Jump to content
cangemi

They should wait a day to wrestle finals

Recommended Posts

the better wrestler wins... they have 3 matches too prove who it is... if no one ever won the spot after coming through the tourney then i might be able to persuaded it is the huge disadvantage that some whiners claim...

 

as it is, that is just not the case...

 

Agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy that both JB and Cox won, that's who I was rooting for.  But you have to be blind if you think that wrestling 3-4 matches against the best the US has to offer doesn't take a toll on you.

 

I think that JBs mental advantage and Cox's slipperiness had more to do with it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So do we have to read this nonsense for another year? It's about time to start working on next year's excuses .

 

Dake was beat on the mat under rules he chose to participate under.

Except those rules are materially unfair and undermine the integrity of the competition. There is no way around that. If you want to call it an excuse or detracting from someone's accomplishments, fine. Dake did not choose anything. These athletes sacrifice a lot and it seems at a minimum that they should be guranteed an even playing field. That is not what we have. There are excuses and then there is denial. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except those rules are materially unfair and undermine the integrity of the competition. There is no way around that. If you want to call it an excuse or detracting from someone's accomplishments, fine. Dake did not choose anything. These athletes sacrifice a lot and it seems at a minimum that they should be guranteed an even playing field. That is not what we have. There are excuses and then there is denial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct on the excuse and denial. You are employing both. Dake choosing to enter the tournament accepted these rules as did every wrestler who entered. No one said "it is "fair". It is to reward the prior year "world" place winner and in the absence of a world placewinner, make the US Open a worthwhile tournament. By not entering the open or by losing the open, wrestlers have put themselves at a disadvantage. Some have overcome it (Gilman) some have not (Dake)

 

Nobody got jobbed at open or wtt. The system worked as planned.

 

 

Never heard much of this before the tourney as I saw many of these Dake cult followers predicting he would win. He did not live up to his or their expectations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct on the excuse and denial. You are employing both. Dake choosing to enter the tournament accepted these rules as did every wrestler who entered. No one said "it is "fair". It is to reward the prior year "world" place winner and in the absence of a world placewinner, make the US Open a worthwhile tournament. By not entering the open or by losing the open, wrestlers have put themselves at a disadvantage. Some have overcome it (Gilman) some have not (Dake)

 

Nobody got jobbed at open or wtt. The system worked as planned.

 

 

Never heard much of this before the tourney as I saw many of these Dake cult followers predicting he would win. He did not live up to his or their expectations.

Give me break. It is a travesty. And excuse me but did Gilman beat Burroughs, or anyone remotely close to that level? Of course not. You knew that before you wrote that.

 

The system is a cheat. Maybe against lesser opponents who are not placed on such a pedestal the disadvantage can be overcome. But having to overcome that disadvantage against Burroughs is absurd. 

 

Sorry it offends you that I call our qualifying system the cheat that it clearly is. And sorry if it detracts from Burrough's accomplishments, because it does through no fault of my own. But if you never heard me write about it before, you have been willfully blind. But my indignation comes from the fact that these athletes sacrifice an exatrordinary amount to compete in a sport that does not offer much in return, and they are powerless to say a word. Cannot risk ruffling feathers and piss off the powers that be. The very least we can offer them is a fair shot, a level playing field, and we do not even give them that. It is a disgrace. Say it is whining or excuse making or whatever. It is simple honesty with a healthy mix of outrage.  Well deserved. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zain had nearly as big of a challenge............

 

What?  Kennedy move to 70.  Metcalf retired.  Pico went MMA.  JO got suspended (after beating Zain).  He had one guy to beat (Frank). -- and Zain had never face him in live competition.  Zain is great, but the seas parted for him this year, be real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Give me break. It is a travesty. And excuse me but did Gilman beat Burroughs, or anyone remotely close to that level? Of course not. You knew that before you wrote that.

 

The system is a cheat. Maybe against lesser opponents who are not placed on such a pedestal the disadvantage can be overcome. But having to overcome that disadvantage against Burroughs is absurd.

 

Sorry it offends you that I call our qualifying system the cheat that it clearly is. And sorry if it detracts from Burrough's accomplishments, because it does through no fault of my own. But if you never heard me write about it before, you have been willfully blind. But my indignation comes from the fact that these athletes sacrifice an exatrordinary amount to compete in a sport that does not offer much in return, and they are powerless to say a word. Cannot risk ruffling feathers and piss off the powers that be. The very least we can offer them is a fair shot, a level playing field, and we do not even give them that. It is a disgrace. Say it is whining or excuse making or whatever. It is simple honesty with a healthy mix of outrage. Well deserved.

Doesn't offend me at all that you call the system a cheat.. the system is a cheat. There I said it. Dake had the same chance as Burroughs at the open and blew it. What does bother me is you thinking Dake should deserve to get preferential treatment over someone like Gilman or anyone else, just because he has to wrestle Burroughs.

 

As far as pissing off powers inside wrestling, he is viewed as a entitled whiner by many outside his "fan club" (including me)..I wouldn't doubt some of the the powers inside also view him the same. I have never heard Burroughs call him or any opponents an "idiot". Every time he whines to a ref, he might as well be calling them an idiot.

He will get respect when he earns it.

 

While Dake is an accomplished domestic wrestler, he is an international nobody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Give me break. It is a travesty. And excuse me but did Gilman beat Burroughs, or anyone remotely close to that level? Of course not. You knew that before you wrote that.

 

The system is a cheat. Maybe against lesser opponents who are not placed on such a pedestal the disadvantage can be overcome. But having to overcome that disadvantage against Burroughs is absurd. 

 

Sorry it offends you that I call our qualifying system the cheat that it clearly is. And sorry if it detracts from Burrough's accomplishments, because it does through no fault of my own. But if you never heard me write about it before, you have been willfully blind. But my indignation comes from the fact that these athletes sacrifice an exatrordinary amount to compete in a sport that does not offer much in return, and they are powerless to say a word. Cannot risk ruffling feathers and piss off the powers that be. The very least we can offer them is a fair shot, a level playing field, and we do not even give them that. It is a disgrace. Say it is whining or excuse making or whatever. It is simple honesty with a healthy mix of outrage.  Well deserved. 

You're in your own world on this one.

 

You have repeatedly said things like "everyone knows" about things that are your opinions. 

 

You have repeatedly declared that Dake was cheated by the refs, when the only things in question are potential penalty points.  It's not like Dake was making actual offensive attacks and not being given takedowns he scored.  He tried to win matches on position and lost close positional battles.  

 

The system is slanted for medalists, but Dake didn't have to wrestle one.  He was on a perfectly equal playing field.

 

There is no travesty, no robbery, no conspiracy, no cheating, and no anything else.  Two guys wrestled repeatedly and one of them won 3 out of 4.  No matter how loud you cry about it those are the facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Give me break. It is a travesty. And excuse me but did Gilman beat Burroughs, or anyone remotely close to that level? Of course not. You knew that before you wrote that.

 

The system is a cheat. Maybe against lesser opponents who are not placed on such a pedestal the disadvantage can be overcome. But having to overcome that disadvantage against Burroughs is absurd. 

 

Sorry it offends you that I call our qualifying system the cheat that it clearly is. And sorry if it detracts from Burrough's accomplishments, because it does through no fault of my own. But if you never heard me write about it before, you have been willfully blind. But my indignation comes from the fact that these athletes sacrifice an exatrordinary amount to compete in a sport that does not offer much in return, and they are powerless to say a word. Cannot risk ruffling feathers and piss off the powers that be. The very least we can offer them is a fair shot, a level playing field, and we do not even give them that. It is a disgrace. Say it is whining or excuse making or whatever. It is simple honesty with a healthy mix of outrage.  Well deserved. 

 

Ok i tried to help you out with the use of other examples but seriously the only thing you seem to care about is Dake. That right there weakens yyour arguement. Use more examples to defend your point of view, otherwise  your arguement becomes invalid due to being relevant to one case.

 

And while i was rooting for Dake, this is far from a travesty.

 

As for Gilman, are you suggesting we only gove the bye to usa open winners who are not world champion level? Yoir argument has so many holes its not even funny.

Edited by BigTenFanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok i tried to help you out with the use of other examples but seriously the only thing you seem to care about is Dake. That right there weakens yyour arguement. Use more examples to defend your point of view, otherwise  your arguement becomes invalid due to being relevant to one case.

 

And while i was rooting for Dake, this is far from a travesty.

 

As for Gilman, are you suggesting we only gove the bye to usa open winners who are not world champion level? Yoir argument has so many holes its not even funny.

Holes? Let's see. Unfair?-check. Creates physical disadvantage?-check. Impossible to justify?-check. Undermines the integrity of the process?-check. Is not done by any other nation?-check. Etc. I really have to work on this I guess.

 

So what exactly am I missing again? I only seem to care about Dake (although before the finals I said Taylor was going to be hurt by it too, but whatever) but the resistance to something so obvious seems clearly motivated by the fact that it involves Burroughs. It negatively affects all the challengers, but Dake is the most egregious example precisely because of who he is trying to unseat. 

 

Level playing field? Only diehards won't admit the problem, and the rationalizations are desperate.  

 

Not sure what you are trying to say about Gilman. 

Edited by straggler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holes? Let's see. Unfair?-check. Creates physical disadvantage?-check. Impossible to justify?-check. Undermines the integrity of the process?-check. Is not done by any other nation?-check. Etc. I really have to work on this I guess.

 

So what exactly am I missing again? I only seem to care about Dake (although before the finals I said Taylor was going to be hurt by it too, but whatever) but the resistance to something so obvious seems clearly motivated by the fact that it involves Burroughs. It negatively affects all the challengers, but Dake is the most egregious example precisely because of who he is trying to unseat.

 

Level playing field? Only diehards won't admit the problem, and the rationalizations are desperate.

 

Not sure what you are trying to say about Gilman.

 

You said Gilman didnt have to face someone at the level of Burroughs which why it wasnt an issue. This implys that having to go through the challenge tournament us only an issue when you have to face a world champion level opponent.

 

Look. I dont disagree that its an uphill battle for the non returning place finishers but every tourbament with seeding tries to givd the advantage to the best returning wrestlers. If you want a truly level playing field why not randomly place the wrestlers in the bracket. Whyg shouild the 1 seed get an easier psth to the finals over the 15th seed? Etc.

 

Use more examples to give your arguement more weight otherwise this is all just about Dake/Burroughs making your argument skewd and bias, thus not worth much.

 

I am literally trying to help you give a stronger argument yet you seem only fixated on Dake/Burroughs.

Edited by BigTenFanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.      

It's not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing to do with examples.

Just common sense says wait a day to give a deserved advantage of waiting wrestler against a fresh winner of mini tournament.

Just common sense

Unfortunately we live in a world where common sense is not enough when making an argument especially when it comes to changing an established rule. You need examples to support your point of view, and the more you have the better point you can make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The justification for giving returning medalists the advantage, is that they are proven internationally. You can dominate domestically, or gameplan for one wrestler, but not be the best option. So give a slight advantage to the medalists to offset people just happening and hurting our medal count. Non medalists have a shot to get the advantage at the open, where it's an even playing field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The justification for giving returning medalists the advantage, is that they are proven internationally. You can dominate domestically, or gameplan for one wrestler, but not be the best option. So give a slight advantage to the medalists to offset people just happening and hurting our medal count. Non medalists have a shot to get the advantage at the open, where it's an even playing field.

Yep.  I like medalists getting an advantage.  But I also get the issue with a guy always having that advantage.  I'd be fine if the medalist advantage was only available to a guy every other year (or maybe just in even years to everyone to cover Olympics and get out best there).  That way a changing of the guard was a little more possible.  

 

But the advantage that comes from winning the Open is earned in this year's qualification process.  You have to be healthy, show up, and win.  I like rewarding guys for going to the open and think it should continue.  It creates a two step qualification process that means a guy who just gets hot on one day at the trials has to get really hot and win the mini tournament and the final.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing to do with examples.

Just common sense says wait a day to give a deserved advantage of waiting wrestler against a fresh winner of mini tournament.

Just common sense

Common sense is not having the winner of the mini tournament wrestle in the final immediately after stepping off the mat. That would be a huge advantage if they wrestled within an hour of their last match. But we are talking about a 5 hour break for elite athletes. How is that not enough recovery time? And if 5 hours isn't enough, why is it common sense that 24 hours would be enough?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because it is physically impossible to recover from a day of wrestling in 5 hours. You cannot replenish glycogen that quickly, for starters, not to speak of general systemic fatigue and mental fatigue.

A day of wrestling...  12 minutes 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because it is physically impossible to recover from a day of wrestling in 5 hours. You cannot replenish glycogen that quickly, for starters, not to speak of general systemic fatigue and mental fatigue.

Retherford seemed to recover pretty well.

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...

×
×
  • Create New...