Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
davenowa

Team Scoring: 2018 Rule Proposals (last of 4)

Recommended Posts

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. The prior 3 have been posted over the last 3 weeks, and this is the final installment for 2018...the team scoring topic, and many variants, have been discussed extensively on the college forum in the past.

 

**Individual Match Scoring (Jan 2)

**Weight Classes & Growth Allowances (Jan 10)

**Weigh-Ins (Jan 17)

**Team Scoring (Jan 23)

 

Team Scoring--Far too many matches are seen as "boring" by most casual fans.  Something must be done to increase action, and the best way to do so is to reward wrestlers by making every point scored related to team points that can be earned.  In baseball, a 1-0 game can be an exciting pitcher's dual with great defense.  The same can't be said for a 1-0 wrestling match.  Implement a "Margin of Victory" (MOV) bonus and "Action" Bonus (rewards all match points scored, increasing action for duration of the match).  This would create incentive to score at all times--much like a current wrestler who is either up by 7 and trying to secure a major...or down by 8 and trying to save his team a point.  Don't fear the decimal, as tournament team scoring currently utilizes 1/2 points already.

a. Implement “Margin of Victory” bonus. Winner receives 2 base team points for a win (including any OT win), plus 0.1 to 1.4 for MOV (for a “Margin of Victory" ranging from 1 pt to 14 pts).

b. Also includes “action” points for # of points scored by the winner, with an additional “action bonus” for actual number of pts scored by winner, ranging from 0.1 (for 1 point in a 1-0 win) up to a max of 1.5 for a winner scoring 15 pts or more. All decisions would then range from 2.2 (for a 1-0 win) to 4.9 pts (for a 15-1 win...or any win by 14 pts).  A typical score win of 6-2 would earn 3 team pts (base 2 plus 0.4 MOV and 0.6 Action).

c.  Tech Fall still 5 team points (for MOV or match lead of 15 pts or more) and pin or default 6 team points.

d.  A forfeit becomes 7 points.  Too often, wrestlers are bumped away from other good wrestlers.  While some have proposed only awarding 7 points if the team that is forfeiting has a wrestler available but still elects to forfeit, I believe that could create issues. With implementation of fewer weight classes, forfeits would be reduced.

b. For tournaments, simplify by eliminating advancement points and simply award team pts as shown (2.2 to 6.0 pts), with consi bracket points cut in half, maintaining placement points (which may need to be increased slightly to maintain proper balance).  Byes (when followed by a win) would be worth 2 points on championship side and 1 point in consi bracket.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe you stated you would like to go to 11 weights. Others think decrease the weights to 13. The easy way to do that is to keep the weights as they are 106 to 132; keep 145-152-160 which were weights in the old configuration, and the new (current), but go back to the weights above 160. i.e 171-189-215-285. 

 

One could go to 15 weights by using 145-152-160 keeping the current weights above i.e 170-182-195-220-285. But go back to the old weights below 145. 103-112-119-125-130-135-140 (in reality 103 is just to low, I would make that 104 or 105.

 

What I am getting at is that I would like to see an odd number of weights. That means we always have an easy tiebraker, most bouts won, unless their is a double DQ, a double default (both incredibly rare- can't remember the last time I saw either) or a non bout, aka a double forfeit. Sure that happens a lot. but I suspect it would happen a lot less. 

 

Even better make a tie impossible (save in the event of one of the three double non-winners I mentioned, by making all winning scores an odd number and by making team misconducts an even number of points. Specifically:

1 point for a win in UTB (in college it would be a victory by less than a 1 minute time advantage.

3 points for a winner in regular OT (SV or TB)

5 points for a victory by 1 point (possibly also by 2)

7 points for a regular decision, margin of 2 thru 7(possibly 3-7)

9 points for a major, 8-14  

11 for a Tech Fall  15+

15 for a FFT, DFLT, FALL, DQ.

 

I could see that if a match reaches OT a default be worth only 5 points. Same with an accumulation DQ (say 4 locked hands)

Big difference between Tech and fall would make a fall much more of an incentive - although an argument could be made for a 15 point fall only if in the first period, 13 in the second or third.

Obviously, a flagrant misconduct DQ should be 15 and a -6, no matter when it occurs.

 

-----------------------------

 

This year will be the 80th Pa state tournament ( or is it 81?). 145 is the only weight that has been in all of them.  I don't know if that was the case pre championships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a couple of thoughts on current dual meet scores that would produce a different outcome with Margin of Victory and Action points...

 

  1. Team A wins 7 matches by identical scores of 2-1, while Team B wins 7 matches by identical scores of 12-5.  Instead of a 21 to 21 score, with 8 levels of tie-breakers perhaps earning a win for Team A, Team B would win 27.3 to 16.1, rewarding the match dominance that fell just short of 7 major decisions.

  2. Team A wins 7 matches by pin.  Team B wins 6 matches by pin and 1 by forfeit (Team A had a 285 pound wrestler but forfeited, strategically/duckingly).  Each winner scores the first takedown, so Team A wins on criteria of most first points scored (since no TD in forfeit), thereby being rewarded for forfeiting to avoid giving up any first points scored.  In new method, Team B wins 43-42 (forfeit is worth 7).

**In this instance, if nothing else, the NFHS tie-breaker should be changed such that a win by forfeit earns 2 "first points scored" so that a team is not rewarded for forfeiting (and might need an addendum about making sure match points are within the action, such that a coach who might be aware of the situation, score and subsequent tie-break criteria does not have his wrestler intentionally report with shoelaces unsecured).

 

Additionally, if Team A wins 9 matches by decision, while team B wins 5 matches by pin or forfeit, Team B wins 30-27. With modified scoring, Team A could win if those current 3-point decisions were all near-majors (such as the prior mentioned 12-5), but would still lose if all were 2-1 victories.

 

As a final aside, if the Penn St/Ohio State dual had been scored with the above noted method of MOV and Action Pts, instead of PSU winning 19-18, tOSU would have won 18.8 to 18.6.

 

125: OSU 21-12 gets 4.4 (2.0 base + 0.9 MOV + 1.5 action)   OSU 4.4 PSU 0

133: OSU 5-4 gets 2.6 (2 + 0.1 + 0.5)   OSU leads 7-0

141: OSU 7-6 gets 2.8 and leads 9.8-0

149 PSU TF 20-4 gets 5 now OSU 9.8-5

157: OSU TF 24-9 for 5, now 14.8-5

165: PSU 12-3 PSU gets 4.1, now 14.8 to 9.1

174: PSU 6-4 gets 2.8, now 14.8 to 11.9

184: PSU 10-2 gets 3.8, now PSU up 15.7 to 14.8

197: PSU 6-3 gets 2.9, now up 18.6 to 14.8

285: OSU 15-10 gets 4, and wins 18.8 to 18.6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Margin of victory points don’t sound completely terrible, but “action points” do. So a 15-8 Win would be worth more than an 10-0 Win? That seems silly.

 

If Team A wins 5 matches by scores of 15-8 and Team B wins 9 matches by scores of 2-1, Team A still wins 21-20.7. That’s crazy considering those are all regular decisions.

Edited by 1032004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Margin of victory points don’t sound completely terrible, but “action points” do. So a 15-8 Win would be worth more than an 10-0 Win? That seems silly.

 

If Team A wins 5 matches by scores of 15-8 and Team B wins 9 matches by scores of 2-1, Team A still wins 21-20.7. That’s crazy considering those are all regular decisions.

Are you saying there is a flaw in his perfect system? Come on now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×