3 point takedowns but 2 point reversals

[Wrestleknownothing]

7 minutes ago, russelscout said:

What if someone scores a takedown off of the others offensive attack? It also makes offensive attacks more risky.

By that logic you should make takedowns worth zero so no one is afraid to try for one.

[wrestle87]

2 hours ago, boconnell said:

I remember 1 point FS takedowns well.  I don't get what former FS rules have to do with you proclaiming yourself a FS fan who doesn't like that Folkstyle TDs are worth a whole 1.5Xs more than Folkstyle TDs.  The problem (if it is one) is worse in FS.  

I agree with you 1000% here.  I don’t want Folkstyle to get as bad in terms of chasing shiny things with rule changes is my point.

[russelscout]

35 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

By that logic you should make takedowns worth zero so no one is afraid to try for one.

No. It’s more risky, but there’s also more reward. My point is that it doesn’t really change anything and does nothing to increase the frequency of attacks. You can now score an early takedown and have 2 stall calls to play with which is too bad since the number one issue in the sport in my opinion is refs refusing to call stalling. 
 

We have yet to see it be a major issue so far, but I expect we will see a lot of sitting on first period leads come conference championships and the NCAAs

[Wrestleknownothing]

8 minutes ago, russelscout said:

No. It’s more risky, but there’s also more reward. My point is that it doesn’t really change anything and does nothing to increase the frequency of attacks. You can now score an early takedown and have 2 stall calls to play with which is too bad since the number one issue in the sport in my opinion is refs refusing to call stalling. 
 

We have yet to see it be a major issue so far, but I expect we will see a lot of sitting on first period leads come conference championships and the NCAAs

For me it eliminates the worst result. Two escapes equals a takedown. I absolutely hated that. And that was far more common than what you are worried about.

[Caveira]

23 hours ago, jross said:

Perhaps. 

It may have been enough to know he was winning the neutral position.  Known knowns strategy.  Or perhaps he scouted that Feldkamp is decent on top (many wins by falls and major).

I’m a Hawkeye fan.   I’m not a fan of the 3 point td.    
 

with that said.  Old rules he would have to take down and get out or get a td.    The new rule allowed him to skip that and stall ish through the third period.    The new rule promoted that.  

[neutral]

The three point TD devalues the escape, reversals, and the stall call and inflates the TD.  This will absolutely change match outcomes and mat strategy. 

[jross]

That Carr v. Ramirez match is the showcase example for the 3pt reversal to match the 3pt takedown.  

[Caveira]

On 11/27/2023 at 10:21 PM, russelscout said:

No. It’s more risky, but there’s also more reward. My point is that it doesn’t really change anything and does nothing to increase the frequency of attacks. You can now score an early takedown and have 2 stall calls to play with which is too bad since the number one issue in the sport in my opinion is refs refusing to call stalling. 
 

We have yet to see it be a major issue so far, but I expect we will see a lot of sitting on first period leads come conference championships and the NCAAs

This happened in the Ayala v penn Match.   He even gave up a stalling point in the 3rd I think. 

[Hammerlock3]

2 hours ago, jross said:

That Carr v. Ramirez match is the showcase example for the 3pt reversal to match the 3pt takedown.  

only if you hate top wrestling and think ramirez should have been punished for taking an aggressive ride at a suboptimal time. who were you cheering for?

[1032004]

49 minutes ago, Caveira said:

This happened in the Ayala v penn Match.   He even gave up a stalling point in the 3rd I think. 

He won that match 8-7.  I thought the complaint you were replying to was about guys getting 1 early TD then stalling the rest of the match?

[1032004]

Gonna have to watch this one…

 

 

[jross]

On 12/2/2023 at 4:56 PM, Hammerlock3 said:

only if you hate top wrestling and think ramirez should have been punished for taking an aggressive ride at a suboptimal time. who were you cheering for?

No dog in the fight.

It seems weird, but Carr arguably wrestled the better match and lost.  I don't have an opinion on whether a TD should be increased to 3 points to match the TD. 

This has me wondering...

If freestyle largely awards points based on scoring difficulty, what is the reasoning for considering a TD as more difficult than a reversal?  Is this reasoning why the TD is now worth more than the reversal in Folkstyle?

[Hammerlock3]

1 hour ago, jross said:

No dog in the fight.

It seems weird, but Carr arguably wrestled the better match and lost.  I don't have an opinion on whether a TD should be increased to 3 points to match the TD. 

This has me wondering...

If freestyle largely awards points based on scoring difficulty, what is the reasoning for considering a TD as more difficult than a reversal?  Is this reasoning why the TD is now worth more than the reversal in Folkstyle?

I'd say a takedown is worth more than a reversal because TDs to some extent are initated by the scorer every time. IMHO reversals are predicated on the top guy making a mistake, because he could always just let the bottom guy go. 

My take on Carr/Ramirez is that after he got the TD ramirez went into a very aggressive crab ride (i'm not claiming he wanted to it was more of a situational imperative), and got reversed. I don't think he should be punished for that aggression to a degree to which it negates the TD he earned.

[Eagle26]

I’m torn on this one. I agree takedowns are generally more “difficult” because reversals often happen when the top guy goes for something and gets out of position. I also like that it is more reflective of freestyle scoring. However, the one thing I have a hard time with is the situation where the bottom guy basically escapes and goes right for an attack. The difference between the ref calling it an escape and a takedown vs a reversal can be a bit subjective. Now that’s the difference of getting 4 points or getting 2 points… I don’t like that. 

[Hammerlock3]

3 minutes ago, Eagle26 said:

I’m torn on this one. I agree takedowns are generally more “difficult” because reversals often happen when the top guy goes for something and gets out of position. I also like that it is more reflective of freestyle scoring. However, the one thing I have a hard time with is the situation where the bottom guy basically escapes and goes right for an attack. The difference between the ref calling it an escape and a takedown vs a reversal can be a bit subjective. Now that’s the difference of getting 4 points or getting 2 points… I don’t like that. 

yeah but no one likes it when refs make bad calls.

[Eagle26]

18 minutes ago, Hammerlock3 said:

yeah but no one likes it when refs make bad calls.

Yeah but in this situation, there’s not much difference in the action of the wrestlers. 

[Hammerlock3]

3 minutes ago, Eagle26 said:

Yeah but in this situation, there’s not much difference in the action of the wrestlers. 

i'd say thats a distinction without a difference. there are always going to be hard calls for refs, botched escape calls are now less important.

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

On 11/30/2023 at 12:15 PM, neutral said:

The three point TD devalues the escape, reversals, and the stall call and inflates the TD.  This will absolutely change match outcomes and mat strategy. 

I think that's the point.

[1032004]

1 hour ago, Hammerlock3 said:

i'd say thats a distinction without a difference. there are always going to be hard calls for refs, botched escape calls are now less important.

I think the argument (which I’d agree with, but overall am OK with reversals staying as 2) is that they are now more important, not less 

[Eagle26]

Yes, to clarify I’m a big fan of the 3 pt takedown, and I’m ok with reversals staying 2 points. I’m not concerned as much as about refs making tough calls either… I’m more concerned that it can be called correctly as reversal, but the action was such that a wrestler got to his feet, didn’t quite get separation, but then “takes down” his opponent from his feet, and then only gets 2 points. IMO the action of taking someone down from your feet is a distinction that makes the takedown more valuable than the reversal, but in this case the action is basically the same. I can live with it though… wrestlers will adjust and put an even bigger emphasis on getting away first (which consequently slows down action).