Matside Weigh-Ins & Locked Line-Ups: 2018 Rule Proposals (Jan 17)

[davenowa 22]

The following ideas are based on an attempt to increase action, increase & simplify scoring, increase participation, reduce forfeits and increase fan interest. Some are original, others borrowed (or modified from folks such as Wade Schalles), and some are concepts that have appeared on annual surveys or as forum suggestions or comments. Always look forward to feedback and suggestions. I will post each of the following 4 proposals over the next 4 weeks...

 

**Individual Match Scoring (Jan 2)

**Weight Classes & Growth Allowances (Jan 10)

**Weigh-Ins (Jan 17)

**Team Scoring

 

Matside Weigh-Ins & Locked Line-Ups (improves weight control protocol by discouraging excessive weight loss  and reduces forfeits by locking in line-ups)

1. Increase all weight classes by 2 pounds to allow for uniforms, shoes, headgear etc.

2. Procedures will vary slightly based on dual meet (or multi dual) and individually bracketed tournaments

 

Dual Meet Procedure

A. Locked Line-Up: Require each coach to submit a locked-in line-up to the official 10 minutes prior to start of dual, just prior to any introductions or playing of National Anthem.  Rationale: a coin toss should not have such an impact on a dual meet result, and forfeits and ducking of quality opponents will be reduced.  Referee will present line-ups to the head table to be entered into scorebook/computer and for introductions.

B. Weigh in when reporting to table ready to wrestle (scale available prior, including during warm-ups, to check weight).  Referee will supervise each weigh-in at the head table, confirming weight of each wrestler.  Option for headgear to be included or put on after weigh-in as proceeding to center of the mat.

C. For a dual-meet team tourney or multi dual, a wrestler can’t compete in more than 2 different weight classes for the event.  Wrestler may compete in class for which qualifies OR may wrestle up 1 (one weight class) above which initial weigh in of the event allows.  Ex:  Wrestler A makes 132 for first dual.  This allows him to wrestle 132 or 138 during event, provided he makes weight for subsequent rounds.  If he does not make 132, he may still wrestle 138, but MAY NOT then wrestle 145.

D. Weigh ins will be held prior to each “odd” round of the dual tourney/multi meet.  Scratch weight for round one, with one additional pound for round #3 and a second additional pound for round #5 (maximum number of matches in 1 day per NFHS).

E.   If wrestler who is listed on lineup for that dual does not make weight when called matside, it is a forfeit and that wrestler may not wrestle at a higher weight class in that same dual.  That wrestler may not be replaced by a teammate--it is a forfeit.  Wrestlers will adjust to wrestling at a weight class for which they are best suited, as they will need to actually wrestle at that weight (as opposed to weighing in at that weight and actually competing at a significantly higher amount).

4. Individually Bracketed Tournament Procedure--This is a bit more tricky, and is a work in progress...

A. Initial matside weigh in prior to first round matches (including all wrestlers receiving byes).  No weigh-in needed 2 hours prior to tourney start time.

B. Two pound allowance for semi-finals (and corresponding consolation round of consi quarters) and additional  pound for championship finals (and consi medal round).  Maintain additional one pound allowance for 2nd day of 2-day event.

C. Weigh in to take place matside.  Scales at each mat if possible, or between mats if not enough scales available.  Wrestler failing to make weight on designated scale may make 1 attempt at each other available scale.

D.   Any wrestler failing to make weight for first round is considered a scratch (entered as a "forfeit"), and is deleted from the event.

E. Any wrestler failing to make weight for the semifinals (or corresponding consi round) is considered a forfeit.  Team does not lose all points earned for that wrestler, and wrestler may continue in the tournament if same weight is made for next round (even if that round would not have required a weigh in).  Ex:  Wrestler B fails to make weight for the semifinals.  He drops down to the consi semis, and must make the same weight he was required to make for the championship semis in order to compete in the consi quarter round.

[Ogalthorpe Haywood 399]

I like the locked lineups, this would prevent ducking and give fans potentially better matchups. However hate the mat side weigh in idea. This would destroy wrestling IMO, who wants to weigh 3 or more times a day. Weight cutting is and always be a part of wrestling.

[BobDole 1,229]

Please quit making rules.

 

Submitting a locked lineup will not prevent forfeits, if a team wants to duck someone they will do it.

 

Submitting a locked lineup will also prevent shifting of your lineup to better your chances for a win. 

 

Dumb idea.

[superbowlhomeboy 235]

Too many rules. A "locked" line-up will not prevent a coach from forfeiting. You'd just have to say your kid got hurt warming up. If we want to eliminate "intentional" forfeits, make forfeits worth 8 points. Give teams an incentive to throw someone out there and wrestle.

 

However, part of a dual is knowing when to move people around and make adjustments. The people that complain about this always sound lazy. Do you homework before the dual and put yourself in a position to win. Wrestling is a competition and the opposing teams are under no obligation to help the other by spoon feeding them matches. It's always annoying when the other coach acts surprised that you are trying to win. 

[SetonHallPirate 993]

A locked lineup and mat-side weigh-ins simply don't work well together, IMO. Just what you want, a wrestler who is locked into a spot in the lineup (and everybody else locked out of that spot), and then that wrestler misses weight.

[davenowa 22]

always appreciate input, especially from shp (just wait until next week's final batch, much to the chagrin of Bob D.. but his spirit should be high after that congressional medal award...).  however, locking for a dual is not much different than pre-registering for any individually bracketed tourney, but would throw this out as a "solution" -- each "team" gets 1 pound.  Not as gimmicky as it sounds. Use it as needed.  Need to waste it almost all on 1 guy that is 0.8 over?  Fine, but you better not have many others over by just a little.    Got a guy or 2 over by 0.2?  No big deal.  Despite what some think, matside is an attempt to de-emphasize weight loss.

[repechange 184]

Mat side weigh in is and always will be a bad idea. Go to a tourney, make weight once, eat breakfast and start matches in an hr or so. Thats the way it has always been. It isn't broke, don"t fix it.

[RichB 227]

The only times matside weigh-ins could make sense is in a "true" dual meet, not any kind of a dual meet tournament (not triangular quad etc)  or if it was the final round of an individual tournament, and the only event of the day e.g. NCAA championship final only and some qualifiers (B1G  and sometimes EIWA). And, the other example Is PIAA AA, but not AAA. ( I guess there are some other states that have semi's on Friday, a lot of consolations Saturday, but in the championship only finals)

 

Then it seems to me a state just cannot have some events with matside weighins and some without.     

[BobDole 1,229]

always appreciate input, especially from shp (just wait until next week's final batch, much to the chagrin of Bob D.. but his spirit should be high after that congressional medal award...).  however, locking for a dual is not much different than pre-registering for any individually bracketed tourney, but would throw this out as a "solution" -- each "team" gets 1 pound.  Not as gimmicky as it sounds. Use it as needed.  Need to waste it almost all on 1 guy that is 0.8 over?  Fine, but you better not have many others over by just a little.    Got a guy or 2 over by 0.2?  No big deal.  Despite what some think, matside is an attempt to de-emphasize weight loss.

Tournaments and duals are different, a tournament I enter 14 guys only. For duals I don't need to be locked into just 14 guys. 

[Eagle26 606]

Locked line ups will absolutely cut down on forfeits, and make the dual meets much more fair. In PA last year, BECA and Nareth wrestled 3 times and each time whoever won the coin toss, won the dual. Think about that... The state championship was won on a coin flip! Of course they still have to wrestle, but BECA would've won that dual had they won the toss (personally, I'm glad they lost!). Dave Crowell is a master of getting the right match ups, but he is even an advocate of locked line ups.

 

I'm kinda split on mat side weigh ins. I think it would help with poor weight cuts, but I agree with others that it would be difficult to implement. Plus I don't think it makes too big of a difference between mat side and one hour. Multiple weigh ins in a multi dual or tournament setting seems like it could be too much for an avg high schooler to manage

[BobDole 1,229]

Locked line ups will absolutely cut down on forfeits, and make the dual meets much more fair. In PA last year, BECA and Nareth wrestled 3 times and each time whoever won the coin toss, won the dual. Think about that... The state championship was won on a coin flip! Of course they still have to wrestle, but BECA would've won that dual had they won the toss (personally, I'm glad they lost!). Dave Crowell is a master of getting the right match ups, but he is even an advocate of locked line ups.

 

I'm kinda split on mat side weigh ins. I think it would help with poor weight cuts, but I agree with others that it would be difficult to implement. Plus I don't think it makes too big of a difference between mat side and one hour. Multiple weigh ins in a multi dual or tournament setting seems like it could be too much for an avg high schooler to manage

Being able to manipulate your lineup on the fly has made for some great duals.

Edited January 28, 2018 by BobDole

[SetonHallPirate 993]

Being able to manipulate your lineup on the fly has made for some great duals.

Well, how would you recommend a dual be decided some way other than the flip of a colored disc?

[BobDole 1,229]

Well, how would you recommend a dual be decided some way other than the flip of a colored disc?

Duals aren't decided by a coin flip. 

[Eagle26 606]

Duals aren't decided by a coin flip.

 

Of course you can't say the coin flip is the only thing that decides the dual, but there are way more high school matches than anybody realizes that the outcome would be reversed if the other team won the coin flip. As per my previous example, there is a 99.9% chance that BECA beats Nazereth for the state title if they win the coin flip. When a coin flip decides a state championship, that is a problem.

[Eagle26 606]

To further illustrate how this works, here is how I've seen it work with a more common (avg. talent) local team. Team A has two studs and a few other above avg. guys. Team B wins the coin toss, and team A's two studs both happen to be at odd weights. Team B gets to dictate those match ups and puts JV wrestlers (or sometimes fft) against the two studs. Team B had pretty good wrestlers at the same weight as the studs, but they would have been all but guaranteed to lose against the studs. Instead, team B bumps these decent wrestlers up and they both win close matches. Coincidentally, team A would've been heavily favored in those two matches had team B not gotten those match ups.

[BobDole 1,229]

That is called strategy and coaching.

 

Please tell me how the "locked" lineup would affect the BECA and Nazareth match? Seems to me like it would be a toss-up either way. 

 

Amazingly the coin flip was a quite a difference maker, it gained Nazareth  10+ points while it cost BECA 16 in one dual. Of course I bet the criteria it came down to was...coin flip right?

Bethlehem Catholic 40, Nazareth 20, Jan. 28 in EPC final.

Nazareth 33, Bethlehem Catholic 24, Feb. 4 in District 11 3A final.

Nazareth 30, Bethlehem Catholic 29 (on criteria), Feb. 11 in PIAA 3A final.

 

I would hate for facts to get in the way of your opinion though, so keep ranting. A locked lineup won't happen.

[Eagle26 606]

That is called strategy and coaching.

 

Please tell me how the "locked" lineup would affect the BECA and Nazareth match? Seems to me like it would be a toss-up either way. 

 

Amazingly the coin flip was a quite a difference maker, it gained Nazareth  10+ points while it cost BECA 16 in one dual. Of course I bet the criteria it came down to was...coin flip right?

Bethlehem Catholic 40, Nazareth 20, Jan. 28 in EPC final.

Nazareth 33, Bethlehem Catholic 24, Feb. 4 in District 11 3A final.

Nazareth 30, Bethlehem Catholic 29 (on criteria), Feb. 11 in PIAA 3A final.

 

I would hate for facts to get in the way of your opinion though, so keep ranting. A locked lineup won't happen.

I'm not sure what I stated that wasn't fact? You said yourself that the coin flip was quite a difference maker in the duals. The locked line still requires strategy and coaching as you are free to bump wrestlers in your line up to do what you think will be best for your team. You just won't know what the other team is doing first. The duals could very well end up with the same result, but this way the outcome is due to where the coach decides to put the wrestlers before the dual rather than a 50/50 chance on who has to send out first. You literally have every positive aspect that you mentioned (strategy, coaching, the ability to manipulate your lineup, etc.), but you take the luck of the coin flip out of it. Seems like a no brainer to me

[BobDole 1,229]

I'm not sure what I stated that wasn't fact? You said yourself that the coin flip was quite a difference maker in the duals. The locked line still requires strategy and coaching as you are free to bump wrestlers in your line up to do what you think will be best for your team. You just won't know what the other team is doing first. The duals could very well end up with the same result, but this way the outcome is due to where the coach decides to put the wrestlers before the dual rather than a 50/50 chance on who has to send out first. You literally have every positive aspect that you mentioned (strategy, coaching, the ability to manipulate your lineup, etc.), but you take the luck of the coin flip out of it. Seems like a no brainer to me

Locked lineups aren't good and won't happen. 

[SetonHallPirate 993]

Locked lineups aren't good and won't happen. 

Because you said so...therefore it's true.

[BobDole 1,229]

Because you said so...therefore it's true.

Because of liability. If a kid gets hurt during warm-up AFTER the lineup is submitted and is forced to wrestle that opens up an avenue for litigation.

 

It's a dumb idea also. 

[gimpeltf 2,085]

Because of liability. If a kid gets hurt during warm-up AFTER the lineup is submitted and is forced to wrestle that opens up an avenue for litigation.

 

It's a dumb idea also. 

 

I don't have a full opinion on this, but how could someone ever be 'forced' to wrestle? I fairly regularly set up an event and someone comes up and says they got hurt or sick since weighins (or they were hoping they'd be ok by then and weren't). It's a forfeit. If I get this plan they might not be able to move someone from another weight but that's all. That doesn't put a gun to the kid's head. No different to the tournament scenario. That kid is locked in there too and no one else can move up to take his place.

[BobDole 1,229]

I don't have a full opinion on this, but how could someone ever be 'forced' to wrestle? I fairly regularly set up an event and someone comes up and says they got hurt or sick since weighins (or they were hoping they'd be ok by then and weren't). It's a forfeit. If I get this plan they might not be able to move someone from another weight but that's all. That doesn't put a gun to the kid's head. No different to the tournament scenario. That kid is locked in there too and no one else can move up to take his place.

With this stupid "rule" coaches would be FORCED to put in an injured kid instead of a backup. Plus a forfeit is probably frowned upon with this whole "locked" lineup thing also. I thought this was supposed to prevent forfeits. 

[Zebra 546]

Locked in lineups are stupid and will never happen. 

 

Mat-side weigh-ins however are a good idea and regardless of the naysayers can be easily implemented at dual meets and tournaments. For duals you need 1 scale at the table for tournaments you have 2-3 scales at the head table where the wrestlers report to weigh-in and get their bout sheet, if they make weight of course.     

[gimpeltf 2,085]

With this stupid "rule" coaches would be FORCED to put in an injured kid instead of a backup. Plus a forfeit is probably frowned upon with this whole "locked" lineup thing also. I thought this was supposed to prevent forfeits. 

 

 

I just read it and don't like it but not for this reason. The coaches would also not have a gun to their heads to wrestle somebody. If they're hurt they're hurt. And nowhere in the original statement did the op say it would eliminate forfeits. He said it would reduce forfeits. I don't see where it says they can only weighin one kid per weight. He might have meant that but I didn't see it in a quick read through.

I've been opposed to matside weighins since they were first suggested- especially since 1998. My original main reason probably doesn't factor in as much 20 years later- that being that what happens if a kid still does cut too much and has a problem at matside. This would happen in public and would be an unmitigated disaster. This possibility would still be the case, however after 20 years of 1-2 hour weighins and more education I think this very unlikely. But even with people saying how simple this would be to implement logistically- it would be a mess. The suggestion was that the ref would monitor the weighins. This means extra time between every bout and inevitable arguments if anyone was close. It would require larger crews at tournaments. The people doing weighins have to come from somewhere.

[Zebra 546]

 

I've been opposed to matside weighins since they were first suggested- especially since 1998. My original main reason probably doesn't factor in as much 20 years later- that being that what happens if a kid still does cut too much and has a problem at matside. This would happen in public and would be an unmitigated disaster. This possibility would still be the case, however after 20 years of 1-2 hour weighins and more education I think this very unlikely. But even with people saying how simple this would be to implement logistically- it would be a mess. The suggestion was that the ref would monitor the weighins. This means extra time between every bout and inevitable arguments if anyone was close. It would require larger crews at tournaments. The people doing weighins have to come from somewhere.

 

 

None of that is true. You make weight just how you're going to step on the mat (knee pad, headgear, mouthpiece, etc.) or you are DQ'd immediately. No allowances at all, even between rounds of a tournament. The only caveat would be 1 pound for day two of a two day event and then only because it is in the rule book.   

 

For tournaments the guy (or gal) who hands out the bout sheet will see them step on the scale. There is no need for an additional person at all. If it's run automatically on Track then they have to report to the head table where 1 person, who would already be there, checks their weight. If they are good then they can head to the mat. If not immediate DQ. You're done, go sit in the stands and watch.   

 

Will it stop all big weight cutters, nope. But it will reduce them as eventually they'll get DQ'd in the middle of a tournament and move up a weight class.You don't want to be embarrassed then stop cutting too much weight. It's pretty simple and self policing.