Kansas Wrestling Forums Escapes

I had a kid go into overtime becasue he gave up an escape because of "loss of control" on the out of bounds line.

After lookin at the rule book it state somethin to the fact that an escape is earned when the defensive wrestler is in neutral position AND loss of control... so how is it possible to give up an escape on just a "judgement" of loss of control when the rule requires both the "judgement" of loss of control AND for wretlers to be in neutral position before escapes are awarded.

Maybe I am reading the rule wrong???

This is a very good question. Below are rule and case book references to answer this question.

Rule 5, Section 10 states: An escape is when the defensive wrestler gains a neutral position and the opponent has lost control while the supporting points of either wrestler are in bounds.

Rule 5, Section 20, Art. 3 states: A neutral position is one in which neither wrestler has control.

As you can see from the rules references above it basically comes down to judgement. A neutral position is when neither wrestler has control and an escape is when the defensive wrestler gains that neutral position when his opponent has lost his control. The case book is great resource for this question as it breaks down this position.

Situations:
From the starting position on the mat, wrestler B quickly stands up and strips the hands of wrestler A and turns and faces. This would be an escape.

If wrestler B starts towards the edge of the mat, strips his the hands of wrestler A and is more than an arms length away with the back towards A just as B goes off the mat it may be possible to gain an escape in this situation provided A does not follow up and try to maintain the advantage. The key here is that wrestler B has not turned and faced wrestler A. But if wrestler A is content to let wrestler B go without trying to maintain advantage, it should be an escape. Again, this is in the judgement of the official.

If they are going out of bounds, across the boundary line, in this same situation it would not be an escape as the loss of control isn't until they were out of bounds.

When the defensive wrestler is able to stand, turn and face the opponent and break the locked hands and separate them to the point that they both cross the midline of the back, control is lost and an escape is awarded.

As a wrestling official you have a very tough job as the majority of the calls made are judgement. Getting an abundance of mat time and studying the rule and case books will help you in making the correct calls. Wrestling is a sport where the obvious call may not be made by the naked eye but by feeling that situation. Control is felt not always seen.

I agree what what about when in my case neigher wrestler is standing nor facing each other... could or should a loss of control alone grant an escape or should neutral position as the rule book requires also be neccessary??

A neutral position is where neither wrestler has control. An escape is where a neutral position is gained and the opponent has lost control. They are basically one in the same. If a wrestler loses control they have gained a neutral position. Again this is a judgement situation. Please give me the scenario you are speaking of to better answer your question.

ok if Neutral position is loss of control and loss of control is neutral position... Why to the Rule Book defination of Escape requires both loss of contral and neutral postion... if they are both the same thing...

I think this is where my confusion lies... If the Rule book said an escape is neutral position OR loss of control I coul understand but it doesn't the rule book required two events to happen loss of control AND neutral position...

I have also looked in the Case Book and all the scenarios involve the bottom wrestler coming to his feet... which leads me to believe that loss of control and neutral position are NOT the same things.

I mean dont get me wrong I have wrestled for 6 years and coached for 7 but just want to get a better understanding for what is really in the rule book and not what we just make up because we thought that was the rule. I honestly believe knowing the rule and case book fairly well will make the calls on the mat easier and there wouldn't be nearly much judgement

Excuse the typos

I believe you are reading too much into the rule. To gain an escape the defensive wrestler gains a neutral position and the opponent has lost control. An escape can be given on your feet or on the mat depending on the situation. Most of the time you are going to see it from a stand up (to the feet). Again, this judgement.
Common sense should prevail. The more mat time you get the easier this judgement will come.

The more and more I go to wrestling tournaments this year the less "common sense" I have for what is an escape... Here are some examples of what I saw yesterday.

1) A kids was on his back, giving up near fall points when he slides out of bounds. Once the defensive wrestler goes out of bounds he lays on his back knowing that he cant get pinned out of bounds. The offensive wrestler tries to circle him but steps out of bounds. a moment before he steps out the defensive wrestlers rolls to his side and awarded an escape because of lack of control...

2) A kid goes optional start and attempts to cut the defensive wrestler. On the whistle the offensive wrestler steps back but the defensive wrestler never moves... after about 5 seconds the offensive wrestler just jumps back on top and continues to wrestle... and escape is never awarded.

3) From refs position a kids stands to his feet, turns and faces his opponent and breaks physically free from his opponent. A second later the offensive wrestlers shoots back in and grabs the ankle. The standing wrestler sprawls and crossfaces but and escape is never earned.

4) A kid is getting pinned in a cradle near the edge. The defensive wrestler, while still locked up in a cradle, rolls on top of the offensive wrestler... Remember the cradle is still locked... As the defensive wrestlers rolls on top the ref signals out of bounds awards the near fall points and an escape point for loss of control.


Sooo Common Sense tells me that some where in the rule book there must be a different rule for scoring escapes near the out of bounds line.

But common sense dont help me at all when escapes are not scored when your opponent are not even physically in contact... yet u can have your opponent in a position where they are not facing you, not controlling a single point, not on their feet, not able to defend themselves and yet they can get an escape just because they roll out of bounds, justified by “loss of control” of course an unarguable judgment of the official.

Weather I am right or wrong I don’t feel bad for asking a question. Maybe I am “reading” too much into the rule but I only am reading what the rule books states… maybe the rule book is worded incorrectly. But it does in my opinion clearly state the definition of an escape, and this is a forum for discussing rules I felt this was an appropriate place to question it. As far as accepting a call, after coaching for 7 years from Novice, Kids, and now High School you don’t last long if u can’t accept what you have no control over.

I tell my kids the primary difference in the scoring of points in wrestling as compared to other sports are all points are subjective. In basketball you score when the ball goes through the hoop and with wrestling you don’t score till the ref awards you the points. That I can live with. My days of arguing with refs ended years ago. Some calls go your way and some don’t. I however don’t feel every call an official makes can be justified with the blanket statement “it’s a judgment call”

Now I am not an official and I have a high level of respect for the job they perform. I understand the numbers and that a large percentage of times the officials make the correct calls vs. an incorrect application of the rule. How about this I passed my KSHSAA test with a 98% if you or anyone can explain to me why following the rule book definition of an escape is too literal… I will make it a point to register as an official next fall.

Alot of your confusion concerning loss of control and/or escape is related to judgement of the official. Control is alot of times felt but not actually seen. In your examples 1,2, and 4, all are judgement calls. In the eye of that official he felt control was lost and in turn the escape was earned. As far as example 3, the bottom wrestler did not gain a neutral position as he had not turned and faced his opponent. The offensive wrestler still has advantage. If the defensive wrestler does not turn and face his opponent he should be called for stalling as he is not trying to improve his position. Again, alot of the rules in wrestling deal with the judgement. The more an official works matches, studies the rules and casebook, and attends clinics the easier the judgement becomes.

I see this quite a bit:

From the starting position with A on top, B is working towards an escape and A maintains a single leg. They end up facing each other with A still maintaining the single leg and B sprawled on top with a front headlock, head chancellor or similar hold. A releases the leg and is on his hands and knees with the only contact between the wrestlers being the hold the defensive wrestler has. It seems like some referees will award an escape at this time and a subsequent takedown if B is able to work around behind, and some wait and award a reversal when B comes behind or an escape when they completely separate.

I reread my earlier post and realized I hadn't asked any question. I realize that judgement is important, but, in general, if wrestler A is on all fours with no grasp of wrestler B, and the only contact between the wrestlers is B's front headlock for several seconds, should an escape be awarded, or is it appropriate to wait and see what develops?

This is a purely a judgement call. If wrestler A has lost control and wrestler B is face to face this would be an escape. Many escapes are missed because of "waiting to see what develops." The more prepared you are the easier this call is. As I have mentioned before, control, or loss of control, is sometimes felt rather than seen. The more an official works matches, studies the rules and casebook, and attends clinics the easier the judgement becomes.

I have been told by an official that he may award an escape at any point when the two wrestlers have become neutral or neither has an advantage yet most officials will not call an escape until contact is broken once the bottom wrestler comes to his feet and faces the top man. Common sense says that they are neutral but some officials will not call the escape until contact is broken. It would be alot easier on the refs and the coaches and wrestlers if we knew what an escape was. I don't believe that most officials know or there wouldn't be the confusion. I hope that the rulemakers and the officials can get together and hash this one out a little better so that everyone involved will know exactly what the rule is. I too officiated for 2 years and you guys do a wonderful job. I know that it isn't easy. Keep up the good work and don't give up.

Actually pvillecoach,

I think some officials as well as coaches have "heard" that contact must be broken for an escape, this is very much untrue and nowhere mentioned in the rule book. Its unfortunate that coaches, and spectators are sometimes told things like this and take them to heart.

I have a question on escapes also. the top man signals that he is going to let the bottom man up on the whistle. bottom man stands up and top man follows 1 step behind and basically walks the bottom man out of bounds. Is this stalling on bottom, fleeing the mat or does top man have to give bottom man reasonable room to turn and face him before bottom man is required to do so?

I believe you can penalize the top wrestler for running him out of bounds... also for Fleeing the Mat

If the bottom man does not turn to face him and walks out of bounds the bottom man would be avoiding wrestling and called for fleeing the mat for leaving the circle (mat area). If the top man pushes him out of bounds the top man would be called for fleeing the mat. If the bottom goes to the edge but doesn't go out of bounds and makes no attempt to improve his position he would be called for stalling. Both wrestlers must make an honest attempt to improve their position. The wrestler not trying to improve their position will be penalized accordingly depending on the situation.

Ok here is a situation that happened to us earlier in the year and I would like some advice as to if my thinking was right on the situation or not you be the judge:

Wrestler A starts out in referee's down position starting the 2nd period. on the whistle wrestler A hits a stand-up and turns to face wrestler B whereupon wrestler B still has control with a front headlock and throws wrestler A back down to the mat. The wrestlers roll for a few seconds trying to gain control over one another when wrestler A ends up with his head on top and now has wrestler B locked up in a "snake" where wrestler A then throws the snake on wrestler B ending up going out of bounds. No points were awarded and the wrestlers were restarted in the previous configuration. Shouldn't there have been at LEAST an escape point awarded to wrestler A?

"If wrestler B starts towards the edge of the mat, strips his the hands of wrestler A and is more than an arms length away with the back towards A just as B goes off the mat it may be possible to gain an escape in this situation provided A does not follow up and try to maintain the advantage. The key here is that wrestler B has not turned and faced wrestler A. But if wrestler A is content to let wrestler B go without trying to maintain advantage, it should be an escape. Again, this is in the judgement of the official."

the book says "if wrestler a is content to let wrestler b go without trying to maintain advantage, it should be an escape"
since in my question the top wrestler did not try to maintain control couldnt it just as likely be an escape as a stall? also if the top wrestler shoots on and gets the take-down just as bottom wrestler is turning toward him is it a judgement as to whether to award an escape and takedown or to just say no loss of control? (even though they are an arms legnth away?

The situation is purely judgement. Control is sometimes felt and rather than seen. As you describe it, it would be difficult to rule. It would be a good situation to analyze on film in an area supervisor meeting.