Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
cornercoach

What would this rule change do ......

Recommended Posts

https://therudis.com/rudis-wrestling-podcast-episode-18-penn-state-arizona-state/

I agree with Ben Askren here. Willie Saylor, Ben addresses an exact match/scenario where you guys on FRL were discussing how the scoring was unfair.

 

 

I disagree with you LBJ. I think your system is a weaker system than what we have in place now. I believe your system devalues mat wrestling. I do not believe the current system devalues neutral wrestling.

I do value wrestling from neutral, just not as much as you do. I value mat wrestling more than you do as well.

I wont insult you by saying you dont value mat wrestling like you insulted me by saying i don't value wrestling from your feet.

I enjoy seeing guys get turns. I enjoy seeing pin falls. I watched RBY the other day score 9 takedowns against NCState, but not able to score any nearfall points. That bothered me. It probably didn't bother you.

I prefer Folkstyle over Freestyle.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, GoNotQuietly said:

Why is this true?

Also, I honestly do not understand rewarding an 'escape' from an inferior position into a neutral position, nor do I understand incentivizing holding a position which has already been achieved without advancing that position.  If you wrestle a beast on top, your reward for getting off bottom is NOT BEING ON BOTTOM.  Being down there is maybe the closest thing to legal torture we have when you've got someone like Zain on ya.  If you want to score on bottom, you can achieve a superior position with a reversal, or achieve a neutral position and then achieve a superior position via a takedown.

If your are on top, your reward for being on top is BEING ON TOP.  Its a thousand times easier than being in a neutral or inferior position, and you don't need a superfluous point to keep you clinging on there.  If you want to score on top, either commit to an attack for a nearfall or pin, which are both heavily rewarded already, or take the risk of surrendering your superior position and proving that you can regain it when they have an equal opportunity.

NO RIDING TIME POINT

NO ESCAPE POINT

because currently if he dont not ride his opponent he gives up a point. 

If that point was no longer awarded he would be less likely to work for nearfall and just go for another takedown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, LJB said:

objectivity is removed because you don't have to determine if someone is cutting them or if they are escaping... it doesn't matter... the dominant action is being rewarded... and you all can still keep your precious "not willing to ride" gifted point...

right now, being dominant on top is being over rewarded and it still has not made a significant impact on who is dominant on top and who isn't... you either are or you are not... 

right now, being dominant on your feet is being penalized, yet, some are still willing to take your "catch and release" style and run with it...

you think because it is so easy to take someone down... clearly think that if the point values were changed to reward action properly, that wrestlers would not get better defensively on their feet to prevent themselves from being in the hole they should if the dominant action was properly rewarded... or even that they would not try to get better offensively to properly reward their activity... you don't value wrestling on the feet...  

whatever... that's your prerogative...

i just think it is silly to penalize one aspect of wrestling and over reward another when it clearly isn't working either way...

i think the dirty little secret that no one wants to admit is that kids like wrestling from their feet... it is fun... it allows for creativity... it is exciting... and for the most part mat wrestling is not... meatheads can gain some ground on you... and anyone can be a meathead with a little hard work...

but again, whatever...

 

One of the things that makes Spencer Lee so impressive is his ability to score point on top in bulk. If anyone can be a meathead and score from top why aren't we seeing more nf points than takedowns? nf points are more difficult that takedowns. it doesnt mean takedowns are easy. It just means literally takedowns are more common and take place more often than nearfall points.

Takedowns are more fun than nearfalls because they're easier to achieve. They happen more frequently than nearfalls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BigTenFanboy said:

One of the things that makes Spencer Lee so impressive is his ability to score point on top in bulk. If anyone can be a meathead and score from top why aren't we seeing more nf points than takedowns? nf points are more difficult that takedowns. it doesnt mean takedowns are easy. It just means literally takedowns are more common and take place more often than nearfall points.

Takedowns are more fun than nearfalls because they're easier to achieve. They happen more frequently than nearfalls.

i think that takedowns are more fun because it actually lends itself to creativity... you can let your personality and atheleticism show...

and if they are so easy to get, then why aren't all matches just takedown fests?

if they are so easy to get then surely both wrestlers should be able to get them easily, right?

funny... it just never happens like that, huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LJB said:

i think that takedowns are more fun because it actually lends itself to creativity... you can let your personality and atheleticism show...

and if they are so easy to get, then why aren't all matches just takedown fests?

if they are so easy to get then surely both wrestlers should be able to get them easily, right?

funny... it just never happens like that, huh?

There are plenty of matches where both wrestlers score takedowns on each other. Funny do you not watch a lot of wrestling or something?

And again. I never said takedowns were easy to get. I said theyre easier to get than Nearfall points.

Edited by BigTenFanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BigTenFanboy said:

There are plenty of matches where both wrestlers score takedowns on each other. Funny do you not watch a lot of wrestling or something?

And again. I never said takedowns were easy to get. I said theyre easier to get than Nearfall points.

but not takedown fests where they just trade takedowns one after the other... which is weird because they are so easy to get...

and ask yourself, why are near falls so much harder to get?

and are they really?

can you actually show some data that supports that?

i have no idea to be honest... my assumption is that it is easier to get "not willing to ride" point and so most focus on that and pick bottom to hopefully win by one...

which, by your logic should not be rewarded because it is easier to get, right?

i would hazard to guess most matches are won by an escape, lack thereof, and/or ride time...

not there is some exciting wrestling...

i really wish they would all just recognize how easy it is to get a takedown and do that instead...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, LJB said:

but not takedown fests where they just trade takedowns one after the other... which is weird because they are so easy to get...

and ask yourself, why are near falls so much harder to get?

and are they really?

can you actually show some data that supports that?

i have no idea to be honest... my assumption is that it is easier to get "not willing to ride" point and so most focus on that and pick bottom to hopefully win by one...

which, by your logic should not be rewarded because it is easier to get, right?

i would hazard to guess most matches are won by an escape, lack thereof, and/or ride time...

not there is some exciting wrestling...

i really wish they would all just recognize how easy it is to get a takedown and do that instead...

I will repeat myself of the umpteenth time. I never said a takedown was easy to get. I said it was easier to get than NF points.

If that wasnt the case why were RBY's 20 points the other night from 9 takedowns and no nf points?

Why would a wrestler go to the catch and release strategy if they could just as easily (remember in your logic they're equally difficult) score MORE points from top?

I guess you think wrestlers like making things more difficult for themselves.

Spencer Lee is known for jumping out to 12 point leads in the first period. Why dont more wrestlers do that instead of playing catch and release?

Why?

because catch and release is easier than turning a guy. Again "easier than" turning a guy, not easy. 

 

And yes, guys will try to win a match by 1 escape (or as you named it "not will to ride" point) when the score is 0-0 or very close. Its a strategy, that like catch and release works but has its flaws. You know why they use this strategy? Because its easier to get a "not willing to wrestle from top point" than it is to get a reversal or takedown.

Edited by BigTenFanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here is the forest...

now right over there is the tree...

we shouldn't reward dominant action of a takedown because it is easier to get than near fall...

we should reward "not willing to hold down" points even though they are easier to get than takedowns...

now where does the stall-time point fall into this?

is it harder or easier to get the "not willing to ride" point or secure a minute of "riding" to get the stall-ride point?

im pretty sure we should get rid of whichever one of them is easier to achieve because obviously that means they are of less value and are just ruining wrestling...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LJB said:

here is the forest...

now right over there is the tree...

we shouldn't reward dominant action of a takedown because it is easier to get than near fall...

we should reward "not willing to hold down" points even though they are easier to get than takedowns...

now where does the stall-time point fall into this?

is it harder or easier to get the "not willing to ride" point or secure a minute of "riding" to get the stall-ride point?

im pretty sure we should get rid of whichever one of them is easier to achieve because obviously that means they are of less value and are just ruining wrestling...

 

With a takedown you are rewarded. It's called 2 points. Near falls are generally more difficult to attain which is why they're 4 points for 4 seconds. If wrestling did not reward for takedowns they would be worth zero. Bringing a guy down to the mat is considered a less dominant single action than it is to put someone on their back. Putting someone on their back is a more dominant action than bringing them down to the mat.

A "not willing to hold down point is rewarded with 1 point. Why because it's easier to get than a takedown" a takedown is a more dominant action than a "not willing to hold down point." Hence why it's worth double!

Stall points and penalty points are a punishment, not a reward. 

 

Ok enough snark. You like freestyle more. I get it. I prefer folkstyle. If you think that makes you a superior person than me then good for you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

Legit question, FanBoy....not shade.

when did you start watching wrestling? 

1992 wherever I could find it ofcourse

I followed you in high school too. You and Chris Kelly.

I remember the Easton Wrestling tuxedo pic as well.

If I remember correctly you had frosted tips right?

My first time watching wrestling on tv was the 1988 Seoul Olympic games.

Edited by BigTenFanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to side with BTFB in this discussion.  I like that guys like AJ Schopp and Ethan Lizak can prosper in this sport even if they will never be great international style wrestlers.

 

To me, it’s like mma fans that criticize Askren.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, BigTenFanboy said:

Ok enough snark. You like freestyle more. I get it. I prefer folkstyle. If you think that makes you a superior person than me then good for you. 

You clearly get too emotional for this and your lack of any sense of humor means you failed to get any of the clever references, so, it’s not even much fun...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Husker_Du said:

BTFB - can you agree that what passes as 'activity' on top in college has DEVOLVED in recent years? 

Honestly I dont think it's all that different from the early 2000s. If you go back earlier into the 90s I would say guys certainly got turned more, but at the same time I think wrestling was a bit sloppier then as well. I think what we're seeing today is guys are more technically and positionally sound than ever before and it basically cancels a lot of action out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, BigTenFanboy said:

Honestly I dont think it's all that different from the early 2000s. If you go back earlier into the 90s I would say guys certainly got turned more, but at the same time I think wrestling was a bit sloppier then as well. I think what we're seeing today is guys are more technically and positionally sound than ever before and it basically cancels a lot of action out.

yeah and that will cycle into more innovation and the action will go up. Unless we make a bunch of stupid rules. How about 5 point superducks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, WF89 said:

I have to side with BTFB in this discussion.  I like that guys like AJ Schopp and Ethan Lizak can prosper in this sport even if they will never be great international style wrestlers.

 

To me, it’s like mma fans that criticize Askren.

 

I don’t see how properly rewarding action on the feet would negatively affect someone who is better on top and can score more points with out being penalized

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, hammerlockthree said:

I like the way you skipped the whole discussion by inserting the word "properly" as if that wasn't the issue. 

Uuuhhhhh... I haven’t skipped anything... the “not willing to ride” point penalizes wrestlers who excel on the feet... if they were properly rewarded for dominating their opponent it still would not negatively affect wrestlers who are dominating on top

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LJB said:

Uuuhhhhh... I haven’t skipped anything... the “not willing to ride” point penalizes wrestlers who excel on the feet... if they were properly rewarded for dominating their opponent it still would not negatively affect wrestlers who are dominating on top

It rewards wrestling up off the mat from bottom. Clearly you dont value that.

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  

×