Effect of the 3-point TD

[Scouts Honor]

i think we need a break down... 

[Scouts Honor]

i think the NCAA needs to justify the rule... prove that it does what it intended.

 

[Eagle26]

2 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

ok, so now i have to go again, and again get countered... now its 5, instead of 3

And you are two takedowns away from winning… just like you would be if you had given up two takedowns when they were 2 points. There’s no difference 

[Offthemat]

John Smith might have had it right when he advocated for only the first takedown being 3 points. 

[1032004]

I like the 3 pt TD purely because of the difficulty of getting one.

But I think the apparent tentativeness is partially due to the way reaction time is called.  Get rid of reaction time and I think some of that goes away.

[4awrestler]

Because of all the scrambling you don’t see hardly anyone shoot unless there’s 30 seconds left on the clock because it takes forever to finish… wastes so much of the match guys staring at each other. Makes for a bad product imo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BruceyB]

22 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

John Smith might have had it right when he advocated for only the first takedown being 3 points. 

Sarcasm..?

[Offthemat]

Just now, BruceyB said:

Sarcasm..?

No, he said it. 

[BruceyB]

6 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

No, he said it. 

I mean that giving 3 points for the first takedown only would exacerbate the question that prompted this discussion. Taking a chance and giving up a reattack takedown would many times mean that you now have to score 2 takedowns to cancel out 1. This would make wrestlers less likely to take chances.

[BruceyB]

I would be curious also to know in, say, top 10 matchups what the ratio is of initiators of action scoring takedowns vs how many takedowns are scored off of an opponents shot. The reattacks are so good right now that if you don't get in deep, there is a good chance you're going to end up in a position to give up a takedown, and then we're back to having to score a takedown against stalling tactics for the remainder of the match.

[scourge165]

1 hour ago, Scouts Honor said:

guys the finals are ALWAYS boring

i have watched every single one since 1990...

nothing new here

 

Jesus...all you guys were bored during THESE finals! I thought they were incredible. Yeah, you're running in the 3rd period up by 3, but...there were a lot of attempts.

Plus, we all know that matches of this caliber of Wrestler is going to be VERY close and guys are going to want to be VERY careful about a bad shot. The Semis ARE better, you're right, the Finals are usually more...I wouldn't say boring, but not as wild. 

 

But Starocci, the Buchannan-Barr match, Hamiti-O'Toole, Mesnbrink shot all night, I thought '41 and '49 were both great.

 

And then...Hendrickson vs Steveson and...the biggest upset in NCAA History! Y'all have short ass attention spans! That was an awesome finals to cap a GREAT weekend!

 

[Offthemat]

19 minutes ago, BruceyB said:

I would be curious also to know in, say, top 10 matchups what the ratio is of initiators of action scoring takedowns vs how many takedowns are scored off of an opponents shot. The reattacks are so good right now that if you don't get in deep, there is a good chance you're going to end up in a position to give up a takedown, and then we're back to having to score a takedown against stalling tactics for the remainder of the match.

He was attempting to resolve the 0-0 first period issue. 

7 minutes ago, scourge165 said:

Jesus...all you guys were bored during THESE finals! I thought they were incredible. Yeah, you're running in the 3rd period up by 3, but...there were a lot of attempts.

Plus, we all know that matches of this caliber of Wrestler is going to be VERY close and guys are going to want to be VERY careful about a bad shot. The Semis ARE better, you're right, the Finals are usually more...I wouldn't say boring, but not as wild. 

 

But Starocci, the Buchannan-Barr match, Hamiti-O'Toole, Mesnbrink shot all night, I thought '41 and '49 were both great.

 

And then...Hendrickson vs Steveson and...the biggest upset in NCAA History! Y'all have short ass attention spans! That was an awesome finals to cap a GREAT weekend!

 

I thought it was a dandy tournament.  And for all the concern about seeding, especially with 125 & 141, they seemed to have gotten it pretty close.  

[Boring]

1 hour ago, Offthemat said:

John Smith might have had it right when he advocated for only the first takedown being 3 points. 

Hehehe, he said that? That's dumb. 

[Offthemat]

3 minutes ago, Boring said:

Hehehe, he said that? That's dumb. 

You’re only speculating.  We won’t know how it would affect scoring until or unless it’s tried.  It would certainly put emphasis on being the first to get a takedown. 

[Boring]

2 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

You’re only speculating.  We won’t know how it would affect scoring until or unless it’s tried.  It would certainly put emphasis on being the first to get a takedown. 

Or possibly make them even more nervous about giving up an easy go around.  There's something really unbalanced about the 3 point takedown, seems like it leads to a bunch of stallfests among the top guys. 

[lu_alum]

@Jason Bryant... didn't someone conduct an NCAA championships TD analysis on the old forum?  I seem to recall a very detailed analysis on success rates by type of TD attempted.

[gimpeltf]

7 hours ago, Offthemat said:

John Smith might have had it right when he advocated for only the first takedown being 3 points. 

 

6 hours ago, Boring said:

Hehehe, he said that? That's dumb. 

It was called the Okie State (or maybe the anti-Okie State rule) rule for a few years in the 60s!

[Eagle26]

6 hours ago, Offthemat said:

He was attempting to resolve the 0-0 first period issue. 

I have an idea for that… what about if it’s 0-0 after two minutes, the ref has to put someone on a 30 second shot clock and if they don’t score, their opponent gets a point. 

[LemonPie]

The perfect takedown-escape scoring ratio is 2 to .5,  with 2-point reversals and stalling scoring remaining the same.  Scoreboard nightmare, casual fan nightmare, but you could never convince me it’s not the perfect ratio.  We wanted to devalue the escape (which was badly needed), but instead we just overvalued the takedown. 
 

it will never happen though, so probably time to make the 3rd stalling call a 2-pointer. 

 

Edited 23 hours ago by LemonPie

[Boring]

22 minutes ago, gimpeltf said:

 

It was called the Okie State (or maybe the anti-Okie State rule) rule for a few years in the 60s!

And I thought I was old...great trivia though! 

Edited 23 hours ago by Boring

[1032004]

15 minutes ago, Eagle26 said:

I have an idea for that… what about if it’s 0-0 after two minutes, the ref has to put someone on a 30 second shot clock and if they don’t score, their opponent gets a point. 

No, IMO.  I don’t like adding more subjectivity.  I don’t think guys running away was any worse than Byrd winning on a stall call.  Cael may have been on to something when he said just get rid of stalling completely.

[Offthemat]

3 hours ago, gimpeltf said:

 

It was called the Okie State (or maybe the anti-Okie State rule) rule for a few years in the 60s!

So it has been tried and rejected?

[Scouts Honor]

10 hours ago, scourge165 said:

Jesus...all you guys were bored during THESE finals! I thought they were incredible. Yeah, you're running in the 3rd period up by 3, but...there were a lot of attempts.

Plus, we all know that matches of this caliber of Wrestler is going to be VERY close and guys are going to want to be VERY careful about a bad shot. The Semis ARE better, you're right, the Finals are usually more...I wouldn't say boring, but not as wild. 

 

But Starocci, the Buchannan-Barr match, Hamiti-O'Toole, Mesnbrink shot all night, I thought '41 and '49 were both great.

 

And then...Hendrickson vs Steveson and...the biggest upset in NCAA History! Y'all have short ass attention spans! That was an awesome finals to cap a GREAT weekend!

 

very well put!!

[Scouts Honor]

11 hours ago, 4awrestler said:

Because of all the scrambling you don’t see hardly anyone shoot unless there’s 30 seconds left on the clock because it takes forever to finish… wastes so much of the match guys staring at each other. Makes for a bad product imo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i agree, we have the heil rule of danger now

maybe we need to make diving at the ankle when it's not your shot a stall call.  instead of a stalemate. you are avoiding wrestling.

[Scouts Honor]

3 hours ago, Eagle26 said:

I have an idea for that… what about if it’s 0-0 after two minutes, the ref has to put someone on a 30 second shot clock and if they don’t score, their opponent gets a point. 

no