Two_on_one 121 Report post Posted January 23, 2015 I see that Andrew made the finals with a 5-2 win over Makoyev of Russia in the semis. Can't find the results of his finals match. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wrestlingphish 1,034 Report post Posted January 23, 2015 Lost 2-2. Sounds like some questionable officiating. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
armspin 257 Report post Posted January 23, 2015 Well, hers wrestling a Russian in Russia...what were the controversial calls? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wrestlingphish 1,034 Report post Posted January 23, 2015 Apparently Howe wasn't awarded a takedown and everyone in the arena knew he had it. Went to review for a push out which he got to tie it up but lost on (stupid) criteria. This is all second-hand info from Twitter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tech_fall15 1 Report post Posted January 23, 2015 The fact you can lose 2-2 needs to change Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pipewrench 73 Report post Posted January 23, 2015 The fact you can lose 2-2 needs to change According the Foley, there is no need to change this. Mat color is more important. 2 GranbyTroll and sockobuw reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GranbyTroll 454 Report post Posted January 23, 2015 Mat color is the 2nd most important aspect of wrestling, followed by whether or not Greco exclusively should be shirtless. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gutfirst 220 Report post Posted January 23, 2015 (edited) 6 minutes to wrestle. every one who competes at that level knows they have 6 minutes to win a match. that's it. there was ot. most of the wrestling in ot was slow paced and conservative. fila had a great idea to the increase action... the over/under clinch. yes, let's see some throws. wrong. more boring wrestling trying to break someone's lock to win a bout. fila can fix that with new ideas... enter the leg clinch. yuk let's learn from the past, boys. 6 minutes and then match is over. Edited January 23, 2015 by gutfirst 1 Coach_J reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jaroslav Hasek 2,067 Report post Posted January 23, 2015 dont see the big deal with ending every match in 6 minutes. whether there is OT or not, every match that doesn't end in a pin will end in some sort of criteria. we're just so used to matches ending in points we don't consider it criteria, but it is. could the tie break rules be simpler and could they be displayed more prominently? sure probably. but all OT usually does is extend the length of the match until it ends in criteria anyway. not getting a TD call is a different issue but im fine with no OT. especially for tournaments where the extra time on the mat adds up with multiple matches a day. and having OT is fine too but i really dont see it improving the quality of the match. it also has nothing to do with mat color or uniforms. no need to conflate the issues. you can make improvements to multiple facets of the sport simultaneously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NJDan 1,113 Report post Posted January 23, 2015 With or without OT, it's ridiculous that you can "win" by a 2-2 score. If they cannot manage OT, they should award a point based on criteria and report the score as "3-2" or "3-2, criteria". 1 wnywrestling reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gimpeltf 2,085 Report post Posted January 23, 2015 The NCAA does that in TB where you win by a few seconds rt as in 6-6 RT (TB-2) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BigRedMachine 210 Report post Posted January 23, 2015 If the concern about overtime is the length of time it would take up they should simply do this: At the end of regulation, if the score is tied, add thirty seconds to the clock and call passivity against the wrestler who had been less aggressive throughout the entirety of the match. He has 30 seconds to score or he loses. It would only take an extra 30 seconds and would increase action throughout the match. boom! problem solved. 1 NJDan reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IronChef 1,134 Report post Posted January 23, 2015 According the Foley, there is no need to change this. Mat color is more important. I don't think Foley is transparent enough about the fact that he is employed by United World Wrestling. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Two_on_one 121 Report post Posted January 23, 2015 If the concern about overtime is the length of time it would take up they should simply do this: At the end of regulation, if the score is tied, add thirty seconds to the clock and call passivity against the wrestler who had been less aggressive throughout the entirety of the match. He has 30 seconds to score or he loses. It would only take an extra 30 seconds and would increase action throughout the match. boom! problem solved. I hate criteria too. It is hard to explain to the casual fan. They have improved that system by using the arrow to show who wins if the tie is not broken. That is a big help on letting people know who is winning, especially in high scoring matches or matches that you have not seen the entire bout. The problem I see with your suggestion on passivity is as follows. In Howe's finals match at Yarygin, if the ref has to determine who loses passivity call, it is likely that Howe loses that call almost every time in Russia. If the same match happened at the Schultz tournament, the Russian loses that passivity call almost every time. Since most top level wrestlers can run for 30 seconds and not get scored on so you would effectively have the refs determining the outcome with the passivity call. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites