Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 19 to 27 of 74

Thread: Proposed High School Weights for 2010-2011

  1. #19

    Default Re: Proposed High School Weights for 2010-2011

    I certainly hope they will drop the growth allowance. This is just another rule that is for the smaller guys, it's hardly an allowance at all for upper weights when it's across the board. Two pounds for a 3lber is nothing to a 89lber.

  2. #20
    Round of 12 The Janitor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Riverside California
    Posts
    221

    Default Re: Proposed High School Weights for 2010-2011

    they should add a 98 lb weight class and make 103 and 112 mixed to 110
    Mental toughness is to physical as four is to one.

  3. #21
    Olympic Champ therick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    2,052

    Default Re: Proposed High School Weights for 2010-2011

    Quote Originally Posted by CaneinBatonRouge View Post
    Rick, some schools don't have freshman and jv programs.
    So, what happens with the second and third string guys at 125, 135, 140, etc.?

    Why isn't the coach working in the off season to recruit enough kids to the team to have at least two to three full line ups?

    Since when is a varsity spot guaranteed to anyone?

    I don't get this mentality that everyone gets to start and everyone gets a medal. If a kid will quit simply because he isn't on the varsity squad. No matter what the weight. Then he wasn't much of a competitor to being with. I've seen plenty of kids who didn't make the varsity squad until their senior year because they just weren't good enough to beat the guy ahead of them. I had a kid who finally started his junior year at 103 after spending 7th through 10th grades behind a bigger, better kid. He ended up as a state placer and then busted his tail to get bigger and ended up as team captain at Bucknell. So, I don't buy that crap about how it's not fair to the freshman if you get rid of 103, or that we need more weight classes so that everyone can start.

  4. #22

    Default Re: Proposed High School Weights for 2010-2011

    Quote Originally Posted by fanofthegame View Post
    Guy didn't mean to offend you. Thought this was a national forum, however if you had less freshman filling the void then I'd bet there would many more forfeits. In Oklahoma, I'd rather see more opportunity for the upper classmen. The Jr. High is already set aside for the freshman. Is there a problem with a 103lber giving up 6-7lbs(+/-7%) to compete? Giving up 10-20% is the norm for a large number of those who choose to compete above 170 and around 7% for the 160lber.
    You didn't offend me at all. The reasoning behind the move and the collected data are both skewed. If the governing body is bored and needs something to tweak to prove their worth to the wrestling community, why not make it mandatory for 215+ weight classes to have to wear a two piece singlet?

  5. #23

    Default Re: Proposed High School Weights for 2010-2011

    Quote Originally Posted by therick View Post
    So, what happens with the second and third string guys at 125, 135, 140, etc.?

    Why isn't the coach working in the off season to recruit enough kids to the team to have at least two to three full line ups?

    Since when is a varsity spot guaranteed to anyone?

    I don't get this mentality that everyone gets to start and everyone gets a medal. If a kid will quit simply because he isn't on the varsity squad. No matter what the weight. Then he wasn't much of a competitor to being with. I've seen plenty of kids who didn't make the varsity squad until their senior year because they just weren't good enough to beat the guy ahead of them. I had a kid who finally started his junior year at 103 after spending 7th through 10th grades behind a bigger, better kid. He ended up as a state placer and then busted his tail to get bigger and ended up as team captain at Bucknell. So, I don't buy that crap about how it's not fair to the freshman if you get rid of 103, or that we need more weight classes so that everyone can start.
    It's not guaranteed to anyone, as of now. But, the new weights are being tossed around to give the "middleweights" MORE of an opportunity, at the expense of the lighter weights. The weights you mentioned all have 3 choices now, go up, go down, or hold steady. The 95lb guy has one, go up and wrestle 103. The new weights will make that an even bigger jump. It's a bigger percentage of his body weight.

  6. #24

    Default Re: Proposed High School Weights for 2010-2011

    Quote Originally Posted by CaneinBatonRouge View Post
    It's not guaranteed to anyone, as of now. But, the new weights are being tossed around to give the "middleweights" MORE of an opportunity, at the expense of the lighter weights. The weights you mentioned all have 3 choices now, go up, go down, or hold steady. The 95lb guy has one, go up and wrestle 103. The new weights will make that an even bigger jump. It's a bigger percentage of his body weight.

    Guy I don't know if your math is different, but 95 to 106 is 12%. Whereas 235 to 270 is 15%. Also, don't forget that the 95lber has the option. Seems that the 310lber has no option he's out. The forfeits are a direct correlation to limiting Heavy, kids that are larger tend to drop out of the sport. That was a major selling point, 'Wrestling was the sport for all!'. I understand why the little guy has taken over the sport. Wrestling is one of a very few opportunities for them to have a level playing field. However, I feel it is an injustice to the bigger kids. It's only in recent years that we've seen the decline in the heavier weights, history tells us that they can more than carry their weight. When we limit the numbers then we suffer in quality.

  7. #25

    Default Re: Proposed High School Weights for 2010-2011

    Quote Originally Posted by fanofthegame View Post
    Guy I don't know if your math is different, but 95 to 106 is 12%. Whereas 235 to 270 is 15%. Also, don't forget that the 95lber has the option. Seems that the 310lber has no option he's out. The forfeits are a direct correlation to limiting Heavy, kids that are larger tend to drop out of the sport. That was a major selling point, 'Wrestling was the sport for all!'. I understand why the little guy has taken over the sport. Wrestling is one of a very few opportunities for them to have a level playing field. However, I feel it is an injustice to the bigger kids. It's only in recent years that we've seen the decline in the heavier weights, history tells us that they can more than carry their weight. When we limit the numbers then we suffer in quality.
    No, my math is fine. Under ALL THREE options, that 310lb kid, is still out, while the 150lb kid gets another option. My biggest beef is giving kids(the middle to upper weights) that do not put forth the effort for wrestling, because they also play football, baseball, etc., that the smaller kids do. You tend to see the smaller kids wrestle YEAR round, because it's the only sport available to most of them that they can be competitive in. A large portion of the bigger kids just wrestle in between football and baseball season.

  8. #26

    Default Re: Proposed High School Weights for 2010-2011

    I stated why the smaller guys seem tobe the squeaky wheel. However, facts are facts and the fact is 103 is full of freshmen. Meanwhile the upper weights suffer because the bias towards the small athletes. When was the last time you observed a 3lber, or even a 12lber, receive OW at a tourney? Are you making the statement, that the smaller weights represent the quality in HS wrestling? I would say just the opposite, for the most part these matches are a toss-up due to lack of maturity, poor technique, and lack of competion in the practice room. In final, you seek to penalize the multi-sport athlete. Just a sign of times in our world today, it's ok little Johnny mommy and daddy will make them be fair to you.

  9. #27

    Default Re: Proposed High School Weights for 2010-2011

    First off, yes it is a sign of the times today, eat all you want little Johnny, it doesn't matter that we're already the fattest nation on earth, we'll get that freshman out of your deserved spot. It's not like he attends the same high school. Second, you seek to reward the athlete that wrestles "part time". So yes, if I have one kid who gives his all for wrestling and one kid who only wrestles because his other sports are not in season, then I'm going to side with the wrestler. And third, poor technique? Have you seen the Heavys wrestle? There's more quality in the lighter weights than the heavys for sure. Fourth, one last fact for you, freshmen ARE in high school, therefor, eligible for high school sports.
    106 would be fine for me, but let's get rid of these weight allowances. I understand kids grow, that's fine, that's why we have the next weight class up.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •