pmilk

wrestling and football.ppt see if this opens for you. pmilk

64...I hate to tell you this, but, it's actually referred to in the rules book as "defensive" position...apparently I was wasn't taught that it was a "disadvantaged position." Thank god. The inimitable Rick Sanders "when I'm on bottom, I have him right where I want him." As far as legs go, Knownothing, how did legs get in in the first place? There are symptoms/setups that indicate legs are coming, of which one should be aware, to PREVENT them getting in. Ok, so now that they're in, there are techniques to COUNTER legs and either free yourself or reverse/escape. Should those fail, your next option is to NEUTRALIZE them and get a stalemate. On the restart, shame on you if they come in again. The effect of using legs wears a guy out, accumulates RT, kills time, keeps him from scoring, saves you energy, and keeps the ref happy (if you're actively trying stuff). As Hokie states, there are three aspects to wrestling, master all three and you should do pretty well. Deficiency in one or two areas usually leads to whining/complaining/blaming/excuses/suggesting changing rules, etc.

How is being on bottom a disadvantage? You have the opportunity to escape, reverse, limit RT, possibly get back points. Perhaps coaches/wrestlers should spend more time working on effective bottom techniques rather than complaining that the guy on top is "stalling." And why shouldn't the top man be rewarded with points for control? You get points for control on TD's, reversals, tilts, NF's. Watched MSU/Northwestern on BTN. One match went like this- 0-0 1st. 2nd MSU top..NW reverses at 1:53. 3rd. NW takes down...MSU rides 2:00...totals 3:53 RT...loses 2-1. Enough action that there was no stalling. Sorry, but RT should have more value. 1pt for every 30 sec would increase the activity/action. I hear no one screaming "stalling" in Freestyle when in par terre bottom man flattens out like a post-it note on the mat while the top man fiddle farts around for the 5-7 secs before they go feet. Some of the problems with folkstyle nowadays is the infusion of freestyle concepts. Go back and look at some of the brackets/scores from '68-'85 which was pre-freestyle infusion. In virtually every sport, control is a primary goal for success. The rules committee has diminished the value of mat wrestling and put the emphasis on Neutral wrestling. Because down man cannot manage to free himself lies solely in his coaching or his learning the techniques, not because the top man has his ankle or he's on his stomach or he's wallowing in his own ignorance. A "push out" rule? Oh, please! Mandatory warning to someone if no score at the end of the 1st? They tried that back in the 70's...dumb rule.

Pretty impressive, WKN....

Back in the day ('68-'84) there were lots of opportunities to wrestle collegiately, more intangibles, and rules that offered more pinning opportunities. That 16 yr time span averaged 63 falls/13 OT's per tourney vs 32 falls/26 OT's per tourney for the last 16 yrs on the championship side of the brack Freshman and multiple time NCAA Champions are not unique in a field of 78 or so. There were four freshman NCAA champs from '68-'84 (approx. 350 schools in the field- D1+D2+D3). The top 2+2 WC's in D2 and the D3 Champs came to the Big Show. There were 13 Frosh champs in the last 16 yrs (approx 77 schools in the field) and there were 21 total Frosh champs total since '85. In '78 they awarded 6 AA's (1.65%) from a total field of approx 363 schools. Now they award 8 AA's (10.39%) from total field of 77 schools. Consider this abbreviated list of D2/D3 wrestlers who stood at the top of the podium in D1: Rich Sanders (Portland State), Stan Dzeidzic (Slippery Rock), Wade Schalles (Clarion), Joe Gonzales (CSU-Bakersfield), Carlton Haselrig (Pitt-Johnstown- 3x NCAA D2/D1 Champ) and Ken Mallory (D3-Montclair St.) I would have to push back on the idea that winning a championship was easier back then as opposed to now. Here's a very small sampling of NCAA scores from that period. Cleo McGlory (U of Okla) 21-4 in '68, Steve Dildine (Alabama) 27-3 in '70, Don Rohn (Clarion)26-6 in '73, Gary Breece (U of Okla) 24-2 in '74, Nabil Guketlov (Montclair St) 26-9 in '75, Mark Churella (Mich) 34-4, in '77, Shawn Whitcomb (Mich St) 30-7 in '79, Charlie Heard (UT-Chatt) 32-12 in '83, Joe Gibbons (Iowa St) 32-0 and Melvin Douglas (U of Okla) 35-5 in '84. That's a lot of wrestling, fans loved it, and those guys refused to get pinned. My how things have changed.

Scourge...where to start...obviously I don't know your vintage nor your level of experience, but to claim that there is more chain wrestling and counters now than ever before is...well, rather uninformed, to be kind. Been around a long time as a competitor and coach at virtually every level. Man's arms, legs, and head are in the exact same spots as they have been since the beginning of time. Give a man the correct stimulus and he will give you a predictable response. That's wrestling in a nutshell. And I hardly believe that you are "aware of them all," as some of those names/techniques were unique to our team and I have seen virtually no-one use several of them...ever, regardless of the label. You can cherry pick one technique (e.g.boot scoot -perhaps your boot scoot is a different technique than ours) and claim that it is not "automatic." Correct, our philosophy and coaching had us in the mindset that when an opp goes to his knees, we have enough firepower/options to make scoring damn near automatic. That's the point. The guy on his knees doesn't have to push or anything else...just being on his knees makes him vulnerable IF you have an arsenal of techniques from which to draw. If your opp is not "wrestling," your job is to expose it. That's what we were taught. Just because a guy is on his knees doesn't make it stalling. Plenty of guys on their feet stall. Furthermore, stalling a part of good strategy for winning. Fortunately for me, I had only four coaches from HS thru college and they are all in the National Wrestling Hall of Fame.

Scourge...happy to do so...and the names that we knew them as ---snapdown, post set cross snap, sidesnap, headwhip, shuck, elbow throw, boot scoot, limp arm underhook, front headlock combo's, shoulder extension knee trip, underhook cross wrist limp arm, misdirection hand shove, overhook limp arm, fireman's knee trip (Churella was the best I've seen with it from the knees). Lots of options if you know the techniques and set-ups. If a guy with one leg is allowed to drop to a knee to wrestle, then the same allowance has to be universal to bipeds as well. And there is no guaranteed way to score on someone from the feet either...just lots of options and set-ups. If there was one "guaranteed" way, then why practice anything else. Smart guys/coaches figure out ways to score instead of complaining or trying to change the rules.

Why would the last point scored carry more weight than the first point scored in a tie? Logic indicates that you can't have a last point if there isn't a first point in tie match regardless of how it is acquired. FWIW, I think duel meets could end with matches in a draw and save all the pomp and circumstance of criteria and OT for tournaments. Anticipating the rematch would create more excitement, imo. RT indicates a degree of control/dominance. All things equal, who had control of whom longer. Therefore, learn how to control/ride and learn how to escape/reverse efficiently and quickly for your advantage. Off topic...watched a freestyle match the other day and the bottom guy flattens out like a starfish for several seconds and then they go feet. Essentially, he stalls. Incredibly exciting...edge of your seat kind of stuff.

I don't think any sport jacks around with the rules more than wrestling, and if there is one, please let me know so I can avoid watching it. Personally, and this is food for thought and my observations; I don't think a match should go longer than 7 min if the score is tied. Criteria should be enough to determine the winner so that it would be very unusual to have an actual "tie." This is just an example of criteria/order, so don't jump down my throat. Most Unsportsmanlike loses, most stalling loses, most near falls 4, 3, 2 (tilts actually) wins, most TD's wins, reversals wins, escapes wins, and ultimately most RT. Maybe there's a different order or something else to add but you get the idea...As much as some of you dislike RT, dominating someone should be rewarded whether it's TD's, tilts, reversals, escapes, or RT. If, for some ungodly reason, all the criteria are equal, then the match should go no longer that a 1-1 OT. First score/wins or stall loses in 1st period from neutral. If still tied, flip the magic coin, winner chooses top/bottom. He gets out-it's over...he rides-it's over. On a side note...I watched a high school wrestling meet recently and in one match it was 0-0 in the 1st. 2nd period, Kid A (choice) takes top, rides like a dog in heat, trying stuff to score, kid on bottom warned for stalling (2 min domination on top, close to scoring but didn't)...no score, still 0-0. In the 3rd period the other kid (B) takes down... more of the same, with no stall calls, until the last 5 secs he escapes..AND WINS 1-0. This is one example of the injustice and irrationality of eliminating RT at the high school level. Worst case scenario, match should be tied and criteria applied and Kid A wins. Perhaps someone can elucidate for me just why was RT eliminated from HS and how it helps wrestling at the college level. I keep suggesting that 1pt for every :30 secs RT would make things pretty interesting. Perhaps that's another thread but...

WC...it is hilarious. my point was, smart, well-coached wrestlers figure it out. whether on his feet or on his knees, smart guys figure out how to make it work by finding a way to score or finding a way to make it look like his opponent is stalling instead of whining or making excuses. If he's stalling, expose it. Wrestling is at a point now that when things get too difficult to figure out, folks want the rule changed or they bellow, "he's stalling." He's got my ankle...help me ref! I didn't know how to prevent it and I don't know how to counter it. Start counting. He dropped to his knees ref, I don't know what to do. He's stalling. Sheesh!. Ha. P.S. I recruited Brian Smith to Michigan State when I was assistant there... apparently he learned something. Probably not from me though. I was just a hack.

Stalling is not unique to dropping to a knee...you can stall in any position. I had a great high school coach who taught us that when an opponent drops to his knees, it should be an automatic TD. We were also taught that there are just as many many TD techniques from the knees as there were in neutral...he still has legs...just shorter ones. And he's not as mobile on his knees. Whether YOU are neutral, on top, or your opponent is on his knees, one of your objectives is to make it look like HE's stalling. Besides, Robles has already set the precedent for wrestling on his knee. Smart, well coached wrestlers will drop to their opponents level and employ the myriad of techniques available for scoring. And there are a lot of them.

A touch off-topic but the point is...D2/D3 added interest and variables that made the NCAA's even more interesting. Article written for last months AWN.... My, How Things Have Changed My how things have changed! My time frame reference is 1968-1984, which I believe was the Golden Era of wrestling. That’s when college wrestling was the most healthy, robust, and deep. There were lots of opportunities to wrestle collegiately, more intangibles, and rules that apparently offered more pinning opportunities. That 16 year time span averaged 63 falls/13 OT’s per tourney vs 32 falls/26 OT’s per tourney for the last 16 years on the championship side of the bracket. My, how things have changed. There were no tech falls, no video reviews, no bricks, no grad school competitors, no 7th year seniors, no Olympic redshirts, no transferring without penalty, no choice to avoid mat wrestling, no “cheap tilts,” no touch falls, individual dual matches could end in a draw, and for years you could only wrestle back if you lost to a semifinalist or finalist. Matches were 2-3-3 vs the present 3-2-2. Overtime was 1-1-1. Here is a very small sampling of the scores from that period. Cleo McGlory (U of Okla) 21-4 in ’68, Steve Dildine (Alabama) 27-3 in ‘70, Don Rohn (Clarion) 26-6 in ’73, Gary Breece (U of Okla) 24-2 in 74, Nabil Guketlov (Montclair St.) 26-9 in ‘75, Mark Churella (Mich) 34-4 in ’77, Shawn Whitcomb (Mich St.) 30-7 in ’79, Charlie Heard (Univ Tenn-Chatt) 32-12 in ‘83, Joe Gibbons (Iowa St) 32-0 and Melvin Douglas (Univ of Okla) 35-5 in ’84. That’s a lot of wrestling, fans loved it, and those guys refused to be pinned! Why are those kinds of scores are no longer allowed? My, how things have changed. The top 2 finishers, plus 2 wild cards in D2 and the D3 NCAA Championships (college division prior to ’74) were invited to compete in the D1 NCAA until ’92, and it made a difference. Consider this abbreviated list of D2/D3 wrestlers who stood at the top of podium in d1: Rich Sanders (Portland St.), Stan Dziedzic (Slippery Rock), Wade Schalles (Clarion), Joe Gonzales (CSU-Bakersfield) Carlton Haselrig (Pitt-Johnstown 3x D2/D1 NCAA Champ) and D3 NCAA Champ Ken Mallory (Montclair St.). The powers that be fixed that in 1992. Go away, you have your own tournament! How different would the individual D1 results or the team scores have been, post ’92, if undefeated (131-0) 4x D2 NCAA champion Joey Davis (Notre Dame (OH), or any of the other 3x D2/D3 champions and the wild cards competed? Freshman and multiple time NCAA champions are not unique in a field of 78 or so. There were four freshman champs from ’68 to ’84 (approximately 350 schools), 13 in the last 16 years (approximately 77 schools), and 21 total since ’85. In ’78 they awarded 6 AA’s (1.65%) from a total field of 363. Now they award 8 AA’s (10.39%) from a total field of 77. Perhaps limit AA to top 6 or even top 3 or 4. Though largely no fault of their own, the estimated number of college wrestling programs at all collegiate levels has dwindled from 777 in 1972 to 273 total programs in 2025. Restricting the NCAA to only D1 since ‘92, along with the progressive rules changes, has diminished the sport. Wouldn’t allowing D2/D3, Junior College, and even NAIA into D1 add more suspense, depth, breadth, excitement, interest, and viewership and unite the entire wrestling community? There are some positive changes in the current rules. Riding time in OT has value and eliminates supposed unbiased officials from deciding victors via Referees Decision. Another positive change is the Double Elimination bracket. This type of consolation wrestle-back offers a truer outcome for those wrestlers eliminated in the championship bracket, and every single competitor other than the finalists receive a chance to come back and place. And probably the biggest bright spot today is that NCAA wrestling is televised on BTN, ESPN and other conference networks instead of only ABC Wide World of Sports as a 10 minute, once-a-year, heavily edited, side note. That has added to the amount of money wrestlers now command in college, and how nice to see a financial reward FINALLY for so much hard work in a sport that has few equals as far as physical challenges and the amount of work it takes to be an NCAA champion. My how things have changed.

BB...so what you are recommending is to....smart stall. Stalling is ok now, eh? I would add to work "smartly" towards the edge, in case: 1) something goes wrong...discreetly get out of bounds, and 2) if my back is to the edge, circle in and take a 1/2 shot to make him go out...keeps the refs very happy. Perhaps it's semantics, but with a minute left and 1pt lead, I'm shutting it down, I'm done wrestling. You are essentially doing the same thing except you call it "don't stop wrestling." I'll give you a B+ for the stall strategy. 3pt. TD was a mistake imo. puts more emphasis on TD's and diminishes mat wrestling...headed towards freestyle, but that's another discussion. thanks for the tip, perhaps I'll figure out how to use it someday. I'm not a new poster. been on here many years. I just post infrequently and only when something piques my interest. And you were criticizing the referees for not calling what you think they should be calling.

BB...ok, just so I better understand how you may think and wrestle ...I'm ahead of you 3-2, no stalling calls, :30 seconds left, or make it the 1:00 that you stated, and we're on our feet...what do you recommend I do, or how would you coach me, to ensure I win the match? ps..someone else was advocating for more rules...I just thought I could kill two birds with that one stone.

BB...I know it's easy for many of us to sit in the stands or in the coaching corner and "referee." I've competed and coached at virtually every level and I have reffed...I'll take coaching any day! Reffing is not an easy job for sure. A vast majority of the refs I've seen and interacted with over the course of my lifetime are fair, competent, and professional. Like every profession, there are dopes, biased refs, and incompetent turds, just like some coaches (and edge to the coaches)...but refereeing is a very tough job and it's easy to criticize from afar. They don't always get right... no one does, but they do the best they can, I think...and I believe the NCAA refs are some of the best in any sport. Anyway, more rules is not going to prevent using tactics that some people don't like and more rules just muddies the water and usually leads to more rules and then people lose interest in the sport. Smart athletes, in all sports, find ways to let the rules work in their favor. Call it manipulation, call it clever, call it stalling...

Brucey? Ha...yes, I do watch current college wrestling. Actually...been watching wrestling since I've been old enough to see. I apologize for not being able to adequately explain the strategy of protecting a lead and "smart stalling." Stalling has always been and always will be a "standard and part of the game." I do have a little experience wrestling at the college level against exceptional competition and "stalling" within the confines of the rules as written was a great weapon. First of all, my observation is that referee's usually call stalling when it's obvious and not cloaked well. When it is concealed well, they have no choice. They can't call it. Second of all, the lead wrestler has earned that right to stall at the end of a match particularly when a stall call will not affect the outcome of the match and especially if he has no prior stall calls. Handing out a courtesy stall at the end is...other than appeasing folks like you...useless anyway. That you, or others, don't approve...well, I can't help you on that. As mentioned earlier, as a wrestler, if you feel your opponent is stalling, you have a responsibility to expose it and get the call. Actually, as a strategy, I was taught to try to get my opponent called for stalling early in the match so that call is hanging over his head for the rest of the match. Usually, not always, a very good coach teaches and drills those techniques. Sometimes a wrestler can figure it out on his own too, but I was taught stalling and "expose" stalling techniques and used it very well, might I add.

Folks are upset that the leading score can "stall." One of your jobs as an opponent who is behind is to expose the stalling. As long as the leader is fulfilling the requirements for "not stalling," i.e. not backing up, avoiding contact, etc., then it isn't considered stalling. Know the rules and how to work them to your advantage regardless whether you are leading or losing. Look at the rules books prior to 1985 and compare them to now....way more pages, way more rules, and the sport hasn't gained any more popularity and may even be losing some. Making more rules is not the answer. Coaching is the answer. It's not the style. It's the rules and the coaching. Why is PSU so good? Lots of schools get good kids. Being well coached in virtually every aspect of the sport is one of several factors that allows PSU to excel.

It’s obvious that the elimination of RT at the high school level has had a negative impact on mat wrestling at the collegiate level. How in the world can college coaches build on the skills and strategies when there is little foundation from which to build? Why did they eliminate it? I have asked folks. No one can really tell me, but here’s my guess; Too many coaches at that level don’t know or understand the intricate mechanics of top and bottom mat wrestling. We are reluctant to admit that it’s too hard and frustrating to teach and learn for a large majority of hs coaches. It’s easier to denigrate it, lower the standards, and do away with it, than to put in the time and effort to learn it and be successful. So, we change the rules and we dumb it down so it gives more folks a chance and makes "coaching" easier. Bottom wrestling has suffered as a result. The three-point TD doesn’t create more wrestling. It now takes less wrestling to score more points. Point inflation pacifies the freestyle clique. It doesn’t make the sport any more interesting or give it mass appeal, which it will never achieve anyway. The dog whistle complaint is that mat wrestling and ankle control is boring and if you do catch an ankle or drop down to a single to maintain control, it’s stalling and, therefore, a detriment to the sport. The real detriment to the sport is not coaching an athlete on all the various techniques that he has available in any given situation, both offensively and defensively. As far as stalling goes...Matches are only 7 min and we can now have an entire match where both wrestlers start neutral. There's a lot of time spent jockeying around, measuring, feeling things out, etc. To expect two wrestlers to go balls out for 7 min is not reasonable. In virtually every sport, keeping and protecting a lead, aka-stalling, is part of the strategy. There's plenty of it in freestyle. What's the entire purpose of being in the down position in free? TO STALL. Flatten out like a starfish/post-it note and wait a 5-7 seconds. The irony is, that strategy is encouraged not criticized. Smart wrestlers, get ahead, stay ahead, protect their handywork and smart stall...plain and simple, like it or not.

Dark E...First, my dad never told anyone what weight they had to wrestle. The wts were quite different back then. 98, 107, 115, 123, 132, 138, 145, 155, 165, 175, 185, Hvy. They varied slightly every few years. Everyone decided what weight they wanted to wrestle and if they couldn't make the team at, say, 123...they could cut to 115 or bump up to 132. Second, our pre-season conditioning was a key factor in knocking off fat without really decreasing food intake. My dad encouraged all of us was to stop the soda pop (replace that with water or milk), candy/chips/junk food, and to stick with healthier and lower calorie "junk food," like raw vegetables and lots of fruit, salads, cottage cheese, poached eggs/toast/tea, etc. He was really way ahead of his peers in not just technique and how to run an effective practice, but how to manage weight loss with virtually no negative effect in strength, stamina, and health. My personal belief was that I wanted to cut weight to be bigger than my opponents without sacrificing any of the other performance factors..If I could drop 10-15 lbs, or whatever, I would x-pounds faster, stronger, and larger than my opponents. I would have a distinct advantage. Yeah, being honest, I fell off the wagon early on and did the dumb stuff, but it was rare...I don't like cutting corners. Do things right all the time. Like I said, pretty much everyone has some fat they can live without, but discipline must support the education. I have yet to meet a former wrestler that cut wt. who doesn't look like they fell on an air pump since their competition days....I also know of none who ended up anorexic.

This is somewhat long a perhaps strays a little from the original question, however….. It’s a foregone conclusion that cutting weight will always be an issue in the sport of wrestling. Changing the weight classes won’t stop athletes from losing a few pounds to make a weight several pounds below their natural weight. You may hear people say that weight cutting is a “black eye” on wrestling. Athletes in other sports cut weight too. Our society is loaded with overweight individuals and billions are spent on methods of losing weight. Virtually everyone can afford to lose a few pounds. In wrestling, it’s not the losing of weight that gives the sport a “black eye,” it’s the way people do it. The main problem coaches and athletes suffer from with regards to weight loss is lack education and discipline. With the exception of my tenth grade year, I have cut weight every year that I competed. The problem I saw in my peers was their ignorance on how to cut weight and their inability to discipline themselves to say within 5 pounds between competitions. That’s not to say I didn’t use plastics, or saunas (neither or which were illegal back then), or even binge-purge on occasion, but those techniques were few and far between, and I certainly don’t recommend them. The most valuable asset I had was the education about how to lose weight correctly, how to eat right, and using discipline to support that education. The three wrestling deaths in 1997 were a direct result of using drastic weight cutting measures in very short period of time, i.e., dehydration, saunas, plastic sweat suits, laxatives, diuretics. My high school coach was my dad and he was very educated on how to lose weight properly. He had a weight chart on his office wall and he monitored our progress. We had to record our pre and post practice weight under his watchful eye. He developed in his wrestlers the habit of starting to lose weight 45-60 days before the first weigh-in. Most wrestlers do several thing wrong when cutting weight. Many don’t start any serious cutting until the last couple of days before a competition. They dehydrate or starve themselves instead of practicing the discipline of losing permanent weight (body fat). Many bounce up 8, 10, and even 15 pounds after weigh-ins, and then try to lose the weight using the drastic measures and they don’t eat healthy foods or stay hydrated. Pre-season conditioning that included running for 45 minutes was actually my dad’s way of helping us burn off body fat. He explained that besides developing mental toughness, stamina, and discipline, long term endurance training was something we had to do if we wanted to lose weight correctly. He always wanted us 1-2 pounds under weight the day before weigh-ins. We learned exactly how much we would “drift” overnight. We had ample opportunities to weigh ourselves several times during the day, without interfering with classes, we knew exactly how much each article of clothing weighed, and how much weight we were drifting during the day. He would correctly predict that we could eat 2-3 pounds of food and water the night before and still be on or under weight for weigh-ins the next day. He would prescribe an evening meal of steak, baked potato, another vegetable, salad and a nice glass of milk or water. After weigh-ins he always fed the team a vegetable soup concoction that became known to opposing teams as “Super juice.” He wanted us to have something in our stomach that broke down quickly and was easily digested. He told us our stomachs have three layers of muscles that are used to digest food. Those muscles need oxygen to do their job and if there is food in your stomach when you go out to compete, there will be an O2 shortage for your brain and muscles. In those days, wrestlers had five hours to make weight. For example, if match time was 7:30, weigh-ins started at 2:30 and you had until 7:29 to make weight. I enjoyed watching many of my less disciplined opponents having to use some of that five hours running, exercising, or drilling to knock off those last few ounces or pounds. Energy that could have been used for the match was being used to lose weight. A rather unique strategy, I presumed. The day after a tournament or match, even if it was a Sunday, the team met at school to check our weight and we could not be more that 5 pounds over. Anyone who was over, stayed and worked out until his weight was ok. Because of history and tradition, it was rare that anyone was more than five over. The theory was simple. Once you make flat weight and stay within 5 pounds between weigh-ins, your body adjusts to living that way and when you come to practice, you can focus on technique, strategy and conditioning, and you aren’t worried about how much you have to lose or what you can’t eat or drink that night. As long as you followed the regimen, you could eat fairly normally. Learning this was even more valuable when we had to make weight multiple days in a row. Obviously, this requires a lot of mental toughness and discipline. Some of you may find fault with some of these concepts, and lots of things have changed over the years. One thing that hasn’t changed is the power of education and importance of supporting it with discipline. No, it wasn’t fun running for 45 minutes 6 days a week for a couple months and change my eating habits to make weight in December, but it allowed me to burn off permanent weight (fat) and further develop my endurance, stamina, and discipline. It also gave me a lot of time to contemplate how someone was going to pay for all these sacrifices. Condensed, my weight loss program started 45-60 days before the first weigh-in and it was facilitated with long-term endurance training to burn off fat. Once flat weight is made, stay within 5 pounds or less between weigh-ins. It will be difficult for several weeks but your body will adjust and it will be the new “normal.” Once we made flat weight, the rules allowed a 1 pound allowance in January, another pound in February, and another pound in March. They called it a "growth allowance." Then you got a pound for the second day of a tournament. So, you make 126 in Dec, 127 in Jan, 128 in Feb, 129 in March, and if you make it to the second day of a tournament, your get to make 130. State tournament rules also offered the opportunity to either weigh-in the night before or the morning of, each day of the tourney. That’s a great rule at any level. Wrestling season is long and grueling. It’s not losing weight that hurts performance and health as much as it is how you lose weight. Education and discipline are the keys.

A guy dropping to one knee is stalling or unmanageable? Come on, really? We end up on our knees all the time in wrestling. Weren't you all taught techniques from the feet and knees that allowed you to score by going over, under, or around your opponent? Wrestling an opponent who drops to his knee isn't much different than an opp on his feet...he's just shorter. If you have been trained appropriately, wrestling from the knees is an excellent scoring opportunity. With slight modifications, work into your tie-ups just like you would from on your feet: Snapdowns, sidesnaps, shrugs/shucks, underhook headwhips, short arm drags, elbow throws, knee trips, etc., are all options..if you know how to set them up and execute...if you don't, then I guess your next best recourse is to claim stalling or something like that. Kinda like when the top man catches an ankle...claim he's stalling if you don't know how to 1)prevent or 2)employ and effective counter and then create a rule that eliminates the down man's responsibility to effectively free himself. Part of any wrestler's game plan should incorporate tactics that make it look like your opponent is stalling. That can be done from feet or on top...harder to do on bottom tho.

https://vault.si.com/vault/1975/02/24/driving-up-with-a-compact-carr I'm sure very few of you ever had the pleasure of watching Jimmy Carr (Erie, Pa. and Univ of Ky). I have a long and interesting history with the Carr family dating back to 1975. Great people, great competitors. I believe that if Jimmy hadn't started training year round at such an early age, he would have been the next Gable or Sanderson. Just an incredible talent. Balance, technique, speed, strength, smarts...just an incredible athlete. I know from spending time reading comments on various websites, that no one from any era could have been good enough to compete with wrestlers today...I would vigorously dispute that precept because of folks like Jimmy (and others of course).

Milkovich placed 1, 1, 2, 2, and the last year was 1976. Thanks

Obviously, TF's and MD's were not a part of rules set prior to '85. Where it took 3 TD's to = 6pts, it now only takes 2 TD's... There are negative trends in Falls, Major Decisions, and Tech Falls (Figure 1) Falls have the largest decrease followed by Major decisions and Tech Falls (Figures 2 and 3) Overtime matches show a steady upward trend (Figures 1 and 3) In terms of number of matches, on the average Major Decisions are the highest followed by Falls and Tech Falls (Figures 4 and 5). In the last few years there has been an approximately equal number of Falls and Overtime matches (Figures 2 and 3) NCAA D1 Champinship Statistics Trends 2024.docx

Back in the 70's they had a rule that if you took two steps backwards, it was an automatic warning. It was a great rule until it just became pushing with no real attempt to attack. Stall calls in the first 10 seconds of a match...7:50 left to avoid getting called again. Consequently, it didn't last too long. So, if someone "steps out" of bounds, he gets penalized? I have watched enough wrestling in my lifetime where I truly cannot determine who went out of bounds first. So, that situation will be left to the ref to determine the guilty party or the silly brick gets thrown and we spend another 3-4 minutes watching video in slow motion several times to determine who went OB. Flow, momentum, stamina, among other things are now affected. Part of one's job is to expose an opponent who is avoiding "wrestling." To do that requires skill and tactical knowledge. The rules for stalling are already in place. Understanding the "stalling" rules either exposes the staller or disguises the staller. Smart wrestlers know how to do both. I really do not understand why being shrewd and clever to work the rules to your favor is so repulsive. What many of you are proposing is just moving more to freestyle. Why?