Does the shot clock work?

[CoachWrestling 436]

The intention of the shot clock is to encourage the person on the clock to take a risk to score. It feels like 90% of the time no one scores and a wrestler earns a passivity point. It doesn't seem to do its intended purpose. Thoughts?

[Plasmodium 2,312]

Better than awarding a point.  I like the rules, apart for the laces.

[Perry 1,429]

It depends on the situation. A lot of the time when someone is hit early the risk of overextending and giving up 2 or more isn't worth it. Would he an interesting study to see how many attempts were made on the shot clock in period 1 vs period 2. I imagine it is a big higher on the latter but I could be way off base there.

[Jimmy Cinnabon 411]

I don't understand how it is decided who gets put on the clock.  Every time I watch a match the US wrestlers gets put on the clock even if both wrestlers are doing the same thing.  Has a US wrestler ever had their opponent put on the clock first?

[Crash 217]

I don't understand how it is decided who gets put on the clock.  Every time I watch a match the US wrestlers gets put on the clock even if both wrestlers are doing the same thing.  Has a US wrestler ever had their opponent put on the clock first?

Yes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GoNotQuietly 1,175]

I think the only thing which needs to change is first score wins on criteria rather than last score. Encourage action from the jump


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AnklePicker 649]

1 minute ago, GoNotQuietly said:

I think the only thing which needs to change is first score wins on criteria rather than last score. Encourage action from the jump


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No way!  Wrestlers will get a lead and shut down. The shot clock point does work because it eliminates the possible of overtime. The only thing that sucks about it is the subjectivity it lies in the hands of the refs. 

[Gantry 1,872]

Yep, like the rule - lets people choose their own destiny.  Infinity times better than a ref randomly awarding a passivity point.  Sometimes they don't go for it but that's on them and after that someone is always losing.

There's no perfect answer for a match where nobody is trying to score, this is the best solution I can think of.

Edited August 5, 2021 by Gantry

[LJB 2,093]

forced par terre in greco is more appealing to me...

the first shot clock point in free is almost incidental...

free still has too much bouncing around the outside trying to look busy, but, that is the nature of the beast i suppose...

[GockeS 549]

i agree with forced par terre. just no point.

if you aren't going to work on feet, then you have to defend

the bouncing around might be b/c of the push out. and the dropping to knees to avoid wrestling on the edge

[Lurker 2,049]

2 hours ago, Jimmy Cinnabon said:

I don't understand how it is decided who gets put on the clock.  Every time I watch a match the US wrestlers gets put on the clock even if both wrestlers are doing the same thing.  Has a US wrestler ever had their opponent put on the clock first?

You're looking at it through a US folkstyle stalling perspective rather than what is passivity in international wrestling.  International wrestling does not care about how many shots, fakes, level changes someone is making, its all about where you are on the mat.  International wants action in the center, so whoever is controlling center, regardless of activity, is going to benefit from passive call.

[LJB 2,093]

Just now, Lurker said:

You're looking at it through a US folkstyle stalling perspective rather than what is passivity in international wrestling.  International wrestling does not care about how many shots, fakes, level changes someone is making, its all about where you are on the mat.  International wants action in the center, so whoever is controlling center, regardless of activity, is going to benefit from passive call.

do you ever get tired of saying this exact thing?

i surely do...

[Lurker 2,049]

Just now, LJB said:

do you ever get tired of saying this exact thing?

i surely do...

Somewhere out there, there is a saying about Rome, and how long it took to be built...

[GockeS 549]

someone posted that it says nothing about mat position in the rules and posted the rule book

just sayin

[LJB 2,093]

Just now, Lurker said:

Somewhere out there, there is a saying about Rome, and how long it took to be built...

dude...

even the coliseum was built quicker than it will take some to get even the simplest of concepts...

**shakes head slowly with a grimace**

[Lurker 2,049]

Just now, LJB said:

dude...

even the coliseum was built quicker than it will take some to get even the simplest of concepts...

**shakes head slowly with a grimace**

Don't you remember what Bush said...

No Child Left Behind

[LJB 2,093]

Just now, GockeS said:

someone posted that it says nothing about mat position in the rules and posted the rule book

just sayin

that someone does not understand what it says either...

more importantly how it is interpreted by every ref of the international styles and has been for years...

has been explained ad naseum...

but...

peoples is peoples...

[LJB 2,093]

Just now, Lurker said:

Don't you remember what Bush said...

No Child Left Behind

if we still had saber tooth tigers running around those same children would be great distractions so the rest of us could get away...

[GockeS 549]

man you really are obsessed with me

[Lurker 2,049]

3 minutes ago, GockeS said:

someone posted that it says nothing about mat position in the rules and posted the rule book

just sayin

I honestly couldn't tell you the last time I read the UWW rule book, but been around the block enough to know what they're looking for and how it's called.  

[LJB 2,093]

5 minutes ago, GockeS said:

man you really are obsessed with me

pg 45 of the "Internet Parlor Tricks for Dummies" manual...

[Wrestleknownothing 1,675]

1 hour ago, GoNotQuietly said:

I think the only thing which needs to change is first score wins on criteria rather than last score. Encourage action from the jump


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was thinking the same thing yesterday. Even thought about starting a post, but my procrastination was strong.

It does seem like when a wrestler gets put on the clock there is often little urgency to score. I am sure part of that is the other wrestler is expecting it to come in that 30 seconds so if it is poorly set up and rushed it is easily defended and probably turns into 2 for the wrestler not on the clock. 

Then there is the secondary issue of "if I went on the clock first, there is a probability, all else being equal, that my opponent will go on the clock next and I will have the tie breaker in a low/no scoring situation".

But if the tie breaker becomes first to score rather than last it completely changes the calculus. It gives the shot clock some teeth. 

What am I failing to consider?

[LJB 2,093]

i can't imagine the running that would go on if first score criteria was enacted and the shot clock point then became truly a match decider...

 

[gimpeltf 2,089]

First point was the tie breaker a number of years back. People scored then shut down. They changed it.

A study that would be interesting might not be so much how many scores happen during the 30 but how many occur shortly after (especially by the one giving up the point). to see if it motivated them. Wrestlers, especially in the first period, might be disciplined enough to stay within themselves rather than take a bad shot and slowly up their game safely afterwards.

[IronChef 1,138]

2 hours ago, CoachWrestling said:

It doesn't seem to do its intended purpose.

I think it does it's intended purpose very well, but it is important to know what that purpose is. The purpose of the shot clock is to get a point on the board and get the criteria machine moving when the wrestlers haven't done it themselves. From the moment a point goes on the board, someone is always winning, and thus at least one wrestler is motivated to score to try to get the lead back.