Jump to content
cangemi

Changing college to freestyle

Recommended Posts

Just now, TobusRex said:

LOL...yeah, because to you the best part is the takedown, not the pin. Halfway there is good enough for some folks, though. 

You sound like someone that enjoyed the ball grab era of wrestling. 

Share this post


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

So you just dropped in to tell everyone they are stupid and now you're dipping out? C ya later.

I enjoy freestyle more than folk but it isn't going to change anytime soon. Like many others said neither style is perfect. 

Share this post


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

Actually, I just quickly broke it out and saw there were 1,006 matches with results from Kazakhstan. Of those, 144 were decisions that lacked points (VPO, aka shutouts).

What's the story behind those freestyle initialisms -- e.g., VPO? French language?

Edited by jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jon said:

What's behind those freestyle initialisms -- e.g., VPO? French language?

VPO: Victory by Points (0 points for opponent)
VPO1: Victory by Points (opponent scores)
VSU: Victory by technical superiority
VFA: Victory by fall
the 1 at the end signifies a technical point scored, which is use for classification points. A wrestler who gets beat 9-1 scores one classification point whereas a wrestler who gets beat 9-0 doesn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just my opinion here but I’ve watched freestyle and folk style both for as long as I can remember. While there’s refereeing controversy in folk style, I feel like I’ve seen it much more in freestyle. It feels like the ref has more opportunities to influence the outcome of freestyle matches as there is more subjectively in scoring criteria. I think everyone on this board can agree the last thing college wrestling needs is even more referee screw ups. That’s how you run off potential new fans and struggle growing the fan base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, goheels1812 said:

While there’s refereeing controversy in folk style, I feel like I’ve seen it much more in freestyle. It feels like the ref has more opportunities to influence the outcome of freestyle matches as there is more subjectively in scoring criteria.

Even as one who prefers freestyle, this is a real issue with the sport. Definitely true, and no easy solution. When you take away reaction time, you raise subjectivity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, JasonBryant said:

I'd encourage you to back up that statement by finding all the 1-0 matches from World Championships in 2019, specifically in freestyle (men's and women's). Greco is a different animal.

How many 1-0 matches were there at the World Championships? I know the answer. I want to know how many 1-0 stallfests you saw at this past Worlds to justify that position.

 

Maybe he means soccer (football)

Share this post


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

Mr. Bryant,

I would be interested to understand your view as to why "riding time sucks."  Thanks.

The concept of it, I'm fine with. What it means now, in execution, has become a painful point in our sport. How many matches in recent memory are 3-2 decided by 1:04 of riding time where it's grab ankle until a four count, drive opponent down to the mat, rinse, repeat. I think it sucks in its current format. I believe it should be kept and only scored if a viable nearfall attempt has been scored. We have stalling rules aimed at reducing "riding" yet we still have something called "riding time." I didn't grow up in wrestling from a young age. I discovered it in my teens after being an avid and rabid fan of all sports. It's one less nuance as well. When I went to the Virginia Duals and saw the second clock, it confused me. Without fail, I have to explain riding time to every single high school fan under the age of 50 who looks over to watch college wrestling. It's been my personal experience that it's another unnecessary nuance that slows matches down, creates controversial scenarios with ankle riding, added rules to combat it and ultimately, serves as what exactly? Some time of weird tiebreaker? With all the attacks on freestyle and its criteria, we decide a winner based on seconds of riding time when athletes go into the tiebreakers. I think the concept of riding time, perhaps in your era, was justified and provided some merit. I've only been around college wrestling approaching 25 years, so my scope of why I don't like riding time comes from this era.

Wrestling's got three positions, top, bottom and neutral. I think proficiency on top should be about turning and going for the fall, not hanging on and going for a point for hanging on for a minute. I don't subscribe to a theory that we should go freestyle, but I've just never liked riding time. I also don't subscribe to the theory that one style is wholly superior to the other. I like them both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, JasonBryant said:

The concept of it, I'm fine with. What it means now, in execution, has become a painful point in our sport. How many matches in recent memory are 3-2 decided by 1:04 of riding time where it's grab ankle until a four count, drive opponent down to the mat, rinse, repeat. I think it sucks in its current format. I believe it should be kept and only scored if a viable nearfall attempt has been scored. We have stalling rules aimed at reducing "riding" yet we still have something called "riding time." I didn't grow up in wrestling from a young age. I discovered it in my teens after being an avid and rabid fan of all sports. It's one less nuance as well. When I went to the Virginia Duals and saw the second clock, it confused me. Without fail, I have to explain riding time to every single high school fan under the age of 50 who looks over to watch college wrestling. It's been my personal experience that it's another unnecessary nuance that slows matches down, creates controversial scenarios with ankle riding, added rules to combat it and ultimately, serves as what exactly? Some time of weird tiebreaker? With all the attacks on freestyle and its criteria, we decide a winner based on seconds of riding time when athletes go into the tiebreakers. I think the concept of riding time, perhaps in your era, was justified and provided some merit. I've only been around college wrestling approaching 25 years, so my scope of why I don't like riding time comes from this era.

Wrestling's got three positions, top, bottom and neutral. I think proficiency on top should be about turning and going for the fall, not hanging on and going for a point for hanging on for a minute. I don't subscribe to a theory that we should go freestyle, but I've just never liked riding time. I also don't subscribe to the theory that one style is wholly superior to the other. I like them both.

i think this is generally true - i think there may be a happy medium between free (where you get one chance to get a turn before they put you on your feet) and folk (where you can sit on someone for 2:58 as long as you are making an effort to expose). too many other folk rules - like 2 and 4 second exposure requiring a different type of control than a gut or lace and the tiebreaker emphasis on the value of the escape point - argue against doing away with the skill of riding entirely. even the RT point itself has some merit.  but some kind of guidance for refs that balances it out - a determination that the guy on top can't turn and the guy on bottom is trapped - could be a return to neutral without awarding the escape point. 

since i just dashed this off, there wasn't a ton of thought behind it, but jason gave me something to think about so i thought about it a little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, D3UC157 said:

Not a complete overhaul...but...

 

If you could take any aspects of Freestyle and implement them in Folk what would you take?

 

What current aspects would you remove from Folk?

Just spit balling ideas but I’d take away the riding time point. As Jason mentioned before that’s the most confusing thing for non wrestling fans to understand. I had some buddies over a couple years ago during the NCAA championships and I swear I spent half the time trying to explain what a riding time point is and how if effects the outcome of the match. One of my buddies even said something along the lines of “so you get a point just for holding someone down for a minute?” 
 

I also would tinker with giving a step out point instead of a stall call for going out of bounds. Personally I’d rather see a guy like DeSanto get 1 point every time he runs a guy out of bounds instead of stalling the other wrestler out and ending the match. But on the flip side I do see how that could also turn some matches into sumo wrestling and make it boring. It’d be something you’d need to see how it affects the majority of wrestling before you make it a permanent rule. 

Share this post


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

I'd encourage you to back up that statement by finding all the 1-0 matches from World Championships in 2019, specifically in freestyle (men's and women's). Greco is a different animal.

Actually, I just quickly broke it out and saw there were 1,006 matches with results from Kazakhstan. Of those, 144 were decisions that lacked points (VPO, aka shutouts).

How many 1-0 matches were there at the World Championships? I know the answer. I want to know how many 1-0 stallfests you saw at this past Worlds to justify that position.

 

I didn't watch worlds this year and I foresee that happening with regularity in the future. The last FS match I watched I saw Sadulaev kindly help Snyder count the ceiling lights.  As I've stated in this thread multiple times, I consider FS half a sport, and obviously I'm not going to pore over the minutae of a sport I dislike. But in your own stats over 1/7th of the matches at Worlds had NO SCORES AT ALL. That pretty much says it all in my opinion: those guys are supposed to be the best FS wrestlers in the world, and between the two of them over 1/7th of the time NO POINTS ARE SCORED AT ALL?  I'd say "add a riding time point to break the tie", but since nobody bothered even getting a takedown. On the other hand, it's HARD to get a takedown when one stalls every period until only a second or two is left and then makes a halfhearted shot. Can't afford to let the other guy get a chance for a cheap go-around, after all. It's either that or 10-0 blowouts when guys lock in that stupid gator roll, or whatever they call it, and roll around on the mat like gradeschoolers. 

Edited by TobusRex

Share this post


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

But in your own stats over 1/7th of the matches at Worlds had NO SCORES AT ALL. That pretty much says it all in my opinion: those guys are supposed to be the best FS wrestlers in the world, and between the two of them over 1/7th of the time NO POINTS ARE SCORED AT ALL?  I'd say "add a riding time point to break the tie", but since nobody bothered even getting a takedown. On the other hand, it's HARD to get a takedown when one stalls every period until only a second or two is left and then makes a halfhearted shot. Can't afford to let the other guy get a chance for a cheap go-around, after all. It's either that or 10-0 blowouts when guys lock in that stupid gator roll, or whatever they call it, and roll around on the mat like gradeschoolers. 


Let me spell this out for you, so you don't misinterpret the stats again. Because instead of answering with any facts to back up a rationale, you merely deflected.

There were 144 matches that were decisions that ended in a shutout. Meaning they were the 4-0, 5-0 type of match, which are plenty common in folkstyle wrestling.
Of those 144 matches, NOT ONE SINGLE BOUT ENDED 1-0. Not one.

So you bemoaned freestyle and refused to watch because of the 1-0 stallfests, yet not a single 1-0 match happened over 1,000 matches at the World Championships.

Now to refute your other point, because "that" isn't the case, nor were the 10-0 blowouts.

FACTS, good sir.

DQ's by Caution: 3
Pins: 104
Forfeits: 3
Injury Defaults: 9
VPO (Decision where one wrestler doesn't score): 144
VPO1 (Decisions where both wrestlers score): 475
VSU0 (Tech falls that are of the 10-0 type): 174
VSU1 (Techs were both wrestlers score): 90

I get why people don't like freestyle, but why just make up things as a justification? What you've said isn't true. Prior to 2013, when the rules were sh*t, that's a different story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"but why just make up things as a justification? "

Always so confusing.
Just say, "I don't care for freestlye" 
I don't like pushouts.
I dont like matches ending with the scores tied.
I was a leg rider so I like watching leg riding. 
I like scrambles where people can expose their backs without the fear of giving up points. 

 (I always think of marijuana people who won't say "I like to get high" instead they say "It cures cancer"...but that's another topic)


Either way Freestyle, hell actually all sports, have taken steps to promote action and it's really paid off. I think over time we will see folk-style take similar steps to "promote action" and hopefully its like boiling a frog, and the old grumps who prefer all things boring won't have realized 4 years from now, one rule change per year has yielded a more viewer friendly and internationally adaptable style. 

#Cheers though, hopefully regardless of what happens, everyone here still enjoys keeping up with it. 

Edited by spladle08

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, spladle08 said:

For whatever reason people love pointing to terrible wrestlers getting laced without resistance, as if watching a bar-arm tilt happen 4x in a row is just the most exciting thing ever. It literally feels like they've watched one Freestyle match ever and that is what happened.
Eh well.

Have watched a lot of them and they are a takedown workshop at best. Then the "roll'em over" crap starts. A lot of these guys don't seem to be able to go a full match without a lung time out - often poorly disguised as a heart attack or maybe hearing a German BiPlane making a bomb run at the Arena.

Mat wrestling is basically non-existent and working for a pin seldom happens as they are usually not given enough time to do so. If they are on the mat more than 12 seconds...

Jason Bryant wrote: "Wrestling's got three positions, top, bottom and neutral. I think proficiency on top should be about turning and going for the fall, not hanging on and going for a point for hanging on for a minute."

He's right here and referees who won't call stalling are part of the problem. The idea of riding time works for me. I think Bryant with " I believe it should be kept and only scored if a viable nearfall attempt has been scored" is close to the mark. Just holding on happens too often and the top wrestler does not work for the pin while the bottom wrestler really doesn't work to escape or get a reversal. We need to make it more of a priority to go for the pin when one is on top and to get out/reverse if one is on the bottom.

Stalling calls need to be consistently enforced.

Edited by WillieBoy

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...