Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
mspart

Questions for Stan Dziedzic

Recommended Posts

i would like to think that stan was pushing for the rule change that made "pass behinds" two points; however he made every excuse on here as to why it was a good rule. fila then changed the rule just prior to the world championships. that had to be a shot to the ego. he is probably avoiding the board to not get the " i told you..." from everyone on that thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would hope he would come on this board and explain that even though he thought a "pass behind" should be worth one point, the people he represents** clearly want it to be two so he tirelessly fought for the change to two points.

 

** The 12 people on this message board are his constituents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sockobuw wrote:

i would like to think that stan was pushing for the rule change that made "pass behinds" two points; however he made every excuse on here as to why it was a good rule. fila then changed the rule just prior to the world championships. that had to be a shot to the ego. he is probably avoiding the board to not get the " i told you..." from everyone on that thread.

 

I hope this isn't about anyone's ego, the least of which I hope is mine. If wrestling learned anything, it should've learned that egos are not a good thing. I've not had time to go thru all the post but let me start:

To clarify, I believe I argued that for as long as I've been involved in intern'l wrestling a 'pass-behind' has been viewed as distinctly different than a 'takedown' in intern'l wrestling--though it mattered little because both were worth 1 pt. Still the majority of the world view a 'pass-behind' & 'takedown' as different. The question now is: How many points should a 'pass-behind' & a 'takedown' be worth. Perhaps equally important; Are the referees and fans able to distinguish the difference sufficiently consistent?

In Budapest, the FILA referees-now I hope somewhat more independent referees--deemed consistency trumped the fact that a 'pass-behind' was not as worthy as a 'takedown' in the eyes of most wrestlers. In addition, some felt scoring the 2 differently opened an tactical avenue for a wrestler to dodge wrestling in some cases as the match wound to a close. Hence, in Budapest it was agreed to score both the same, 2 pts. As FILA puts the rules in stone, this most certainly will be among the issues to be debated. And what I feel isn't going to be most important. It's what the world deems best for the sport of wrestling.

Regarding the weight classes, I think Georgy in the broadest sense summed up well what our Technical Committee concluded at its meeting in Budapest. The intentions are to have the weight classes in place by the end of this month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stan, I agree with the reasons the referees gave for making both 2 pts . I can't speak for other countries but in Canada, we don't make a distinction between a pass behind and a takedown. I hope you will answer the questions about the need for rapid-fire tournaments, and what can/will be done to increase the length of time between matches. Also some thoughts about the possibility of having non-Olympic weights would be appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
armspin wrote,

 

Stan, I agree with the reasons the referees gave for making both 2 pts . I can't speak for other countries but in Canada, we don't make a distinction between a pass behind and a takedown. I hope you will answer the questions about the need for rapid-fire tournaments, and what can/will be done to increase the length of time between matches. Also some thoughts about the possibility of having non-Olympic weights would be appreciated.

There is widespread agreement among the worldwide wrestling community--FILA Bureau members, referees, coaches, athletes and researchers--that there needs to be more time between matches, wrestling would do well to introduce tournament presentation efficiencies and generally 6 wtg classes strain the breadth of the wrestling population.

Most of these issues will be part of a broader discussion regarding 1 or 2 day format, daily starting time [morning session 9-11h], broadcasting, event presentation, separating freestyle & GR World Championships and rule adjustments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really solid logic and IMO, right on the money by rickybobby, quanon, 2td3nf, and many others. Like oldrules, it's gets tiring and uninspiring to watch when you can't figure out what's going on. And I wouldn't consider myself the average fan either, so many people have to be confused.

-----

 

My sentiments as well. Especially regarding "clearly announce/display our scoring" point made by rickybobby.

 

It is hard for even serious wrestling fans to figure out what happened sometimes... why the ref called it the way he did. The match gets stopped for video review, minutes pass. *yawn*

 

This kind of cr*p just kills the excitement. If wrestling is to attract a wider audience.... not just former wrestlers, it needs simplicity in the rules, so that most anyone can figure out who scored and why.

 

All of the arcane rules minutia has to be streamlined or tossed. This would make for less controversy and the requisite protests and video review.

 

I also agree, there should be seeding.

 

It seemed like FILA was leading the charge in the wrong direction for so many years. Hopefully, with the latest changes, the ship can be headed in the right direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why the devil must international clocks count up?

 

That's not just a "it's bad, because it's not the way we do it" question; if a clock counts down, anybody watching understands when action ends: 0. Counting up to some point in the future, you have to know how long matches last (lately).

 

Which, really, is far too characteristic of FILA's outlook: we understand what we mean, and we can explain it perfectly well. And you should too; we explained it at the rules clinic this morning...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why the devil must international clocks count up?

 

That's not just a "it's bad, because it's not the way we do it" question; if a clock counts down, anybody watching understands when action ends: 0. Counting up to some point in the future, you have to know how long matches last (lately).

 

Which, really, is far too characteristic of FILA's outlook: we understand what we mean, and we can explain it perfectly well. And you should too; we explained it at the rules clinic this morning...

Nearly every timed international sport I can think of does it that way, actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nearly every timed international sport I can think of does it that way, actually.

That's interesting; I don't much watch other sports. Still bad, but interesting. Such as?

I'll name a couple...soccer (or, as most of the rest of the world knows it, football), rugby union, gaelic football, team handball. Pretty sure ice hockey when run by IIHF rules also counts up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found this on soccer:

 

Because there are 45 minutes in each half with an addition time added at the end of each 45 minute half for any time that they stopped the game during that half for an injury, an altercation, to clean something up that a fan threw on the field, etc...So they may add an additional 3 or 4 minutes to a half and its easier to count up to 49 minutes for example, rather than minus 4 minutes.

 

Which isn't relevant to us. Your answer is still appreciated, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Found this on soccer:

 

Because there are 45 minutes in each half with an addition time added at the end of each 45 minute half for any time that they stopped the game during that half for an injury, an altercation, to clean something up that a fan threw on the field, etc...So they may add an additional 3 or 4 minutes to a half and its easier to count up to 49 minutes for example, rather than minus 4 minutes.

 

Which isn't relevant to us. Your answer is still appreciated, however.

Soccer isn't relevant to us. However, rugby union (where there is no time added on) certainly is applicable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the answer Stan. When you have the meeting, will it be possible to state which groups/federations support a particular rule or practice? Stating that "most international wrestlers" support something (criteria instead of OT, 7 point techs, and so on) doesn't square with our (admittedly North American) experiences, where most wrestlers we know do not support the rule. It would be helpful to say "the Russian federation wants 1 pt pass-behinds and 5 pt ippons" or or whatever the case may be. This will also help everyone understand where FILA is coming from when they make a decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The scoreboard should convey all the information you need to understand the match at a glance. The clock should count DOWN, and since there is no overtime, the current winner on criteria needs to be indicated.

 

Right now, some of the international scoreboards mark the last wrestler who scored if the score is tied -- but that's not the only criteria at the moment, so you don't know who is winning.

 

It's not rocket science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
armspin wrote,

Thank you for the answer Stan. When you have the meeting, will it be possible to state which groups/federations support a particular rule or practice? Stating that "most international wrestlers" support something (criteria instead of OT, 7 point techs, and so on) doesn't square with our (admittedly North American) experiences, where most wrestlers we know do not support the rule. It would be helpful to say "the Russian federation wants 1 pt pass-behinds and 5 pt ippons" or or whatever the case may be. This will also help everyone understand where FILA is coming from when they make a decision.

 

The National Federations supply candidates to the Referees Commission, Athletes Commission, Research Commission and Technical Commission, for example. FILA assigns the Chairperson and votes on its members. To ensure the veracity of the process, a group tabulates the results.

In the case of the Athletes Commission, the 7 members were 'elected by their peers' as stipulated by the IOC. Each entry @ this year's WC in Budapest had the right to cast his/her vote for 7 members. These 7 elect members will select their representative to the FILA Bureau shortly.

To the extent someone wishes to know how each voted, it's up to the individual to divulge. Otherwise, it has the potential to encourage misguided decision making--one that is influenced by the most vocal at the expense of the most committed. The Athletes Commission is expected to represent its peers--the committed wrestlers who earned his/her spot on their respective team @ the WC in this case. Each 4 yrs the process will be repeated. FILA must ensure the tabulation are beyond reproach and should convey the results. It should not compromise the integrity of the process or influence the voting by reporting how each member voted. In many cases the voting is purposefully secret--each member receives a certified ballot; the ballots are then collected (w/out names) and tabulated and are available for review if desired. The FILA members are supplied the final tabulation, 18-7 for example; but not which countries made up the 18 or the 7.

I have a question: I am a bit confused by something. Earlier you mentioned support for more rest between bouts and now you write "(criteria instead of OT, 7 point techs, and so on) doesn't square with our (admittedly North American) experiences, where most wrestlers we know do not support the rule." You can't support both more rest and OT. For example, @ the US team trials this year there was an OT bout (Dake-Howe) that lasted 6 minutes--in effect 2 full matches w/ no rest. In addition, both wrestlers were deprived of valuable rest time before the next bout [both were teched in less than 2 minutes??]. If the semi-finals and/or repechage are set to start 1745h for instance and the finals are set for 1900h [^ 1h+ rest] and one match has an OT that last 12 running minutes; the end result would be: 1 wrestler in effect wrestles 3 bouts w/out any rest and then has to wrestle in the finals or for 3rd w/ as much as 30 minutes less rest than his/her opponent????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's easy to support both overtime and extended rest periods if the tournament is spread out over multiple days. The NCAA tournament does this quite well.

 

So far, I have only seen official discussion of two options: a one day tourney per weight class, or a two day tourney per weight class. Since the entire tournament actually takes a week, wouldn't it make more sense to stretch the rounds out over multiple days (that is, more than two)? This would ensure that the athletes were well rested and performing their best when they compete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quanon wrote,

It's easy to support both overtime and extended rest periods if the tournament is spread out over multiple days. The NCAA tournament does this quite well.

So far, I have only seen official discussion of two options: a one day tourney per weight class, or a two day tourney per weight class. Since the entire tournament actually takes a week, wouldn't it make more sense to stretch the rounds out over multiple days (that is, more than two)? This would ensure that the athletes were well rested and performing their best when they compete.

 

1 or 2 days are the only option because of the Olympic program requirement to have finals everyday; or at the least every day but the 1st day?

Prior to that change, Olympic wrestling was competed in a 3 day format (weigh-in everyday--flat weight 2 hrs before competition). In Montreal, the final day (medal rds) were filled to capacity @ the main arena. The 1st 2 days, on the otherhand, were void of spectators @ the local high school gym--even though several of the gold and silver medalist wrestled in the early rds (rd-robin, no seeding).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quanon wrote,

It's easy to support both overtime and extended rest periods if the tournament is spread out over multiple days. The NCAA tournament does this quite well.

So far, I have only seen official discussion of two options: a one day tourney per weight class, or a two day tourney per weight class. Since the entire tournament actually takes a week, wouldn't it make more sense to stretch the rounds out over multiple days (that is, more than two)? This would ensure that the athletes were well rested and performing their best when they compete.

 

1 or 2 days are the only option because of the Olympic program requirement to have finals everyday; or at the least every day but the 1st day?

Prior to that change, Olympic wrestling was competed in a 3 day format (weigh-in everyday--flat weight 2 hrs before competition). In Montreal, the final day (medal rds) were filled to capacity @ the main arena. The 1st 2 days, on the otherhand, were void of spectators @ the local high school gym--even though several of the gold and silver medalist wrestled in the early rds (rd-robin, no seeding).

Why aren't Archery, Badminton, Basketball, Boxing, Canoeing, Cycling, Diving, Equestrian, Field Hockey, Football, Gymnastics, Handball, Rowing, Sailing, Synchronized Swimming, Table Tennis, Tennis, Volleyball, and Water Polo held to the same standard? Sometimes I feel like these excuses are made up just to provide a reason to oppose something when you have no other reason to oppose it, particularly when 2/3rds of the sports on the Olympic program aren't held to the standard you mention.

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...