Jump to content

straggler

Members
  • Content Count

    325
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by straggler

  1. Except Burroughs lost in April. At the least there should not be a bye unless one of the competitors is a defending medalist. Dake got screwed twice at the Open.
  2. Hard to say. They have only wrestled once on a level playing field and Dake outwrestled him. The idea that the challenge tournament being wrestled the same day as the best of three is not a serious disadvantage is denial. Dake had to wrestle Imar and Ringer. He is exerting energy, and eventually fatigue is going to set in, your step is going to be that slight degree slower. The athletes cannot speak up for themselves because they get attacked for "whining" and "excuses." Well this is just plain old reality. You cannot have it both ways, claiming that the system is designed to give the incumbent a tangible advantage but then say "stop making excuses" when an athlete comes up just short going uphill in a very competitive series of matches.
  3. If the issue is logistics then the solution is no bye.
  4. Because in the first two matches he had a lead. He was up 3-1 with about 35 seconds left in the second match. He should have tried to run like hell at that point but he would have been hit for passivity/fleeing in a microsecond. After Burroughs scored the 4 points Dake got the point on the pushout/near takedown and then almost got the turn in the final seconds. The third match was all about exhaustion. He did not deserve any passivity calls in the first match. He was active and holding the center and never put his hand down once.
  5. I did not have any major issues with the officiating in the Dake/Burroughs matches this time out. Dake had the lead until about 30 seconds left in the second half of the second match. Burroughs did some rough housing but for the most part it was not over the top. The main issue was the format, again. The only scoring issue was whether it was a 2 point takedown or a 4 point takedown + exposure in the second match and it seemed like a defensible call. The damage as far as officiating was done at the US Open, which was a travesty imho. Dake was showing a lot of concern about being hit with passivity calls based on the Open and it probably affected why he did not start fleeing at the end of the second match. But as to the trials this was the first time since 2012 that I thought the officiating at least was evenhanded. As to Taylor/Cox, I definitely think Taylor has legitimate gripes with the calls. They were slip sliding all over the mat, Cox was backing up constantly. There should have been some passivity/fleeing calls. But Taylor also had his chances.
  6. Let me think about this. I often get accused by Burroughs fans of being in denial. "Look at the record-it would not have mattered, your complaints are invalid." But it is clear that denial works both ways. The idea that having to wrestle the challenge tournament, then immediately wrestle the best of three does not create a legitimate physical disadvantage for the challenger is the height of denial. Remember Dake is not just wrestling some guy, but Jordan Burroughs. That is not ever going to be an easy assignment. Now try beating him with lead weights on your ankles. But as to favoritism? In 2012 it just was not close enough to be a factor. (Although Dake was really competitive in their second match that year). It was subsequently when the gap began to close that it became an issue, that Burroughs starting getting the defending champ, you have to beat him decisively treatment. In the first match of the best of three, Dake outwrestled Burroughs. But then Dake goes for a throw, initiates it, and guess what? Burroughs is given the 4 points on what was at best a 40/60 call. Then the next match Burroughs jumped the whistle. It was Dake's fault; he was dejected and did not defend himself, but it was a stretch of the rules. But Burroughs was Burroughs and at that point Dake was not coming back anyway. Jump ahead to The US Open. Dake scored two push outs to one, Burroughs could not get to his legs, and yet Burroughs got a gift based on two passivity calls. And even Burroughs acknowledged on an interview that he was luck with those calls. Then a funny thing happened. Quite a number of people who watched the match and commented on it called out the favoritism. And strangely enough I think US wrestling heard them and to be honest I think the trials matches were actually refereed quite well. Except by then the damage was done from the Open, Burroughs had the bye, and Dake lost the lead very late in the second half of the second match when muscle fatigue had to be setting in. By the third the will was there but the energy was gone. So all in all, in the one square match they had I thought (and others thought) that Dake was better and that Burroughs got a champion's decision. But in all the other matches the field was so tilted that what conclusion can we fairly draw? By 2013 onwards these two were separated by a razors margin. I think the bye is the main difference.
  7. That would have sucked. Just want a fair, square competition. That's why I'm moving to Russia.
  8. Ok. Deluded. :). Now in fairness maybe I'm paranoid. But there is no dispute that we have a format designed to play favorites and protect spots because US wrestling seems very desperate for medals. It is the closest thing to selection by committee while still having a competition as you can get. So excuse me if based on what I keep seeing in that mindset certain competitors are deemed more equal than others and get the benefit of the doubt to a quite noticeable degree. (The favoritism shown to Burroughs for example more than once is hard to miss, and very few people missed it at the Open). You create a system that signals the preferred roster choice, mix that basic favoritism with very subjective rules and then couple it with a horrendous format. I don't blame Taylor in the least.
  9. Excuse me but the favoritism is not exactly hidden. It is built right in. Out there for everyone to see. The WHOLE POINT of the challenge/bye format is to protect the spot of former world placers and medalists. US wrestling is not hiding it. They are telling everyone they are playing favorites. So if they set up a format that tells everyone who the preferred choice is and who the challengers are, gee I wonder if that just may, possibly, theoretically effect how matches are called and how the very subjective rules are applied. I wonder.LOLL. It is called giving the champion the benefit. In the case of a former medalist that benefit is really broad apparently. There is no marching orders from central command. None are necessary. Any dispute that Cox was fleeing? We are talking repeatedly backing all the way across the mat. Yes, I would say corrupt applies. Just different levels of corruption. Bottom line it is noticeable. It is obvious. The people on here defending it come off as incredibly deluded.
  10. Exactly. Cox was legitimately fleeing. Then you have the phantom step out. The whole corrupt set up. The challenge format is ridiculous enough, but becomes very obvious that favoritism is also involved and people admit that the whole point is to protect spots of the guys US wrestling thinks have the best chance. On the YT videos a lot of people notice it. It is not conspiracy theory when the whole point of the set up is to tilt towards a deserved result.
  11. I said I think he can place for a bronze. But does not change the fact that he clearly lost that lightening first step. Burroughs is among the most protected athletes in Olympic history. US wrestling let's him get away with it. Won't happened at the WCs. Just as in Rio.
  12. It is about protecting a spot.
  13. The issue is that the process does not deserve respect. It leaves competitors feeling cheated which they are.
  14. I never wrote him off. I pointed out that he no longer had the warp speed first step and that the playing field would not be tilted in Rio or at the WC. I thought he could win a bronze in Rio but he did not take losing well. My honest assessment is that Dake outwrestled him again but the playing field was tilted just enough in Burroughs favor that he got the spot being protected for him. I think he can place for a bronze medal this time out.
  15. As to medals, Snyder gold, Cox may get the bronze, and JB bronze as long as he keeps his head in it.
  16. And Dake outwrestled him. Two pushouts to one. Oh and multiple passivity calls that went against guess who? I know I get accused of conspiracizing but go look at the comments from that match; people do not have difficulty seeing the favoritism. Even Burrough's fans on here admitted that Burroughs was getting the champion's preference in the calls. I always come back to this, but when you create a system that is primarily about spot protection, everyone within it know who the powers that be are pulling for. US Wrestling wants Burroughs because as a second-rate wrestling power they want to maximize their medal chances. Burroughs is still the golden boy. People can say "but what about" all they want. I think the impulse in US wrestling's quest for crumbs to protect Burrough's spot is tremendous. All that said, maybe Burroughs is just better. Although he certainly did not show it the one and only time it was a square match. Even so we have a third-rate qualifying system and all the corrupting influences it exerts. There is no argument. Either admit this is about protecting spots and choose by committee or do away with the sham competition and have a fair tournament.
  17. No way. I have been railing against this system forever. Before the Taylor/Cox matches I made a point that the tough match Taylor had in the challenge final would affect the result with Cox, especially if it went to a third match. Did it? The point is we should not have to ask. When Dake lost to Cox I was not thrilled with him having to move up that much but I accepted that it was a fair match.Without belaboring this, these matches are decided on a razor's edge. Either pick by committee or make the competition as fair as possible.
  18. There is absolutely no justification for the current qualifying system. None. Tell you what. Can someone please point to an equivalent qualifying system in the modern Olympic era where a direct physical disadvantage is imposed on one competitor? This is likely the worst qualifying system in Olympic history. The only thing I can think of that would be worse would be just nomination by committee. No other nation does this. Attempts to rationalize this seem laughable. These matches are often decided by the narrowest of margins. The idea that you are left to wonder if the outcome is completely fair or if fatigue became a factor is a cheat, a disservice to fans and competitors. You can point to any outlier you want. Bottom line is that we have a system that imposes a physical disadvantage on one competitor while also tilting towards a deserved outcome. The NCAA does not have an difficulty waiting one day.
  19. Look, there is simply no way to defend the way US wrestling does things. This could be the worst qualifying system in the history of Olypmpic sports. Bottom line is that it leaves people feeling cheated. Because it is a cheat. In the history of Olympic sports point to any other sport, or better still any other combat sport, that imposes a direct physical disadvantage on a competitor. Judo? Boxing? Anything? These matches are being decided on a razor's egde. Does not matter if you think your guy is better (if he is then he should have no difficulty just winning straight up), whether you think it is whining or fanboyism or if you can point to an outlier. The fact remains that US wrestling is the only national sports federation that has come up with a qualifying system that completely needlessly imposes a physical disadvantage on the challengers when the fix is incredibly simple. Not just in wrestling but in the entire Olympic sports universe. Well done. Just fix it for pete's sake.
  20. Never said once that Dake was better than Burroughs at freestyle. Have about folk and will stick to that. But Burroughs has the track record. What I will say is that we are not getting a fair set up. That is indisputable. They are certainly close whether Burroughs is ultimately better or not. All I know is that in the first match before fatigue would likely set in Dake won. And at Vegas I and others thought Dake deserved to win. But realistically I just want a fair set up where we are not left to wonder what roll the Challenge tournament played in the outcome. Hardly too much to ask, especially as no other nation has a set up like this. Sorry but there is no way to defend the current set up. No way around it. Rationalize it to your heart's content. But fact is the only time Dake wrestled him in a square setting he outwrestled Burroughs at Vegas.
  21. Wait! Dake wasn't hit with passivity this time out? Well that is a change from Vegas. It's going in the right direction. :)
  22. I have my gripes, some founded, probably some unfounded. I think there is a ton of favoritism in the system, and that bye contributes to it. There is no question who US wrestling is pulling for, and indirectly at least this affects a very subjective scoring criteria. Burroughs himself admitted he has lost a step or two, which means he needs to resort to "tactics", tactics which I don't think he is going to get away with anymore against Russia, Iran, etc. So in my mind I keep noticing a pattern of questionable calls that always go in the same direction and unequal enforcement of the rules, ie bias, which when added to the qualifying format makes it very frustrating to observe. But all that said, the stupidity of imposing a physical disadvantage on one competitor is indefensible. By the third match there is no way it was not a factor. I will likely always have gripes when I watch JB's matches; I think he is blatantly protected at this point by US wrestling and Dake always has his chances and let's Burrough's rule bending get to him too easily. But even if I have many screws loose, the format right now is a disservice to the competitors and the fans.
  23. Third best thing is watching diehard fans of a sport that is still on Olympic death watch not accept simple criticisms of a third-rate qualifying system. You create a crappy system then expect no complaints. OK.
  24. "Got crushed in the second." Bad calls aside, I think that has something to do with the challenge tournament. I do not think that is a coincidence. So now illegal tactics are "winning." Until he wrestles outside the US and he no longer has the speed that it does not matter. Winning will quickly becomes losing. You can accuse people of whining and frankly guilty as charged. Because there is clearly something to whine about. The set up of this tournament is insane and very unfair. And the bush league level of bias/favoritism this reflects as US Wrestling is so desperate in preserving what it deems as the best hope for a medal by creating a sham system is a scandal. I am not the only one who recognizes that consistent with the set up Burroughs gets every single call, at least to the 40/60 range and gets away with "tactics" that are downright dirty. All I know is that Dake was better in Vegas but the rules are so subjective the refs can determine the resuilt of any close match. And Burroughs is not allowed to lose those type of matches in the US.
  25. Maybe. But he is still a heavy coddled, protected athlete with an indestructible sense of entitlement. Do I have to endorse that or call it classy? I'm not going to blame Burroughs for our crap system. But I am going to blame him for so blithely taking advantage of it. Eye pokes. Hands to the face. Punches/ Early shots. Knowing every close call will go his way, then acting like he won fair and square. It is extraordinary.
×
×
  • Create New...