Poll: Do you like three point takedowns?

[peanut]

Burroughs likes three point takedowns because they reward the offensive wrestler and deemphasize the significance of escapes. What do you think?

[Dark Energy]

Very much yes.

[Wrestleknownothing]

Yes, I do. The reversal should also be 3.

[Mr. PeanutButter]

Big fan. I do think we should change majors to a 10 point differential seeing how just one move (Takedown + 4 nearfall) can get you nearly all the way to bonus point territory.

We also might need to rethink techfall barriers at some point, idk. Carr definitely majored Caliendo today and demonstrated he was several levels above. I was surprised, however, to see how quickly and how close he got to a techfall because in my totally unbiased eyes Caliendo wrestled really tough while being totally outwrestled (if that makes sense). I didn't feel like I was watching a techfall take place but maybe I should get my eyes checked.

[ionel]

1 hour ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Yes, I do. The reversal should also be 3.

2.5

[headshuck]

2.5

I was thinking escapes should be 1/2. Leave TDs at 2.

[ionel]

Just now, headshuck said:

I was thinking escapes should be 1/2. Leave TDs at 2.

I would've been good with that.

[wrestle87]

I am unsure, I’ve disliked them in certain matches, but enjoyed them tonight.  Others have said this, I think a major should be ten and a tech 18 or 20 points.  Seven point moves are silly big IMO.

[Plasmodium]

I think the td:esc ratio is better now.

I expected it to generate urgency but haven't seen it.

[ClawRidesAgain]

It’s point inflation just like 4 point near falls.

Just my opinion.  I am old.

[peanut]

I like three point takedowns because it encourages offense. I think it makes the matches more fun to watch.

I’d love to see step outs added to the mix. I think it would encourage even more offense.

One last thing I’d like to see is two periods, with both periods beginning in neutral. That way if you plan to score with riding time, you have to do something offensively first. 

[lightweight]

It confuses me a bit, since I thought the purpose of the recent change of the big near fall to 4 points was to encourage more mat wrestling, but this change now just encourages more stay on your feet, takedown-then-cut him matches?  

Edited November 27, 2023 by lightweight

[russelscout]

8 hours ago, peanut said:

 

I like three point takedowns because it encourages offense. I think it makes the matches more fun to watch.

 

It’s also more risky to give up a takedown… I’m not sure that it actually encourages offense…

[Sheerstress]

So far I like what I see, as it encourages wrestlers to open up their offense.  It's a little early to see whether there will be any long term problems with the change.

[Tigerfan]

Did the 2,3,4 near fall go through? If so, I don’t think I’ve seen a 3 near fall called yet. I feel like wrestlers with leads are continuing to be offensive late in matches rather than stall, since leads feel less safe, but it’s still early. 

[1032004]

On 11/27/2023 at 2:37 PM, lightweight said:

It confuses me a bit, since I thought the purpose of the recent change of the big near fall to 4 points was to encourage more mat wrestling, but this change now just encourages more stay on your feet, takedown-then-cut him matches?  

It's encouraging more scoring.   4 > 3 so if guys are good on top they will still be going for turns.

[gimpeltf]

1 hour ago, Tigerfan said:

Did the 2,3,4 near fall go through? If so, I don’t think I’ve seen a 3 near fall called yet. I feel like wrestlers with leads are continuing to be offensive late in matches rather than stall, since leads feel less safe, but it’s still early. 

Yes, I had asked on another thread if anyone saw one yet also.

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

- I think a 3 point reversal would further disincentive top wrestling.  We don't need less top wrestling. 

- I really like the idea of the stepout in freestyle.  In theory, I like it in folk.  However it doesn't work.  Imagine a guy getting an escape next to the edge and then immediately stepping out in the process as he gets to his stance.  He gained a point and then immediately gave up a point.  There are plenty of similar issues that would occur and ways to game the system.

[Offthemat]

How about awarding points for moves that are initiated inbounds and finish out?

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

8 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

How about awarding points for moves that are initiated inbounds and finish out?

Again, a good idea, but I don't see it happening.  We already run out of mat space in college matches (athletes end up on the floor) and no administrator is going to approve incentivizing a blast double onto the gym floor.  Yes, it exists in freestyle, but no AD is going to be a fan. (some lawyers might be)

[1032004]

37 minutes ago, Interviewed_at_Weehawken said:

Again, a good idea, but I don't see it happening.  We already run out of mat space in college matches (athletes end up on the floor) and no administrator is going to approve incentivizing a blast double onto the gym floor.  Yes, it exists in freestyle, but no AD is going to be a fan. (some lawyers might be)

Agree.  They need to make the outside of mats bigger first so guys can actually finish takedowns while they still have part of their body in bounds and not hitting the gym floor.

[wrestle87]

I’d be in favor of them taking that one rule from jiu jitsu, that it is referees discretion where out of bounds is and continuation beyond the mat is always the assumption. 

Nobody plays the line in jiu jitsu bc it is moving and entirely up to the ref.

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

Just now, wrestle87 said:

I’d be in favor of them taking that one rule from jiu jitsu, that it is referees discretion where out of bounds is and continuation beyond the mat is always the assumption. 

Nobody plays the line in jiu jitsu bc it is moving and entirely up to the ref.

Interesting... can't see that one going over very well in a Cy-Hawk!

[Wrestleknownothing]

1 hour ago, wrestle87 said:

I’d be in favor of them taking that one rule from jiu jitsu, that it is referees discretion where out of bounds is and continuation beyond the mat is always the assumption. 

Nobody plays the line in jiu jitsu bc it is moving and entirely up to the ref.

This is also a concept in securities regulation. Most bright shining line rules have been replaced by principals based rules. They found that if you gave certain brokerage firms a line they will get as close to it as often as possible. But if it is a more general principal the same people will not attempt to get close to the line because they are not sure where the line is.

[Jim L]

7 hours ago, Offthemat said:

How about awarding points for moves that are initiated inbounds and finish out?

You need bigger out of bounds area