Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
jbresette

Rule i'd like to see implemented

Recommended Posts

When a top wrestler drops to the bottom wrestlers legs to keep them from escaping it should automatically be a stall call. There should be no warning or stalemate called in this situation. This is an obvious attempt to stall. Imagine how much better ride outs could be because then you actually have to ride them to keep them down instead of stalling for 30 seconds. Also, the stall point will negate someone from stalling just to get a riding time point.

 

I understand it when you are trying to get a takedown and you don't want to let go of it, but after the ref awards points you should have to move up, release bottom man, or get a stalling point.

 

I just feel like by the time you have a stalemate and then a stall warning it is already too late for those calls to even have an impact. What does everyone else think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^From top start position, agree, no dropping down to lock on legs to maintain control. Drop down and lock on legs - automatic stall call.

 

However, on a TD, I'd allow locking hands for a ten-count. If the wrestler who got the TD maintains control for a ten-count, then the TD would be a 3-point TD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like anything regarding the refs and "making the call" I dn't believe that just because a guy is dropping to the leg then he is stalling but could call it quicker or stallmate the position so that the top guy doesn't get a ton of riding time by just doing that.

 

Personally, I thnk the refs not calling the top guy for getting off to a side is a bigger issue. Top guy has to make an attempt to turn and in most cases he is just hanging on and the refs do nothing about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I started a thread about this a year or so ago. At that time, as I still say today, I agree with LEE KEMP, in that it is a cheap call for someone to get dinged for stalling when you consider the options: let the guy go and freely give up the escape, or try to work your way up to get a better hold?

 

It's always been an absurd "stalling" call to me (and LEE).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^^^From top start position, agree, no dropping down to lock on legs to maintain control. Drop down and lock on legs - automatic stall call.

 

However, on a TD, I'd allow locking hands for a ten-count. If the wrestler who got the TD maintains control for a ten-count, then the TD would be a 3-point TD.

Great idea. Very creative. That would change a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should just eliminate riding time. In my opinion, the difference between riding and trying to turn a guy is that you can ride a guy without much risk, but setting up a good turn almost always involves some element of risk that they opponent gets an escape. It's one thing to just slap on a claw or spiral and hang on a guy, but if you are trying to break a guy down, knock him off his base, catch an arm bar, slap on a cradle, etc, there's a moment there where a guy might slip away. Many college wrestlers are not willing to take that risk, especially if it costs them riding time. Eliminating riding time would not eliminate stalling on top, but if there was no extra point, guys might decide to spend their energy trying for a turn even if it means the bottom guy gets out.

 

I think we should experiment with that simple rule change before we start calling stalling on top anymore, because the risk is if guys are getting dinged on top for stalling for almost anything they do, they will just start to cut guys and mat wrestling will die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We should just eliminate riding time. In my opinion, the difference between riding and trying to turn a guy is that you can ride a guy without much risk, but setting up a good turn almost always involves some element of risk that they opponent gets an escape. It's one thing to just slap on a claw or spiral and hang on a guy, but if you are trying to break a guy down, knock him off his base, catch an arm bar, slap on a cradle, etc, there's a moment there where a guy might slip away. Many college wrestlers are not willing to take that risk, especially if it costs them riding time. Eliminating riding time would not eliminate stalling on top, but if there was no extra point, guys might decide to spend their energy trying for a turn even if it means the bottom guy gets out.

 

I think we should experiment with that simple rule change before we start calling stalling on top anymore, because the risk is if guys are getting dinged on top for stalling for almost anything they do, they will just start to cut guys and mat wrestling will die.

 

Great comment but let's take it further. Let's reward top for his work and give one point for any back exposure so that if bottom does get out of the hold, it was worth the risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We should just eliminate riding time. In my opinion, the difference between riding and trying to turn a guy is that you can ride a guy without much risk, but setting up a good turn almost always involves some element of risk that they opponent gets an escape. It's one thing to just slap on a claw or spiral and hang on a guy, but if you are trying to break a guy down, knock him off his base, catch an arm bar, slap on a cradle, etc, there's a moment there where a guy might slip away. Many college wrestlers are not willing to take that risk, especially if it costs them riding time. Eliminating riding time would not eliminate stalling on top, but if there was no extra point, guys might decide to spend their energy trying for a turn even if it means the bottom guy gets out.

 

I think we should experiment with that simple rule change before we start calling stalling on top anymore, because the risk is if guys are getting dinged on top for stalling for almost anything they do, they will just start to cut guys and mat wrestling will die.

 

Great comment but let's take it further. Let's reward top for his work and give one point for any back exposure so that if bottom does get out of the hold, it was worth the risk.

 

This would certainly make things interesting, but you'd have to figure out a way to do this without eliminating scrambling from the bottom, like granbys. Of course we could say we would only reward exposure that was initiated by the top man's move....but what style of wrestling (that many seem to despise) does that start to sound like? It would be tougher on officials as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^One of the best indications that one wrestler is a better wrestler than another is THE ABILITY TO RIDE HIM. There should be more points awarded for riding. For example, you take someone down and ride him for a ten count, that should constitute a 3-pt move. You take him down and the other guy quickly escapes (before 10 count), that should be a 2-point move.

 

One problem we're having with riding time is that you have to have good table workers to compute it (especially at all-day events) and wait until after the final-period buzzer sounds to award it. It would be better if riding time points could be awarded during the bout and by a ten-count or what ever. The back and forth time accumulation is one of them deals that new fans have trouble quickly understanding.

 

Wrestling fans rarely come to any consensus on rule changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Riding time doesn't need to be changed, it is a great element to the sport.

The OP however is a great idea.

Some top wrestlers use an ankle breakdown well to set up their top game.

 

Others simply drop to an ankle, especially in OT situations.

Making it an auto stalling would certainly add a different element to the sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Riding time doesn't need to be changed, it is a great element to the sport.

 

It's funny how some people love riding time and others hate it. I personally don't hate it, but I think it's a very large stretch to call it a "great element" to the sport. I see it as a minor element that has both positive and negative repercussions. And whenever we get matches where between 1-5 seconds of riding time determine the winner of the match, such as in the Dake Taylor Scuffle finals, I question the validity, because anybody who has watched the table workers at these tournaments knows that the margin of error for accurate riding time is at least +/- 5 seconds when average over the entire match, and that's being very generous. Most of the time the difference between 59s of riding time and 1:00 min is simply the table worker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. Anytime you drop to a leg when both wrestlers are not fully standing, it should be stalling. If a guy stands up and his opponent nails a double leg return, thats fine. When a guy stands up, and his opponent stays down and leeches the leg, he is making ZERO effort to turn or return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch last year's finals at 184 where Bosnak stayed on Q's low half of the body for well over half his time in the top position. Bosnak should have been dinged multiple x's for stalling. Hate to see wrestlers stall by dropping to ankles; and I don't care what the bottom man is doing (standing, tripod, etc)-repeatedly dropping to ankles is clearly stalling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Riding time doesn't need to be changed, it is a great element to the sport.

 

It's funny how some people love riding time and others hate it. I personally don't hate it, but I think it's a very large stretch to call it a "great element" to the sport. I see it as a minor element that has both positive and negative repercussions. And whenever we get matches where between 1-5 seconds of riding time determine the winner of the match, such as in the Dake Taylor Scuffle finals, I question the validity, because anybody who has watched the table workers at these tournaments knows that the margin of error for accurate riding time is at least +/- 5 seconds when average over the entire match, and that's being very generous. Most of the time the difference between 59s of riding time and 1:00 min is simply the table worker.

 

Interesting statistics that you've clearly researched. Table help is the real problem with RT. Never thought of that one.

 

Instead of questioning the validity of the RT why not question why with over 1 minute of Rt and a virtual 3-1 lead that psu coaches and DT didn't cut KD.

 

Once again, change the rules when our team can't figure them out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...