Do the U.S. based rules make more sense?

[The Guru]

AWN/TOM Jason Bryant

 

http://news.internationalwrestling.org/2013/07/column-do-the-u-s-based-rules-make-more-sense/

 

COLUMN: Do the U.S. based rules make more sense?

on July 30, 2013 1:17 pm in Blogs & Columns, Featured Rotation / no comments

 

bythenumbers

 

By Jason Bryant

Editor, Amateur Wrestling News

 

After spending 10 days at the USA Wrestling Cadet & Junior Nationals in Fargo, N.D., one thing became abundantly clear once the competition got started – wrestling was back.

 

When FILA issued a document on May 18 regarding the rule changes, ditching the 3-period format in favor of cumulative scoring, the hearts of the wrestling world skipped a beat. Did this really mean we were going to have less nuances and a more continuous flow of action which could make our sport more enjoyable to not only wrestling fans, but sports fans in general?

 

A few weeks later, a clarification came out detailing how matches would still have nuanced match stoppages – things that previously were only good enough to end a period would now end a match. Technical falls were scaled back to seven points in freestyle (Greco was already at seven after the May 18 document).

 

Since, it’s been a bit of a free-for-all when it comes to scoring internationally. The U.S. told its developmental levels to stick with the interpretation wrestled at the United 4 Wrestling event in Los Angeles. The Mediterranean Games used the old 3-period system, Russia decided to stick with one-point takedowns and pushouts became somewhat indistinguishable in how they were scored.

 

From my (sometimes not-so) humble seat, one thing I was curious about was how much data could be gathered to support any system of rules. Growing up with American folkstyle wrestling, where takedowns are two points, I naturally favored the 2-point takedown. Turns became less subjective, with most turns scored as two.

 

One issue I had with the Russian system was the 3-point move was extremely difficult to overcome. You would need four takedowns (under their system) to top one 3-point move. A three-point armspin with no control was better than three takedowns, where there is clear control. The 2-point takedown, at least from where I sit, evens things out. A 3-point move is still better than a 2-point one – but TWO scoring actions is always better than one. The lone exception being the grand amplitude 5-point action, which currently ends a match. I’m still indifferent with that.

 

All that being said, the USA Wrestling Cadet & Junior Nationals used a 10-point technical fall for freestyle, a 7-point technical fall for Greco. All takedowns were two points, all turns (at least from what I saw) were two points and the only thing to terminate a match prematurely would be a fall or a technical fall (obviously injuries and disqualifications are included, but aren’t statistically significant).

 

So what did we learn from Fargo?

 

First, let’s compare 2012 and 2013. Justin Tritz of Trackwrestling.com provided the comparative statistics to help with this idea.

 

Before we get there, we have to ask ourselves a simple question – what is more important to wrestlers and fans? Is it the action of scoring or is it actual points on the scoreboard? If Fargo is any indication from 2013, it’s points on the scoreboard.

 

In Junior freestyle in 2012, there were 17,246 scoring actions resulting in 23,583 points. In 2013, there were 16,071 scoring actions resulting in 27,238 points. Obviously, with takedowns and all turns being scored as two points, it doubles the output of the previous takedown and any hand-to-hand exposure.

 

Further, there were 8,665 1-point actions in 2012, which were combined cautions, takedowns, turns and pushouts. In 2013, there were 2,392 1-point actions which only dealt with pushouts and cautions.

 

The 2-point action was the most-scored action in 2013, especially in freestyle. In 2012, 50.24 percent of the scoring actions in Junior freestyle were of the 1-point variety, but in 2013, it was only 14.88 percent. The 2-point action dominated the 2013 numbers, with every division (of the six) scoring at least 53 percent of its points via 2-point actions.

 

But what about points per match? One thing to remember is the total points to terminate a match has been changed, causing some statistical closeness that may or may not be indicative of backing up anyone’s claims. In 2012, you could conceivably end a match with 10 total points (scoring a 5-point action in each period), but that was extremely rare. The most common technical fall score in 2012 was 6-0, 6-0 (in both styles). So the difference in match termination in most cases is a differential of two fewer points in freestyle and five fewer in Greco-Roman.

 

In Junior freestyle in 2012, the average points per match was 11.58, while in 2013, it was 13.06, but the scoring actions per match decreased from 8.47 to 7.70. Cadet numbers were similar, with an increase in points per match to 13.35 from 11.02 in 2012.

 

In Greco-Roman, there was virtually no change in total points per match, with both Junior and Cadet Greco each staying within the 9.4 points per match. It’s my belief Greco would have seen the same increase in scoring per match that freestyle did if the technical fall was raised to a 10-point differential.

 

In Cadet freestyle, there were more scoring actions compared to Juniors. In 2012, Cadets scored actions 13,879 times, while in 2013 it was 15,396 times. So while actions per match decreased at the Junior level, it increased at the Cadet level. It also increased at the Junior Women’s level, although due to smaller numbers, the total number of actions was only 23.

 

Now, while total actions increased for Cadets, it should be noted the number of bouts also increased, as it did with every tournament except Cadet Women’s freestyle, which is only in its third year.

 

Entries were up in every single style, which created more bouts and more opportunity to increase the number of total actions and total points, but the averages still show an increase in actions per match and points per match at the Cadet freestyle level.

 

Another thing to consider when comparing these rules to any current FILA iteration is this – once a wrestler is down 7-0, there’s no more chance to score points either way, so there’s a perceived cap on scoring potential. While not completely broken down yet, there were several instances where wrestlers down more than seven points in freestyle came back to win matches. There were also instances where wrestlers who gave up more than one 3-point throw and gave up a 5-point throw came back to win matches as well. Ending matches prematurely is the enemy of scoring.

 

Let’s use the highest scoring match in Fargo as an extreme example. Cadet freestyle at 138 pounds saw Kentucky’s Jackson Oxford beat Georgia’s Derekston Williams 25-21.

 

Under current FILA rules, Williams would have won in 50 seconds. Williams scored 1, 3, 1 and 2 in the first minute of the match. Oxford rallied to score two 3’s and a 2-point action to take an 8-7 lead. Williams then scored his second 3-point move, taking a 10-8 lead. This would have again ended the match. Oxford scored two points late in the first to tie the bout at 10-10 going into the second period. Williams retook the lead 12-10, the Oxford rattled off eight straight points to take an 18-12 lead. Then it was Williams’ turn, who scored nine straight to take a 21-18 lead. Oxford came back again in the last 15 seconds, scoring seven more points to pick up a 25-21 victory.

 

Why rob the fans of 46 points and only give them eight? Williams was a prolific scorer, but he also gave up a ton of points. In his first three matches, he won 21-21, lost 25-21 and won again 24-22. That’s 66 points in three matches.

 

Some purists might argue that it’s “terrible wrestling,” or “lacks technique” or is outright sloppy. Yup, it could be all of those things, but let’s look at college and pro football (American) to compare. What came is more memorable or exciting for fans – a 14-7 tactical ground game with exact precision? Or a 63-61 shoot out with long touchdown bombs being thrown left and right.

 

I’ll take the higher scoring game, especially when two opponents can exploit each other’s weakness. It makes for high drama and more exciting anything – not just wrestling.

You can’t quantify perception. Having attended the last 15 USA Wrestling Cadet & Junior Nationals, it’s my personal and professional opinion we saw wrestling again. We saw exciting finishes, we saw kids getting after it, we saw kids unafraid to go for big moves. Huge rallies are great for sports, all sports, including wrestling.

 

The Stats

Junior Freestyle

Total Bouts: 2,085

Technical Falls: 1,285 (61.63%)

Decisions: 444 (21.29%)

Falls: 331 (15.88%)

Injury Defaults: 20 (0.96%)

Disqualifications: 0

Forfeits: 6 (0.29%)

 

Matches NOT ending in falls, forfeits, disqualifications or injury defaults (1,728)

 

Matches that went to criteria: 27 (1.56%)

Most Common Score: 10-0 (540 times, 31.25%)

Matches with less than 10 points: 77 (4.46%)

Matches with 10-19 points: 1,411 (81.66%)

Matches with 20-29 points: 228 (13.19%)

Matches with 30-39 points: 35 (2.03%)

Matches with 40 or more points: 1 (0.06%)

Total Matches with at least 10 points: 1,675 (96.93%)

**- Statistical Anomaly: Check formula was off by one bout.

 

Cadet Freestyle

Total Bouts: 1,970

Technical Falls: 1,161 (58.93%)

Falls: 457 (23.19%)

Decisions: 338 (17.16%)

Injury Defaults: 13 (0.66%)

Disqualifications: 0

Forfeits: 2 (0.10%)

 

Matches NOT ending in falls, forfeits, disqualifications or injury defaults (1,498)

 

Matches that went to criteria: 27 (1.80%)

Most Common Score: 10-0 (456 times, 30.44%)

Matches with less than 10 points: 42 (2.80%)

Matches with 10-19 points: 1,221 (81.51%)

Matches with 20-29 points: 229 (15.29%)

Matches with 30-39 points: 39 (2.60%)

Matches with 40 or more points: 5 (0.33%)

Total Matches with at least 10 points: 1,494 (99.73%)

**- Statistical Anomaly: Check formula was off by one bout.

 

Junior Women

Total Bouts: 426

Technical Falls: 137 (32.16%)

Falls: 211 (49.53%)

Decisions: 66 (15.49%)

Injury Defaults: 10 (2.35%)

Disqualifications: 0

Forfeits: 0

 

Matches NOT ending in falls, forfeits, disqualifications or injury defaults (204)

 

Matches that went to criteria: 0

Most Common Score: 10-0 (60 times, 29.41%)

Matches with less than 10 points: 17 (8.33%)

Matches with 10-19 points: 171 (83.82%)

Matches with 20-29 points: 14 (6.86%)

Matches with 30-39 points: 2 (0.98%)

Matches with 40 or more points: 0

Total Matches with at least 10 points: 187 (91.67%)

**- Statistical Anomaly: Check formula was off by one bout.

 

Cadet Women

Total Bouts: 148

Technical Falls: 39 (26.35%)

Falls: 83 (56.08%)

Decisions: 24 (16.2%)

Injury Defaults: 1 (0.68%)

Disqualifications: 0

Forfeits: 1 (0.68%)

 

Matches NOT ending in falls, forfeits, disqualifications or injury defaults (63)

Matches that went to criteria: 1 (1.59%)

Most Common Score: 10-0 (14 times, 22.22%)

Matches with less than 10 points: 9 (14.29%)

Matches with 10-19 points: 50 (79.37%)

Matches with 20-29 points: 4 (6.35%)

Matches with 30-39 points: 0

Matches with 40 or more points: 0

Total Matches with at least 10 points: 54 (85.71%)

 

Junior Greco

Total Bouts: 1,578

Technical Falls: 942 (59.70%)

Falls: 322 (20.41%)

Decisions: 286 (18.12%)

Injury Defaults: 14 (0.89%)

Disqualifications: 6 (0.38%)

Forfeits: 3 (0.19%)

 

Matches NOT ending in falls, forfeits, disqualifications or injury defaults (1,233)

Matches that went to criteria: 20 (1.62%)

Most Common Score: 7-0 (298 times, 24.16%)

Matches with less than 10 points: 815 (66.10%)

Matches with 10-19 points: 354 (28.71%)

Matches with 20-29 points: 52 (4.22%)

Matches with 30-39 points: 5 (0.41%)

Matches with 40 or more points: 1 (0.08%)

Total Matches with at least 10 points: 412 (33.41%)

**- Statistical Anomaly: Check formula was off by five bouts.

 

Cadet Greco

Total Bouts: 1,587

Technical Falls: 937 (59.04%)

Falls: 383 (24.13%)

Decisions: 256 (16.13%)

Injury Defaults: 9 (0.57%)

Disqualifications: 1 (0.06%)

Forfeits: 1 (0.06%)

 

Matches NOT ending in falls, forfeits, disqualifications or injury defaults (1,193)

 

Matches NOT ending by fall, forfeit, disqualification or injury —

Matches that went to criteria: 24 (2.01%)

Most Common Score: 7-0 (292 times, 24.48%)

Matches with less than 10 points: 764 (64.04%)

Matches with 20-29 points: 52 (4.22%)

Matches with 30-39 points: 5 (0.41%)

Matches with 40 or more points: 1 (0.08%)

Total Matches with at least 10 points: 412 (33.41%)

 

Since this isn’t an exact scientific study, there are some anomalies that exist. Of the 7,794 bouts listed in Fargo, there are eight bouts that don’t seem to match up with the formula to check the numbers. It’s not statistically significant, but for disclosure sake, we’ll mention it.

 

Another point to discuss is types of outcomes. Across the four freestyle tournaments held in Fargo, there were 4,629 bouts – 2,622 ended via technical fall (56.64 percent), while 1,082 ended with falls (23.37 percent). From a developmental standpoint, it makes sense to expand the technical fall to 10 or 12 points. At the senior level, 10 or 12 should be the magic number based on the increase in points for actions previously scored as one.

 

The case for overtime

One thing FILA got rid of with the 3-period format was any overtime. This eliminates one of the ultimate rushes in sports – sudden victory. While I don’t support an unlimited overtime, the numbers in Fargo seem to indicate there will be a minimal amount of matches going to overtime if a U.S. version of the rules is implemented.

 

Can that be verified? Depends on how you look at it. In the 7,794 bouts completed in Fargo, only 99 matches ended tied at the end of regulation. That’s 1.27 percent of the bouts. Adding a two or three-minute overtime and then going to criteria would have happened so infrequently, it would make a minimal impact on the length of a tournament – especially if FILA finally abandons the one-day format. The argument to that point isn’t statistically verifiable either – the kids knew there was no overtime and scored to win the match. Sure, that might be the case, but when less than two percent of matches are decided by criteria, it leads one to believe overtime wouldn’t be detrimental to the flow of a tournament.

 

Junior Women’s freestyle had 426 bouts and not a single one went to criteria. It’s not going to slow things down.

 

Points, Points, Points

In the finals of the Junior Greco-Roman competition, 157 points were scored compared to 113 in 2012. Some of that can be attributed to the 22-16 finals match at 100 pounds where Michigan’s Dalton Roberts beat Illinois’ Kirk Johansen. But again, 38 points in a Greco match – and not a preliminary, but a final?

 

During the course of the tournament, wrestlers scored at least 20 points while winning a match 68 times. Sure, it’s a small percentage (less than one percent), but it still happened. That type of scoring happening in any World or Olympic final should be encouraged.

 

Final Thoughts

As an American, it might be viewed by others I’m only backing the U.S. interpretation of the rules because it’s favorable to U.S. athletes. That’s false. I’d love to watch Sushil Kumar and Andriy Stadnyk wrestle a 15-14 match. I’d love to see Opan Sat open up and score 25 points in a match.

 

Surely, there will be defenses to some of the points I’ve tried to make, or at least show based on the data. Once the one-day format is removed (here’s to hoping), I believe it will open up athletes to attack and score, not sit on a lead and conserve energy, which seems to be the biggest supporting point to a 7-point tech. Problem with that theory is, it can’t be tested, so we’re reliant on “I think” rather than real data. This data isn’t perfect and like any statistical breakdown, it can be used to prove or disprove any hypothesis, depending on how you run the numbers.

 

I believe the USA Wrestling Cadet & Junior Nationals provided the world enough data to show ending matches prematurely with nuances stifles scoring. Quicker matches are a by-product, not the end game. Keep the rules simple. The wrestler who scores the most, wins. Let’s get rid of the match terminating two 3’s and one 5.

 

We’re not trying to solve every single problem, but there seems to be an international scoring system that promotes scoring. It bears repeating, let’s not limit scoring and cut it short. If wrestlers can score 50 points, let them score 50 points. It’ll get people talking. Natural scoring is a sure way to improve the product. Let’s hope we see even more progress after the World Championships in Budapest. Points matter, not always how they get those points.

 

NOTE: These numbers will be sent to the International Network of Wrestling Researchers