some know more than I

[Paul158]

21 hours ago, MPhillips said:

I'm older school than MD but I'm not getting older, just getting better.

That's debatable. We will need some photographic proof. lol

[Paul158]

16 minutes ago, Coastal said:

Merrill was stalling the entire match.  That doesn't change the fact that Elam picking up Merrill, standing there for a while then walking Merrill out was textbook stalling and the official didn't have the guts to call it because it would have decided the  match.

I sometimes wonder what it would take for some officials to call a match deciding stall.  If that wasn't warranted than nothing is.   

If referee's would call stalling earlier in the match instead of waiting until late in the match that would make both wrestlers pick up the pace. Maybe they will adopt that.

[Sir Pin Alot]

21 hours ago, ionel said:

I was beating guys in their 20s, 30s & 40s at 56.  Pick a sport, get in shape and go after it!  

[BruceyB]

3 hours ago, Fletcher said:

I think people have lost track of what stalling is. It's deliberately avoiding action.  You know it when you see it - moving backwards and downblocking when winning with short time on the clock.

Nonaction does not equal stalling. College wrestlers these days are excellent at keeping perfect positioning, particularly in the 1st period. That's not stalling. We shouldn't be using the ref to force wrestlers into taking bad shots out of fear of a stall call.

I think you have lost track of what stalling is. 

Yes, I know it when I see it. And nonaction does equal stalling. If both wrestlers stand in the middle of the mat staring at each other, that's not stalling? A wrestler doesn't need to shoot in order avoid stalling, but they should be engaging their opponent, faking, handfighting, looking for angles, etc. 

Your above definition of stalling - you know it when you see it - is the stalling that is so obvious that my wife could call it. Referees should be a little more nuanced and understand that clearing ties and retreating over and over in order to prevent action from taking place is indeed stalling.

The free stall warning should be used more liberally when someone is continually ceding ground as a way to get them to engage and stay in the center. It would only make for a better product. If you make it to the end of the match with your free one, then you can clear, retreat, circle, repeat. If you were standing around in the first period and not looking to engage, then you have lost that privilege and now you have to actually engage in the last 30 seconds. Why is there this idea that a guy should be able to run away for the last 30 seconds of a match without it effecting the outcome?

[PortaJohn]

22 hours ago, MPhillips said:

I'm older school than MD but I'm not getting older, just getting better.

 

 

[PNWfan]

26 minutes ago, BruceyB said:

I think you have lost track of what stalling is. 

Yes, I know it when I see it. And nonaction does equal stalling. If both wrestlers stand in the middle of the mat staring at each other, that's not stalling? A wrestler doesn't need to shoot in order avoid stalling, but they should be engaging their opponent, faking, handfighting, looking for angles, etc. 

Your above definition of stalling - you know it when you see it - is the stalling that is so obvious that my wife could call it. Referees should be a little more nuanced and understand that clearing ties and retreating over and over in order to prevent action from taking place is indeed stalling.

The free stall warning should be used more liberally when someone is continually ceding ground as a way to get them to engage and stay in the center. It would only make for a better product. If you make it to the end of the match with your free one, then you can clear, retreat, circle, repeat. If you were standing around in the first period and not looking to engage, then you have lost that privilege and now you have to actually engage in the last 30 seconds. Why is there this idea that a guy should be able to run away for the last 30 seconds of a match without it effecting the outcome?

Exactly! These refs have become trained, especially in high level, high stakes matches, to just let these guys stand in the middle and do nothing for 3 minutes with no stall calls. 

I would be in favor of a freestyle pushout rule, I know that is controversial, but I think it would help to push the pace and encourage action. Yes, you will probably get some matches that turn into a sumo match, but is that worse than a 2-1 stall fest? I'd argue no.

[boconnell]

3 hours ago, Coastal said:

The only thing embarrassing is your blind homerism.  I stopped doing full pbp because of your whiny ass when I was critical of one of your beloved Cowboys.

Vega stalled his ass off.  It's everything wrong with wrestling yet you treat him not constantly going out of bounds as worthy.

Go read the comments and try to justify me as the biased one.  

In my comments I say Vega stalled and rightly got called.  I say the facts of the match don't come close to supporting him getting DQd.  

In your comments you call for a stalling DQ, make personal insults, and ignore facts in favor of what the match felt like to you.

The fact that you think Vega should be DQd in that match shows you either don't understand wrestling at all (which I don't think is the case), or you are trying to use this match to make a point that you strongly believe in even if it doesn't fit (which is super obvious).  

[forkemaz]

6 hours ago, Fletcher said:

I'm old school because I think the match should be won by wrestlers scoring points instead of being given points by the ref.

Stall calls are inherently subjective and will always be called inconsistently, even by the best-intentioned ref. We need fewer stall calls, not more.

People will hate it but i agree. Get rid of stalling and make the matches longer. You know what opens guys up? Being tired. 

[He Rassle]

18 hours ago, forkemaz said:

People will hate it but i agree. Get rid of stalling and make the matches longer. You know what opens guys up? Being tired. 

I think the stall call is bogus and does not lead to more action or better wrestling.

Here's my idea:

1. a takedown is only 3pts if it happens in the inner circle. All other takedowns are 2pts.
2. the 1st period gets divided into two 1:30 half-periods, wherein the wrestlers alternate starting their half-period on the clock. They kill the clock with a takedown, or if the period expires...
3. ...the non-clocked wrestler gets 2pts only if remaining in the center circle throughout, or 1pt if they stay in bounds throughout. However...
4. ...included in the definition of a 2pt takedown for the clocked wrestler is when the non-clocked wrestler touches out of bounds. The clocked wrester has freedom of movement.
5. the 2nd and 3rd periods alternate top and bottom positions - no more choosing neutral, and no step out rule in either period - and no riding time

Edited February 7 by He Rassle
added "no riding time"

[scourge165]

On 2/5/2026 at 12:42 PM, MD152 said:

Hate to sound like a cry baby BUT,

Im old school (56 yrs old), my best days are behind me, with that being said i dont understand how some of the below thoughts are not called STALLING????  (in 1 paticular match over the weekend i counted a nationally ranked wrestler taking 74 steps backwards and 6 forward, he dropped to a knee or both knees with atleast 1 hand on the mat for a total of nearly 3 minutes and 15 seconds with zero intentions of attacking, take a look below and feel free to help me understand why we are seeing so much of the below tactics and should they be considered a form of stalling just as holding onto the leg/ankle for a 6 count is......

*going to one knee plus 1 hand and going backwards the entire match ... (note: 1 or 2 fake attempts at a shot/takedown is just that)

*going to 2 knees or switching knees plus 1 hand and going backwards the entire match .......

*CONSTANTLY hands to the forehead or head and face 

*backing up constantly THAN a quick circle in to avoid a stall call 

there are others but i am certain those on this forum all understand my thoughts, again I am an older school veteran wrestler, i like the unlimited "gas tanks", "popeye forearms" and "peg-board" workouts........ everyone knows I love all wrestling anyone who wrestles (spent time in the  war-room" has my support, no real favorites so i really dont favor this school or that school over another, my 2 favorite wrasslers are Snyder and Nolf with Kolat and Fried honorable mention, lol...... no need to name names on my end but why so many wrestlers dropping to the knee or the 3 point football stance or in many cases dropping to 2 knees, personally i think many times its a case where wrestlers who do this are tring to ride there match into OT and/or SV & TB........ all the same what say you all, would that/this be a form of STALLING and not wrestling, has wrestling change so much since my days that its now, "im not gonna try to win it in regulation"?? 

Yeah, I'm with you... mostly. I would say I think the Gas Tanks are... as unlimited today as ever. Actually more so.

But I don't know how to solve the stalling. There is an aspect of strategy. There were times vs Duke I thought Taylor should get hit... but then he'd attempt a short, or he was holding center most of the time. 

 

This is always going to be that subjective part of the sport. They've done what they could IMO with the riding and the 5 counts. That just has more guys gaming the system on the edge. 

 

[forkemaz]

42 minutes ago, He Rassle said:

I think the stall call is bogus and does not lead to more action or better wrestling.

Here's my idea:

1. a takedown is only 3pts if it happens in the inner circle. All other takedowns are 2pts.
2. the 1st period gets divided into two 1:30 half-periods, wherein the wrestlers alternate starting their half-period on the clock. They kill the clock with a takedown, or if the period expires...
3. ...the non-clocked wrestler gets 2pts only if remaining in the center circle throughout, or 1pt if they stay in bounds throughout. However...
4. ...included in the definition of a 2pt takedown for the clocked wrestler is when the non-clocked wrestler touches out of bounds. The clocked wrester has freedom of movement.
5. the 2nd and 3rd periods alternate top and bottom positions - no more choosing neutral, and no step out rule in either period - and no riding time

I think thats overly complicated but I appreciate the creativity.  I like a more simple product. I think its the mark of a good game: having short, clear, and intutive rules that dont leave room for subjectivity or gameificiation of those rules. Im a board game nerd, its harder with sports but i think the goal should be the same.

I do like your 5th point. Where nuetral is not a option. The losing wrestler starts down in the 2nd period, if the score is tied flip the disk. The opposite wrestler starts down in the third period. I dont know that it fixes much when removed from your system but i do like that it requires you to be competent in all 3 areas of wrestling by putting you in all 3 positions every match.