The idea with no riding time point in regulation without back points is a pretty good one. The one that gets tossed around every once in a while that I think is ridiculous is when people say you should score "offensive" takedowns more than "defensive" takedowns.

As a guy who was constantly shooting and pushing the action, I love the first point about takedowns. If you're on your butt and your opponent has both legs wrapped up, you are taken down. If you're hanging on to a lock around the waist, or in the crotch at this point, you're looking for a stalemate. Which also means that you're stalling. If you're not actively looking to improve your position or score then you're stalling.

I also like that no riding time without BP idea. It would be simple to adopt and wouldn't require putting any more judgement calls in the hands of officials.

Originally Posted by ISU2008

As fans looking for more action, it seems like that idea is a plus, but what do you think wrestlers and coaches think about it?

I think that Tom Brands and other coaches, who recruit and coach kids who are aggressive, would be all for getting rid of stalling and stalemate defensive tactics and rewarding the aggressive wrestler.

As for the wrestlers, I think they'd adjust just like they always have when the rules change. Some would be hurt by the new interpretations, but the better athletes would eventually rise to the top and we'd see a lot more action and scoring.