hand.

If a wrestler relies on catch and release to get a tech fall, there are 14 moves that need to be completed at minimum. (14 takedowns and an escape.)

If a wrestler relies on turning an opponent to tech fall, there are 4 moves to execute at minimum. (3 turns x 4 pts + takedown and escape.)

In a dual setting, there might not be much difference. However, in a tournament setting of five rounds of competition, the wrestler teching his way through the event utilizing catch and release must execute a minimum of 70 offensive moves to that end. The guy relying on turns must complete a minimum of 20 moves for the same results.

I'd like to see more focus on mat wrestling. Talk amongst yourselves……

 

[artradley]

The other day I did some ciphering on the topic at hand.

If a wrestler relies on catch and release to get a tech fall, there are 14 moves that need to be completed at minimum. (14 takedowns and an escape.)

If a wrestler relies on turning an opponent to tech fall, there are 4 moves to execute at minimum. (3 turns x 4 pts + takedown and escape.)

In a dual setting, there might not be much difference. However, in a tournament setting of five rounds of competition, the wrestler teching his way through the event utilizing catch and release must execute a minimum of 70 offensive moves to that end. The guy relying on turns must complete a minimum of 20 moves for the same results.

I'd like to see more focus on mat wrestling. Talk amongst yourselves……

I prefer catch and release until you're up by five or six. Break their spirit and wear them out. Then try to turn them and pin them. It's easier to turn a guy who is demoralized and tired.

If you try to turn them while they're fresh and the score is close you're apt to burn so much clock you have to give up early and scramble for the major.

I do believe you make a good observation about our Hawks; seems the suck back is pretty much our only turning move. Now, the truth is it is hard to turn a guy. So I also prefer emphasis on feet-to-back moves.

 

[DonHawkeye]

A lot of times, a wrestler that is not a top wrestling juggernaut has a better shot of putting a guy to his back while taking a guy down.

 

[PSU Mike]

Is this a Jason Nolf vs Zain Retherford argument on an Iowa board? Geez, don't blame us ...

 

[crablegs1]

Turns are a much more efficient way to score points. Plus turns can end matches in a pin.

Unfortunately it is very difficult to develop a college wrestler into a turner if they aren't already. So many youth and high school focus on takedowns and getting away. Very little practice time is spent on top. Retherford was leg riding before he ever came to Penn State. Steiber was ripping people's arms off in high school.

Add this as another reason to be extra excited for Spencer Lee to suit up. He is a beast on top, and expect him to continue turning people in college.

 

[el dub]

Is this a Jason Nolf vs Zain Retherford argument on an Iowa board? Geez, don't blame us ...

Was not thinking about PSU when I wrote the op, nor do I read your boards.

 

[Cali_Nittany]

Was not thinking about PSU when I wrote the op, nor do I read your boards.

I agree with what artradley said. Good discussion point though. A lot of effort to get the tech without back points. Did Gilman inspire your post? He so thoroughly dominated Assad it seemed hard to believe it was just a major.

 

[el dub]

I agree with what artradley said. Good discussion point though. A lot of effort to get the tech without back points. Did Gilman inspire your post? He so thoroughly dominated Assad it seemed hard to believe it was just a major.

That's spot on.

 

[Chickenman Testa]

Turns are a much more efficient way to score points. Plus turns can end matches in a pin.

Unfortunately it is very difficult to develop a college wrestler into a turner if they aren't already. So many youth and high school focus on takedowns and getting away. Very little practice time is spent on top. Retherford was leg riding before he ever came to Penn State. Steiber was ripping people's arms off in high school.

Add this as another reason to be extra excited for Spencer Lee to suit up. He is a beast on top, and expect him to continue turning people in college.

Look at how well Jack Mueller is doing and then google videos of him against Lee. Lee absolutely annihilates Mueller.

 

[el dub]

I prefer catch and release until you're up by five or six. Break their spirit and wear them out. Then try to turn them and pin them. It's easier to turn a guy who is demoralized and tired.

If you try to turn them while they're fresh and the score is close you're apt to burn so much clock you have to give up early and scramble for the major.

I do believe you make a good observation about our Hawks; seems the suck back is pretty much our only turning move. Now, the truth is it is hard to turn a guy. So I also prefer emphasis on feet-to-back moves.

A balanced attack would be optimal, imo.

On the other hand, taking a guy down and riding the pi$$ out of him will also lead to a tired opponent who is easier to turn. And we only need to turn that guy three times to end it with a tech. I'm guessing a person burns less energy riding than working from the feet and I know a wrestler works harder with someone on their back.

 

[HawkwardEncounter]

I think takedowns should be worth 3 points. Letting an opponent up should not be equal to 50% of the effort a td requires.

 

[el dub]

I think takedowns should be worth 3 points. Letting an opponent up should not be equal to 50% of the effort a td requires.

I agree. But rules is rulz.

At present exchange rate, catch and release doesn't appear to be profitable from an energy expense/reward comparison to turning opponents.

 

[HawkwardEncounter]

I agree. But rules is rulz.

At present exchange rate, catch and release doesn't appear to be profitable from an energy expense comparison to turning opponents.

I concur! Lol

 

[theIowaHawk]

I think takedowns should be worth 3 points. Letting an opponent up should not be equal to 50% of the effort a td requires.

I believe you are thinking about the scoring process opposite of its intention. The offensive wrestler's goal is to control the opponent, not just control them briefly. They are being negated a point for not continuing the control, but it is far less complicated to award a point to the other guy than to be subtracting points.

I'm against the 3 point takedown for this purpose because it just further negates control, which is the entire goal of wrestling, imo.

I don't have a problem with takedown and release, but it is an affirmation from the wrestler that they can't, or don't believe they will be able to, turn the other wrestler. They should therefore need to work harder to prove their dominance. If they were truly just dominating and controlling - they would pin them, which is the ultimate proof of control.

Of course there are times in matches where this is more complicated, like takedowns to end periods, which don't allow for time for non-control.

 

[theIowaHawk]

I agree. But rules is rulz.

At present exchange rate, catch and release doesn't appear to be profitable from an energy expense/reward comparison to turning opponents.

I'm not sure. I think this stance necessarily presumes that turning a person and technically using "one move" uses less energy than catch and release.

 

[el dub]

I'm not sure. I think this stance necessarily presumes that turning a person and technically using "one move" uses less energy than catch and release.

I'd be happy to agree that it takes as much energy to turn as to take down. However, the turn can be worth net 4 points and a take down net one w/ catch and release.

 

[theIowaHawk]

I'd be happy to agree that it takes as much energy to turn as to take down. However, the turn can be worth net 4 points and a take down net one w/ catch and release.

I totally agree, but as far as rule-making goes that is the point. One rewards control and domination: turning, and one rewards the ability to take people down and control them, at least, briefly.

 

[el dub]

So why the emphasis on takedowns by so many wrestlers?

Next question…… What takes more evergy, riding a guy without turning opponent or fighting for takedowns from neutral without scoring?

How about the energy expended fighting to get away from underneath as compared to fighting for takedowns?

 

[theIowaHawk]

From a strategy standpoint, I agree completely with the earlier posts. In high school, and younger, talent gaps are far, far more obvious and it is often quite easy for a more talented wrestler to simply catch and release until the match is over. Therefore emphasis is placed on that and that is what they learn.

Sort of, they either "have it or they don't" involved in that. I think it is easier to teach takedown techniques than to teach turning, and it is also more frustrating to try and fail to turn than it is to miss a takedown, a takedown that they'll just get a different way.

 

[theIowaHawk]

What I don't know is which one is more demoralizing. Getting taken down a lot, or being constantly controlled and fighting not to be turned?

My gut tells me its the latter. If the other guy is better than you to the point he can accomplish 14 offensive moves, you just know he is better than you and your strategy is to not get pinned. However, you are using every ounce of energy and motivation to stop being turned, precisely because you don't want to be pinned.

 

[AFHawk86]

What I don't know is which one is more demoralizing. Getting taken down a lot, or being constantly controlled and fighting not to be turned?

Doesn't matter. Both are demoralizing if you get your butt kicked.

 

[theIowaHawk]

Doesn't matter. Both are demoralizing if you get your butt kicked.

I'm sure that is true. I'm thinking more during match, which one will "break them" and allow for pinning.

 

[theIowaHawk]

I'm not offering any sort of solution, and my opinion is fairly obvious:

I trust the coaches, either an incoming wrestler is believed to "have it" and then they should emphasize turning, or they don't and they catch/release. I'm not saying there isn't an emphasis on bonus points already, by there is a very successful program out east really showing what bonus points can do at nationals.

 

[el dub]

Back in the day of wrestlers in tights, we didn't want to get scored on. My goal was to take down and turn or go feet to back, always. And the guys kicking my butt like John Thorn and Joe Gibbons did the same, back in the day….

 

[el dub]

Doesn't matter. Both are demoralizing if you get your butt kicked.

I wonder if it matters from the tourmanent standpoint of expending energy for multiple matches on consecutive days.

 

[AFHawk86]

I wonder if it matters from the tourmanent standpoint of expending energy for multiple matches on consecutive days.

It could. Depends on the opponents, the strengths of the wrestler, and how big a stud he/she is.

 

[bphawkeye_Rivals]

Back in the day of wrestlers in tights, we didn't want to get scored on. My goal was to take down and turn or go feet to back, always. And the guys kicking my butt like John Thorn and Joe Gibbons did the same, back in the day….

Welp - ole bud .... back in our day some coach (Cleffish or something) chewed my ass off for winning 5-0. got the TD and ride out - got the escape plus TD and ride out - and just did the ride out thing in the 3rd. Got the W, and the shutout, and was feeling pretty good about myself. Then came the locker room call out - and I was shocked. I'm sure you were in that room - I never forgot that ass chewing in front of everyone. Cory Clark should get an ass chewing like that today! In other words; it can't be one way or the other. You gotta understand the scoreboard and the clock. Damn I love that Gilman kid.

 

[el dub]

Well, lets consider the Big's or Nationals…. (The Cupcake Open doesn't count.)

My theory is that a guy working to control and dominate rather than catch and release will use less energy or at least be fresher the deeper they go in the tourney.

On the other hand, a takedown often makes the difference at national finals, or even an escape.

 

[el dub]

Welp - ole bud .... back in our day some coach (Cleffish or something) chewed my ass off for winning 5-0. got the TD and ride out - got the escape plus TD and ride out - and just did the ride out thing in the 3rd. Got the W, and the shutout, and was feeling pretty good about myself. Then came the locker room call out - and I was shocked. I'm sure you were in that room - I never forgot that ass chewing in front of everyone. Cory Clark should get an ass chewing like that today! In other words; it can't be one way or the other. You gotta understand the scoreboard and the clock. Damn I love that Gilman kid.

LOL This is great! Who da heck are you? I'm laughing my butt off while typing.

 

[bphawkeye_Rivals]

Well, lets consider the Big's or Nationals…. (The Cupcake Open doesn't count.)

My theory is that a guy working to control and dominate rather than catch and release will use less energy or at least be fresher the deeper they go in the tourney.

On the other hand, a takedown often makes the difference at national finals, or even an escape.

So do ya really think Meyer worked his ass off for any of those TDs?

 

[el dub]

Btw, I really like Coach Clefish. Had the opportunity to kayak down Hells Canyon with him one summer after graduation. He's a heck of a guy.

But I wish that Thayer had stuck around rather than take a college gig. Next choice would have been to see Clefish as O-rab head coach.

 

[HawkwardEncounter]

I believe you are thinking about the scoring process opposite of its intention. The offensive wrestler's goal is to control the opponent, not just control them briefly. They are being negated a point for not continuing the control, but it is far less complicated to award a point to the other guy than to be subtracting points.

I'm against the 3 point takedown for this purpose because it just further negates control, which is the entire goal of wrestling, imo.

I don't have a problem with takedown and release, but it is an affirmation from the wrestler that they can't, or don't believe they will be able to, turn the other wrestler. They should therefore need to work harder to prove their dominance. If they were truly just dominating and controlling - they would pin them, which is the ultimate proof of control.

Of course there are times in matches where this is more complicated, like takedowns to end periods, which don't allow for time for non-control.

Good post, and I respect your opinion! I agree with you that the pin is the grand daddy. I think that dominating on your feet is just as controlling as working guys from the top position. If I'm taking my opponent down, and letting him up, I've given him a point, he hasn't earned it. I've been on the wrong end of a couple of those matches, and they bothered me a lot more then getting pinned.

 

[theIowaHawk]

Good post, and I respect your opinion! I agree with you that the pin is the grand daddy. I think that dominating on your feet is just as controlling as working guys from the top position. If I'm taking my opponent down, and letting him up, I've given him a point, he hasn't earned it. I've been on the wrong end of a couple of those matches, and they bothered me a lot more then getting pinned.

What is "dominating on your feet?"

If you are on your feet, you aren't controlling them, and you aren't "dominating" them. They are where they want to be - standing up and not in your control.

The domination can come from the ability to control them, but at least minimally that control is only for a few seconds, which isn't much control at all.

And yes, he has "earned" it, imo, because he broke control. My reading of your post is that you would want differing escape points depending on how they escape, whether their own actions and talent, or simply let go. That would be a strange rule. Think of a double leg, complete control on the hips, but the person sits back, works around, breaks the grip, and rolls out. Did he "earn" that escape? Hell, its called an escape for a reason - he escaped through his own actions while the other guy tried to stop it. I would be terrified of allowing these refs even more discretion and the ability to determine whether a person escaped under their own power vs. a release. Plus it would simply lead to a lot more releases and less time on the ground, because they would risk less and gain more points by an immediate release.

But, again, my opinion is simpler. It isn't even a "reward" for the opponent, it is a negation of a point for you. You had two for control, you "lose" one for losing that control. It is just simpler to award opposing points instead of subtracting.

If two wrestlers are standing, and one double-legs, gains control, rolls and releases, let's say five seconds have elapsed, and the guy controlled him for two seconds. That doesn't exactly show the ability to control, nor greater talent or skill. If it did, like often in high school, the best guys would simply never be taken down at all.

Of course all of this is just my opinion, I just don't think the purpose of wrestling, even just offensively, is takedowns. But, what it would undoubtedly do is lead to more simplicity in rules-understanding for new/lesser fans who don't always get whats going on. I certainly admit it could lead to more popularity for the sport. Just like the offensive-protection rules have for the NFL, a league that is more popular in the last decade than ever before. I still think they've largely hurt the purpose of football, a protracted tug-of-war.

 

[GG121AND2]

IowaHawk - I agree with your premise, but have a hair to split. I find "control" on top to be better wrestling when attempting to turn and pin than when used to simply ride.

 

[el dub]

IowaHawk - I agree with your premise, but have a hair to split. I find "control" on top to be better wrestling when attempting to turn and pin than when used to simply ride.

Sounds like stalling.

 

[el dub]

So do ya really think Meyer worked his ass off for any of those TDs?

bphawk: Would the "bp," be initials? If so, I think I know who you are. If so, you were a bit older and heavier than I was?

 

[HawkwardEncounter]

What is "dominating on your feet?"

If you are on your feet, you aren't controlling them, and you aren't "dominating" them. They are where they want to be - standing up and not in your control.

The domination can come from the ability to control them, but at least minimally that control is only for a few seconds, which isn't much control at all.

And yes, he has "earned" it, imo, because he broke control. My reading of your post is that you would want differing escape points depending on how they escape, whether their own actions and talent, or simply let go. That would be a strange rule. Think of a double leg, complete control on the hips, but the person sits back, works around, breaks the grip, and rolls out. Did he "earn" that escape? Hell, its called an escape for a reason - he escaped through his own actions while the other guy tried to stop it. I would be terrified of allowing these refs even more discretion and the ability to determine whether a person escaped under their own power vs. a release. Plus it would simply lead to a lot more releases and less time on the ground, because they would risk less and gain more points by an immediate release.

But, again, my opinion is simpler. It isn't even a "reward" for the opponent, it is a negation of a point for you. You had two for control, you "lose" one for losing that control. It is just simpler to award opposing points instead of subtracting.

If two wrestlers are standing, and one double-legs, gains control, rolls and releases, let's say five seconds have elapsed, and the guy controlled him for two seconds. That doesn't exactly show the ability to control, nor greater talent or skill. If it did, like often in high school, the best guys would simply never be taken down at all.

Of course all of this is just my opinion, I just don't think the purpose of wrestling, even just offensively, is takedowns. But, what it would undoubtedly do is lead to more simplicity in rules-understanding for new/lesser fans who don't always get whats going on. I certainly admit it could lead to more popularity for the sport. Just like the offensive-protection rules have for the NFL, a league that is more popular in the last decade than ever before. I still think they've largely hurt the purpose of football, a protracted tug-of-war.

Dominating on my feet would be scoring at will as a result of using my speed, strength, and technique to control pace, ties/setups. When I'm doing all of that, you aren't able to stop me.... I'm dominating you on my feet. I didn't say that escapes should be scored differently. I said that some escapes were earned, and some were given. If you've ever wrestled, you would understand what I'm saying. I understand that some folks enjoy and appreciate the top guy riding the piss out of the bottom guy for control/riding time. I personally don't find it very exciting to watch someone sinking a tight waste, and riding a wrist off to the side for a period extremely exciting(doesn't mean I'm right). I like to watch points being put on the board.

 

[el dub]

Dominating on my feet would be scoring at will as a result of using my speed, strength, and technique to control pace, ties/setups. When I'm doing all of that, you aren't able to stop me.... I'm dominating you on my feet. I didn't say that escapes should be scored differently. I said that some escapes were earned, and some were given. If you've ever wrestled, you would understand what I'm saying. I understand that some folks enjoy and appreciate the top guy riding the piss out of the bottom guy for control/riding time. I personally don't find it very exciting to watch someone sinking a tight waste, and riding a wrist off to the side for a period extremely exciting(doesn't mean I'm right). I like to watch points being put on the board.

i don't know anyone who enjoys watching a guy looking to increase riding time. Just like I don't enjoy watching two guys not able to pull the trigger from the feet and commit to a takedown.

We're specifically talking about going for a tech/pin one way or the other.

 

[HawkwardEncounter]

i don't know anyone who enjoys watching a guy looking to increase riding time. Just like I don't enjoy watching two guys not able to pull the trigger from the feet and commit to a takedown.

We're specifically talking about going for a tech/pin one way or the other.

I'm done talking about it....theIowaHawk is going to come over to central Iowa, and whip my ass if I don't shut up!

 

[bphawkeye_Rivals]

bphawk: Would the "bp," be initials? If so, I think I know who you are. If so, you were a bit older and heavier than I was?

we were in the same class 1980 - and bp has nothing to do with my name / initials. I wrestled varsity for a few years at the 132/138 range. Did not part take my sr season because my c5 and c7 discs exploded in a football game - still have problems. another clue ...the state champ and i hung out together back in the day