Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Not exactly the same thing, but when I was the competition mgr for the 2003 World Championships at the Garden I wanted to get our volunteers something more unique than at most big tournaments. Everyone has so many shirts, bags, etc. So we ordered 200 blankets with the event logo on it. It was really well received. That blanket was one of the only souvenirs I took from the event. A few years later when we got a puppy, she decided it would be a good move to chew the logo off the blanket. I also got a "plaque in a box" (one of those where it opens and stands like a tripod). Folded in it, I keep the list of all the volunteers from that event that I know were responsible for making me look good. I look at that list every once in a while to remind myself how great this team effort was. Sad to see how many of those people are no longer with us.
  2. Fund Raiser for the Friends of Long Island Wrestling is showing the finals at the VFW in Levittown. For tickets go to Friendsoflongislandwrestling.com. Tickets can be purchased at dny-nyhof.ticketleap.com/ncaa-finals-2019. All wrestling fans
  3. Here was my idea: Every year someone comes up with a proposal to create a more relevant scoring system for wrestling. The most common one is to give each wrestler’s team the number of points that he scores in the match. In other words, an 8-1 decision would give the winning wrestler’s team 8 points and the loser’s team 1 point. The problem with that system becomes how do account for a pin without having to create a convoluted system of bonus awards. I think I have the solution: · The winning wrestler’s team gets the differential between his score and his opponent’s. So, in the 8-1 scenario, the winner’s team gets 7 points. · If the differential gets to 15, the match stops as a tech fall. · To address the pin situation, here’s what I would suggest: o 3rd period fall – 16 points o 2nd period fall - 17 points o 1st period fall – 18 points o DQ’s for something not bad (something off the penalty chart leading to DQ) same as pin o DQ’s for something bad like flagrant misconduct – 20 points. o Forfeits could be 19 so as to encourage teams to actually put a wrestler on the mat. · This system allows for the weakest wrestler on the team to make a significant contribution to the team effort. A wrestler who gets pinned in the first period has contributed to his team because a forfeit would have given the opposing team one point more. · This system could be adapted to tournaments by o Eliminating advancement points o Adding an “inverse bonus” for each place. In a tournament that awards 8 places: § 1st – 8 points § 2nd – 7 § 3rd – 6 and so on
  4. Since the advent of the current qualifying system, would it not make sense to allow wrestlers from other NCAA divisions to be considered for the final spots after the allocations if: They had a high enough RPI meaning they would have had to have competed against enough D1 competition to get such a high score and They were D1 eligible.
  5. Interesting way to demonstrate just how hard it is to ever get a starting spot on a 4 year college team. Consider this: Teams 326 Starters 3260 Starters per weight 326 (that was a hard calculation.) Avg. # of Starters per HS graduating class (5 years counting red shirts) per weight 65.2 Of course these are averages. So a wrestler has to project in the top 66 for his college weight in the year he graduates HS counting all the HS's in the country that have wrestling. And that's just to start for one season. It gets even less when you consider that most starters start for more than one year.
  6. Here's how I would word it: "If a wrestler intentionally goes out of bounds to avoid being scored upon, his opponent will receive 1 point."
  7. Side by side = 8 mats/4 each conference. Each conference uses 4 mats now. We already know that the Garden can accommodate 8 mats from the NCAA's
  8. I've done the computer work at the EiWA's for the last 12 years. I've also been the Competition Manager for the World Championships at the Garden in 2003 and have been part of the organizing committee for the Grapple at the Garden and the 2016 NCAA's there. This past weekend I floated the idea of having the Garden host both the EIWA and the BiG side by side with Hofstra (host of the 2016 NCAA and this year's EIWA) and Rutgers serving as the respective hosts. I spoke to the powers that be at Hofstra and they love the idea. Then I see the Rutgers announcement for 2020. I sent the proposal to my contact at the Garden who also likes the idea, at least in the abstract. I've not spoken to anyone at Rutgers. The biggest hurdle would be to guarantee the host schools that they would not lose the significant revenue from hosting an event that only comes their way once every blue moon. And it is significant. But I think the novelty of the idea of the two most prestigious qualifiers in the World's most famous arena should be something the wrestling community would love to see. It would be great for the sport.
  9. Actually, if everyone wrestled Folk, we'd have to re-name it because it wouldn't be Folk any more.
  10. Assuming we can't go to double elimination, I think a good adjustment would be to cross bracket the semi-finalists. This way, if the 3 best wrestlers in the event are in the same bracket and the 2nd an 3rd best both lose to the best, all 3 would/should medal. The way it is now, the 2nd and 3rd would meet in the consi-semi's and only one could medal. It's not perfect because the 2nd and 3rd may have met each other early in the tournament and one would be completely eliminated, but it would lessen the chance that the 3rd best wrestler would not medal at all.
  11. So the real question is whether or not the Final Trials is a stand alone event or the culmination of a series of events to select the team. As a stand alone, there should be a more even playing field. As a culmination the whole purpose is to give those who might have just been "off" physically, mentally, whatever, a second or even a third chance while rewarding the athlete who has outdistanced the field during the entire process. (placed in Worlds or Olympics or won Nationals). If we were going to pick the team based on having a strict even playing field, why bother with the final trials? Just bring the National Champion. Apologies if I am making a case that has already been made. Came late to this party and didn't have time to wade through all the pages.
  12. I wonder if it would make sense to propose a system like Soccer has where all countries can enter all weights in qualifying tournaments just before and the top 16 move to the competition during the actual games? This is different than the current qualifying system where a country qualifies its teams through the most recent worlds, continental championships, last chance qualifiers, etc. What I'm suggesting is that everyone who enters the qualifying event would actually be the Olympian from his/her country and that athlete would move on to the final rounds at the games. Each country would enter only one qualifier, I assume geographically set up, although that could ultimately water down the finals. They would not have to wrestle the qualifiers to conclusion, only down to the final 4 (if 4 qualifiers) or 2 (if 8 qualifiers with a true second match). This way there would actually be more "Olympians" since each country could enter a full team but the IOC would have its goal of cutting numbers. In our country, once he/she made the team, our Olympian would have his/her fate in his own hands as to whether or not he got to the actual games. Then I would look for a true wrestle back from the round of 16 or at least from the quarters.
  13. Florian Ghinea, couple time D3 Champ from Montclair State was from Romania. Came to US Open Invitational in Teaneck, NJ and never went home. Running a great club now in NJ.
  • Create New...