Turk95 Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 I was given the call that the OAKHILL sectional will recieve an extra 2 lbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bomber Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 I believe the Twin Lakes Sectional will get a 1 lb weight allowance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Peck Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Shenandoah Sectional will have 2 pounds on top of the original growth allowance. (i.e. 152 will weigh in at 156). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goul149 Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Delta Sectional is also getting 2 pounds. Andrew Goul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinedad Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Warren Central will be getting an extra 2 pounds. Which brings up the question, how does this play into the 1.5% weight allowance? OK, you math majors, figure it out for all of us math challenged people out here. ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starsaw Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Our AD informed us today that the Jay County Sectional will also get 2 extra pounds! (103= 107...112=116...and so on!) wow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littlevito Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Warren Central will be getting an extra 2 puonds. Which brings up the question, how does this play into the 1.5% weight allowance? OK, you math majors, figure it out for all of us math challenged people out here. ;D It doesn't play in effect at all. The wrestlers weight loss plan does not change meet to meet. You get the weight loss plan at the beginning of the season and follow it, end of story. Nothing changes or recalculates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinedad Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Thanks littlevito. That was the answer I was looking for. I have read the rule, and it seemed to me that it was a yearlt plan, and not a weekly plan, but I did not want to get caught in a trap for next weekend for those that make it through to regionals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littlevito Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Thanks littlevito. That was the answer I was looking for. I have read the rule, and it seemed to me that it was a yearlt plan, and not a weekly plan, but I did not want to get caught in a trap for next weekend for those that make it through to regionals. I'm just tired of all the talk about it. There are so many people trying to interpret a policy, and it is getting out of hand. All it will take is one idiot coach that has no clue to start some crap just from reading something on the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinedad Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 That is what I am trying to avoid, I can see something getting started next week about this at regionals, and creating a huge mess on site. I wonder how many calls Mr. Cox is going to get next weekend? What is the over under on this issue? 12 would be a good guess...... ;D And the over under on the number of questions on the board will be set at around 150. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 My big beef is, isn't the state tournament ONE big tournament? If one sectional gets extra weight shouldn't ALL of them get it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinedad Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 My big beef is, isn't the state tournament ONE big tournament? If one sectional gets extra weight shouldn't ALL of them get it? Good point, that should be the way the rule reads. What is the process for getting somerthing like this put into the rules? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Warren Central will be getting an extra 2 puonds. Which brings up the question, how does this play into the 1.5% weight allowance? OK, you math majors, figure it out for all of us math challenged people out here. ;D It doesn't play in effect at all. The wrestlers weight loss plan does not change meet to meet. You get the weight loss plan at the beginning of the season and follow it, end of story. Nothing changes or recalculates. Littlevito, Could you provide me with rule that refers to you only having to follow the wieght managment plan as it refers to 1.5%. All I've found is documentation saying that "a wrestlers is not allowed to loss more than 1.5% any given week." The way that is worded it make it sound like reguardless of the minimum weight you could be per the weight management plan you can only lose 1.5%. Basically saying from official weight in to official weigh in you are only allowed a 1.5% drop. So by that definition if a really lightweight wrestlers officially weighed in 2 pounds heavy one week he would not be able to drop more than the 1.5% correctly by the next weeks weigh in. That would prevent a wrestler during the state tournament from going form 105 officially one week to 107 the next then dropping back down to 105 the next meet after just because the weight management plan told him he could make that weight by that match. He would infact have to be slightly under 107 to to make it work. From what I've heard someone during the state tournament two years ago even got called out on it last year and the IHSAA addressed the school and coach over it. While I think that is a cheap thing to do since obviously that was not a major weight cutting issue I do want to get the rule correctly addressed by everyone so a similar issue does not occur. I'm not trying to get any team in individual in trouble over this one just wanting to clarify using the actual rules so noone is called out on it. I personally think most of this weight management stuff , while helpful in stopping major weight cutting issues, ends up being a lot of extra work that not everyone understands or even follows in teh exact same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littlevito Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 So did you have a kid come in more than 3 pounds over on Monday? Cause if so, the way you are stating it makes him breaking the rule to lose that weight within that week. It doesn't ask you to go into that performance calculator to enter stuff after each weigh in. The minimum weight and the 1.5% a week weight loss is set to allow an athlete ample time to lose weight over a period of time and allows a way to keep track of "qualifying weigh-ins". The weight loss plan was set to cut down on the drastic weight cutting that has dreaded this sport by outsiders. You can't designate an alteration to the athlete's weight loss plan on a competition to competition basis, there is no way to go in and change it unless filing an appeal to change what was put in at the beginning of the season for body fat composition. And there is also no way to change it competition to competition based on weight has it's own natural fluctuation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 By the word average of 1.5% per week that would make me think from one weeks official weigh in to offical weigh in you can not drop more than an average of 1.5% per week. Since the only think measured are official weigh ins then as long as you didn't drop more than 1.5% from that documented weigh in to the next it would tell me thats OK. I am not saying alter the weight management plan form week to week form each official weight in. That weight managment plan tell you the minimum you can possibly weight per week based on the 1.5% per week. However, no everyone makes that minimum weight. In fact several are way above that weight, so by your definition they could infact lose a ton of weight from one official weigh in to the next without issue because they are OK with their weight management plan. In other words wrestler A weight management plan says for week 8 he can weigh 140.0 minimum however he have been weighting at 160 as of the last official weight in. By your definition he can drop to 140 for week 9 without issue because he is still following his weight managment plan which puts him at 140 or that week. I contest while 140 may be his lowest weight he can make for week 8 or 9 that doesn't mean he should be allowed to drop 20 pounds in a weeks time to get there just because the weight management plan said he could that week. From my understanding he would have to go from week to week dropping 1.5% until he actually makes 140 that way. Yes this is much more work and worry for wrestlers and coaches but I belive that is what the rule intended to occur. If it actually does occur correctly in that way I doubt. As I mentioned all I can find on this says you can't drop more than 1.5% any week. And that is what I am trying to clarify using that actual rules wording. Two seperate issue seem to be at play by the wording of what I have read. One is the minimum weight you can be at each week according to your weight management plan. Which goes on until you have made your lowest minimum possible. The other issue is the weight loss per week you are allowed to have based on the 1.5% per from official weigh in to official weigh in. Again I'm not trying to call anyone out, but would actually like the documented rule to be presented and for everyone to interpret it the same way. As I've said all I have found so far is the statement listed above, and nobody has presented anther one that says all you have to follow in the weight management plan 1.5% and from their you can drop as much as you need from weigh in to weigh in as long as your weight management weekly minimum is fine. I believe it would be stupid to call a lightweight out on such a rule because it obviously isn't a dramatic cut, but do want to get it clarified so that it doesn't happen to a wrestler during this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueBolt Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 It would seem that the Weight Program that is intended to protect the kids from doing what most of us old timers did is even MORE effective at placing a coach into the psych ward! Well earlier than they usually go anyway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Peck Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 In truth some wrestlers weighing in at scratch plus four pounds on Saturday, and for some even weighing in at scratch plus three pounds on Wednesday, would create problems in complying with the Weight Loss Regulations on Saturday at Regional. I asked Bobby Cox about this and evne gave him a hypothetical situation with a 103 making 107 Saturday. He responded as follows: "The point you bring up about the 103 pounder while technically is valid, I am not going to get exercised over this and suspend a coach in this circumstance. With that said all coaches should attempt to do their best in monitoring the weights of all their wrestlers during this extraordinary period of time." I thnk that pretty much answers the question on the Weight Control issue at this moment. He pretty much says that if a wrestler is in the bounds of his weight class Saturday and he is there Wednesday (if his team is in the Team Regional), and he is there again next Saturday that the IHSAA is not going to make issue with what probably amounts to around a pound or less of rule violation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Peck Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 My big beef is, isn't the state tournament ONE big tournament? If one sectional gets extra weight shouldn't ALL of them get it? I actually asked Bobby Cox about this earlier in the week. I made the comment that quite often I have heard him talk about the IHSAA Tournament being one continuous tournament, and if that is the case wouldn't that mean that every sectional should get the extra weight for not being in school/practicing if one of the Sectionals did. He gave me some normal IHSAA talk and then said that although it is one continuous tournament where many issues are concerned, it is not in terms of giving added weight allowance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Thanks Coach Peck for clearning this up per Mr. Cox's interpretation of the rules. I thought my understanding of the rule was correct, but am also glad to see Mr. Cox is able to see pass the rules wording to the actual purpose it was created for. I believe their is still much more that needs to be done to inform the coaches of the proper execution of weigh management so that everyone is on the same page. And seriously if someone is going to "boo" me doing it for something I at least got wrong or offended someone by. It pathetic when someone boos another poster for correctly point out the actual meaning of a rule which had been incorrectly interpreted by others. We do this to help everyone ensure the rules are correctly followed in order to prevent a wrestler from gett hurt by them because the coach or parent was not properly infromed. If that is worth getting booed for over two different corrected rules issues in two days then several people on here are not in this sport or on this website for the right reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littlevito Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Thanks Coach Peck for clearning this up per Mr. Cox's interpretation of the rules. I thought my understanding of the rule was correct, but am also glad to see Mr. Cox is able to see pass the rules wording to the actual purpose it was created for. I believe their is still much more that needs to be done to inform the coaches of the proper execution of weigh management so that everyone is on the same page. And seriously if someone is going to "boo" me doing it for something I at least got wrong. It pathetic when someone boos another poster for correctly point out the actual meaning of a rule which was interpreted it incorrectly by others. I do this to help everyone ensure the rules are correctly followed so that the wrestlers do not get hurt by them without know they even did something wrong. If thats worth being booed over two different rules issues in two days for then several people on here are not in this sport for the right reason. Who is to say that you are totally right??? It is still a personal interpretation. There is also no valid documentation that says from weigh-in to weigh-in. The whole weight control program has many flaws that need to be addressed by the NFHS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Littlevito, Bobby Cox through coach Pecks message stated exactly what I had pointed out earlier that you said was wrong. The weight loss done at an average of 1.5% per week does carry on through the tournament series. Thus, this does effect the lightweights who get the extra pound. At least Bobby Cox recognizes this is not the purpose of the rule and is willing to look past it, but that was not the case in the past. Since he is the person incharge of determining wrestling per the IHSAA for the state of Indiana I would say that would mean my interpretation is correct. I agree alot needs to be done to fix the wieght managment issue in the sport and all I am trying to do is ensure no wrestlers get hurt by those rules based on the current iterpretation. Again I still would like to see the actual worded rules that reflect your interpretation of the rules. If they do exist then we need to talk with Bobby Cox and get this corrected so that other are not penalized for it in the future as they were in the past. While it does not say from one weeks official weigh in to the next weeks official weigh in I would believe that is the best appoach to go off and the one that someone would site when making a case against a kid. That is the only official documentation anyone has on a wrestlers weigh from week to week, so that would have to be how someone would measure it. The point I am making is to ensure a kid isn't unfairly punished by the rules because a coach or parent was misinformed. This has already happened in the passed and I just don't want to see it occur again. I hope you can see it that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littlevito Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Littlevito, Bobby Cox through coach Pecks message stated exactly what I had pointed out earlier that you said was wrong. Since he is the person incharge of determining wrestling per the IHSAA for the state of Indiana I would say that would mean my interpretation is correct. Again I still would like to see the actual worded rules that reflect your interpretation of the rules. If they do exist then we need to talk with Bobby Cox and get this corrected so that other are not penalized for it in the future as they were in the past. Bobby Cox could care less about this sport, and there has been other times where his interpretation of rules have been inadequate of what the rule means. All in all, this talk is just going to end up hurting a wrestler, because some coach reads something on here. He then voices his opinion to some official that doesn't have any idea on the rule, or the A.D./Tournament Director that also has no clue of the ruling. If you are right, then you are right and that is fine. But all this bickering is just going to lead to some wrestler being dicked over because some unqualified official or unqualified administer will just go off of an argument between coaches. The whole weight loss program needs overlooked. The 7% body fat was a great idea, but everything else that has been added just leads to headaches like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 While Mr. Cox probably does incorrectly understand parts of the sport he is still the governing body that makes the rulings for an against any issue in the sport. All I am doing is making sure people are informed correctly so it doesn't happen again. If you believe I am pointing the correct rules interpretation out to hurt other wrestlers I feel sorry for you. Its not about being right or wrong its about getting the rules correct according to what the IHSAA follows so no one is effected by them. I did not bring the topic up, however I did try to correct it once information was presented that was incorrect according to the IHSAA interpretation of the rules. Mr. Cox did not look past it 2 years ago and a decent wrestler almost go ejected from the tournament for that reason. I am trying to make sure that doesn't happen again. If you feel that alot of work needs to be done on the rules as many of us coaches do then this needs to be addressed to the ISWCA, IHSAA, and the national organizations. This discussion is not personal towards you or attacking your interpretation. However, we have to play by the interpretations of the IHSAA, if we like them or not, and that is the interpretation they are currently using. But, hidding the issue or interpreting the rules different than the governing body and spreading that information as correct is not getting the problem fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts