What's the question?

If that's the guy who is the best wrestler in D1 ... Then, the object is to be super-defensive ... not take a shot ... hope you can get a spin when the other guy is being aggressive (who is trying to make something happen)?

I haven't seen him other than wrestling Brester. But ... from what I have seen ... it's hard for me to believe this is a budding "world champion".

Can you simply be strong and defensive at that level? Seems unlikely. Probably not going to get "spin" or "shuck" takedowns at that level.

If Varner's style is the answer, then no wonder wrestling isn't particularly popular to non-wrestlers . It's boring. ESPN2 is the best it's going to get, for national finals only.

This is the guy who had the nerve to say that other wrestlers didn't wrestle him, just tried to keep it close? Sheesh. They probably just watched his matches -- why take a shot? He certainly takes no chances himself. What a joke.

Can't compare him to Sanderson at all. One guy wrestles. The other guy plays constant defense.

If this is how you "win" the game of folk-style wrestling, perhaps freestyle does make sense instead. Perhaps it would bring more fans to the sport.

The sport needs more Bryan Snyder's and Ben Askrens and Cael Sandersons then it needs another total bore like Varner.

If you think that folk style is boring no one is making you watch it.

Huskernut, you missed his point. Goblin doesn't think it's boring (Most of the time). He just wants to see more action. But other potential fans might think its boring if they see all defensive matches. He just means that our sport would gain more fans if when it is exposed on a national level the action is exciting. Granted not all finals matches can be wrestled wide open. However, it helps our sport when wrestlers like Metcalf, Burroughs, Herbert, Dake from cornell, etc are in the spotlight. They all get after it in a big way and make it exciting.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Mustang Wrestler,

When Kevin Jackson, ISU coach and USA freestyle team coach, said Varner is the best wrestler in the United States, did he mean at the collegiate level or at any level? And if he meant any level, was it just his own weight class or all classes?

Varner is a beast no doubt, but I can't see him winning a World or Olympic gold medal unless he can score from his own shots. He is the future in the US at his weight that seems assured.

I think strictly defensive wrestling (with no plan to mount an offense) is boring, and I think I am not in a minority. Wrestling where you don't take any chances and hope the guy you are wrestling against does -- so you can take advantage.

What kind of life lesson is it anyway? Where in life can you just play defense and not take chances. Putting money in bonds?

For the most part, to survive, you have to take chances. Varner took ZERO shots that I saw. He got an escape and countered shots and got one spin. A spin is not exactly a shot.

If that is how you wrestle, it's plain boring, period. You are basically burning time -- waiting for the other guy to shoot, chewing up the 7 minutes while you stand there in your stance. And to top it off, he had the nerve to claim that other wrestlers "were just wrestling to keep it close". What exactly was he doing?

This is the best collegiate wrestler? Imagine the boredom if everyone wrestled like that.

Varner is strong as an Ox and plays great defense, and has a fantastic escape move. To me, thats 2/3 of wrestling, where is his other 1/3?

It's a matter of philosophies. For example Gable and the Brands believe why win 2-1 when you can win 10-1 and try to punish their opponents with nonstop attacking, Varner and many others who are now big freestyle and Greco wrestlers believe why win 10-1 when you can win 2-1. I think it comes down the period rule in free/Greco. You get no bonus for scoring more points, it's all about doing enough to win the period and those ideals have transferred into high school and college wrestling.

quote:

Originally posted by TheWarrior:
It's a matter of philosophies. For example Gable and the Brands believe why win 2-1 when you can win 10-1 and try to punish their opponents with nonstop attacking, Varner and many others who are now big freestyle and Greco wrestlers believe why win 10-1 when you can win 2-1. I think it comes down the period rule in free/Greco. You get no bonus for scoring more points, it's all about doing enough to win the period and those ideals have transferred into high school and college wrestling.

Freestyle and Greco rules are created to promote scoring and action. A 5 point move can end a period and two 3 point moves end the period (technical superiority). The higher point moves are more exciting. You can earn bonus points for falls and technical superiority (in two periods) similar to folkstyles pin and technical fall.

Also starting the periods over forces wrestlers to keep scoring each period. In the past if a wrestler scored big early on they could become conservative and win. Now they can score big early and win the period but they will have to come back in the next period and keep scoring.

Scores are low at the high level becuase they are so good it is hard to score on them.

quote:

Originally posted by Badger:
Scores are low at the high level becuase they are so good it is hard to score on them.

Couldn't that also be said at the college level of wrestling. I don't know why but Green Goblin your comments really sit wrong with me, especially when they are directed towards a guy from Iowa State. I root for anyone else in the Big 12 (When they are not against Nebraska) except for Missouri in football and Iowa State in wrestling.) Maybe it because Brester did the same thing last year at the Big 12's to beat Varner. It a tactic he used to win and it worked. Also he was wrestling on the biggest stage of college wrestling, might of had something to do with it. His scores in the other matches were 17-3, 10-1, 4-0, 6-0, and then the championship match of 5-2. Saw him wrestle throughout the year and he was pretty dominate. I'm not making an argument that he was the wrestler of the year, but in his other matches with Brester it was hard to argue who the better wrestler was. That might be another reason this sits wrong with me. To dis on Varner has to dis a little on Brester and everything he did in his college career, for his last two years there was only one guy that was better that Brester. 4 time finalist and 2 time champ. I would take that winning every match 2-1 if I could.

Badger, I know the rules are designed for scoring but I just don't see it happening. at the world team trials it seemed that many wrestlers didn't even take more then 1 to 2 attempts a period. It looked like some hoped to take the match to the ball draw and clinch instead of deciding it in regulation. Maybe it is the fact that I have only recently seen free/greco on the top level and have not seen juniors or cadets in a few years. Also if someone scores big on you early it forces you to be offensive to get back into the match creating more action.

Green goblin, I am not a Varner fan but if you look how many points he scored during the tournament compared to Brester you would have to say he is more offensive than Brester. Varner scored 42 points in the tournament and Brester scored 24. I wish Brester won but have to admit Varner scored a lot more than Brester.

quote:

Originally posted by wrestle05:
Green goblin, I am not a Varner fan but if you look how many points he scored during the tournament compared to Brester you would have to say he is more offensive than Brester. Varner scored 42 points in the tournament and Brester scored 24. I wish Brester won but have to admit Varner scored a lot more than Brester.

Those that are not big fans of Varner want to see him score on his OWN shots not just off of counters. The vast majority of his points were from near fall points and countering his opponent's shots. It certainly works for him as he is very, very good at that style.

I tried to watch Varner wrestle at the D-1s, but then I noticed some paint drying in the corner which seemed to have a higher entertainment value.

I wonder how those of you opposed to Varner's style feel when they watch a kid win by taking down and letting an opponent up. I know that it's a perfectly legal and legitimate strategy but it bugs the crap out of me when I see it done. Unfortunately the best path to victory is not always the most popular. I know that at least a takedown is an offensive move but my point is that I doubt that those that use it really care how I feel about their strategy, especially when they win. I was jumping up and down in my living room rooting for Brester but I also have to congratulate Varner on a well executed strategy for the title.

There are a few guys that have great offense that they can score even at the highest levels of wrestling.

Most people get so wrapped up in offense they they only train 30 percent of the time in "counter offense" that's right not defense but "counter offense". Varner has great counter offense which is what is needed at the world and olympic levels. Believe me, all those guys have offense too you just can't tell it when 2 great counter offense guys go at it for 7 minutes....you may call it boring but as knightmare said it's great tactical wrestling. Even great offense can be countered by better counter offense. There are few guys that were so good at offense that they were unstoppable. Sure we would all like to see it but its not the norm.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: 525,

I agree with you knightmare. I may be in the vast minority here but watching a kid takedown and let up someone else is very boring to me. I would much rather watch two very good wrestlers that may not take as many shots, but can counter and score extremely well, is what I love to see. Goblin you are correct also. There is a reason why the NBA and the NFL are more popular than say the WNBA and Hockey. The average sports fan loves to see scoring and action.

Green Goblin's premise for this thread seemed to be that Varner's style is boring, and after watching him in four consecutive D-1 finals, I agree. Thank goodness not all of the 10 weight classes had a Varner type wrestler in the finals or it would have been one long night.