Jump to content
1032004

Folkstyle Rule Change Proposal: Step Out/Shot Clock Combo

Recommended Posts

Kinda mentioned this in a different thread but figured I’d start a new one...

I don’t really watch a ton of freestyle but in watching last night’s matches, I like how the shot clock forces guys to not wait until the last 20 seconds of a period to shoot.  However, I don’t like that it often seems aritrary as to who it’s called on.

I know people have also been calling for a stepout rule in folkstyle (and there have been many complaints about the revised out of bounds automatic stalling calls).  So what if instead of a point for a stepout, it puts the other guy on the shot clock?  I feel like that would ease the concern of matches just “turning into sumo,” but would also encourage more action (both to not step out and then when on the shot clock if you do), and wouldn’t be as drastic of a change as adding a shot clock for “regular” stalling.

I feel like the most difficult part would probably be another clock for the ref/table to need to monitor.

Thoughts?

Edited by 1032004

Share this post


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

Are you imagining every step out results in a shot clock or perhaps would there be a warning like there is in freestyle?

Not sure...probably every stepout results in a shot clock.  Not sure how it would work if you go out during the shot clock though, I guess then I’d have to say if the same guy steps out again, then that’s a point, and maybe if the other guy steps out then that’s a shot clock for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No thank you 

not a fan of the shot clock, so-so on potential step out

 

To me, step out removes edge takedowns, shot clock add to stall tactics

 

folkstyle rules about the edge are well made, the issue is the inconsistent execution of the stall call by the referees. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Folkstyle very badly needs a clear step out penalty. it's done wonders for both freestyle AND greco. it would not turn folkstyle into freestyle, or into sumo, or into anything else, it would just make folkstyle better. 

I don't think folkstyle needs an activity clock. It should switch to criteria, instead of OT, which another rule change that improves all styles. 

I will lay done my life in defense of both the step out and criteria. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/28/2020 at 2:53 PM, GockeS said:

we already have freestyle

I don't think this makes it like freestyle.  The biggest difference between free/folk IMO is the exposure rules/par terre.   I feel like wrestling on your feet is already pretty similar between free/folk anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jaroslav Hasek said:

Folkstyle very badly needs a clear step out penalty. it's done wonders for both freestyle AND greco. it would not turn folkstyle into freestyle, or into sumo, or into anything else, it would just make folkstyle better. 

I don't think folkstyle needs an activity clock. It should switch to criteria, instead of OT, which another rule change that improves all styles. 

I will lay done my life in defense of both the step out and criteria. 

I think I could give or take criteria.   One argument I saw from Saturday was that it can definitely be confusing for people that aren't that familiar with the rules.  But then again a lot of the rules are confusing anyway...

I never really thought of wanting an activity clock until trying to think of an alternative solution for a stepout rule.  But I think it would also help the issue of a lot of high level college matches not having a ton of action for the first 2 minutes and 30 seconds of the first period because it seems a lot of guys wait until the end of the period so that they can try to get a takedown + rideout since they don't want to give up the escape point.

Of course the other option could be 3 point takedowns...

Share this post


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

I think I could give or take criteria.   One argument I saw from Saturday was that it can definitely be confusing for people that aren't that familiar with the rules.  But then again a lot of the rules are confusing anyway...

I never really thought of wanting an activity clock until trying to think of an alternative solution for a stepout rule.  But I think it would also help the issue of a lot of high level college matches not having a ton of action for the first 2 minutes and 30 seconds of the first period because it seems a lot of guys wait until the end of the period so that they can try to get a takedown + rideout since they don't want to give up the escape point.

Of course the other option could be 3 point takedowns...

Unfamiliarity is definitely a big hurdle to clear for criteria. I believe it is worth the adjustment but that's easy for me to say since I've long since come around to idea. 

I would simplify criteria and make it first to score and that its. then underline or highlight that persons score and you're done. easy to understand for the wrestlers, coaches and fans. 

I also hear a lot of 'ending a match in a tie score is stupid' complaints, and do that I would say make the first scoring move worth 0.5 points more than usual, then someone will always have at least 0.5 points more than the other wrestler, but people think that idea is stupid to. 

I just want to incentivize scoring at the end of the matcha and decrease stalling. scoring aesthetics and familiarity are secondary concerns. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Jaroslav Hasek said:

Unfamiliarity is definitely a big hurdle to clear for criteria. I believe it is worth the adjustment but that's easy for me to say since I've long since come around to idea. 

I would simplify criteria and make it first to score and that its. then underline or highlight that persons score and you're done. easy to understand for the wrestlers, coaches and fans. 

I also hear a lot of 'ending a match in a tie score is stupid' complaints, and do that I would say make the first scoring move worth 0.5 points more than usual, then someone will always have at least 0.5 points more than the other wrestler, but people think that idea is stupid to. 

I just want to incentivize scoring at the end of the matcha and decrease stalling. scoring aesthetics and familiarity are secondary concerns. 

I don't hate these.   Making the first to score the criteria would  likely solve the issue I mentioned of people often being overly cautious at the beginning of the first period.   Although if the criteria is first to score, how does that "incentivize scoring at the end of the match"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1032004 said:

I don't hate these.   Making the first to score the criteria would  likely solve the issue I mentioned of people often being overly cautious at the beginning of the first period.   Although if the criteria is first to score, how does that "incentivize scoring at the end of the match"?

in close bouts, if someone is losing close to the end of regulation, they are incentivized to go for broke. makes things more exciting. if there score is tied but there is a potential overtime period (or worse, multiple overtime periods), then both wrestlers are incentivized to wrestle cautiously, so as not to give up the match winning points in short time. 

criteria works because it eradicates ties, which are the enemy of action. 

Edited by Jaroslav Hasek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Jaroslav Hasek said:

Unfamiliarity is definitely a big hurdle to clear for criteria. I believe it is worth the adjustment but that's easy for me to say since I've long since come around to idea. 

I would simplify criteria and make it first to score and that its. then underline or highlight that persons score and you're done. easy to understand for the wrestlers, coaches and fans. 

I also hear a lot of 'ending a match in a tie score is stupid' complaints, and do that I would say make the first scoring move worth 0.5 points more than usual, then someone will always have at least 0.5 points more than the other wrestler, but people think that idea is stupid to. 

I just want to incentivize scoring at the end of the match and decrease stalling. scoring aesthetics and familiarity are secondary concerns. 

I like the concept of first to score being the tiebreaker rather than last to score. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will always be stalling when someone is protecting a lead.  I think the hope with a tiebreaker is stalling protecting a tie to hope to start wrestling for real in OT, or worse continued stalling trying to win in the ride outs 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Jim L said:

There will always be stalling when someone is protecting a lead.  I think the hope with a tiebreaker is stalling protecting a tie to hope to start wrestling for real in OT, or worse continued stalling trying to win in the ride outs 

The point is, they tried it and didn't like it and changed. The first score was only for a short time as compared to last score.

Share this post


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

Been there, done that. It was that way some years back. People stalled out.

I don't recall that experiment. Was this a FILA/UWW rule and do you know the dates it was put in place? 

Edit: not challenging that it happened or that they didn't like the results, just curious and would like to see how those matches went. thanks in advance for any additional details you can provide. 

Edited by Jaroslav Hasek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Jaroslav Hasek said:

in close bouts, if someone is losing close to the end of regulation, they are incentivized to go for broke. makes things more exciting. if there score is tied but there is a potential overtime period (or worse, multiple overtime periods), then both wrestlers are incentivized to wrestle cautiously, so as not to give up the match winning points in short time. 

criteria works because it eradicates ties, which are the enemy of action. 

Got it, makes sense.   Although again I probably like it more for hopefully incentivizing scoring in the first period.   Honestly I'm not as concerned with stalling at the end of tie matches.   Even if the end of a 3rd period tied match can be boring, overtime is usually exciting (except for HS heavyweights).   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Jaroslav Hasek said:

I don't recall that experiment. Was this a FILA/UWW rule and do you know the dates it was put in place? 

Edit: not challenging that it happened or that they didn't like the results, just curious and would like to see how those matches went. thanks in advance for any additional details you can provide. 

FILA yes. can't recall when. Many years ago. Offhand, it seems like it happened twice over the decades. Maybe late 90s? And before that? And maybe both times were only a year or so before they realized what happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, GockeS said:

the guy with criteria is still going to stall

the guy with the lead you mean. and yes, while it is unfortunate when anyone stalls during a wrestling match, only one guy doing it is preferable to both guys stalling. 

Also worth keeping in mind that both the NCAA and UWW have rules in place to penalize wrestlers for trying to sit on a lead and run out the clock. You can get dinged for passivity in UWW rulesets, as Ganzorig famously did in Rio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem with the folkstyle stepout:

In international wrestling, all neutral exchanges ultimately begin at the center of the mat.  In folkstyle, an escape can be achieved on the boundary.  That would place the escaping wrestler at a horrible disadvantage where he is just shot off the mat, negating the escape point. 

I can think of some solutions, but I certainly would not favor a stoppage whenever an escape is achieved to return the athletes to center.

Maybe a push out shouldn't be in play until the wrestling returns to the 10 foot circle, but most college mats don't have a 10 foot circle.  Plus it would be even more for the over-burdened referee to keep track of.  Plus I wouldn't want to tell an administrator questioning the value of a wrestling program that they need new mats.

Why do high school mats currently require a 10 foot circle, anyway?

Share this post


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

Shot clock is arbitrary which has no business in folkstyle wrestling.

The current push out is working with a guaranteed stall call.

The oldest sport in the world and we still cannot figure out how to do it.

I don’t believe the current push out rule is working.  It seems to be one of the most argued calls, and that’s with the highest level refs calling it.

What part of the shot clock is arbitrary?  Who the passivity gets called on?  If so I agree, and that’s why my proposal was to start the shot clock on the stepout instead.

Edited by 1032004

Share this post


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

I don’t believe the current push out rule is working.  It seems to be one of the most argued calls, and that’s with the highest level refs calling it.

What part of the shot clock is arbitrary?  Who the passivity gets called on?  If so I agree, and that’s why my proposal was to start the shot clock on the stepout instead.

A problem of definition with a step out type of rule in folkstyle (especially college) comes from current out of bounds rules. In college, nobody is out until everybody is completely out. So it's actually the second guy going out that causes an out of bounds call. Obviously, you don't want to penalize him. But suppose one guy goes one foot out and then yanks the other guy around and out and then the first guy steps out. That's why currently you might see it called wrestling out. You might need to change the ob criteria from your feet to mirror freestyle and keep it when on the mat or in the process of a td.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about these:

If you are let go from international start (intentionally),  it is 0 escape for you,  however...if you as the one released scores the next point (it can be on a stall,  illegal hold, anything...)  you get that escape of 1 added to whatever you just scored.

Also for college,  how about if you are over 1 minutes of riding time and higher but have nearfall rewarded,  you get an extra point?  So RT at 1 min is 1...but if you are over that with nearfall you can score additional?  Or maybe reset RT each period and if you have 1 minute over you score a point at end of each period?   

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...