Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
1oldwrestler

Wt Change for 2010/11

Recommended Posts

Now that 103 will be increased to 106 or 107 in 2010, will all the vitriol shown towards the lowest weight class stop?  Accordingto the 103 haters it should because, supposedly, all they ever wanted was an increase in the weight.  Well now they have it but me thinks their hatred will continue to burn because, ultimately, their distaste for the weight class is truly based on the fact that freshmen dominate the class and "it's not fair that freshmen get a varsity letter just because they're the only one's small enough to qualify for the weight."  106 or 107 will continue to be dominated by freshmen.  Raising the weight isn't, IMO, going to change that.  The other argument againt 103 is that it has too many forfiets.  Will they decrease now that the class has been raised 3 or 4 pounds?  Only time will tell but, IMO, it will remain the the highest forfeited class in all of the weights.  Frankly, I love the lighter weight classes and an increase to 103 I don't believe is a bad thing but I don't think it's going to have the effect the 103 haters hope for.  The only way they will be truly satisifed is if the first weight class started at 112 but then they'd be hacked off that mostly sophomores dominate that class.  BTW, 103 pounders this is the year to set state and school records at 103 because those records will live forver once the weight change takes place next year! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, 103 is the most forfeited.

Yes, 103 is mostly Freshman.

The problem is this creates the least competition as you have a bunch of forfeits, an easier way to a state finals, and a class full of guys with less than one year of experience. 

 

In general, people '103 haters' as you call them, want the weight classes to all be fair and even. There shouldn't be one (or two) weight classes that are easier to be a state qualifier, or have a better record in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still would rather watch two good 103's than 2 good heavies.  Ton more action in those matches which makes it exciting to watch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In general, people '103 haters' as you call them, want the weight classes to all be fair and even. There shouldn't be one (or two) weight classes that are easier to be a state qualifier, or have a better record in.

 

Fair and even??? Really?  Weight classes will never be equal in the regards to being a state qualifier. 

 

 

I do not get the "no experience or not paid their dues" arguments.  Many freshmen 103 lbers have wrestled for years and i am pretty sure they go through the same practices as everyone else. Are there exceptions, yes, but are there a lot of upper weights filled by football players who never wrestled until hs and were recruited to help fill line-ups, yes.

 

Never wrestled 103, heck i havent even weighed 103 since the 6th grade so i have no real dog in this fight.  I enjoy watching the lower weight matches.  I have no real problem with them changing the weight class either. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AJ - I cannot speak for others, but when I said 'less than one year of experience' i thought I being clear that this meant with Varsity High School Wrestling. Sorry for the confusion.

 

Correct, the weight classes will never be totally even, but if you have ONE weight class in particular that is year in and year out the weight that 'easier' to be a state qualifier in - well you change it! -Which they did i might add.

 

As to previous arguments I do not think the change is enough, but it is certainly a step in the right direction.

 

Yes, I would rather watch two good 103'ers battle it out than 2 heavies as well. *285 was the other class i was quietly referring to when i said one 'or two' classes that are easeir. YOU HEARD ME, I think the 285 should be scaled back to a lighter weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think wildcat speaks for the 103 haters.  They believe that wrestling weight classes should mainly consist of upper classmen (jrs & srs) so the weight classes should start at 120 and end at 200.  I suppose 9 weight classes separated by 10 pounds  would be what they are looking for.  What does everyone think of that?  How would development opportunities be effected?  Many great wrestlers start at 103/112.  Would Henry Cejudo have won the olympics in 08 if the weights started at 120?  How would numbers be effected?  We're always complaining about the number of kids coming out for the sport.  Is wrestling's popularity strong enough (like football and basketball) to have most kids wrestle jv for two years?  I'm sure there are other issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of like the 103lb. weight class. I started wrestling when I was 5  years old and then went on and  tried every other

sport until I was in middle school and realized I wasn't going to be a big football player or basketball player and returned wrestling. My freshman year I weighed 85lbs and had to gain 3lbs to be within 10lb limit and wrestled varsity at 98lbs. Some kids develop a little a later, I wrestled 112 as a sophmore and had to cut weight. That's what makes this sport so great.  I also like the idea of 106lb class because this will make for more exciting wrestling. The lighter weight classes up to 160 are always more exciting to watch. No offense to the upper weight classes there's just more going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weight class changes have been part of the sport for decades and they are done with data and discussion to back up the decision.  Probably a better idea to just accept it and let the boys eat rather "blame" the so called haters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing is official yet, the NFHS is reviewing three proposals along with keeping the current weight classes(so basically 4 options).  

 

The proposals are as follows:

nfhs_proposed_weight_classes.jpg

 

Here is the reasoning behind each proposal

CURRENT:

-These current 14 weight classes have been in place since 1995.

-The 215-pound weight class was added in 2002.

-In 2006, the 275-pound weight class was increased to 285 pounds.

-These weight classes were developed from a survey that the NFHS Wrestling Rules Committee administered in 1994-95.

 

OPTION A:

-The weights were created from looking at the hydrated body weight at the time of assessment of 195,000 wrestlers from the NWCA Optimal performance calculator.

-Each weight class was created to have approximately 7.14% of the wrestlers.

-Equal distribution of wrestlers in each weight class.

-Eliminates one of the first three weight class. Combines 103, 112 and 119 into two weight classes.

 

OPTION B:

-The weights were created from looking at the minimum wrestling weight (7% weight) at the time of assessment of 195,000 wrestlers from the NWCA Optimal Performance Calculator.

-Each weight class was created to have approximately 7.14% of the wrestlers.

-Equal distribution of wrestlers in each weight class.

-Adds an 'additional' weight class at the top.

-Creates a weight class in the low 180-pound range.

 

OPTION C:

-The weights were based off using the hydrated body weight at the time of assessment of 195,000 wrestlers from the NWCA Optimal performance calculator.

-Percentages of distribution was between 7-8%. -he first three weights were distributed in the mid 6% range. This ensured that you did not eliminate the 'small' wrestler not being represented.

-Data supports moving 103 to 107 would greatly increase the number of eligible wrestlers for the first weight class.

-Will decrease the large jump from 103-112-pounds.

-Changes the middle weight increments from 5-pounds to 6-pounds.

-Eliminates the large jump between 171-189-pounds. Makes that a 15-pound jump from 177-192-pounds.

-The prevalence of HS wrestlers (N=195,000) at each of these weight classes, there is an equal distribution (~7%) of wrestlers for each of the weight classes listed. In addition, when reviewing the national data on children from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES published 1995), these weight classes are consistent with the 5th - 95th percentile data on weight for adolescent males aged 15-19.

 

Here is more information on the proposals.

http://ohiowrestling.net/2009/8/nfhs_proposed_weight_classes.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weight class changes have been part of the sport for decades and they are done with data and discussion to back up the decision.  Probably a better idea to just accept it and let the boys eat rather "blame" the so called haters.

Very good point. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, 103 is the most forfeited.

Yes, 103 is mostly Freshman.

The problem is this creates the least competition as you have a bunch of forfeits, an easier way to a state finals, and a class full of guys with less than one year of experience. 

 

In general, people '103 haters' as you call them, want the weight classes to all be fair and even. There shouldn't be one (or two) weight classes that are easier to be a state qualifier, or have a better record in.

 

My 3 son's vary hugely in size. My oldest wrestled at 215 and my younger sons wrestle in the lightest weights.

 

I take great offense to any statement that the lighter weights are "easier". In my opinion the highest weights are often the weakest and here is why...

 

Age does not equal experience or skill level, nor does size/weight.

 

I have seen over and over again in multiple programs very inexperienced wrestlers (with only a few years in wrestling) being starters on teams at the heavier weights. It has also been my experience that most of the lightest wrestlers (even the youngest) had more years of wrestling experience when compared to the experience of most heavyweights.

 

Because of how most heavyweights wrestle mostly on their feet looking for headlocks etc. simply being strong may be good enough for some heavies to win many matches during a season. That simply does not happen at the lightest weights. Lightweight wrestlers that have success are skilled WRESTLERS.

 

Heavier/larger wrestlers have a multitude of sports they can compete in. Very few large kids ever devote themselves solely to wrestling as their main sport.

 

Lighter weight kids have less opportunity to play other sports because of their size. The ones that become wrestlers do so because it is one of the few sports they can participate in without being at a disadvantage for being smaller. A small wrestler is much more likely to have wrestling be their main sport.

 

If we want wrestling to be about truly having wrestling skills then I think that elimination of the lightest weights is a gross error.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lighter weight kids have less opportunity to play other sports because of their size. The ones that become wrestlers do so because it is one of the few sports they can participate in without being at a disadvantage for being smaller. A small wrestler is much more likely to have wrestling be their main sport.

 

 

I agree with ccbig on this statement and his whole post. I like the way it currently is because it gives the smaller athlete the chance to compete. It is not all freshmen and sophmores at 103, I have seen senior 103's as well. I am not knocking what others feel about this topic, this is just how I feel personally.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lighter weight kids have less opportunity to play other sports because of their size. The ones that become wrestlers do so because it is one of the few sports they can participate in without being at a disadvantage for being smaller. A small wrestler is much more likely to have wrestling be their main sport.

 

 

I agree with ccbig on this statement and his whole post. I like the way it currently is because it gives the smaller athlete the chance to compete. It is not all freshmen and sophmores at 103, I have seen senior 103's as well. I am not knocking what others feel about this topic, this is just how I feel personally.

 

 

 

I wrestled 103 and was a 3 sport athlete. Often the small kids can do cross country and track in the off seasons to help keep in condition, I'm not sure the lighter weights are single sport athletes by any stretch.

 

That being said, in some cases there is a lot more skill at the lighter weights than the heavier. But there are exceptions both ways. I have known heavy weights who were some of the most technically sound guys on a team, but didn't get to showcase as often. Lighter guys have to be quicker and very clean, because there is a lot of speed, and if you slip once it's likely your opponent will take advantage. "Skill" is a little relative too I guess, a heavyweight who knows how to use his weight and throw guys could be said to be as skilled as a 103 who has mastered singles and superducks, maybe a skill is just knowing how to use your body against your opponent.

 

Sorry, guess that was my 5 cents, I went a little over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a coach tell me that strength is a great equalizer.  I know we have all had kids in our rooms who were technically better than that JR or SR but would get caught or would lose in certain scramble situations because of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrestlingdadx2, ccbig, lpbrown90.  Get ready to get sarcasmed and ridiculed to death for liking 103.  The haters (and yes Mr Hungus, you guys are haters) for some reason can't stand the fact that underclassmen get a chance to compete.  As I stated in an earlier post 9 wt classes separated by 10 pounds, starting at 120 and ending at 200 would be a dream for these guys.  They hide behind forfeits as the main reason they want to see the wt increased.  Underclassmen should, in their world, have no place to showcase their talents and abilities.  I ask again, would Henry Cejudo have won olympic gold in '08 if the weights started at 120?  Doubtful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Age does not equal experience or skill level, nor does size/weight.

 

If age does not matter why at state are most state qualifiers seniors then juniors then sophomores and finally freshmen?

Although age is somewhat of a factor there's no denying that skill and experience is everything. There are alot of upperclassmen that get beat by underclassmen all the time based soley on skill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Age does not equal experience or skill level, nor does size/weight.

 

If age does not matter why at state are most state qualifiers seniors then juniors then sophomores and finally freshmen?

Although age is somewhat of a factor there's no denying that skill and experience is everything. There are alot of upperclassmen that get beat by underclassmen all the time based soley on skill.

A lot and all the time?  Those are strong words.  If it happened "all the time" how come this year at state 80% of the state qualifiers were juniors and seniors?  If you take out 103lbs, 84.6% of the state qualifiers are juniors and seniors and by taking out 112lbs it goes up to 88%. 

 

I am curious where all these super stud freshmen that are better than seniors "all the time."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrestlingdadx2, ccbig, lpbrown90.  Get ready to get sarcasmed and ridiculed to death for liking 103.  The haters (and yes Mr Hungus, you guys are haters) for some reason can't stand the fact that underclassmen get a chance to compete.  As I stated in an earlier post 9 wt classes separated by 10 pounds, starting at 120 and ending at 200 would be a dream for these guys.  They hide behind forfeits as the main reason they want to see the wt increased.   Underclassmen should, in their world, have no place to showcase their talents and abilities.  I ask again, would Henry Cejudo have won olympic gold in '08 if the weights started at 120?  Doubtful.

Thats fine.  :D  I would rather watch the  103lb state wrestlers than the 215lb football/wrestler anyday. I usually don't  stay to  much to watch  the upper weight classes (I think it's sloppier)but everyone has there own opinion. I was a

lighter wrestler (98,112,135,135)  so I might be a little biased myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Age does not equal experience or skill level, nor does size/weight.

 

If age does not matter why at state are most state qualifiers seniors then juniors then sophomores and finally freshmen?

Although age is somewhat of a factor there's no denying that skill and experience is everything. There are alot of upperclassmen that get beat by underclassmen all the time based soley on skill.

A lot and all the time?  Those are strong words.  If it happened "all the time" how come this year at state 80% of the state qualifiers were juniors and seniors?  If you take out 103lbs, 84.6% of the state qualifiers are juniors and seniors and by taking out 112lbs it goes up to 88%. 

 

I am curious where all these super stud freshmen that are better than seniors "all the time."

If you noticed i said upperclassmen and underclassmen not just freshman. I'm not trying to start a debate here! I probably should have been clearer . I was basically trying to say that experience and skill are more of a  factor than anything in this sport.I'm not arguing youre facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK- Let me take a deep breath.... 

 

I said: "I cannot speak for others, but ..."

The reply was "I think wildcat speaks for the 103 haters..."

 

I do not "Hate" 103 lbs kids. I think the weight class is too low. It has been shown over the past few years that 103 is the weakest weight class by any measure. Most forfeits, most younger guys, etc.

 

*I am well aware their are exceptions!! I know that freshman win at higher weights, that there are athletic little guys, that there are very talented 103'rs, and that there has been some very talented 103'rs in the past. Point is, the weightclass is out-dated now. Obviously I'm not the only one who thinks this, as you all continue to paint me in the minority, as these are BEING PROPOSED as we speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK- Let me take a deep breath.... 

 

I said: "I cannot speak for others, but ..."

The reply was "I think wildcat speaks for the 103 haters..."

 

I do not "Hate" 103 lbs kids. I think the weight class is too low. It has been shown over the past few years that 103 is the weakest weight class by any measure. Most forfeits, most younger guys, etc.

 

*I am well aware their are exceptions!! I know that freshman win at higher weights, that there are athletic little guys, that there are very talented 103'rs, and that there has been some very talented 103'rs in the past. Point is, the weightclass is out-dated now. Obviously I'm not the only one who thinks this, as you all continue to paint me in the minority, as these are BEING PROPOSED as we speak.

 

But, wildcat, isn't it true that you don't believe that going up to 106/107 isn't enough?  It needs to be more in order to make sure freshmen have a very difficult time wrestling varsity, correct?  C'mon, let it out.  I know you can!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.