Free or Folk?

oldcougar65

Well-Known Member
Mar 11, 2015
273
676
1
Ever watch an Iowa match?
I'm a Penn State fan because of its wrestling philosophy, if one can be defined. Since Cael took over, the plan is to score points. Most PSU wrestlers just go for it. Maybe it started with Ruth and Taylor, but it was elevated by Zane, Nolf and Bo. When you watch a Nit wrestle, expect points. Expect action.

Iowa has always been a 'dominate physically and emphasize defense' team. Boring. Maybe Dan Gable had been trying to prepare them for international styles. Or maybe he just likes boring matches. But Iowa style sucks from a spectator point of view.

To me, that's the point. We have a sport that the casual spectator has difficulty getting in to. And freestyle is worse and Greco is agonizing.
But when the points start flying, spectators have something to watch.

Cael may be personally responsible for moving folkstyle wrestling toward becoming a spectator sport. In the long term, that's the best thing that can happen to the sport and to its participants.
 

Split shot

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2020
99
201
1
I would be pleased if Folk adopted one simple rule as a first step that is already a Free style rule. If you throw a brick and lose the challenge, a point is awarded to the other wrestler. There seems to be few fans that would argue this. Tom Ryan is a master of getting lungers for his wrestlers but by no means the only coach that uses this tactic. Prime example is Tom Brands throwing the brick during the Kemmerer-Starocci match. Kemmerer was done, done, done when that brick was thrown. There was no one that seen or believed there was a locked hands during that sequence. It did however allow Kemmerer to get back in the match. This seems to me to be low hanging fruit that could be implemented with little push back.
 

NittanyChris

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2001
8,508
7,911
1
I would be pleased if Folk adopted one simple rule as a first step that is already a Free style rule. If you throw a brick and lose the challenge, a point is awarded to the other wrestler. There seems to be few fans that would argue this. Tom Ryan is a master of getting lungers for his wrestlers but by no means the only coach that uses this tactic. Prime example is Tom Brands throwing the brick during the Kemmerer-Starocci match. Kemmerer was done, done, done when that brick was thrown. There was no one that seen or believed there was a locked hands during that sequence. It did however allow Kemmerer to get back in the match. This seems to me to be low hanging fruit that could be implemented with little push back.
I like your logic, however I would not implement this rule change unless the challenges were to be reviewed by an independent official. It’s far too easy for the Ref to confirm their initial call when doing the review.
 

yakrider

Member
Oct 28, 2014
16
24
1
I’ll watch FS, only if PSU guys are involved, but do not like the short interval on top after a TD and the lace or trapped arm leading to a tech in less than 20 seconds. Folk all the way, I like how in this style our guys have the opportunity to truly brutalize their opponents in a way that is not usually possible in FS.
yeah. if one falls into a trap arm, it over!! I agree with all your points. plus the excitement of Nolf and Bo exposing their backs just to exposed a incredible move or technique is eliminated. Winn Dixie would cost Jason points. nah.
 

SWPA

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2017
1,031
2,042
1
yeah. if one falls into a trap arm, it over!! I agree with all your points. plus the excitement of Nolf and Bo exposing their backs just to exposed a incredible move or technique is eliminated. Winn Dixie would cost Jason points. nah.
In folk, this is called a Spencer.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: dunkej01

SWPA

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2017
1,031
2,042
1
This is called a “Spencer “ in folk.
im-done-wiffleGif.gif
 

yakrider

Member
Oct 28, 2014
16
24
1
In folk, this is called a Spencer.
yep!! and did ya see his leg lace? he won a lot of tournament by rolling around over and over. Prob learned it from all the great folk style wrestlers throughout the ......... wait???? what???? guess that's why they make chocolate and vanilla.
 

SWPA

Well-Known Member
Mar 9, 2017
1,031
2,042
1
yep!! and did ya see his leg lace? he won a lot of tournament by rolling around over and over. Prob learned it from all the great folk style wrestlers throughout the ......... wait???? what???? guess that's why they make chocolate and vanilla.
I was referencing what Spencer does in folk with a "trapped" arm. He tilts everyone to death. Now that I think about it, can we implement a rule in 2022-2023 that Spencer is prohibited from tilting anyone? Let's shake things up a little.
 
Last edited:

vhsalum

Well-Known Member
Nov 14, 2002
309
349
1
For those who advocate changing college to freestyle, imagine how ridiculously short most duals would be. Except for duals between fairly matched teams (and fairly matched across weights too), you’d be looking at a lot of duals over in about 40-50 minutes real time with like 25 minutes of action.

1. This wouldn't be a bad thing necessarily.

2. Simple solution - increase tech falls to 15 or 20 points.
I'm a Penn State fan because of its wrestling philosophy, if one can be defined. Since Cael took over, the plan is to score points. Most PSU wrestlers just go for it. Maybe it started with Ruth and Taylor, but it was elevated by Zane, Nolf and Bo. When you watch a Nit wrestle, expect points. Expect action.

Iowa has always been a 'dominate physically and emphasize defense' team. Boring. Maybe Dan Gable had been trying to prepare them for international styles. Or maybe he just likes boring matches. But Iowa style sucks from a spectator point of view.

To me, that's the point. We have a sport that the casual spectator has difficulty getting in to. And freestyle is worse and Greco is agonizing.
But when the points start flying, spectators have something to watch.

Cael may be personally responsible for moving folkstyle wrestling toward becoming a spectator sport. In the long term, that's the best thing that can happen to the sport and to its participants.

Don't lump Gable into the 'dominate physically and emphasize defense' team - he was the exact opposite. Some guys were more offensive than others, but Gable was just as likely to call his own guys for stalling as the fans.

Tom on the other hand? He forgets that what he was is incredibly special. He and Terry could physically wear guys down in the first 1-2 minutes of any match. Tom wants guys to score points and be offensive, but its the how that's the problem - what he's preaching requires the other guy to fall over before you can truly start taking risk. and that just isn't happening anymore.
 

oldcougar65

Well-Known Member
Mar 11, 2015
273
676
1
I posted this on another thread the other day, but I realized it illustrates a major difference and what, to me, makes a good folkstyle bout so exciting. It's called mat wrestling:
Wildasin v Finacchio
 

CJFisJoePaII

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2019
2,367
2,486
1
OKST and Lehigh don't value it at all.

Keeping matches in the center = fewer stoppages = more continuous action = more scoring.

But even if one doesn't like the pushout: how does Wrestler A score if he has no responsibility for keeping himself in bounds? All he can do is prevent Wrestller B from scoring.

Don't necessarily agree - edge wrestling allows someone to attempt to counter-attack with little risk as well. If they don't get the outcome they're looking for they can still use OB to get a restart.
 

CJFisJoePaII

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2019
2,367
2,486
1
Take a look at how many folk matches end 0-0 after the first period - the longest period and 43% of the match. Beyond that, many matches feature quick escapes by both wrestlers and no further scoring ending up with a 1-1 regulation score and zero OFFENSIVE scoring from Neutral despite 6 1/2 minutes of Neutral wrestling.....

Then you have the utterly ridiculous OT Rules of Folk where there often is zero scoring from Neutral and the match is typically awarded on utterly irrelevant and laughable "riding time advantage" when one of the wrestlers chooses Neutral and spends the entire 30 seconds literally running away from the other wrestler (the diametric opposite of "wrestling" and the absolute definition of Stalling - interesting how a Folk Rule accomplished this paradox [win goes to best staller] yet again LMAO).
 
Last edited:

Petch

Well-Known Member
Mar 28, 2012
3,402
5,371
1
Take a look at how many folk matches end 0-0 after the first period - the longest period and 43% of the match. Beyond that, many matches feature quick escapes by both wrestlers and no further scoring ending up with a 1-1 regulation score and zero scoring from Neutral despite 6 1/2 minutes of Neutral wrestling.....

Then you have the utterly ridiculous OT Rules of Folk where there often is zero scoring from Neutral and the match is typically awarded on utterly irrelevant and laughable "riding time advantage" when one of the wrestlers chooses Neutral and spends the entire 30 seconds literally running away from the other wrestler (the diametric opposite of "wrestling" and the absolute definition of Stalling - interesting how a Folk Rule accomplished this paradox [win goes to best staller] yet again LMAO).
Think of how many free matches end after 30 seconds when one wrestler manages to cross another’s ankles during a takedown and rolls around on the mat a few times like a little kid.

Equally stupid IMHO.
 

82bordeaux

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2019
3,995
12,619
1
59
eriespecialty.com
Take a look at how many folk matches end 0-0 after the first period - the longest period and 43% of the match. Beyond that, many matches feature quick escapes by both wrestlers and no further scoring ending up with a 1-1 regulation score and zero scoring from Neutral despite 6 1/2 minutes of Neutral wrestling.....

Then you have the utterly ridiculous OT Rules of Folk where there often is zero scoring from Neutral and the match is typically awarded on utterly irrelevant and laughable "riding time advantage" when one of the wrestlers chooses Neutral and spends the entire 30 seconds literally running away from the other wrestler (the diametric opposite of "wrestling" and the absolute definition of Stalling - interesting how a Folk Rule accomplished this paradox [win goes to best staller] yet again LMAO).

Think of how many free matches end after 30 seconds when one wrestler manages to cross another’s ankles during a takedown and rolls around on the mat a few times like a little kid.

Equally stupid IMHO.




If my wife were reading this thread she would say "the only thing this thread proves is that wrestling is stupid".
 
  • Haha
Reactions: hlstone

CJFisJoePaII

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2019
2,367
2,486
1
Think of how many free matches end after 30 seconds when one wrestler manages to cross another’s ankles during a takedown and rolls around on the mat a few times like a little kid.

Equally stupid IMHO.

Really??? You clearly didn't watch the Olympics - I can't think of a single match that ended as you described. An opponent that is totally outclassed can get taken out very quickly by a superior wrestler with a gut wrench if he can't stop him from turning him. But at the higher levels of free - especially in International Tournaments such as Olympics or Worlds, you do not see matches end the way you're attempting to imply. But at the highest levels of folk you regularly see matches with zero scoring from Neutral and matches that end regulation 1-1....
 
  • Like
Reactions: vhsalum

Petch

Well-Known Member
Mar 28, 2012
3,402
5,371
1
Really??? You clearly didn't watch the Olympics - I can't think of a single match that ended as you described. An opponent that is totally outclassed can get taken out very quickly by a superior wrestler with a gut wrench if he can't stop him from turning him. But at the higher levels of free - especially in International Tournaments such as Olympics or Worlds, you do not see matches end the way you're attempting to imply. But at the highest levels of folk you regularly see matches with zero scoring from Neutral and matches that end regulation 1-1....
Yes….and some of those matches are classic, tactical masterpieces. Did you find the Starocci/Kemerer match at Iowa boring? I did not. Different strokes, I guess.

BTW - I enjoy freestyle as well and it can be very exciting, but it has its own issues (some scoring sequences are very subjective, international politics….ie. Cary Kolat, etc)... I just hate seeing folkstyle ragged on so much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NittanyChris

vhsalum

Well-Known Member
Nov 14, 2002
309
349
1
I have. So I’m not sure about the step out point because you already have teams where that is pretty much all they do. Since it’s rewarded in freestyle I think watching the Iranians is worse. It’s ALL they’re going for.

Yeah. But it's exciting the way they do it. They break people.


Yes….and some of those matches are classic, tactical masterpieces. Did you find the Starocci/Kemerer match at Iowa boring? I did not. Different strokes, I guess.

BTW - I enjoy freestyle as well and it can be very exciting, but it has its own issues (some scoring sequences are very subjective, international politics….ie. Cary Kolat, etc)... I just hate seeing folkstyle ragged on so much.

Folkstyle DESERVES to be ragged on. It's getting dangerously close to looking like a greco match. No action, no scoring. It's clear that the powers at be are not going to hold referees accountable for increasing action. Which, isn't necessarily their job.

I would say if Freestyle keeps this same rule set for the next decade and a half or so - about 25 years of the rule set not changing - NCAA should follow suit.
 

CJFisJoePaII

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2019
2,367
2,486
1
Yeah. But it's exciting the way they do it. They break people.




Folkstyle DESERVES to be ragged on. It's getting dangerously close to looking like a greco match. No action, no scoring. It's clear that the powers at be are not going to hold referees accountable for increasing action. Which, isn't necessarily their job.

I would say if Freestyle keeps this same rule set for the next decade and a half or so - about 25 years of the rule set not changing - NCAA should follow suit.

Only in Folk could they adopt a set of OT Rules that encourages stalling for the entirety of the OT Periods and award the win to a wrestler that chooses Neutral for their TB Period and literally spends the entire TB Period running away from their opponent and refusing to engage! Then this is labeled as "smart wrestling" by Folk apologists when it is the diametric opposite of "wrestling" whatsoever and the epitome of the definition of "Stalling" (refusing to engage your opponent and purposely avoiding wrestling action to "Stall" your way to victory - a victory only made possible by the absurd tiebreak criteria which has been put in place by the Folk powers that be.). Essentially, the OT and Tiebreak Rules in place encourage stalling and do the diametric opposite of encouraging matches to be determined by wrestling action and offensive scoring.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vhsalum

vhsalum

Well-Known Member
Nov 14, 2002
309
349
1
Only in Folk could they adopt a set of OT Rules that encourages stalling for the entirety of the OT Periods and award the win to a wrestler that chooses Neutral for their TB Period and literally spends the entire TB Period running away from their opponent and refusing to engage! Then this is labeled as "smart wrestling" by Folk apologists when it is the diametric opposite of "wrestling" whatsoever and the epitome of the definition of "Stalling" (refusing to engage your opponent and purposely avoiding wrestling action to "Stall" your way to victory - a victory only made possible by the absurd tiebreak criteria which has been put in place by the Folk powers that be.). Essentially, the OT and Tiebreak Rules in place encourage stalling and do the diametric opposite of encouraging matches to be determined by wrestling action and offensive scoring.

Completely agreed. I used to hate criteria. But you know? It makes sense and it's simple. It encourages action (last person scored) through to the END of the bout.
 

nerfstate

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2017
8,083
19,668
1
Completely agreed. I used to hate criteria. But you know? It makes sense and it's simple. It encourages action (last person scored) through to the END of the bout.
I agree too. I also used to not like criterea, and I still do hate any freestyle match that winds up being 1-1 w/ both points on passivity. In all other cases, I think it does good things.

I have to say--I haven't seen any data--but it seemed to me that the 2 minute SV period was a bit of a game change for folkstyle. Maybe its confirmation bias, but I feel like a lot more OT matches were decided in that 120 seconds than ever were in the 60.

I could easily conjecture some hybrid approach of the two that may or may not be optimized. That's why I'm with @El-Jefe that one of the bigger frustrations in this perennial debate is that no one seems to ever want to use tournaments as testbeds for rule changes. It seems like such an obvious thing to do. Anyone know why it doesn't happen? Who's Number One is the only event I've seen that does this, and it isn't enough matches.
 

El-Jefe

Well-Known Member
Jul 27, 2012
26,126
55,057
1
I agree too. I also used to not like criterea, and I still do hate any freestyle match that winds up being 1-1 w/ both points on passivity. In all other cases, I think it does good things.

I have to say--I haven't seen any data--but it seemed to me that the 2 minute SV period was a bit of a game change for folkstyle. Maybe its confirmation bias, but I feel like a lot more OT matches were decided in that 120 seconds than ever were in the 60.

I could easily conjecture some hybrid approach of the two that may or may not be optimized. That's why I'm with @El-Jefe that one of the bigger frustrations in this perennial debate is that no one seems to ever want to use tournaments as testbeds for rule changes. It seems like such an obvious thing to do. Anyone know why it doesn't happen? Who's Number One is the only event I've seen that does this, and it isn't enough matches.
Just a guess: referee training?

Testing sounds great in theory. In practice, if ref calls are scattershot, then we don't learn anything.

Likely need a large event like Super 32 or Disney to get enough data. But bigger events = more refs = greater call variability.

He'll, we can't even get Ohio refs to call mat wrestling like the rest of the country.
 

nerfstate

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2017
8,083
19,668
1
Just a guess: referee training?

Testing sounds great in theory. In practice, if ref calls are scattershot, then we don't learn anything.

Likely need a large event like Super 32 or Disney to get enough data. But bigger events = more refs = greater call variability.

He'll, we can't even get Ohio refs to call mat wrestling like the rest of the country.
Good point.
 

CJFisJoePaII

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2019
2,367
2,486
1
Yeah. But it's exciting the way they do it. They break people.




Folkstyle DESERVES to be ragged on. It's getting dangerously close to looking like a greco match. No action, no scoring. It's clear that the powers at be are not going to hold referees accountable for increasing action. Which, isn't necessarily their job.

I would say if Freestyle keeps this same rule set for the next decade and a half or so - about 25 years of the rule set not changing - NCAA should follow suit.

One thing they should enact immediately in Folk is create two separate rules for "Stalling" and "Passivity". There should be no "warning" for blatant Stalling - such as intentionally fleeing the mat (including causing both wrestlers to go OB) looking for a restart to stay in top/control position or to avoid being taken down or to escape a hold you are in (for example, Wrestler A has a clear single leg and Wrestler B is attempting to drag both wrestlers toward the OB circle and off the mat with his defensive tactics so as to avoid being takendown and gain a restart. Wrestler B is successful in getting an OB call when it is clear that his Sole Intention was to flee the mat and thereby flee the hold via an OB restart - this is Blatant Stalling and should be called as such every time). Blatant Stalling would also include when you back away from your opponent and refuse to engage with your opponent pursuing you for more than a 5-Count.

Passivity would become the rule that includes a warning but should have a time element added to it. If there are no attempts to score from Neutral for a 30 second period, the Referee should be required to issue a warning to the more passive wrestler (i.e., the wrestler backing up more, etc...). If both are deemed equally Passive (i.e., holding their ground against each other but no scoring attempts), both get hit with a Passivity Warning. If there has been Offensive attempts but no scoring after one minute in Neutral, the Referee shall call a Passivity Warning on the Wrestler with less attempts or in case of a tie, less quality attempts (if wrestlers engaged in a scramble at minute mark in a scoreless match, then call will be made after the result of the scramble if the scramble does not result in a takedown - i.e., scramble results in stalemate, dangerous hold or wrestlers going OB...). Passivity would also be called on rides that are going nowhere - if a top wrestler rides for 30 seconds and has exhibited no real control of the bottom wrestler (i.e., not broken bottom wrestler down or improved their position in a way that would put them in a position to score from the top position, then Passivity will be called; however, the top wrestler has the choice to have Passivity waived if he chooses to just go Neutral (no escape point awarded). Passivity can be called on bottom wrestler if he is showing no real attempt to escape. However, fighting to simply not be turned or scored upon is not Passivity.
 

vhsalum

Well-Known Member
Nov 14, 2002
309
349
1
One thing they should enact immediately in Folk is create two separate rules for "Stalling" and "Passivity". There should be no "warning" for blatant Stalling - such as intentionally fleeing the mat (including causing both wrestlers to go OB) looking for a restart to stay in top/control position or to avoid being taken down or to escape a hold you are in (for example, Wrestler A has a clear single leg and Wrestler B is attempting to drag both wrestlers toward the OB circle and off the mat with his defensive tactics so as to avoid being takendown and gain a restart. Wrestler B is successful in getting an OB call when it is clear that his Sole Intention was to flee the mat and thereby flee the hold via an OB restart - this is Blatant Stalling and should be called as such every time). Blatant Stalling would also include when you back away from your opponent and refuse to engage with your opponent pursuing you for more than a 5-Count.

Passivity would become the rule that includes a warning but should have a time element added to it. If there are no attempts to score from Neutral for a 30 second period, the Referee should be required to issue a warning to the more passive wrestler (i.e., the wrestler backing up more, etc...). If both are deemed equally Passive (i.e., holding their ground against each other but no scoring attempts), both get hit with a Passivity Warning. If there has been Offensive attempts but no scoring after one minute in Neutral, the Referee shall call a Passivity Warning on the Wrestler with less attempts or in case of a tie, less quality attempts (if wrestlers engaged in a scramble at minute mark in a scoreless match, then call will be made after the result of the scramble if the scramble does not result in a takedown - i.e., scramble results in stalemate, dangerous hold or wrestlers going OB...). Passivity would also be called on rides that are going nowhere - if a top wrestler rides for 30 seconds and has exhibited no real control of the bottom wrestler (i.e., not broken bottom wrestler down or improved their position in a way that would put them in a position to score from the top position, then Passivity will be called; however, the top wrestler has the choice to have Passivity waived if he chooses to just go Neutral (no escape point awarded). Passivity can be called on bottom wrestler if he is showing no real attempt to escape. However, fighting to simply not be turned or scored upon is not Passivity.

You see how many words that takes. Then you're just putting referees in the same position they're in now. Judgement after judgement. And they clearly are not going to do that.

Pushout solves a LOT of problems when it comes to evading attacks.

Your "passivity" rule is awesome, and it's basically what FS has now. There is absolutely no damn reason a 3 minute period should end 0-0 AND with no stall calls.
 

PSUAllTheWay

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2015
1,201
1,650
1
I subscribed to the Fritz/Destefanis (and now Nolf) approach to wrestling. You set up and take good shots as frequently as you can as it wears out your opponent and gives you more opportunities to score more points. It takes MOST matches out of the hands of the official. But I wasn't as good at it as these three National Champs were for sure but I like that style of wrestling and it worked ok for me.

Having said that, there is nothing more frustrated than when you are doing all of the work and the referee refuses to call your opponent for stalling. I found that freestyle rewarded me more for being aggressive than folkstyle did and always appreciated some of the passivity rules when wrestling freestyle. I've always believed there is a way to incorporate passivity into folkstyle in a way that encourages more action without fundamentally changing the great things about folkstyle wrestling. IMHO most (but not all) matches that end the first period 0-0 are not very exciting and lessens the interest in our sport. I'll admit that when not watching PSU wrestle, I will often put a match on 2x speed in the first period just to speed past the dancing parts and stop and watch when I see a legitimate shot happening. Of course you can only do that if you are recording matches which is what I do.

I know others disagree and that's just fine. There is no perfect solution. I just want to see action and dancing around taking fake shots and swiping at a leg is not my definition of action.
 

Petch

Well-Known Member
Mar 28, 2012
3,402
5,371
1
Yeah. But it's exciting the way they do it. They break people.




Folkstyle DESERVES to be ragged on. It's getting dangerously close to looking like a greco match. No action, no scoring. It's clear that the powers at be are not going to hold referees accountable for increasing action. Which, isn't necessarily their job.

I would say if Freestyle keeps this same rule set for the next decade and a half or so - about 25 years of the rule set not changing - NCAA should follow suit.
Freestyle is exciting but has some insanely stupid scoring where aggressive wrestling is often punished. I just watched Nick Lee completely dominate Henderson and lose on a fluky leg lace after repeatedly taking him down and having him pinned for a good 15 seconds. Disgusting. Better wrestler lost.
 

vhsalum

Well-Known Member
Nov 14, 2002
309
349
1
Freestyle is exciting but has some insanely stupid scoring where aggressive wrestling is often punished. I just watched Nick Lee completely dominate Henderson and lose on a fluky leg lace after repeatedly taking him down and having him pinned for a good 15 seconds. Disgusting. Better wrestler lost.

better wrestler didn’t lose. Nick lost because Evan scored more legal holds than him.

I don’t get the banging on leg laces. They’re not that easy to get guys. And if you do? That shit hurts. So acting like it’s some lucky move makes no sense.

it’s a pretty easy move to defend - you just can’t be lazy. It’s no different than a roll through tilt or cheap tilt tbh. Again. If this were NCAA, I’d say up the tech to 15 or 20 - but otherwise, learn how to defend in pat terre.
 
Last edited:

dunkej01

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 10, 2005
18,631
28,631
1
better wrestler didn’t lose. Nick lost because Evan scored more legal holds than him.

I don’t get the banging on leg laces. They’re not that easy to get guys. And if you do? That shit hurts. So acting like it’s some lucky move makes no sense.

it’s a pretty easy move to defend - you just can’t be lazy. It’s no different than a roll through tilt or cheap tilt tbh. Again. If this were NCAA, I’d say up the tech to 15 or 20 - but otherwise, learn how to defend in pat terre.
Where you drive...does yellow mean speed up or prepare to stop?
 

Petch

Well-Known Member
Mar 28, 2012
3,402
5,371
1
better wrestler didn’t lose. Nick lost because Evan scored more legal holds than him.

I don’t get the banging on leg laces. They’re not that easy to get guys. And if you do? That shit hurts. So acting like it’s some lucky move makes no sense.

it’s a pretty easy move to defend - you just can’t be lazy. It’s no different than a roll through tilt or cheap tilt tbh. Again. If this were NCAA, I’d say up the tech to 15 or 20 - but otherwise, learn how to defend in pat terre.
Henderson kind of fell into that lace because Nick was a bit too aggressive. I think that they should limit the scoring to 4 or something with the lace. I like in folk that you can’t keep turning a guy with the same hold.

Like I said…different strokes. Agree that they should tweak some things in folk too, but I hate the bashing of the style without recognition that freestyle has issues too.
 

Latest posts