The 3-Point Takedown - Folkstyle's Sea Change

Wrestleknownothing · Mar 28, 2026

50% more points should be 50% more fun.

But is it working? Does it incentivize more action and risk taking?

The 3 Point Takedown - Folkstyle's Sea Change | Wrestling.Guru

The year was 2023 and there was a plague upon the land of folkstyle wrestling. Scoring at the NCAA tournament was down - a lot. After hitting a near-term pe ...

wrestling.guru

Crablegs1 · Mar 29, 2026

This chart is insane. Would be interesting to see a 3 year look back for the 2 point era if possibly 22-23 was an anomaly.

Also, really interesting point about the point differential and incentives between stalling and a takedown. Makes a lot of sense.

Wrestleknownothing · Mar 29, 2026

Crablegs1 said:
This chart is insane. Would be interesting to see a 3 year look back for the 2 point era if possibly 22-23 was an anomaly.
View attachment 1236088

Also, really interesting point about the point differential and incentives between stalling and a takedown. Makes a lot of sense.

If you extend the lookback the zero or 1 category shrinks.

2021-2023 = 15.5%
2019-2023 = 14.5%
2018-2023 = 13.9%
2017-2023 = 13.5%
2016-2023 = 13.3%

I chose the shorter time period because it was the easiest comparison, and it still makes the last three years look very bad from the perspective of ultra-low scoring decisions.

Wrestleknownothing · Wednesday at 10:24 AM

Who has mastered the 3-Point Takedown?

Vince Robinson is 7-0 in the past two tournaments in 0 or 1 takedown matches. He has a pair of 4-2 wins, a pair of 4-1 wins, a 5-1 win, a 3-2 win and a 2-1 win. That is the most such wins by any wrestler in the three years of 3-point TD - and he only needed two of the years to do it. Honorable mention to Patrick Kennedy (6-0).

Wrestlers with the most (8) 0 or 1 TD matches are Caleb Smith (6-2), Stephen Little (5-3) and Ben Kueter (4-4).

And who needs to consider a second takedown?

Most high volume, low scorers do well with the strategy though there are four wrestlers who may want to consider a second takedown. There are the wrestlers who have 7 such matches with a losing record (all are 3-4): Joey Blaze, Stevo Poulin, Evan Frost, and Mac Stout.

There are three wrestlers with a 1-4 record: Dayton Pitzer, Cam Steed, and Dean Peterson.

Nine wrestlers are 1-3.
Forty-three wrestlers are 0-2, 0-3, or 0-4.

sdvike · Wednesday at 11:18 AM

Seems most highly ranked match ups come down to one takedown and wrestlers seem to be more defensive and patient in tight matches. There are outliers like Mess. Wonder what the takedown ratio is comparing round of 16 to semis.

Wrestleknownothing · Wednesday at 11:47 AM

sdvike said:
Seems most highly ranked match ups come down to one takedown and wrestlers seem to be more defensive and patient in tight matches. There are outliers like Mess. Wonder what the takedown ratio is comparing round of 16 to semis.

Good questions. So here are your answers:

The zero or 1 TD match is the most common type on the championship side of the bracket for every round but the pigtail, where the major is most common.

On the consolation side it is the most common type for the round of 16, round of 12, and both semis. It spikes in the blood round, where things get tense.

This one surprised me a bit.
It happens more often when a mild to solid favorite wins.

I am defining mild favorite as a win by a wrestler who is seeded 1-4 slots higher than the loser.
I am defining solid favorite as a win by a wrestler who is seeded 5-9 slots higher than the loser.
I am defining heavy favorite as a win by a wrestler who is seeded 10+ slots higher than the loser.
Upset categories are symmetrical.

Edit: the website seems to be struggling today. So I posted them a different/ less legible way. Sorry.

ArtRadley · Wednesday at 4:54 PM

Given that a counter move is highly likely after any initiated takedown attempt, there is no reason to think increasing the value of a TD will increase activity so long as the risk is equally increased.

To increase activity you have to award three points takedowns where the scorer initiated action, and just two points for wrestlers who score on a counter, this is pretty simple logic.

Trakker · Wednesday at 5:09 PM

ArtRadley said:
Given that a counter move is highly likely after any initiated takedown attempt, there is no reason to think increasing the value of a TD will increase activity so long as the risk is equally increased.

To increase activity you have to award three points takedowns where the scorer initiated action, and just two points for wrestlers who score on a counter, this is pretty simple logic.

So everyone is in agreement on who initiated the takedown attempt and what a counter is?

ArtRadley · Wednesday at 5:46 PM

Trakker said:
So everyone is in agreement on who initiated the takedown attempt and what a counter is?

I have every confidence that this could be interpreted by an official. Watch about twenty matches and tell me it isn’t obvious who initiated action every time.

Either way, so far as the risk is equal to the reward there is little incentive to be aggressive from neutral.

Trakker · Wednesday at 6:10 PM

So is it takedown attempt like you first said or is it initiated action?

And what is action?

Does a fake count?
A knee slap?
What about a reshot?

redghost1974 · Wednesday at 6:12 PM

ArtRadley said:
I have every confidence that this could be interpreted by an official. Watch about twenty matches and tell me it isn’t obvious who initiated action every time.

Either way, so far as the risk is equal to the reward there is little incentive to be aggressive from neutral.

Angel R is laughing evilly right now.

blcoach80 · Wednesday at 7:16 PM

Trakker said:
So is it takedown attempt like you first said or is it initiated action?

And what is action?

Does a fake count?
A knee slap?
What about a reshot?

Exactly, this would be a train wreck imo. Hell, they struggle with getting stalling correct or even consistent.

Trakker · Wednesday at 7:45 PM

blcoach80 said:
Exactly, this would be a train wreck imo. Hell, they struggle with getting stalling correct or even consistent.

Stalling, what is control vs no control, reaction time, neutral danger.........hard enough getting these called consistently. Lol.

ArtRadley · Thursday at 6:02 AM

Trakker said:
Stalling, what is control vs no control, reaction time, neutral danger.........hard enough getting these called consistently. Lol.

But my point is that so long as the aggressor scores no more points than the defender, there is no way to shuffle the deck and see wrestlers become more aggressive in neutral.

Aggressive wrestlers have to be rewarded in some way to change things.

huntinghawk · Thursday at 6:53 AM

ArtRadley said:
Given that a counter move is highly likely after any initiated takedown attempt, there is no reason to think increasing the value of a TD will increase activity so long as the risk is equally increased.

To increase activity you have to award three points takedowns where the scorer initiated action, and just two points for wrestlers who score on a counter, this is pretty simple logic.

Funny is the person who thinks the officials are capable of discerning who initiated action

ArtRadley · Thursday at 6:54 AM

huntinghawk said:
The simpleton is the person that thinks the officials are capable of discerning who initiated action

Not the point.

”Given that a counter move is highly likely after any initiated takedown attempt, there is no reason to think increasing the value of a TD will increase activity so long as the risk is equally increased”

Trapper85 · Thursday at 11:39 PM

ArtRadley said:
Not the point.

”Given that a counter move is highly likely after any initiated takedown attempt, there is no reason to think increasing the value of a TD will increase activity so long as the risk is equally increased”

Think I'd agree. It's only the truly dominant offensive finishers (or when talent differential is high between 2 guys) that yield low risk for 1 guy and lead to more offensive activity/scoring. In more even matches, high likelihood it does nothing or makes it more boring.

WIP2001 · Saturday at 9:27 PM

Great analysis. Definitely need more incentives for action. My two suggestions are

(1) Quicker trigger on stall calls. Moving backwards is an auto stall. Going off the mat to defend a takedown is an auto stall. Edge wrestling is an auto stall. Holding center does not absolve a wrestler from stalling if they’re not trying to score.

(2) More severe punishment for stalling. First = warning. Second = 2 points. Third = 4 points. Fourth = 6 points. Fifth = DQ.

FF141 · Saturday at 9:37 PM

WIP2001 said:
Great analysis. Definitely need more incentives for action. My two suggestions are

(1) Quicker trigger on stall calls. Moving backwards is an auto stall. Going off the mat to defend a takedown is an auto stall. Edge wrestling is an auto stall. Holding center does not absolve a wrestler from stalling if they’re not trying to score.

(2) More severe punishment for stalling. First = warning. Second = 2 points. Third = 4 points. Fourth = 6 points. Fifth = DQ.

Well they’ve shown for about 20 years calling stalling is not a point of emphasis. Doesn’t seem likely to change. Step outs ,passivity warnings and shot clock from neutral fixes most of the issue.

The 3-Point Takedown - Folkstyle's Sea Change

Wrestleknownothing

All-Conference