Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
BRGuy

matt kocher

Recommended Posts

anyone catch the match between borschel and kocher? it looks like kocher is on a whole nother level from his college days he was taking borschel down at will. i dont rememebr him being this good when he was in college. cant help but wonder if he was undersized too since he was a 157 in colleg.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude just doesnt get tired. Borschel was gassed and Kocher kept pushing. Kocher deserved to win that match (and probably would have if he just cut and went for another takedown instead of a turn).

 

IMO, that rule needs to be changed when Tour ACW moves past the "test event" stage. That wasnt worth 5 points - at least not when its first to ten.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude just doesnt get tired. Borschel was gassed and Kocher kept pushing. Kocher deserved to win that match (and probably would have if he just cut and went for another takedown instead of a turn).

 

IMO, that rule needs to be changed when Tour ACW moves past the "test event" stage. That wasnt worth 5 points - at least not when its first to ten.

I just read the rules at the tour acw site.

 

I like them as they are written. If the top man can control and expose his opponent while going to his own back, it's fine, otherwise there is a penalty. This prevents wrestlers from spending so much time on their backs, out of position -- one of the real problems with current folkstyle rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^Kocher wanted to go hwt in that tournament and I think he weighed in wearing weighted pants (?) to make the minimum weight requirement to compete at hwt. Matt Kocher did place fifth at the 2007 NCAA Tournament at 157 pounds. Anyway, Matt wrestled 5 yrs at Pitt, the 2004 season thru 2008. He redshirted the 2006 season. Matt's W/L logs for those 5 college seasons were: 32-13, 30-12, 36-3, 27-9 and 23-7.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude just doesnt get tired. Borschel was gassed and Kocher kept pushing. Kocher deserved to win that match (and probably would have if he just cut and went for another takedown instead of a turn).

 

IMO, that rule needs to be changed when Tour ACW moves past the "test event" stage. That wasnt worth 5 points - at least not when its first to ten.

I just read the rules at the tour acw site.

 

I like them as they are written. If the top man can control and expose his opponent while going to his own back, it's fine, otherwise there is a penalty. This prevents wrestlers from spending so much time on their backs, out of position -- one of the real problems with current folkstyle rules.

 

Maybe the new NF rules would for habits that would benefit folkstyler wrestlers going into freestyle, but the rules themselves are much closer to folkstyle than freestyle and Boschel wouldn't have been winning in either. In folkstyle it would be 9-8 Kocher with Borschel on top in the 3rd period. The end to that match would probably be more exciting than the one we watched. Had it been a freestyle match Kocher would have won by tech after the last TD at 9-2. With the disparity in scoring between ACW and the other prevalent styles it makes it look like Kocher was the clearly the better wrestler and just got screwed by weird rules.

 

As mentioned in the earlier comment the sequence that earned Borschel 4 or 5 points (was it 2 or 3 NF?) would be worth significantly less in any form of wrestling. In folkstyle it would get Borschel 2 points (only a reversal). In freestyle probably 1 point for Kocher and 2 for Borschel. As it's scored in ACW it puts Borschel halfway to winning the match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe the new NF rules would for habits that would benefit folkstyler wrestlers going into freestyle, but the rules themselves are much closer to folkstyle than freestyle and Boschel wouldn't have been winning in either. In folkstyle it would be 9-8 Kocher with Borschel on top in the 3rd period. The end to that match would probably be more exciting than the one we watched. Had it been a freestyle match Kocher would have won by tech after the last TD at 9-2. With the disparity in scoring between ACW and the other prevalent styles it makes it look like Kocher was the clearly the better wrestler and just got screwed by weird rules.

 

As mentioned in the earlier comment the sequence that earned Borschel 4 or 5 points (was it 2 or 3 NF?) would be worth significantly less in any form of wrestling. In folkstyle it would get Borschel 2 points (only a reversal). In freestyle probably 1 point for Kocher and 2 for Borschel. As it's scored in ACW it puts Borschel halfway to winning the match.

 

Folkstyle has many guys that expose their backs when on top or in the neutral position. To me, you start counting back points once a guy exposes, regardless of position, and that eliminates this kind of sloppiness. I understand what Tour ACW is trying to accomplish here.

 

I don't know if they're trying to blend folkstyle and freestyle, or just addressing a problem in the folkstyle rules. Maybe someone else knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^^Kocher wanted to go hwt in that tournament and I think he weighed in wearing weighted pants (?) to make the minimum weight requirement to compete at hwt. Matt Kocher did place fifth at the 2007 NCAA Tournament at 157 pounds. Anyway, Matt wrestled 5 yrs at Pitt, the 2004 season thru 2008. He redshirted the 2006 season. Matt's W/L logs for those 5 college seasons were: 32-13, 30-12, 36-3, 27-9 and 23-7.

"Fat" Kocher (actual name on the bracket) entered the 2008 Nittany Lion Open at 285 and went 5-2. He lost to the eventual 2nd and 6th place finishers, 2-1 and 10-3 respectively. He wrestled back to what would have been a 7/8 placing. Recall that the NLO only give placements to the top 6 at each weight. Semi-final losers drop directly into a 3/4 bout. All other championship bracket losers compete for 5th place in the consolation bracket.

 

http://postedresults.escapesports.com/2009/2008_NLO.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude just doesnt get tired. Borschel was gassed and Kocher kept pushing. Kocher deserved to win that match (and probably would have if he just cut and went for another takedown instead of a turn).

 

IMO, that rule needs to be changed when Tour ACW moves past the "test event" stage. That wasnt worth 5 points - at least not when its first to ten.

I just read the rules at the tour acw site.

 

I like them as they are written. If the top man can control and expose his opponent while going to his own back, it's fine, otherwise there is a penalty. This prevents wrestlers from spending so much time on their backs, out of position -- one of the real problems with current folkstyle rules.

 

 

I just think that its not worth a 5 point move. If Wrestler A blast doubles Wrestler B straight to his back but then Wrestler B bellies down, thats worth only 3 in the ACW rules, correct? Why is this different? Why does Borchel get a 3 pt exposure and then a two point reversal? If you want to rule that Borchel exposed Kocher for the reversal, then sure, he gets three. If he just reverses him, then it should be two points.

 

"Folkstyle has many guys that expose their backs when on top or in the neutral position. To me, you start counting back points once a guy exposes, regardless of position, and that eliminates this kind of sloppiness. I understand what Tour ACW is trying to accomplish here."

 

This logic, however, discourages scoring, which is the exact opposite of what Tour ACW is trying to accomplish with their point system. In just about every type of tilt from the top position the top guy exposes his own back. If this rule is continually ruled this way, then guys will stop wrestling on top completely and we are just going to have a grown up version of Ohio TOC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pre if the point is to score points then the rules succeeded in scoring 5 points so it worked and guys can tilt all day and score points but there was only one person exposed here and it was kocher who had his back to the mat and borschel stoped the change and held him there it seems like kocher didn't know the rules otherwise he should have got off his back or bellied out or something but borschel was never exposed his back was on kochers chest how are you suppose to give nearfall to kocher when he is the one nearest being pinned I think this is a good rule and something that has killed folk when you take someone new to wrestling and they ask why does that guy get the points when he is closer to being pinned and you try to explain it is because he is technically on top

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pre if the point is to score points then the rules succeeded in scoring 5 points so it worked and guys can tilt all day and score points but there was only one person exposed here and it was kocher who had his back to the mat and borschel stoped the change and held him there it seems like kocher didn't know the rules otherwise he should have got off his back or bellied out or something but borschel was never exposed his back was on kochers chest how are you suppose to give nearfall to kocher when he is the one nearest being pinned I think this is a good rule and something that has killed folk when you take someone new to wrestling and they ask why does that guy get the points when he is closer to being pinned and you try to explain it is because he is technically on top

 

Whew, talk about a run on. Seriously, try and read that with one breath. Impossible.

 

All punctuation police kidding aside, seeing as this was a test event I just threw out a rule that I thought needed tweaked. this situation scored 5 pts this time. But guys at these events will just stop trying to turn ppl on top if it's that easy to score big points from bottom. That discourages scoring and it will evolve into a takedown tournament. If that's what you want then fine, different stokes for different folks I guess. I personally like mat wrestling of both the folk style and freestyle variety.

 

I never said Kocher should have gotten points here because he absolutely shouldn't have. And I understand that the rule was called correctly as it is currently written. My entire argument rests on the fact that I feel this situation should - in future events - warrant 3 OR 2 pts, not both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's appropriate to award both exposure and control points.

 

Here's a scenario:

 

A crab rides B and gets stuck on A's own back for four seconds, then rolls through, back in control.

 

If you only award exposure points, and treat those exposure points as a reversal (ala freestyle), then this scenario plays out as 2-2. Because A ends up in control again, he gets his own reversal, with the result being that A received no real penalty for losing control and exposing his back.

 

Under the Tour ACW rules, a blast double to the back scores 3 -- but theoretically it can score as many as 6, if the attacker holds his opponent to the mat for long enough following the takedown. The Borschel exposure/reversal scored 4 at Tour ACW, not 5.

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...