Wow thats not the Iowa way. Was Terry or Tom in the corner? Lee has taken some strange losses lately. The way he was not finishing reminds me of Gilman. IDK if the trials will get any better. LL is getting his takedowns SL not so much.
Senior Men US Open
- Thread starter CatCoach
- Start date
Situational wrestling is beyond important with less than 10 seconds left. No reason to give them any chance to get their hands on you…
Also if he didnt press forward LL would of gotten pushout pt and won on criteria
Lee up by 4. He could have take 3 push-ups and still won.....???
You literally wrote “He went full double unders.” You do make mistakes. It’s okay to admit that.
If you follow the conversation I openly said I went off memory and I openly admit I make plenty of mistakes. Still, If the detail I misremember is double unders when he got thrown to his under side of an over under, does that in anyway change the point of the argument?
it’s sort of like arguing against someone when they said it was so hot outside, it’s 97, when it’s actually 99. 99 or 97, it’s still fricking hot…
Having re-watched the match a few times, of the three step out points Spencer earned, in two of them I think the step out was the best he could have accomplished. In the first sequence, Luke was able to apply a deep shin whizzer. When Spencer stood up with the leg, Luke was able to grab Spencer's other hand to keep him from transitioning. In the second sequence, Luke was able to apply a whizzer again so that Spencer couldn't get his whizzered arm around Luke's waist. The only step out sequence where Spencer had a fair chance at a TD was the third one where Spencer had Luke hopping on one leg. In that sequence, Spencer only had Luke's leg by one arm as Luke had his other hand tied up. Spencer wasn't able to free his hand until they were on the edge of the mat, but by then Luke had applied a whizzer. Bottom line, I actually think Spencer did a good job getting a step out in those three sequences. I don't think Spencer was "settling" for a step out as much as he was taking the only scoring opportunity that was reasonably available to him. Luke can be hard to score on, especially with his height advantage over Spencer.
I wish he would have cleared and circled instead of digging in and holding position
I honestly thought Lee looked good leading up to the injury. He took what he could and had a commanding lead. I like LL and he's obviously a world level wrestler but I think, if healthy, Lee is still a small level above LL. Bottom line, Lee has to figure out his late match strategy in all situations. I'm amazed he was even close enough to get tossed with the Hail Mary headlock. Has anyone seen any info on his elbow?
have seen some people online saying he tore his ucl, nothing official though
The brain and basch were discussing on their show that spencer probably has the most matches in the last 10 years that didn't go the distance. It stands to reason that he isn't used to dealing with end of matches because he dominated most wrestlers and ends it early
That definitely makes sense. Still, that is something you should have drilled thousands of times by now in practice. Especially when you are tired. One guy down by 1 with 15 or so seconds left and the other up by 1. In the case of Spencer, I would put a fresh guy on him and drill that after a few tough goes. Gotta get him more comfortable circling, especially when exhausted, and blocking off with short time left and STAY OUT OF THE DAMN TIES!!!!
Wish he would have pressed a bit more to finish those early shots rather than settling for pushouts. Suppose he was in his own head again like last summer after Final X
Serious questions as I'm somewhat familiar with freestyle rules, but not an expert by any means and still trying to figure out nuances of the changes:
1. What do the new rules say about when a wrestlers feet go oob while in a grounded position, but they then come up off their knees while feet still oob? Or in Lilledahl case, does elbow down still count as grounded?
1. Is there not a rule that states a wrestler cannot initiate a scoring move after going oob? That the attack must be started while in bounds? Or did I just make that up/confuse it with continuation?
Makes sense - he doesn't have to deal with frantic end of match type situations all that often. Really a different defensive approach.
The elbow down should have given Spencer a point for the pushout.
At least how I read the new grounded/pushout rule.
just saw this and I already posted it in another thread but they explain it pretty well on FRL at the 30 minute mark. Basically the wording is a pinning point has to also be out of bounds. That is to mean the head or chest also have to be out of bounds or above the “sphere” so that should have been Spencer’s point.
First, the elbow is irrelevant, and second, it’s not on the mat in the image shown above.
I explained the new rule several days ago; no, that is not a step out under the new rules. Not even close.
USA Wrestling made a video, "2026 Rules Modification", clarifying this rule and other new rules. Starting at 15:42 in the video the Step Out In Grounded Position is explained along with numerous video examples from UWW matches. Here are some highlights from the video:
-- A step out point can only be awarded if the wrestlers start on their feet, one or both wrestlers go down to one or both knees (parterre position) with no points scored in the sequence, and then the opponent of the wrestler who goes out of bounds first will be awarded a step out point
-- If points are scored in the process of going to the mat or if parterre points are awarded, then any subsequent step out in the wrestling sequence will not result in a point
-- Once the wrestlers get to a standing, facing position (whether from a restart or both wrestlers getting back to a neutral position on the mat), then the possibility for a step out point will resume
-- A wrestler can have both his knees and feet outside the cylinder and not be called for a step out. Their chest and "pinning points" also have to be outside the cylinder before a step out point is awarded. See the two photos below for clarification. It is not until the wrestler's upper body goes outside the cylinder (second photo) that a step out point would be awarded:
-- No step out points will be awarded if a wrestler pushes their opponent off the mat. The example given is where a wrestler extends both arms out and uses their palms to shove their opponent off the mat. Several video examples are included in the video.
On an unrelated note, in FS you are now allowed to step on an opponent's foot.
www.dropbox.com
-- A step out point can only be awarded if the wrestlers start on their feet, one or both wrestlers go down to one or both knees (parterre position) with no points scored in the sequence, and then the opponent of the wrestler who goes out of bounds first will be awarded a step out point
-- If points are scored in the process of going to the mat or if parterre points are awarded, then any subsequent step out in the wrestling sequence will not result in a point
-- Once the wrestlers get to a standing, facing position (whether from a restart or both wrestlers getting back to a neutral position on the mat), then the possibility for a step out point will resume
-- A wrestler can have both his knees and feet outside the cylinder and not be called for a step out. Their chest and "pinning points" also have to be outside the cylinder before a step out point is awarded. See the two photos below for clarification. It is not until the wrestler's upper body goes outside the cylinder (second photo) that a step out point would be awarded:
-- No step out points will be awarded if a wrestler pushes their opponent off the mat. The example given is where a wrestler extends both arms out and uses their palms to shove their opponent off the mat. Several video examples are included in the video.
On an unrelated note, in FS you are now allowed to step on an opponent's foot.
Dropbox
Ok, so I think that I understand the new stepout while grounded rules a bit better now. @Psalm 1 guy thanks for the video. Feet don't matter in a grounded defender situation.
I still have a question on the situation with Lilledahl and Spencer that I'm not quite grasping. I understand that when Lilledahl was on his knees, he's grounded and chest/shoulders would determine oob. But once he comes off his knees, wouldn't he no longer be "grounded" and regular stepout rules apply?
This is the best post I have read on the subject. Lee was wrestling a very smart match prior to whatever happened to his arm. LL is absolutely a world level freestyle wrestler. It is one match and if healthy Spencer Lee is still the favorite. Most people knew this would be World semi final type competition in this battle. Team USA is getting better and better at several weights and this is good for all of us. Spencer Lee has had some weird losses in close matches with some of his late tactics. He just doesn't wrestle very many close matches. He is somewhat a victim of his own dominance.
Well no because when the 1 is awarded to Lee that means it’s not awarded to LL. So it would be 5-4 Lee
Unfortunately they do not address that aspect in the video. I will email the USA official from the video to see if I can get an answer.
Here is the gracious and thorough reply from Casey Goessl from USA Wrestling. I highlighted where he addresses the specific question @jrod65 had:
Hi Gaylon. I'll see if I can help answer these questions.
Please understand the evolution of the "grounded out-of-bounds (oob)." In previous years, wrestlers would be under attack from standing and then drop to their knees near the zone to avoid a standing stepout. The onus was on the referees to determine if this was correct defense and no points, or a tactic to avoid going out-of-bounds whereby fleeing the mat would be called. To avoid these types of tactics going forward, the "grounded oob" provision was added to the UWW rules this year. Please understand, fleeing the mat from this position is still an existing application if an athlete intentionally leaves the wrestling area, but hopefully this modification increases action towards the edge and takes some of the referee subjectivity out of the equation.
If the athletes are standing and facing one another, then per Olympic style rules, each athlete can score a takedown. If the athletes start in this position, but then transition to a knee/s without one wrestler showing dominance (meaning no score during this transition), and then go oob, a point for grounded stepout shall be awarded assuming that a clearly offensive wrestler does not go oob first (think of a go behind situation). If neither athlete is clearly offensive or if the athletes are just in a scramble for position, a grounded oob should be scored. If the athletes score during the transition (takedown, or turn from par terre), the sequence for grounded oob will not restart again until the athletes come to a standing position, facing one another since each athlete would then be eligible to score a takedown again.
The only other exception to going out of bounds in par terre where no point is awarded would be an ordered par terre situation. In this case, it is only fair to allow the bottom athlete an opportunity to defend without fear of penalty by going oob.
To clarify the situation at 2:00 in the bout in the Lee v. Lilledahl match, the interpretation of this position comes back to Article 34 in the UWW rules:
"any momentary loss of contact of the knees from the mat once the athletes have established parterre position will not be considered a standing action."
Lilledahl comes off his knees but Lee maintains his chest on his back, never allowing him to come to a fully standing position. Think of it from these terms: if Lee would do a front headlock on Lilledahl in this position (knees slightly off the mat) , it would only be judged as two points, not four points, meaning Lilledahl is still in parterre, not standing. By the time Lilledahl comes back to what I would consider standing, he is already well in bounds and then gets the stepout on Lee.
And please do not be confused; grounded is par terre, only in that grounded implies no wrestler is dominant.
I apologize but the pictures you sent in your message aren't coming up for me.
The last highlighted point you sent is in regards to "push-outs." I make sure to cover this topic in every rules clinic because the American wrestling audience often mixes "push-outs" with stepouts. Pushing your wrestler out of bounds in all styles is not allowed, even though no real penalty exists. It generally involves a break in contact near the zone and one athlete extending his arms to attempt to get a cheap point, although we don't consider this a wrestling action worthy of a point.
I don't routinely visit any wrestling forums as to maintain my sanity
I think I follow that, but it’s disappointing in that I can’t really argue the way it is explained. Maybe some one else can. I don’t claim to be an expert or even very well versed on these rules. I wish to hell that Spencer had finished a takedown or just circled at the end. Dammit this still sucks. Gotta run the damn gauntlet again now. Maybe the extra matches will be good for him. Just looking for some upside here.Here is the gracious and thorough reply from Casey Goessl from USA Wrestling. I highlighted where he addresses the specific question @jrod65 had:
Hi Gaylon. I'll see if I can help answer these questions.
Please understand the evolution of the "grounded out-of-bounds (oob)." In previous years, wrestlers would be under attack from standing and then drop to their knees near the zone to avoid a standing stepout. The onus was on the referees to determine if this was correct defense and no points, or a tactic to avoid going out-of-bounds whereby fleeing the mat would be called. To avoid these types of tactics going forward, the "grounded oob" provision was added to the UWW rules this year. Please understand, fleeing the mat from this position is still an existing application if an athlete intentionally leaves the wrestling area, but hopefully this modification increases action towards the edge and takes some of the referee subjectivity out of the equation.
If the athletes are standing and facing one another, then per Olympic style rules, each athlete can score a takedown. If the athletes start in this position, but then transition to a knee/s without one wrestler showing dominance (meaning no score during this transition), and then go oob, a point for grounded stepout shall be awarded assuming that a clearly offensive wrestler does not go oob first (think of a go behind situation). If neither athlete is clearly offensive or if the athletes are just in a scramble for position, a grounded oob should be scored. If the athletes score during the transition (takedown, or turn from par terre), the sequence for grounded oob will not restart again until the athletes come to a standing position, facing one another since each athlete would then be eligible to score a takedown again.
The only other exception to going out of bounds in par terre where no point is awarded would be an ordered par terre situation. In this case, it is only fair to allow the bottom athlete an opportunity to defend without fear of penalty by going oob.
To clarify the situation at 2:00 in the bout in the Lee v. Lilledahl match, the interpretation of this position comes back to Article 34 in the UWW rules:
"any momentary loss of contact of the knees from the mat once the athletes have established parterre position will not be considered a standing action."
Lilledahl comes off his knees but Lee maintains his chest on his back, never allowing him to come to a fully standing position. Think of it from these terms: if Lee would do a front headlock on Lilledahl in this position (knees slightly off the mat) , it would only be judged as two points, not four points, meaning Lilledahl is still in parterre, not standing. By the time Lilledahl comes back to what I would consider standing, he is already well in bounds and then gets the stepout on Lee.
And please do not be confused; grounded is par terre, only in that grounded implies no wrestler is dominant.
I apologize but the pictures you sent in your message aren't coming up for me.
The last highlighted point you sent is in regards to "push-outs." I make sure to cover this topic in every rules clinic because the American wrestling audience often mixes "push-outs" with stepouts. Pushing your wrestler out of bounds in all styles is not allowed, even though no real penalty exists. It generally involves a break in contact near the zone and one athlete extending his arms to attempt to get a cheap point, although we don't consider this a wrestling action worthy of a point.
I don't routinely visit any wrestling forums as to maintain my sanity, but if this helps clarify the rules, I am happy to assist.
Here is the gracious and thorough reply from Casey Goessl from USA Wrestling. I highlighted where he addresses the specific question @jrod65 had:
Hi Gaylon. I'll see if I can help answer these questions.
Please understand the evolution of the "grounded out-of-bounds (oob)." In previous years, wrestlers would be under attack from standing and then drop to their knees near the zone to avoid a standing stepout. The onus was on the referees to determine if this was correct defense and no points, or a tactic to avoid going out-of-bounds whereby fleeing the mat would be called. To avoid these types of tactics going forward, the "grounded oob" provision was added to the UWW rules this year. Please understand, fleeing the mat from this position is still an existing application if an athlete intentionally leaves the wrestling area, but hopefully this modification increases action towards the edge and takes some of the referee subjectivity out of the equation.
If the athletes are standing and facing one another, then per Olympic style rules, each athlete can score a takedown. If the athletes start in this position, but then transition to a knee/s without one wrestler showing dominance (meaning no score during this transition), and then go oob, a point for grounded stepout shall be awarded assuming that a clearly offensive wrestler does not go oob first (think of a go behind situation). If neither athlete is clearly offensive or if the athletes are just in a scramble for position, a grounded oob should be scored. If the athletes score during the transition (takedown, or turn from par terre), the sequence for grounded oob will not restart again until the athletes come to a standing position, facing one another since each athlete would then be eligible to score a takedown again.
The only other exception to going out of bounds in par terre where no point is awarded would be an ordered par terre situation. In this case, it is only fair to allow the bottom athlete an opportunity to defend without fear of penalty by going oob.
To clarify the situation at 2:00 in the bout in the Lee v. Lilledahl match, the interpretation of this position comes back to Article 34 in the UWW rules:
"any momentary loss of contact of the knees from the mat once the athletes have established parterre position will not be considered a standing action."
Lilledahl comes off his knees but Lee maintains his chest on his back, never allowing him to come to a fully standing position. Think of it from these terms: if Lee would do a front headlock on Lilledahl in this position (knees slightly off the mat) , it would only be judged as two points, not four points, meaning Lilledahl is still in parterre, not standing. By the time Lilledahl comes back to what I would consider standing, he is already well in bounds and then gets the stepout on Lee.
And please do not be confused; grounded is par terre, only in that grounded implies no wrestler is dominant.
I apologize but the pictures you sent in your message aren't coming up for me.
The last highlighted point you sent is in regards to "push-outs." I make sure to cover this topic in every rules clinic because the American wrestling audience often mixes "push-outs" with stepouts. Pushing your wrestler out of bounds in all styles is not allowed, even though no real penalty exists. It generally involves a break in contact near the zone and one athlete extending his arms to attempt to get a cheap point, although we don't consider this a wrestling action worthy of a point.
I don't routinely visit any wrestling forums as to maintain my sanity, but if this helps clarify the rules, I am happy to assist.
Thank you for this!!! Wasn't expecting this level of detailed response. Great stuff
I dont know if it is behind a pay wall or not but this is the first I've seen of it and man did Spencer just horse Knox and Knox looked a tad bit bigger than he Spencer did. I thought Knox was built more like Ayala.
This video is
! https://www.flowrestling.org/video/15822883-spencer-lee-vs-anthony-knox-2026-us-open-57kg-semifinal
This video is
! https://www.flowrestling.org/video/15822883-spencer-lee-vs-anthony-knox-2026-us-open-57kg-semifinal