Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. The following is an attempt to consistently interpret forfeits in terms of an individual’s won/loss record for my state, as those records count toward seeding (and folks like to celebrate milestone wins etc). As there is no NFHS policy, each state adopts their own guidelines. Some states (such as NY) count virtually every forfeit as a loss, while other states do not. In terms of defining win types, please note: 1. Medical forfeit is NOT an option in high school results. 2. If a match has started, and ends due to injury, it is a DEFAULT (not a medical forfeit or a forfeit). Seeking input before trying to implement...have seen too many situations where healthy wrestler forfeits in the finals, or where wrestlers forfeit in tourneys with no impact on their record. at the same time, not looking to unfairly penalize a wrestler who is actually injured and can't continue, especially via a win by DQ. thanks! Dual Meet: For any forfeit in a dual meet, the winner shall receive a win on their record, but there is no individual loser to be recorded. Please note that any wrestlers who are part of a “one-man team” may NOT accept forfeits in a dual meet situation (if the other team has no opponent, or chooses to not wrestle). In addition, any true “team” that allows a wrestler to compete in a “dual meet” match against a 1-man team MAY NOT claim forfeit victories for their other wrestlers against any 1-man teams. Forfeits: All of the following are acceptable reasons why a wrestler may not compete due to an injury/sickness: On site trainer does not let wrestler continue; On site trainer approves wrestler to continue but the coach does not let them continue; On site trainer and coach approves wrestler to continue but wrestler does not want to continue; no on-site trained available, coach does not let wrestler continue, and no on-site trainer available, coach approves wrestler to continue but wrestler does not want to continue. Summary: The forfeit procedure (to follow) basically attempts to make the number of losses that a wrestler must take for withdrawing from a tournament consistent for both Individual Bracketed tournaments and Individual Round Robin tournaments. Individually Bracketed Tournaments: Multiple Scenarios are detailed below 1. If a wrestler is entered into an individually bracketed tournament, he or she may not forfeit their first match and then proceed to continue to wrestle in the wrestlebacks (Rule 10-2-5). This is a federation rule designed to prevent teams from “ducking” a top seed in the first round. If they are injured or become ill after being entered (but before competing) they should be removed from the tournament and replaced with a bye, or the tournament director may opt to enter the result of the first match as a forfeit (counting as a win for that opponent) and the subsequent consolation match as a forfeit as well (counting as a win for that opponent). In this case, the withdrawn wrestler does not take any losses on their record. 2. If a wrestler in the winner’s bracket does not take the mat (and forfeits), a win shall be recorded by forfeit for the winner, and a loss shall be counted for the wrestler who is forfeiting. This includes the championship finals. This shall also be considered as a “win” in terms of head-to-head purposes for seeding points. There is ONLY one exception to this rule: If the wrestler who is forfeiting became injured in his immediately preceding match and was declared the winner by disqualification (ie illegal move resulting in injury), and the coach immediately withdraws the injured winner from the tournament at the head table, the winner of the forfeited match shall still take a forfeit win for record purposes, but the wrestler forfeiting shall not take a loss on record and shall not count as a head to head win for seeding purposes. If the wrestler who won his prior match by DQ waits until the next round to determine ability to continue, and then forfeits, a loss shall be taken on record. 3. In the consolation bracket, if a wrestler does not take the mat and forfeits to their opponent, the winner shall take a win and the wrestler forfeiting shall take a loss. However, there are 3 exceptions to this rule: A. If the wrestler who is forfeiting the match was injured in their immediately preceding match and lost by injury default and did not complete the match (counting as a loss), and the wrestler was then immediately withdrawn from the tournament by the coach, the subsequent forfeit (or forfeits, in the case of a tournament scoring to more than 4 places) shall NOT be counted as losses. However, the winner by forfeit shall claim a win on their record (the match will NOT count toward head-to-head criteria). B. As in situation #2 above, if the wrestler who is forfeiting became injured in his immediately prior match and was declared the winner by disqualification (ie illegal move resulting in injury), and the coach immediately withdraws the injured wrestler from the tournament at the head table, the winner of the forfeited match shall still take a forfeit win for record purposes, but the wrestler forfeiting shall not take a loss on record and shall not count as a head to head win for seeding purposes. C. In a tournament, an injured wrestler shall not be required to take a loss on their record by forfeit if they have a prior counted loss by injury default. For example, if a semi-finalist is injured by a legal move, resulting in a loss by injury default, and they are then withdrawn from the tournament and unable to continue, they would NOT take another loss in the consolation semi-finals (and not counted as head to head), and would NOT take another loss for 6th place. However, if a wrestler has not previously forfeited or lost by injury default, that forfeit loss would count on the record. Please note that any tournament disqualification for flagrant misconduct will result in losses on record for all forfeited matches, with no limit, and no placement earned. For example, a semi-finalist is DQed for flagrant misconduct. A 2nd loss is taken in the consi semis, and a 3rd loss is taken in the 5th place bout (with opponents all earning wins for record, AND these wins DO count for head-to-head). 4. Two-Day Tournaments: A wrestler who advanced on a bracket to a second day of a tournament does not make weight, becomes injured, or cannot compete and must forfeit on Day #2. Although they never take the mat: Record as follows: Winner: Earns a win by forfeit over the school and the name of the wrestler who forfeited. Loser: The wrestler who forfeited takes a loss on their record against the school and name of the opponent they forfeited to in each and every round of the second day. Note: If a wrestler had advanced to a semifinal (in a tournament that places the Top 6) the wrestler would receive 3 losses on their record: One for the semi, one for the consolation semi and a third for the consolation final for 5th/6th. 5. Federation 5-Match Limit: A wrestler is forced to forfeit because if they wrestled their next bout, it would be their 6th match of the day which would put them over the allotted 5 bouts per day. Record as follows: Winner: Earns a win by forfeit over the school (but not over any specific opponent) . Loser: The wrestler who forfeited does not take a loss on their record as they were denied the chance to wrestle based on the maximum matches per day rule. 6. Individually Bracketed Round Robin Tournaments: If a wrestler withdraws due to injury, a maximum of 2 losses by injury default or forfeit will be counted on their record (in addition to any other losses). All winners of these forfeits shall earn wins on record. Same exception as in #2 above.
  2. davenowa

    States using different weight classes than NFHS

    wyoming is not the outlier here. the number of forfeits in many states is excessive, reducing many dual meets to a small handful of actual matches, with many contested bouts being mismatches due to the fact that teams are having to insert JV/brand new kids into their varsity line-up because they have no other bodies for those weights. A roster of 15-20 can't adequately fill 14 (or in most cases, even 12 or 13) weight classes. look at box scores from almost any state...not only will you see plenty of forfeits, but you will notice that far too many team scores add up to a number pretty close to 84, with very few 34-29 matches. 11 weight classes would be plenty, allowing a limited number of 2nd entries at tournaments and in post-season. or we could increase to 28, so everyone gets a varsity letter and medal at all tournaments.
  3. davenowa

    States using different weight classes than NFHS

    just as some divisions within some states with predominantly smaller enrollments are opting for 7 on 7 (or 8-man) football, it might be beneficial for a reduced number of weight classes (such as 11) to be offered in certain states (or within small-school enrollments, in states that separate based on enrollment). While it could improve dual-meet competition and reduce forfeits, unsynchronized weights could cause issues when individual state tourneys roll around (or at in-season invites). Have advocated fewer weight classes before (11, but allowing a 12th scorer at tournaments), but saw limited support (108, 116, 124, 132, 140, 148, 158, 170, 188, 212 and 285). http://board.themat.com/index.php?/topic/16457-weight-classes-growth-allowances-2018-rule-proposals-jan-10-week-2/
  4. Not much other than clarifying out of bounds...http://www.nfhs.org/articles/clarity-provided-to-out-of-bounds-calls-in-high-school-wrestling/ New definitions for inbounds and out of bounds highlight high school wrestling rules changes for the 2018-19 season. Beginning next year, a wrestler will be inbounds if two supporting points of either wrestler are inside or on the boundary line. This could be two supporting points of one wrestler or one supporting point of each wrestler that is inside or on the boundary line. Changes related to out-of-bounds and inbounds calls, along with rules dealing with uniforms and sportsmanship, were among the rules revisions recommended by the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) Wrestling Rules Committee at its April 2-4 meeting in Indianapolis. All rules changes were subsequently approved by the NFHS Board of Directors. The revised definitions for out of bounds and inbounds eliminate subjectivity with the out-of-bounds call without increasing the out-of-bounds area. The removal of “majority of weight” from the definition will allow officials to focus on inbounds and out of bounds rather than having to make a judgment on where the majority of the wrestler’s weight is being supported. “The majority of rules changes for the 2018-19 high school wrestling season deal with revised definitions of escape, reversal, out of bounds and takedown,” said Elliot Hopkins, NFHS director of sports and student services and liaison to the Wrestling Rules Committee. “These changes were needed to reinforce our new position with increasing scoring opportunities by addressing the supporting point issue, but not creating additional risk to the sport. We have defined what the usual supporting points are while down on the mat and how near-fall points or a fall shall be earned.” Several articles in Rule 5 are affected by the elimination of subjectivity in the out-of-bounds call. Rule 5-10 now provides language stipulating that any combination of two supporting points allows an official to make an inbounds call. Similarly, Rules 5-15-1 and 5-15-3 introduce the same clarity while Rule 5-15-2 alters language from “knees” to “knee(s),” making it consistent with Rule 5-15-2a(4) and its use of “hand(s).” The revision to the definition of an out-of-bounds call is clearly stated in Rule 5-18, which outlines that it occurs when there are no longer two total supporting points inside or on the boundary line (two supporting points of one wrestler or one supporting point of each wrestler). Rules 5-22, 5-25-1 and 5-25-3 will have similar language to establish inbounds and out-of-bounds calls for reversals and takedowns. Revisions to Rule 5-24-3 will assist officials with making a stalling call. The new criteria establish that stalling in the neutral position also takes place when a wrestler is backing off the mat and out of bounds, as well as when the wrestler is pushing or pulling out of bounds. In addition to the numerous changes related to inbounds and out-of-bounds calls, Hopkins noted sportsmanship issues, a new illegal hold and uniform promotional references as other rules changes made by the committee. Among those are the following: Rule 4-1-2: New language will state that no additional manufacturer’s logo, trademark or promotional references shall be allowed on the wrestling uniforms. Rule 7-1-5y (NEW): The Nelson-Cradle is a new illegal hold/maneuver that is a combination made up of a Half-Nelson on one side with a locked cradle from around the neck with the far side knee. The back of the knee acts as the other arm (arm pit) to complete the Full-Nelson pressure on the neck and throat. Rule 7-4-2: New language states that repeatedly dropping to one knee, as well as one hand, to break locked hands is considered unsportsmanlike conduct. Wrestling ranks seventh in popularity among boys at the high school level with 244,804 participants, according to the 2016-17 NFHS Athletics Participation Survey. In addition, 14,587 girls participate in the sport throughout the nation. “Overall, the sport is stable,” Hopkins said. “We are excited to have the influx of young women wrestlers who want to challenge themselves and represent their local high schools.”
  5. Just a couple of thoughts on current dual meet scores that would produce a different outcome with Margin of Victory and Action points... Team A wins 7 matches by identical scores of 2-1, while Team B wins 7 matches by identical scores of 12-5. Instead of a 21 to 21 score, with 8 levels of tie-breakers perhaps earning a win for Team A, Team B would win 27.3 to 16.1, rewarding the match dominance that fell just short of 7 major decisions. Team A wins 7 matches by pin. Team B wins 6 matches by pin and 1 by forfeit (Team A had a 285 pound wrestler but forfeited, strategically/duckingly). Each winner scores the first takedown, so Team A wins on criteria of most first points scored (since no TD in forfeit), thereby being rewarded for forfeiting to avoid giving up any first points scored. In new method, Team B wins 43-42 (forfeit is worth 7). **In this instance, if nothing else, the NFHS tie-breaker should be changed such that a win by forfeit earns 2 "first points scored" so that a team is not rewarded for forfeiting (and might need an addendum about making sure match points are within the action, such that a coach who might be aware of the situation, score and subsequent tie-break criteria does not have his wrestler intentionally report with shoelaces unsecured). Additionally, if Team A wins 9 matches by decision, while team B wins 5 matches by pin or forfeit, Team B wins 30-27. With modified scoring, Team A could win if those current 3-point decisions were all near-majors (such as the prior mentioned 12-5), but would still lose if all were 2-1 victories. As a final aside, if the Penn St/Ohio State dual had been scored with the above noted method of MOV and Action Pts, instead of PSU winning 19-18, tOSU would have won 18.8 to 18.6. 125: OSU 21-12 gets 4.4 (2.0 base + 0.9 MOV + 1.5 action) OSU 4.4 PSU 0 133: OSU 5-4 gets 2.6 (2 + 0.1 + 0.5) OSU leads 7-0 141: OSU 7-6 gets 2.8 and leads 9.8-0 149 PSU TF 20-4 gets 5 now OSU 9.8-5 157: OSU TF 24-9 for 5, now 14.8-5 165: PSU 12-3 PSU gets 4.1, now 14.8 to 9.1 174: PSU 6-4 gets 2.8, now 14.8 to 11.9 184: PSU 10-2 gets 3.8, now PSU up 15.7 to 14.8 197: PSU 6-3 gets 2.9, now up 18.6 to 14.8 285: OSU 15-10 gets 4, and wins 18.8 to 18.6
  6. davenowa

    Easton Coach

    similar to faulting a coach for not knowing the intricacies of a rule regarding weigh-ins never granting more than a plus 2 for consecutive days, which will now probably result in a new specific example in the case book that currently addresses consecutive days and weather related allowances, but not a combination thereof (which, if it was not repeatedly stated to coaches, wrestlers and fans in attendance, should have been announced clearly), one could chastise others posting here for not being familiar with 10.2.7, which states that a wrestler must make weight each day of a tournament in order to "place" and earn a medal (even if he had already "earned" that spot). No actual placement is given. Deduct placement points earned. Keep advancement and bonus points. Once had our state tourney postponed to Sat/Sun and a kid who advanced to semis could not attend and compete on Sunday due to his beliefs. Suffice it to say we over-ruled the NFHS rulebook and awarded him the 6th place medal (but did follow the team scoring rules...just in case it was a factor).
  7. In CT (as with most states), highest vacancies at both ends of the spectrum. With 100 teams, the following shows the number of wrestlers entered in post-season action at each weight class. Please note that due to a handful of "one man teams" that may have 1-2 wrestlers (not part of the 100 "team" count), the actual number of vacancies is slightly higher. Roughly 75% for 106/113, 85% from 120-170, then a little under 75% for upper 4 weights. Again, only data from 1 small state...but a start. 2018 Entered 106 72 113 79 120 86 126 80 132 89 138 85 145 85 152 85 160 84 170 89 182 76 195 70 220 77 285 64
  8. davenowa

    Is your state doing it worse than VA?

    the question was asked about qualifiers for a "tournament of champions" opting out (following a divisional state championship, based on school size). In CT, with 4 enrollment based divisions, the top 6 place-winners from the state championship (by enrollment) advance to the State Open, creating a 24-man bracket (top 2 from each class have byes in round of 32). As with any event, there are some injury and illness scratches. In 2018, of the 336 qualifiers, there were 19 scratches (some weights had none, others had 2-3...most were 5th/6th from divisionals, but there were a couple of div finalists), slightly more than normal...but the flu has resulted in more kids out this year. For the NE Tournament, also a 24-man bracket, there are usually even fewer scratches. This year, CT has had 2 of their 70 qualifiers scratch, while last year, the NE Tourney saw 11 total scratches (out of 336 entries). Of those, most were early in the week and were able to be replaced by the next highest finisher from that state. separately, regarding the percentage of "toc" champs coming from small schools, in the CT format (with 100 schools split into 4 divisions by enrollment), the larger schools do typically dominate the top of the podium at the "toc", with the smallest schools averaging 2 champs (some years 1, others as many as 4-5, for while those small teams do have individuals who can reach the top, few have the depth to compete for the team title). This year, 1 small champ and 3 medium school champs (1 from a "one man team" school).
  9. I think that the vast majority of coaches feel that a coin toss CAN decide a dual. In fact, I would be willing to bet that if in the situations that have been described multiple times on this thread (consider re-reading those), if I can have MY TEAM and WIN the coin toss, I will beat YOUR TEAM. If you have YOUR TEAM and win the toss, you will probably beat MY TEAM (unless you have no idea what you are doing). However, I will also take YOUR TEAM, and if I win the coin toss, I will beat MY TEAM. The worst part of this whole thing is that if we swap teams and YOU win the coin toss, you will probably beat MY TEAM (if you have even the slightest clue to strategy), as neither I, nor you, nor Cael, nor Dan, nor Nostradamus will be able to overcome the significance of that coin toss in many situations. Here is a simple survey asking about the importance of a coin toss. I will post the results in 1 week. In the meantime, I would ask that for all future coin tosses prior to dual meets, Sen. Dole MUST DEFER choice to the opponent, as he feels it does not ever matter. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/MN9WB8S
  10. if seeking to compare to other sports, perhaps "true" team sports such as football and baseball are not the best analogy. however, similar "individually paired" team sports could be considered. if the US is beating the Europeans in the Ryder Cup on Sunday, the captain can't suddenly change his submitted line-up because his first couple of guys are getting shellacked and he wants to move his best golfer to face their weakest. The submitted line-up must be followed. In a high school tennis match, you are paired against the comparably ranked player on the other squad. If wrestling coaches were allowed to manage that sport, they would put their worst kid against the other team's #1 player and then hope that your #1 and #2 can beat their #2 and #3, which would then result in an investigation and forfeit due to ethical violation. coaches would still be able to employ strategy, based on where they think the other team might put their kids...but 1. it would not be based on the outcome of a coin toss 2. it would not allow you to forfeit without significant repercussions (can't move the kid up to next weight), thereby reducing forfeits 3. would reduce PO'ed parents and fans who were expecting to see their varsity starter actually wrestle a match (as opposed to being removed for a slightly better kid one weight lower, who was replaced by Mr. Forfeit).
  11. davenowa

    Is your state doing it worse than VA?

    shp--while I think that an individually bracketed tournament consisting of 20-30 schools of similar size classifications would generally produce a similar winner if those same top schools were paired in a dual format, I don't think the same can be said when an all-state individual tournament with over 100 schools of various size classifications are involved. in that scenario, a small-school team with 2-3 studs and nothing else could score around 60-80 points and be the highest finishing small school, but in the 20-30 team scenario, those same 60 points would not get you top 10. I don't believe they are truly the team champs (lacking a dual format).
  12. davenowa

    Is your state doing it worse than VA?

    in terms of states having class tournaments based on enrollment, followed by an all-state tourney, this allows TEAMS the opportunity to be state TEAM champs against other schools of comparable size. while it is true that an individual could achieve the highest success without regard to the number of students in the school, in a public school setting, it is difficult for the best small schools (ie under 250 boys in grades 9-12) to be as strong as the best schools with over 1000 boys (especially with 14 weight classes). Since the TEAM champion is determined at the individually bracketed tourney in many states, the need exists. However, if the TEAM championship were to be determined by a DUAL tournament (based on school enrollment), I would agree that the INDIVIDUAL state champ be determined from a single event. The New England Tournament is a nice 2-day, 8 mat event in Providence, with top 7 from MA, 5 from CT and 3 each from VT/MA/RI/ME (based on population, number of teams and participants), creating a 24-man bracket.
  13. it is obvious that this thread is going nowhere fast, but was hoping for a little more input on the Team Scoring proposal post...
  14. Maybe I am missing something, but I don't understand how you can say all close duals are simply won by bonus pts and winning close matches, and that the pre-match coin toss does not matter. while I think Eagle26 explained it quite well earlier, below is a simple 4 weight class scenario... Team A wins toss and elects to send 1st in even matches. Match starts at 126. Team A has solid (but not spectacular) wrestlers at 126 and 138, with JV back-ups available. Their 132 is not very good, but is competitive. Team B has studs at 126 and 138, but is weak at 132 and 145. Team B has to send first at 126, and puts out their stud. Team A counters with a JV kid, and Team B earns 6 pts. Team A then puts their decent 126 at 132, and he wins by pin. Score is 6-6. Team B then puts out their stud at 138, and team A again sends their JV kid to get pinned. Team B leads 12-6. Team A then wins by pin at 145, and the score is 12-12. Granted, Team B could have sent a JV at 126...but team A would have countered by sending their good kid (but not good enough to beat the state champ from B at 126), who wins by pin. The stud from B at 126 then pins at 132, so same net result of 12-12 after 4 matches. However, instead nowTeam B wins the toss and selects even bouts. Now Team A must send at 126. If they send their good wrestler, he gets beat by the state champ from team B. Maybe only a decision, but at least a major...but if A sends out a JV back-up, B counters with a JV back-up who happens to be better. Either way, B is getting at least 4 points. Then at 132, Team B wins again, because A has used their pretty good kid against the state champ. Same thing happens at 138 and 145, and because of the coin toss, there is nothing Team A can do to avoid putting their really good (but not great) kids against those 2 state champs. End result? From those 4 bouts, Team B now leads 20-0, which is a big difference from being 12-12. What could Team A have done differently? Sure, get better and avoid a pin, prevent bonus pts blah blah blah...but other than having your 2 decent kids fail to make weight and then hope to bump up 2 weight classes to avoid the state champs, there is nothing you can do to overcome the fact that you lost the match because of the coin toss. Oh, and by the way, you now have plenty of angry parents who did not get to see their kid wrestle because he was removed from the line-up because we lost the coin toss and had to bump up our 126 to 132...and the parents of the JV kid we fed to the wolf with the hope of avoiding a pin are not too thrilled either, because the state champ was perhaps a little too physical (taking out some of his frustration, as he was hoping to get a little challenge from the kid you had to bump away to save points). Coin toss matters (way too much).