Jump to content
Marcus Cisero

Should College Wrestling Adopt Cumulative Dual Scoring?

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Zebra said:

Simple is always better. The more complex things are the fewer people want to be involved. 

I have not really thought this through but what about 1 point for a win and a bonus point for a pin? The breaker most pins then total match points scored. If both criteria are the identical then it's a tie. 

 

 

 

 

I agree - simple is better

I disagree - 1 point per match seems soccerish to me.....and I hate soccer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we should stop trying to reinvent wrestling and instead switch from folkstyle to freestyle and get on board with the rest of the world.

It's not a popular move, but the world keeps getting smaller and the future of isolationism is too limiting.

Big picture - let's get on board with freestyle. Then, we focus on trying to make freestyle better.

Folkstyle scoring tweaks each year... seems like we're rearranging deck chairs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

I think we should stop trying to reinvent wrestling and instead switch from folkstyle to freestyle and get on board with the rest of the world.

It's not a popular move, but the world keeps getting smaller and the future of isolationism is too limiting.

Big picture - let's get on board with freestyle. Then, we focus on trying to make freestyle better.

Folkstyle scoring tweaks each year... seems like we're rearranging deck chairs.

No. Big time no. See the million other threads on this very subject. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Idaho said:

I agree - simple is better

I disagree - 1 point per match seems soccerish to me.....and I hate soccer. 

2 / 4 or 3 / 6. It doesn't really matter it ends up the same. The score is arbitrary anyway. 

 

Soccer sucks for a lot of reasons that have nothing to do with goals only being worth 1 point. 

Edited by Zebra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes I wonder if I'm the only person who likes duals in part because it makes otherwise uninteresting matches interesting because guys who are mismatched are suddenly in a battle to get/avoid bonus points or to get/avoid a pin. It adds pressure and importance to matches that would otherwise be a boring blowout. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here was my idea:

Every year someone comes up with a proposal to create a more relevant scoring system for wrestling.

The most common one is to give each wrestler’s team the number of points that he scores in the match.  In other words, an 8-1 decision would give the winning wrestler’s team 8 points and the loser’s team 1 point.

The problem with that system becomes how do account for a pin without having to create a convoluted system of bonus awards.

I think I have the solution:

·         The winning wrestler’s team gets the differential between his score and his opponent’s.  So, in the 8-1 scenario, the winner’s team gets 7 points.

·         If the differential gets to 15, the match stops as a tech fall.

·         To address the pin situation, here’s what I would suggest:

o   3rd period fall – 16 points

o   2nd period fall - 17 points

o   1st period fall – 18 points

o   DQ’s for something not bad (something off the penalty chart leading to DQ) same as pin

o   DQ’s for something bad like flagrant misconduct – 20 points.

o   Forfeits could be 19 so as to encourage teams to actually put a wrestler on the mat. 

·         This system allows for the weakest wrestler on the team to make a significant contribution to the team effort. A wrestler who gets pinned in the first period has contributed to his team because a forfeit would have given the opposing team one point more. 

·         This system could be adapted to tournaments by

o   Eliminating advancement points

o   Adding an “inverse bonus” for each place.  In a tournament that awards 8 places:

§  1st – 8 points

§  2nd – 7

§  3rd – 6 and so on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2019 at 9:28 AM, bill_crum said:

Here was my idea:

Every year someone comes up with a proposal to create a more relevant scoring system for wrestling.

The most common one is to give each wrestler’s team the number of points that he scores in the match.  In other words, an 8-1 decision would give the winning wrestler’s team 8 points and the loser’s team 1 point.

The problem with that system becomes how do account for a pin without having to create a convoluted system of bonus awards.

I think I have the solution:

·         The winning wrestler’s team gets the differential between his score and his opponent’s.  So, in the 8-1 scenario, the winner’s team gets 7 points.

·         If the differential gets to 15, the match stops as a tech fall.

·         To address the pin situation, here’s what I would suggest:

o   3rd period fall – 16 points

o   2nd period fall - 17 points

o   1st period fall – 18 points

o   DQ’s for something not bad (something off the penalty chart leading to DQ) same as pin

o   DQ’s for something bad like flagrant misconduct – 20 points.

o   Forfeits could be 19 so as to encourage teams to actually put a wrestler on the mat. 

·         This system allows for the weakest wrestler on the team to make a significant contribution to the team effort. A wrestler who gets pinned in the first period has contributed to his team because a forfeit would have given the opposing team one point more. 

·         This system could be adapted to tournaments by

o   Eliminating advancement points

o   Adding an “inverse bonus” for each place.  In a tournament that awards 8 places:

§  1st – 8 points

§  2nd – 7

§  3rd – 6 and so on

Hi Bill

Back in 2011 when Dake and Taylor were in college, Dake as champion scored  2 , 2 ,1 , 1, 16 = 22 team points. Taylor as runnerup to Bubba Jenkins scored 2, 2.5, 1, 1, 12 = 18.5.  http://www.wrestlingstats.com/ncaa/pdf/brackets/NCAA2011.pdf

The bout differential system  w/places 8, 7, 6,....1  would have Dake 9, 8, 3, 4 ,7, 8 = 39 and Taylor 11, 15, 3, 6, 7 = 42.

What's worse is a round of 12 loser w/ 3 pins would get 16, 16, Lose Qtrf. 16, Lose R12= 48.

No one is able to solve the exponential huge gap problem that all bout score/ differential score systems rely on. The exponential increase quickly eats up a lot of  decisions, e.g. 16 +16 = 2+3+4+5+8+10. Team Balance suffers along with all the coaching and recruiting, academics, the hard work on and off the mat that it takes to produce a balanced team effort. This is what it seems everybody is missing. The team score has to take into account what you don't see, as well as what you do, otherwise it's highway robbery,

by the powerful few.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the traditionalists value the 3-4-5-6 dual scoring, and the progressives want to encourage more action and reward points scored and margin of victory, whereas a 9-2 win has more value to your team than a 1-0 match, I again offer...the decimal.  No change to tech falls or pins, but all other decisions earn between 3 pts and 4.4 points, with a base win worth 3 points PLUS YOUR MARGIN OF VICTORY.  Simply, 1-0 or 8-7 is 3.1 points.  If you win by 5 points, you get 3.5.  A margin of 12 would mean 4.2. (additional examples not provided for other margins, but available upon request).  The max would be 4.4 for a 14 point difference.  Every match point scored (or allowed) would therefore have value.  Virtually all dual meet ties would be eliminated, as a current 17-17 tie would likely be 17.4 to 16.7 or so.  As a final note, I would make any overtime win worth only the base of 3 points (no additional margin of victory points...and even an OT pin would still only net 3 team points, as OT implies virtual equality).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/15/2019 at 8:19 PM, AKHUNTER said:

It's hard to pin and takes a lot of work. 

If you don't believe me......ask Wade Schalles......... or Nolf or Nikal for that matter.

Nolf and Nickal probably disagree with you here so I wouldn't ask them. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Duals are awesome and the scoring system for duals is equally great. There is nothing better then attending a dual meet that comes down to two wrestlers that will not qualify for the tournament but have a chance to win a dual by wrestling hard for 7 minutes. It is the ultimate when trying to create a good team/community atmosphere. It proves that you don't have to be great in this sport but can still be a relevant factor for your team/school. The scoring keeps the great wrestler and then less then stellar wrestler about as close as possible when it comes to winning a match. This makes for more interesting duals which is what drives wrestling. Not as much at the NCAA level but at the levels where most wrestlers begin and decide if they want to stick with the sport.

If you want to keep fan base or accrue a new fan base then don't change the current system to widen the gap and reward a higher scoring wrestler. We do that at the end of the year when it is more about the individual themselves and less about the team. Widening the gap in scoring decreases the chances of a well balanced team winning over a team with 4 studs. If you don't believe me look at who wins nationals almost every year.

The problem with wrestling isn't the scoring system because it isn't fair or that people don't understand it. It is the product itself displayed by those who take the mat. There are only two people who can decide to make someone wrestle once they step on the mat, the wrestler themselves and the man in black and white stripped shirt.

I also think that the scoring system at nationals is great and I don't care if I can score it by myself even those sports that you can score yourself you don't because they have a scoreboard (genius invention). The reason that non wrestling fans and some wrestling fans don't know how to score nationals is because they don't know where to find the scoring system online. That isn't there fault. It should be readily available on every wrestling website on the internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2019 at 1:01 AM, JasonBryant said:

Of the 18,000 fans who attend each session at D1, I’d say less than 100 can score the NCAA tournament by hand or even know how. nothing says growth like clinging to scoring systems that can’t even be scored by the majority of its fans, let alone understood by the drive-by sports fan

This is very true.  As somebody who follows wrestling as much as anyone I couldn't score the NCAA tournament by hand because I don't know the advancement point numbers unless I look them up and I really don't feel like keeping track of them.  It really is a sport where even the most die hard fans don't bother trying to figure out how to score the thing by hand.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2019 at 1:01 AM, JasonBryant said:

Of the 18,000 fans who attend each session at D1, I’d say less than 100 can score the NCAA tournament by hand or even know how. nothing says growth like clinging to scoring systems that can’t even be scored by the majority of its fans, let alone understood by the drive-by sports fan

I had good job security that way for twenty years!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a concept that I thought would work well for Free or Greco duals, but it actually impacts the rules of the match (not ideal) - but I think it would be a great format for fans.

  • Winner of the match is determined by the first wrestler to 10 points or win by fall.
  • The team receives the exact number of points that wrestler earned unless there was a fall.
  • A fall is scored 10-0 for the winning wrestler regardless of the score at the point of the fall.
  • Unlimited overtime until one wrestler achieves 10 points or the fall. No criteria.

The first to 10 isn't a new concept, I just like how it could work for dual scoring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ching said:

I have a concept that I thought would work well for Free or Greco duals, but it actually impacts the rules of the match (not ideal) - but I think it would be a great format for fans.

  • Winner of the match is determined by the first wrestler to 10 points or win by fall.
  • The team receives the exact number of points that wrestler earned unless there was a fall.
  • A fall is scored 10-0 for the winning wrestler regardless of the score at the point of the fall.
  • Unlimited overtime until one wrestler achieves 10 points or the fall. No criteria.

The first to 10 isn't a new concept, I just like how it could work for dual scoring.

Two wrestlers of unequal ability would work good. But two equal would be risky. We now see matches going into o.t. tied at 3-3. Unlimited o.t would put a lot of people ill at ease unless the ref stepped in and called stalling with extreme severity to get the 10th point. And once again, a couple big wins can put a powerful minority ahead of a balanced majority. Tomorrow's Headline: Worst Beats Best!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Cooch1 said:

Tomorrow's Headline: Worst Beats Best! 

 

Depends on your point of view. If winning most matches is the best indicator of the best team, you could use UWW style model, 100 points for a win + 0-10 for bonus points. 6 wins could never lose to 4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In sports, winning team competitions is not about which team is more well rounded.  If you have 9 of your guys winning one point margins, and one of your guys loses by fall, thats the breaks.  In football, you can score 3 safetys, not let your opponent get anywhere near the endzone, and their QB throws a bomb and their stud receiver goes up and gets it over 3 defenders, than you lose.  In baseball, you can get to 3rd 14 times and have your pitcher throwing a no no until the bottom of the 9th and it takes one guy to step up and overcome all of your dominance from the previous 8 1/2 innings.  This to me, would add a ton of excitement and buzz, not take away.

 

As a competitor, with the current scoring, my only goal was to get the W.  Bonus points took a back seat.  There comes a point in a match where it is very clear whether or not you have a chance to pin, a chance to tech, or a chance to major.  That is almost always in the 1st period or somewhere at the beginning of the 2nd.  Once you know there is a less than good chance you can win by more than 7, you go into risk mitigation.  As a coach and athlete, you can train to become very, very good at this.  Thats the name of the game.  As a fan, it sucks to watch.  I can tell almost instantly when a guy figures this out in a point in the match.  After that, its pretty boring to watch.  Guys like Nickal, Nolf, Askren, Taylor, changing the scoring would not effect them.  However, think about guys like Joe Williams, Trirtsis, Joe Dubuque, or Dustin Fox.  Yes, they won NCAAs but were painfully boring to watch.  They would get one scoring sequence and thats a wrap.  As a fan, if I am going to invest 45 minutes of my life watching just your matches at the NCAAs, I would like rules that incentivize you to score more than 10 points in 6 matches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/19/2019 at 1:09 PM, davenowa said:

if the traditionalists value the 3-4-5-6 dual scoring, and the progressives want to encourage more action and reward points scored and margin of victory, whereas a 9-2 win has more value to your team than a 1-0 match, I again offer...the decimal.  No change to tech falls or pins, but all other decisions earn between 3 pts and 4.4 points, with a base win worth 3 points PLUS YOUR MARGIN OF VICTORY.  Simply, 1-0 or 8-7 is 3.1 points.  If you win by 5 points, you get 3.5.  A margin of 12 would mean 4.2. (additional examples not provided for other margins, but available upon request).  The max would be 4.4 for a 14 point difference.  Every match point scored (or allowed) would therefore have value.  Virtually all dual meet ties would be eliminated, as a current 17-17 tie would likely be 17.4 to 16.7 or so.  As a final note, I would make any overtime win worth only the base of 3 points (no additional margin of victory points...and even an OT pin would still only net 3 team points, as OT implies virtual equality).

Essentially, this is a 31/60 ratio and seems about the same as the 3-4-5-6 system we now use. The range- without the decimal -would be extremely long: 31-32-33-34-35-36-37-38-39-40-41-42-43-44-50 tech-60 pin. But It has a hidden dimension; accumulation from every match point scored  favors balance even better than official.   

  Example: 6,6,6,3 officially beats six decisions, 3,3,3,3,3,3 = 21-18. But watch what happens when you have 6,6,6, 3.1 = 21.1  vs  3.3, 3.5, 3.5, 3.6, 3.6, 3.7 = 21.2. 

Balance has more of a fighting chance, because of the extra weight of the decimals, but only from more big decisions. This means high scoring w/large margins would be encouraged rather than hanging on to a ride and low score. Also the ratio weight of the top half to bottom half is lighter than official.

6+5/4+3 = 11/7=1.57 and      40+41+42+43+44+50 + 60  31+32+33+34+35+36+37+38= 320/276 = 1.30. The closer to 1:1 the better team balance will succeed. But the scoreboard would have to be able to handle 3 places.

Unfortunately, the PDM people want the raw score transferred. What you have is better but more complex ; plus like PDM there's an incentive to score big decisions rather than ride, unless you're confident of pinning or tech. Best idea so far as killing two birds with one change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2019 at 10:09 AM, buckshot1969 said:

So a team wins eight matches by two points each but loses a MD and TF and loses the dual?

Makes sense.

Wouldn't this be sort of like football where one team could score 3 times (3 touchdowns) and the other team could score 7 times (6 field goals plus 1 safety) and the team with just 3 scores is the close 21-20 winner? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, rpm002 said:

Wouldn't this be sort of like football where one team could score 3 times (3 touchdowns) and the other team could score 7 times (6 field goals plus 1 safety) and the team with just 3 scores is the close 21-20 winner? 

No

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, olddirty said:

I would like rules that incentivize you to score more than 10 points in 6 matches.

This is the problem in general. Does the scoring system incentivize action or is it the skill level and motivation to win, i.e. is  the scoring the cause of abilty or the result of ability?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Cooch1 said:

This is the problem in general. Does the scoring system incentivize action or is it the skill level and motivation to win, i.e. is  the scoring the cause of abilty or the result of ability?

Scoring trends are dictated by the rules.  If a tech was 4 points, you would see guys going like gangbusters.  When a major is 8 and you are close, no one wll take a risk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, olddirty said:

Scoring trends are dictated by the rules.  If a tech was 4 points, you would see guys going like gangbusters.  When a major is 8 and you are close, no one wll take a risk

.????

Depends...If there's plenty of time left a guy with a potential major on the board, say 8-1, is going to take risk to get to bonus or a pin. Happens a lot. His coach will kick his ass if he sits on it with a ride or stalls around on his feet. If a tech was 4 team points it wouldn't make any difference with a 15 point margin. If you're talking 4 bout points margin it would'nt make it into the rule book. The rule book dictates common sense. The paying public would be going home after half an hour and the wrestlers would hardly need a shower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/22/2019 at 8:17 AM, Cooch1 said:

.????

Depends...If there's plenty of time left a guy with a potential major on the board, say 8-1, is going to take risk to get to bonus or a pin. Happens a lot. His coach will kick his ass if he sits on it with a ride or stalls around on his feet. If a tech was 4 team points it wouldn't make any difference with a 15 point margin. If you're talking 4 bout points margin it would'nt make it into the rule book. The rule book dictates common sense. The paying public would be going home after half an hour and the wrestlers would hardly need a shower.

I meant 4 points ahead gets you a techfall.  A score of 4 or even 6 ahead of your opponent would virtually guarantee every guy that had an advantage would go full blast to get it.  Would that make a better match?  No, but the more attainable something is for the better wrestler, the more aggressively he will go after it.  If I know I have to take a huge risk in the 3rd period to get 7 points more against a guy I can just handfight against and the extra 6 points I would get would do nothing for the scoreboard, Im just going to lay back and look busy.

Edited by olddirty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, olddirty said:

I meant 4 points ahead gets you a techfall.  A score of 4 or even 6 ahead of your opponent would virtually guarantee every guy that had an advantage would go full blast to get it.  Would that make a better match?  No, but the more attainable something is for the better wrestler, the more aggressively he will go after it.  If I know I have to take a huge risk in the 3rd period to get 7 points more against a guy I can just handfight against and the extra 6 points I would get would do nothing for the scoreboard, Im just going to lay back and look busy.

I see. Sort of like fencing, all out and touche. Or beating out a bunt to first base. But, like fencing, the match can't be over after one successful round. Gotta keep going for the conditioning factor. How about 6 all out, sudden death, 1 minute rounds, first to score a takedown, but continuation like F-S with immediate danger? 10-9... boxing system per round. 10-8 w/NF. 10-7 by Pin. No score = ref decides round. Tie breaker= 7th ot round, winner takes all. Stall call automatically loses any round.

One thing I noticed about NCAA's final round. All those people up close to the raised mat with stands packed. Lots of suspense......then it happens. The ref blows the whistle...... two cats on a fence looking at the clock waiting for the end of the period/match to make a move. Let's face it. Most bouts are decided on one or two big moves then coast until the end trying to fake out the ref with circling and half shots. 

If sudden bursts are what it's all about, then maybe it would be better to break up the bout into a lot of short rounds. Go with the natural flo.

Just think, no more A] coin-flipping-and-baby-sitting the referee's position, start, stop...caution.....hand signal...repeat B] No more Zzzzriding time and clocks and extra personal C] Mostly up-and-at-em, like other sports, no image problem w/on-the-mat groveling and grinding, stalling, faking pin holds, D] easy to understand, E] big moves from the feet and action encouraged in spurts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...