Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
vhsalum

GOT TAMMIT FILA!

Recommended Posts

If anybody has access to old FILA rulebooks, I'd be interested in taking a look.

 

FILA has an old rulebook posted in their library.

 

http://www.fila-official.com/images/FIL ... 2/FA02.pdf

 

I can't tell what year it is, but Milan Ercegan was president, so it was sometime from 1972 - 2002. Judging by the sneakers in the photos (one guy's wearing Ultraflex's), I think it's from the 80s. At the time, there were 12-point tech falls.

 

Thanks -- I looked before and didn't find one. Lots of minor differences in the points awarded. The pass-by distinction was already there, and demonstrated in photographs as a reversal (no idea when it originated). Takedowns and pass-bys were both worth 1, of course.

 

The old rule book was written more clearly, in simple English, with photographic examples. No reason why there shouldn't be photographic examples in the current rulebook -- or why there couldn't be a few pages devoted to showing the rules in action with videos on the FILA website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Lalovic has said, among other things: “Now the rules are very understandable and very good for TV. Everyone can now understand what happens in two minutes."

http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/sports/wrestling-reforms-wont-stop-after-ioc-vote/

 

I don't want to jump all over the new FILA president, because he just took over and is not responsible for the last few decades, but this interview pretty much sums up where we're at.

 

Thinking what we have currently is "very understandable" and "good for TV" is so far out-of-touch with reality it's mind-boggling. It just shows how infintely far we are behind the curve of understanding what's actually understandable for fans and truly TV worthy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If anybody has access to old FILA rulebooks, I'd be interested in taking a look.

 

FILA has an old rulebook posted in their library.

 

http://www.fila-official.com/images/FIL ... 2/FA02.pdf

 

I can't tell what year it is, but Milan Ercegan was president, so it was sometime from 1972 - 2002. Judging by the sneakers in the photos (one guy's wearing Ultraflex's), I think it's from the 80s. At the time, there were 12-point tech falls.

 

Thanks -- I looked before and didn't find one. Lots of minor differences in the points awarded. The pass-by distinction was already there, and demonstrated in photographs as a reversal (no idea when it originated). Takedowns and pass-bys were both worth 1, of course.

 

The old rule book was written more clearly, in simple English, with photographic examples. No reason why there shouldn't be photographic examples in the current rulebook -- or why there couldn't be a few pages devoted to showing the rules in action with videos on the FILA website.

 

Pass-behind rule circa 1980s:

...to the wrestler who reverses, holds and controls his opponent on the mat, by passing behind him.

 

Pass-behind rule June 2013:

...to the wrestler who overcomes, holds and controls his opponent by passing behind him.

 

They replaced the words "reverses" and "on the mat" with "overcomes". So in the 1980s it was a reversal like in folkstyle, but today it can happen (apparently) from the neutral position. It's not the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thinking what we have currently is "very understandable" and "good for TV" is so far out-of-touch with reality it's mind-boggling. It just shows how infintely far we are behind the curve of understanding what's actually understandable for fans and truly TV worthy.

What did you expect him to say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pass-behind rule circa 1980s:

...to the wrestler who reverses, holds and controls his opponent on the mat, by passing behind him.

 

Pass-behind rule June 2013:

...to the wrestler who overcomes, holds and controls his opponent by passing behind him.

 

They replaced the words "reverses" and "on the mat" with "overcomes". So in the 1980s it was a reversal like in folkstyle, but today it can happen (apparently) from the neutral position. It's not the same.

 

You make a good point, but I'd really like to see older rules books to see how the rule evolved. They demonstrated the "pass-behind" with a grounded switch. There was no difference in points between a pass-behind and a takedown, so even if Wrestler A's shot to the knees followed by Wrestler B's snap and spin were also considered "reversing" the opponent for a "pass-behind," there would not have been a need to point out the distinction in the photo section.

 

Based on the recent rules and that document, it looks like the rules changed from being written specifically for an English speaking audience, to being transliterated directly from French. Who knows when that happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thinking what we have currently is "very understandable" and "good for TV" is so far out-of-touch with reality it's mind-boggling. It just shows how infintely far we are behind the curve of understanding what's actually understandable for fans and truly TV worthy.

What did you expect him to say?

 

I'm just not willing to drink the Kool-Aid and tell Stan thanks every time comments on how he's confusing the fans and hurting the sport. Or everytime he 'reinterprets" a rule and the sport changes. Or everytime they cut weight classes to "benefit" wrestling. It's a game of smoke & mirrors and the only thing that keeps the illusion going is us, the fans, by believing it all.

 

Wrestling fans have been too lenient with our leadership for long enough. I have nothing personally against Lalovic, but he's not the answer wrestling needs.

 

Now, what did I expect him to say? "We have a LOT of work to do to bring our sport into the 21st Century." That I'd respect and see that he understands. What we have currently is an insult to a great sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And to the article above, for all those who tire of Stan's rants that talk down to fans as if we just started watching wrestling, shows that he had no clue then, just like he doesn't have one now. The phrase used has been "out of touch", and that's being nice.

I love that article that you posted. He said he "loved" the rules back in 2004 when they made the change to best 2 of 3. And then he argued with many of us when we said best 2 of 3 was stupid for wrestling. And then he comes out a few months ago and says cumulative scoring makes the most sense, and best 2 of 3 is no good. It's hard to know what this guy actually believes. He's just a walking FILA talking points machine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lalovic is a "yachting" guy who was surprised he was appointed to the job? What a complete joke.

 

Does FILA have a list of their salaries online anywhere?

 

I was looking up FILA on wiki and saw the "controversies" section. After reading the comments about Russia's Mamiashvili it's no wonder there is still bribery going on as Kumar has claimed. A guy, Mamiashvili, who is blatantly involved in some kind of corruption not only is the president of the Russian wrestling federation but also a FILA bureau member? If he cheats who holds him accountable.

 

I suggest everyone read the fila wiki site. When a former 17 year Swiss board member says FILA is an "inherently corrupt organization" I think there are serious issues.

 

I think if we really want to save our sport, the best way may be a grass roots approach to systematically BRING DOWN FILA!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And to the article above, for all those who tire of Stan's rants that talk down to fans as if we just started watching wrestling, shows that he had no clue then, just like he doesn't have one now. The phrase used has been "out of touch", and that's being nice.

I love that article that you posted. He said he "loved" the rules back in 2004 when they made the change to best 2 of 3. And then he argued with many of us when we said best 2 of 3 was stupid for wrestling. And then he comes out a few months ago and says cumulative scoring makes the most sense, and best 2 of 3 is no good. It's hard to know what this guy actually believes. He's just a walking FILA talking points machine.

I think he believes that the rules have to change regularly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LlwdSteve wrote:

"Following the IOC's decision and the subsequent removal of FILA's President in February, an opportunity to broaden the changes to reflect the removal of constraints placed by FILA's previous leader was opened.

 

What specifically were the constraints that came from the previous leader?"

 

Best-of-three match format, 2 minute periods, a 30 second sudden-death-overtime using the 'ball-pull/clinch' and 13:00 starting time are a few off-hand.

 

"The rules makers seized the opportunity to re-solicit the ideas of the worldwide wrestling community. As these new rules are put to practice adjustments are being made. Hopefully following Budapest the final touches can be put in place for the remainder of the quadrennial."

 

Seems like purposeful experimenting, which, under the circumstances, should be very useful. BTW, which factions pushed for the 7 point TF? And their rationale?"

 

As we solved for various priorities, constraints materialized. For example, by going to a 2 x 3 minute-period, cumulative score format; it meant that roughly 50 % of the matches had to end prematurely by 2 minutes to off-set the additional 1 minute/period--[given the number matches that had been determined in two 2 minute periods in the best-of-three format minus the time saved by not using 30 sec. sudden-death overtime]. In addition, the broadcasters and other media advised more than 3 mats and a 2-day format were not in the best interest of wrestling.

Most agree w/ Technical Superiority. When it was settled to use a 1 day format w/ 15 minute breaks between the 1/4 & 1/2 finals, 7 pts became a starting point.

Me personally, I'd rather have a starting time of 9 am; repechage for those losing to 1/2 finalists, no 2 x 3s ending the bout, 10 pt TS and a longer break time between the 1/4 and 1/2 finals.

After Budapest, we'll have more information to determine if we are able to introduce any of the alterations the world-wide wrestling community desires, w/out sacrificing the 3 minute period time??

 

 

 

"But the 1st "Athletes Questionnaire" was 1st posted on FILA's website roughly a yr ago."

 

Media and fans....?"

 

We also will have the input from the wrestlers, coaches, media, researchers, referees, TV Broadcasters and fans attending the World Champ. in Budapest

 

"Major sports are not facing a looming decision regarding its future in a matter of weeks.......understand the personal @ FILA's hdqtrs priority of ensuring the wrestlers whose native language is Farsi, Azeri, Turkish, Georgian, Japanese, Bulgarian or Russian understand the adjustments before the wrestling fans. Don't you think if the National Federations felt it necessary to inform the fan base, they'd have better access?"

 

The current crisis certainly tests (or exposes) the capabilities of the leadership corps.

 

Indeed, we'll find out in a week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LlwdSteve wrote:

"The rules makers seized the opportunity to re-solicit the ideas of the worldwide wrestling community. As these new rules are put to practice adjustments are being made. Hopefully following Budapest the final touches can be put in place for the remainder of the quadrennial."

 

Seems like purposeful experimenting, which, under the circumstances, should be very useful. BTW, which factions pushed for the 7 point TF? And their rationale?"

 

As we solved for various priorities, constraints materialized. For example, by going to a 2 x 3 minute-period, cumulative score format; it meant that roughly 50 % of the matches had to end prematurely by 2 minutes to off-set the additional 1 minute/period--[given the number matches that had been determined in two 2 minute periods in the best-of-three format minus the time saved by not using 30 sec. sudden-death overtime]. In addition, the broadcasters and other media advised more than 3 mats and a 2-day format were not in the best interest of wrestling.

Most agree w/ Technical Superiority. When it was settled to use a 1 day format w/ 15 minute breaks between the 1/4 & 1/2 finals, 7 pts became a starting point.

Me personally, I'd rather have a starting time of 9 am; repechage for those losing to 1/2 finalists, no 2 x 3s ending the bout, 10 pt TS and a longer break time between the 1/4 and 1/2 finals.

After Budapest, we'll have more information to determine if we are able to introduce any of the alterations the world-wide wrestling community desires, w/out sacrificing the 3 minute period time??

So FILA is mostly concerned with the length of a match instead of determining the better wrestler.

 

FILA needs to get their heads out of their butts and quit being worried about what time their nightly social begins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In addition, the broadcasters and other media advised more than 3 mats and a 2-day format were not in the best interest of wrestling.

 

what broadcasters and media? i am absolutely on board with making concessions to help market and broadcast the sport, so long as the concessions are worth the exposure. but what media are broadcasting the worlds and what is their reasoning for keeping the format to 3 mats and 2 days?

 

somehow espn has figured out how to televise the NCAAs, which adheres to none of these restrictions. NBC's coverage of the olympics wresting is basically a few highlights and maybe a 5 minute costas interview if we win a gold. where is the media influence coming from and why do they want to impose such drastic changes to the competition?

 

i appreciate the response but these types of answers just bring up more, disconcerning questions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In addition, the broadcasters and other media advised more than 3 mats and a 2-day format were not in the best interest of wrestling.

 

what broadcasters and media? i am absolutely on board with making concessions to help market and broadcast the sport, so long as the concessions are worth the exposure. but what media are broadcasting the worlds and what is their reasoning for keeping the format to 3 mats and 2 days?

 

somehow espn has figured out how to televise the NCAAs, which adheres to none of these restrictions. NBC's coverage of the olympics wresting is basically a few highlights and maybe a 5 minute costas interview if we win a gold. where is the media influence coming from and why do they want to impose such drastic changes to the competition?

 

i appreciate the response but these types of answers just bring up more, disconcerning questions

 

See 'smoke & mirrors'.

 

How about the fact that the former president was the one responsible for all of the old rules. Guys that were part of that regime were held hostage at gunpoint I guess, made to use the terrible rules. Funny, the article form 2004 where Stan applauded the same rules NOT as a member of FILA seem to paint a different picture.

 

Sounds like a great leadership body we've got going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He explained the rationale very clearly. People don't want to attend or watch a tournament from 6AM -11:30PM for a solid week. Put me in that group. I like to eat, drink and be merry with my friends.

Perhaps the semis and medal matches in the World Championships or Olympics should run by different criteria. Other tournaments for that matter. That is successful in many HS tournaments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He explained the rationale very clearly. People don't want to attend or watch a tournament from 6AM -11:30PM for a solid week. Put me in that group. I like to eat, drink and be merry with my friends.

Perhaps the semis and medal matches in the World Championships or Olympics should run by different criteria. Other tournaments for that matter. That is successful in many HS tournaments.

 

You mean like the NCAA Tournament? The one that draws 15,000+ annually for 3 days of 9-10am start and 10pm finish, with a 2-3 hour break in between?

 

Time wrestled is a direct function of number of competitors and number of mats used. Use more mats. Use less competitors. Run the bracket over multiple days, like every other sport in the Olympics.

 

None of this is revolutionary thinking. It's all been done 10,000 times yet when explained to FILA, there's always a "new" reason why it can't be accomplished.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He explained the rationale very clearly. People don't want to attend or watch a tournament from 6AM -11:30PM for a solid week. Put me in that group. I like to eat, drink and be merry with my friends.

Perhaps the semis and medal matches in the World Championships or Olympics should run by different criteria. Other tournaments for that matter. That is successful in many HS tournaments.

 

lots of people eat drink and make merry throughout the 3 day, often 8 mat NCAA tournament, and espn, a pretty big broadcaster, found a way to televise it.

 

i dont want a week of 18 hour a day competitions either, but there is a happy medium to be found. first lets start with who the actual media are. then lets hear, from them, what their concerns and requirements are. then lets have an honest discussion about how the changes to the competition are helping facilitate those media requests and if they are indeed worth making

 

to explain 7 pt techs and 6 weight classes away with a mere "'media' want short matches and tournaments" is nebulous, obtuse, and frankly unhelpful to fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In addition, the broadcasters and other media advised more than 3 mats and a 2-day format were not in the best interest of wrestling.

 

what broadcasters and media? i am absolutely on board with making concessions to help market and broadcast the sport, so long as the concessions are worth the exposure. but what media are broadcasting the worlds and what is their reasoning for keeping the format to 3 mats and 2 days?

 

somehow espn has figured out how to televise the NCAAs, which adheres to none of these restrictions. NBC's coverage of the olympics wresting is basically a few highlights and maybe a 5 minute costas interview if we win a gold. where is the media influence coming from and why do they want to impose such drastic changes to the competition?

 

i appreciate the response but these types of answers just bring up more, disconcerning questions

 

See 'smoke & mirrors'.

 

How about the fact that the former president was the one responsible for all of the old rules. Guys that were part of that regime were held hostage at gunpoint I guess, made to use the terrible rules. Funny, the article form 2004 where Stan applauded the same rules NOT as a member of FILA seem to paint a different picture.

 

Sounds like a great leadership body we've got going.

Hey FILA why don't you get a company in Hollywood (or Bristol, Connecticut) to give you advice instead of Iran State Television and the All-Russia State Television and Radio Company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tirapell wrote,

"You mean like the NCAA Tournament? The one that draws 15,000+ annually for 3 days of 9-10am start and 10 pm finish, with a 2-3 hour break in between?"

 

And what? The # of Division I programs has shrunk at a time when the number of member Federations and participant @ the World Championships has skyrocketed. The number of entries/wtg @ this yr's WC will be 25% greater than @ the NCAAs. There are a 177 FILA members, up from roughly ninetyish, 25 years ago. London's attendance by the way was roughly 160,000 and would have been larger if not limited by the size of the venue.

 

Each year the WC's feed is purchased and viewed by a much larger TV viewing audience than the NCAAs.

 

You insult the intelligence of the readers. I think most see clearly your less than veiled desire to have wrestling out of the Olympic program.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on Stan - as a former world class wrestler, do you believe some of the posts you write ? I assume that you actually wrestled in HS and College so you should know that TV coverage on multiple mats running at the same time with long sessions etc. is possible. If the media does not know how to cover the event or when they raise concerns then teach them or find someone who can. Maybe a consult with ESPN or FLO would help. You and Plasmodium don't even have to attend all sessions, go back to your suite and knock a few back for all I care. Train your people and the show can go on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what? The # of Division I programs has shrunk at a time when the number of member Federations and participant @ the World Championships has skyrocketed. The number of entries/wtg @ this yr's WC will be 25% greater than @ the NCAAs. There are a 177 FILA members, up from roughly ninetyish, 25 years ago. London's attendance by the way was roughly 160,000 and would have been larger if not limited by the size of the venue.

 

Each year the WC's feed is purchased and viewed by a much larger TV viewing audience than the NCAAs.

 

You insult the intelligence of the readers. I think most see clearly you're less than veiled desire to have wrestling out of the Olympics.

 

this reasoning is pretty specious. a much better measure would be how much money does the world championships pull in vs the ncaa championships. also, if FILA is such a juggernaut when it comes to world wide popularity, tournament attendance, etc, why would it need to make so many concessions just to stay in the olympics? and if the WC is so popular, wouldn't the people purchasing it want MORE product, not less? at the very least they would presumably be pushing for more mens freestyle weight classes.

 

for this to make any sense, we still need to know

1) who are the media that are purchasing the WC feed and

2) why do they want these changes made

 

we'd also want to know how much they're paying and how much they making on the feed, but i'm assuming there is no way we'd ever get that info. though it would help in determining if it's worth it to the sport to make the changes they are suggesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tirapell wrote,

"You mean like the NCAA Tournament? The one that draws 15,000+ annually for 3 days of 9-10am start and 10 pm finish, with a 2-3 hour break in between?"

 

And what? The # of Division I programs has shrunk at a time when the number of member Federations and participant @ the World Championships has skyrocketed. The number of entries/wtg @ this yr's WC will be 25% greater than @ the NCAAs. There are a 177 FILA members, up from roughly ninetyish, 25 years ago. London's attendance by the way was roughly 160,000 and would have been larger if not limited by the size of the venue.

 

Each year the WC's feed is purchased and viewed by a much larger TV viewing audience than the NCAAs.

 

You insult the intelligence of the readers. I think most see clearly your less than veiled desire to have wrestling out of the Olympic program.

Talk about insulting. Are you suggesting T9 and individual budgetary concerns (real or imagined) of US colleges is a driving force/concern at FILA and the IOC?

 

If getting out of the Olympics is what is necessary to regain and restore wrestling, count me in. I had my hopes raised with some of the changes. But one thing is clear, once you have lost something (# of competitors, # of wts, duration of matches, etc) they are gone. At least under current "stewardship".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep the rules simple and stop cutting weights should be the objective. Wrestling is not a technical pure sport I don't care if do a TD better on style than the other it is all bout getting control whether a spin around off a shot or blast double should be scored the same unless of course there is back exposure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tirapell wrote,

"You mean like the NCAA Tournament? The one that draws 15,000+ annually for 3 days of 9-10am start and 10 pm finish, with a 2-3 hour break in between?"

 

And what? The # of Division I programs has shrunk at a time when the number of member Federations and participant @ the World Championships has skyrocketed. The number of entries/wtg @ this yr's WC will be 25% greater than @ the NCAAs. There are a 177 FILA members, up from roughly ninetyish, 25 years ago. London's attendance by the way was roughly 160,000 and would have been larger if not limited by the size of the venue.

 

Each year the WC's feed is purchased and viewed by a much larger TV viewing audience than the NCAAs.

 

You insult the intelligence of the readers. I think most see clearly your less than veiled desire to have wrestling out of the Olympic program.

 

WOW Stan - You continue to set yourself up. If FILA numbers are up and brackets are bigger then wouldn't you think we need more mats ? Bigger venue ? The world wrestling numbers are greater now, so you conceed to taking away more weight classes ? Please explain the logic? I know FILA is in the process of passifying the IOC but can't you guys sell them on anything that makes sense and is proven with facts and scientific data ?

The number of DI programs is down but the number of entries at NCAA's is about the same. We are talking about tournament coverage, not how the entries got there and from what school, title 9 etc!!

How can you logicaly make a point about the viewers for WC numbers compared to NCAA. One is just the USA, the other is the WORLD. I would hope that the WC would have better numbers. You should be really concerned that the number is so low. Does it really surprise you that viewership may be up for WC ? Technology, better streaming on internet and greater internet coverage in the world should lead to more viewers. The WORLD fans should be looking forward to the WC coverage just as NCAA fans are excited about NCAA's. Some will tune in but we know the coverage will not be on par but at least it's something. Just think how the viewership would skyrocket with ESPN/FLO type coverage. The feed numbers would likely be even greater for WC if the coverage was on par with recent technology. Again, look at ESPN and Flo and look at dashboard from trackwrestling.

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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...