Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
OhioSpladle

Question about Smith's 92 olympic loss

Recommended Posts

I was looking up old results from the Olympics and I came across smiths weight in 92. As we all know he took a loss to the Cuban wrestler in his weight but still ended up winning gold. What i didn't know was that had come in the last round of the pool action. Smith had beaten the unified team wrestler like 15-1, and the Cuban had lost to the same wrestler 6-13 i think it said. I'm not familiar with the system back then, but did Smith know all he had to do was not get beaten by a certain margin and he would be in the finals?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, smith knew.

 

i don't recall all the particulars, but Smith (and everyone) knew the situation.

 

that being said, that Cuban was always a tough matchup for John, for whatever reason. I believe they split matches before that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was an A and B pool positive point system. First place in the pool puts you in the gold match, second in the bronze, third place in pool fights for fifth place. A single loss could place you first, second, or third in your pool depending on how the A vs B vs C matches worked out. Jim Scheer in 88 had a single loss but finished third in his pool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reinoso trained specifically to beat Smith's style--the coaching staff devoted a lot of time having his sparring partners emulate Smith's style.  He won five bouts, including the win over Smith, but Azizov (who only lost once) had his number.  Damn  great weight class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was an elementary p.e. teacher at the time.  While I coached at Deer Creek of Edmond, my P.E. Classes were chanting USA, USA, John Smith all the way!  Great memories.   What a great journey it was following John's competitive career...and then nothing really changed.  He was competing for Team Titles immediately, and we just got used to a constant level of challenging for a title.  He overlapped the Gable Era and the Sanderson Era.  Quite possibly the two greatest of all time when Cael retires.   This young gun from Oklahoma has raised the entire level of the state...for decades.    Now, he's somehow managed to put together another great recruiting run, and should make a decent push next season.  No one's ready to beat the Nittany Lyons, but along with Iowa, probably good enough that if PSU hiccups, it could get interesting.

One thing about it, both the Pokes and the Hawks have the mind set to actually "man-up" when challenging for a title.  I think OSU will put a potential AA on the mat at all 10 weights.  That's a damned good product no matter how you slice it.  I'm certainly not saying the stars will align and they will have that kind of finish, but who in that line-up is not a potential AA?  

Edited by Peso

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were two pools one of 11 and 1 of 10. You continued wrestling until you and lost twice. Bad points were given and at the end of the pool play the top one in each group wrestled for the gold, #2 in each group for the bronze & 3rd in each group for 5th.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a stupid process that was

 

It was a confusing system, but at least it was double-elimination, unlike today.  If you lost once, worst you could do was wrestle for 5th, and only if everyone in your final round robin went 1-1 against each other.

 

1996 actually saw a true bracket with double-elimination.  This is the best system I've ever seen FILA utilize.  Of course, they scrapped it.

 

2000 had the pod system, which created three and four wrestler pods from which only one wrestler would emerge from a round robin and be entered into a bracket at either the quarterfinals or semifinals.  (Slay defeated Saitiev in the pod, thus Saitiev was eliminated with no opportunity to place.)  Again, I'd much rather have the the 1992 system than the 2000 system given the extreme penalty of one loss.

 

Ultimately, I think we're going to be stuck with the current setup so long as UWW only cares about declaring a winner and spreading the medals around.  The new two-day format is only designed for promotion/TV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

two day format has nothing to do with TV/promotion at all...

 

http://olympicwrestlingnz.com/newsarticle/46457

 

The two-day competition format will undergo testing at the Cadet European Championships in July and the Cadet World Championships in September. If the tests are a success then the format will be effective on January 1, 2018. The two-day format requires athletes to weigh-in on the morning of their competition, with a two-kilo allowance for the second day. Wrestlers currently weigh-in the day before they compete and finish their wrestling in one day.

 

The two-day format will limit extreme weight loss and allow for improved promotion of the tournament finals.

Edited by Voice_of_the_Quakers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it was all about getting everyone to compete at a more natural weight... any promotion is just a kick back... not at all why it was done... had it been, weigh in procedures would not have changed...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next quote from this article from Lalovic.  Note what he lists before what:

 

“These improvements made are incredible for the sport of wrestling,” said United World Wrestling president Nenad Lalovic. “Our sport has never been stronger, and I believe that with the new categories and the improved competition format we will see continued growth in participation, support and viewership. I also believe these new rules will also encourage healthier wrestlers.”

 

Money and TV make the Olympics, and Olympic sports, go around.  If we also have healthier wrestlers, so be it.

Edited by Voice_of_the_Quakers

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  

×