Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

 

With the 3-point take down and 4 pt near fall you have the ability to drastically change a match.   The last exchange in the Ramos v Noto match took the match from a 3-2 decision to a major in one exchange.    It was just a despiration move by Noto in a close match that on paper looks like domination by Ramos    

Edited by Threadkilla
Posted

I found it interesting that John Smith promoted the idea that the first takedown would be worth three points and subsequent takedowns would be two points.  He was looking for a way to reduce the number of scoreless first periods.  I wonder if it would be better that way and to only award three points for the first takedown if it occurs during the first period. 

  • Fire 1
Posted
17 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

I found it interesting that John Smith promoted the idea that the first takedown would be worth three points and subsequent takedowns would be two points.  He was looking for a way to reduce the number of scoreless first periods.  I wonder if it would be better that way and to only award three points for the first takedown if it occurs during the first period. 

This does make a lot of sense and would encourage action early but alas, we can't confuse the fans, think about the children.  😕

2BPE 11/17/24 SMC

Posted
25 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

I found it interesting that John Smith promoted the idea that the first takedown would be worth three points and subsequent takedowns would be two points.  He was looking for a way to reduce the number of scoreless first periods.  I wonder if it would be better that way and to only award three points for the first takedown if it occurs during the first period. 

Similar to the mid-60s anti-OSU rule of 2 for the first td and 1 for the rest. Didn't last long.

Posted
9 minutes ago, ionel said:

This does make a lot of sense and would encourage action early but alas, we can't confuse the fans, think about the children.  😕

Not to mention the scorekeepers, some of whom already struggle. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, gimpeltf said:

Similar to the mid-60s anti-OSU rule of 2 for the first td and 1 for the rest. Didn't last long.

Did it not last long because OSU was getting most of the first takedowns?

Posted
4 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

Did it not last long because OSU was getting most of the first takedowns?

Not sure but the rule was instituted because OSU was getting most of ALL tds. So since they were doing that before it stands to reason they were getting most of the first tds earlier and this would have cut into the leads they were getting.

Posted
2 minutes ago, gimpeltf said:

Not sure but the rule was instituted because OSU was getting most of ALL tds. So since they were doing that before it stands to reason they were getting most of the first tds earlier and this would have cut into the leads they were getting.

Not just that they were getting most but they were using cut and release thus making many matches simply a takedown contest.  Others didn't like this, changed the rules so OSU beat them on the mat.  

2BPE 11/17/24 SMC

Posted
9 minutes ago, Threadkilla said:

This went off the rails in record time.  

OffTheRails ... that would've been a good username ... almost as good as Threadkilla😉

2BPE 11/17/24 SMC

Posted
9 minutes ago, ionel said:

OffTheRails ... that would've been a good username ... almost as good as Threadkilla😉

 

The WrestlingGonad didn't feel appropriate.  Flo already had one.  

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...