Wisconsin Wrestling Online

Wrestling Rules changes from the April NFHS meeting.

https://www.nfhs.org/articles/separate-weight-classes-for-girls-choice-of-weight-classes-established-in-high-school-wrestling/

States will have a choice of 12, 13 or 14 weight classes for both boys and girls competition in high school wrestling, effective with the 2023-24 season.

This will be the first separate weight classes established for girls in high school wrestling, and it marks the first time that state associations will have a choice in the number of weight classes.

The landmark change in weight classes was one of several significant revisions recommended by the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) Wrestling Rules Committee at its April 7-9 meeting held virtually this year. All recommendations were subsequently approved by the NFHS Board of Directors.

States must select one of the three sets (12, 13 or 14) of weight classes for girls and one of the three sets (12, 13 or 14) for boys. States cannot adopt all three sets and cannot switch back and forth during the season.

The following weight classes (in pounds) were established for girls competition (girls wrestling girls), effective July 1, 2023:

12 Weight Classes – 100, 107, 114, 120, 126, 132, 138, 145, 152, 165, 185, 235.

13 Weight Classes – 100, 106, 112, 118, 124, 130, 136, 142, 148, 155, 170, 190, 235.

14 Weight Classes – 100, 105, 110, 115, 120, 125, 130, 135, 140, 145, 155, 170, 190, 235.

The following weight classes (in pounds) were established for boys competition (boys wrestling boys or girls wrestling boys), effective July 1, 2023:

12 Weight Classes – 108, 116, 124, 131, 138, 145, 152, 160, 170, 190, 215, 285

13 Weight Classes – 107, 114, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 152, 160, 172, 189, 215, 285

14 Weight Classes – 106, 113, 120, 126, 132, 138, 144, 150, 157, 165, 175, 190, 215, 285

12 please.

But this may be the key to changing the Wisconsin postseason schedule!

The other significant change in high school wrestling rules for 2021-22 addresses the number of matches allowed in one day of competition. Currently, no wrestler shall represent the school in more than one weight class in any meet or wrestle in more than five matches, excluding forfeits, in any one day of competition.

A change provides an exception to Rule 1-4-3 as follows: "No wrestler shall wrestle in more than six matches (championship or consolation), excluding forfeits, in any one day of a tournament conducted by the state high school association for qualification to the state high school championships or the specific state championships."

Quote from: Numbers on April 20, 2021, 12:01:24 PM
States will have a choice of 12, 13 or 14 weight classes for both boys and girls competition in high school wrestling, effective with the 2023-24 season.

This will be the first separate weight classes established for girls in high school wrestling, and it marks the first time that state associations will have a choice in the number of weight classes.

The landmark change in weight classes was one of several significant revisions recommended by the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) Wrestling Rules Committee at its April 7-9 meeting held virtually this year. All recommendations were subsequently approved by the NFHS Board of Directors.

States must select one of the three sets (12, 13 or 14) of weight classes for girls and one of the three sets (12, 13 or 14) for boys. States cannot adopt all three sets and cannot switch back and forth during the season.

The following weight classes (in pounds) were established for girls competition (girls wrestling girls), effective July 1, 2023:

12 Weight Classes – 100, 107, 114, 120, 126, 132, 138, 145, 152, 165, 185, 235.

13 Weight Classes – 100, 106, 112, 118, 124, 130, 136, 142, 148, 155, 170, 190, 235.

14 Weight Classes – 100, 105, 110, 115, 120, 125, 130, 135, 140, 145, 155, 170, 190, 235.

The following weight classes (in pounds) were established for boys competition (boys wrestling boys or girls wrestling boys), effective July 1, 2023:

12 Weight Classes – 108, 116, 124, 131, 138, 145, 152, 160, 170, 190, 215, 285

13 Weight Classes – 107, 114, 121, 127, 133, 139, 145, 152, 160, 172, 189, 215, 285

14 Weight Classes – 106, 113, 120, 126, 132, 138, 144, 150, 157, 165, 175, 190, 215, 285

8)

BIG decisions/changes coming with those modifications allowed.

Quote from: bigoil on April 20, 2021, 03:45:11 PM
BIG decisions/changes coming with those modifications allowed.

Can you explain what those would be?

I like to see the match increase to 6. could help with some improved regional/sectional logistics, which at some point will happen.

I think they are voting on increasing the event limit to 16 for the season, which would be nice for teams to get in an extra tourney and another dual. Hopefully that passes in June.

Quote from: MatScoutWillie on April 21, 2021, 08:24:26 AM

Quote from: bigoil on April 20, 2021, 03:45:11 PM
BIG decisions/changes coming with those modifications allowed.

Can you explain what those would be?

# of weight classes which could change the actual weight classes, dual meets will be changed with less weight classes.

Potential for 6 matches in a day opens up changes to tournament structure, timing, etc. a full wrestle back in one day, 7 team dual round robin, etc; # of total matches would likely increase as well.

I believe the increase in matches per day is just for the state tournament series, not regular, in season tournaments. 

Quote from: bigoil on April 21, 2021, 10:08:22 AM

Quote from: MatScoutWillie on April 21, 2021, 08:24:26 AM

Quote from: bigoil on April 20, 2021, 03:45:11 PM
BIG decisions/changes coming with those modifications allowed.

Can you explain what those would be?

# of weight classes which could change the actual weight classes, dual meets will be changed with less weight classes.

Potential for 6 matches in a day opens up changes to tournament structure, timing, etc. a full wrestle back in one day, 7 team dual round robin, etc; # of total matches would likely increase as well.

My guess is 13 weights for boys and 12 for girls.

Quote from: MNbadger on April 21, 2021, 10:36:51 AM
I believe the increase in matches per day is just for the state tournament series, not regular, in season tournaments. 

Quote from: bigoil on April 21, 2021, 10:08:22 AM

Quote from: MatScoutWillie on April 21, 2021, 08:24:26 AM

Quote from: bigoil on April 20, 2021, 03:45:11 PM
BIG decisions/changes coming with those modifications allowed.

Can you explain what those would be?

# of weight classes which could change the actual weight classes, dual meets will be changed with less weight classes.

Potential for 6 matches in a day opens up changes to tournament structure, timing, etc. a full wrestle back in one day, 7 team dual round robin, etc; # of total matches would likely increase as well.

you are correct.

6 matches a day  should allow us to do Super-Regionals in D2 and D3.  Bring two regionals together and take the top four wrestlers.  The top four from the two regionals can then be cross bracketed at the sectional, which would run as normal.

Please make it happen

I don't think the 12 weight class solution will eliminated the forfeit problem. 108 is still really light. I would like to see a by the numbers on what weight classes had the highest forfeit percentage in the State of Wisconsin. I would think it would be 106 and 113. Pretty hard to find wrestlers for those weights year in and year out.

Quote from: tigerking on April 22, 2021, 12:57:38 PM
I don't think the 12 weight class solution will eliminated the forfeit problem. 108 is still really light. I would like to see a by the numbers on what weight classes had the highest forfeit percentage in the State of Wisconsin. I would think it would be 106 and 113. Pretty hard to find wrestlers for those weights year in and year out.

Queuing Ghetto.....

Quote from: tigerking on April 22, 2021, 12:57:38 PM
I don't think the 12 weight class solution will eliminated the forfeit problem. 108 is still really light. I would like to see a by the numbers on what weight classes had the highest forfeit percentage in the State of Wisconsin. I would think it would be 106 and 113. Pretty hard to find wrestlers for those weights year in and year out.

Every year is different for the lightweights. Plenty of teams this past season had multiple strong 106lbers.

if you go to 12, weak teams will still be weak. there will be less available spots on the big roster schools. its not a magic fix. It would benefit the teams that lacked in that certain deleted weight class, and it would hinder the teams that had studs around that weight class that was substracted.

I would say stay with 14, if you need to drop, go to 13 and see if that makes you feel better. it ultimately won't after the fact. Every team has different holes and forfeits will still happen.

Math would say it is more likely you will be able to fill a 12 person JV team if there are two less varsity weights to "fill" by trying to do better than a forfeit at the varsity level.

12 Weight Classes – 108, 116      124,     131, 138, 145, 152,     160,    170, 190, 215, 285

14 Weight Classes – 106, 113, 120, 126, 132, 138, 144, 150, 157, 165, 175, 190, 215, 285

The formatting I'm trying to accomplish isn't great.

I don't like to say a specific weight is "eliminated". It's an emotional argument. The weights are adjusted.

I just hope that we are able to try adjusting the weight class number. I thought the NFHS was being wishy washy with allowing the options, but now I like it.

We could choose to go to 12 weights, and then if it was a disaster, we could go back pretty easily. I was talking to a friend who coaches, and he suggested we could try things on a trial basis. I agree with that. There is very little downfall to giving 12 weights a chance. I see no negative to a 3 year trial.

Unfortunately, all my data is on my computer at home.

I think the 12 weights that were picked are wrong, according to straight body fat numbers. I know others interpret the data differently.

I heard Ben Askren give this analogy to kids wrestling, and I like it for HS as well.

If you drop a frog into boiling water, they'll immediately try to jump out. If you gradually turn up the heat, they won't realize it and you can cook them.

Same thing with wrestlers. Our attrition rate is terrible. We lose too many kids. One reason may be that we throw them into the varsity fire too quickly. Adjusting the weights to 12 may reduce the need to just fill weights.

With the super regionals in D2 and D3 we could send top 2 teams from each super regional to team sectionals. Folks from a certain D2 regional should be going nuts over the possibility of sending more kids to sectionals and the potential of 2 teams making it to team sectionals.

The upper 4 weights are basically the same for the 3 options. I guess 182 just went out the window. The middle is pretty close with all 3 options. I guess the WIAA will need to decide how many of the little weights we want. Our team has had a terrible time finding little guys and now we finally have some coming in middle school. I don't know what to think.

Do the rules allow for super regional format where top 2 advance to state for 16-man bracket in D2 and D3? Seed the state tournament while we are at it. The third place kid at stud super-regional left out of chance to advance on third at sectionals in current format. This gives another Saturday back to non-diehards. Team sectionals on historic individual sectionals weekend?

Just throwing out ideas...

Quote from: Ghetto on April 22, 2021, 03:25:31 PM
I heard Ben Askren give this analogy to kids wrestling, and I like it for HS as well.

If you drop a frog into boiling water, they'll immediately try to jump out. If you gradually turn up the heat, they won't realize it and you can cook them.

Same thing with wrestlers. Our attrition rate is terrible. We lose too many kids. One reason may be that we throw them into the varsity fire too quickly. Adjusting the weights to 12 may reduce the need to just fill weights.

Or here is an even better way to lessen attrition-Don't be a crappy coach that throws kids out onto a varsity lineup that don't belong out there. 

Every DIV I school that can't consistently fill a lineup is either in need of a coaching change or in a few rare cases just not meant to have wrestling program.

I look forward to coming back to this blog in a few years to read how 12 classes didn't magically rally kids to come out and we need to go back to 14 to create opportunities.

I enjoy watching all 14 weights at tournaments. Cutting opportunities won't fix the supposed overall problem. It will drop the number of forfeits and will help out some teams, but it will be detrimental to other teams.

I'll still enjoy watching 12 or 13 weight classes, but I will feel bad for those teams with two studs at 106 where one bumps up to 113, or those teams where they have plenty of athletic big guys to fill the upper weights out.

Kids aren't going to join the wrestling team because you dropped a couple weight classes.

Also less opportunities to place at state and less state champions each year equals less enjoyment for some wrestlers and fans. I'm sure there will be some different matchups to look forward to, but every year has matchups to look forward to. 

I enjoy watching the tough little 106lbers scrap. I think Rhett Koenig was about 100lbs when he won a 106lb title. I believe the Crass twins were both 103 as freshmen. Several other well accomplished wrestlers started out at 103 back in the day.

I know it's a difficult topic and we don't need to think too much about it until 2023, so we got time.

For the regional thing, we are hoping to break up that certain D2 regional up all together. It's a shame to cluster top teams into one regional, let alone one sectional. We prefer a little updating the method of regional/sectional placement to catch up with modern times. You can still base regionals/sectionals mostly on geography, but have some of the top talented teams travel to spread them out a bit. Hotels are easy to use these days. We do spend 3 days in expensive Madison for individual state.

Of course the number of weights doesn't attract (or detract) kids from wrestling. Kids aren't joining because of the number of weights no matter what.

They will join a team if there is buzz around that team. It is entirely possible that having two less weights creates a more competitive dual.

More than ever, kids transfer to good situations. Maybe the logjam pushes a kid to a school that doesn't have a 106 pounder instead of the team that has three?

I also love watching little guys. I will say it every year. I am only here on this forum because of being able to wrestle a light weight.

I thought going to two piece uniforms was going to fill our rooms with kids (never mind that I did this for years in the middle school level and it had little to no effect).

Quote from: asdf on April 22, 2021, 04:24:16 PM

Quote from: Ghetto on April 22, 2021, 03:25:31 PM
I heard Ben Askren give this analogy to kids wrestling, and I like it for HS as well.

If you drop a frog into boiling water, they'll immediately try to jump out. If you gradually turn up the heat, they won't realize it and you can cook them.

Same thing with wrestlers. Our attrition rate is terrible. We lose too many kids. One reason may be that we throw them into the varsity fire too quickly. Adjusting the weights to 12 may reduce the need to just fill weights.

Or here is an even better way to lessen attrition-Don't be a crappy coach that throws kids out onto a varsity lineup that don't belong out there. 

Every DIV I school that can't consistently fill a lineup is either in need of a coaching change or in a few rare cases just not meant to have wrestling program.

I look forward to coming back to this blog in a few years to read how 12 classes didn't magically rally kids to come out and we need to go back to 14 to create opportunities.

Some time ago when we went to 106 from 103 as the starting weight, we eliminated at least 5% of the potential high school aged boys from our pool of recruits.  The 12 and 13 weight choice make this even worse, approaching 10%. 
How can we think this will be better? 

Quote from: Ghetto on April 22, 2021, 03:19:48 PM
12 Weight Classes – 108, 116      124,     131, 138, 145, 152,     160,    170, 190, 215, 285

14 Weight Classes – 106, 113, 120, 126, 132, 138, 144, 150, 157, 165, 175, 190, 215, 285

The formatting I'm trying to accomplish isn't great.

I don't like to say a specific weight is "eliminated". It's an emotional argument. The weights are adjusted.

I just hope that we are able to try adjusting the weight class number. I thought the NFHS was being wishy washy with allowing the options, but now I like it.

We could choose to go to 12 weights, and then if it was a disaster, we could go back pretty easily. I was talking to a friend who coaches, and he suggested we could try things on a trial basis. I agree with that. There is very little downfall to giving 12 weights a chance. I see no negative to a 3 year trial.

Unfortunately, all my data is on my computer at home.

I think the 12 weights that were picked are wrong, according to straight body fat numbers. I know others interpret the data differently.

Quote from: MNbadger on April 23, 2021, 10:46:34 AM
Some time ago when we went to 106 from 103 as the starting weight, we eliminated at least 5% of the potential high school aged boys from our pool of recruits.  The 12 and 13 weight choice make this even worse, approaching 10%. 
How can we think this will be better? 

Quote from: Ghetto on April 22, 2021, 03:19:48 PM
12 Weight Classes – 108, 116      124,     131, 138, 145, 152,     160,    170, 190, 215, 285

14 Weight Classes – 106, 113, 120, 126, 132, 138, 144, 150, 157, 165, 175, 190, 215, 285

The formatting I'm trying to accomplish isn't great.

I don't like to say a specific weight is "eliminated". It's an emotional argument. The weights are adjusted.

I just hope that we are able to try adjusting the weight class number. I thought the NFHS was being wishy washy with allowing the options, but now I like it.

We could choose to go to 12 weights, and then if it was a disaster, we could go back pretty easily. I was talking to a friend who coaches, and he suggested we could try things on a trial basis. I agree with that. There is very little downfall to giving 12 weights a chance. I see no negative to a 3 year trial.

Unfortunately, all my data is on my computer at home.

I think the 12 weights that were picked are wrong, according to straight body fat numbers. I know others interpret the data differently.

Come on. We eliminated kids?! Now the 103 pound kid can't wrestle because the weight class moved up two pounds to 108? The weight class is currently 109 at the end of the year. Do the kids who are at 100 have to quit when we get the weight allowance?

I did not say they would quit.  I will say they are more likely to quit over that than having to wear a singlet or wrestle on a team that has forfeits.
You can't deny that it is much tougher to compete for a lighter kid when the weight goes from 103 to 106 and now 108.  Might I remind you that you will not get more kids into wrestling if you decrease the potential weights they can wrestle.... This is not arguable.  One can say the can"t find 103 pounders but if you eliminate the weight you eliminate even the POTENTIAL for finding them.  I still have a tougher time finding heavier guys than lighter guys.  To top it off, my heavier guys are really just overweight.
I will post the CDC weight charts for high school age boys later tonight.  We should not be ignoring a good portion of potential participants.  To reiterate, it IS a stretch for a kid who barely makes the minimum for 106 to then wrestle 108.

Quote from: Ghetto on April 23, 2021, 02:35:25 PM

Quote from: MNbadger on April 23, 2021, 10:46:34 AM
Some time ago when we went to 106 from 103 as the starting weight, we eliminated at least 5% of the potential high school aged boys from our pool of recruits.  The 12 and 13 weight choice make this even worse, approaching 10%. 
How can we think this will be better? 

Quote from: Ghetto on April 22, 2021, 03:19:48 PM
12 Weight Classes – 108, 116      124,     131, 138, 145, 152,     160,    170, 190, 215, 285

14 Weight Classes – 106, 113, 120, 126, 132, 138, 144, 150, 157, 165, 175, 190, 215, 285

The formatting I'm trying to accomplish isn't great.

I don't like to say a specific weight is "eliminated". It's an emotional argument. The weights are adjusted.

I just hope that we are able to try adjusting the weight class number. I thought the NFHS was being wishy washy with allowing the options, but now I like it.

We could choose to go to 12 weights, and then if it was a disaster, we could go back pretty easily. I was talking to a friend who coaches, and he suggested we could try things on a trial basis. I agree with that. There is very little downfall to giving 12 weights a chance. I see no negative to a 3 year trial.

Unfortunately, all my data is on my computer at home.

I think the 12 weights that were picked are wrong, according to straight body fat numbers. I know others interpret the data differently.

Come on. We eliminated kids?! Now the 103 pound kid can't wrestle because the weight class moved up two pounds to 108? The weight class is currently 109 at the end of the year. Do the kids who are at 100 have to quit when we get the weight allowance?

Quote from: MNbadger on April 23, 2021, 04:08:40 PM
I did not say they would quit.  I will say they are more likely to quit over that than having to wear a singlet or wrestle on a team that has forfeits.
You can't deny that it is much tougher to compete for a lighter kid when the weight goes from 103 to 106 and now 108.  Might I remind you that you will not get more kids into wrestling if you decrease the potential weights they can wrestle.... This is not arguable.  One can say the can"t find 103 pounders but if you eliminate the weight you eliminate even the POTENTIAL for finding them.  I still have a tougher time finding heavier guys than lighter guys.  To top it off, my heavier guys are really just overweight.
I will post the CDC weight charts for high school age boys later tonight.  We should not be ignoring a good portion of potential participants.  To reiterate, it IS a stretch for a kid who barely makes the minimum for 106 to then wrestle 108.

Quote from: Ghetto on April 23, 2021, 02:35:25 PM

Quote from: MNbadger on April 23, 2021, 10:46:34 AM
Some time ago when we went to 106 from 103 as the starting weight, we eliminated at least 5% of the potential high school aged boys from our pool of recruits.  The 12 and 13 weight choice make this even worse, approaching 10%. 
How can we think this will be better? 

Quote from: Ghetto on April 22, 2021, 03:19:48 PM
12 Weight Classes – 108, 116      124,     131, 138, 145, 152,     160,    170, 190, 215, 285

14 Weight Classes – 106, 113, 120, 126, 132, 138, 144, 150, 157, 165, 175, 190, 215, 285

The formatting I'm trying to accomplish isn't great.

I don't like to say a specific weight is "eliminated". It's an emotional argument. The weights are adjusted.

I just hope that we are able to try adjusting the weight class number. I thought the NFHS was being wishy washy with allowing the options, but now I like it.

We could choose to go to 12 weights, and then if it was a disaster, we could go back pretty easily. I was talking to a friend who coaches, and he suggested we could try things on a trial basis. I agree with that. There is very little downfall to giving 12 weights a chance. I see no negative to a 3 year trial.

Unfortunately, all my data is on my computer at home.

I think the 12 weights that were picked are wrong, according to straight body fat numbers. I know others interpret the data differently.

Come on. We eliminated kids?! Now the 103 pound kid can't wrestle because the weight class moved up two pounds to 108? The weight class is currently 109 at the end of the year. Do the kids who are at 100 have to quit when we get the weight allowance?

This impacts maybe .2% of the wrestling population.  I know someone in this group as well but what about the 315 pound kid?  It will never be perfect.

.2% of the wrestlers?  No, mot true.
Ninth graders are 14/15 years old, correct?  Let's just take 15 years old.
Looking at the CDC growth charts for American males, slightly more than 10% weigh 103 pounds.  We want to count these kids out?!?!
This is on top of the fact that many ninth graders are 14 years old.  If you go there it is 25%.
So now we want to make the starting weight even higher?  This makes no sense looking at the pool of potential wrestlers.
I would bet that less than .2% of 315 pound high schoolers are not obese.  Actually I would bet close to 100% of those weighing 315 are obese.

There will always be small freshman. If they are only 100 pounds they can still wrestle 106-108. There are not eliminated.

Technically they are not eliminated but practically they are.

Quote from: Wis-Mallard on April 23, 2021, 06:58:32 PM
There will always be small freshman. If they are only 100 pounds they can still wrestle 106-108. There are not eliminated.

Quote from: MNbadger on April 23, 2021, 07:11:53 PM
Technically they are not eliminated but practically they are.

Quote from: Wis-Mallard on April 23, 2021, 06:58:32 PM
There will always be small freshman. If they are only 100 pounds they can still wrestle 106-108. There are not eliminated.

I think you only need to weigh 88 pounds to wrestle the lowest weight class and there are still forfeit issues at 106.

So you think we need to make sure the smallest freshman have a solid chance of placing at state as a freshman?

Is there a basketball message board for the freshman kid that is the 10th best player in the high school but might not make varsity for a few years and may never get significant varsity minutes?  Wrestlers have it pretty good.

No but basketball doesn't cannibalize itself by decided that no one should be allowed to play that is shorter than some arbitrary height.
I am strictly looking at numbers of age eligible/size eligible high school males.
As far as forfeits I kept track of in a tournament we competed in in WI, invariably 103 had more wrestlers than 285.  Additionally, 103 and 112 had more than 215 and 285.
All of this other stuff means nothing compared to the pool of high school athletes.

Quote from: Numbers on April 23, 2021, 07:22:31 PM

Quote from: MNbadger on April 23, 2021, 07:11:53 PM
Technically they are not eliminated but practically they are.

Quote from: Wis-Mallard on April 23, 2021, 06:58:32 PM
There will always be small freshman. If they are only 100 pounds they can still wrestle 106-108. There are not eliminated.

I think you only need to weigh 88 pounds to wrestle the lowest weight class and there are still forfeit issues at 106.

So you think we need to make sure the smallest freshman have a solid chance of placing at state as a freshman?

Is there a basketball message board for the freshman kid that is the 10th best player in the high school but might not make varsity for a few years and may never get significant varsity minutes?  Wrestlers have it pretty good.

Forget freshmen then.
Just under 10% of sophomore aged males are 103 pounds.(15.5 yo)
Just under 5% of junior aged males are 103 pounds.
Look at the charts for 106, there are more of each age than at 103.  No way we should be raising the starting weight.  If anything, we should be going back to 103 if we are serious about growing numbers.
As far as jv, maybe kids don't want to be on jv.  I know this is the case for other sports that I coach.  We will have try outs and often kids make the decision to quit when they find they did not make the varsity squad.  My point is that thinking that is not the issue some think it to be.

Quote from: Numbers on April 23, 2021, 07:22:31 PM

Quote from: MNbadger on April 23, 2021, 07:11:53 PM
Technically they are not eliminated but practically they are.

Quote from: Wis-Mallard on April 23, 2021, 06:58:32 PM
There will always be small freshman. If they are only 100 pounds they can still wrestle 106-108. There are not eliminated.

I think you only need to weigh 88 pounds to wrestle the lowest weight class and there are still forfeit issues at 106.

So you think we need to make sure the smallest freshman have a solid chance of placing at state as a freshman?

Is there a basketball message board for the freshman kid that is the 10th best player in the high school but might not make varsity for a few years and may never get significant varsity minutes?  Wrestlers have it pretty good.

Quote from: Ghetto on April 23, 2021, 10:08:29 AM
Of course the number of weights doesn't attract (or detract) kids from wrestling. Kids aren't joining because of the number of weights no matter what.

They will join a team if there is buzz around that team. It is entirely possible that having two less weights creates a more competitive dual.

More than ever, kids transfer to good situations. Maybe the logjam pushes a kid to a school that doesn't have a 106 pounder instead of the team that has three?

I also love watching little guys. I will say it every year. I am only here on this forum because of being able to wrestle a light weight.

By your own statement above "Kids aren't joining because of the number of weights no matter what"--so what in the heck is the point of eliminating weight classes?  You state eliminating classes will somehow magically increase #s, then just type the opposite.

You like to quote Flo Guys, so here is one for you.  When discussing decreasing weigh classes, Willie had the best statement----basically said anyone that wants to eliminate classes isn't looking to better the sport, but instead is feeding his own ego in the hopes of winning a meaningless dual in January.

Here's a story-Our team had no 106er this year initially.  The kids found one in the hallway.  Wrestled 3 matches the whole year, got killed...but took a forfeit against our rival team to help the team (got the biggest cheer of the night).  The 106er approached my son asking for some training in our shed this summer..the kid is all in off a 3 loss season and a forfeit. Kids is maybe 90# so should have 106 locked in for at least 1 more year.   Point is close dual scores won't "create buzz".  Kids being leaders and teammates do.

Quote from: asdf on April 23, 2021, 10:13:01 PM

Quote from: Ghetto on April 23, 2021, 10:08:29 AM
Of course the number of weights doesn't attract (or detract) kids from wrestling. Kids aren't joining because of the number of weights no matter what.

They will join a team if there is buzz around that team. It is entirely possible that having two less weights creates a more competitive dual.

More than ever, kids transfer to good situations. Maybe the logjam pushes a kid to a school that doesn't have a 106 pounder instead of the team that has three?

I also love watching little guys. I will say it every year. I am only here on this forum because of being able to wrestle a light weight.

By your own statement above "Kids aren't joining because of the number of weights no matter what"--so what in the heck is the point of eliminating weight classes?  You state eliminating classes will somehow magically increase #s, then just type the opposite.

You like to quote Flo Guys, so here is one for you.  When discussing decreasing weigh classes, Willie had the best statement----basically said anyone that wants to eliminate classes isn't looking to better the sport, but instead is feeding his own ego in the hopes of winning a meaningless dual in January.

Here's a story-Our team had no 106er this year initially.  The kids found one in the hallway.  Wrestled 3 matches the whole year, got killed...but took a forfeit against our rival team to help the team (got the biggest cheer of the night).  The 106er approached my son asking for some training in our shed this summer..the kid is all in off a 3 loss season and a forfeit. Kids is maybe 90# so should have 106 locked in for at least 1 more year.   Point is close dual scores won't "create buzz".  Kids being leaders and teammates do.

Nailed it! Some people just have to whine about something. It could make for a more competitive dual or it could make it even worse. Other sports aren't cutting spots or opportunities because some kids might not be "varsity caliber" or don't have enough. Maybe basketball should go to 3 on 3 and the kids who aren't as good or who are under 5'10" can play JV.  ::)

" Other sports aren't cutting spots or opportunities because some kids might not be "varsity caliber" or don't have enough. Maybe basketball should go to 3 on 3 and the kids who aren't as good or who are under 5'10" can play JV.  "
Agreed.  We seem to be obsessed about forfeits.  Who cares?  I have coached for years and have had teams from great to horrible.  When we are down, I schedule accordingly.  This does not help as much in our conference as it is a bear and always has been but overall, we do ok. 
Football teams (and every other sport) have blow outs all the time.  Their answer isn't to fundamentally change their sport.  Yes, there is nine man football so I suppose we could have that too with some teams choosing 12 weights.  The difference here is that you inevitably cut opportunities for a good portion of potential wrestlers by doing so. 
Again, having trouble finding a lightweight is one thing, getting rid of a weight guarantees you'll never have one.  Expecting a small kid to toil for three years to make the varsity sounds good to some but it is an unrealistic expectation in my opinion.  We are restricted by weights, nine man (or regular football or other sports) are not. 
I make it a point while we are rebuilding to schedule individual tournaments as we forfeit some weights.  From year to year we can measure our progress by where we place.  In duals, we try to schedule teams "like" us.  In any dual, our measure is how many matches did we win out of the matches wrestled. 

Quote from: wrastle63 on April 23, 2021, 11:50:59 PM

Quote from: asdf on April 23, 2021, 10:13:01 PM

Quote from: Ghetto on April 23, 2021, 10:08:29 AM
Of course the number of weights doesn't attract (or detract) kids from wrestling. Kids aren't joining because of the number of weights no matter what.

They will join a team if there is buzz around that team. It is entirely possible that having two less weights creates a more competitive dual.

More than ever, kids transfer to good situations. Maybe the logjam pushes a kid to a school that doesn't have a 106 pounder instead of the team that has three?

I also love watching little guys. I will say it every year. I am only here on this forum because of being able to wrestle a light weight.

By your own statement above "Kids aren't joining because of the number of weights no matter what"--so what in the heck is the point of eliminating weight classes?  You state eliminating classes will somehow magically increase #s, then just type the opposite.

You like to quote Flo Guys, so here is one for you.  When discussing decreasing weigh classes, Willie had the best statement----basically said anyone that wants to eliminate classes isn't looking to better the sport, but instead is feeding his own ego in the hopes of winning a meaningless dual in January.

Here's a story-Our team had no 106er this year initially.  The kids found one in the hallway.  Wrestled 3 matches the whole year, got killed...but took a forfeit against our rival team to help the team (got the biggest cheer of the night).  The 106er approached my son asking for some training in our shed this summer..the kid is all in off a 3 loss season and a forfeit. Kids is maybe 90# so should have 106 locked in for at least 1 more year.   Point is close dual scores won't "create buzz".  Kids being leaders and teammates do.

Nailed it! Some people just have to whine about something. It could make for a more competitive dual or it could make it even worse. Other sports aren't cutting spots or opportunities because some kids might not be "varsity caliber" or don't have enough. Maybe basketball should go to 3 on 3 and the kids who aren't as good or who are under 5'10" can play JV.  ::)

What I mean is that the kids don't say, oh, there's 14 weights. I should wrestle. Conversely they don't quit because of the number of weights.

I totally disagree that exciting, close score duals won't create a buzz.

Other sports aren't cutting spots because most basketball teams etc.  have a full JV team full of kids, plus a varsity. Most wrestling teams don't even have a full team of varsity kids.

Quote from: asdf on April 23, 2021, 10:13:01 PM

Quote from: Ghetto on April 23, 2021, 10:08:29 AM
Of course the number of weights doesn't attract (or detract) kids from wrestling. Kids aren't joining because of the number of weights no matter what.

They will join a team if there is buzz around that team. It is entirely possible that having two less weights creates a more competitive dual.

More than ever, kids transfer to good situations. Maybe the logjam pushes a kid to a school that doesn't have a 106 pounder instead of the team that has three?

I also love watching little guys. I will say it every year. I am only here on this forum because of being able to wrestle a light weight.

By your own statement above "Kids aren't joining because of the number of weights no matter what"--so what in the heck is the point of eliminating weight classes?  You state eliminating classes will somehow magically increase #s, then just type the opposite.

You like to quote Flo Guys, so here is one for you.  When discussing decreasing weigh classes, Willie had the best statement----basically said anyone that wants to eliminate classes isn't looking to better the sport, but instead is feeding his own ego in the hopes of winning a meaningless dual in January.

Here's a story-Our team had no 106er this year initially.  The kids found one in the hallway.  Wrestled 3 matches the whole year, got killed...but took a forfeit against our rival team to help the team (got the biggest cheer of the night).  The 106er approached my son asking for some training in our shed this summer..the kid is all in off a 3 loss season and a forfeit. Kids is maybe 90# so should have 106 locked in for at least 1 more year.   Point is close dual scores won't "create buzz".  Kids being leaders and teammates do.

I love Willie and listen to him too. Let's be super clear. I'm not on this crusade for me. I am no longer a head coach, and even when I was, my ego was large enough when we were losing every dual to negate any possible inflation from winning a dual. Exciting duals was awesome to be a part of. I am absolutely in this to improve wrestling. When I get back in as a head coach, wherever that may be, I'll get better numbers.

You know what decreases opportunities? Lost teams. That's the only thing that removes the ability to wrestle. JV is still an opportunity. Every other sport builds their teams with JV1 and JV2 teams. For whatever reason, we think that's not important.

108 is not that light for starting.
https://www.cdc.gov/growthcharts/data/set1clinical/cj41l021.pdf

You can see that 5% of sophomore age boys weigh 106 pounds.  More than 10% of freshman weigh 106. Do we want to close our doors to these athletes?  Whether we are getting these kids out or not is one thing.  If you raise the weight there is no option to recruit them to.

Quote from: tigerking on April 22, 2021, 12:57:38 PM
I don't think the 12 weight class solution will eliminated the forfeit problem. 108 is still really light. I would like to see a by the numbers on what weight classes had the highest forfeit percentage in the State of Wisconsin. I would think it would be 106 and 113. Pretty hard to find wrestlers for those weights year in and year out.

Quote from: Ghetto on April 26, 2021, 10:51:31 AM

Quote from: wrastle63 on April 23, 2021, 11:50:59 PM

Quote from: asdf on April 23, 2021, 10:13:01 PM

Quote from: Ghetto on April 23, 2021, 10:08:29 AM
Of course the number of weights doesn't attract (or detract) kids from wrestling. Kids aren't joining because of the number of weights no matter what.

They will join a team if there is buzz around that team. It is entirely possible that having two less weights creates a more competitive dual.

More than ever, kids transfer to good situations. Maybe the logjam pushes a kid to a school that doesn't have a 106 pounder instead of the team that has three?

I also love watching little guys. I will say it every year. I am only here on this forum because of being able to wrestle a light weight.

By your own statement above "Kids aren't joining because of the number of weights no matter what"--so what in the heck is the point of eliminating weight classes?  You state eliminating classes will somehow magically increase #s, then just type the opposite.

You like to quote Flo Guys, so here is one for you.  When discussing decreasing weigh classes, Willie had the best statement----basically said anyone that wants to eliminate classes isn't looking to better the sport, but instead is feeding his own ego in the hopes of winning a meaningless dual in January.

Here's a story-Our team had no 106er this year initially.  The kids found one in the hallway.  Wrestled 3 matches the whole year, got killed...but took a forfeit against our rival team to help the team (got the biggest cheer of the night).  The 106er approached my son asking for some training in our shed this summer..the kid is all in off a 3 loss season and a forfeit. Kids is maybe 90# so should have 106 locked in for at least 1 more year.   Point is close dual scores won't "create buzz".  Kids being leaders and teammates do.

Nailed it! Some people just have to whine about something. It could make for a more competitive dual or it could make it even worse. Other sports aren't cutting spots or opportunities because some kids might not be "varsity caliber" or don't have enough. Maybe basketball should go to 3 on 3 and the kids who aren't as good or who are under 5'10" can play JV.  ::)

What I mean is that the kids don't say, oh, there's 14 weights. I should wrestle. Conversely they don't quit because of the number of weights.

I totally disagree that exciting, close score duals won't create a buzz.

Other sports aren't cutting spots because most basketball teams etc.  have a full JV team full of kids, plus a varsity. Most wrestling teams don't even have a full team of varsity kids.

Not true here.  We are finding more and more that kids quit when they don't make the varsity team especially juniors and seniors.
The school I am in:
At one point we were a 10-12 high school with 2600 students.  During those years we would dress almost 100 players(it would vary from 80~ to 90 +).  We now are a 9-12 high school and last season we never got to 90 players on the roster 9-12. 
We sed to have four levels of soccer.  We had three last season but the jv and sophomore team had to share six players or one of them would have been eliminated.
It is not just us.  Another strong soccer program in our conference went to three levels from always having four in their complete history.
Forfeiting weights is no different than a blowout in football, basketball, or any other sport.  And in fact, going to 12 weights will make strong teams stronger and result in more lopsided victories than ever as it will condense their talent.

Four levels down to three.

We don't even have a full one at over 60% of the D1 schools.

I am aware.  It is similar to that here.  Wrestling doesn't have the numbers of soccer, football, etc.  The thing is, is that really that big an issue?  If it is, why?  And again I will ask, is it worth eliminating even 5% of our potential pool because of these forfeits?  How is it really any different than having a weak football team that loses by twenty or thirty points per game? 

Cutting weight classes is the lazy out.  For a sport that prides itself on "no excuses", we sure got alot of people out there making them.

We get what we earn.  Cutting weight classes when there is no logic, evidenced based, or even factual #s that justify it is nuts.  Prove to me that it will guarantee #'s to increase.  Otherwise the "well we gotta try something" is just weak sauce.

"you got any better ideas, step up" will be the next comment.  This forum alone has thrown out tons of great ideas that I do not see struggling teams implementing.  At the leadership level there is no concrete, state wide plan to increase #'s.  Again- if they decrease weight classes it is just lazy.

When Colleges are dropping teams left and right the worst thing to do is embrace lessening opportunities at the HS level.  The mental gymnastics to justify this by "creating buzz" is comical.  Having a few teams with closer dual scores does not justify cutting across the state.

For every team that has a big dip, I can show you some that increased.  One team near us jumped from 13-15 kids to over 35 kids fat tested in one year.   It definitely wasn't due to the exciting duals they have had.  I don't think they won a dual in 4 years.  Wanna guess what changed?

Good luck to everyone this FS/Greco season.  I am off the forum again until this comes around next year.

Quote from: Ghetto on April 26, 2021, 10:51:31 AM

Quote from: wrastle63 on April 23, 2021, 11:50:59 PM

Quote from: asdf on April 23, 2021, 10:13:01 PM

Quote from: Ghetto on April 23, 2021, 10:08:29 AM
Of course the number of weights doesn't attract (or detract) kids from wrestling. Kids aren't joining because of the number of weights no matter what.

They will join a team if there is buzz around that team. It is entirely possible that having two less weights creates a more competitive dual.

More than ever, kids transfer to good situations. Maybe the logjam pushes a kid to a school that doesn't have a 106 pounder instead of the team that has three?

I also love watching little guys. I will say it every year. I am only here on this forum because of being able to wrestle a light weight.

By your own statement above "Kids aren't joining because of the number of weights no matter what"--so what in the heck is the point of eliminating weight classes?  You state eliminating classes will somehow magically increase #s, then just type the opposite.

You like to quote Flo Guys, so here is one for you.  When discussing decreasing weigh classes, Willie had the best statement----basically said anyone that wants to eliminate classes isn't looking to better the sport, but instead is feeding his own ego in the hopes of winning a meaningless dual in January.

Here's a story-Our team had no 106er this year initially.  The kids found one in the hallway.  Wrestled 3 matches the whole year, got killed...but took a forfeit against our rival team to help the team (got the biggest cheer of the night).  The 106er approached my son asking for some training in our shed this summer..the kid is all in off a 3 loss season and a forfeit. Kids is maybe 90# so should have 106 locked in for at least 1 more year.   Point is close dual scores won't "create buzz".  Kids being leaders and teammates do.

Nailed it! Some people just have to whine about something. It could make for a more competitive dual or it could make it even worse. Other sports aren't cutting spots or opportunities because some kids might not be "varsity caliber" or don't have enough. Maybe basketball should go to 3 on 3 and the kids who aren't as good or who are under 5'10" can play JV.  ::)

What I mean is that the kids don't say, oh, there's 14 weights. I should wrestle. Conversely they don't quit because of the number of weights.

I totally disagree that exciting, close score duals won't create a buzz.

Other sports aren't cutting spots because most basketball teams etc.  have a full JV team full of kids, plus a varsity. Most wrestling teams don't even have a full team of varsity kids.

You keep bringing up these close duals. You really think going to 12 weights is going to change a dual? There is no correlation between those two ideas. In fact you could lose by more with less weight classes.

So there are 10 weight classes for the world championships (6 in Olympic years)
10 weights in college
but the idea of only having 12 or 13 weights in high school is nuts?

Many teams that support 14 weights would also support 15 weights.  Yet the majority of teams cannot field a full varsity team and have maybe 2/3 of a JV team.

I do believe fewer weight classes is better, because it is so difficult to find 14 starters that are all a different weight. But whether they change or not, I don't think it will do much to effect the sport. I am afraid if we continue to add more events to the schedule we will lose more kids and more coaches. The biggest hurdle I have in recruiting kids is they don't want to give up every Saturday. We seem to focus everything in our sport on the top 1%. The huge tournaments and getting kids to wrestle 60 or 70 matches is great for the top kids. It is horrible for the average and below average kids. They end up quitting or never coming out in the first place. Kids get pushed to the brink in elementary and middle school and then have no desire to wrestle in high school. We have got to lose the mentality that more is always better. Sometimes, less is more.

I have a team that many of the retraction supporters would think would benefit from said reduction of weight classes.  We forfeited one or two weights all year.  They were upper weights however(it varied ...170, 182,195).  The heavier weights we did have were not legitimate weight-wise.  Honestly they probably should not have been out there in many cases.  We do all the right things.  We try new things.  We keep working.  I have mentioned before, we have been at the top, at the bottom, and everywhere in between.  I still don't want weight classes cut and I wish we would start lower again.  We struggle to get big kids out.  Some struggle to get light kids out.  The difference is, if you cut the light weight classes out, you can't give them a place to be.  My lack of getting bigger kids out is what it is.  At least when I do recruit a (big) kid, he has a place to wrestle.
Despite our shortage of wrestlers(something we are ALWAYS working on) I would be happy adding a weight to 15.  We need something lighter than 106 and lighter than the proposed 108 for sure. 
https://www.cdc.gov/growthcharts/data/set1clinical/cj41l021.pdf
Look at the weight of kids.  Now, it depends what ages you pick for high school.  Do you count 14-15 F, 15-16 So, 16-17 J, and 17-18 Sr or 15 F, 16 So, 17 J, and 18 Sr or 14.5 F, 15.5 So, 16.5 J, and 17.5 Sr?
Regardless, it shows we could easily start lower than 106.  Actually, 103 was a good starting point statistically.
If you find the line for 106 pounds, go right to left and you will see that just over 25% of 14.5(freshmen) year old males weigh 106.  More than 10% of 15.5(sophomores) year old males weigh 106. Now we are considering going even higher to start?!?!?! I do know some on here are of the opinion that varsity athletics are just for upper classmen.  That is a different argument but one I personally disagree with for too many reasons to go into. 
Some of my "big guys" this year.....Wrestler A: competed at 182/195 minimum wrestling weight via skin fold: 129.59
Wrestler B: competed at 220 minimum wrestling weight via skin fold: 159.78.  Wrestler C: competed at 182/195 minimum wrestling weight via skin fold: 141.98.  Wrestler D:  actual weight 246 minimum wrestling weight via skin fold: 168.72.  Just a few examples.   My point is, my "big" kids aren't really big kids.  One could question the decision to have them wrestling in these weight classes.  The thing is, you don't see football skin folding and measuring body fat.  There are literally zero restrictions on that sport.  You can literally have a 95 pound freshman go head to head on the field with a 300 plus pound senior.  No one would say a word.  And I would argue until the end of time that a 300 pound teen ager is destined for WAY more health problems down the road than any kid cutting weight.
The obsession with JV is overblown in my opinion in regard to duals.  Kids want to be on varsity.  Nowadays kids often drop out of sports when they don't make varsity.  Kids have changed.  Trying to insist on jv being dual oriented is worse, not better for our sport.  The jv should be more like exhibition, giving kids as many matches as possible in preparation for when they make varsity and for their fun and enjoyment.
I know this is long and a bit disjointed but I think we are seriously hurting ourselves when considering retraction and raising the starting weight class. I really believe we are making a mistake considering this kind of thing.  Regardless, I will be here trying to recruit every kid in the hallways, coaching the kids I have in the room and trying to build as we all are.  Thanks.

Quote from: Numbers on April 27, 2021, 09:07:55 AM
So there are 10 weight classes for the world championships (6 in Olympic years)
10 weights in college
but the idea of only having 12 or 13 weights in high school is nuts?

Many teams that support 14 weights would also support 15 weights.  Yet the majority of teams cannot field a full varsity team and have maybe 2/3 of a JV team.

Quote from: wrastle63 on April 27, 2021, 08:53:18 AM

Quote from: Ghetto on April 26, 2021, 10:51:31 AM

Quote from: wrastle63 on April 23, 2021, 11:50:59 PM

Quote from: asdf on April 23, 2021, 10:13:01 PM

Quote from: Ghetto on April 23, 2021, 10:08:29 AM
Of course the number of weights doesn't attract (or detract) kids from wrestling. Kids aren't joining because of the number of weights no matter what.

They will join a team if there is buzz around that team. It is entirely possible that having two less weights creates a more competitive dual.

More than ever, kids transfer to good situations. Maybe the logjam pushes a kid to a school that doesn't have a 106 pounder instead of the team that has three?

I also love watching little guys. I will say it every year. I am only here on this forum because of being able to wrestle a light weight.

By your own statement above "Kids aren't joining because of the number of weights no matter what"--so what in the heck is the point of eliminating weight classes?  You state eliminating classes will somehow magically increase #s, then just type the opposite.

You like to quote Flo Guys, so here is one for you.  When discussing decreasing weigh classes, Willie had the best statement----basically said anyone that wants to eliminate classes isn't looking to better the sport, but instead is feeding his own ego in the hopes of winning a meaningless dual in January.

Here's a story-Our team had no 106er this year initially.  The kids found one in the hallway.  Wrestled 3 matches the whole year, got killed...but took a forfeit against our rival team to help the team (got the biggest cheer of the night).  The 106er approached my son asking for some training in our shed this summer..the kid is all in off a 3 loss season and a forfeit. Kids is maybe 90# so should have 106 locked in for at least 1 more year.   Point is close dual scores won't "create buzz".  Kids being leaders and teammates do.

Nailed it! Some people just have to whine about something. It could make for a more competitive dual or it could make it even worse. Other sports aren't cutting spots or opportunities because some kids might not be "varsity caliber" or don't have enough. Maybe basketball should go to 3 on 3 and the kids who aren't as good or who are under 5'10" can play JV.  ::)

What I mean is that the kids don't say, oh, there's 14 weights. I should wrestle. Conversely they don't quit because of the number of weights.

I totally disagree that exciting, close score duals won't create a buzz.

Other sports aren't cutting spots because most basketball teams etc.  have a full JV team full of kids, plus a varsity. Most wrestling teams don't even have a full team of varsity kids.

You keep bringing up these close duals. You really think going to 12 weights is going to change a dual? There is no correlation between those two ideas. In fact you could lose by more with less weight classes.

It is entirely possible that duals get closer. We know what happens with 14. It is true we don't know what 12 would bring.

The scores might be closer but it will be more of a drubbing.  When a team better than you condenses their talent the weaker team will be less likely than before to win that 2 or three weights in the dual. 

Quote from: MNbadger on April 27, 2021, 07:14:54 PM
The scores might be closer but it will be more of a drubbing.  When a team better than you condenses their talent the weaker team will be less likely than before to win that 2 or three weights in the dual.

That's possible.

Let's try it and find out

The cost is too great in my opinion for the reasons I've stated.  Ignoring/excluding a significant portion of potential participants is not worth it.  And in fact, we tried it in MN with teams having the option to use fewer weight classes.  It changed nothing. .

Quote from: Ghetto on April 27, 2021, 10:16:48 PM

Quote from: MNbadger on April 27, 2021, 07:14:54 PM
The scores might be closer but it will be more of a drubbing.  When a team better than you condenses their talent the weaker team will be less likely than before to win that 2 or three weights in the dual.

That's possible.

Let's try it and find out

Quote from: MNbadger on April 27, 2021, 10:26:48 PM
The cost is too great in my opinion for the reasons I've stated.  Ignoring/excluding a significant portion of potential participants is not worth it.  And in fact, we tried it in MN with teams having the option to use fewer weight classes.  It changed nothing. .

Quote from: Ghetto on April 27, 2021, 10:16:48 PM

Quote from: MNbadger on April 27, 2021, 07:14:54 PM
The scores might be closer but it will be more of a drubbing.  When a team better than you condenses their talent the weaker team will be less likely than before to win that 2 or three weights in the dual.

That's possible.

Let's try it and find out

Well there has been enough pushback on 14 that states have options now.  And if the strongest wrestling state wants to reduce, maybe the rest of the nation should take notice and rethink some things.

Quote from: Ghetto on April 27, 2021, 10:16:48 PM

Quote from: MNbadger on April 27, 2021, 07:14:54 PM
The scores might be closer but it will be more of a drubbing.  When a team better than you condenses their talent the weaker team will be less likely than before to win that 2 or three weights in the dual.

That's possible.

Let's try it and find out

So your whole point is close exciting duals will happen if we go to 12 which in turn will create buzz and help grow the sport. But you acknowledge that it might not change things? LOL

Also Pennsylvania didn't go to 12 they went to 13. They kept the first 9 weight classes exactly the same- 106, 113, 120, 126, 132, 138, 145, 152, 160. The update was 172, 189, 215, 285. They did the opposite of what Ghetto has said with trying to push the weight classes higher. Basically they combined 195 and 220.

Fewer weight classes shortens tournament lengths.  Another positive.  I would definitely be in favor of trying significant change and going to 12 weight classes.

I truly believe that to be a successful sport you have to focus on having quality JV experiences first.  I believe fewer weight classes will funnel more kids to JV improving that level for events and duals.  I also believe if you have two distinct teams it will lead to schools hiring more coaches.

My guess is that MN will stick with 14 when all is said and done.  I will say it would be WAY more palatable whether we were to go to 13 or 12 weights that the starting weight does not go up at all from 106.  The numbers of high school age males doesn't indicate this being the right move.  If going to 13 happens, it makes sense to do what PA. did with the upper weights.

Quote from: wrastle63 on April 28, 2021, 06:44:32 AM

Quote from: Ghetto on April 27, 2021, 10:16:48 PM

Quote from: MNbadger on April 27, 2021, 07:14:54 PM
The scores might be closer but it will be more of a drubbing.  When a team better than you condenses their talent the weaker team will be less likely than before to win that 2 or three weights in the dual.

That's possible.

Let's try it and find out

So your whole point is close exciting duals will happen if we go to 12 which in turn will create buzz and help grow the sport. But you acknowledge that it might not change things? LOL

Also Pennsylvania didn't go to 12 they went to 13. They kept the first 9 weight classes exactly the same- 106, 113, 120, 126, 132, 138, 145, 152, 160. The update was 172, 189, 215, 285. They did the opposite of what Ghetto has said with trying to push the weight classes higher. Basically they combined 195 and 220.

Guys I don't know what the right amount of weights are for wrestling! I know that when I wrestled it was 12 weights. Scores were lopsided then just as they are now. The great teams still beat good teams badly and the good teams did the same to bad teams. I saw forfeits then and I see them now.
I wrestled in 8 team tournaments and the finals started at 7pm. Wrestling has come a long way with technology to speed up events. Back then we hand wrote all bouts and had people running the bouts from the head table to the mat. Now we have track and everything is done so much quicker. The experience for the athlete, coach and fan is much better now than it has ever been.
Each head coach sets their schedule for weekend events. They need to do what they think is best for their program. Team vs individual tournaments or 5 events vs 7 events. You know your team better than anyone and what is best for them, so schedule appropriately for your program. You do not have to keep up with the Jones.
Weather we have 12, 13 or 14 weights please make sure the athletes are having a great experience. Word of mouth is the best advertisement!

Yes, remember the bad old days....tournaments would get to the finals and have a dinner break and fo the finals two hours later!.....

Quote from: kluevercoach on April 28, 2021, 01:05:24 PM
Guys I don't know what the right amount of weights are for wrestling! I know that when I wrestled it was 12 weights. Scores were lopsided then just as they are now. The great teams still beat good teams badly and the good teams did the same to bad teams. I saw forfeits then and I see them now.
I wrestled in 8 team tournaments and the finals started at 7pm. Wrestling has come a long way with technology to speed up events. Back then we hand wrote all bouts and had people running the bouts from the head table to the mat. Now we have track and everything is done so much quicker. The experience for the athlete, coach and fan is much better now than it has ever been.
Each head coach sets their schedule for weekend events. They need to do what they think is best for their program. Team vs individual tournaments or 5 events vs 7 events. You know your team better than anyone and what is best for them, so schedule appropriately for your program. You do not have to keep up with the Jones.
Weather we have 12, 13 or 14 weights please make sure the athletes are having a great experience. Word of mouth is the best advertisement!

Quote from: MNbadger on April 28, 2021, 02:22:22 PM
Yes, remember the bad old days....tournaments would get to the finals and have a dinner break and fo the finals two hours later!.....

I loved that!

I have to agree with Tom on this. I can remember the Middle Border Conference had in its bylaws the finals started at 7:00pm. The place was always jam packed. Ellsworth, Baldwin, Amery with Henry Yetter Durand had some good kids, New Richmond with Bob Olson. The place, whoever hosted, would be rockin. Really made the tournament special. Not saying all tournaments should be that way but making some events special is also a good way to sell a sport.

Based on this thread, I had to go revisit the piles of data I collected the 2016-17 season.
113, 195, 220,. 285, and 106 in that order had the most open slots in tournaments from beginning to end of the season.
No division averaged more than 11  varsity wrestlers per team in the season.including Regionals.  Most weights at most tournaments were less than 70% full.   
We have 7000 wrestlers now. We had 16000 with 12 weights.
Food for thought.

Quote from: Handles II on April 28, 2021, 10:05:53 PM
Based on this thread, I had to go revisit the piles of data I collected the 2016-17 season.
113, 195, 220,. 285, and 106 in that order had the most open slots in tournaments from beginning to end of the season.
No division averaged more than 11  varsity wrestlers per team in the season.including Regionals.  Most weights at most tournaments were less than 70% full.   
We have 7000 wrestlers now. We had 16000 with 12 weights.
Food for thought.

So combine 106/113 at 110 and 182/195 at 190. Lower 220 to 215.

Quote from: wrastle63 on April 28, 2021, 06:44:32 AM

Quote from: Ghetto on April 27, 2021, 10:16:48 PM

Quote from: MNbadger on April 27, 2021, 07:14:54 PM
The scores might be closer but it will be more of a drubbing.  When a team better than you condenses their talent the weaker team will be less likely than before to win that 2 or three weights in the dual.

That's possible.

Let's try it and find out

So your whole point is close exciting duals will happen if we go to 12 which in turn will create buzz and help grow the sport. But you acknowledge that it might not change things? LOL

Also Pennsylvania didn't go to 12 they went to 13. They kept the first 9 weight classes exactly the same- 106, 113, 120, 126, 132, 138, 145, 152, 160. The update was 172, 189, 215, 285. They did the opposite of what Ghetto has said with trying to push the weight classes higher. Basically they combined 195 and 220.

No one knows what will happen. I believe they will. You may believe they won't. Either way they are opinions. Yours just happens to be wrong.  ;D

"So combine 106/113 at 110"....I hope we never do this! 
17% 14 year old males (freshmen) weigh 100 lbs.
10% 15 year old males (sophomores) weigh 100 lbs.

See my previous post listing 103 pounds and 106 pounds from the CDC Growth Charts.

So after reading all these post that speak ad nauseum about how the poor little kids are getting opportunities taken away from them, explain to me how a 100lb kid CAN'T wrestle 108, or 106, or 103, or any weight that is higher than 100??   ::) ::)

No one said "they can't".  But it certainly is not optimal for them.  "A few pounds" is much more for a 100 pound wrestlers vs say, a wrestler who weighs 140.  There is a point at which we are kind of shutting potential participants out.  For a kid who weighs 100 pounds, 103 was a place they could be legitimately competitive.  106 is a stretch.  108 is a substantial stretch.  I have posted the numbers of what high school age males weigh.  Our weight classes should include the bottom 5-10% don't you think?

Quote from: dman on May 01, 2021, 10:04:59 AM
So after reading all these post that speak ad nauseum about how the poor little kids are getting opportunities taken away from them, explain to me how a 100lb kid CAN'T wrestle 108, or 106, or 103, or any weight that is higher than 100??   ::) ::)

I have said a million times.  The JV weights should be different than the varsity weights.  Each weight class should probably be 5 lbs lighter.

Quote from: MNbadger on May 01, 2021, 04:22:05 PM
No one said "they can't".  But it certainly is not optimal for them.  "A few pounds" is much more for a 100 pound wrestlers vs say, a wrestler who weighs 140.  There is a point at which we are kind of shutting potential participants out.  For a kid who weighs 100 pounds, 103 was a place they could be legitimately competitive.  106 is a stretch.  108 is a substantial stretch.  I have posted the numbers of what high school age males weigh.  Our weight classes should include the bottom 5-10% don't you think?

Quote from: dman on May 01, 2021, 10:04:59 AM
So after reading all these post that speak ad nauseum about how the poor little kids are getting opportunities taken away from them, explain to me how a 100lb kid CAN'T wrestle 108, or 106, or 103, or any weight that is higher than 100??   ::) ::)

You literally said the new weights are "ignoring/excluding" the 100lb kids!  When you get called out on it you then turn around and try to weasel your way out of it by saying, "No one said "they can't".  But it certainly is not optimal for them."  The new weights are not "ignoring/excluding" anyone.  For crying out loud, wrestling is pretty much the only high school sport that gives a 100lb kid a chance to be on varsity...and be very successful.  Sure glad my 100lb kid isn't wrestling for a coach like you that would pretty much be telling him he has no chance.

I stand by my post.
Other sports let 100 pound kids compete.  Basketball would allow a 4' tall ninth grader to play.  They would struggle to compete though wouldn't they?  But they can play........
Why are you "calling me out"?  What does this even mean in this context?
Are you asking me to meet you in the middle school playground after school?!?!?!
I have posted the CDC Weight Charts showing the distribution of high school age males.  We are in discussions regularly on here in regard to numbers of participants.  It is our responsibility to the sport and to potential and current wrestlers to offer weight classes that best serve most of them.  The aforementioned CDC charts indicate that we should not raise the starting weight from 106.  I believe that the numbers show we should go back to 103 as a starting weight class..

Quote from: dman on May 02, 2021, 09:06:11 AM

Quote from: MNbadger on May 01, 2021, 04:22:05 PM
No one said "they can't".  But it certainly is not optimal for them.  "A few pounds" is much more for a 100 pound wrestlers vs say, a wrestler who weighs 140.  There is a point at which we are kind of shutting potential participants out.  For a kid who weighs 100 pounds, 103 was a place they could be legitimately competitive.  106 is a stretch.  108 is a substantial stretch.  I have posted the numbers of what high school age males weigh.  Our weight classes should include the bottom 5-10% don't you think?

Quote from: dman on May 01, 2021, 10:04:59 AM
So after reading all these post that speak ad nauseum about how the poor little kids are getting opportunities taken away from them, explain to me how a 100lb kid CAN'T wrestle 108, or 106, or 103, or any weight that is higher than 100??   ::) ::)

You literally said the new weights are "ignoring/excluding" the 100lb kids!  When you get called out on it you then turn around and try to weasel your way out of it by saying, "No one said "they can't".  But it certainly is not optimal for them."  The new weights are not "ignoring/excluding" anyone.  For crying out loud, wrestling is pretty much the only high school sport that gives a 100lb kid a chance to be on varsity...and be very successful.  Sure glad my 100lb kid isn't wrestling for a coach like you that would pretty much be telling him he has no chance.

Quote from: MNbadger on May 02, 2021, 01:49:07 PM
I stand by my post.
Other sports let 100 pound kids compete.  Basketball would allow a 4' tall ninth grader to play.  They would struggle to compete though wouldn't they?  But they can play........
Why are you "calling me out"?  What does this even mean in this context?
Are you asking me to meet you in the middle school playground after school?!?!?!
I have posted the CDC Weight Charts showing the distribution of high school age males.  We are in discussions regularly on here in regard to numbers of participants.  It is our responsibility to the sport and to potential and current wrestlers to offer weight classes that best serve most of them.  The aforementioned CDC charts indicate that we should not raise the starting weight from 106.  I believe that the numbers show we should go back to 103 as a starting weight class..

Quote from: dman on May 02, 2021, 09:06:11 AM

Quote from: MNbadger on May 01, 2021, 04:22:05 PM
No one said "they can't".  But it certainly is not optimal for them.  "A few pounds" is much more for a 100 pound wrestlers vs say, a wrestler who weighs 140.  There is a point at which we are kind of shutting potential participants out.  For a kid who weighs 100 pounds, 103 was a place they could be legitimately competitive.  106 is a stretch.  108 is a substantial stretch.  I have posted the numbers of what high school age males weigh.  Our weight classes should include the bottom 5-10% don't you think?

Quote from: dman on May 01, 2021, 10:04:59 AM
So after reading all these post that speak ad nauseum about how the poor little kids are getting opportunities taken away from them, explain to me how a 100lb kid CAN'T wrestle 108, or 106, or 103, or any weight that is higher than 100??   ::) ::)

You literally said the new weights are "ignoring/excluding" the 100lb kids!  When you get called out on it you then turn around and try to weasel your way out of it by saying, "No one said "they can't".  But it certainly is not optimal for them."  The new weights are not "ignoring/excluding" anyone.  For crying out loud, wrestling is pretty much the only high school sport that gives a 100lb kid a chance to be on varsity...and be very successful.  Sure glad my 100lb kid isn't wrestling for a coach like you that would pretty much be telling him he has no chance.

MN Badger, I'm not sure exactly how you are coming up with the suggestion that a 100lb kid (or 90, or 80) would not be allowed to compete (making the comparison that they could in basketball but apparently not in wrestling) with changes to the weights.  I see kids that size at virtually every JV tournament and many varsity tournaments. Wrestling allows them to compete, and in fact, since they aren't competing against kids that are 160lbs like they might in basketball, they have an increased chance for success.  I agree wholeheartedly that our small guys typically will grow into our middle weight guys in a few years, while our big guys will stay our big guys so some attention to the future of a program needs to be looked at, but they still can wrestle.

", I'm not sure exactly how you are coming up with the suggestion that a 100lb kid (or 90, or 80) would not be allowed to compete (making the comparison that they could in basketball but apparently not in wrestling) with changes to the weights"

I was referring to the previous post where the comment was made that we (wrestling) gave 100 pound kids a chance to compete.  I pointed out that other sports allow them to compete too. 
My point is that as we have kept raising the starting weight, it becomes more difficult for lighter kids to truly compete.  Those incremental changes are not necessarily incremental for a 100 pound kid but they likely are for heavier wrestlers.  When I posted this, I was essentially called a bad coach......:)   
How many 100 pound 4' tall kids start on your high school's basketball team?  My guess is that the number is zero.  My question to dman is, would you tell a 4' kid that he can start on the basketball team?  If not, I am sure glad you are not my kid's coach.......(note sarcasm)
One of our selling points has always been that we give kids a legitimate chance to be a part of varsity wrestling.  And yes, I believe if you are a 100 pound kid, all things being equal that going from 103 to 106 to conceivably 108 or more is too much of a jump.
Lastly, the fact is there are kids out there that we are not getting to.  There needs to be a place for them.
https://www.cdc.gov/growthcharts/data/set1clinical/cj41l021.pdf

You act like every 106 weighs a full 106 exactly. Sure the 100 pound kid is going to hit a couple kids cutting down to get to 106, but they will also hit some 95-105 pound kids too. I know of multiple undersized kids that lost some matches at 106 their freshman year and came back the next year to do great as a full sized 106 or 113.

Making the starting weight 103 would promote weight cutting in some situations.

EVERY weight class promotes weight cutting, not just 103........?!?!?!

Quote from: Wis-Mallard on May 04, 2021, 12:49:47 PM
You act like every 106 weighs a full 106 exactly. Sure the 100 pound kid is going to hit a couple kids cutting down to get to 106, but they will also hit some 95-105 pound kids too. I know of multiple undersized kids that lost some matches at 106 their freshman year and came back the next year to do great as a full sized 106 or 113.

Making the starting weight 103 would promote weight cutting in some situations.

Our present 106 pounders are cutting down......news flash.  I don't know if you are missing my point or just don't want to see what I am saying.  It is undeniable that as you raise that starting weight, it makes it tougher for that smaller kid that we are both talking about to compete.  Every increase is a bigger deal to them than say a 140 or 145 pound wrestler.  I also know of multiple kids who lost matches at 106 and do great the next year at 106. .  What is your point?  I know kids who lost in one season at 140 and the next year won many matches at 145.  That is often what happens when we train and practice but it isn't weight class dependent, they got better.
  In fact, our "106" this year had to drink water to make the minimum (93 pounds after the growth allowance).  You cannot mount a valid argument that this weight class was appropriate for him.  By your own post, talking of the wrestlers growing into 106 it shows there is a need for a lower starting weight as does this:
https://www.cdc.gov/growthcharts/data/set1clinical/cj41l021.pdf

Quote from: Wis-Mallard on May 04, 2021, 12:49:47 PM
You act like every 106 weighs a full 106 exactly. Sure the 100 pound kid is going to hit a couple kids cutting down to get to 106, but they will also hit some 95-105 pound kids too. I know of multiple undersized kids that lost some matches at 106 their freshman year and came back the next year to do great as a full sized 106 or 113.

Making the starting weight 103 would promote weight cutting in some situations.

You are right about all things 90-108! I know from the good old days that 98 and 103 promoted serious weight cutting. Let the little guys eat ;)

Having 90, 96, 102, 108 would be great for small kids and would have small but fair brackets at tournaments. It would create a lot of forfeits in duals. I see your points, but where do you draw the line on number of small weights?

The lines should be drawn here, where the kids are.....:
https://www.cdc.gov/growthcharts/data/set1clinical/cj41l021.pdf
This has been my point since the thread started down this road.

MnBadger I hear what you are saying.  I agree we keep expanding the lower weights and making it harder for Smaller wrestlers to be competitive at the Varsity lvl.  I had 2 small freshman sons. I remember the Frustrations they had when at the end of the year everyone got the 2 pounds then 3 a state?  Our team last year had a 75 pound Freshman and another one that was 105?   Cale Benitz started for us his Freshman year and was 90?

Personally I would like Wisconsin to adopt a more strict weight loss management program.  Making wrestlers actually make the scratch weight in Jan. If they don't they don't get the additional pounds!

I really don't like the jump from 170 to 190 in the 12 weight option. We will have 2 really good kids at 182 next year. A senior and a junior. I think the 14 weight option is best for tournaments. You guys have light guy examples while others have 150-190 issues where juniors and seniors quit since they can't make the team.

Quote from: Wis-Mallard on May 04, 2021, 08:33:06 PM
I really don't like the jump from 170 to 190 in the 12 weight option. We will have 2 really good kids at 182 next year. A senior and a junior. I think the 14 weight option is best for tournaments. You guys have light guy examples while others have 150-190 issues where juniors and seniors quit since they can't make the team.

I'd much rather do 12 for duals and keep 14 for tournaments.