What weight class has more competition in 4A..152 or 160?

First off untill you know whos wrestling at what weight you can not say, but knowing a lot of the kids in both weight if your looking for a easy weight try 103.

Grandad you're right, obviously we ought to completely eliminate the 103 weight class altogether its so easy. Heck, just look at last years top 3 in 4A: Slyter, Weller, Sparr - No talent in that group at all. Thats probably the only time we'll see them place at state in their high school careers. Just lucky for them they were small since they arent very talented.
I guess if you weigh less you have no technique, skill, and probably dont even work hard during the season, let alone the off season, may as well just start at 112.

Well said Tim.....

Cael Sanderson wrestled 103 as a freshman in HS. If the KSHSAA did't carve KS up into four state tournaments every weight would be tough and there would be no debate.

I think its time to start looking at adding a weight around 240 or somewheres above 215 because theres a need for it. kids are getting bigger and better and its hard for a 235 or 240 to wrestle at weight around 285.

I'm not sure grandad detected your sarcasim!

The NCAA only offers 190 and 285. HS offers 215 already. Maybe 215 should be 230. I don't think we need more weight classes...

What do the NCAA weights have to do with high school? 95% of these kids will never wrestle in college, give the 240-250 lb kids a chance to compete. Maybe they should get rid of 8 man football in high school, I don't see where the NCAA offers that either.

what i was trying to say is that most of the meets over a year you will find that very few schools can fill the 103 weight class. yes in the 5a and 6a where you have a lot more kids you may not have any open weights but thats the weight that seems to be the hardest to fill. Yes the boys you listed are great wrestlers but the number of kids at 103 are not there.
The kids in High School today are bigger and stronger than kids that wrestled 10 years ago and that does not mean ten years ago those boys were not good wrestler but times have chanced and so have the kids. Do you agree with that?

Tne NCAA really needs to have a weight class between 197 and 285. That gap of 88 pounds is ridiculous. The NCWA the college club wrestling division has a 235 weight class.

If you are suggesting that we should be more like NCAA, we could increase the competition level for high school kids by widening the weight gaps between weight classes for the wrestlers under 145. Five pound intervals for those weights are too small. I believe the smallest gap in college is eight pounds. The gaps in high school at one time were larger than five pounds. Kids in high schools are bigger and I think we lose a lot of the bigger kids over 160 pounds with our current weight class system.

You do realize that I think you could make the same arguement of the numbers with the heavier weights despite saying kids are getting bigger. It seems to me that there are alot of schools that have trouble filling the top two weights just as readily as trying to fill 103. I also dont beleive that simply because the kids bigger that means they are better. I beleive alot of coaches will take a "body" simply to fill the top weight(s)which doesnt necessarily go hand in hand with your opinion of them being better. I believe that it would be suprising to know the % of upper weights that began their wrestling career very late simply b/c a coach was in serious need of an upperweight spot filled.
Just returned from a tournament this weekend. The 102 bracket was a 64 man bracket, 215 and 285 were 8 man. Yes, football is going on I'm aware of that. But I have honestly never once been to a tournament where my son has had less entries than the heavy weights.
Actually this is all away from the point of my objection originally and that is simply that you felt 103 was easy which I thought was a poor and innacurate comment.

I think kids that wrestle 103.112 usually have an easier time winning as freshman because there are less juniors and seniors at those weights. I think between 135-171 is what the majority of high schoolers weigh. With that being said no weight class is easy, there are studs at every weight.

Agree with you rassler, for a Freshman to be top 3 or 4, probably the smaller the better chances on average. Is it easy, I dont really think so. I think you can look each year and pick what you would consider was the easiest weight in each classification, and it is not simply always going to be 103. I'm to lazy to look it up, but if I remember correctly, when Danny Tibbles from Colby was a Senior, I think 5 of the top 6 placers @ 103 were Seniors. Its simply going to vary from year to year. I did receive a PM that someone looked it up, and the totals from all the 4A regionals last year showed as many 103lbers as 285lb wrestlers, go Grandad - the #'s are there. (In 4A anyway)

well mabe your right then but in the big seven your wrong and if you look at last years meets you will see that in the big seven I am right. I can not say about the 285lb boys but there were a few opens there to.

I think the topic of adding a weight is one that needs looked into. We don't need to drop 103 why not just add another weight between 215 and 285. Weights have been moved or added before. I remember a time when there wasn't a weight cut off for heavy weight, and my brother, who was a good wrestler, grabbed a hold of guys over 300lbs. I also think maybe adding a super heavy weight class of over 285lbs might night be bad. I know a lot of guys that are over 285lbs, muscular built, that can't cut down to 285 so they can't wrestle is that fair for them? I believe things like this are whats holding back our sport when "old rules" keep kids from wrestling. On the topic of what weight is tougher you will just have to see who comes out.

The weight classes are setup according to the population distribution of high schoolers by weight. The gaps at the low and high ends represent the tails of a normal distribution curve. That is why there are more weight classes in the middle to allow for more participation where the bell curve peaks. I don't think we need more weight classes as it is difficult for many teams to field a full team now. I also do believe it would be okay to eliminate 8 man football. The schools that cannot support an 11 man team need to consolidate in order to be able to support a 11 man program. I believe you will find that most schools that have 8 man programs do NOT have wrestling because they don't have enought athletes to support basketball and wrestling. This is my opinion because it is economically senseless to have these small schools operating. Consolidation makes economic sense and it would provide an opportunity for more wrestling programs to start up.

Will Cokeley
Will after giving a lot of though to your post I think what you say makes sence in consolidation to help the schools have more kids so wrestling can become a sport in those schools, how ever some schools do not want to consolidate so that being said the boys that do want to wrestle can not go to other schools to just wrestle so where do we go from there?
In big towns in kansas kids can and do move around to other schools so they can have a chance to go out for sports and have a good chance to wrestle but like you said in eight man football most schools can not field a wrestling team so its hard for kids to wrestle. A lot of kids wrestle in the kids program but not in high school because its not offed there.
When my boy Don was wrestling in high school we had a driver ed teacher from Topeka teaching it durring the summer and he was trying to talk my son and three other boys to come to Topeka and wrestle for his school and he even had a place for them to live, and this goes on a lot when you have three or four high schools in a city the size of topeka or kansas city.