The Worst Rule IMHO

[Hammerlock3]

The "action or automatic stalling call" on the edge is a complete joke. For one thing, we all know its an attempt to have a push out, but pretend its not because of freestyle. Unfortunately it sacrificed the best thing about the pushout rule, its very objective and easy to understand, in favor of what we hate about stalling calls, they are often annoyingly subjective.

this rule sucks because:

1) its really hard to call consistently.

2) Refs use it based on the situation in the match and not what they just saw. If you are winning with no stalling calls in the third you're really vulnerable. If you are winning in the third with a stall call, you're pretty safe.

Put in a pushout, ditch the stalling warning and all the count to 5 nonsense.

[wrestle87]

I am not hopping in here just to be the guy that disagrees. I will leave my thoughts on why a pushout would be bad, but I would like to share about a recent experience I had going back and revisiting old NCAA matches, and how much these new rules, including the edge stalling, have improved folkstyle.

Specifically, I was going back and watching the old early 2010's 174 matches, with that murders row that just chopped each other to pieces every year.  I'm talking about robert kokesh, logan storley, matt brown, mike evans, and chris perry in particular. 

I rewatched the final between Matt Brown and Chris Perry.  My mind, having adjusted to expect modern scoring, was aghast at how that match was wrestled and officiated.  With current edge stalling (and dropdown count stalling, which is terrific as well), Matt Brown would have had zero trouble winning that match.  Multiple point margin of victory because of how the lack of a stalling rule allowed Perry to just escape bad situations he put himself in to waste time.  

The edge stalling could be improved, because...like just about everything that doesn't have a count attached to it, it is officiated inconsistently.  I would prefer putting metrics to the OB stalling, instead of just doing away with it.  


I do understand what you are saying, but I think a pushout rule would ruin folkstyle wrestling. 

It would introduce so much more new strategy, and would turn scoring into more of a mess than it already is.  If you have a pushout rule, you can't really have mat wrestling, because any semi-savvy top wrestler will manage the boundary to earn a pushout at the exact same time the bottom guy earns an escape.

I would like to agree with this, but a pushout rule would ruin folkstyle wrestling.  Creative scrambles would disappear.

[gimpeltf]

The actual problem with a step out rule (it's not a push out rule in freestyle) is how it would conflict with the current cylinder interpretation of folkstyle. You can't do both. It's when the second guy goes out that OB calls are now made.

[1032004]

3 hours ago, gimpeltf said:

The actual problem with a step out rule (it's not a push out rule in freestyle) is how it would conflict with the current cylinder interpretation of folkstyle. You can't do both. It's when the second guy goes out that OB calls are now made.

Yeah this would be my biggest question. I like the “keep wrestling as long as there’s a pinky toe in bounds” rule.  We just need mats with bigger areas outside of the circle.

Overall, while the subjectivity isn’t great, I prefer how folkstyle stalling is called compared to freestyle passivity.  Half the time to me it seems like they just alternate who they put on the shot clock.

@Hammerlock3 are you suggesting they get rid of “regular stalling” too?  I know Cael kinda suggested that.  It’s intriguing, but I’m not sure if it’d be any better.

[Truzzcat]

I think a lot of people argue (just make it a push out point) without thinking about how terrible and inconsistent grounding is called in and of itself.

[gimpeltf]

1 hour ago, 1032004 said:

Overall, while the subjectivity isn’t great, I prefer how folkstyle stalling is called compared to freestyle passivity.  Half the time to me it seems like they just alternate who they put on the shot clock.

No question about that second sentence. Folkstyle stalling is more about penalizing. Freestyle is more about incentivizing and getting points on the board. They sometimes pick on one of them and hope the call works and someone scores. I don't see that it happens too often during the 30 seconds. I guess it would be interesting to see if anyone has done a study of what happens after. Don't forget that if you get called first- it can be an advantage if little other scores happen later and the other person gets called late in the match since you will get the last score.

[Dogbone]

The problem with the current rule is guys back up all the way to the edge then circle in so they don't get hit.     I get the concern regarding grounding but to me if you are first to step out of the inner circle and the first one out of bounds, I am fine with a pushout type rule. 

More times than not, no one really engages until they are half way out of bounds. If the action was started in the center guys would go out of bounds less.

[PortaJohn]

2 hours ago, 1032004 said:

We just need mats with bigger areas outside of the circle.

I always wished we could just have one standard mat size but I've always been under the understanding that it isn't feasible because the actual floor space fluctuates too much from one arena/gym to the next.  

Edited March 4 by PortaJohn

[Mr. PeanutButter]

Maybe we should wrestle in a cage. Would probably make the viewing experience worse, would completely chang scrambles on the edge, and most likely would be a logistical nightmare in terms of set up, but at least we wouldn't need to worry about stalling on the edge

 

[1032004]

31 minutes ago, PortaJohn said:

I always wished we could just have one standard mat size but I've always been under the understanding that it isn't feasible because the actual floor space fluctuates too much from one arena/gym to the next.  

For duals (and NCAA finals) I would think you could do that, tournaments probably not.  Shane Sparks wouldn’t be happy but I know Dollamur makes the smaller sections that you should be able to just add around the edge

Edited March 4 by 1032004

[Scouts Honor]

i like the edge and out of bounds wrestling.

you can't escape the mat. i can still pin you out of bounds. (think about the 2 foot rule in NFL makes for some fantastic highlights....same for wrestling... one toe in... takedown!)

in free, if something touches out of bounds... back to the center.

let them wrestle.

Edited March 4 by Scouts Honor

[forkemaz]

1 hour ago, Mr. PeanutButter said:

Maybe we should wrestle in a cage. Would probably make the viewing experience worse, would completely chang scrambles on the edge, and most likely would be a logistical nightmare in terms of set up, but at least we wouldn't need to worry about stalling on the edge

 

We already tried this. It was awful because they didn't think through the rules and paid big names.

 

We need the pit from karate combat. I've told several people. No one cares. And jiu jitsu just beat us to to it again. Embarrassing.

 

Edit: the in cage wrestlin is on ufc fight pass and called wrestling underground. Amazing opening, stinker of an event and rule set. 

Edited March 4 by forkemaz

[Hammerlock3]

5 hours ago, 1032004 said:

Yeah this would be my biggest question. I like the “keep wrestling as long as there’s a pinky toe in bounds” rule.  We just need mats with bigger areas outside of the circle.

Overall, while the subjectivity isn’t great, I prefer how folkstyle stalling is called compared to freestyle passivity.  Half the time to me it seems like they just alternate who they put on the shot clock.

@Hammerlock3 are you suggesting they get rid of “regular stalling” too?  I know Cael kinda suggested that.  It’s intriguing, but I’m not sure if it’d be any better.

I'm think we'd be slightly better off if we just beefed up fleeing. The subjectivity of stalling as it stands currently is a source of constant discontent and its not going anywhere. If you are saying "just call stalling" at this point you're part of the problem.

Someone brought up a how goofy and arbitrary "grounded" is in freestyle, which is true, but everyone hates people wrestling on their knees anyway and who doesn't hate those guys who can hold on to an elbow on two knees for an hour, why not call pushouts in every neutral situation, and have it not result in a clock stoppage? This would preserve edge wrestling, and stepping out wouldn't bail you out of worse scoring situations like in freestyle.

I'm sure someone will point out why that's stupid but I can't see it yet...

[KLCarnegieTech_1969]

13 hours ago, Hammerlock3 said:

The "action or automatic stalling call" on the edge is a complete joke. For one thing, we all know its an attempt to have a push out, but pretend its not because of freestyle. Unfortunately it sacrificed the best thing about the pushout rule, its very objective and easy to understand, in favor of what we hate about stalling calls, they are often annoyingly subjective.

this rule sucks because:

1) its really hard to call consistently.

2) Refs use it based on the situation in the match and not what they just saw. If you are winning with no stalling calls in the third you're really vulnerable. If you are winning in the third with a stall call, you're pretty safe.

Put in a pushout, ditch the stalling warning and all the count to 5 nonsense.

In total agreement!

[dragit]

10 hours ago, wrestle87 said:

I am not hopping in here just to be the guy that disagrees. I will leave my thoughts on why a pushout would be bad, but I would like to share about a recent experience I had going back and revisiting old NCAA matches, and how much these new rules, including the edge stalling, have improved folkstyle.

Specifically, I was going back and watching the old early 2010's 174 matches, with that murders row that just chopped each other to pieces every year.  I'm talking about robert kokesh, logan storley, matt brown, mike evans, and chris perry in particular. 

I rewatched the final between Matt Brown and Chris Perry.  My mind, having adjusted to expect modern scoring, was aghast at how that match was wrestled and officiated.  With current edge stalling (and dropdown count stalling, which is terrific as well), Matt Brown would have had zero trouble winning that match.  Multiple point margin of victory because of how the lack of a stalling rule allowed Perry to just escape bad situations he put himself in to waste time.  

The edge stalling could be improved, because...like just about everything that doesn't have a count attached to it, it is officiated inconsistently.  I would prefer putting metrics to the OB stalling, instead of just doing away with it.  


I do understand what you are saying, but I think a pushout rule would ruin folkstyle wrestling. 

It would introduce so much more new strategy, and would turn scoring into more of a mess than it already is.  If you have a pushout rule, you can't really have mat wrestling, because any semi-savvy top wrestler will manage the boundary to earn a pushout at the exact same time the bottom guy earns an escape.

I would like to agree with this, but a pushout rule would ruin folkstyle wrestling.  Creative scrambles would disappear.

I thank you for being the one who went back to watch The Worst Match In The History Of Wrestling so we didn't have to.  

I'll stipulate that things aren't that bad anymore.  But I think they're still not good.  Way too much edge wrestling, way too little stall calls, way too little action. 

Freestyle matches typically have much more action, much of which is because the incentives to engage and attack are higher, a good percentage of which is due to the pushout rule.

Unpenalized stalling is way too big a part of college wrestling.

Changing rules and incentives for mkre action can get a sport oit of a rut. Baseball helped itself tremendously with the objective rules from the pitch clock with virtually no detriment. An objective rule like the pushout is the only possible way to change the problem with the terribly enforced subjective stalling regime.

[TexRef]

3 hours ago, PortaJohn said:

I always wished we could just have one standard mat size but I've always been under the understanding that it isn't feasible because the actual floor space fluctuates too much from one arena/gym to the next.  

After Iowa Coach Gary Kurdelmeier used Big Bertha (1977) which was a 62'X62' mat. This mat was built because Okie State had a "style" of backing up, backing up, backing up, and then shooting. So Kurdelmeier wanted to keep those Okies away from the oob line, and wrestle! So it appears that this is not a new problem! 

The NCAA received several complaints and they put a restriction on how big a mat could be. They claimed that not all schools could afford to have such a big mat. 

[PortaJohn]

1 hour ago, TexRef said:

After Iowa Coach Gary Kurdelmeier used Big Bertha (1977) which was a 62'X62' mat. This mat was built because Okie State had a "style" of backing up, backing up, backing up, and then shooting. So Kurdelmeier wanted to keep those Okies away from the oob line, and wrestle! So it appears that this is not a new problem! 

The NCAA received several complaints and they put a restriction on how big a mat could be. They claimed that not all schools could afford to have such a big mat. 

That is a great story. I thought Kurdelmeier came up with the idea a few years prior to Gable taking over but it was Gable who actually made it happen during his tenure as head coach  

Edited March 4 by PortaJohn

[1032004]

2 hours ago, TexRef said:

After Iowa Coach Gary Kurdelmeier used Big Bertha (1977) which was a 62'X62' mat. This mat was built because Okie State had a "style" of backing up, backing up, backing up, and then shooting. So Kurdelmeier wanted to keep those Okies away from the oob line, and wrestle! So it appears that this is not a new problem! 

The NCAA received several complaints and they put a restriction on how big a mat could be. They claimed that not all schools could afford to have such a big mat. 

Isn’t that just referring to the actual circle though?

[TexRef]

1 hour ago, PortaJohn said:

That is a great story. I thought Kurdelmeier came up with the idea a few years prior to Gable taking over but it was Gable who actually made it happen during his tenure as head coach  

It was Kurdelmeier's idea. He was sitting in a coffee shop with Mike Nary who was the owner of Quality Mat Company and they came up with the idea and then set the ball into motion. 

[TexRef]

53 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Isn’t that just referring to the actual circle though?

Where else have you seen a circle that is 62'X62'? 

[MPhillips]

https://hawkeyesports.com/news/2018/11/19/wrestling-no-323-meet-big-bertha/

[Ohio Elite]

6 minutes ago, MPhillips said:

https://hawkeyesports.com/news/2018/11/19/wrestling-no-323-meet-big-bertha/

That mat looks awsome!

[SetonHallPirate]

8 hours ago, PortaJohn said:

I always wished we could just have one standard mat size but I've always been under the understanding that it isn't feasible because the actual floor space fluctuates too much from one arena/gym to the next.  

If we had a standard mat size, it would likely be the 32-foot diameter (42x42 mat) used at Nationals and most big tournaments.

I've actually wondered, out loud (on the former BirdApp) whether it might be a good idea to go down to a 28-foot diameter, but a minimum seven-foot protection area, in the next rules cycle (although this would have to probably be phased in over several years).

[ionel]

1 hour ago, TexRef said:

It was Kurdelmeier's idea. He was sitting in a coffee shop with Mike Nary who was the owner of Quality Mat Company and they came up with the idea and then set the ball into motion. 

sure but what kind of coffee?

[PortaJohn]

29 minutes ago, SetonHallPirate said:

If we had a standard mat size, it would likely be the 32-foot diameter (42x42 mat) used at Nationals and most big tournaments.

I've actually wondered, out loud (on the former BirdApp) whether it might be a good idea to go down to a 28-foot diameter, but a minimum seven-foot protection area, in the next rules cycle (although this would have to probably be phased in over several years).

What if the diameter decreases as you go up in weight so by the time you get to heavy weight it's identical to the diameter of a sumo dohyo

Edited March 5 by PortaJohn