Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
tightwaist

My issues with Freestyle

Recommended Posts

Generally, the new rules do seem to increase action and simplify scoring, but I still don't get the mindset of some of these refs. Jason Nolf gets in quickly on a leg and battles hard for an attempted score against Hall. Action stops, back on their feet and Nolf gets hit with a passivity calls 5 seconds later by a ref with a ponytail (guessing he never wrestled). Taylor shoots his low ankle, gets caught underneath Howe for 20 seconds and his front headlock, and Taylor gets a passivity warning. Meanwhile, Howe does nothing with this opportunity. Have these refs ever wrestled? At least at the NCAA's, most if not all of those refs were former wrestlers. I am wagering that ain't the case with freestyle. How can a wrestler who generates the action get a passivity call? It just seems so subjective and evidence that these refs don't understand the complexity of the sport from a technical standpoint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't understand the passivity calls either.  It seems whoever gets called in the first period will have the advantage in the 2nd period because it's going to go against the other guy.  Ramos gets called in the 2nd period of his finals match yet it seemed to me he was pushing the action the entire match.  It did end up making for an exciting finish but just didn't seem correct when called.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Passive call is random a lot of the time. A wrestler will be trying to score but failing and still get hit with the shot clock. Or neither will be doing much but the ref picks one to put on the clock, like they are obligated to use the shot clock at some point. The funny thing is the first warning you get before the shot clock is basically warning you that if you don't score you'll be on the shot clock, whereas it should be a warning to attempt to score. Referees can't use it properly, would not mind it being scrapped altogether. The world cup a few weeks ago in particular had a lot of dumb passive calls. I haven't seen anyone get screwed on a passive call and then lose the match for that reason, though. So that's why it's not mentioned much. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The passivity calling against Nolf in particular was awful. However, that ref seemed to mess up a lot of stuff, even scoring TD's as one point when they are obviously 2. Wasn't very impressed with his performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My two cents: the challenge system needs to be re-worked. As it is now a coach can "buy" a break for one point simply by throwing the brick. It's ridiculous how long they take to review the challenges. Is there really no way to bring up the video and make a determination more quickly?

 

I'm not the first to say this but we have to get rid of criteria. It's ridiculous. Do it like NCAAs with sudden victory or something. SV can be exciting.

 

Change TF to 15 point differential. Back in the day TF was I believe 12 points but a TD was 1 point. 

 

Give people a little more time in par terre after a takedown. I get why they changed the rules but the pendulum has swung too far the other way.

 

If someone is passive then the other guy (the aggressor, for lack of a better word) gets a choice. Mr Passive either goes on the shot clock which works as usual or goes down for 30 seconds. This gives the other guy a strong advantage to understand his opponent's weaknesses and exploit them. It will also create a strong incentive to learn some par terre.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not the first to say this but we have to get rid of criteria. It's ridiculous. Do it like NCAAs with sudden victory or something. SV can be exciting.

 

You do realize that if at the end of SV at NCAA's if the score remains tied they still use criteria right? It's just who has more riding time in the overtime periods. Honestly, freestyle's criteria almost makes more sense than folkstyle's criteria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see your point phish. If you want to declare a winner then some of the time no matter how many overtimes you have you will need criteria. So the only question is when do you say no mas? To my mind the wrestlers work so hard they deserve another three minutes to decide it. But you're right, at the end of the overtime the same problem is there. If there's a tie you have to either do more overtime or go to criteria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't change anything. Freestyle currently is the best on-the-mat product in the past 20 years. The low ceiling for a Tech is pone of the primary reasons the sport is so exciting. There is more of an incentive to keep scoring when up 5 or 6 than to conserve the lead. A higher ceiling will just lead to a lot more 4-6 point wins with the last 3 minutes of boredom. Criteria also makes the 6 minutes on the match way more exciting. Both competitors wrestle till the whistle. If you stop wrestling you lose. With OT, up by two just chill because even if you get taken down you don't lose. A slight complication with criteria means make sure you have more points. Refs are a totally different story. All refs perform a difficult job but can be even better. If it ain't broke don't fix it and freestyle is finally exciting again. So exciting that we want to makes change to college because we see what the sport could provide. Hard to believe, but UWW got it right with this set of rules. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW i'd vote to keep criteria and the 10 pt tech. maybe raise the tech to 12 but definitely no OT. i've become convinced on that topic.

 

review process needs to be streamlined. the delays are killers for fans and unfair to the wrestlers. 

 

the passive calls and shot clocks should be more consistent. i dont know exactly how they should be changed but i like the idea of putting someone on the clock if there is no scoring. if they just flipped a coin and said red on the clock if no scoring after 2 minutes and period 1 and blue on the clock if still no score after 2 minutes in the 2nd i think that would be fine. 

 

pretty nice product on the mat right now tho. it was an entertaining Open for sure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd agree with freestyle currently having the best rules, certainly for as long as i've been watching. The problems are relatively minor, shot clock is flawed but not so much that it ruins the product. Freestyle is very entertaining to watch.  I really don't want to them ever bring back the forced par terre stuff. It's awkward and frustrating to watch with the constant attempts at flattening out before a grip is established leading to the ref intervening constantly. It creates a break in the action and for people who don't know the rules (I remember being confused as to why one wrestler randomly went down on all fours in the middle of a match) it can be hard to follow. Freestyle flows a lot better without forced par terre. 

Edited by Shiraz123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rules now are mostly good. Keep then as is.

 

I do want turn to be more clear about how passivity is determined. Right now it's possible to game the system. "If I stall early he will get the first shot clock , and I'll get the 2nd, and I'll be ahead on criteria ".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think no overtime has made the end of matches much more exciting. How often do you see guys in folkstyle both just ease off the gas pedal the last :30 before OT? The last :30 in freestyle with no OT has created some pretty awesome drama. I thought it was dumb at first but after watching it for a year I think its the way to go for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think no overtime has made the end of matches much more exciting. How often do you see guys in folkstyle both just ease off the gas pedal the last :30 before OT? The last :30 in freestyle with no OT has created some pretty awesome drama. I thought it was dumb at first but after watching it for a year I think its the way to go for now.

 

I hate to agree with you because I hated the no OT rule, but now, I do agree with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys make some really great points. The fact it is ending and that's all there is to it forces some serious risk taking at the end. In terms of making a sport with a reputation for being boring (typical non-wrestler remark "what's so interesting about two guys pushing and groping each other") it's a good thing. And hey, if everyone knows and understands the rules then everyone can do their best to win within the rules. 

 

I'm a little less convinced on the tech fall criteria. My issue is that with trapped arm guts and leg laces it's all too easy to end the match before it starts. A take down and a trapped arm gut can put you up 8-0 and one td away from a tech. Too fast!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a little less convinced on the tech fall criteria. My issue is that with trapped arm guts and leg laces it's all too easy to end the match before it starts. A take down and a trapped arm gut can put you up 8-0 and one td away from a tech. Too fast!

 

I hear what you're saying, but isn't that like saying a pin shouldn't end the match so soon? Bottom line: there are certain moves you can absolutely not get hit with or the match will end. You have to learn to defend them and stay out of them or you will lose quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nerd, yes and no. Yes if a pin and a ten point spread represent the same level of domination. No if they don't. For me it comes down to the reason for stopping a match before the allotted amount of time. The only reason I can think of is because the level of dominance is so extreme as to make continuing pointless. As in the next step is to unsheathe your dagger and end it for real. Now the touch fall in itself has confused this issue I admit. But the fact is if you are going to stop the match before its time I think the outcome should be close to assured and I think the current rules fall short there and rob the fans of some action to boot. I would rather see a 15 point TF. That's all. I'm not greedy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A touch fall does not assure victory for the guy who is dominating. Sometimes, but not other times. There are many come-from-behind pins, pins during otherwise very evenly matched compeition, and even fluke pins (e.g. self-pinning).

 

If you are looking for matches to be stopped only when the outcome is so sure that it makes no more sense to go on, then the touch fall should be eliminated the same way you're calling for trapped arm guts to be less impactful to the outcome of a match.

 

The possibility of a match ending anytime by fall or a guy coming from behind out of nowhere with one good move (e.g. a trapped gut) is part of what makes wrestling exciting. it's not like football or basketball where teams just go through the motions in the end since victory is literally assured. In wrestling, you have to wrestle the whole time or risk losing. I like it that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incidentally, it is really hard to work a trapped arm gut. Very few can do it and nobody can do it consistently. You sort of have to "catch" a guy in it. If you are able to do such a difficult move, you deserve a big outcome, just like if you are able to put a guy on his back and pin him,  you deserve a big outcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well my points are minor in the scheme of things. I hated the clinch and didn't like the system of having new scores each period. I also hate the endless tweaking of the rules. My points on TF are a matter of perspective. I think I'd like it a bit more with some changes but I don't want to constantly tinker either. Also one thing's for sure is you can never predict exactly how a well-thought-out change is going to play out. So good. We have a set of rules that are doing their job and are easy enough to understand. Case closed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the passive calls and shot clocks should be more consistent. i dont know exactly how they should be changed but i like the idea of putting someone on the clock if there is no scoring. if they just flipped a coin and said red on the clock if no scoring after 2 minutes and period 1 and blue on the clock if still no score after 2 minutes in the 2nd i think that would be fine. 

I think switching the guy who's down at random would be better than the current system, but I'm still against any rule that makes someone score arbitrarily.

 

I also would prefer a single criteria - last score wins.  Any rule that makes people do math in their heads or think about sequences from five minutes before is too complicated.

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...