|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Tommy Rowlands at Olympic Team Trials
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on June 16, 2008
|
DC: Long live folkstyle? Why? Because you hate the coin flip? Do you prefer the stalling call? How many wrestlers have lost because the ref got a hair up his butt and started putting his fist in the air? I'll answer--a lot more than lose due to a coin flip.
The flip, while arbitrary, still gives the wrestler who loses a chance to counter and score. Andy Hrovat was on the edge of defeat yesterday when he lost the coin flip to Lawal in the second period of their second bout. Had Lawal merely finished, he'd have won and been the olympian. Hrovat successfully countered, won the period, and ended up winning that match and the next one. That's a lot fairer than a capricious stalling call giving unearned points to whichever wrestler is losing.
Rowlands also successfully countered one of the times his leg was in the air.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Tommy Rowlands at Olympic Team Trials
Rex Holman added to this discussion on June 16, 2008
|
The coin flip is the fairest means possible to the solution because it is predicated on chance and not favoring one wrestler over the other. The wrestlers put themselves in that situation by both having great defenses rather than offensive attacks.
The clinch system awards/penalizes (based upon your interpretation) by forcing a situation in which points will be scored or awarded. Unfortunately, Tommy is at a size disadvantage versus Mocco. Moving Mocco out of position is more than a herculean task. Mocco was perfectly willing to go to the clinch and that was his strategy from the onset. I suspect his training over the last two months focused on winning the clinch more than anything else.
Sometimes the element of luck does play a decisive role in winning and losing.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Tommy Rowlands at Olympic Team Trials
Rex Holman added to this discussion on June 16, 2008
|
You can prepare for that position and be ready for it either offensively or defensively. Either way you better be great at both ala Andy Hrovat.
Tommy is great at both but his size was a disadvantage against Mocco in the defensive clinch position.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Tommy Rowlands at Olympic Team Trials
Rex Holman added to this discussion on June 16, 2008
|
The time Tommy scored on Mocco from that position, his (Mocco's)chest was beyond his knees and he became extended and off balance. Whereas Mocco scored when he was able to stay more upright and in a powerful position.
|
Last edited by Rex Holman on June 16, 2008; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Tommy Rowlands at Olympic Team Trials
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on June 16, 2008
|
i havent been to Olympic trials, but i have been to Fargo almost every year for many years and i can tell you
100 % of the time the guy who wins the coin toss chooses to apply the leg clinch AND 90 % of the time he WINS. This is fair that World/Olympic team spots and Olympic medals are decided this way???
u got to be kidding me !
and here is more UNfairness: if a guy wins the coin toss in period one, and it is scoreless in period two
it AGAIN goes to the coin toss.
Whats fair about that ???
Why wouldnt the guy who lost the first coin toss get his choice in the 2nd situation ?? makes no sense to me or anyone else i've talked to out there.
i've talked to Rich Bender, director of USA Wrestling about it, and even he does Not defend the coin toss
--- but its a FILA rule and we have no choice.
This is one reason i have to shake my head any time i read someone post that America should do away with folkstyle and go strictly with freestyle in high school & college. Americans would Not take to this FILA nonsense,
that would be the certain death wail of our sport
. (Am i the only one who noticed all the empty 50 yard line seats ?)
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Tommy Rowlands at Olympic Team Trials
Greg Debbe added to this discussion on June 16, 2008
|
I'm not 100% against a coin toss off some sort, but it should be used as a last resort after a match and some form of overtime is complete. There is absolutely no reason to have a coin toss at the end of the first period. I don't really like the whole scoring system.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Tommy Rowlands at Olympic Team Trials
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on June 16, 2008
|
Bob: I'm not saying the coin flip is perfect. I'd prefer a different system. But it's better than stalling.
I also agree that it would be fairer to alternate choice after the initial coin flip.
Rex: I wish you'd been doing the commentating during the matches. Your insights are what was generally missing.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Tommy Rowlands at Olympic Team Trials
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on June 16, 2008
|
"Bob: I'm not saying the coin flip is perfect. I'd prefer a different system. But it's better than stalling."
------------------------------------------
Hank,
"stalling" has never exsited in freestyle,
passivity yes
, stalling no, and i didnt like that call either btw.
However
the complete travesty
known as the coin toss, imo, is Not fairer than anything, not when 100 % of the time the guy who wins the toss chooses to apply the leg clinch-- i
have yet to see anyone win the coin toss and choose to have the clinch applied on himself.
Does that tell us something about "fairness" ??
it is patently UNfair to virtually give one guy who did nothing himself the period and maybe the match.
a
better rule was going back a few years, that a match went into OT in cases where the guy winning did Not have
at least 3 points
.
This at least put some emphasis on scoring. This rule was in place when a match consisted of one 5 minute period.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Tommy Rowlands at Olympic Team Trials
Rex Holman added to this discussion on June 16, 2008
|
Maybe we could just do positional wrestling and start in a variety of positions until someone is able to score five points. That would be silly.
The rules are known to everyone. Everyone can prepare for those rules. The person with the offensive clinch position wins the majority of the time. Yes that is true but I would also be willing to say that more energy is spent on developing an offense from that position rather than a defense from that position. Hrovat did it right by angling Lawal to his head and squaring up with his hips, thus neutralizing his attack. Hrovat gets an A+ and the title of olympian for his ability to wrestle at that position His matches are a testament to him developing that area of wrestling. I guess it is not fair to Lawal that he developed that area of his wrestling. I guess it is not fair that people have different training partners which make them develop styles inherent to their abilities. I guess life is not fair. It seems to be a constant theme on this planet, don't you think.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Tommy Rowlands at Olympic Team Trials
Mark Niemann added to this discussion on June 16, 2008
|
My point is simply that there has to be a better way to let the wrestlers decide.
I don't even think I'd like it if both got the chance after one period.
But hey, that is just MY opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Tommy Rowlands at Olympic Team Trials
Rex Holman added to this discussion on June 16, 2008
|
Bob-
Perception is everything,
"when 100 % of the time the guy who wins the toss chooses to apply the leg clinch-- I have yet to see anyone win the coin toss and choose to have the clinch applied on himself. Does that tell us something about "fairness"
Actually it tells you nothing about fairness, you took a big leap of faith in getting there. What it does tell us is that wrestlers want the conventional position because they have been conditioned to score there and have spent most there time working with that mindset. Few wrestlers have put that same energy into defending that position and thinking as themselves as the counteroffensive wrestler in that situation. I would make an educated guess that Hrovat thinks of this position in that regard and is one of the few wrestlers that does so. Had Hrovat won the coin toss, he would have likely taken the offensive position because that is what you do during training. You train as you compete. It happens by design that some people become great at defending the position due to inherent abilities, coaching, and an unconventional approach towards wrestling.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Tommy Rowlands at Olympic Team Trials
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on June 16, 2008
|
Rex, ok, u got your opinion, here's mine: under the current rule, in a zero to zero tie
the guy who wins the coin toss is given a great advantage, yet
he did nothing to earn it
. Thats fact, imo.
what has the luck of a coin toss got to do with who is the best wrestler ?
that is WHY the NCAA moved away a few years ago from the coin toss in OT deciding who got "up" and who got "down" in the 30 second rideout---- the coaches knew it wasnt fair.
And the coaches wanted a new OT procedure which they now have--- no arbitrary coin toss decides the match anymore because the coaches hated it. Now each wrestler gets his chance at "up", down" and on their feet.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Tommy Rowlands at Olympic Team Trials
Ethan Moore added to this discussion on June 16, 2008
|
I think the point made above is an important one... If both periods end in zero-zero ties, then the coin flip should be used after period one to determine that period and the next. (the loser of the coin flip in period one would have choice in period two). You could even allow a person to defer if he wanted to wait and have choice after the second. The fact that someone could lose both tosses when no offensive points have been scored makes no sense to me.
I would like to see it this way, and then in the third period wrestle until there's a winner. Conditioning should play a role in deciding the winner.
I was rooting for Hrovat, but it was obvious in my opinion that Lawal was the clear aggressor and Andy was playing for the coin toss. A great strategy, I suppose, but not one that leads to exciting wrestling or gravitates people towards the sport.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Tommy Rowlands at Olympic Team Trials
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on June 16, 2008
|
"I think the point made above is an important one... If both periods end in zero-zero ties, then the coin flip should be used after period one to determine that period and the next. (
the loser of the coin flip in period one would have choice in period two). "
--------------------------------------------
Ethan,
yes i made that point--- its ridiculous, unfair and to me illustrates that FILA is just not concerned with fairness. What rationale could there be for letting one wrestler gain a big advantage by winning 2 coin flips in a row ?
all those empty "50 yard line seats" at the Trials and the Men's Senior championships in Las Vegas must mean something ? in America fans vote with their butts in seats.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Tommy Rowlands at Olympic Team Trials
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on June 16, 2008
|
I'm going to offer an analogy and will ask all to beg the indulgence of a former English major.
Most poetry writers around 500 years ago wrote sonnets. There were various types of sonnets but generally speaking the poems were 14 lines, had a rhyme scheme and contained three four line stanzas prior to a finishing couplet. This formatting did not limit the style and subject matter of the poems but gave them a degree of uniformity which made them easier to study and appreciate. Another example would be Haikus, which are three line poems containing 5, 7 and 5 syllables.
I think that the current freestyle/greco system has actually made the sport easier to follow. Each period is two minutes and each match winner wins two periods. If no one scores at the end of the period, a coin flip determines who gets the advantage position. From here we get a winner. While I agree that it would be fairer not to keep flipping the coin--rather award the choice to the person who lost the flip last time--I think this system does a very good job of imposing discipline on the competitors and outlining their strategies for them.
Is it fair that the last man to score wins a tie match when no back exposures have taken place? Again, this rule causes the competitors to have strategies.
In America, we see a lot of coin flips. In Russia--not so many.
I think this system works pretty well and eliminates the official's judgement from the equation. I think some tweeks are all it needs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
