Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Pinnum

What is a better style: high school or college?

Recommended Posts

I am not too much of a fan of the riding time since I think a lot of guys use it as a way to stall, with legs, and get a point. But, at the same time, I am not sure high school, which is the only real way to see how people wrestle when there is no riding time, is any better when you account for the catch and release games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

High school. I too don't like riding time. Further, I think one less minute would increase action.

 

However, I think calling a fall after one second, as in college, and not two seconds, as in HS, is better. And, while not in the rules, college refs are a little more lenient on what qualifies as a slam, which I think is good for the sport (not advocating slams, per se, just don't like anything that resembles a slam being called a slam).

 

So if I had to pick and choose, I would have six minute matches with no riding time and one-second falls and some leniency on what qualifies as a slam (e.g. Reece Humphreys' double-over salto throw should never be called a slam unless the opponent lands on his head, which has never happened in all the times I've watched him).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
High school. I too don't like riding time. Further, I think one less minute would increase action.

 

However, I think calling a fall after one second, as in college, and not two seconds, as in HS, is better. And, while not in the rules, college refs are a little more lenient on what qualifies as a slam, which I think is good for the sport (not advocating slams, per se, just don't like anything that resembles a slam being called a slam).

 

So if I had to pick and choose, I would have six minute matches with no riding time and one-second falls and some leniency on what qualifies as a slam (e.g. Reece Humphreys' double-over salto throw should never be called a slam unless the opponent lands on his head, which has never happened in all the times I've watched him).

I am alittle older and wrestled when there was riding time in High schools during states, and college matches were 9 minutes ----kind of gives my age away doesn't it-- Riding time rewards control and should not be takien away as control is a vert important part of wrestling. Also the nine minute match rewarded conditioning and really hurt the people that were cutting to much weight. I would favor increasing the match length. riding time was removed from high school because of people cost and training the time keepers--if it was brought back we would have the same problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wish the style, over all, had not evolved into what it is today. I miss pins! It seems like only the people at the very top can pin, and they have to be wrestling a wrestler of much less caliber do that. Whatever happened to getting the first takedown and pinning your opponent as soon as possible? In my opinion that should be plan A for every match. Of course, I know that's a little extreme taken literally, but pinning your opponent should be on your mind before you step on the mat and at all points during a match. Not riding time, not catch and release, but pinning. Riding time will take care of itself if you are constantly working for the fall on top, instead of looking like you are working for it. It just seems in the last decade or so, most wrestlers have moved away from that mentality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nice thought but the question is too unspecific. i.e. Do you want more action? higher scores, blow outs and slop. Go to PW tournaments. Do you want giant mismatches, slightly better technical wrestling, few mat skills and more scoring due to that, HS is your cup of tea. If you want the best wrestling go back to the 9 minute days referred here when there was no TF.

 

My main reasons for claiming this are that as the screen winnows the talent pool invariably improves. I think that in the interest of shortening the time for dual meets the poobahs have slowly but surely wrecked the sport. The time of matches is more about the groan-ups(no sp) wishing to get out of the gym as quickly as possible. I get a kick out of the guys who are always yelling we need more action who get upset with the take down let up TF employed today or scream for the official to stop PD. In most cases a PD can be avoided by giving up the points. today's wrestlers use it as an opportunity to reload or get out of bad situations. Due to inexact rules and no penalty, the officials allow it.The bleeding and broken bones turned that around. I don't wish anyone hurt either but when you put yourself in danger at least 1 or 2 pt should be awarded to the offensive wrestler when the official stops action. Back in the day the scoring continued until 9 minutes wore down or you pinned your opponent. The guys today who can't make 7 and gas out at 6 would not have made the team most likely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Changing matches to 9 minutes at the high school level probably wouldn't have much effect, because many matches would either be a fall or a tech well before the end of the match. At the college level, it would be a disaster, because guys would just find a way to stall for 2 extra minutes. A lot of older guys like to wax nostalgic about the days of the 9 minute match, but they forget that all that did was slow down the pace of the match. You can make a match as short or as long as you want, and athletes will adapt their styles to fit the new constraint. Think college wrestling is boring now? A 9 minute stall-fest would make us long for the days of the 7 minute stall-fests.

 

The bottom line regarding pinning, is that working for a fall is very hard work, and difficult to do against a tough opponent. And since all athletes want to win, wrestlers have adapted their strategy to give themselves the highest chance of winning. Many have come to the conclusion that working for a fall takes a lot of energy, and only has a small chance of success, but letting a guy go and taking him down multiple times takes less energy and has a higher reward....more points on the board. The only way to truly encourage mat wrestling and pinning would be to completely change the rules of wrestling. You could, for example, eliminate all point scoring moves except for nearfall and takedowns directly to the back. No points for riding. No points for escapes or reversals. No points for takedowns that don't result in nearfall. So catch and release as a strategy would garner zero points. The problem with this is, matches between two elite competitors would still rarely have nearfall or falls. So then how would you decide the winner? Many many years ago, wrestling didn't keep score, and the only way to win was to pin your opponent, or if there was no pin, it would be a referees "decision". This is where the term "decision" comes from.....the days before moves actually were awarded points, and so the officials literally decided the winner. But that was deemed unacceptable, and so point values were assigned to moves. And so we come back full circle to the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Risk vs. Reward....could it be that wrestlers "back in the day" were willing to take more risks and go for the fall, or is today's style just the evolution of the sport? Serious question...I'm asking what you guys think.

 

*back in the day for me was late 80's and 90's. Of course I have watched earlier matches on YouTube, but really the 90's were when I was old enough to understand what was going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Risk vs. Reward....could it be that wrestlers "back in the day" were willing to take more risks and go for the fall, or is today's style just the evolution of the sport? Serious question...I'm asking what you guys think.

 

*back in the day for me was late 80's and 90's. Of course I have watched earlier matches on YouTube, but really the 90's were when I was old enough to understand what was going on.

Wrestlers took more risks from the feet "back in the day" because refs would call stalling if you put your head down and blocked. Now that is the standard stance from neutral, not just in college but internationally. A head up stance led to more throws as well.

 

As for more risks on the mat with regards to pinning, somehow it seems that wrestling has evolved much more to the neutral position over the years. Again, this is something you see internationally as well, with the near elimination of par terre wrestling in freestyle and 95 percent of the match is on the feet. In college now, more guys train with emphasis on neutral wrestling and getting out from bottom than on turning and pinning. If you look at the best US wrestlers that kids these days look up to, many of them have dynamic, explosive styles from the feet, and so the emphasis has become flashy takedowns (think about Burroughs and Oliver). As much as many of us like to see pins, many kids seem to get more excited about blast doubles that send the guy flying across the mat.......again, think about the crowd's reaction at Midlands a couple years ago when Burroughs blasted Howe across the mat to begin the match. That's just the way the sport has evolved. Even going back to Cael, although he was a great pinner, he is most well known for his ankle pick. And if we go all the way back to John Smith, despite the fact that Smith scored more points from par terre with his ankle laces than with any other move, and despite the fact that he scored more takedowns with his high-crotch, he is most well known for his low single. Americans seem to like innovative, flashy takedowns, and the sport has moved in that direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Long arms, I wrestled back then too. I had one match tie at regulation and tie after three full periods of overtime. The match was a true ref decision on a vote of three refs two who sat watching mat side as judges. Mike Allen was the man official. I won but I don't think either of us cared. We were fully spent. At least I was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
High school. I too don't like riding time. Further, I think one less minute would increase action.

 

However, I think calling a fall after one second, as in college, and not two seconds, as in HS, is better. And, while not in the rules, college refs are a little more lenient on what qualifies as a slam, which I think is good for the sport (not advocating slams, per se, just don't like anything that resembles a slam being called a slam).

 

So if I had to pick and choose, I would have six minute matches with no riding time and one-second falls and some leniency on what qualifies as a slam (e.g. Reece Humphreys' double-over salto throw should never be called a slam unless the opponent lands on his head, which has never happened in all the times I've watched him).

I am alittle older and wrestled when there was riding time in High schools during states, and college matches were 9 minutes ----kind of gives my age away doesn't it-- Riding time rewards control and should not be takien away as control is a vert important part of wrestling. Also the nine minute match rewarded conditioning and really hurt the people that were cutting to much weight. I would favor increasing the match length. riding time was removed from high school because of people cost and training the time keepers--if it was brought back we would have the same problems.

 

There was Riding Time in High School?? I was on the mat from '65- til '77 so riding time in HS must have been before '65. Or.... maybe we in the PNW were not implementing it??

 

I like the fact, the HS is allowing the kids to wrestle more similarly to College. It was very, very restricted back then as kids with Elevation during TD's ... etc. Yet we could still Figure 4 the head ... so I guess there are trade off's.

 

I recently watched the ASU - OK State dual .... What a mess that was. I've seen better HS duals then that Debacle.

 

 

 

All in All, when we get to the NCAA's .... IMO, that's the best!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Long arms, I wrestled back then too. I had one match tie at regulation and tie after three full periods of overtime. The match was a true ref decision on a vote of three refs two who sat watching mat side as judges. Mike Allen was the man official. I won but I don't think either of us cared. We were fully spent. At least I was.

And my senior year in college I was 15w and 2L in (duals) and of the 15 14 were pins and most in the thrid period, I needed socks and the coach gave you a pair of socks for every pin. The those in shape the extra time was a great advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I graduated from high school in 1963. We had riding time then. There was no chosing neutral, it was either top or bottom, i'd like to see that brought back. Then more guys would get proficient in all three positions.

 

The biggest thing that changed wrestling in recent years was the 30 seconds rideout in overtime. A friend of mine commented that college wrestlers no longer knew how to ride. When they put this in i told him you'll see wrestlers develop riding skills because they need to. Coaches and wrestlers always adapt to what they need to do to win matches and meets.

 

I'd like a lot less potentially dangerous calls. If the wrestler can turn over it isn't potentially dangerous, he has the option of fighting thev"legal pain" or giving into it.

 

I am not exactly sure how to accomplish it, but i'd love to see the elimination of diving under and grabbing and ankle to get into a stalemate situation.

 

If riding time is eliminated we'll have a lot more overtime matches with 30 second rideouts which aren't normally very exciting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FLURRIEs/ BIG MOVEs ....is what makes people get out of their seats.

 

Americans like scoring. It is our nature to need stimulus and constant gratification. Purists can enjoy defensive or offenseless competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having just finished my career, I undoubtedly say college wrestling is better. Not sure if it has been mentioned, but the out of bounds rule for college is a no-brainer. It dramatically increases the size of the mat, therefore increasing activity.

 

Also, I definitely fall on the side that says riding is a skill and should be rewarded with a point. Mat wrestling is what makes folkstyle wrestling so superior to freestyle. I think that someone who can wrestle from every position should be rewarded compared to someone who can only get takedowns. We can't make every decision based on what will be fan-friendly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Changing matches to 9 minutes at the high school level probably wouldn't have much effect, because many matches would either be a fall or a tech well before the end of the match. At the college level, it would be a disaster, because guys would just find a way to stall for 2 extra minutes. A lot of older guys like to wax nostalgic about the days of the 9 minute match, but they forget that all that did was slow down the pace of the match. You can make a match as short or as long as you want, and athletes will adapt their styles to fit the new constraint. Think college wrestling is boring now? A 9 minute stall-fest would make us long for the days of the 7 minute stall-fests.

 

The bottom line regarding pinning, is that working for a fall is very hard work, and difficult to do against a tough opponent. And since all athletes want to win, wrestlers have adapted their strategy to give themselves the highest chance of winning. Many have come to the conclusion that working for a fall takes a lot of energy, and only has a small chance of success, but letting a guy go and taking him down multiple times takes less energy and has a higher reward....more points on the board. The only way to truly encourage mat wrestling and pinning would be to completely change the rules of wrestling. You could, for example, eliminate all point scoring moves except for nearfall and takedowns directly to the back. No points for riding. No points for escapes or reversals. No points for takedowns that don't result in nearfall. So catch and release as a strategy would garner zero points. The problem with this is, matches between two elite competitors would still rarely have nearfall or falls. So then how would you decide the winner? Many many years ago, wrestling didn't keep score, and the only way to win was to pin your opponent, or if there was no pin, it would be a referees "decision". This is where the term "decision" comes from.....the days before moves actually were awarded points, and so the officials literally decided the winner. But that was deemed unacceptable, and so point values were assigned to moves. And so we come back full circle to the problem.

I agree with your analysis, however, my understanding is that before points were awarded for moves, "time advantage" played a big role in bouts decided by referees' decisions. The earliest brackets at Jay's site show most of the champions winning by "TA" - followed by the amount of time.

 

Also, Wikipedia uses a sourced reference when contrasting how college wrestling has historically stressed control when contrasted with freestyle. It states that, since 1915, collegiate wrestling officials have recorded "time advantage" and this was once the major way to determine the winner in the absence of a fall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
High school. I too don't like riding time. Further, I think one less minute would increase action.

 

However, I think calling a fall after one second, as in college, and not two seconds, as in HS, is better. And, while not in the rules, college refs are a little more lenient on what qualifies as a slam, which I think is good for the sport (not advocating slams, per se, just don't like anything that resembles a slam being called a slam).

 

So if I had to pick and choose, I would have six minute matches with no riding time and one-second falls and some leniency on what qualifies as a slam (e.g. Reece Humphreys' double-over salto throw should never be called a slam unless the opponent lands on his head, which has never happened in all the times I've watched him).

I am alittle older and wrestled when there was riding time in High schools during states, and college matches were 9 minutes ----kind of gives my age away doesn't it-- Riding time rewards control and should not be takien away as control is a vert important part of wrestling. Also the nine minute match rewarded conditioning and really hurt the people that were cutting to much weight. I would favor increasing the match length. riding time was removed from high school because of people cost and training the time keepers--if it was brought back we would have the same problems.

 

Bingo, we have a winner. The answer to the original question is neither. Refs influencing outcomes through inconsistent application of judgment calls (stalling) is not good at any level. Make the matches 9 minutes, institute the push-out rule and a standard (large) mat size, and do away with stalling from the neutral position.

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...