I am curious as to what people think about the overtime in wrestling. I know in college, we hae a 1 minute and then a ride out. The man scoring the first offesive point gets choice in OT.
I believe this should change:
I think overtime should be which man/woman can overpower the other from their feet and score when they are beginning to be mentally and physically tire. I think there should be no clock and the first person to score a takedown should win the match. If it takes 15 minutes, it will be a great 15 minutes wont it. Even in the state final!

God Bless,
Michael R. Church

Especially in the State Finals! I have always thought that reducing a match to a coin flip is one of the greatest travesties in sports. It completely trivializes some of the most memorable moments of these wrestlers' lives. I know the KSHSAA would probably be concerned about injuries with an open-ended overtime, but surely a better way to determine a match can be found!

I never thought about that. That's a pretty sweet idea!!!!

I thought that all the wrestling was the same for all the high schools in the United States (weight classes... rules...) do they have it different in other states? Because I didn't think the KSHSAA determined the rules, I thought they were mutually agreed on...

There is no coin flip in overtime. If there is no scoring in the first minute (neutral position), then the wrestler scoring the first point of the match gets his choice of top or bottom. If the top guy can ride for 30 secs., he wins. If the bottom guy scores, he wins. They should (and will) leave it the way it is. It works, so why mess with it?

Wag there is a coin toss if the score is 0-0. No one has scored so there is no advantage. Thus a toss is used.

That would take way too long. Let's say it did take 15 minutes, and it is in the 1st round with HWT's...I don't see a whole lot of action going on there. I think the way they do it now works just fine. It is a lot more organized and takes less time than just waiting and waiting and waiting for someone to be taken down. Cause that could take a long time.

not many go into overtime and not many would last 15 minutes or more. I think it would be interesting to try.

Pups4Ever- I am not sure of the exact procedure used. I know that there are national standards, but I am sure the KSHSAA is ultimately in charge of what the rules are. I am sure there are people out there who can more accurately answer that question.

I guess what I was trying to say was that it is unfair because the person on bottom almost always wins. Maybe if they gave each guy alternating chances on bottom and kept going until one didn't escape?

It seems to me if there was an unlimited time for overtime to see who scores, it would end up being a ref decision - stalling- and people don't like stalling calls deciding a match. The way it is now works, the 2nd overtime many win who get bottom, as said above, but that encourages someone in period 1 to score first, so it works.

have overtime stay the same, but for double OT go with the clinch like in freestyle and greco

Oh Chewbacca that would open up a whole new world of bad calls and screaming fits with refs lol. What a way to lose by having your hands slip out of a clinch.

I bet if this were the case and overtime was allowed to last however long it took a lot of matches would end in a disappointment because they lost cause of stalling.