A Point Earned is a Point Scored
Let me apologize upfront—this will be the longest read among my Super 7 Solutions. But that’s because it’s the most important one.
To my detractors, let me be clear: I’m not claiming any of these suggestions are perfect. But they’re a hell of a lot better than the rules we’ve been forced to live with for decades.
And don’t be misled—all of wrestling’s challenges (and God knows there are plenty) fall squarely at the feet of the NCAA Rules Committee. They’re the ones tasked—and who’ve accepted the responsibility—of being good stewards of this sport.
Now, on to the first of my Super 7 changes. It could become the most important rule change wrestling has ever adopted—or, I’m afraid, rejected.
So here we go…
What’s Broken
The current system—3 team points for a decision, 4 for a major, 5 for a tech, and 6 for a fall—is so off the mark, I struggle to find words strong enough to describe the lunacy.
Whoever came up with it had to have been a closet socialist. Win by one point? You get 3 team points. Win by seven points? Still just 3 team points.
Whatever happened to capitalism—the idea that the producer should be rewarded?
Instead, we’ve been stuck with a system that’s fundamentally socialistic: take from the producer to reward those who don’t produce. And under such a system, the producer inevitably produces less.
Name me one other sport—any sport—with a scoring system like ours. Wrestling needs rules that benefit spectators, not just those who coach it.
If anyone doubts what I’m saying, ask yourself: How’s the current system working for us?
In 1911, Frank Gotch and George Hackenschmidt wrestled in front of 30,000 fans in Comiskey Park. Just two people, one match. Today, we average fewer than 1,000 fans per collegiate dual meet when you divide total attendance by the number of programs.
And look at the UFC. It’s barely 25 years old and worth billions. It’s become a mega-sport. Collegiate wrestling, meanwhile, is five times older and still begging for scraps. Why? Because wrestling has become boring and too complicated.
In the UFC, fighters throw punches every 2.5 seconds. In wrestling, our athletes take shots every 2.5 minutes.
To the naysayers—read those last two sentences again.
The New Approach: Every Point Counts
Enough preamble. Let’s talk solutions.
We need to retire the notion of 3, 4, 5, and 6-point match outcomes. Instead, every point an athlete scores should directly translate into team points.
For example, if Wrestler A wins 7-5, Wrestler A’s team gets 7 team points, and Wrestler B’s team gets 5. Reward the producer, and the producer will produce more.
Forfeits
Forfeits are worth 15 team points—the same total as a tech fall under the current system. So if Wrestler A receives a forfeit, his team scores 15 team points, and the opposing team scores zero.
But coaches will cry, “that’s not fair!” Tough. If you can’t find someone to fill the spot, you’re not recruiting hard enough. And if you adopt one of my later rules that you’ll read about, like Doubling Up, many of your concerns will disappear.
Special Situations
-
Disqualifications: For any of the five levels (Flagrant Misconduct, Unsportsmanlike Conduct, Unnecessary Roughness, Illegal Holds, Stalling), the winning wrestler’s team gets 15 additional team points added to their current bout score. So if Wrestler A leads 5-4 when Wrestler B is disqualified, Wrestler A’s team earns 20 team points (15+5), and Wrestler B’s team gets 4 points. There must be strong incentives to disincentivize bad behavior, this does it.
-
Injury Defaults: This is a tough one. Injuries can’t be helped and the athlete who can’t continue shouldn’t be coerced into continuing for the sake of team scores. But, for consistency and ease of spectator understanding, it’s a 15 point difference. If wrestler A is winning 5-4 when Wrestler B can’t continue, Wrestler A’s team scores 20 points (15 plus 5); Wrestler B’s team keeps his or her 4.
-
Pins: Again, consistency matters. If Wrestler A is up 5-4 when he pins Wrestler B, Wrestler A’s team gets 20 points, and Wrestler B’s team gets 4.
-
Tech Falls: A tech fall is still any 15-point separation. For example, if Wrestler A wins 20-5, Wrestler A’s team earns the 20 points, and Wrestler B’s team gets 5.
Why This Works
I know this proposal raises eyebrows. Let me try to address the concerns:
✅ No added risks to athlete safety
✅ No additional training needed for officials
✅ No extra costs for schools
✅ Doesn’t change who wins—just the margin of victory
✅ Encourages constant scoring, which means action and excitement
✅ Allows every wrestler to contribute, even in a loss, as it is in all other sports.
✅ Pushes athletes to score until the final whistle
✅ Increases the likelihood of pins due to higher scoring
✅ Discourages stalling—every point matters, even in a loss
✅ Makes dramatic comebacks possible—spectators stay engaged to the end
✅ Simplifies the sport for new fans—scoring works like every other sport
✅ Severely discourages forfeits and bad behavior
✅ Virtually eliminates ties and the confusion of complex tie-breakers
What’s Killing the Sport
Our current system has gradually eroded scoring. Wrestling today is often about who makes the fewest mistakes and takes the fewest shots. Matches are low-scoring, cautious affairs, leaving spectators bored and new fans bewildered.
Yes, wrestling has other problems. But the biggest one is a lack of individual scoring. A Point Earned is a Point Scored would be a huge change. Coaches will object because they fear losing to teams they once dominated. But in the long run, that won’t happen. Coaches will adjust—they always do.
Remember, most wrestlers don’t care about the score as long as their hand is raised. I don’t blame athletes for low-scoring matches. They’re playing to the rules, encouraged by coaches. If we want action, we have to change the rules they’re playing to.
Other Sports Don’t Work This Way
In every other sport, a point earned equals a point on the scoreboard. Why should wrestling be different?
Imagine basketball waiting until the end of the game to tally the team scores. Or awarding 5 team points if a player scores 10–15 individual points, and 10 team points if he scores 15–30. That’s what wrestling does!
Imagine a quarterback throwing 3 touchdowns and getting credit for only one on the scoreboard. Serve 3 aces in tennis and the score is still only 15-love. Hit a grand slam in baseball and only your own run counts. Win a rugby match 27–23, and your opponent loses all their points because they lost. Sound crazy? That’s exactly what wrestling does. Where’s the incentive?
Remember the uproar when basketball introduced the 30-second shot clock? Coaches nearly lost their minds. But fans loved it, and scores soared past 100. The same happened with the 3-point shot.
This isn’t about the new 3-point takedown rule—that’s about athlete scoring, not team scoring. Which by the way has failed when you look at the statistics. There’s a big difference between the two.
Why It Matters
Under this new system, imagine a dual meet ending 126–122. One of the winning team’s wrestlers lost his match 10–5. How valuable does he feel knowing his 5 points helped clinch the team victory? How vocal do you think his teammates were as he fought for every point, even against a superior opponent? Peer pressure is a powerful thing.
Currently, if a wrestler is down 12–4 in the third period with 1:15 left, the match is basically over. The atmosphere dies. The wrestler with 4 points has mentally checked out, while the wrestler with 12 just rides out the clock. Fans are thinking about dinner. But when every point counts, coaches are screaming, fans are on their feet, and wrestlers are fighting until the final second.
None of that can possibly be a bad thing.
Looking Ahead
Tournaments should follow for simplicity sake the same scoring model—but maybe that’s a conversation for another day.
I doubt there would be major upsets early on with this rule change. And even if there were, the natural pecking order would reestablish itself over time. Successful coaches know how to stay successful, no matter the rules.
And for fans—what’s not to love about more scoring? This change would eliminate the confusion of explaining regular decisions, majors, and tech falls to newcomers. As for referees—who wouldn’t welcome a rule that increases scoring and reduces the need for stalling calls?
A Final Thought
Some worry that teams with a couple of strong pinners could beat teams with 10 solid wrestlers. But think about it: How is that any different from other sports? One exceptional basketball star surrounded by four average players can still carry a team. A standout running back or quarterback can carry a football team. An ace tennis player can account for a huge chunk of team points. One dominant pitcher can defeat a team of great hitters.
Just because A Point Earned is a Point Scored is different from what we’re used to doesn’t mean it’s not the right move.
We have a choice: allow wrestling to maintain it’s positioning in the sporting world—or change the rules and at least give it a chance to survive and prosper.
