Kansas Wrestling Forums General Discussion Kids Folkstyle $14, 130 contributed by 6 and unders

I snickered a bit when I saw this post on themat.com ... it was actually about kids cutting weight but I think it fits into our discussion.

Ken Chertow
Silver Member
PA, USA
Total Posts: 1762
Posted: 01/06/2007 at 9:53:04 pm reply with quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree with Gemdy. Priority of 10 and under wrestling should be development of wrestling skills and athletic skills while kids work hard and have fun. Teaching young wrestlers about the importance of proper nutrition is important but cutting weight should be discouraged. You want kids "hungry" to excel when they grow up.

I have mixed emotions about hard core competition for 10 and under. I am not convinced of the value of intense competition at a young age. Again, focus should be on development of skills and helping young wrestlers develop a "passion" for our sport.

Ken




Ken Chertow
Gold Medal Wrestling Camp

These little guys are the future of the sport and must be nurtured on their very long journey. Hug them and love them today as tomorrow you may not have the opportunity.



Phote courtesy of Pratt Tribune
Dalton Prosser of the Pratt Kids Wrestling Club (Green) and Taylor Tapendicle of the Salina Kids Wrestling Club!

Exactly my point SmokeyCabin. We don't run 6 and under tournaments by themselves all year. Everyone wants the 6 and under participation, parent/grandparent attendance, concessions until it gets to be State time. Many tournaments are set up as split format just so the large groups of supporters, parents and fans that follow these six and unders can participate without the mats/stands being overcrowded. My son and I attended a very well run tourney this weekend. When the six and unders were gone the stands were more than half empty, the t shirt guy was reading a book, the people in the concessions were standing around. The majority of people were gone.

There you go another proposal to solve the crowded mat problem- Split format State. Yes, I know split format isn't the way we always did it. Sometimes things change.

But there were other points made!

I really don't think the exclusion of the 6 and unders is a matter of money or a matter of lack of space at the State Tournament! And I really don't think it is a matter of ... that's the way we've always done it!

I would restate the points I made earlier for discussion!

The issue was voted on at the 2005 Annual Meeting and was overwhelmingly defeated. The vote was not close.

The mambership has spoken through their club representative.

There are many opportunities to improve the State Tournament for the kids, however must all include a larger venue, which at present does not exist.

I may be mistaken, but I believe the membership will place first priority on full size mats for several weight categories and age groups before we have Six (6) and Under at the State Tournament.

How did the District 2 reps vote on the issue, including the reps in at large positions?

I believe you are confusing the Executive Council meeting, where the District representatives meet and vote on issues to bring to the State Body meeting, with the State Body Meeting, where the individual club representatives meet and vote on matters brought to the body as a whole.

At the State Body meeting, the District II clubs present voted in favor of the resolution. With the unanimous vote of District II the resolution failed. The resolution failed due to lack of support from clubs in Districts I, III, and IV.

At the 2005 Executive Council meeting the elected District II representatives all voted in favor of bringing the resolution to the State Body meeting for a vote.

If your question is how did the elected Parliamentarian from District II vote on the motion, the Parliamentarion did not vote as the position is a non voting position of the Executive Council.

The Parliamentarian was aware of a procedural error in the vote at the Executive Council meeting which would have caused the motion to fail and the Parliamentarian chose to not raise an issue over the procedural issue as it was the belief of the Parliamentarian the issue to be of major importance to allow the State Body to vote on the matter.

District II tries everytime to get this changed so these young boys and girls could wrestle. Last time there was a vote District II all voted to except the 6 year olds at state. Until we can get District I, III, and IV, on board there isn't a chance for these young wrestlers. Don't get me wrong, Ottawa has done a great thing by starting a 6 and under State Championships and I commend them for doing it, but we need to get away from 32 and 64 man brackets at the 6 year old level.

Why do we have to stay away from 32 and 64 men brackets for six and unders? The periods are short, the kids don't exert themselves enough to be exhausted, six year olds have more energy than most parents can possibly harness, etc. Focus on the problems:

1. The season is FAR too long for six year olds.
2. There is not enough mat space now so we can't add an age group at state.
3. There aren't enough hotel rooms for the state tournament in its current status so we can't add an age group.
4. The pool of qualified officials is being tapped by the existing tournament.

Right now we should be focusing our attention on the decline in overall card sales. Why are the numbers dropping? Could it be because parents expect too much out of kids who are not ready for one-on-one competition? Who knows. I do know it is insane to think it is feasible to add six and unders to the existing format.

I believe the issue of 6 and under wrestlers and how we treat them is very important, but I believe including them at state is not the answer. As a Saturday morning coach finding something to say to the 6 and under who just lost his 2nd straight match and is going home with his/her parents by 10:00 am, with nothing to show is tough. As such, I believe the comments from Chertow are appropriate. Getting 'all' of these kids to have fun and have success and teaching them the fundamentals is what will keep our sport full of participants. I really liked the way Paola and Park Hill kept most of the 6 and 8 u's in 4 man round robins with 4 medals. Most 5 and 6 year olds like getting a medal even if they lose all their matches. Mom and dad, who may be new to the sport, will be happier and more likely to keep their kid in the sport. I believe the answer to keeping 6 u's participating in the sport is to make it less competitive for them, not more. Have round robins for them, not 8 man brackets. I believe we should eliminate 8 and 16 man brackets for 6 u's at all but select tournaments. Yes, there are some 6 u's who can compete at a high level, and these tournaments will give them that, but the rest just need to learn. But Jeff hit on an important point, these kids are a big group and we need them. We lose way too many.

I am a mother of a third year wrestler, who is six years old. He absolutely loves it. He looks forward to practices and tournaments. This is the first year that we are going to take him to six and under state. The first two years he was just a novice and would not be able to handle it. Now, for his third year, he's placed first and second in the tournaments and enjoys it. But, he also loves it when the older kids sit mat side and cheers him on. I agree that the six and unders should be added to the state tournament. Most six and unders can handle it. Yea, the season is long; but my son asks in July when wrestling will begin. I just think it's a great idea to add six and unders.

mcaugusta

First off most 6 & unders only have 1 to 2 years experience in most cases I hope. I do not understand - Last year you were mad
when your son did not take 1st or 2nd. "It was totally unfair to my child who was learning. He just "beat" up on all of the other novice children. I was quite angry over it." Now that he is taking 1st or second you want a state tournament. There normally is not that mutch difference between a 6 & under novice and 6 & under open tournament. YES - 8 & under, 10 & under, 12 & under, 14 & under Novice vs. Open can be a big difference.

mcaugusta mcaugusta
Junior Member


Registered: January, 14 2007
Posts: 2 I am a mother of a third year wrestler. To my knowledge, I was told that if the child placed first or second in any open tournament at least twice, then he cannot wrestle novice. It happened to my son last year. He wrestled novice. There was a kid in one of his brackets that we knew for sure wrestled in the open tournament and placed first. It was totally unfair to my child who was learning. He just "beat" up on all of the other novice children. I was quite angry over it.

Well, first off, my son was a novice wrestler last two years. I do not care if he gets first, second, third, fourth, or fifth for that matter. As long as he does his best. But you can tell the experienced kids against the novice ones. So, yes, a wrestler who "beats" up on the other novice kids, does not belong in novice tournaments. I would never even thought to put him in the state tournament the last two years.