Weigh-ins

[NYupstate]

18 hours ago, boconnell said:

You asked for an example of what I meant when I said you were dismissive.  Here's an example.  The suggestion that anyone with a brace shouldn't wrestle that day.  That's a wild suggestion that protective equipment shouldn't be used.  

Thanks for taking the time - I see how I could have phrased that more elegantly.

I was not trying to say somebody in a brace should not wrestle that day. I said, "that is a good question" at the end of my comment, attempting to imply that I hadn't thought of the particular issue and it needed consideration, not that I had all the answers. I can see how it could be read the way you did take it.

As other people have said already, this is a logistical hurdle that could be addressed. Maybe when the teams show up anyone who needs a brace or wrap gets put on a list that allows them to "jump the line" a few slots and weigh in when on double deck or however many positions needed to get into their gear. 

 

[NYupstate]

15 hours ago, Formally140 said:

A major contributing factor to the deaths of the wrestlers in the 90s was they were on creatine. 
that was impetus for the rules changes, that were much needed. 
 

my point was that any mention of anything involving weight management is automatically treated as directly equivalent to dumbass dangerous crap they did back in the day. Which is disingenuous. 
 

and again, two things can be true at once. I can be okay with the rule being implemented.. and also think an obvious set of consequences is that

1. more forfeits will occur. Especially in dual meets
2. Smaller schools will be disproportionately affected, irregardless of how hard a coach recruits or hustles to get kids out. Which exasperates the issues already going on. 
3. I think people underestimate how much fluctuations will occur in weight between drinking and sweating. Bjj weight classes are usually much further apart than hs ones. If you spread out hs weight classes. If you spread out weight classes to emphasize being at walking around weight.. There's  already been lawsuits in the past about weight class gaps.. it directly led to the weight class changes taking out 140 and putting 182 

Again, these are all obvious, rational ramifications of implementing mat side weigh ins. Any actual discussion needs to be honest. The real problems are pretending these aren't real issues and the pretending any weight management is automatically 1990s style plastics running 

 

Can you elaborate on point #3 for me? I'm not sure I got the point you're making there. 

Are you saying bigger gaps between classes encourages competing at walk-around weight?

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

7 hours ago, 1032004 said:

And isn’t creatine for gaining muscle/weight?  Why would someone trying to lose weight be taking it?

I don't think a lot do, but if they did: recovery, injury prevention, strength, etc.

[jross]

Life has taught me that changing the environment is the simplest solution to effectuate change.

If you want to lose weight, use a smaller dinner plate.  Then you don’t need to monitor portions, educate, or lecture.  If you want safer weight management, ensure the wrestler is under 140lbs at match time, not “formally 140.”

[Formally140]

6 hours ago, NYupstate said:

Can you elaborate on point #3 for me? I'm not sure I got the point you're making there. 

Are you saying bigger gaps between classes encourages competing at walk-around weight?

It's easier to do mat side weigh ins with bigger gaps yea.. BUT the hs weight classes are not Random. There's a specific percentage gap (I forget the exact one) between them. Around 2012 they changed the weight classes to remove a middle weight and replaced it with an upper weight. NO ONE liked it unless they had a weirdly high amount of big guys. Multiple officials explained there had been lawsuits about the weight gap between 171 and 189.

 

Additionally, bigger gaps =  less weight classes equals less opportunities for athletes.

and it isn't at all insane to imagine a kid downing a 32oz Gatorade. Eating. Then, despite being at their literal walking around weight... "missing weight" second round of a tournament 

 

 

 

[Formally140]

4 hours ago, jross said:

Life has taught me that changing the environment is the simplest solution to effectuate change.

If you want to lose weight, use a smaller dinner plate.  Then you don’t need to monitor portions, educate, or lecture.  If you want safer weight management, ensure the wrestler is under 140lbs at match time, not “formally 140.”

Did I say something to offend you..

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

1 hour ago, Formally140 said:

It's easier to do mat side weigh ins with bigger gaps yea.. BUT the hs weight classes are not Random. There's a specific percentage gap (I forget the exact one) between them. Around 2012 they changed the weight classes to remove a middle weight and replaced it with an upper weight. NO ONE liked it unless they had a weirdly high amount of big guys. Multiple officials explained there had been lawsuits about the weight gap between 171 and 189.

 

Additionally, bigger gaps =  less weight classes equals less opportunities for athletes.

and it isn't at all insane to imagine a kid downing a 32oz Gatorade. Eating. Then, despite being at their literal walking around weight... "missing weight" second round of a tournament 

 

 

 

Personally I would be in favor of one matside weigh in per day.  I'm fine with the current system, but would be interested in a seeing a well-thought out matside weigh-in.  I just can't see doing it every round.

[jross]

1 hour ago, Formally140 said:

Did I say something to offend you..

Nah, I'm just the way I am.  Thanks mom.

The comment was addressing some things you and others said.  When people talk about nuances, rule enforcement, education, and such... I completely agree!  But it doesn't work well enough...  As more nuances are brought up, the more important it often is to simplify the solution.  

There was a study that demonstrated movie goers eat 50% more popcorn when given a large bucket versus a small bucket, each with endless refills, even when the popcorn is grossly stale.  There is no nuance, exception, education, rule compliance, etc. involved.  Nobody should eat the gross popcorn... just the environment of a larger bucket results in more consumption.  This science is why the first thing a fat person should do to trim down, is to throw out their large dinner plates in favor of smaller ones.  This is why parents should not bring sugary snacks and microwavable into their home... to where their tech addicted children can access.  Tech addiction?... hell throw that device out if you want your kids to be active.  Do you want to manage screen time?  

A mat side type weigh in, on a vetted scale, with everything you would wrestle in, is an imperfect means that greatly simplifies the path to desired outcomes. (healthy weight management, etc.)

Also, treating the weigh-in as a temporary checkpoint violates the spirt of weight classes... to have someone wrestle at 140lbs, while the opponent is 148lbs or even 140.2lbs, when the weight limit is 140.0 lbs.  There was a study that found a 5% weight advantage in wrestling increases win probability by 10–15% in like-skilled matches.

 

Edited Wednesday at 05:43 PM by jross

[NYupstate]

17 hours ago, Formally140 said:

It's easier to do mat side weigh ins with bigger gaps yea.. BUT the hs weight classes are not Random. There's a specific percentage gap (I forget the exact one) between them. Around 2012 they changed the weight classes to remove a middle weight and replaced it with an upper weight. NO ONE liked it unless they had a weirdly high amount of big guys. Multiple officials explained there had been lawsuits about the weight gap between 171 and 189.

 

Additionally, bigger gaps =  less weight classes equals less opportunities for athletes.

and it isn't at all insane to imagine a kid downing a 32oz Gatorade. Eating. Then, despite being at their literal walking around weight... "missing weight" second round of a tournament 

 

 

 

I agree it would be bad to reduce the number of weight classes, but I don't see that it necessarily follows that classes would have to be cut to make matside weigh-in feasible.

[NYupstate]

Re: scale shopping and limited number of referees - the one tournament I volunteered to work a table at this past season filled the gym full, but there would have been space for a "weigh station" at one end of the mats. The referees walked back and forth from the individual mat tables to the official tabulation table every match with slips of paper for recording all the scoring.  I think in that situation it would have worked smoothly to have a scale or two next to the officials' table. The two competitors could have met the ref there, weighed-in, and then walked to the mat together. 

But that is just one tournament in one state. Maybe there are other places such a set-up would be a nightmare? One venue that hosted a tournament had a single mat down the hall in a smaller gym space away from the main scene. Running weigh-ins the way I propose here would have made the matches down the hall take longer as the ref would spend time hiking back and forth from mat to weigh station. It would not have risen to the level of "nightmare" but it would add gaps in the action out on that isolated mat.

Or in more computerized score keeping scenarios refs just stay on the same mat without going to the officials' table very often?

[Formally140]

21 hours ago, jross said:

Nah, I'm just the way I am.  Thanks mom.

The comment was addressing some things you and others said.  When people talk about nuances, rule enforcement, education, and such... I completely agree!  But it doesn't work well enough...  As more nuances are brought up, the more important it often is to simplify the solution.  

There was a study that demonstrated movie goers eat 50% more popcorn when given a large bucket versus a small bucket, each with endless refills, even when the popcorn is grossly stale.  There is no nuance, exception, education, rule compliance, etc. involved.  Nobody should eat the gross popcorn... just the environment of a larger bucket results in more consumption.  This science is why the first thing a fat person should do to trim down, is to throw out their large dinner plates in favor of smaller ones.  This is why parents should not bring sugary snacks and microwavable into their home... to where their tech addicted children can access.  Tech addiction?... hell throw that device out if you want your kids to be active.  Do you want to manage screen time?  

A mat side type weigh in, on a vetted scale, with everything you would wrestle in, is an imperfect means that greatly simplifies the path to desired outcomes. (healthy weight management, etc.)

Also, treating the weigh-in as a temporary checkpoint violates the spirt of weight classes... to have someone wrestle at 140lbs, while the opponent is 148lbs or even 140.2lbs, when the weight limit is 140.0 lbs.  There was a study that found a 5% weight advantage in wrestling increases win probability by 10–15% in like-skilled matches.

 

But again, I'm not opposed to it and think you may or may not have a point. But. My point remains the same. If the discussion is going to be had. Dont pretend like things like increased forfeits won't happen 

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

3 minutes ago, Formally140 said:

But again, I'm not opposed to it and think you may or may not have a point. But. My point remains the same. If the discussion is going to be had. Dont pretend like things like increased forfeits won't happen 

I don't understand how forfeits would happened at an increased rate if you are weighing in the same number of times, but in a different location.

[Formally140]

4 hours ago, NYupstate said:

I agree it would be bad to reduce the number of weight classes, but I don't see that it necessarily follows that classes would have to be cut to make matside weigh-in feasible.

I guess kids never vary widely in weight... when sweating and hydration they are competing throughout the day. Again, if it happens it happens. But wrestling discourse isn't capable of calmly acknowledging obvious consequences, of changes. It is almost always, either ignoring realities on the ground or saying that you're automatically just defending the bad thing. 

the number one response I get "eh details, details", even if they aren't "just details". 

[Formally140]

1 minute ago, Interviewed_at_Weehawken said:

I don't understand how forfeits would happened at an increased rate if you are weighing in the same number of times, but in a different location.

Not every school has 3000 kids to recruit 4 kids at each weight from. I explained it earlier. 

[Formally140]

21 hours ago, Interviewed_at_Weehawken said:

Personally I would be in favor of one matside weigh in per day.  I'm fine with the current system, but would be interested in a seeing a well-thought out matside weigh-in.  I just can't see doing it every round.

One mat side weigh in is just the same thing we're doing already, Just closer to competition. It won't prevent the things it's supposed to.
 

If you're going to do mat side weigh ins to prevent weight cutting. Making them do multiple throughout the day is what will actually prevent it. And if that's done, there is obvious ramifications. 
 

Doing just one mat side weigh in gives you more problems and doesn't really actually help 

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

2 minutes ago, Formally140 said:

Not every school has 3000 kids to recruit 4 kids at each weight from. I explained it earlier. 

I had 51 boys join the team from a school with a male population of about 250.

[Formally140]

1 minute ago, Interviewed_at_Weehawken said:

I had 51 boys join the team from a school with a male population of about 250.

I get 50-70 from 900. There are still teams with coaches doing their best that will be affected negatively, again. I just want the discussion to be honest, not just discarding them as details 

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

1 minute ago, Formally140 said:

One mat side weigh in is just the same thing we're doing already, Just closer to competition. It won't prevent the things it's supposed to.
 

If you're going to do mat side weigh ins to prevent weight cutting. Making them do multiple throughout the day is what will actually prevent it. And if that's done, there is obvious ramifications. 
 

Doing just one mat side weigh in gives you more problems and doesn't really actually help 

Well, no... it is not the same thing.  It happens much closer to competition.  Guys will be wrestling closer to their natural weight, theoretically. If you think 5 minutes is the same amount of time as an hour or two hours, we have a problem and it goes deeper than weight cutting.

Multiple weigh-ins throughout the day is absurd and creates more problems (administrative mostly) than it fixes.  That would be a great reason to keep things as they are.

[Formally140]

Just now, Interviewed_at_Weehawken said:

Well, no... it is not the same thing.  It happens much closer to competition.  Guys will be wrestling closer to their natural weight, theoretically. If you think 5 minutes is the same amount of time as an hour or two hours, we have a problem and it goes deeper than weight cutting.

Multiple weigh-ins throughout the day is absurd and creates more problems (administrative mostly) than it fixes.  That would be a great reason to keep things as they are.

The mentality will be to just survive first match. Then business as usual. I'm well aware of the minimizing recovery time aspect... I was a poster child for doing it the wrong way when I competed. It's why I'm not 100% opposed.. 

But if you're going to do mat side weigh ins. You might as well do them right. Pretending that most Schools/kids doing the bad cutting won't just treat it like a more annoying version of current rules if you do it once a day is just naive.
 

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

3 minutes ago, Formally140 said:

The mentality will be to just survive first match. Then business as usual. I'm well aware of the minimizing recovery time aspect... I was a poster child for doing it the wrong way when I competed. It's why I'm not 100% opposed.. 

But if you're going to do mat side weigh ins. You might as well do them right. Pretending that most Schools/kids doing the bad cutting won't just treat it like a more annoying version of current rules if you do it once a day is just naive.
 

I would add: Naive is thinking that multiple matside weigh-ins per day is every going to happen.

I would also put myself in as a poster child: we had night before weigh-ins during my college career.

Edited Thursday at 03:19 PM by Interviewed_at_Weehawken

[boconnell]

5 hours ago, NYupstate said:

Re: scale shopping and limited number of referees - the one tournament I volunteered to work a table at this past season filled the gym full, but there would have been space for a "weigh station" at one end of the mats. The referees walked back and forth from the individual mat tables to the official tabulation table every match with slips of paper for recording all the scoring.  I think in that situation it would have worked smoothly to have a scale or two next to the officials' table. The two competitors could have met the ref there, weighed-in, and then walked to the mat together. 

But that is just one tournament in one state. Maybe there are other places such a set-up would be a nightmare? One venue that hosted a tournament had a single mat down the hall in a smaller gym space away from the main scene. Running weigh-ins the way I propose here would have made the matches down the hall take longer as the ref would spend time hiking back and forth from mat to weigh station. It would not have risen to the level of "nightmare" but it would add gaps in the action out on that isolated mat.

Or in more computerized score keeping scenarios refs just stay on the same mat without going to the officials' table very often?

I've never seen refs go back and forth.  I think standard is something like track wrestling where results are real time on the internet.  I think the solution to the extra ref issue is just that we don't need a ref to weigh in at a local tournament.  Let them weigh in pre match in a staging area with an adult from the host school.  Postseason it can be a ref.  I think all of the logistical stuff can be overcome, but it requires significant changes.