Reversal

[Royalfan]

Am I the only that thinks reversal should be worth 3? I just don’t get the logic of current rule.  If you get control with a takedown it is 3 but if you get control in an even worse position it is two.  May wrestling needs to matter imo.  Too many matches I see a guy doing a great job to get the reversal only for it not to matter when the other gets an escape.  When you gain control from bottom it should be the same as gaining control from neutral.  Can people that disagree help me understand.  Thanks!

[BruceyB]

1 hour ago, Royalfan said:

Am I the only that thinks reversal should be worth 3? I just don’t get the logic of current rule.  If you get control with a takedown it is 3 but if you get control in an even worse position it is two.  May wrestling needs to matter imo.  Too many matches I see a guy doing a great job to get the reversal only for it not to matter when the other gets an escape.  When you gain control from bottom it should be the same as gaining control from neutral.  Can people that disagree help me understand.  Thanks!

I want to start by clarifying that I don't have a hard stance as I see an argument for both. I do lean towards keeping it at two points though, but I wouldn't have any strong feelings if it went to 3.

This is the thing with the bottom position, you either were put into the bottom position by being taken down, or you chose to be in the bottom position. 

If you are in the bottom position from being taken down, you are given the opportunity to score points from a defensive position (ie: you cannot score an escape without being taken down).

Likewise, with reversals, you cannot score a reversal unless you are in a defensive position. If I take you down, and you reverse me, you were only capable of scoring a reversal because I took you down in the first place. Why should you get the same amount of points as me for reversing me out of the position I put you in? If I didn't take you down, you wouldn't have had the opportunity to score from bottom. This is where it is obviously subjective in what you think should be most heavily rewarded. I think that gaining control from a neutral position should be rewarded more heavily than being able to reverse the position you were forced into after being taken down.

Additionally, if you choose bottom, you are choosing bottom knowing that your scoring possibilities are either one point for an escape or two points for a reversal. You can choose neutral with the opportunity to score 3 points, so why does anyone choose bottom? It is because the bottom wrestler believes they are more likely to accumulate more points starting the period in the bottom position than in neutral.

I am of the camp that believes scoring a takedown should be most heavily rewarded, and that a reversal, which is only possible to earn by being taken down, or putting yourself in the bottom position should not be equally rewarded.

I also understand the argument for emphasizing mat wrestling where being sloppy on top and getting reversed should be more penalized. If you're afraid of getting reversed, cut them instantly and don't play around in the position. 

I just believe in the current era of college wrestling with the leg passes, far ankle scrambles, Churella positions, etc. It is so hard to get in on someone and score without it being stalemated, that securing a takedown should be rewarded with more points than reversing a position that you were forced into/chose to be in.

Anyway, I know that was long, but I hope I was able to make the argument against a 3 point reversal understood.

Edited 11 hours ago by BruceyB
typo

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

4 hours ago, BruceyB said:

I want to start by clarifying that I don't have a hard stance as I see an argument for both. I do lean towards keeping it at two points though, but I wouldn't have any strong feelings if it went to 3.

This is the thing with the bottom position, you either were put into the bottom position by being taken down, or you chose to be in the bottom position. 

If you are in the bottom position from being taken down, you are given the opportunity to score points from a defensive position (ie: you cannot score an escape without being taken down).

Likewise, with reversals, you cannot score a reversal unless you are in a defensive position. If I take you down, and you reverse me, you were only capable of scoring a reversal because I took you down in the first place. Why should you get the same amount of points as me for reversing me out of the position I put you in? If I didn't take you down, you wouldn't have had the opportunity to score from bottom. This is where it is obviously subjective in what you think should be most heavily rewarded. I think that gaining control from a neutral position should be rewarded more heavily than being able to reverse the position you were forced into after being taken down.

Additionally, if you choose bottom, you are choosing bottom knowing that your scoring possibilities are either one point for an escape or two points for a reversal. You can choose neutral with the opportunity to score 3 points, so why does anyone choose bottom? It is because the bottom wrestler believes they are more likely to accumulate more points starting the period in the bottom position than in neutral.

I am of the camp that believes scoring a takedown should be most heavily rewarded, and that a reversal, which is only possible to earn by being taken down, or putting yourself in the bottom position should not be equally rewarded.

I also understand the argument for emphasizing mat wrestling where being sloppy on top and getting reversed should be more penalized. If you're afraid of getting reversed, cut them instantly and don't play around in the position. 

I just believe in the current era of college wrestling with the leg passes, far ankle scrambles, Churella positions, etc. It is so hard to get in on someone and score without it being stalemated, that securing a takedown should be rewarded with more points than reversing a position that you were forced into/chose to be in.

Anyway, I know that was long, but I hope I was able to make the argument against a 3 point reversal understood.

All of that.  Most reversals are also largely the fault of the top man.

Edited 7 hours ago by Interviewed_at_Weehawken

[Pinnacle]

Wrestler A gets 4 Tds

Wrestler B gets no Tds but gets 4 escapes

They both escape from bottom choice

Match is tied

Seems to disincentivize earning tds

[jchapman]

4 hours ago, BruceyB said:

I want to start by clarifying that I don't have a hard stance as I see an argument for both. I do lean towards keeping it at two points though, but I wouldn't have any strong feelings if it went to 3.

This is the thing with the bottom position, you either were put into the bottom position by being taken down, or you chose to be in the bottom position. 

If you are in the bottom position from being taken down, you are given the opportunity to score points from a defensive position (ie: you cannot score an escape without being taken down).

Likewise, with reversals, you cannot score a reversal unless you are in a defensive position. If I take you down, and you reverse me, you were only capable of scoring a reversal because I took you down in the first place. Why should you get the same amount of points as me for reversing me out of the position I put you in? If I didn't take you down, you wouldn't have had the opportunity to score from bottom. This is where it is obviously subjective in what you think should be most heavily rewarded. I think that gaining control from a neutral position should be rewarded more heavily than being able to reverse the position you were forced into after being taken down.

Additionally, if you choose bottom, you are choosing bottom knowing that your scoring possibilities are either one point for an escape or two points for a reversal. You can choose neutral with the opportunity to score 3 points, so why does anyone choose bottom? It is because the bottom wrestler believes they are more likely to accumulate more points starting the period in the bottom position than in neutral.

I am of the camp that believes scoring a takedown should be most heavily rewarded, and that a reversal, which is only possible to earn by being taken down, or putting yourself in the bottom position should not be equally rewarded.

I also understand the argument for emphasizing mat wrestling where being sloppy on top and getting reversed should be more penalized. If you're afraid of getting reversed, cut them instantly and don't play around in the position. 

I just believe in the current era of college wrestling with the leg passes, far ankle scrambles, Churella positions, etc. It is so hard to get in on someone and score without it being stalemated, that securing a takedown should be rewarded with more points than reversing a position that you were forced into/chose to be in.

Anyway, I know that was long, but I hope I was able to make the argument against a 3 point reversal understood.

If Wrestler A choses top to start a period, would you support awarding 3 points to Wrestler B for a reversal?

[Caveira]

I vote for stop changing the darn scoring it was fine before.   Go back to the older method.    The “action” you’re trying to create isn’t there.  If you turned the volume and hid the score you can’t tell the diff in a match now vs right before the change.  

[666]

I saw a guy get a reversal a couple days ago and thought the same thing myself. If takedowns are going to be 3 points, so should reversals. Also, and most of you guys will hate this, I think a point should be awarded for every minute of riding time, with the proviso that the top man is trying for turns. 

Edited 6 hours ago by 666

[666]

35 minutes ago, Caveira said:

I vote for stop changing the darn scoring it was fine before.   Go back to the older method.    The “action” you’re trying to create isn’t there.  If you turned the volume and hid the score you can’t tell the diff in a match now vs right before the change.  

Is that you, Grandpa?? 

Just kidding. I like the 3 point takedown, I think it's done a lot to incentivize guys towards more aggressive work in neutral. Do you dislike the 3 point takedown?

[Caveira]

10 minutes ago, 666 said:

Is that you, Grandpa?? 

Just kidding. I like the 3 point takedown, I think it's done a lot to incentivize guys towards more aggressive work in neutral. Do you dislike the 3 point takedown?

I do.  Call me old fashioned.   I’m no grandpa lol.  Kids only in 7th grade.   
 

I think on paper it looks like it incentivizes but I think the preliminary math showed it changed nothing or minimal other than the score itself.  
 

 

[PencilNeck]

back when TDs were two points, I used to think reversals should be worth three (It's like getting an escape AND a takedown!), but now I actually think the scoring is in really good shape with 3td 1e and 2r. If you reverse and let the guy go, that's kind of like getting an escape. If you reverse the guy and hold him down, that's slightly better than an escape (and you can accrue riding time, could be a three point swing!).

I wonder if making reversals higher in value would decrease their frequency. Like if you would get three for a reversal, the top man would be more likely just to disengage with a possible scramble rather than try to maintain control.

[Caveira]

22 minutes ago, PencilNeck said:

back when TDs were two points, I used to think reversals should be worth three (It's like getting an escape AND a takedown!), but now I actually think the scoring is in really good shape with 3td 1e and 2r. If you reverse and let the guy go, that's kind of like getting an escape. If you reverse the guy and hold him down, that's slightly better than an escape (and you can accrue riding time, could be a three point swing!).

I wonder if making reversals higher in value would decrease their frequency. Like if you would get three for a reversal, the top man would be more likely just to disengage with a possible scramble rather than try to maintain control.

Dunno.  I remember in 6th grade coaches yelling 1 not 2 all the time in those situations.   Kind of same same imo.  

we’re also kind of getting to an old adage….. if everything is worth more (points) nothing is worth more (points).  

[666]

24 minutes ago, PencilNeck said:

 

I wonder if making reversals higher in value would decrease their frequency. 

I don't understand your reasoning. 

[ionel]

8 hours ago, Royalfan said:

Am I the only that thinks reversal should be worth 3?

We've been through this many times now.  2.5

[Dogbone]

1 hour ago, Pinnacle said:

Wrestler A gets 4 Tds

Wrestler B gets no Tds but gets 4 escapes

They both escape from bottom choice

Match is tied

Seems to disincentivize earning tds

I don't think anyone is suggesting changing the escape point.    I don't see how the match would be tied?  A has 13 points and B has 5 points in your example, a MD not a tie?

I would be in favor of making a reversal 3, but I don't feel strongly about it.   Basically only matters if A gets a TD and B reverses and then finishes the period on top would there be a tie.   

If A gets an escape after getting reversed he is then up 1, they are in natural but the guy who got the TD is still rewarded.

[Gene Mills Fan]

1 hour ago, 666 said:

I saw a guy get a reversal a couple days ago and thought the same thing myself. If takedowns are going to be 3 points, so should reversals. Also, and most of you guys will hate this, I think a point should be awarded for every minute of riding time, with the proviso that the top man is trying for turns. 

All for rewarding dominance and scoring more points. I like an extra point for a period ride out. If bottom is the easiest way to get a point, shouldn't guys pay the price if they can't get out. isn't a period ride out the hardest act of dominance with no reward. I think this just leads to the bottom guy working harder to not give up the extra points.

[Caveira]

16 minutes ago, Gene Mills Fan said:

All for rewarding dominance and scoring more points. I like an extra point for a period ride out. If bottom is the easiest way to get a point, shouldn't guys pay the price if they can't get out. isn't a period ride out the hardest act of dominance with no reward. I think this just leads to the bottom guy working harder to not give up the extra points.

There is a thread on here dedicated to….. announcers being horrible (I don’t ageee).     This is partially due to the fact they don’t know the rules well enough and are inexperienced. 
 

if scoring is a complex eye chart you are making this worse.  
 

I don’t recall actual gene mills complaining about scoring model

 

[Wrestleknownothing]

45 minutes ago, 666 said:

I don't understand your reasoning. 

At the risk of speaking for someone else, I think what he means is that people respond to incentives/punishments. If you make a reversal worth 3 instead of 2 then the punishment to the top wrestler is greater. That will incentivize the top wrestler to cut, instead of ride, to avoid giving up the extra point (3-2) if the reversal occurs.

With the right data, I think this is testable. In theory you could compare riding time and riding time points from when takedowns and reversals were both worth two to now, when there is a one point difference, and infer whether behavior from top wrestlers has changed. 

[Pinnacle]

51 minutes ago, Dogbone said:

I don't think anyone is suggesting changing the escape point.    I don't see how the match would be tied?  A has 13 points and B has 5 points in your example, a MD not a tie?

I would be in favor of making a reversal 3, but I don't feel strongly about it.   Basically only matters if A gets a TD and B reverses and then finishes the period on top would there be a tie.   

If A gets an escape after getting reversed he is then up 1, they are in natural but the guy who got the TD is still rewarded.

Ughh. Brain fart. Too much work on my desk and no coffee. 

[Gene Mills Fan]

14 minutes ago, Caveira said:

There is a thread on here dedicated to….. announcers being horrible (I don’t ageee).     This is partially due to the fact they don’t know the rules well enough and are inexperienced. 
 

if scoring is a complex eye chart you are making this worse.  
 

I don’t recall actual gene mills complaining about scoring model

 

no one is complaining. This was a discussion of ideas. The only eye chart is the Ref calling stalling on top which he can still do. Most refs know the rules and aren't inexperienced. the 3 point TD will insure guys are going to cut for the TD in most cases but if your good on top you should get a point for the dominance. 

[Caveira]

9 minutes ago, Gene Mills Fan said:

no one is complaining. This was a discussion of ideas. The only eye chart is the Ref calling stalling on top which he can still do. Most refs know the rules and aren't inexperienced. the 3 point TD will insure guys are going to cut for the TD in most cases but if your good on top you should get a point for the dominance. 

Apologies.  This topic comes or seems to come up yearly.  People will follow up with things like the first td should be 1 and every subsequent one should double (I’m exaggerating).   People will talk about accumulating riding time for each min.   Then someone will talk about riding time sucking ( Boring ).   Then the Get rid of riding time crowd will show up.   Then the freestyle peeps will show up with changing nf to exposure.   Then the folkstyle peeps will meh that.   Then the Greco crowd will come and throw rocks.    Then people will ask for push outs.   Then the sumo jokes will happen.  Then the im tired of people playing the edge will happen.   Then someone will gripe that we have stalling just call it.   Then the cstall riding is boring jokes.    Then the Zain train didn’t do that jokes.        More rinse repeat.  
 

It’s a tired old topic is all.   

[Gene Mills Fan]

1 hour ago, Caveira said:

Apologies.  This topic comes or seems to come up yearly.  People will follow up with things like the first td should be 1 and every subsequent one should double (I’m exaggerating).   People will talk about accumulating riding time for each min.   Then someone will talk about riding time sucking ( Boring ).   Then the Get rid of riding time crowd will show up.   Then the freestyle peeps will show up with changing nf to exposure.   Then the folkstyle peeps will meh that.   Then the Greco crowd will come and throw rocks.    Then people will ask for push outs.   Then the sumo jokes will happen.  Then the im tired of people playing the edge will happen.   Then someone will gripe that we have stalling just call it.   Then the cstall riding is boring jokes.    Then the Zain train didn’t do that jokes.        More rinse repeat.  
 

It’s a tired old topic is all.   

3 month member, sorry for interjecting in these tired old topics

[Caveira]

53 minutes ago, Gene Mills Fan said:

3 month member, sorry for interjecting in these tired old topics

No worries lol.