Rules to help keep kids enjoying and involved in wrestling?

[padre]

I understand the drive to kill head steals at youth. Taking a guy's head, with and arm, is legit wrestling. Let's teach them the defense early and call the illegal ones as usual. Most twerps get pinned by the half. Do we make the illegal until middle school? No, it's legit; as is the head steal.

Exactly.  Why would your weakest part of your body that a kid can attack not be part of wrestling.  Teach the counter and most of the time you will end up on top.

However....I will say I tell beginning parents "If your son/daughter survives their first headlock they will be here a long time"

[ramjet]

We all for sure cringe when we see the head steal.

I love the above statement Ramjet. Very true.
It's a cringe-worthy move at young ages regardless of if it's the kid doing it or the kid receiving it.  
Isn't that kind of the exact sentiment that has caused hockey to ban checking at early levels of the game?
Isn't that kind of the exact sentiment that has caused football to change tackling, or to get rid of it completely?

I've got to believe that as long as we do nothing, even though knowledgeable coaches and parents agree that it isn't a good move for young wrestlers (on either side of the equation) that it will continue to exist and cause kids, sooner or later, to quit the sport when perhaps we could be keeping them.  

I'm sensing that Dforsythe might have hit at least one of the bullseyes that we should be aiming at with his idea.

Let kids hit it in FS/GR if they so choose to go that route, but maybe before, I don't know, grade 5 (?) just eliminate it from folkstyle.

Even just 3rd or 4th. Get it out of young 1st graders head throwing every match.

While head throws are not taught in my early age group no doubt will there be kids that will be trying to do it against them.  I generally in the K-1st grade after it happens just tell them that is why we keep good position and attack the legs.

But come 2nd grade they need to know both sides of it for multiple reasons....

#1 There are kids out there that have lived on that move going on 3 years at this point and now are actually pretty good at it.  The defense HAS to be taught.   We cant always be the parent/coach saying "don't worry that won't work later" because sometimes it does.  Be proactive and teach the counter.

#2  A kid needs to know the move.  There are situations when down by 3-5 points late in the match that to earn a victory the move must be part of your arsenal.

I am a coach that preaches we are just learning for later years but its a hard excuse to make that it wouldn't be taught just because one is anti-throw.  Then why do greco?  My oldest son threw his whole life and much of it on his way to a state title....and I know of plenty others that have done the same.  
[/quote]

Greco is great sport the throws are part of it My son even used them very effectively in College year end banquets had many of his throws. It hurt him too I mean physically hurt him landing in the point of the shoulder will do some damaging things like seperate them.

I agree teach the counter. Choke holds are more the issue that's a matter of getting your youth tournamanet refs to call them and be aware when a kid is being choked out. Those are already illegal but not properly enforced at the youth level ...... why? because the HS wrestlers reffing may not be properly trained or there is not enough emphasis put on looking for it.

[bigG]

I understand the drive to kill head steals at youth. Taking a guy's head, with and arm, is legit wrestling. Let's teach them the defense early and call the illegal ones as usual. Most twerps get pinned by the half. Do we make the illegal until middle school? No, it's legit; as is the head steal.

Exactly.  Why would your weakest part of your body that a kid can attack not be part of wrestling.  Teach the counter and most of the time you will end up on top.

However....I will say I tell beginning parents "If your son/daughter survives their first headlock they will be here a long time"

[bigG]

I understand the drive to kill head steals at youth. Taking a guy's head, with and arm, is legit wrestling. Let's teach them the defense early and call the illegal ones as usual. Most twerps get pinned by the half. Do we make the illegal until middle school? No, it's legit; as is the head steal.

Exactly.  Why would your weakest part of your body that a kid can attack not be part of wrestling.  Teach the counter and most of the time you will end up on top.

However....I will say I tell beginning parents "If your son/daughter survives their first headlock they will be here a long time"

I use a similar line with parents and try to instill in kids that the head throw on you is your easy 2. If you can't turn a kid's head steal into points, you're not long for the sport. Still, kids gotta learn the hard way. That's kids for ya.

[ramjet]

Here is a rule;

6th grade and up NO MINI MATS. Full size mat ......

[imnofish]

Here is a rule;

6th grade and up NO MINI MATS. Full size mat ......

ABSOLUTELY AGREE!!!  Let 'em wrestle! 

[MNbadger]

I absolutely agree but.....................
How does this align with all the distress people show about stalling?
If no one took a step back (what many want), we could wrestles in a 9' circle...............
Hmmmm

Here is a rule;

6th grade and up NO MINI MATS. Full size mat ......

ABSOLUTELY AGREE!!!  Let 'em wrestle! 

[ramjet]

I absolutely agree but.....................
How does this align with all the distress people show about stalling?
If no one took a step back (what many want), we could wrestles in a 9' circle...............
Hmmmm

Here is a rule;

6th grade and up NO MINI MATS. Full size mat ......

ABSOLUTELY AGREE!!!  Let 'em wrestle! 

College out of bounds rules start at 6th grade full size mat.

It also goes to the refs having a consistent platform.

Stalling? So this discourages kids from wrestling?

[MNbadger]

I was supporting the use of full-size mats always but trying to point out how it might conflict with the argument as to backing up being stalling.  If kids never backed up you could wrestle inside a 9 foot circle.

I absolutely agree but.....................
How does this align with all the distress people show about stalling?
If no one took a step back (what many want), we could wrestles in a 9' circle...............
Hmmmm

Here is a rule;

6th grade and up NO MINI MATS. Full size mat ......

ABSOLUTELY AGREE!!!  Let 'em wrestle! 

College out of bounds rules start at 6th grade full size mat.

It also goes to the refs having a consistent platform.

Stalling? So this discourages kids from wrestling?

[ramjet]

I was supporting the use of full-size mats always but trying to point out how it might conflict with the argument as to backing up being stalling.  If kids never backed up you could wrestle inside a 9 foot circle.

I absolutely agree but.....................
How does this align with all the distress people show about stalling?
If no one took a step back (what many want), we could wrestles in a 9' circle...............
Hmmmm

Here is a rule;

6th grade and up NO MINI MATS. Full size mat ......

ABSOLUTELY AGREE!!!  Let 'em wrestle! 

College out of bounds rules start at 6th grade full size mat.

It also goes to the refs having a consistent platform.

Stalling? So this discourages kids from wrestling?

That seems like an erroneous argument coaching them up to, press forward , keep the pressure, you set the pace not your opponent. Small mats for 6th grade and up teach nothing except the ref can make mistakes on out of bounds rules......

[Handles II]

Welp,
It really looks like nothing could come out of this discussion. While a few things that could help protect kids, possibly improve the actual aspects of wrestling we should be focused on, and therefore keep them involved longer were proposed, others seem against doing anything like that.

I wonder how the baseball, football, soccer, softball, hockey, la crosse, rugby clubs did it?  They all have created rules about their games, practices, techniques that add safety, enjoyment, and keep the focus on the fundamentals needed at each level to retain as many kids as they can.

"if your kid survives their first headlock they will be around a long time"...?? Really? 1. Is that actually true? 2. That should be our attitude?  And for the kids who don't survive their first headlock at 3rd grade, good riddance you could never be good at this sport anyway?

I wonder if that's how the discussions for no-checking rule for youth hockey went? "Checking is actually helping kids quit, it isn't something that is really an important part of the fundamentals for the sport, at least not until much later on." 
"Nah, this is hockey, if these kids can't handle getting put into the boards, they shouldn't be on the ice. We don't need 'em."

Our numbers of kids entering this sport at the high school level in our state continue to drop even though there are as many or more youth starting the sport than ever before. Identify the reasons why kids quit and do something about it. That's what other sports are doing. Some of you are heavily involved in those other sports and can see how beneficial it can be, yet for wrestling we do nothing. It's kind of sad.

[wrastle63]

Welp,
It really looks like nothing could come out of this discussion. While a few things that could help protect kids, possibly improve the actual aspects of wrestling we should be focused on, and therefore keep them involved longer were proposed, others seem against doing anything like that.

I wonder how the baseball, football, soccer, softball, hockey, la crosse, rugby clubs did it?  They all have created rules about their games, practices, techniques that add safety, enjoyment, and keep the focus on the fundamentals needed at each level to retain as many kids as they can.

"if your kid survives their first headlock they will be around a long time"...?? Really? 1. Is that actually true? 2. That should be our attitude?  And for the kids who don't survive their first headlock at 3rd grade, good riddance you could never be good at this sport anyway?

I wonder if that's how the discussions for no-checking rule for youth hockey went? "Checking is actually helping kids quit, it isn't something that is really an important part of the fundamentals for the sport, at least not until much later on."  
"Nah, this is hockey, if these kids can't handle getting put into the boards, they shouldn't be on the ice. We don't need 'em."

Our numbers of kids entering this sport at the high school level in our state continue to drop even though there are as many or more youth starting the sport than ever before. Identify the reasons why kids quit and do something about it. That's what other sports are doing. Some of you are heavily involved in those other sports and can see how beneficial it can be, yet for wrestling we do nothing. It's kind of sad.

I agree Handles checking is a huge part of hockey as kids get older, but why isn't it in youth hockey? They are working on the more important skills of skating, passing, shooting, defense, etc. In wrestling we should be focused on the same thing. A headlock is a good move but is it helping our youth wrestlers to do it? No not when they are standing straight up, reaching for the head, potentially choking their opponent, and their opponent cries and quits. So the wrestler who wins gains almost nothing of value and the losing wrestling quits?

I also agree with others that say the defense needs to be taught, but I don't think we need to teach it in 1st and 2nd grade. We should be focused on fundamentals like stance, hand control, level changes, shots, half, etc.

I truly believe this is something that if it were to become "illegal" until at least 3rd grade would benefit our entire sport. It would increase participation(less quiting) and would also increase our fundamentals.

[BT]

Personally, I think coaches/corners in the youth wrestling world do more harm than good.  Having brought dozens, if not hundreds,  of new kids to wrestling meets and have almost never had any kid get upset over losing to the point of crying.  I think between the physical presence of a yelling coach and or the expectations (spoken or unspoken) of parents lead to the emotional outbursts.  My personal belief is that if kids are exploding over losses at the young age, they lack the maturity level to do competitions.  No judgment; but maybe it's a litmus test for kids and their maturity level as far as wrestling goes. Between that and potential for burnout is why I held my own son out of youth wrestling for most of his grade and middle school years.  

On the front of kids new to the sport, there are very few meets that cater to brand new kids.  That is not to say that they do not exist, but they are rare.  Things have improved on some fronts; the ranking system is good.  I would also like to see more challenge tournaments at youth and off-season high school levels.  Kids arrange their own meets with opponents at those.  I saw them work pretty well in Florida.

I don't think it would hurt wrestling to revisit and redevelop the sport's youth model to de-emphasize competitions and focus on workouts, practices.  For the belief that the matches are absolutely necessary ignores the international scene, where countries with almost no formal, highly structured youth opportunities tend to dominate that scene, this weekend's success for the US aside.  

Having been away from WI high school wrestling since 2004, then coming back this year, there were some things that stood out.  Seems like forfeits are way up, and that is troubling.  There are programs out there with 4-8 kids total on the varsity that have youth programs.  There's something really wrong about that.  Where are they going?  I think we have lots of kids out in the earlier years but are frying kids out before high school.  There is a growing arms race in wrestling, as evidenced by the ton of "national tournaments", private clubs, and year-round opportunities.  Obviously, those things are not inherently negative.  That said, a lot of folks brag about how hard wrestling is; and it is just that hard.  On the same token, an activity that demanding of time and energy may be too much for kids at too young of an age.  

It is the right of parents to spend the money, to take the kids to as many meets as they want, and it is certainly their business.  The tricky part is when does it becomes wrestling's business, especially if it is driving kids away from the sport in the long run.  We have a tendency to be our own worst enemy at times.  

[imnofish]

I was supporting the use of full-size mats always but trying to point out how it might conflict with the argument as to backing up being stalling.  If kids never backed up you could wrestle inside a 9 foot circle.

I absolutely agree but.....................
How does this align with all the distress people show about stalling?
If no one took a step back (what many want), we could wrestles in a 9' circle...............
Hmmmm

Here is a rule;

6th grade and up NO MINI MATS. Full size mat ......

ABSOLUTELY AGREE!!!  Let 'em wrestle!  

College out of bounds rules start at 6th grade full size mat.

It also goes to the refs having a consistent platform.

Stalling? So this discourages kids from wrestling?

MnBadger has a good point.  My concern is less about backing up, based on my recent observations of middle school wrestling.  I just watched a big MS tourney wrestled on 8 mats.  Most kids really were aggressive.  Those who continually backed out were consistently called for stalling, on the bigger mats (7th and 8th graders).  The small mats (5th and 6th graders) seemed to get away with it more, perhaps because there was just less room for it to become blatantly obvious?  The biggest concern for me is the increased chance of action taking kids on smaller mats out of bounds, effectively stopping their completion of moves.  This was an issue on the feet, as well as on the mat.  I like the bigger mat because it lets them finish their moves, which intrinsically rewards and encourages aggressive wrestling.  

As for the headlock issue, I was amazed at how rarely leg attacks were used in the tournament I just watched.  Kids seemed to prefer going upstairs, overwhelmingly, or working for snap downs.  That led to a lot of scoreless first periods, as most of them countered upper body attacks well.  However, a lot of 8th graders are in for a huge shock next year, when opponents start shooting on their legs.  I really do think that allowing no headlocks in lower elementary competitions would force kids and coaches to focus on doubles and singles, before they get caught up in 'head hunting.'  By what I observed, the kids who were shooting had better stances, unlike the others who seldom even bent their knees.

[MNbadger]

I was only half-serious Fish.  But, I do think we scream stalling immediately when in neutral but a kid (especially in hs) can leg ride (and I mean leg RIDE) forever and not get called.  They can repeatedly put the leg in over and over.  Secondly, they then will draw a call on the bottom man who is simply resisting getting turned (if the top man is even trying).  The bottom man should not have to "submit" by doing something to put himself at risk when the top man has the leg in just waiting.

I was supporting the use of full-size mats always but trying to point out how it might conflict with the argument as to backing up being stalling.  If kids never backed up you could wrestle inside a 9 foot circle.

I absolutely agree but.....................
How does this align with all the distress people show about stalling?
If no one took a step back (what many want), we could wrestles in a 9' circle...............
Hmmmm

Here is a rule;

6th grade and up NO MINI MATS. Full size mat ......

ABSOLUTELY AGREE!!!  Let 'em wrestle!  

College out of bounds rules start at 6th grade full size mat.

It also goes to the refs having a consistent platform.

Stalling? So this discourages kids from wrestling?

MnBadger has a good point.  My concern is less about backing up, based on my recent observations of middle school wrestling.  I just watched a big MS tourney wrestled on 8 mats.  Most kids really were aggressive.  Those who continually backed out were consistently called for stalling, on the bigger mats (7th and 8th graders).  The small mats (5th and 6th graders) seemed to get away with it more, perhaps because there was just less room for it to become blatantly obvious?  The biggest concern for me is the increased chance of action taking kids on smaller mats out of bounds, effectively stopping their completion of moves.  This was an issue on the feet, as well as on the mat.  I like the bigger mat because it lets them finish their moves, which intrinsically rewards and encourages aggressive wrestling.  

As for the headlock issue, I was amazed at how rarely leg attacks were used in the tournament I just watched.  Kids seemed to prefer going upstairs, overwhelmingly, or working for snap downs.  That led to a lot of scoreless first periods, as most of them countered upper body attacks well.  However, a lot of 8th graders are in for a huge shock next year, when opponents start shooting on their legs.  I really do think that allowing no headlocks in lower elementary competitions would force kids and coaches to focus on doubles and singles, before they get caught up in 'head hunting.'  By what I observed, the kids who were shooting had better stances, unlike the others who seldom even bent their knees.