Jump to content


Photo

States using different weight classes than NFHS


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 SetonHallPirate

SetonHallPirate

    Hall of Fame Member

  • Members
  • 10,748 posts

Posted 25 July 2018 - 12:34 PM

I've found two so far...Michigan uses the old NFHS weights (103-112-119-125-130-135-140-145-152-160-171-189-215-285), and Montana has just 13 weights (103-113-120-126-132-138-145-152-160-170-182-205-285). Anybody else aware of other states that use different weight classes? (I'm not looking for states that add weight classes to the normal 14, such as the NYSPHSAA uses a 99-pound weight class in addition to the normal 14, although feel free to mention them here.


Building a better Pirate...construction in process.

 

Editor-in-Chief, WrestlingByPirate

Website/Blog: http://wrestlingbypirate.wordpress.com

Twitter: @wrestlingbypir8

Building a smarter wrestling fan


#2 Husker_Du

Husker_Du

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 8,524 posts

Posted 25 July 2018 - 01:34 PM

Idaho has 98lbs.

 

that's the only other 'oddity' i can think of at the moment.


Edited by Husker_Du, 25 July 2018 - 01:35 PM.

  • SetonHallPirate likes this

#3 BobDole

BobDole

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 2,765 posts

Posted 26 July 2018 - 02:21 AM

Doesn't New York have a 98 or 100lbs weight class?



#4 SetonHallPirate

SetonHallPirate

    Hall of Fame Member

  • Members
  • 10,748 posts

Posted 26 July 2018 - 03:15 AM

Doesn't New York have a 98 or 100lbs weight class?

The 99-pound weight class I mentioned.


Building a better Pirate...construction in process.

 

Editor-in-Chief, WrestlingByPirate

Website/Blog: http://wrestlingbypirate.wordpress.com

Twitter: @wrestlingbypir8

Building a smarter wrestling fan


#5 davenowa

davenowa
  • Members
  • 51 posts

Posted 26 July 2018 - 06:55 AM

just as some divisions within some states with predominantly smaller enrollments are opting for 7 on 7 (or 8-man) football, it might be beneficial for a reduced number of weight classes (such as 11) to be offered in certain states (or within small-school enrollments, in states that separate based on enrollment).  While it could improve dual-meet competition and reduce forfeits, unsynchronized weights could cause issues when individual state tourneys roll around (or at in-season invites).  Have advocated fewer weight classes before (11, but allowing a 12th scorer at tournaments), but saw limited support (108, 116, 124, 132, 140, 148, 158, 170, 188, 212 and 285).  

 

http://board.themat....-jan-10-week-2/


  • Eagle26 likes this

#6 Eagle26

Eagle26

    Bronze Member

  • Members
  • 662 posts

Posted 28 July 2018 - 09:25 AM

I've heard talk that PIAA is thinking about using their own weight classes and dropping to 12 weights. That may be why the OP asked. I am in favor of eliminating a weight class or two, but if every weight is different from other states, wouldn't that make it quite difficult for out of state competition?

#7 SetonHallPirate

SetonHallPirate

    Hall of Fame Member

  • Members
  • 10,748 posts

Posted 28 July 2018 - 10:07 AM

I've heard talk that PIAA is thinking about using their own weight classes and dropping to 12 weights. That may be why the OP asked. I am in favor of eliminating a weight class or two, but if every weight is different from other states, wouldn't that make it quite difficult for out of state competition?

I actually asked because I happened to see Montana's weights, and totally had been unaware of it. As to the second part, like you said, it would certainly make out-of-state competition difficult...just ask anybody who coaches in Michigan (although the MHSAA makes things difficult for their teams to go out of states in a multitude of other ways as well).


Building a better Pirate...construction in process.

 

Editor-in-Chief, WrestlingByPirate

Website/Blog: http://wrestlingbypirate.wordpress.com

Twitter: @wrestlingbypir8

Building a smarter wrestling fan


#8 Eagle26

Eagle26

    Bronze Member

  • Members
  • 662 posts

Posted 29 July 2018 - 07:09 AM

I actually asked because I happened to see Montana's weights, and totally had been unaware of it. As to the second part, like you said, it would certainly make out-of-state competition difficult...just ask anybody who coaches in Michigan (although the MHSAA makes things difficult for their teams to go out of states in a multitude of other ways as well).


Gotcha. Now that you mention it, I really like Montanas weights. It has a slightly lower starting weight which I think is good because some kids are too small for 106. Plus it gets rid of a weight up top which has been watered down quite a bit since they redid the weights.

#9 cbg

cbg

    Bronze Member

  • Members
  • 859 posts

Posted 31 July 2018 - 04:11 AM

I've heard talk that PIAA is thinking about using their own weight classes and dropping to 12 weights. That may be why the OP asked. I am in favor of eliminating a weight class or two, but if every weight is different from other states, wouldn't that make it quite difficult for out of state competition?

 

IMO it would be best for the sport if wrestling returned to 12 weight classifications.  With many of the current weight classes being so close together you have kids going both up and down trying to avoid various opponents.  I would love to see a rule that kids must compete in 50% of their matches that they will wrestle in the weight they enter the state tournament series.  The 12 weight classes would be as follows:  110. 118, 126, 134, 142, 150, 158, 166, 175, 190, 215 & Unlimited.  Wrestling has eliminated the opportunity for the truly large football players 6'4" & 300+ linemen by placing a 285 weight limit.  Let's go back to the old school way and see if things don't get better.


Edited by cbg, 31 July 2018 - 04:12 AM.


#10 BobDole

BobDole

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 2,765 posts

Posted 31 July 2018 - 04:26 AM

IMO it would be best for the sport if wrestling returned to 12 weight classifications.  With many of the current weight classes being so close together you have kids going both up and down trying to avoid various opponents.  I would love to see a rule that kids must compete in 50% of their matches that they will wrestle in the weight they enter the state tournament series.  The 12 weight classes would be as follows:  110. 118, 126, 134, 142, 150, 158, 166, 175, 190, 215 & Unlimited.  Wrestling has eliminated the opportunity for the truly large football players 6'4" & 300+ linemen by placing a 285 weight limit.  Let's go back to the old school way and see if things don't get better.

Two points

1. An 18 year old kid that weighs 300lbs is unhealthy, even one that is near 285 is on track for diabetes before 25.

2. The 50% rule doesn't exactly fit in well with the weight loss management and descent plans that are in place. 



#11 cbg

cbg

    Bronze Member

  • Members
  • 859 posts

Posted 31 July 2018 - 04:40 AM

Two points

1. An 18 year old kid that weighs 300lbs is unhealthy, even one that is near 285 is on track for diabetes before 25.

2. The 50% rule doesn't exactly fit in well with the weight loss management and descent plans that are in place. 

 

Is the kid that is 5'10" and 285 healthy?  You have eliminated the opportunity for kids that are going to play D1 football to wrestle because they are not going to cut weight.  Their meal ticket is in football but they could sure help their high school wrestling team if given the opportunity.



#12 gimpeltf

gimpeltf

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 5,509 posts

Posted 31 July 2018 - 05:07 AM

And when it was unlimited, do you remember a bazillion 285+ football players wrestling? One of the reasons for 215/220 was to try to lure more players of that size out. I don't see that it did much.

Also, If your concern is locking out a class of large kids, 110/118 locks out a group of small ones. And they don't really have another sport to do.



#13 BobDole

BobDole

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 2,765 posts

Posted 31 July 2018 - 05:45 AM

Is the kid that is 5'10" and 285 healthy?  You have eliminated the opportunity for kids that are going to play D1 football to wrestle because they are not going to cut weight.  Their meal ticket is in football but they could sure help their high school wrestling team if given the opportunity.

You tell that kid that he doesn't have any limit to his weight and he'll be 350....

 

You seem overly concerned with D1 football players wrestling. How many guys are we truly leaving out with having this limit?



#14 Lurker

Lurker

    Bronze Member

  • Members
  • 618 posts

Posted 31 July 2018 - 06:30 AM

I've heard talk that PIAA is thinking about using their own weight classes and dropping to 12 weights. That may be why the OP asked. I am in favor of eliminating a weight class or two, but if every weight is different from other states, wouldn't that make it quite difficult for out of state competition?


Not really. If you’re traveling out of state, it’s on your schedule well enough in advance to plan accordingly, you just conform to the weights of that state for that particular event.

#15 gimpeltf

gimpeltf

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 5,509 posts

Posted 31 July 2018 - 07:01 AM

Not really. If you’re traveling out of state, it’s on your schedule well enough in advance to plan accordingly, you just conform to the weights of that state for that particular event.

 

There may be more to it than that. When teams traveled between NJ and NY in the past when NY had a 215 vs 220 and I think possibly also the lowest weight class (other than the under 100 class). One of those states prohibited their kids from competing at the other weights. Rules are unclear about going up or down a weight in these cases. 220 is different than 215 and is a higher weight class even if you weigh in at your normal weight. It seemed dumb but ...

Multiply that if Pa goes 12 and the rest of the nation goes 13 or stays 14. I don't think it would affect Pa going elsewhere since they concern themselves more with weight rather than weight classes but other states coming in to compete might have issues.


Edited by gimpeltf, 31 July 2018 - 07:07 AM.


#16 Show_Me

Show_Me

    Bronze Member

  • Members
  • 738 posts

Posted 03 August 2018 - 10:12 AM

Gotcha. Now that you mention it, I really like Montanas weights. It has a slightly lower starting weight which I think is good because some kids are too small for 106. Plus it gets rid of a weight up top which has been watered down quite a bit since they redid the weights.


Agree. I would like to see entire country go with Montana's weight classifications.

#17 RichB

RichB

    Bronze Member

  • Members
  • 672 posts

Posted 07 August 2018 - 10:33 AM

I would like to see both 92 and 99 pound weights added, but I would like to see all 9th graders up with the JV-Varsity [Jr-Hi being renamed as Middle School]  92-99 would not be weights competed in Varsity Duals, or in the State Tournaments [unless sub 9th graders are part of the State individual tournament, like NY].  92-99 would, of course, be part of JV Duals, JV tournaments. 92-99 could also be part of in season individual tournaments, either as point scorers or exhibitions. 

 

30-45 years ago I often attended Pa "Christmas Tournaments" with an 88 or later 91 class, usually exhibition. 



#18 RichB

RichB

    Bronze Member

  • Members
  • 672 posts

Posted 07 August 2018 - 10:52 AM

The idea of fewer weight classes for smaller schools, like 6,8,9 man for football.

 

How about, with the present 14 classes [106,113, .... , 220, 285]  require any team to field the even classes [113, 126, 138, 152, 170, 195,  285.  Teams would be allowed to "opt out", i.e. avoid a forfeit penalty under certain restrictions. For example, in a state with 3 classes, an AAA school could declare "we cannot field a 106 pounder," their opponent might declare no 220 pounder,  so there would be 12 "contested" bouts.  [a team may still fft a second waight, say 113, or 285, or even another odd weight, like 120 or 182].

 

AA teams may opt out of 2 weight classes, and A teams might opt out of 3 classes. So, possibly a dual between two very small schools with fairly weak programs might end up with only 8 bouts.      


Edited by RichB, 08 August 2018 - 01:43 AM.


#19 BobDole

BobDole

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 2,765 posts

Posted 07 August 2018 - 10:58 AM

The idea of fewer weight classes for smaller schools, like 6,8,9 man for football.

 

How about, with the present 14 classes [106,113, .... , 220, 285]  require any team to field the even classes [113, 126, 138, 152, 170, 195,  285.  Teams would be allowed to "opt out", i.e. avoid a forfeit penalty under certain restrictions. For example, in a state with 3 classes, an AAA school could declare "we cannot field a 106 pounder," their opponent might declare no 220 pounder,  so there would be 12 "contested" bouts.  [a team may still fft a second waight, say 113, or 285, or even another odd weight, like 120 or 182].

 

AA teams may opt out of 2 weight classes, and A teams might opt out of 3 classes. So, possibly a dual between two very small schools with fairly week programs might end up with only 8 bouts.      

Coaches will find huge loopholes in your plan. If we our opponent has a stud at an "opt-out" weight, I can just not weigh a kid in and force him up without penalty. That would create havoc and not good for the sport.

 

Having different weight classes for each "division" is also a huge issue as many times teams compete with others from the other divisions. Thus you'd have kids pulling extra weight for events just so they can be varsity when they will be varsity for a different event. On top of that it creates issues for common fans who won't know why there are different weights at every meet.



#20 RichB

RichB

    Bronze Member

  • Members
  • 672 posts

Posted 08 August 2018 - 01:42 AM

Bob Dole.

 

Choosing the weight to opt out would obviously not be a night of weigh in process. It would be either for an entire season, or maybe you could revise [or end] your opt out weight[s] once during the season.

 

The following might be suggestions for those who want totally different weight class structures.

AAA  or the National Federation standard =============14 classes = 106-113-120-126-132-138-145-152-160-170-182-195-220-285

AA or the standard of states wanting fewer classes ===== 12 classes =  108-115-122-128-135-141-148-156-168-180-200-285 

Obviously this is very chaotic. And it still might not solve the "too many forfeits" problem.

 

For Example, a small school coach just cant find anyone whose certification weight is under 118. With 14 weights he has 12 wrestlers and 2 ffts, With 12 weights he still has 2 ffts. Under the opt out plan, he would declare, "we cannot field a 106 pounder, likely for the entire year unless someone moves in."  He still must surrender six points at 113, but does not begin each dual down twelve. And if he goes up against a large school with a large roster he still fields 12 guys at their better weights. 

 

The opt out system is the answer to your second paragraph problem, no one changes weight classes just because they go against schools in a different classification.

 

No perfect solution exists, but as long as there are small schools, or too many disinterested/discouraged kids, we must choose the least bad. 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users