3 point TD mid year review

[GogglesPaizano]

One thing is crystal clear to me. My pre season prediction is coming true before our very eyes.

The team best positioned to benefit from the new role is PSU.

We out-takedown every opponent in every dual, by a wide margin. Bonus victories are far easier to attain.

I believe that our team will set a record for bonus points in this year's Nationals. GIA will start calling for the return to the old ways soon enough.

The Major is the new decision, and the Tech is the new major. I keep underestimating our kids in KYPSW. Not knowing whether to predict a major or a tech is a pretty sweet burden to face.

 

[Callthestall]

I like the 3 but maybe change a major to 10 points and a tech to 18 points .

 

[pawrestlersintn]

Here is a challenge to any of the 3 point take down defenders: Send me videos of 3 matches where the 3 point takedown made a match more exciting. And, convince everyone that the reason for the excitement was the 3-point takedown rule.

If anything, the guys who are big fans of takedowns and wrestling from the feet are getting ripped off, because we're seeing fewer take downs. And, the rest of the fans are getting to see less wrestling.

Take yesterday as an example. The 3-point takedown was such a great incentive that Indiana had 0 takedowns, 5 matches ended early, we lost as much as 8 minutes of wrestling, and the on the feet wrestling that would have come with that.

Hoo, boy, was that ever exciting!

 

[donboy6499]

Not convinced either way yet, but one thing seems crystal clear: reversals need to be the same amount of points as a TD.

Not really sure it’s impacting matches all that much otherwise. Wrestling media seems to have bought in because it allows for comebacks more often when guys are down big, but guys are down big because of the 3 point takedown in the first place.

 

[86PSUPaul]

Take yesterday as an example. The 3-point takedown was such a great incentive that Indiana had 0 takedowns, 5 matches ended early, we lost as much as 8 minutes of wrestling, and the on the feet wrestling that would have come with that.

I don’t really have a position on the three, and your statement is factually correct, but one of the early stopages was at 6:59, and the Indy coach actually argued no escape, until the ref told him it would have been a 7:00 TF because of riding time.

 

[mcpat]

I don’t hate it, but I think it’s bringing us futther away from what I thought was the ultimate point of competition: the fall.

More points, more cat and mouse, more techs, fewer pins.

46-0 yesterday. Zero offensive points from the opponent. And yet not a single pin.

 

[pawrestlersintn]

I don’t really have a position on the three, and your statement is factually correct, but one of the early stopages was at 6:59, and the Indy coach actually argued no escape, until the ref told him it would have been a 7:00 TF because of riding time.

I hear ya.

Counterpoint: Two of the other tech falls were stopped with more than three minutes left to wrestle. With one set of four backpoints.

 

[tullfan68]

One thing is crystal clear to me. My pre season prediction is coming true before our very eyes.

The team best positioned to benefit from the new role is PSU.

We out-takedown every opponent in every dual, by a wide margin. Bonus victories are far easier to attain.

I believe that our team will set a record for bonus points in this year's Nationals. GIA will start calling for the return to the old ways soon enough.

The Major is the new decision, and the Tech is the new major. I keep underestimating our kids in KYPSW. Not knowing whether to predict a major or a tech is a pretty sweet burden to face.

NCAA will continue with the 3 point TD but PSU wrestlers will still only get 2 for TD!!

 

[El-Jefe]

Take yesterday as an example. The 3-point takedown was such a great incentive that Indiana had 0 takedowns, 5 matches ended early, we lost as much as 8 minutes of wrestling, and the on the feet wrestling that would have come with that.

Did anybody ever claim the T3 rule was aimed at making PSU more active?

 

[SlipperyPete12]

And yet not a single pin.

True, but Beau, Kasak & Levi were really close to getting pins. To me, Kasak's guy looked like he was pinned. Beau had his opponent on his back, but ran out of time at the end of the 3rd period & same for Levi at the end of the 2nd period. With a different ref or a little more time on the clock, we could have had three pins.

 

[lookleft goright]

Definitely need to make the reversal worth 3 also. Reversals are the rarest points awarded and should be worth the same as a takedown. The point of the 3 point takedown, I thought, was to make the difference between a takedown and an escape (the most common points awarded) a big bigger. That way guy who only gets an escape and a ride out, does not beat a guy who took him down.

 

[HikeNatParks]

Definitely need to make the reversal worth 3 also. Reversals are the rarest points awarded and should be worth the same as a takedown. The point of the 3 point takedown, I thought, was to make the difference between a takedown and an escape (the most common points awarded) a big bigger. That way guy who only gets an escape and a ride out, does not beat a guy who took him down.

Logically, it’s worth more, as others have argued better than I.
A move that starts from a worse position (being controlled rather than at neutral), includes an imbedded escape, and ends exactly where a TD does (in control) should be 3.5, especially since far more infrequent. Only a half-point higher value is key, as it still allows a further escape or riding point to eclipse a reverser’s half-point but fully deserved lead.
Bottom line, if an escape is worth a point, an imbedded one is worth a half.

 

[pawrestlersintn]

Did anybody ever claim the T3 rule was aimed at making PSU more active?

What was the rule for, again? Oh, that's right, too kick the "refs calling stalling can" down the road.

Take PSU out of it. I'm happy to watch three matches that were more exciting because of the 3, instead of the 2.

 

[Still in State College]

When changes like these are made it never matters to the end product. Guys who have 1 takedown matches will still have 1 takedown matches and guys that take someone down over and over will still take them down over and over.

I look at freestyle and the shot clock and push out really haven't made a difference. Guy gets put on the clock and he just resigns himself to giving up a point. Guy gets in a bad spot he uses the push out to give up one point and get out of trouble. nobody seems to worry about that one point either way.

I think only thing that would make a difference is if every match required a fall to end and even then the counter guys would be looking to counter.

 

[PD4thespawn]

I always thought it was set up by Cael to break Iowas 170 point NCAA scoring record.

 

[matter7172]

What was the rule for, again? Oh, that's right, too kick the "refs calling stalling can" down the road.

Take PSU out of it. I'm happy to watch three matches that were more exciting because of the 3, instead of the 2.

Yeah, you have to take PSU out of the analysis because they are outliers in terms of wrestling style. I'll say the 3 point takedown had a big impact in Saturday's Lehigh/Cornell match and did make things more exciting. I think it may take a full season for it to sink in, but I believe the 3 point takedown is working.

I also agree reversals should be worth 3 points now.

 

[SlipperyPete12]

To me, this seems like the NCAA might be trying to phase out mat wrestling. If a takedown is worth 3 points, a reversal worth 2 points, and an escape worth 1 point, then if you can takedown your opponent, why would you choose bottom and score less points? What's the average time it takes for someone to get off bottom or get a reversal, 20-30 sec? That will only get you 1-2 points. If you can takedown your opponent in that same amount of time, then you get 3 points, so why waste any time on bottom to score less points?

Levi picked neutral when he had his choice yesterday, and I get that. I suspect this might lead to more wrestlers, especially the ones good on their feet, choosing neutral more often, especially if they're going against someone who is good or decent on top.

I don't understand why anyone would choose bottom against a guy like Nagao. He's just too good on top. His opponents would have a much better chance taking him down, then getting out from bottom. You don't get the single escape point then, but you also don't give up a riding time point. If you have the opportunity to score 3 points from a takedown, but only 1-2 from choosing bottom, then why would you choose to go underneath a guy who's that good on top?

 

[GogglesPaizano]

I don't understand why anyone would choose bottom against a guy like Nagao. He's just too good on top. His opponents would have a much better chance taking him down, then getting out from bottom.

Aaron just needs something more effective than a half nelson with double boots in to get a turn. Oh if it were humanly possible to do a bow and arrow from that position, now there is some pain and points for ya.

 

[pawrestlersintn]

Yeah, you have to take PSU out of the analysis because they are outliers in terms of wrestling style. I'll say the 3 point takedown had a big impact in Saturday's Lehigh/Cornell match and did make things more exciting. I think it may take a full season for it to sink in, but I believe the 3 point takedown is working.

I also agree reversals should be worth 3 points now.

Lead me down the path of acceptance.

Which matches and why?

 

[Aardvark86]

My take is that I would love to see a harder statistical look at effects. My “eyeball” hypothesis:
1. Where there is a substantial difference in wrestlers ranking, the 3 pt rule facilitates techs and majors.
2. But, where the wrestlers are at substantial parity, it incents defensive (boring) wrestling around the first td game theory principles.

 

[86PSUPaul]

Definitely need to make the reversal worth 3 also. Reversals are the rarest points awarded and should be worth the same as a takedown. The point of the 3 point takedown, I thought, was to make the difference between a takedown and an escape (the most common points awarded) a big bigger. That way guy who only gets an escape and a ride out, does not beat a guy who took him down.

They are rare, in the past we have guys not get an escape because they were trying to get a reversal and failed. Yesterday we had two guys, back to back I think, get reversals.

 

[matter7172]

Lead me down the path of acceptance.

Which matches and why?

Just off the top of my head, the Wilt/Foca match. Wilt was down by a lot in the 3rd period (15-3) and was able to get two late takedowns to reduce the lead to 7 (16-9), thereby avoiding the major and keeping Lehigh within 8 points of Cornell going into the last 3 matches.

 

[donboy6499]

Just off the top of my head, the Wilt/Foca match. Wilt was down by a lot in the 3rd period (15-3) and was able to get two late takedowns to reduce the lead to 7 (16-9), thereby avoiding the major and keeping Lehigh within 8 points of Cornell going into the last 3 matches.

So the question is, would the lead have gotten to 15-3 sans the 3 point takedown? In other words, would it have been 12-3 and then the 2 late ones achieved the same thing with 2 point takedowns?

 

[matter7172]

So the question is, would the lead have gotten to 15-3 sans the 3 point takedown? In other words, would it have been 12-3 and then the 2 late ones achieved the same thing with 2 point takedowns?

Wilt almost got pinned in the first period (I think Foca got back points twice), so it wasn't just a takedown battle.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

Not convinced either way yet, but one thing seems crystal clear: reversals need to be the same amount of points as a TD.

Not really sure it’s impacting matches all that much otherwise. Wrestling media seems to have bought in because it allows for comebacks more often when guys are down big, but guys are down big because of the 3 point takedown in the first place.

Agree - a reversal is arguably harder to get than a TD (certainly much rarer).

 

[bourbon n blues]

Agree - a reversal is arguably harder to get than a TD (certainly much rarer).

I see a lot of takedowns and very few reversals.

 

[pawrestlersintn]

Wilt almost got pinned in the first period (I think Foca got back points twice), so it wasn't just a takedown battle.

1st
Foca T3 NF4. T3
Wilt. E1. E1
2nd
Foca E1 T3
Wilt. E1
3rd
Foca. E1. RT1
Wilt. T3. T3

So, it was 16-9, and would have been 13-7.

 

[Psubiomed]

I don’t hate it, but I think it’s bringing us futther away from what I thought was the ultimate point of competition: the fall.

More points, more cat and mouse, more techs, fewer pins.

46-0 yesterday. Zero offensive points from the opponent. And yet not a single pin.

Unless you don't count the two pins Kasak had without a call.

 

[matter7172]

1st
Foca T3 NF4. T3
Wilt. E1. E1
2nd
Foca E1 T3
Wilt. E1
3rd
Foca. E1. RT1
Wilt. T3. T3

So, it was 16-9, and would have been 13-7.

That's true. Funny but sitting at the match watching it in person, the fact that Wilt was down 14-3 (really 15-3 with riding time factored in) made coming back to prevent the major really difficult to do under the old rules. It would have required Wilt getting 4 takedowns (15-5, 16-5, 16-7, 16-8, 16-10) to do it.

Of course, under the old rules, Foca's lead would have only been 11-3 (12-3 with riding time included), so 2 takedowns would have done it under the old rules also.

All I can say is that the perception of the match live and in person felt entirely different with the new rules. Foca was a lot closer to a TF with the new rules and Wilt came back from a bigger deficit.

 

[RoarLions1]

Every rule change has a breaking-in period. The OP asked the question a bit over two months into the first season. I would like to see more data. That said, here's some facts, with no conclusions yet from me. Team make-up is different each year, so tough to make this an apples-to-apples comparison

2022-23 (10 duals): 21 MD, 11, TF, 16 Falls
2023-24 (8 duals, 3 to go): 13 MD, 20 TF, 9 Falls

One thing that came to mind when the rule was instituted, without any proof or evidence yet, is that the 3-point takedown MAY cause more action, but it may also cause fewer Falls, the ultimate in wrestling. Only a thought for now, need a much larger sample size to prove.

 

[NittanyLion84]

I would be okay with keeping the 2 point takedown, as long the top guy, at any break in the action, can ask the Ref to stand them up, without awarding an escape point to the bottom guy. Break would be the end of of period, guy chooses bottom, top guy could ask Ref to stand them up, any out of bounds, any stalemate, any potentially dangerous, any blood time any coaches challenge/Ref review. The only exception would be injury time and the non-injured wrestler chooses bottom, the injured wrestler could not request standing up.

 

[Cowbell Man]

Every rule change has a breaking-in period. The OP asked the question a bit over two months into the first season. I would like to see more data. That said, here's some facts, with no conclusions yet from me. Team make-up is different each year, so tough to make this an apples-to-apples comparison

2022-23 (10 duals): 21 MD, 11, TF, 16 Falls
2023-24 (8 duals, 3 to go): 13 MD, 20 TF, 9 Falls

One thing that came to mind when the rule was instituted, without any proof or evidence yet, is that the 3-point takedown MAY cause more action, but it may also cause fewer Falls, the ultimate in wrestling. Only a thought for now, need a much larger sample size to prove.

Also With that small sample, what might have been majors last year became TF’s this year.

 

[PSUWrestlingFanSince2011]

If a takedown is 3 then reversals should be 3 and nearfall at minumum 3, no?

In the past It's always been a pet peeve of mine when a guy gets a reversal but his opponent gets out of the reversal quick, so that wrestler didn't really aaccomplish anything besides the 1 point he could have had for escaping anyway.

 

[donboy6499]

If a takedown is 3 then reversals should be 3 and nearfall at minumum 3, no?

Reversals 10000%

That the folks who make/change the rules didn't catch this is a bad look. Or they caught it and kept the status quo intentionally, which is a worse look.

 

[PSUWrestlingFanSince2011]

Reversals 10000%

That the folks who make/change the rules didn't catch this is a bad look. Or they caught it and kept the status quo intentionally, which is a worse look.

I think the 2 nearfall is even worse. The goal of wrestling is what? And you're going to reward a wrestler more for a takedown than having the guy on his back?

 

[dicemen99]

I was and continue to try to be a skeptic when it comes to the 3-point TD. The majority of the "pros" I here voiced in the media and on websites are pure BS:

• Comebacks - people need to do the math. Very rarely has the 3-point TD enabled a comeback that wouldn't have happened under the 2-point TD.
• More action - I think there is more action, but not in the way most people are pointing out (see below). Higher scores do not mean more action in the bout and increased incentives for a TD have not led to more risk-taking. One of my issues is that you can now stall easier in the last minute of a match as the consequence has less impact.

BUT, as I have seen it in action, I'm not against continuing it. I do like the fact that the 3/1 ratio of TD to E is more representative of how it feels they should impact the match. I also do not think that it has impacted the importance of mat wrestling (yet), and end-of-the-period ride-outs still have some significance (I was worried it would be minimal). I'm also a fan of the easier MD, and also the easier TF. Also, I think refs are more inclined to call stalling earlier and often now as they don't think it will determine the winner of the match as easily. This leads to more action.

My biggest tweak would be the reversal. Can someone tell me a good reason that a reversal should not be worth as much as a TD? Additionally, in certain situations, the offensive wrestler has more incentive to give up a reversal than to give up an escape now. This needs to be addressed.

Address the reversal and I'm on board with the 3-point TD.

 

[CSauertiegPSU]

Confirmation bias probably at play here a little but I don’t think it’s added any real entertainment value and I don’t think it’s really any more fair. I also think it’s created some other problems that didn’t exist previously in late-match scenarios.

 

[GogglesPaizano]

Yeah. I have a problem with the free release earning a point and the 3 point takedown helps negate that. Telling the ref I am going to let him go and getting confirmation while wrestling is problematic.

Clearly a reversal needs to be boosted to 3. I have no love for the 2-3-4 pt nearfall, 3 different steps just send silly to me and these refs have far from well calibrated counts.

I am surprised by the stats you show for majors, as they seem so much easier to achieve with the 3 pt takedown (note: after Iowa we are now up to 18). I would be ok boosting a Major up to 10 points. Fewer pins is concerning, it will be interesting to see these stats across say the whole big 10 at the end of the year to draw some stronger conclusions.

 

[Just another PSU Fan]

--- I don't watch ACC matches ( I don't have that service ) nor do I see west coast matches often ---

I've seen 2 double stall calls in the last couple of weeks, well - one was both fists up, the 2nd was you are stalling and you are also stalling ...

Has that been happening across the board or just when certain ref's get on TV?

 

[Bosox2004]

I was and continue to try to be a skeptic when it comes to the 3-point TD. The majority of the "pros" I here voiced in the media and on websites are pure BS:

• Comebacks - people need to do the math. Very rarely has the 3-point TD enabled a comeback that wouldn't have happened under the 2-point TD.
• More action - I think there is more action, but not in the way most people are pointing out (see below). Higher scores do not mean more action in the bout and increased incentives for a TD have not led to more risk-taking. One of my issues is that you can now stall easier in the last minute of a match as the consequence has less impact.

BUT, as I have seen it in action, I'm not against continuing it. I do like the fact that the 3/1 ratio of TD to E is more representative of how it feels they should impact the match. I also do not think that it has impacted the importance of mat wrestling (yet), and end-of-the-period ride-outs still have some significance (I was worried it would be minimal). I'm also a fan of the easier MD, and also the easier TF. Also, I think refs are more inclined to call stalling earlier and often now as they don't think it will determine the winner of the match as easily. This leads to more action.

My biggest tweak would be the reversal. Can someone tell me a good reason that a reversal should not be worth as much as a TD? Additionally, in certain situations, the offensive wrestler has more incentive to give up a reversal than to give up an escape now. This needs to be addressed.

Address the reversal and I'm on board with the 3-point TD.

I’ll give my opinion.

If you increase a reversal to 3 than the top wrestler is less apt to put himself in compromising situations. Simply put why risk giving up three when you can give up one . could be wrong but that’s how I see it playing out. Would you disagree ?

for me it’s keep the 3 point takedown and keep increasing stall calls . Still not enough of them .