With all of this talk about to gap from 197-285

[Wrestleknownothing]

10 minutes ago, BruceyB said:

Many who need to humble brag do so out of a feeling of inferiority. I would go on but I'm losing my breath as I suck in my gut typing this response.

Did I say humble? My bad. I meant bumptious. 

[ionel]

30 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Did I say humble? My bad. I meant bumptious. 

I find that irritating.  

[nhs67]

1 hour ago, bnwtwg said:

Yes.

I also wrestled at a B1G school.

I also had a 6 pack at 37.  I am a skinny bitch, though.

Even as an old skinny bitch, I have a six pack.

[PortaJohn]

1 hour ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I met a two-time NCAA champ who said six-packs were over-rated. He won both titles without one. So my humble brag is that I have always been just like a two-time NCAA champ.

Yeah but you have to admit drinking a six pack right before winning a title is pretty bad as*

[alex1fly]

I put the OP in Word just to check out the word count. 1,485 words! Pretty impressive. I can't really tell what OP is mad about, or what the quoted person is mad about, but another weight or two in the 90 lb space between 197 and 285 sure makes sense to me!

[Fletcher]

95% of our state qualifiers at 106 are frosh and soph. So just keep it as a frosh/soph weight and drop it at the HS varsity level. Maybe 113 too.

At the college level, drop 125 - all those guys are cutting weight anyways (no athletes walk around at that weight) and let 'em bump up. Then add a 220 class and we're all good.

[1032004]

8 minutes ago, Fletcher said:

95% of our state qualifiers at 106 are frosh and soph. So just keep it as a frosh/soph weight and drop it at the HS varsity level. Maybe 113 too.

At the college level, drop 125 - all those guys are cutting weight anyways (no athletes walk around at that weight) and let 'em bump up. Then add a 220 class and we're all good.

Lol

[BruceyB]

1 hour ago, Fletcher said:

95% of our state qualifiers at 106 are frosh and soph. So just keep it as a frosh/soph weight and drop it at the HS varsity level. Maybe 113 too.

At the college level, drop 125 - all those guys are cutting weight anyways (no athletes walk around at that weight) and let 'em bump up. Then add a 220 class and we're all good.

I can only assume this is a sad attempt at rage bait. Shame, shame.

[Fletcher]

10 minutes ago, BruceyB said:

I can only assume this is a sad attempt at rage bait. Shame, shame.

People who get mad at this are all tiny, petite little people, so I'm not afraid.

[flyingcement]

Thanks for bringing the original post to light - it's not something I faced personally, but it's something I've observed.  Although it feels like there is a false choice being presented of removing lightweight in order to resolve the problems of the heavier weights.  As a board, we've batted around some common sense ideas of just evolving our weight classes to more closely mirror the international weights for Freestyle and Greco (splitting the difference where there is one). 

Moving around the middle weights makes more sense to me.  Others make an argument about drawing fewer wrestlers in that case, but I would make the counterargument that there can only be so many varsity wrestlers at a given weight class (one).  Is it so valuable to attract extra people who will be backups instead of attracting the gray area between HWT and 197.

[1032004]

1 hour ago, flyingcement said:

Is it so valuable to attract extra people who will be backups instead of attracting the gray area between HWT and 197.

If those are the two options, yes.  IMO the goal should be to grow total participation.  If so, then the opportunities should be where the participants are.  We have far more participants at the middle weights than the upper weights.

 

If the response to this is “the goal should be to give us the best chance to succeed internationally,” then for the 97kg issue the solution should be to increase 184 and 197, not add another upperweight.

[flyingcement]

2 hours ago, 1032004 said:

If those are the two options, yes.  IMO the goal should be to grow total participation.  If so, then the opportunities should be where the participants are.  We have far more participants at the middle weights than the upper weights.

 

If the response to this is “the goal should be to give us the best chance to succeed internationally,” then for the 97kg issue the solution should be to increase 184 and 197, not add another upperweight.

I disagree wholeheartedly to the first paragraph.  The second paragraph would not have been my argument.  

[1032004]

3 minutes ago, flyingcement said:

I disagree wholeheartedly to the first paragraph.  The second paragraph would not have been my argument.  

So why should there be a weight between 197 and heavyweight?

[flyingcement]

16 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

So why should there be a weight between 197 and heavyweight?

Because

1) the gap of 90 lbs between these two weights eliminates people from the sport altogether.  No one is going to avoid doing the sport altogether if you move around the middle weights (not the kind of people we would want in the sport anyway...)

2) As an added bonus, it directly leads to internationally relevant weight classes.  This is emphatically less important than point one, but still a nice bonus.

[1032004]

2 minutes ago, flyingcement said:

Because

1) the gap of 90 lbs between these two weights eliminates people from the sport altogether.  No one is going to avoid doing the sport altogether if you move around the middle weights (not the kind of people we would want in the sport anyway...)

2) As an added bonus, it directly leads to internationally relevant weight classes.  This is emphatically less important than point one, but still a nice bonus.

But those were the 2 points I addressed in my prior post.

Are you claiming losing a middleweight to add a weight between 197 and heavyweight would increase total participation?  Sorry, but that couldn’t be more wrong.

[flyingcement]

15 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

But those were the 2 points I addressed in my prior post.

Are you claiming losing a middleweight to add a weight between 197 and heavyweight would increase total participation?  Sorry, but that couldn’t be more wrong.

Reallocating the weights to assure that one exists between the weights of 197 and 285 is the argument.  The rest of whatever you're arguing is some sort of strawman that I'm not sure where it is coming from.  

A middleweight doesn't get removed.  All of the middle weights get moved around to account for different distributions of weight classes that do exist.  

The current system is completely asinine in systematically removing an entire group of athletic people from getting to wrestle in order to provide a mood boost to some JV kids that couldn't crack the varsity lineup.   I also view it a slap in the face of the meritocracy that wrestling stands for.

Edited Friday at 04:38 AM by flyingcement

[bnwtwg]

14 minutes ago, flyingcement said:

Reallocating the weights to assure that one exists between the weights of 197 and 285 is the argument.  The rest of whatever you're arguing is some sort of strawman that I'm not sure where it is coming from.  

A middleweight doesn't get removed.  All of the middle weights get moved around to account for different distributions of weight classes that do exist.  

The current system is completely asinine in systematically removing an entire group of athletic people from getting to wrestle in order to provide a mood boost to some JV kids that couldn't crack the varsity lineup.   I also view it a slap in the face of the meritocracy that wrestling stands for.

Yes.

[flyingcement]

I dont know @bnwtwg personally, but 

1. Personal Experience as Valuable Insight
   bnwtwg's post draws from lived experiences as a collegiate athlete, which is highly relevant to the discussion. While some may perceive confidence as a "humble brag," it doesn't diminish the validity of his perspective. His insights about being a tweener in wrestling are credible and should be treated with respect.

2. Context on Male Wrestling Numbers
   The critique cites growth in male participation but misinterprets bnwtwg’s concerns. While high school participation has increased, the argument about elite athletes (especially larger ones) being drawn away by NIL and football remains valid. Wrestling's challenges at the collegiate level, where fewer scholarships and limited resources exist compared to football, reinforce bnwtwg's point.

3. Tweener Dilemma is Real
   Tweener wrestlers often face unique challenges. bnwtwg isn’t alone in pointing out the difficulty of finding a competitive edge at weights like 197 and 285. The critique dismisses this reality by focusing on rare success stories of undersized heavyweights, ignoring the larger trend.

4. Tone and Intent Misunderstood
   While the critique labels bnwtwg’s tone as disrespectful, it may have been a passionate attempt to emphasize his perspective. Forum discussions often benefit from a diversity of voices, and dismissing someone’s experience based on perceived tone doesn’t engage the substance of their argument.

5. Weight Class Structure Needs Reform
   bnwtwg’s call for rethinking the 197-285 gap highlights a long-standing issue in wrestling. Adjusting weight classes to better support tweeners would create more equitable opportunities without "watering down" competition. Critiquing the status quo isn’t belittling but advocating for improvement.

[RockLobster]

9 hours ago, nhs67 said:

I also wrestled at a B1G school.

I also had a 6 pack at 37.  I am a skinny bitch, though.

Even as an old skinny bitch, I have a six pack.

You just opened the door. I'll be referring to you as an old skinny bitch far more often than I already have.

[Husker_Du]

3 hours ago, flyingcement said:

I dont know @bnwtwg personally, but 

1. Personal Experience as Valuable Insight
   bnwtwg's post draws from lived experiences as a collegiate athlete, which is highly relevant to the discussion. While some may perceive confidence as a "humble brag," it doesn't diminish the validity of his perspective. His insights about being a tweener in wrestling are credible and should be treated with respect.

 

oh, ffs, stop with the college Sophomore sociology babble. anecdotes don't make true a problem at scale. 

3 hours ago, flyingcement said:

1. Context on Male Wrestling Numbers
   The critique cites growth in male participation but misinterprets bnwtwg’s concerns. While high school participation has increased, the argument about elite athletes (especially larger ones) being drawn away by NIL and football remains valid. Wrestling's challenges at the collegiate level, where fewer scholarships and limited resources exist compared to football, reinforce bnwtwg's point.

 

define 'elite'. where's the study that say elite wrestling prospects choose football over wrestling because weight class is an issue at anything close to a significant rate. can you name a single one? name an 'elite' high school wrestler that went DI football for the primary reason of weight class.

 

3 hours ago, flyingcement said:

1. Tweener Dilemma is Real
   Tweener wrestlers often face unique challenges. bnwtwg isn’t alone in pointing out the difficulty of finding a competitive edge at weights like 197 and 285. The critique dismisses this reality by focusing on rare success stories of undersized heavyweights, ignoring the larger trend.

 

real for whom? a handful of prospects over the last decade

i can do the same thing in inverse. 

Recent World Teamers that Wrestled 106

57kg - Spencer Lee, Gilman

61kg - Daton Fix, Vito

65kg - Yianni, Stieber, JO

70kg - Zain

74 - Dake

79 - Dake

86 - David Taylor

92 - Zahid Valencia

97 - ?

125 - Zillmer

3 hours ago, flyingcement said:

1. Tone and Intent Misunderstood
   While the critique labels bnwtwg’s tone as disrespectful, it may have been a passionate attempt to emphasize his perspective. Forum discussions often benefit from a diversity of voices, and dismissing someone’s experience based on perceived tone doesn’t engage the substance of their argument.

 

who cares

3 hours ago, flyingcement said:

1. Weight Class Structure Needs Reform
   bnwtwg’s call for rethinking the 197-285 gap highlights a long-standing issue in wrestling. Adjusting weight classes to better support tweeners would create more equitable opportunities without "watering down" competition. Critiquing the status quo isn’t belittling but advocating for improvement.

there is no 'problem'. not at scale, anyway. this is much ado about nothing. i don't here anyone crying about perennial World Teamer James Green being an obvious tweener at 65-74 in olympic years. how many weight class shifts are you going to entertain for the sake of a few outliers? should we re-wrestle NCAA's with a 170lb class b/c Dean Hamiti was struggling with 165? 

here's the # of DI Wrestlers by weight participated at this year...

[1032004]

8 hours ago, flyingcement said:

Reallocating the weights to assure that one exists between the weights of 197 and 285 is the argument.  The rest of whatever you're arguing is some sort of strawman that I'm not sure where it is coming from.  

A middleweight doesn't get removed.  All of the middle weights get moved around to account for different distributions of weight classes that do exist.  

The current system is completely asinine in systematically removing an entire group of athletic people from getting to wrestle in order to provide a mood boost to some JV kids that couldn't crack the varsity lineup.   I also view it a slap in the face of the meritocracy that wrestling stands for.

Can you clarify what you’re suggesting the weights to be?

If you’re proposing that 197 or something close to it remains, and that an additional weight is added between that and heavyweight while still keeping the total at 10 weights, then a lower or middleweight is getting removed 

[1032004]

7 hours ago, flyingcement said:

I dont know @bnwtwg personally, but 

1. Context on Male Wrestling Numbers
   The critique cites growth in male participation but misinterprets bnwtwg’s concerns. While high school participation has increased, the argument about elite athletes (especially larger ones) being drawn away by NIL and football remains valid. Wrestling's challenges at the collegiate level, where fewer scholarships and limited resources exist compared to football, reinforce bnwtwg's point.

2. Tweener Dilemma is Real
   Tweener wrestlers often face unique challenges. bnwtwg isn’t alone in pointing out the difficulty of finding a competitive edge at weights like 197 and 285. The critique dismisses this reality by focusing on rare success stories of undersized heavyweights, ignoring the larger trend.

3. Weight Class Structure Needs Reform
   bnwtwg’s call for rethinking the 197-285 gap highlights a long-standing issue in wrestling. Adjusting weight classes to better support tweeners would create more equitable opportunities without "watering down" competition. Critiquing the status quo isn’t belittling but advocating for improvement.

I’m still confused how more wrestling upperweight classes would have any measurable impact on athletes getting lured away to football by NIL.  Besides, it seems like if they’re good enough to both wrestle and play D1 football, they generally play a position where they’d be best suited at ~250+ lbs (Hutmacher, Kueter, Mullen all very recent examples)

My argument has been that I do NOT believe it’s rare for undersized heavyweights to have success.  I literally couldn’t find a single example of someone bumping from 197 to heavyweight and doing noticeably worse.   The example used in the other thread was a guy who was undefeated going into NCAA’s… IIRC, @bnwtwg’s primary complaint was he didn’t like cutting to 197.  @bnwtwg, did you wrestle heavyweight at all?

I know I basically just asked you in the post above, and I’ve asked @bnwtwg multiple times with no response that I’ve seen.  Do you think shifting 184 and 197 upwards would solve this supposed issue?  I’m on board with that.  But not keeping 197 and adding another weight between that and heavyweight.

[Gus]

40 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

I’m still confused how more wrestling upperweight classes would have any measurable impact on athletes getting lured away to football by NIL.  Besides, it seems like if they’re good enough to both wrestle and play D1 football, they generally play a position where they’d be best suited at ~250+ lbs (Hutmacher, Kueter, Mullen all very recent examples)

My argument has been that I do NOT believe it’s rare for undersized heavyweights to have success.  I literally couldn’t find a single example of someone bumping from 197 to heavyweight and doing noticeably worse.   The example used in the other thread was a guy who was undefeated going into NCAA’s… IIRC, @bnwtwg’s primary complaint was he didn’t like cutting to 197.  @bnwtwg, did you wrestle heavyweight at all?

I know I basically just asked you in the post above, and I’ve asked @bnwtwg multiple times with no response that I’ve seen.  Do you think shifting 184 and 197 upwards would solve this supposed issue?  I’m on board with that.  But not keeping 197 and adding another weight between that and heavyweight.

Agree with shifting 184-197 up. It is such a simple solution that would align better with freestyle aspirations (move 197 closer to 97kg) and create a much smaller gap between the last two weights. For instance if you moved 197 to 215 the gap would decrease by 18 lbs, which is significant. Then guys that weighed around 230-235 could make the cut to 215 if they chose to do so and everyone else bigger would wrestle heavyweight. 

[Fletcher]

We added 7 lbs. to each weight class in the 90s and it worked out fine. Kids are even bigger now and carrying more muscle - let's do it again.

[bnwtwg]

51 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

I’m still confused how more wrestling upperweight classes would have any measurable impact on athletes getting lured away to football by NIL.  Besides, it seems like if they’re good enough to both wrestle and play D1 football, they generally play a position where they’d be best suited at ~250+ lbs (Hutmacher, Kueter, Mullen all very recent examples)

My argument has been that I do NOT believe it’s rare for undersized heavyweights to have success.  I literally couldn’t find a single example of someone bumping from 197 to heavyweight and doing noticeably worse.   The example used in the other thread was a guy who was undefeated going into NCAA’s… IIRC, @bnwtwg’s primary complaint was he didn’t like cutting to 197.  @bnwtwg, did you wrestle heavyweight at all?

I know I basically just asked you in the post above, and I’ve asked @bnwtwg multiple times with no response that I’ve seen.  Do you think shifting 184 and 197 upwards would solve this supposed issue?  I’m on board with that.  But not keeping 197 and adding another weight between that and heavyweight.

Redshirt frosh year I was cutting from 234 down to 197 because it was the only way to try to find the starting lineup. I couldn't hold it any longer after two years so we went on a bulking plan and at my largest I was 248.

So yes, as I have said on this board and the old place many times prior, I wrestled both weights. To reiterate, I was cutting 37 pounds. In what universe is cutting 37 pounds healthy for an athlete?