"Offensive" strategy discussion

[GogglesPaizano]

Thoughts and input from the collective.

This is not intended a criticism by any stretch, but more as an "observation" that applies to both RBY and Brooks, and maybe a lesser extent Carter. To be fair I saw Nolf our most prolific pinner ever run into the same issue from time to time.

I would like to see the count of 12-14 point differential majors our guys have earned the past few years. There have been many more than a handful. It's a testament to the challenge of getting to that 15 point span with catch a release strategy. You can score 10 takedowns to none, and gain only a 10 point differential. This aspect of the scoring frustrates me in almost every dual, partially because we are the best takedown team in the nation most years.

I really despise seeing outclassed kids get rewarded the 1 point for getting 'released'. I have toyed with the thought of eliminating the 1 point escape entirely, but I think that brings in the potential for unintended consequences. Likewise a 3 point takedown is just a wee bit too much, granted 2 seems like not enough. Seeing one of our guys up 6-3 after 3 takedowns in the first, only to get sloppy, give up a TD and you are looking at an undeserving 6-5 match.

Net-net, the main point I am trying to make is getting to that 15 point differential with catch and release 'alone' in 7 minutes is a real challenge.

As a counter illustration, Spencer routinely techs guys in the first and second periods. A TD plus 3 quick 4 point turns gets you to 14 points, and the victim is still sitting at zero. Exposure is rightly so, properly rewarded. You rarely see Spencer playing catch and release for more than 2-3 takedowns max. He goes for blood the old fashioned way. His catch and release is more tilt, release the arm, tilt again, release the arm, rinse and repeat, and ultimately Iowa starts most Spencer led duals up 5-0 or 6-0. This might help explain why Spencer has tank problems in the 3rd. Conditioning aside I would guess his average 3rd period minutes per match is amongst the lowest in D1

Not everyone has the skill for a friggin automatic semi indefensible move like Spencer has, but on balance I would like to see our kids across the board ease off on the catch and release in the second period a bit and work for more turns. Just one 4 point NF would pull many more matches into more sure fire Tech territory. Likewise we will get more pins with this focus as well. Our guys can always return back to catch and release in the third period of needed.

Turning is a critical and important skill. Anyone not named Max Dean across our lineup, has some room for improvement with this skill.

Am I getting to greedy? Maybe just a little, but it seems that we value the takedown higher than does the scoreboard. I think this year's team to to bottom may well prove Cael's strongest ever. Nonetheless, I reminder just a bit back to the days of Zain, Nolf, Bo. Their places are secure on our all time pins list. I would love to see some modern challenges to those numbers, but or focus would need to change a bit to get there.

 

[ChillW]

Thoughts and input from the collective.

This is not intended a criticism by any stretch, but more as an "observation" that applies to both RBY and Brooks, and maybe a lesser extent Carter. To be fair I saw Nolf our most prolific pinner ever run into the same issue from time to time.

I would like to see the count of 12-14 point differential majors our guys have earned the past few years. There have been many more than a handful. It's a testament to the challenge of getting to that 15 point span with catch a release strategy. You can score 10 takedowns to none, and gain only a 10 point differential. This aspect of the scoring frustrates me in almost every dual, partially because we are the best takedown team in the nation most years.

I really despise seeing outclassed kids get rewarded the 1 point for getting 'released'. I have toyed with the thought of eliminating the 1 point escape entirely, but I think that brings in the potential for unintended consequences. Likewise a 3 point takedown is just a wee bit too much, granted 2 seems like not enough. Seeing one of our guys up 6-3 after 3 takedowns in the first, only to get sloppy, give up a TD and you are looking at an undeserving 6-5 match.

Net-net, the main point I am trying to make is getting to that 15 point differential with catch and release 'alone' in 7 minutes is a real challenge.

As a counter illustration, Spencer routinely techs guys in the first and second periods. A TD plus 3 quick 4 point turns gets you to 14 points, and the victim is still sitting at zero. Exposure is rightly so, properly rewarded. You rarely see Spencer playing catch and release for more than 2-3 takedowns max. He goes for blood the old fashioned way. His catch and release is more tilt, release the arm, tilt again, release the arm, rinse and repeat, and ultimately Iowa starts most Spencer led duals up 5-0 or 6-0. This might help explain why Spencer has tank problems in the 3rd. Conditioning aside I would guess his average 3rd period minutes per match is amongst the lowest in D1

Not everyone has the skill for a friggin automatic semi indefensible move like Spencer has, but on balance I would like to see our kids across the board ease off on the catch and release in the second period a bit and work for more turns. Just one 4 point NF would pull many more matches into more sure fire Tech territory. Likewise we will get more pins with this focus as well. Our guys can always return back to catch and release in the third period of needed.

Turning is a critical and important skill. Anyone not named Max Dean across our lineup, has some room for improvement with this skill.

Am I getting to greedy? Maybe just a little, but it seems that we value the takedown higher than does the scoreboard. I think this year's team to to bottom may well prove Cael's strongest ever. Nonetheless, I reminder just a bit back to the days of Zain, Nolf, Bo. Their places are secure on our all time pins list. I would love to see some modern challenges to those numbers, but or focus would need to change a bit to get there.

I think that catch and release is best used to break an opponent mentally or to get to a major. Thst said, it does feel a bit greedy to ask for more than we have.

 

[RB-Old]

They just need to stop piling up the RT, they end up with 2+ minutes too many times. I feel like they can get 4 TDs in the first and 3 in the second and third periods. That's 20 points plus the escape when they choose down and another for RT. 22 points should be plenty for a TF most of the time and if they're pressing like that they're probably going to get a stall point or two.

 

[CSauertiegPSU]

Turning kids at this level is really hard and we’ve been lucky to have guys who made it look easy. Nolf was next level on his feel.

This team is full of absolute studs, but not sure even RBY, AB or Carter are yet at the level of Nolf, Nickal, DT or Ed.

Just sort of how it goes.

 

[BeachJ02]

How about a point for every minute of riding time?

 

[El-Jefe]

How about a point for every minute of riding time?

Tony Nelson approves.

Anyone who hates top stalling says no. Hell no. F- no.

Get rid of RT altogether. Or at the very least, no RT without NF.

 

[kadeeu]

Here are a couple of suggestions:

No escape point after 30 seconds of riding. Would create some urgency on the bottom and get back to nuetral sooner as there might be releases after 30 second rides.

The first 2 takedowns in a period are still 2 points, but anything after that is 3 points. Would allow the TD guys like RBY build up points faster when they are clearly dominating, but closer matches would still maintain the usual scoring.

 

[baccafarmer]

Thoughts and input from the collective.

This is not intended a criticism by any stretch, but more as an "observation" that applies to both RBY and Brooks, and maybe a lesser extent Carter. To be fair I saw Nolf our most prolific pinner ever run into the same issue from time to time.

I would like to see the count of 12-14 point differential majors our guys have earned the past few years. There have been many more than a handful. It's a testament to the challenge of getting to that 15 point span with catch a release strategy. You can score 10 takedowns to none, and gain only a 10 point differential. This aspect of the scoring frustrates me in almost every dual, partially because we are the best takedown team in the nation most years.

I really despise seeing outclassed kids get rewarded the 1 point for getting 'released'. I have toyed with the thought of eliminating the 1 point escape entirely, but I think that brings in the potential for unintended consequences. Likewise a 3 point takedown is just a wee bit too much, granted 2 seems like not enough. Seeing one of our guys up 6-3 after 3 takedowns in the first, only to get sloppy, give up a TD and you are looking at an undeserving 6-5 match.

Net-net, the main point I am trying to make is getting to that 15 point differential with catch and release 'alone' in 7 minutes is a real challenge.

As a counter illustration, Spencer routinely techs guys in the first and second periods. A TD plus 3 quick 4 point turns gets you to 14 points, and the victim is still sitting at zero. Exposure is rightly so, properly rewarded. You rarely see Spencer playing catch and release for more than 2-3 takedowns max. He goes for blood the old fashioned way. His catch and release is more tilt, release the arm, tilt again, release the arm, rinse and repeat, and ultimately Iowa starts most Spencer led duals up 5-0 or 6-0. This might help explain why Spencer has tank problems in the 3rd. Conditioning aside I would guess his average 3rd period minutes per match is amongst the lowest in D1

Not everyone has the skill for a friggin automatic semi indefensible move like Spencer has, but on balance I would like to see our kids across the board ease off on the catch and release in the second period a bit and work for more turns. Just one 4 point NF would pull many more matches into more sure fire Tech territory. Likewise we will get more pins with this focus as well. Our guys can always return back to catch and release in the third period of needed.

Turning is a critical and important skill. Anyone not named Max Dean across our lineup, has some room for improvement with this skill.

Am I getting to greedy? Maybe just a little, but it seems that we value the takedown higher than does the scoreboard. I think this year's team to to bottom may well prove Cael's strongest ever. Nonetheless, I reminder just a bit back to the days of Zain, Nolf, Bo. Their places are secure on our all time pins list. I would love to see some modern challenges to those numbers, but or focus would need to change a bit to get there.

You put a lot into that question Piazano! While watching RBY perform his catch and release routine, I often have similar thoughts. Although I’m sure it’s unpopular to say so; catch and release tactics can be occasionally disrespectful of the opponent. I always come back to the essential goal of wrestling . . . and that is to put an opponent on his back. Bottom line is that dominant wrestlers “do what they do best”. It is perhaps true that for a guy like RBY, getting pins is just not in his wheelhouse so he uses his quickness to exert dominance.
PS: This Georgia team that is torching TCU reminds me of the majority of the PSU matches I attend. Dominant in the extreme!

 

[El-Jefe]

Here are a couple of suggestions:

No escape point after 30 seconds of riding. Would create some urgency on the bottom and get back to nuetral sooner as there might be releases after 30 second rides.

The first 2 takedowns in a period are still 2 points, but anything after that is 3 points. Would allow the TD guys like RBY build up points faster when they are clearly dominating, but closer matches would still maintain the usual scoring.

No on the first. Anybody think bottom wants to be there? This is just an incentive for top stalling.

Second will cause refs and scorers tables to mess up. Just wait until continuation NF gets waived off on replay because the ref put up the wrong number of fingers. Or coaches "lose count" -- Tan Tom is grabbing a lunger brick as I type. T3 is better if we want to further reward takedowns.

 

[a_mshaffer]

it makes sense to me that a major should consist of at least one turn. Regarding RBY - in his first match - against Lehigh - he used an arm bar and pinned his guy? I thought we would see a lot of that but it doesn't look like he tries to turn....at least not a lot of effort at it. But I will say I do like watching him on his feet when he starts moving and wants a TD.

 

[RB-Old]

How about going back to major and superior decisions?

Major (8-11 point wins) 4 points
Superior (12-14 point wins) 5 points
Tech Fall (15+ point wins) 6 points

 

[Nashville_Hawkeye]

Thoughts and input from the collective.

This is not intended a criticism by any stretch, but more as an "observation" that applies to both RBY and Brooks, and maybe a lesser extent Carter. To be fair I saw Nolf our most prolific pinner ever run into the same issue from time to time.

I would like to see the count of 12-14 point differential majors our guys have earned the past few years. There have been many more than a handful. It's a testament to the challenge of getting to that 15 point span with catch a release strategy. You can score 10 takedowns to none, and gain only a 10 point differential. This aspect of the scoring frustrates me in almost every dual, partially because we are the best takedown team in the nation most years.

I really despise seeing outclassed kids get rewarded the 1 point for getting 'released'. I have toyed with the thought of eliminating the 1 point escape entirely, but I think that brings in the potential for unintended consequences. Likewise a 3 point takedown is just a wee bit too much, granted 2 seems like not enough. Seeing one of our guys up 6-3 after 3 takedowns in the first, only to get sloppy, give up a TD and you are looking at an undeserving 6-5 match.

Net-net, the main point I am trying to make is getting to that 15 point differential with catch and release 'alone' in 7 minutes is a real challenge.

As a counter illustration, Spencer routinely techs guys in the first and second periods. A TD plus 3 quick 4 point turns gets you to 14 points, and the victim is still sitting at zero. Exposure is rightly so, properly rewarded. You rarely see Spencer playing catch and release for more than 2-3 takedowns max. He goes for blood the old fashioned way. His catch and release is more tilt, release the arm, tilt again, release the arm, rinse and repeat, and ultimately Iowa starts most Spencer led duals up 5-0 or 6-0. This might help explain why Spencer has tank problems in the 3rd. Conditioning aside I would guess his average 3rd period minutes per match is amongst the lowest in D1

Not everyone has the skill for a friggin automatic semi indefensible move like Spencer has, but on balance I would like to see our kids across the board ease off on the catch and release in the second period a bit and work for more turns. Just one 4 point NF would pull many more matches into more sure fire Tech territory. Likewise we will get more pins with this focus as well. Our guys can always return back to catch and release in the third period of needed.

Turning is a critical and important skill. Anyone not named Max Dean across our lineup, has some room for improvement with this skill.

Am I getting to greedy? Maybe just a little, but it seems that we value the takedown higher than does the scoreboard. I think this year's team to to bottom may well prove Cael's strongest ever. Nonetheless, I reminder just a bit back to the days of Zain, Nolf, Bo. Their places are secure on our all time pins list. I would love to see some modern challenges to those numbers, but or focus would need to change a bit to get there.

Excellent comments. WRT Spencer, he's so fricking successful at turning his opponents yet during his tenure at Iowa I can't think of one Hawk wrestler who seemed to attempt to copy his techniques. I mean I know his strength has to be a part of it, and I'm sure many don't and won't have the skill set no matter how hard they try, but I thought I'd at least see some of them trying to emulate the Spencer turn. Going to hate seeing him graduate and really hope that his knees hold up so we can watch him for many years to come on the US team. Can't wait to see him and Gilman going after it.

 

[SJP80]

I think the easiest change to implement is to stop accumulating 2, 3, 4 minutes of riding time. If you haven't figured out how to turn someone in 1.5 minutes, chances are you are not. The elite turners (Lee, Nolf, Zain, Dean) will have turned an opponent by then. For the rest, let em up unless you are close to the end of the period.

 

[82bordeaux]

Tony Nelson approves.

Anyone who hates top stalling says no. Hell no. F- no.

Get rid of RT altogether. Or at the very least, no RT without NF.

Tony Nelson approves of this memo:

 

[mhlarch]

I'd rather see these guys work for pins.......if the guy is stalling later, then maybe start letting them up, but I don't like to see this strategy utilized immediately.

 

[billrag]

Yep, it's a tough one. Hard to complain about total domination and a 13 or 14 point major decision, but when you see complete and total domination like that, it's probably more deserving of the 5 team points for a tech fall than simply a major decision. And everyone has hit on the reasons why. If Starocci, RBY or whomever gets 10 takedowns in a match, their opponent is probably going to be gifted at least 6 or 7 escapes via being cut, so even with 10 takedowns to zero for your opponent, it's not enough for a tech fall (and nothing could be more indicative of total domination than 10 takedowns to zero in a match). As for back points, yep, if any one of them picks up even one 4-point nearfall, it makes it much easier to obtain the tech, but they're still probably going to need at least 7 or 8 unanswered takedowns as well. And, we just have to be honest and acknowledge that perhaps nearfall points aren't going to be as easy to obtain for some of these guys as they were for someone like Zain or David Taylor. It's a good problem to have (bitching and moaning about 14-point wins in a dual meet).

 

[El-Jefe]

Tony Nelson approves of this memo:

View embedded media

Are we sure Nelson didn't write that?

 

[Sleepylion]

Would it make a difference if an additional. 0.5 team point was awarded for a tech fall pr pin in the 2nd period and another 0.5 team point for a tech fall pr pin in the 1st period.

Another idea is to cap earned riding time at 1:30. I am not really sure what it would do, but it sounds like it could be interesting.

 

[CSauertiegPSU]

I’m really not sure a rule needs to be changed. If you can’t turn someone in folk then your option is catch and release. If you can’t do that enough to win by 15, then you didn’t earn a tech.

It’s an incentive to try to turn guys and to get better at doing so.

 

[NoVa Lion]

I’m really not sure a rule needs to be changed. If you can’t turn someone in folk then your option is catch and release. If you can’t do that enough to win by 15, then you didn’t earn a tech.

It’s an incentive to try to turn guys and to get better at doing so.

I agree. Seems we are looking for a solution to a problem that doesn't, IMHO, exist.

 

[Random4598375]

I’m really not sure a rule needs to be changed. If you can’t turn someone in folk then your option is catch and release. If you can’t do that enough to win by 15, then you didn’t earn a tech.

It’s an incentive to try to turn guys and to get better at doing so.

I mostly agree with this. I don't really see a problem as is, but if you really want to make it easier to tech via catch and release, then just cap the number of escape points a wrestler can get in a match (to like 5 or something).

 

[zzs006]

I’m really not sure a rule needs to be changed. If you can’t turn someone in folk then your option is catch and release. If you can’t do that enough to win by 15, then you didn’t earn a tech.

It’s an incentive to try to turn guys and to get better at doing so.

Definitely agree. Seems like any rule change will just create different problems. Things aren’t perfect but I don’t see any idea brought up that makes things noticeably better and most just make things much more complicated

 

[nerfstate]

Mostly agree that rules don’t need changing here—back points should be highly prized. I might be ok with making a major 10+ differential and go back to requiring a turn for a 15 pt TF. I’d have to see how it changes match tactics to be sure, though. Still think we need rule-change test platforms (tournaments?) as a first step to any crazy but potentially viable idea.

 

[sevensandeights]

Call me crazy but what about 2.5 points for a TD? 5-2 score after 2 TDs and 2 Es is much better than 4-2 (as stated above 6-2 is probably too much). They rewarded NF a few years ago when they went to the 4 point rule so why not reward neutral offense also?

Many matches have an TD and E in the 1st. Let's say 2.5 red, 1 green with 25 seconds of ride time. 2nd period R goes down and can't get out. Still 2.5 red, 1 green with 1:35 ride time green. 3rd period green goes down. He really needs to get out in 35 seconds to save his ride time. Let's say he does, now it's 2.5 red and 2 green with 65 seconds left. I think this would make for a really exciting 3rd period. Green is losing so he has to go for it. Get the TD, keep his ride time and he's in a great spot. Likewise, if red stays offensive he can almost certainly put the match away with a TD. If there was any top or bottom stalling in the 2nd then it would really limit that wrestler's ability to run in the 3rd. Even if green doesn't get out in time to save his RT he can still win the match with a late TD (score would be 4.5 green to 2.5 red) - both wrestlers had a TD but green had 2 escapes and that would be the difference.

If it just ends 2.5 red to 2 green then I'm ok with that too. Reward offense. If you want ride someone after a TD then fine. If you want to ride and turn someone then fine. However, if you want to ride just to ride then I think you should lose the match IF you gave up a TD at some point.

NOTE: I don't think I would like this change for high school though since there is no ride time. I would have to think that one through a little bit more.

 

[palmettolion]

Excellent comments. WRT Spencer, he's so fricking successful at turning his opponents yet during his tenure at Iowa I can't think of one Hawk wrestler who seemed to attempt to copy his techniques. I mean I know his strength has to be a part of it, and I'm sure many don't and won't have the skill set no matter how hard they try, but I thought I'd at least see some of them trying to emulate the Spencer turn. Going to hate seeing him graduate and really hope that his knees hold up so we can watch him for many years to come on the US team. Can't wait to see him and Gilman going after it.

"Well, you can't really learn from a guy if he's not practicing in the same wrestling room as you."- Ayala's mom, probably.

 

[82bordeaux]

Call me crazy but what about 2.5 points for a TD? 5-2 score after 2 TDs and 2 Es is much better than 4-2 (as stated above 6-2 is probably too much). They rewarded NF a few years ago when they went to the 4 point rule so why not reward neutral offense also?

 

[nitlion6]

Ah hell, let's just make TDs 10 points and when somebody goes to their back stop the action and put them on their feet.

 

[oldcougar65]

Long before wrestling was invented at PSU, the rule was that one got 2 points for the first takedown, then 1 point for every takedown thereafter.
Even when I was in Jr Hi, I thought that was a total crap rule (we're talking early 60's here). The USA was getting our brains beat out in Freestyle, and folkstyle rule-makers were penalizing multiple takedowns.
So I don't know what you're complaining about on this thread. If you've ever sat around a scorer's table during a tournament with a bunch of mats going, making the scoring more complicated is a great idea. You pull warm bodies out of the stands or off the JV team to keep score. Then you're going to ask them to remember who had how many takedowns during the current match when they can't remember who is wrestling?

Most tournaments can plan on extending their time in the gym by a significant percentage while the coaches argue over the scoring of each bout.

 

[tullfan68]

I'd rather see these guys work for pins.......if the guy is stalling later, then maybe start letting them up, but I don't like to see this strategy utilized immediately.

usually the bottom guy thats stalling!!

 

[tullfan68]

how about an automatic stall on the guy less aggressive in the 1st period??that way most iowa guys would get called!LOL

 

[Psalm 1 guy]

Tony Nelson approves of this memo:

View embedded media

This NCAA article is very interesting. You hear so much talk of "parallel riding" as stalling, and yet that term is not mentioned in the article. The two general provisions that could be used to enforce an extended parallel ride would be the "attempting to avoid wrestling action" and "attempt to sustain active wrestling" scenarios. It is almost like the NCAA revisited the rules based upon the way Penn State in particular, and other wrestlers in general, are riding these days by hooking the leg or ankle and controlling the wrists. Based on the article, I would say the NCAA has generally sanctioned the way many Penn State wrestlers ride. I would not be surprised to see more teams imitating Penn State's top technique or some variation thereof, especially given this NCAA article.

 

[Marshach]

What about just differentiating a "release" from an "escape", where an actual escape earns the point, but a free release by the dominant wrestler does not?

 

[El-Jefe]

What about just differentiating a "release" from an "escape", where an actual escape earns the point, but a free release by the dominant wrestler does not?

Opens up a can of worms of judgment. When does the cut = a release that does not score?

Seems likely that bottom would do all of the work to get free, and gets pushed away to avoid giving up the point. Ref gives the E1? Challenged. Ref doesn't give the E1? Challenged.

There would need to be some clear-cut definition of what release does not count as E1. Not sure there is an easily definable situation other than optional starts.

 

[GogglesPaizano]

As much ire is directed at 'stalling on top' I remain supportive of the concept riding time. Granted, after 1:30 I think the refs should be quick to stop action when not actively working for a turn.

Riding is a 'skill' that is justly rewarded. It's not easy to do against quality competition, and 90% of wrestlers never master it.

Some hate the concept of RBY riding Fix out for a national championship. I can more than appreciated what RBY was able to do against a world class competitor. I think it is safe to say RBI alone had the skill to do so on the biggest stage.

That said, as soon as I see double boots thrown in, I am angry when the ref starts cautioning the bottom wrestler for stalling. There is nothing anyone can do against double boots most of the time, and unless the to guy is wrenching shoulders over for a turn, that scenario should have a 30 second fuse max.

 

[PAgeologist]

I wouldn't mind seeing an additional ride time point if NF is earned and 2 minutes of ride time earned. Turns that 2 point NF into 3 and the 4 point into 5 essentially. Requires no further judgement from ref other than to read a clock and remember if he gave NF to the riding time earner.

 

[PAgeologist]

How about going back to major and superior decisions?

Major (8-11 point wins) 4 points
Superior (12-14 point wins) 5 points
Tech Fall (15+ point wins) 6 points

I wouldn't mind seeing that. Especially if they knocked a point off of the tech if no NF earned.

Would a fall be 7 points then?

 

[El-Jefe]

I wouldn't mind seeing an additional ride time point if NF is earned and 2 minutes of ride time earned. Turns that 2 point NF into 3 and the 4 point into 5 essentially. Requires no further judgement from ref other than to read a clock and remember if he gave NF to the riding time earner.

So you get a 2-pt tilt in the first period and are free to top stall the rest of the match? No thanks.

Get rid of the RT point altogether.

 

[nitlion6]

As much ire is directed at 'stalling on top' I remain supportive of the concept riding time. Granted, after 1:30 I think the refs should be quick to stop action when not actively working for a turn.

Riding is a 'skill' that is justly rewarded. It's not easy to do against quality competition, and 90% of wrestlers never master it.

Some hate the concept of RBY riding Fix out for a national championship. I can more than appreciated what RBY was able to do against a world class competitor. I think it is safe to say RBI alone had the skill to do so on the biggest stage.

That said, as soon as I see double boots thrown in, I am angry when the ref starts cautioning the bottom wrestler for stalling. There is nothing anyone can do against double boots most of the time, and unless the to guy is wrenching shoulders over for a turn, that scenario should have a 30 second fuse max.

Stalling on bottom guy when top guy has double boots in is from my perception one of the stupidest calls made with regularity.

3 finals appearances, zero offensive points scored. Anybody butthurt with RBY riding out Fix is a freaking idiot. If Fix wants to win a title, score a takedown and get your ass out from underneath. If you can't do that then winning a wrestling match is going to prove difficult.

 

[PAgeologist]

So you get a 2-pt tilt in the first period and are free to top stall the rest of the match? No thanks.

Get rid of the RT point altogether.

I honestly don't see how top stalling would be any more popular than it is now. Several of our wrestlers get 3+ minutes and 0 near fall points fairly regularly. The way I intended what I proposed gives no reward for anything over 2 minutes of ride time.

I do think there should be some reward for riding. Folkstyle is about control of opponent and riding is control.

 

[El-Jefe]

I honestly don't see how top stalling would be any more popular than it is now. Several of our wrestlers get 3+ minutes and 0 near fall points fairly regularly. The way I intended what I proposed gives no reward for anything over 2 minutes of ride time.

I do think there should be some reward for riding. Folkstyle is about control of opponent and riding is control.

It read as if an extra RT point would be awarded for 2:00 RT if NF points are also scored. Which is an incentive to ride one more minute than currently.

Agreed that there is too much top stalling now. Why give more incentives? Even though folk is about control, scoring should be about action. And with or without a RT point, there is a reward for riding: opportunity to score NF or pins, shortening the match, tiring bottom, etc. (which is why there is so much top stalling).