Jump to content
Ragu

New York to get rid of 99lb weight class

Recommended Posts

My son wrestles 88 Cadet (16U). My son wrestled 88 at the USAW Cadet Duals last week in Spokane, as well as a number of other really talented cadets; Cadet (16U) weight classes include 88, 94, and 100 pounds. It's not like these kids chose to be small or cut more weight than any of the other wrestlers, they just have small parents. In my experience, most of the wrestlers that compete against my son have mothers and/or sisters who are cheerleaders/gymnasts; likewise, my wife was a talented gymnast and cheerleader. Why make particularly talented, athletic, and hard-working wrestlers (e.g., like my son) miss out on opportunities to represent their schools/states because they are small?

Cutting out the bottom weight classes encourages holdbacks. I also saw some comments in this thread downing holdbacks, but what would you expect to happen when you cut the lower weight classes out of the lineup? Are the affected smaller wrestlers supposed to no longer take their sport seriously? In regards to keeping the lower grades out of the lower HS weight classes, just limit HS to 4 years.

The popularity/numbers argument would kill girls' wrestling altogether.  It's only tangentially related, but it strikes me as odd that the sport is so eager to open the door for an extreme minority of gals to the wrestling room, while simultaneously ousting a longstanding group of smaller guys that have been here since day one.

I created an account just to throw my 2 cents in on this thread. Thank you for taking the time to read and consider my thoughts. Please keep in mind that my comments are only meant to remind everyone that lightweight wrestlers are severely impacted by elimination of lower weight classes. Turning a longstanding group of wrestlers away is not promoting the sport.

Edited by McycleRider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2019 at 9:18 PM, Ray Brinzer said:

This is like having a three-year-old come show you their crayon drawing, and going, "Jesus, this is terrible!"  Yeah, no kidding.  Congratulations for noticing, you clever art critic, you.

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with saying middle school wrestling is garbage.

There are a lot of good middle school aged wrestlers.  But from what I’ve seen they mostly just train at their clubs and rarely if at all with their actual middle school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2019 at 8:56 PM, 1032004 said:

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with saying middle school wrestling is garbage.

There are a lot of good middle school aged wrestlers.  But from what I’ve seen they mostly just train at their clubs and rarely if at all with their actual middle school.

I'm going to lay out my perspective on this.  Naturally, no one else needs to accept it, but I think it has a lot of utility.

When I was a kid (this would be around 3rd and 4th grade), I used to look at the wall charts to see who was in my weight.  I developed a good sense of who everyone was, and could tell how tough my weight was.  I would go down the chart, and think, "He's good.  He sucks.  He's okay.  He's really good; if I make it to the semis, I'll probably have him.  He's okay..."

After a few years, I found myself going down charts and thinking, "He sucks.  He sucks.  He sucks.  He sucks..."  At a certain point, I realized:  "These guys don't all suck.  I think I've gotten good."

Most people start off with a fixed frame of reference.  The people who become sufficiently good at something tend to grow beyond it.

"Garbage" is a pejorative term.  It's like "lard-ass".  Now, you can define your terms however you like, but if you call someone "lard-ass" and don't expect him to be offended, you're pretty foolish.  Saying, "Well, look, it's not my fault... here's what the term means, and here's how it applies to you" is either disingenuous or clueless.

Likewise, the average middle school wrestler is average.  If you want to say "garbage" covers that, you can, but I don't think it's a good idea.

The gap between the best middle school wrestlers and the average ones is indeed large.  As we get better at the sport, that gap will inevitably get larger.  That's not a good reason to term the average ones (or even the beginners) "garbage".

Likewise, the gap between good college wrestlers and the best middle school wrestlers is large... and should be, else what have the college wrestlers been doing with their time?  That's not a good reason to term the best middle school wrestlers "garbage" either.

If a good coach takes an average wrestler and works with him for awhile, he becomes a good wrestler.  How do you describe this?  "Well, you were garbage before, but now you're not?"  Again, you can define your terms however you like, but not all definitions are equally useful.  Talking like this isn't productive.

Regarding most wrestlers at any given level with scorn is, in my view, stupid... and that's what this amounts to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/18/2019 at 3:38 PM, TobusRex said:

Jeez, 99 pounds for a HS kid? That's nuts. I was wrestling 97 pounds in 6th grade, lol. Then to see most of the HS "champs" at 99 pounds were 7th and 8th graders. Yeah, 99 pounds needs to go. So does 101 pounds, for that matter.

I was a freshman 98 lb in 1989. I was a bit behind my peers growth-wise, so didn't  have to really cut weight for it, maybe a pound or two here and there. Crazy thing was, that year my area was filled with a bunch of upper classmen 98's. My very first varsity match was against a man with chest hair, an afro and a mustache - a real mustache, mind you, not one of those cheesy kid mustaches. I was done before I even stepped on the mat.

Anyway I digress. Back in those days there were enough numbers to populate the 98 lb class and even 91. I'm not sure the numbers are there anymore to justify this class based on the number of forfeits I see in the box scores. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Ray Brinzer said:

I'm going to lay out my perspective on this.  Naturally, no one else needs to accept it, but I think it has a lot of utility.

When I was a kid (this would be around 3rd and 4th grade), I used to look at the wall charts to see who was in my weight.  I developed a good sense of who everyone was, and could tell how tough my weight was.  I would go down the chart, and think, "He's good.  He sucks.  He's okay.  He's really good; if I make it to the semis, I'll probably have him.  He's okay..."

After a few years, I found myself going down charts and thinking, "He sucks.  He sucks.  He sucks.  He sucks..."  At a certain point, I realized:  "These guys don't all suck.  I think I've gotten good."

Most people start off with a fixed frame of reference.  The people who become sufficiently good at something tend to grow beyond it.

"Garbage" is a pejorative term.  It's like "lard-ass".  Now, you can define your terms however you like, but if you call someone "lard-ass" and don't expect him to be offended, you're pretty foolish.  Saying, "Well, look, it's not my fault... here's what the term means, and here's how it applies to you" is either disingenuous or clueless.

Likewise, the average middle school wrestler is average.  If you want to say "garbage" covers that, you can, but I don't think it's a good idea.

The gap between the best middle school wrestlers and the average ones is indeed large.  As we get better at the sport, that gap will inevitably get larger.  That's not a good reason to term the average ones (or even the beginners) "garbage".

Likewise, the gap between good college wrestlers and the best middle school wrestlers is large... and should be, else what have the college wrestlers been doing with their time?  That's not a good reason to term the best middle school wrestlers "garbage" either.

If a good coach takes an average wrestler and works with him for awhile, he becomes a good wrestler.  How do you describe this?  "Well, you were garbage before, but now you're not?"  Again, you can define your terms however you like, but not all definitions are equally useful.  Talking like this isn't productive.

Regarding most wrestlers at any given level with scorn is, in my view, stupid... and that's what this amounts to.

OK I get it, we must think of the children.

How about if we say most middle school coaching is garbage?  I wonder how many middle school coaches actually have wrestling experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

OK I get it, we must think of the children.

Oh, hey, a line of sarcasm.  When you have nothing useful to say, might as well not tax your brain trying to pretend otherwise.

Yes, you have to think of the children.  Because to most high-level wrestlers, your average high school state champ looks like a child fumbling around with some favorite toys.  I guess how you regard that depends on how you think of children.

48 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

How about if we say most middle school coaching is garbage?  I wonder how many middle school coaches actually have wrestling experience.

I'm all for having highly experienced coaches at the lower levels.  Why don't you arrange that?

Meanwhile, a coach with no experience is better than no coach.  Granted, there are too many closed-minded blockheads, who think they know a lot more than they do.  But you know what?  That's pretty common amongst coaches with wrestling experience, too.

Funny thing is, you have a conversation with a Gable, or a Kolat, or a Zadick, and they'll listen and think about different ideas.  You talk to Joe I. Madeittostates, and he thinks the whole thing is really obvious, and he's on top of it.  And one expression of this pig-headed self-assurance will be telling you who the garbage is.

Share this post


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

Oh, hey, a line of sarcasm.  When you have nothing useful to say, might as well not tax your brain trying to pretend otherwise.

Yes, you have to think of the children.  Because to most high-level wrestlers, your average high school state champ looks like a child fumbling around with some favorite toys.  I guess how you regard that depends on how you think of children.

I'm all for having highly experienced coaches at the lower levels.  Why don't you arrange that?

Meanwhile, a coach with no experience is better than no coach.  Granted, there are too many closed-minded blockheads, who think they know a lot more than they do.  But you know what?  That's pretty common amongst coaches with wrestling experience, too.

Funny thing is, you have a conversation with a Gable, or a Kolat, or a Zadick, and they'll listen and think about different ideas.  You talk to Joe I. Madeittostates, and he thinks the whole thing is really obvious, and he's on top of it.  And one expression of this pig-headed self-assurance will be telling you who the garbage is.

Well as I said earlier, there are a lot of good middle school aged wrestlers, so I don't think I'm downplaying the skills that kids at that age can have.  It's just that the best kids seem to mostly be wrestling for club teams at that age, and not their local middle school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Well as I said earlier, there are a lot of good middle school aged wrestlers, so I don't think I'm downplaying the skills that kids at that age can have.  It's just that the best kids seem to mostly be wrestling for club teams at that age, and not their local middle school. 

I find nothing to object to in this, except that it doesn't address what I said, or the point of the conversation.

Sure, middle school wrestlers can learn and do lots of interesting things.  And they should.  Clubs can be great.  More competence, both from wrestlers and coaches, is desirable.  All quite solid points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Ray Brinzer said:

I find nothing to object to in this, except that it doesn't address what I said, or the point of the conversation.

Sure, middle school wrestlers can learn and do lots of interesting things.  And they should.  Clubs can be great.  More competence, both from wrestlers and coaches, is desirable.  All quite solid points.

I think it did.   You're saying it depends on your frame of reference.  My frame of reference was kids of that age.   Those wrestling for their local middle school are not very good compared to the kids spending more time on the club circuit.   If you're problem is with the term "garbage," OK then I'll stick with "not very good."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

If you're problem is with the term "garbage," OK then I'll stick with "not very good."

Mostly, yes.  I see no good in throwing around expressions of contempt, except where people earn them.

The kid who can't get off the bottom because he's weak and has poor balance is not very good.  The father who screams at him for two minutes after the match is garbage.

Edited by Ray Brinzer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New forum member here, I apologize for replying to such an old thread but this is a subject near and dear to my heart.

I was a small, scrawny, kind of lost HS freshman on Long Island way back in 1961. Bullied. An older neighborhood kid was a wrestler and took pity, encouraged me to go out for the team.

I could have stepped on the scale in full uniform including shoes (and I believe I did!) and made 95 ( I think that was the lowest weight then). Wrestled 95 again as a sophomore, 103 as a junior, 112 as a senior. Was successful, had an identity, had teammates around to watch my back,  no longer bullied.

Wound up wrestling in college, Division 2 then Big Ten, 115 as a freshman, 123 as a sophomore, 132 as a junior and senior. Wrestled tournaments around the country for 10 years, coached HS for over 25 years. I'm a small, thin, fit old dude now! :-)

Wrestling became one of the most important things in my life and literally changed my life. I don't think that would have happened unless there was a place where I could fit in.

 

Edited by fightingsioux
correction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/30/2019 at 3:10 PM, fightingsioux said:

New forum member here, I apologize for replying to such an old thread but this is a subject near and dear to my heart.

I was a small, scrawny, kind of lost HS freshman on Long Island way back in 1961. Bullied. An older neighborhood kid was a wrestler and took pity, encouraged me to go out for the team.

I could have stepped on the scale in full uniform including shoes (and I believe I did!) and made 95 ( I think that was the lowest weight then). Wrestled 95 again as a sophomore, 103 as a junior, 112 as a senior. Was successful, had an identity, had teammates around to watch my back,  no longer bullied.

Wound up wrestling in college, Division 2 then Big Ten, 115 as a freshman, 123 as a sophomore, 132 as a junior and senior. Wrestled tournaments around the country for 10 years, coached HS for over 25 years. I'm a small, thin, fit old dude now! :-)

Wrestling became one of the most important things in my life and literally changed my life. I don't think that would have happened unless there was a place where I could fit in.

 

Your post actually got my looking into how long the NY 91# weight class lasted and I came up with 1976-1996

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sublime607 said:

Your post actually got my looking into how long the NY 91# weight class lasted and I came up with 1976-1996

I was a HS wrestler from 1961-1962 season until 1964-1965 season. Is my rusty old memory correct that the lowest weight class was 95?

Share this post


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

I was a HS wrestler from 1961-1962 season until 1964-1965 season. Is my rusty old memory correct that the lowest weight class was 95?

Yes back then it was 95. Just was curious about the 91# class thought it was around a lot longer.

Edited by Sublime607

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Sublime607 said:

Yes back then it was 95. Just was curious about the 91# class thought it was around a lot longer.

I was so small and scrawny and young (a 13 year-old freshman) that I could have made 91# with no trouble. But even to me that seems very low for high school, would lead to a lot of double forfeits.

Edit: I think I could have made 91 with shorts and a t-shirt on. If I would have had to stand on a scale naked, well...I was so emotionally and physically immature that I would not have done it! :-)

Edited by fightingsioux
content

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, fightingsioux said:

I was so small and scrawny and young (a 13 year-old freshman) that I could have made 91# with no trouble. But even to me that seems very low for high school, would lead to a lot of double forfeits.

Edit: I think I could have made 91 with shorts and a t-shirt on. If I would have had to stand on a scale naked, well...I was so emotionally and physically immature that I would not have done it! :-)

I was 88 pounds as 8th grader so I know the struggle. even bumped up to 103 when needed.

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

×