I don't believe anybody truly yet knows.
My impression is anytime riding time is being accrued, because I've seen no caveats.
NCAA Rules changes coming!!
- Thread starter WexfordWarrior
- Start date
My impression is anytime riding time is being accrued, because I've seen no caveats.
From the link in Post #14 (article by the NCAA Media Center):
Riding point modification
The committee proposed changing the way wrestlers can earn riding time. Under the recommendation, a riding time point could be awarded only if the wrestler in the top position has both a minute of time advantage and has scored near-fall points during the match.
It's funny, but I never really bought into the idea that RBY or Jason Nolf needed help teching guys. It's true, especially w/ RBY, that he could absolutely humilate a guy, but would struggle to get a tech. But a 15pt tech from exclusively a catch-and-release strategy is like a unicorn of sorts. If you aren't Jason Nolf, you probably aren't going to get many, and I always thought that was cool (as a fan of Jason Nolf's). But yes, a 3pt takedown does mean more techs for the good guys. Still not sure about it.
I added it cause in many cases you have to break down the bottom guy to turn him. There are exceptions of course. The key regardless is working towards a turn to score or pin.
If you guys want to see more stalling calls just replace the refs with Iowa fans. 🤷♂️
It might be a coincidence, but after you posted this mentioning Stallalonga, CowboyUp came around... unless I missed earlier recent posts by him.
Imagine a situation off a restart where the guy on bottom stands and the top guy has control, it gets near the edge, and there's a step out rule. And the guy on top gets a warning then dinged even if the other wrestler steps out first if deemed that the top guy forced the step out.
Even with the current rules we have, I can't imagine a better way to steer the action away from mat wrestling and still allow for good mat wrestlers to ride/score. We don't need to reinvent the wheel here, we just need to penalize passivity.
Even with the current rules we have, I can't imagine a better way to steer the action away from mat wrestling and still allow for good mat wrestlers to ride/score. We don't need to reinvent the wheel here, we just need to penalize passivity.
they might be a bit lopsided if you do that.
Oh yeah. My bad there. Got him mixed up with Anthony Collica.
You sure? I think when guys "gas" it means their body is shutting down due to lack of oxygen--aka anaerobic.
I disagree to an extent. Guys on top are trying to turn. They wait for the appropriate wrist control so they can get a tilt. They never get it due to the bottom guy preventing.. Greg's matches mimic that a lot - if no tilt or cross face cradle he is working to get them.. just doesn't look like much. I do agree there are many times where the guy on top is simply riding to not give up a point. That's part of wrestling, folkstyle, to an extent in my book. Shows dominance. Doesn't happen all the time cause many people do get off of the bottom - more often than not
It means no oxygen, not sure about the needed part. Muscles can function without oxygen by breaking down glucose. I think Adam was referring to the fact that the best conditioned wrestlers have developed bodies that do this better than most, if not all, athletes.
Anaerobic energy production is generally thought to be less than 30 seconds. Sprints, power lifting etc. Wrestling is definitely not an anaerobic sport!
I don't think that's true. It's both. But when you're talking about fatigue at the end of a match, as Adam mentioned, it's more anaerobic.
Google has a few interesting tidbits, though I don't really know these sources:
Developing World Class Conditioning For Wrestling - Sweet Science of Fighting
Wrestling workouts are considered some of the hardest in any sport. Not surprising as wrestling requires manipulating another large human being and is
sweetscienceoffighting.com
Wrestlers Need Aerobics, Too
Although it’s categorized as a purely anaerobic sport, wrestling has a huge aerobic component. It doesn’t matter how strong and […]
www.stack.com
The anaerobic energy pathway is very short term. Wrestling has components that use this pathway (for example, the explosive moves) but wrestlers aren’t relying on anaerobic production for seven minute matches. That’s why they run, bike etc. I honestly didn’t read all of your links, bc I am not arguing there is an anaerobic component.I don't think that's true. It's both. But when you're talking about fatigue at the end of a match, as Adam mentioned, it's more anaerobic.
Google has a few interesting tidbits, though I don't really know these sources:
Developing World Class Conditioning For Wrestling - Sweet Science of Fighting
Wrestling workouts are considered some of the hardest in any sport. Not surprising as wrestling requires manipulating another large human being and is
Wrestlers Need Aerobics, Too
Although it’s categorized as a purely anaerobic sport, wrestling has a huge aerobic component. It doesn’t matter how strong and […]
I'm fine w/ a "it's both" designation, because it obviously is. But I think Tirappelle was talking about anaerobic fatigue--I don't think it was a typo, or misinformed.
Edit: And if you feel like reading just one link I've provided, look at this one:
The Do’s and Don’ts of Wrestling Conditioning Workouts
When wrestling practice starts in November many coaches are left with a hodgepodge team of athletes coming from football, soccer...
coachesinsider.com
It's been noted the PSU wrestlers don't do a ton of running, and I think that article points to why. The body starts to shut down after intense activity. The wrestlers who can endure that experience the best are usually the ones who win.
Last edited:
I just go by desk references it comes to biology / chemical reaction definition (preferred source for me over a financial management analyst).
Anaerobic means it can occur without the presence of oxygen (i.e., oxygen is not required, i.e., it's not needed). Some gasket making material is necessary anaerobic.
Obviously, wrestling cannot occur without the presence of oxygen. Wrestlers will not perform optimally without excellent oxygen management.
Sure, anaerobic can also relate to an exercise that does not improve the efficiency of the body's cardiovascular system in absorbing and transporting oxygen.
But I don't see that as relates to building stamina or preventing fatigue in a sport such as wrestling. In contrast, aerobic makes perfect sense..
If wrestling was anaerobic, people would've thought reports of Beard not breathing was good training.
Occam's Razor : It was a typo.
I consider this horse sufficiently beaten.
Oh geez though, I can't let it go yet--we seem to be close to a breakthrough!
You guys are treating these systems like they exist in a vacuum when they're both components to how the body produces energy. Even marathoners deal with lactic acid. Know how lactic acid is produced? If you have a great aerobic stamina, your muscles will function in that state for longer--that's a great advantage to have while wrestling, to be sure, and you'll certainly recover faster. But when your body isn't able to deliver enough oxygen for the work you are asking it to do, the anaerobic system kicks in. When Michael Beard isn't breathing well enough, he's taking a fast track to that system, which has a cost in fatigue, and eventually, things shutting down. Elite wrestlers build up a tolerance in their body for managing that situation, and recovering from it quickly. The best wrestlers probably have the best tolerance for it of any sport, IMO. To me, that makes wrestling a substantial anaerobic activity. Maybe not as much as those sports that only exist there like weightlifting, but still quite a bit. OK. I think I'm done now.
edit….Except that Tirapelle isn’t just a financial manager—he’s also an NCAA champ and a coach of one of the most successful high school wrestling programs in the country (ask them Nevills boys about him)
Last edited:
Here's the other problem:
Do we actually NEED any of these rules (at least the ones pertaining to action on the mat? I heartily state we do not.
Sure, there is some stalling, but that doesn't stop college wrestling from being VERY fun and having incredible competition right now.
"If it ain't broke..."
Besides, if they can't apparently do an annual point of emphasis to get refs to call stalling, then just changing the rules all the time isn't going to fix things either.
But it isn't about waiting for the refs. It should be about reforming the rules committee. Who even is on the rules committee? I have no idea. But they aren't doing their jobs properly.
There is never a right to run away.
But refs and those who hire them think there is. That's how we end up with uncalled stalling.
The refs don't make the correct calls --> it's not about the refs, it's about the rules committee --> we don't need the rules changed, we need them enforced --> the refs don't make the correct calls ...
What's the process for someone becoming a ref in the NCAA. You would think they would really push this if there is some program they need to complete to be a ref.
Well, maybe it's not a right per say, but I find it to be way less egregious than stalling the entire match. In particular, the first period.
Prefer a modification to riding-time / escape than 3 pt TD. 30 seconds to escape or turn after being taken down. No escape or turn, wrestlers put back on their feet. If top wrestler turns bottom wrestler, even if they don't get exposure points, they can continue to ride.
Same rule for 2nd and 3rd periods.
Same rule for 2nd and 3rd periods.
About equal to the TD-roll-roll-roll-roll TF of freestyle.
Edit….per poster above….my comment is actually worse. Lol.
agree there
there is a program, and methodology, to getting into the NCAA. But, like all other levels, there is a shortage of those who want to take the abuse, low pay, travel, etc. So, you end up with some that aren't really capable of working the level they end up. Then you have supervisors telling them not to inject themselves into the match. So, stalling doesn't get called the way the rules are written. So we make new rules, making it even more difficult.
Seems like a vicious circle.
Military volunteer system -- everybody get in a line, when they ask for volunteers, people step back. Everyone left in the front gets the job.
Look.
With one possible exception, None of the proposed rule changes are going to do anything to reduce stalling.
They have 2 changes really pointed directly at "stalling"
- One is the ankle ride revision proposal. The 5 second count rule hasn't actually reduced stalling rides, in my opinion, since it does nothing about stalling from higher. Second, the rule is poorly considered as it will penalize bow and arrows.
- The other is not giving a riding time point unless you score near fall etc. This does nothing about stalling in either neutral or bottom, and, in certain circumstances, probably wouldn't stop top stalling either (like if I'm up 2-0 or 1-0 something entering the 3rd, and I take top, even without the RT point, who cares? may as well stall from top if I can). Also, it fails to make a distinction between guys who are trying to turn, which is really hard at the college level, and someone being Tony Nelson.
Cael Sanderson once got a Hawkeye DQd for stalling at a dual meet. I believe it was Paul Jenn. That would never happen now. So, why is it that refs formerly called stalling more aggressively (I'd say correctly) and don't now? Is it the refs? Is it the senior people at the NCAA rules committees? I don't know, but the problem is obviously how refs view stalling, and none of these rule changes will fix that because they haven't fixed it so far.
And lastly, and this is by far my biggest point:
These rule changes aren't even necessary. Like, at all. The sport has a few dud matches here and there, but, aesthetically, it's the best it's probably ever been. This stuff about reductions in viewership or whatever, please. If you want to grow the sport, then find ways to increase the numbers of programs and opportunities (looking at you, federal courts and ADs).
