WIAA changes to wrestling, 1/2 lb per day rule is gone

[bulldog]

Bigoil...this is the problem with writing...what makes sense to me may not convey well in writing. My "issue" with the rule is that there is no policing it. There is no entity responsible to assure the rule is being enforced. The 1.5% was put in place the same reason the .5 lb per day was put into place. To stop wrestlers from dumping an unhealthy amount of weight and to stop the "Yo-Yo" weight cutting of the sport.

YES...if the RULE says the 270 lb wrestler can lose 4.05 lbs and he loses more then that then he should not be allowed to wrestle. It means he cut more weight then the WIAA and the NFHS feels was healthy for him and he is at risk for injury because he may be dehydrated due to unhealthy weight management techniques. I know you are going to say "But it is only .95 lbs." Here is the thing - I am not a doctor...I don't make the rules. THEY (WIAA/NFHS) have doctors and nutritionist at their disposal. Someone much smarter the I am must have come up with 1.5% instead of 2% or 1.8%

In your scenario the 270 lb wrestler can lose 4.05 lbs in a week. So he should/would need to weigh in no lower then 265.95 lbs at the next weigh in 7 days later (not on Saturday, 2 days later)

Now...You throw a wrench in the equation with a 270 lb weight on Thursday and 265 lb on Saturday. Does the week "reset" at each weigh in? Or if he weighed in at 280 on Saturday (giving him 4.20 weight loss allowance) then weighs in Thursday at 270 lb the week was not final but he dropped 10 lbs. So for the Saturday tournament is the 280 lb weight used for the week or is it reset on Thursday.

If it is reset at each weigh in and nobody is policing it then the rule is completely worthless.

That would mean I could weigh in at 120 on Saturday...drop to 113 on Thursday - I could not wrestle at 113 on Thursday but I reset the week on Thursday and now on Saturday I can wrestle at 113 because in effect I can lose 1.70 lbs between Thursday and Saturday.

Ty said "there was never a rule against cutting more than .5 lbs/day" - Maybe there wasn't (isn't)...but if that is the case then why have the rule if it isn't being enforced?

The thing about the .5 per day...it was not being enforced because coaches do not have their athlete stand on a scale each day and see if they are losing more then .5 on a given day. I would guess/think/hope the WIAA is bringing the 1.5% per week rule into effect because it is more manageable to track. A wrestler weighs in on Thursday at 132 lbs. He can lose 1.98 lbs for the next week. He stands on a scale the next Thursday at 126. A red flag should pop up on trackwrestling alerting the coach that there is an athlete who is losing more weight then they should be allowed to lose. And thus the coach can manage his team's weight loss program more efficiently.

I am probably wrong...but I can understand that argument. But if coaches are not going to enforce the rule it is only a matter of time before the NFHS and WIAA come up with a more stringent rule. Next will be matside weigh ins or changing skin fold to 10% and not allowing a parental sign off. It will take another 15 years but it will happen.

I don't believe the WIAA meant it as a "rule in spirit". I believe they expect the rule to be followed. I assume they are implementing this as a rule because they believe it is a good rule and looks out for the health of the athlete. For coaches and refs to "ignore" the rule makes them liable for any injury that athlete may incur that day because they allowed that athlete to compete. If I were an AD I would be dang sure the coaches understand this and do not put my school and athletic program at risk because they are not watching this. All schools have a general waiver that a parent and student have to sign off on to participate in the sport. Part of that statement typically reads something like "Athletic activities can be hazardous, and taking part in such activities is a calculated risk on the part of the student". The "calculated risk" is understood as general part of the spot but as soon as a rule is put in place and not adhered to by the coach that statement is no longer valid and potentially puts the school in a responsible position.

[MNbadger]

Talk about theoretical issues that aren't even plausible. No need to discuss this, the way it is going, I'm out.

of course it is theoretical...the rule has not gone into effect yet. So of course it is theoretical.

So...ignore it until it happens and then feign ignorance. And then say that the WIAA is the problem. How is the scenario not even plausible? In the sue happy world we currently live in I think the second scenario is very plausible.

But it is better to stick your head in the sand and hope it will never happen then it doesn't and you were right. Good for you. Nobody died but we have a generation of kids with eating disorders. But as long as nobody died let's ignore it.

Or it does and then act like you don't understand what happened.

The rule was created for a reason. It wasn't because the NFHS and WIAA were sitting around coming up with stuff to make life difficult. It was because a "theoretical issue that wasn't even plausible" happened. Someone died. Because everyone said it was fine to "cut weight but don't tell me about it because I don't want to know how you are doing it" because kids are shoving laxatives down their throat and because they are wearing rubber suits and sitting in saunas.

Ask Jake Calhoun if he wished someone would have paid closer attention to how he was cutting weight and enforced rules on him. Ask Jeff Reese's parents if today's rules were in effect and followed if it would have made a difference. Joe LaRosa wrestled for UW-LaCrosse...his death happened in our backyard. But that is theoretical and these cases are the worse case. We only want to look at what has happened. Not what may happen. And the worse case will never happen to our kid.

The reason the NFHS and WIAA come up with these rules is because the sport refuses to police itself...because the issue is theoretical.

These situations included extenuating circumstances like the use of creatine as I remember.  This created issues that would likely not have occurred otherwise.

[Ghetto]

I would be shocked if someone called out a heavyweight for cutting too much. No one would even pay attention to it.

[DarkKnight]

the rule change seems easy enough to follow now.

and yea, if HWT loses 5 lbs in 2 days it should be okay, as long he doesn't use that new low weight of 265 from 270 to keep cutting to 220, that's obviously a violation.

I don't know if a 270 lber ever cut to 220 though. haha

[padre]

the rule change seems easy enough to follow now.

and yea, if HWT loses 5 lbs in 2 days it should be okay, as long he doesn't use that new low weight of 265 from 270 to keep cutting to 220, that's obviously a violation.

I don't know if a 270 lber ever cut to 220 though. haha

I agree no one will notice. But that is exactly Bulldogs point...it's a rule but apparently in some cases not going to be followed.  If it's a rule it should be followed in all cases...but I know there will be tons of folks not complying...sometimes by accident and many times not by accident.

[bulldog]

Thank you Padre for making it simple...if it is a rule it should be followed and it should be enforced. The rule is in place for the health of the athlete.

If everyone is going to ignore it then at some point the WIAA is going to come up with more rules to try and further enforce these rules that are being ignored. It seems pointless to have these rules if they are not going to be enforced. And again...all it takes is one kid to get hurt...just because the guy is a HWT doesn't mean he can't cut too much and be dehydrated.

It is a rule...the rule says 1.5% per week.  If it isn't going to be enforced then do away with the rule.

[boowrestle]

!/2lb a day was stupid rule and now this change is even worse,go back to making kids certify by making scratch wt once in order to get growth allowance after Christmas.Most kids that make drop down for wiaa series would never make scratch.

[ELG]

https://www.ghsa.net/sites/default/files/documents/wrestling/2013-2014_Wrestling_Weight_Management_Program_-_Coaches_Manual.pdf.pdf

I think everyone is getting excited about something we really don't know anything about yet. Above is a link to Georgia's 2013/2014 Wrestling Coaches handbook. I am in no way saying that the WIAA will copy this system but would think it would be similar. After reading through this, the process seems much clearer. Again, I am not saying that this is the model the WIAA will be following but found this while looking for what other states are doing.

[npope]

I gotta say, regardless as to what the rule says, if it is a rule then that rule needs to be honored - if for no other reason to protect oneself within the realm of legal liability. No one thinks that something bad could happen...well it has on occasion in the past and it will again.

If it's a bad rule - get rid of the rule. If its a good rule then enforce it.

[bigoil]

Bulldog/Nat,


The rule is being followed:  you can not wrestle in a weight class that is below the 1.5%, it does not state you can't weigh in below that number but rather you can't accelerate your weight loss to wrestle at that weight faster.

In fact, the rule is set up that will penalize your attempt to wrestle at a lower weight if you don't weigh in right at your target or below, same as we had under the old rules.

[npope]

Bulldog/Nat,


The rule is being followed:  you can not wrestle in a weight class that is below the 1.5%, it does not state you can't weigh in below that number but rather you can't accelerate your weight loss to wrestle at that weight faster.

In fact, the rule is set up that will penalize your attempt to wrestle at a lower weight if you don't weigh in right at your target or below, same as we had under the old rules.

From what I gleaned from this thread is that the rule exists, but that there is no central authority assigned to enforce compliance and/or those assigned the responsibility aren't necessarily enforcing it. Is your position that those responsible for enforcement are doing what they are supposed to be doing? Personally, I don't travel in coaching circles any more, so I don't know the reality - only what I am hearing from the posters.

[DocWrestling]

Nobody monitored the 1/2lb per day rule and nobody will monitor this rule.  It will all be on coaches honor which is fine because it will be their liability if something happens.

My experience is that less than half of coaches take weigh-in sheets from tourneys.  They have no access to weigh-in results from other duals or tournaments.

If you truly want this monitored the WIAA needs to mandate that every weigh-in is recorded/entered on something like trackwrestling and is viewable by the public

[npope]

Nobody monitored the 1/2lb per day rule and nobody will monitor this rule.  It will all be on coaches honor which is fine because it will be their liability if something happens.

My experience is that less than half of coaches take weigh-in sheets from tourneys.  They have no access to weigh-in results from other duals or tournaments.

If you truly want this monitored the WIAA needs to mandate that every weigh-in is recorded/entered on something like trackwrestling and is viewable by the public

It's not that I want it monitored but rather, it serves little purpose to have a rule (any rule) if it isn't monitored and/or enforced. Call it a "suggestion" or a "guideline," or whatever one might want - but if it isn't going to be enforced, then it serves no purpose as a "rule."

[DocWrestling]

I agree 100%.  Just another rule/law in life with no follow through

[ELG]

You guys are just talking in circles. If you open the link I provided from Georgia and read it you will see how it is being tracked. Each weigh in is entered by the coach. If a wrestler is heavier than where he is suppose to be to get to a given weight on a given date then the date that he can wrestle at that lower weight is recalculated based on his current weight. There is no incentive to be lower than your plan.