Overtime: Sudden Victory

[tommygun 52]

I say make the first SV period 2-3 minutes on your feet. Thoughts?

[LemonPie 1,368]

Anything but rideouts. Too difficult to ref, too hard on the fans.

[Husker_Du 841]

Rideouts stink.

 

they always have. but now it's become a game. turn off the clock. wrestle neutral until there's a score.

[jstock 125]

Agree 100% with Husker_Du - Make them wrestle on their feet until someone scores or quits

[sockobuw 49]

it is a 3 position sport. why ignore 2 of the positions when it goes to overtime?

[BigRedMachine 210]

Agree 100% with Husker_Du - Make them wrestle on their feet until someone scores or quits

This simply wouldn't work for every event, but I would be in favor of this being instituted for the NCAA finals.

 

 

Dake vs Howe this summer was incredibly exciting even without much scoring. "Howe is this match still going? I can't Dake it anymore" indeed.

[tigerfan9311 223]

Totally agree - rideouts are way too subjective, often hinging on stalling judgement calls. Add the pushout rule and SV would rarely, if ever, last as long as the current format.

[hawkeye73 3]

I wish we would go back to 3-2-2 minutes periods. In first period if no score after 2 warn one or both wrestlers we need more action in all matches.

[Gasman 4]

easy solution - sudden victory on their feet...turn off the clock. First score wins. No ride outs, no riding time.

[HuskyHero133 52]

easy solution - sudden victory on their feet...turn off the clock. First score wins. No ride outs, no riding time.

 

That’d be great… but won’t happen.

[gimpeltf 2,045]

Back ~25 years back when they first started doing OT they tried unlimited SV period at some tourney. They ended up sending kids to the hospital.

[madcat11 434]

Back ~25 years back when they first started doing OT they tried unlimited SV period at some tourney. They ended up sending kids to the hospital.

 

Sounds like a good show.

[skikayaker 93]

I think there should be one minute SV (as there is now), and two 30 second tie breakers (as there are now) but that the riding time should be calculated to determine the winner after the first OT periods (instead of waiting until after the second round of tie-breakers). In the event of a first OT tiebreaker being even then a second SV and TB would be contested.

[lu_alum 920]

Back ~25 years back when they first started doing OT they tried unlimited SV period at some tourney. They ended up sending kids to the hospital.

I see results in the NCAA brackets on Boomer's website with OT as early as 1957 (57 years ago). Are you referring to a specific OT rule change that occurred ~25 years ago?

[GranbyTroll 452]

Totally agree - rideouts are way too subjective, often hinging on stalling judgement calls. Add the pushout rule and SV would rarely, if ever, last as long as the current format.

 

Didn't read the whole thread, but this piqued my interest. Unlimited time SV on your feet, with the same 1pt step-out that freestyle has. I like the 30 second rideout in high school, but watching D1 guys play "who can kill more time on the ankle/merkel ride" sucks.

[gimpeltf 2,045]

Back ~25 years back when they first started doing OT they tried unlimited SV period at some tourney. They ended up sending kids to the hospital.

I see results in the NCAA brackets on Boomer's website with OT as early as 1957 (57 years ago). Are you referring to a specific OT rule change that occurred ~25 years ago?

 

I meant when they first started the Tie Breaker stuff around 25 years ago.

[tirapell 34]

If you really want to include all positions, think about this. Right now, we have 1-:30-:30 and if tied 1-:30-:30 again -- 4 minutes total.

 

Why make the whole thing a lot more simple and give the wrestlers more time to score with 2-1-1?

 

First overtime: 2 minutes of sudden victory. Most matches would be decided here. If still tied...

Top-bottom: 1 minute each wrestler. Riding time still wins but now you have 1 full minute on top so dropping to ankles and holding on is not as easy. If riding time is equal, then go back to repeat cycle...

 

This is EXACTLY the same as what we have now, only it's not broken up so much so that nothing can really happen. We all know that having twelve :10 periods to score is not the same as 2 minutes continuous. The more breaks in the action, the harder it is to generate scoring.

 

I think all positions need to be a part of overtime. I just don't see why we can't give the athletes a little longer to do something to win the match, rather than put so much pressure on the referee to make calls.

[tommygun 52]

Great idea!

[fullnelson 129]

I agree with Adam, but what we have now is still better than it used to be-lucky on coin flip or judges decision. Right now the wrestlers decide it most of time.

[piggy 8]

If you really want to include all positions, think about this. Right now, we have 1-:30-:30 and if tied 1-:30-:30 again -- 4 minutes total.

 

Why make the whole thing a lot more simple and give the wrestlers more time to score with 2-1-1?

 

First overtime: 2 minutes of sudden victory. Most matches would be decided here. If still tied...

Top-bottom: 1 minute each wrestler. Riding time still wins but now you have 1 full minute on top so dropping to ankles and holding on is not as easy. If riding time is equal, then go back to repeat cycle...

 

This is EXACTLY the same as what we have now, only it's not broken up so much so that nothing can really happen. We all know that having twelve :10 periods to score is not the same as 2 minutes continuous. The more breaks in the action, the harder it is to generate scoring.

 

I think all positions need to be a part of overtime. I just don't see why we can't give the athletes a little longer to do something to win the match, rather than put so much pressure on the referee to make calls.

+1

I really I like this idea too Adam. Fewer breaks in action may also mean conditioning becomes more of a factor than it already is in OT. Do you think the NCAA rules committee would also need to include a point of emphasis on the need to actually call stalling in these 1 minute ride out periods?

[tirapell 34]

If you really want to include all positions, think about this. Right now, we have 1-:30-:30 and if tied 1-:30-:30 again -- 4 minutes total.

 

Why make the whole thing a lot more simple and give the wrestlers more time to score with 2-1-1?

 

First overtime: 2 minutes of sudden victory. Most matches would be decided here. If still tied...

Top-bottom: 1 minute each wrestler. Riding time still wins but now you have 1 full minute on top so dropping to ankles and holding on is not as easy. If riding time is equal, then go back to repeat cycle...

 

This is EXACTLY the same as what we have now, only it's not broken up so much so that nothing can really happen. We all know that having twelve :10 periods to score is not the same as 2 minutes continuous. The more breaks in the action, the harder it is to generate scoring.

 

I think all positions need to be a part of overtime. I just don't see why we can't give the athletes a little longer to do something to win the match, rather than put so much pressure on the referee to make calls.

+1

I really I like this idea too Adam. Fewer breaks in action may also mean conditioning becomes more of a factor than it already is in OT. Do you think the NCAA rules committee would also need to include a point of emphasis on the need to actually call stalling in these 1 minute ride out periods?

 

I think you have them call stalling the same way it's done in regulation. To me, it's crazy that we change our stalling/stalemate rules to accomodate extremely short OT periods. Call stalling in the Sudden Victory (neutral) OT if only 1 guy is trying to score. Call it in the tiebreaker OT as well, the same as you would in the 2nd period of a match.

[BigApple 86]

Before the era of the rideout, OT was 1-1-1. If tied at the end it was a referee and two judges decision. I'd like to go back to that, except instead of the referee's decision, i'd make it who scored first in the match would be the winner. That would encourage more activity in the first period.

[BigApple 86]

Before the era of the rideout, OT was 1-1-1. If tied at the end it was a referee and two judges decision. I'd like to go back to that, except instead of the referee's decision, i'd make it who scored first in the match would be the winner. That would encourage more activity in the first period.

[BigApple 86]

Before the era of the rideout, OT was 1-1-1. If tied at the end it was a referee and two judges decision. I'd like to go back to that, except instead of the referee's decision, i'd make it who scored first in the match would be the winner. That would encourage more activity in the first period.

[Gasman 4]

Cael agrees with turn the clock off and let them wrestle to a winner - around 5:30

 

http://www.flowrestling.org/coverage/25 ... wP3fHmaZks