I like the 3pt TD more than the 4 pt NF. Don't like seeing kids get 4 with a cheap tilt.It's actually a better rule change, imo, than the 4-point nearfall, which hasn't created any heartburn at all.
Good or bad idea?
Disagree, strongly. Rules need to be simpler, not more complicated. Haven't yet seen a stall call for interlocking fingers, and the out-of-bounds stall calls (which I like in theory), haven't been consistently applied...just to name a couple examples. NCAA wrestling leadership, the refs, and whoever else is needed, really need to take a look at the refs job...and some of the rules.Still think it should be 3 for a TD off your own attack/shot and 2 for a TD off a counter/scramble (such as a "spin around" off a strong sprawl).
Brands hit the nail on the head. Ref's need to ensure they have a seat at the tableDisagree, strongly. Rules need to be simpler, not more complicated. Haven't yet seen a stall call for interlocking fingers, and the out-of-bounds stall calls (which I like in theory), haven't been consistently applied...just to name a couple examples. NCAA wrestling leadership, the refs, and whoever else is needed, really need to take a look at the refs job...and some of the rules.
agree, that is why I made the comment about cheap tilts.I have always thought the main objective of our sport was to pin our opponent.
I really like the 4 point nearfall, and increasing a takedown value to 3 points devalues the importance of turning your opponent to his back.
Good or bad idea?
So I understand...a "cheap tilt" before this season was 3 points, now it's 4...if it's held for 4 seconds. So you're not really arguing about the added point, you're arguing against "cheap tilts". That's still back exposure, right?agree, that is why I made the comment about cheap tilts.
NitLion stated the objective was to pin your opponent. Cheap tilts rarely (unless opponent is pretty weak) result in a pin. That was my point.So I understand...a "cheap tilt" before this season was 3 points, now it's 4...if it's held for 4 seconds. So you're not really arguing about the added point, you're arguing against "cheap tilts". That's still back exposure, right?
Interesting. So if the bottom guy gets out in the 30 seconds he earns an escape point. But if there are no back points within the 30 seconds the wrestlers are put at neutral and no escape point is awarded?Another rule change that might be interesting is to eliminate the riding time point and replace with a 30 second riding rule where the wrestlers are brought to neutral if there is 30 seconds riding with no back points. This could create more action because the bottom guy is at risk of missing out on the escape point and will also avoid those matches with large amounts of riding with no turns that can be boring to watch. Furthermore, it would be more in line with international wrestling.
Great idea, unfortunately too many refs think that aggressively calling stalling is inserting themselves into the match and that they would be determining the outcome. I would argue, that by them not calling stalling, according to the rules, they are assisting the stalling wrestler to possibly pull out a close win or avoiding bonus.If a wrestler gets a three point takedown straight to back for 4, he'll be just about halfway to a TF. I think rakes6293 is right, you would have to consider increasing TF to 18 or 20.
Here's a really simple idea...how about we have refs call stalling, when there's stalling? I mean, geez, the rules are already in the rule books. Why don't we use them? And, that starts at the lowest level of the sport. I'm fed up with going to HS matches to watch a kid take 8 straight shots without the other kid getting dinged.
Interesting. So if the bottom guy gets out in the 30 seconds he earns an escape point. But if there are no back points within the 30 seconds the wrestlers are put at neutral and no escape point is awarded?
that is interesting and I think I like this suggestion. I don't know the answer because I like riding in wrestling as it is a dominant factor. Riding time adds to strategy but not necessarily simplifying for fans (and scorers).Another rule change that might be interesting is to eliminate the riding time point and replace with a 30 second riding rule where the wrestlers are brought to neutral if there is 30 seconds riding with no back points. This could create more action because the bottom guy is at risk of missing out on the escape point and will also avoid those matches with large amounts of riding with no turns that can be boring to watch. Furthermore, it would be more in line with international wrestling.
Another rule change that might be interesting is to eliminate the riding time point and replace with a 30 second riding rule where the wrestlers are brought to neutral if there is 30 seconds riding with no back points. This could create more action because the bottom guy is at risk of missing out on the escape point and will also avoid those matches with large amounts of riding with no turns that can be boring to watch. Furthermore, it would be more in line with international wrestling.
that is interesting and I think I like this suggestion. I don't know the answer because I like riding in wrestling as it is a dominant factor. Riding time adds to strategy but not necessarily simplifying for fans (and scorers).
Not sure what this would do other than create a lot of guys just hanging on for 30 seconds to avoid giving up the point. I just don't see what this does.Another rule change that might be interesting is to eliminate the riding time point and replace with a 30 second riding rule where the wrestlers are brought to neutral if there is 30 seconds riding with no back points. This could create more action because the bottom guy is at risk of missing out on the escape point and will also avoid those matches with large amounts of riding with no turns that can be boring to watch. Furthermore, it would be more in line with international wrestling.
Possible unintended consequence is we've replaced match long 1-pt riding time with 30 second riding time points scored multiple times.Another rule change that might be interesting is to eliminate the riding time point and replace with a 30 second riding rule where the wrestlers are brought to neutral if there is 30 seconds riding with no back points. This could create more action because the bottom guy is at risk of missing out on the escape point and will also avoid those matches with large amounts of riding with no turns that can be boring to watch. Furthermore, it would be more in line with international wrestling.
Possible unintended consequence is we've replaced match long 1-pt riding time with 30 second riding time points scored multiple times.
I can easily envision instead of working a turn, just hanging on to preserve that 1 non awarded escape point.
Not sure what this would do other than create a lot of guys just hanging on for 30 seconds to avoid giving up the point. I just don't see what this does.
It prettymuch turns folkstyle into freestyle.
It prettymuch turns folkstyle into freestyle.