Push-back against the 3pt TD?

[Cooch1 146]

I don't see any proof of there being more pins as a consequence of the 4 point NF. All it's done is make the tech fall easier, which is what a 3 point TD would also do. Rules committees are good at taking action toward what seems to be desirable without also considering the consequences of increasing the size of the reward. Bigger isn't always better if it distracts from the goal of the sport.

 

If you want to see more real pinning attempts, make the tech fall a 20 point margin. That way it's too hard to reach within the 7 minute  time allotment. Wrestlers will forget the techfall; and rather than risk burning up a ton of time and energy coming up short with an 8 to 19 point margin and only a 4 pt. major, the choice will be to go for a pin sooner once the major has been secured, i.e., leapfrogging the tech fall.

[tightwaist 388]

For a forum full of people who supposedly love the sport it makes no sense that everybody wants to constantly change the rules.  I think it's pretty great as it is.

 

No doubt.  The sport is much better than it was a decade ago when 50% of the matches were 2-1 or 3-2 snooze fests (and the refs wouldn't call stalling). This new generation of wrestler is not content to win with a TD and then stall out the match.  They are constantly looking to score, and the entertainment value is better than ever. Spencer Lee is going to motivate the next generation that dominating on top can be cool as well.  

[1032004 896]

I think a 3 point TD (and reversal) would definitely result in more action.   Realizing that it is tough to take someone down twice in the same period, I think many times guys will wait until there are 20 or so seconds left in the period to really go all out for a TD, because they know they'll have a better chance of finishing the period without giving up an escape.   But if a TD is 3 then even if they give up an escape they'd still have a 2 point advantage, and  it also gives them incentive to try for multiple takedowns in the same period (assuming they are unable to get a turn).

 

But I agree with that if so, you'd probably also need to change the criteria for a major and tech.

[PRyan2012 343]

Lee Kemp would be the first 4-timer if this rule was in place.

And Cael would have made the Olympic Team easily in 2000 as a teenager if  were worth 2pts and Snyder would not have beat Varner with forced down wrestling. Rules are the rules at the time. The old rules would probably have made Snyder a no timer.

[GranbyTroll 431]

If you want to see more real pinning attempts, make the tech fall a 20 point margin. That way it's too hard to reach within the 7 minute  time allotment. Wrestlers will forget the techfall; and rather than risk burning up a ton of time and energy coming up short with an 8 to 19 point margin and only a 4 pt. major, the choice will be to go for a pin sooner once the major has been secured, i.e., leapfrogging the tech fall.

 

The "problem" of lack of falls in D1 doesn't stem from the "low" ceiling for tech falls. It stems from the problem that it's really hard to pin a good wrestler. No amount of rules tweaks will "encourage" wrestlers to pin someone who they aren't able to pin. With the 3pt nearfall, would Spencer Lee still have teched his first kid at NCAAs? Yes; it just would have taken about a minute longer. 

[cornercoach 448]

first and last takedown of the match worth three points- what the heck would that do to things????

[BigTenFanboy 1,710]

The old rules would probably have made Snyder a no timer.

 

careful now...

[Cooch1 146]

The "problem" of lack of falls in D1 doesn't stem from the "low" ceiling for tech falls. It stems from the problem that it's really hard to pin a good wrestler. No amount of rules tweaks will "encourage" wrestlers to pin someone who they aren't able to pin. With the 3pt nearfall, would Spencer Lee still have teched his first kid at NCAAs? Yes; it just would have taken about a minute longer. 

It's hard to pin, to take down, to reverse, ride, turn a Good wrestler. Just because it's hard doesn't mean the rules should be tailored to "encourage" an easier way out; rather they should be shaped to TRY whether or not there are actually more pins. 

[AKHUNTER 290]

If you want more neutral action, just get rid of riding time.  Its as simple as that. No one would bother trying for a ride out if they had over a minute left in a period. 

neutral action.......... what we need is more action period......... freakin stalemates and lack of stalling calls drive me bonkers. MOST stalemate calls are nothing more than a reward for for a guy that is stalling..........many times BOTH guys.

[GranbyTroll 431]

It's hard to pin, to take down, to reverse, ride, turn a Good wrestler. Just because it's hard doesn't mean the rules should be tailored to "encourage" an easier way out; rather they should be shaped to TRY whether or not there are actually more pins. 

 

You're right. Wrestling was better, and more exciting, back in the day- before all this tilting, rolling and scrambling BS. I like my matches long and low scoring too. IF you're not trying to pin like Bo Nickle, then get the heck off of my lawn and get the heck off of my matt! 

[BigTenFanboy 1,710]

You're right. Wrestling was better, and more exciting, back in the day- before all this tilting, rolling and scrambling BS. I like my matches long and low scoring too. IF you're not trying to pin like Bo Nickle, then get the heck off of my lawn and get the heck off of my matt! 

 

Wrestling is most exciting when the unexpected happens. If Bo Nickal had pinned MyMar every previous time they've wrestled the pin in the finals would have been nothing special.

Scrambles are exciting because you dont know who's going to win the position.

High scoring is not necessarily exciting either. I'm a big David Taylor fan, but I will say his NCAA finals win during his Sophomore year against Brandon Hatchett was a pretty boring match.

[jammen 304]

I'm still trying to figure out how there can be push-back against something that doesn't exist.

[jcjcjc 105]

For a forum full of people who supposedly love the sport it makes no sense that everybody wants to constantly change the rules.  I think it's pretty great as it is.

I love myself, but weirdly I read books and stuff to come up with new ideas. If I read something that is better than my current belief, I try to believe the new thing. 

[russelscout 1,573]

I love myself, but weirdly I read books and stuff to come up with new ideas. If I read something that is better than my current belief, I try to believe the new thing.

 

Whoa you sound smart. But if you make changes to your life no one else has to care or understand it. Most of the things you read are ideas from someone else and have been tested first. Constantly tinkering with the rules makes wrestling hard to understand for a casual fan. Also you don't know what the larger impact is because wrestling has never had a 3 point takedown. Not many sports consistently make huge scoring changes. Maybe there is something we can learn from that idea? Edited April 9, 2018 by russelscout

[GRAPLER 7]

Why must a new rule be made every single year? The 4 point near fall rule is awful. It does not encourage wrestling for the fall, or even trying to score...quite the opposite. If you get a take down and backs....game over, stop wrestling....you're up by 6. The rule creates boring matches with less, not more, action.

 

Here is something novel - go back to the 2/3 point back point system and leave well enough alone. NCAA wrestling is not going to gain basketball, football, golf, or chess fans by trying to mess up the sport in hopes of finding a way to appeal to people that don't like it and don't get it....rather, they'll alienate the existing fan base while not gaining anyone new.

 

I will watch college wrestling, but I have to admit...the four point rule makes it difficult.

BTW, a push out rule might be the death of college wrestling if it was ever put in place. Imagine guys training to be Sumo wrestlers and win matches by racking up push outs....no take downs, no back points, no moves - other than driving your opponent off the mat.

 

Stop changing the rules every year...you are only making it worse.

[BigTenFanboy 1,710]

Why must a new rule be made every single year? The 4 point near fall rule is awful. It does not encourage wrestling for the fall, or even trying to score...quite the opposite. If you get a take down and backs....game over, stop wrestling....you're up by 6. The rule creates boring matches with less, not more, action.

 

Here is something novel - go back to the 2/3 point back point system and leave well enough alone. NCAA wrestling is not going to gain basketball, football, golf, or chess fans by trying to mess up the sport in hopes of finding a way to appeal to people that don't like it and don't get it....rather, they'll alienate the existing fan base while not gaining anyone new.

 

I will watch college wrestling, but I have to admit...the four point rule makes it difficult.

 

BTW, a push out rule might be the death of college wrestling if it was ever put in place. Imagine guys training to be Sumo wrestlers and win matches by racking up push outs....no take downs, no back points, no moves - other than driving your opponent off the mat.

 

Stop changing the rules every year...you are only making it worse.

That's how Gilman won earlier today! Racked up them pushouts!

[spladle 179]

I am not a fan of the 4 pt nf. I will still watch wrestling, though it does dilute the sport when we artificially inflate scores.

[Cooch1 146]

I am not a fan of the 4 pt nf. I will still watch wrestling, though it does dilute the sport when we artificially inflate scores.

Agreed. Only increases the likelihood of a tech fault, not a pin, hence tech fault. Allow an option to continue after the TF is scored. Those who are for real to pin will accept the challenge; those who are inept will take the TF and sit down. 

[1032004 896]

4 PT NF makes it “easier” to get a tech, but it’s not really “easy.” I’d be curious to see if there were more TF’s at NCAA’s compared to before the change.

[WillieBoy 713]

Get rid of the Technical Fall.

If you can't pin the opponent you keep wrestling. Doesn't matter if the score is 44-5 - if you can't pin you keep wrestling.

 

Riding time point is fine but refs need to put a lot more emphasis on "work for a pin" and start nailing stalling on the guys who are content to ride and play rather than going for it.

 

A Pin in Wrestling is like a Knockout in Boxing. It is always there as long as there is time left in the match. Some of these 'point a minute' guys would be in trouble more often if they had to wrestle a full match. More would go for pins rather than tiring out over the full match if they knew the only way for a short match is to pin the opponent.

[russelscout 1,573]

I think we should go back to 1896 Olympic rules. No time limit and matches end when one guy gets thrown to his back. Waaay too many rules now!