|
|
Dec 7, 2003
|
|
|
2xlcaachamp
Joined: Dec 6, 2003
Posts: 18
|
has anyone else noticed the decline in the3 sizze of wrestlers i have seen a bunch of wrestlers and the 89 lb look like the 52 and 60 lb looled like when i was wrestling i mean what happendthe the lucas flints the eric steffens the john kellys the ezells the cory lawrences the dan glovers the clayton macks the mathys's i mean really where have the huge jacked up wrestlers that there used to be go
|
|
|
Dec 7, 2003
|
|
|
crawfordn
Joined: Dec 4, 2003
Posts: 64
|
Well surely all those wrestlers were jacked.....but Ive always thought that technique got you where you wanted to go. Look at Gregor Gillespie....hes not huge, but hes fundamentally the best wrestler in the state. The Erich Steffans and Jon Kelly era's show this too though. Though they were both huge guys, they were also great with their technique. I believe most wrestlers are more worried about technique than muscle. Im not jacked, but i do get my fair share of wins without using it. I will agree though, it certainly has declined. That is my thought on the reasoning behind this.
|
|
|
Dec 8, 2003
|
|
|
wrestle2004
Joined: Nov 25, 2003
Posts: 21
Location: HFL |
U R not gonna see those kids at tiny tournys, but they are still here
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2003
|
|
|
Yoguard
Joined: Dec 12, 2003
Posts: 20
Location: Rochester, NY |
There's a few still around. It's tough to get big and also improve your skills at the same time. I've seen a couple in the JV ranks. They are big and their technique is quickly improving. They will be up to the majors next year. The best big man I have seen is Byers. Great combination of speed and strength.
_________________
Winning is everything, but do it with class............ |
|
|
Dec 12, 2003
|
|
|
agr585
Joined: Dec 2, 2003
Posts: 58
|
Byers is not big like what everyone is talking about, but technique means a whole lot more than strength and Byers has pretty good technique for a big guy.
|