fishbane

Mark Hall and Vincenzo Joseph are not among the top NCAA wrestlers of the past 10 years.

Possibly. I think the other party has to have relinquished their right to collect it or forgiven the debt for it to be a taxable gain. Also it could be that the bet was not paid because of some dispute related to the outcome (both parties feel they won for example) or the fairness of the game as played (Ex. someone cheated). Supposing someone marks a card in poker and this impacts the hand in a way that allows them to win. I think you could deny payment without worry that it would be a taxable event even if the other party later "forgave" the "debt."

That can't be a coincidence.

It's true and the student-athlete may be able to set up a business to receive NIL payments and avoid the self employment tax. Still I don't see a lot of expenses to write off in these NIL deals that are $X to attend Y school. Its not like the student can write off tuition/room/board/books/college moving expenses as a business expense. If they were operating clinics in the offseason or selling merch there would be real expenses related to those activities. Renting the venue, equipment, paying other clinicians, advertising, design for advertising/merch, cost of having said merch produced, order fulfillment costs, payment processing costs, computer and office equipment to manage all this stuff, business dinners with partners, travel expenses, ext. If they just get paid a check for showing up at a school what expenses could be claimed? Some legal and accounting services? If to make it less obvious they have the athlete show up for a photo shoot for a billboard or TV commercial what expenses can be claimed even for that? Surely it would be a nominal amount. Educational tax credits are capped at $2500 but there is also an income phase out. Basically if you pay at least $10k in educational expenses you've maxed out the credit. The credit also phases out starting at AGI levels of $80k, so depending on the size and structure of the deal they may be phased out of claiming these credits.

The student could claim the standard deduction regardless. You might be thinking of exemptions which went away back in 2018 with Trumps changes. If the student is paying their tuition and room and board via NIL $$ their parents likely aren't supporting them to the level required to claim the student anyway. A combination of factors would likely make it more advantageous for the parent to not claim their child as a dependent if the child was a full time student paying their own tuition/room/board with NIL money. It likely wouldn't impact the parents deductions unless it was the difference between being able to claim head of household for the parent. A college age child is unlikely to be a qualifying child unless they are younger than typical. Similarly a college age student would likely have aged out of most child tax credits that parents typically claim. Educational tax credits would likely be what decides where the student is claimed as a dependent. These can only be claimed by the person incurring the qualified education expenses. The parents not paying educational expenses would be prevented them from claiming these. The student would also not be able to claim them if they were a dependent on their parents taxes. The solution would be for the student to claim themselves as a dependent provided their income does not profit them from claiming the educational tax credits.

1) Unless the athlete has planned in advance self employment tax (15.3%) would likely be due on NIL payments on top of normal federal and state income tax. 2) Other scholarships you speak of might be related to need. Getting NIL money might put the student outside of need based criteria for certain scholarships, grants, and loans. Before enrolling awards will be based on income that does not include NIL money. Some of that could go away if the students income spikes after receiving NIL $$$. Students on an athletic scholarship would not have to deal with this risk. Vito cited need based aid as a reason that he had not pursued NIL monies earlier. Cornell being an Ivy does not award athletic scholarships. They have a very large endowment (as do all Ivies) and they cover all of their students need by grants. He was receiving significant amounts of need based aid (cost of attendance at Cornell is $88k) so if he made more money it would decrease his aid award. Not sure what the actual numbers are but if he made $1 in NIL money he may owe $0.30 in taxes and it could have reduced his aid award from Cornell by another $0.30 or so removing some incentive to pursue it. He said in his final season he will try and do more with NIL since his aid award is set before the start of the year and would not adjust based on his NIL income during the season.

An NIL agreement would need to provide above the $$ value of a full ride scholarship to replace it. NIL deals are income and get taxed. Scholarships generally are not taxable. Tuition, fees, room, board, books, ext at a school like Iowa is probably $50k. An NIL deal would need to be $65k+ to replace it.

I noticed on John Giura's entry in the wrestling database his profession is listed as "antique dealer." I thought that was an interesting profession for a World Team member. Have any other antique dealers represented the US in wrestling on the world stage? Is he still involved in the antique business? Does he have a showroom anywhere?

The version I found said the match was in 1991. He also said this was a 45-minute match and that he had scored the first 4 points. 50 points over 45 minutes is only 1.11 points per minute of wrestling. That is assuming a flat consistent rate of scoring. That probably wasn't the case. Perhaps Gable wore Lewis down over the 45 minutes and scored more at the end of the time than the early stages. Or perhaps being in his 40s, Gable's pace slowed in the later stages and most of the points were scored early. In any case I think a 6-minute match could be on a knife edge vs a 50-4 blowout. This was also 3 years removed and a weight up from the Lewis-Smith best of three for the 1988 Olympic team spot. The former world champion he beat in 1991, Budaev, only represented Russia once at the world championships. It was the year refereced (1989) when Fadzaev bumped up and lost in the final to Monday. Budaev would have been 34 years old in 1991.

The version I found said the match was in 1991. He also said this was a 45-minute match and that he had scored the first 4 points. 54 points over 45 minutes is only 1.2 points per minute of wrestling. That is assuming a flat consistent rate of scoring. That probably wasn't the case. Perhaps Gable wore Lewis down over the 45 minutes and scored more at the end of the time than the early stages. Or perhaps being in his 40s, Gable's pace slowed in the later stages and most of the points were scored early. In any case I think a 6-minute match could be on a knife edge vs a 54-4 blowout. This was also 3 years removed and a weight up from the Lewis-Smith best of three for the 1988 Olympic team spot. The former world champion he beat in 1991, Budaev, only represented Russia once at the world championships. It was the year refereced (1989) when Fadzaev bumped up and lost in the final to Monday. Budaev would have been 34 years old in 1991.

I wouldn't think Gable could get the better of Smith back when Smith was winning world/Olympic titles. Before the 2004 Olympics Jamill Kelly said he beat John Smith in a match in the room. Maybe Gable could get the better of a 2004-present John Smith. "Does John Smith still wrestle with the guys in practice? Does he go live at all? Kelly: When I first got to school there, he wrestled with us a lot. He'll drill with the guys occasionally. The last time me and him wrestled was when I made the Olympic team. He kind of called me out, so we hooked it up a little bit. How did that go? Kelly: Um … I won. He probably won't admit to it. But, you know, I won. He was good at really getting the intensity out of me sometimes. You get with the guys in practice, a lot of them, you get to kind of have your way with them, and you know exactly what they're going to do. So, sometimes he would go with me, just because he knew how he could bring another level out of me. He came up to me, just a random day at practice, and was like, 'I know that I could have made the (Olympic) team in 96 and 2000. Now I'm going to see if I could have made the team in 2004. I kind of looked at him like, 'I can't believe you just said that to me.' But he knew that would get kind of a rise out of me and bring my intensity level up. Just little things like that, I think is what makes him a great coach. He knows how to bring that out in each individual."

The change in pins from 2008-2015 to 2016-2021 was not really statistically significant. The t statistic for MDs and TFs was over 3.5. For PFs it was ~<1 so we can't really conclude anything changed with respect to pins from the data available. Being able to score 7 points from a TD to NF is kind of crazy. Imagine a 1 point match late where the trailing wrestler throws sends it trying to win the match and gets taken down to his back. It could go from 1 stall call away from OT to a MD real quick. 1 scoring action really.

Brennan Swafford (174) is a transfer and has started in duals for the Hawkeyes before.

Definitely not tainted nor do I think there should be a footnote next to records. This is not typically how these things are handled in other sports. When the NFL added the two point conversion did they add a footnote next to scoring records? Does the NBA put an asterisk next to point totals from the 3 point era? I don't think they do and I don't think wrestling should group scoring records pre 3 point TD and post 3 point TD. I think it should be used to add context goat debates. Say comparing Cael Sanderson's career to that of Zain Retherford, Jason Nolf, Bo Nickal, Yianni Diakomihalis, Spencer Lee, Aaron Brooks, Carter Starocci, Keegan O'Toole ect this should be taken into account. All these guys wrestled in the 4 point NF era where bonus points are easier to come by. This should be taken into account when comparing bonus rates across eras. Look at bonus point rate compared to the average NCAA qualifier or something like that. It would be kind of like how WAR in baseball adjusts the replacement level player based on performance in the league that year. How this might be done on a team scale could be illustrated by looking at Penn State. The top three teams in PSU history were the National title winning 2017 squad, the national title winning 2018 squad, and this years national title winning team. No major team scoring changes were made between 2017 and 2023 nor were there any major changes to bout scoring. In 2017 the team scored 146.5 Team points at NCAAs, in 2018 the team scored 141.5, and this year they scored 137.5. Looking at the absolute number it would seam 2017>2018>2023, but looking at WKN's table of bonus point victories at NCAAs 2017 and 2018 were the highest scoring years in the 15 year period with 306.5 and 292 respectively. Meanwhile this season was one of the tournaments with the fewest bonus points scored, only 225.5. In the context of scoring so many team points in a tournament where team points were more difficult to obtain 137.5 might be more impressive than 146.5 or 141.5. Perhaps looking at PSU's scoring in comparison to the total team points awarded at the tournament would prove more useful. In years where a large skill variance in the competitors making MDs, TFs, and PFs easier to come by this would be reflected in the total bonus points scored over all matches. Similarly if a rule change made smaller skill differences translate into larger point differences, thus making bonus points more common it would be reflected in the totals as well.

deleted

Before 2015-2016 2 points were awarded for a NF between 2 and 4 seconds and 3 points for a NF of 5 seconds or more. It was then changed to 2 points for a NF of 2-3 seconds and 4 points for 4 seconds or more. If we compare the period 2008-2015 (before the 4 point NF) with 2016-2021 (after the 4 point NF and before extra the free year) the # of TF increased from 12.8 to 27.2 per tournament. That is an increase of 112.5%. This increase came from turning MDs into NFs, but also from turning PFs into TFs. Pinfalls fell from an average of 71.6/tournament before the rule change to 67 after. This was a decrease of 6.4%. I suspect the effect of the rules scheduled for next season to be more significant than those back 2015-2016. The 4 point NF turned all 3 point NFs into 4 point NFs (an increase of 33%) and some 2 point NFs (over 4s and < 5s) into 4 points NFs an increase of 100%. The changes for next season not only increase some 2 point NFs into 3 points NFs but increase TDs, which are much more common, by 50%.

Probably just optimists hoping for an interesting team race. PSU has to be one of the biggest favorites in history next season. Eight wrestlers are preseason top 3. Has that ever happened before?

Jaydin Eierman didn't even score 2 points at NCAAs in 2022.

This could see Iowa start a lineup with 7 transfers. What is the most transfers a team has matted for a dual?

I added margin of victory in the team race to your table. With the expanded range there is no correlation between a tight team race and # of mnatches with bonus points. There are likely factors confounding that conclusion - the change of the 4 point NF, COVID, ect. If I only fit to the data 2008-2015 (before COVID and before the 4 point NF) there does appear to be a weak correlation (r=0.5-0.6) and it's notable that the three closest team races 2009, 2013, and 2014 produced the bonus point victories. A weak correlation makes sense because the team race only ever comes down to 2-3 maybe 4 teams, and whilst title contending teams have more wresters in the tournament that wrestle more matches its still only at most 40 out of 330 wrestlers with a material interest in the team race. I had initially proposed margin of victory as influencing things because 2023 was the only true outlier in the first table and last year had been the least competitive team race in decades. With the new expanded table it seems somewhat likely to me that two things had significant influence on the numbers. The first was the 4 point near fall rule. Since it's implementation in 2015-2016 bonus point victories were up in the next 5 year period. What's interesting is that while there was an increase in both TF and MD there was also a decrease in pinfalls. The top 5 years for pinfalls were all before the rule changed and there were 4-5 more pinfalls on average in the 8 years before change than the 5 immediately after the change. The other thing that influencing the numbers happened in the past two years. I think this could be the influence of the 6th year, but I'm open to other explanations. I'd expect the 3 point TD to 1) increase # of MD, 2) increase # of TF, 3) decrease # of PF, 4) increase total matches where bonus points are scored, 5) increase total bonus points scored.

Don't start following the international styles. I hear there is such a thing as a zero point loss...

Which year was the Iowa/OSU debacle? 2023 at Iowa BTN televised 2022 Bout at the Ballpark Flo streams - I only recall minor issues 2021 No Dual - COVID conference only schedule 2020 At Iowa BTN televised 2019 This was a massive dual. Both entered undefeated ranked 2 and 3 behind an undefeated PSU. It was the last dual of the season for both teams and was won by OSU. Picc pinned Spencer Lee. I recall minor issues watching this but not a total meltdown. Was this the year? 2018 At Iowa BTN televised. 2017 This was a pretty massive dual too. OSU was ranked #1 and Iowa #3. I don't recall watching this one. If I did I am sure there were issues with the stream freezing that caused me to reload and such. 2016 Grapple on the Gridiron. This was actually the first dual of the season and was actually wrestled Now 2015. It was at Iowa and on BTN.The total meltdown I remember was the 2017 Season Finale between OSU and PSU at Gallagher-Iba. 2015?

They should compromise and set TDs at 2.5 points. 3 is too much.

The 4 point NF rule was enacted for the 2015-2016 season and it looks like there is a clear increase in bonus points following that. 2016 there were more bonus point victories than in the previous 8 season and over the next 5 years bonus point wins were even higher. Every year 2016-2021 was higher than the highest year 2008-2015. The last two years seem to be real outliers. They had the fewest bonus point victories of the 15 in the table. Maybe this is a COVID effect. You have wrestlers sticking around for extra years starting in 2022, but the same number of qualifiers. The guys that stuck around are generally better than average wrestlers which probably pulled up the ability of the average wrestler at the national tournament. So the 33rd best wrestling in the field in 2022 and 2023 are likely better than the 33rd best wrestler in field in 2012. This could possibly make for more competitive matches than we had been used to seeing. What year did they change to at large selections and using in-season results to select qualifiers?

I can't think of a time when I saw a wrestler at NCAAs trying a catch and release strategy to try and chase down a TF/MD. I think this is almost exclusively a feature of dual meets where a bonus point is more significant in deciding the outcome and the team goal is at the forefront. I would suspect you'd see it more there. At NCAAs I would think there would be a bigger effect on MD numbers than FTs. A three point match is now almost on a knife edge between OT and a MD. 2023 was the least competitive team race in the range of years in your table. I'd expect a tight team race to increase the importance of bonus points and turn some of those MDs into FTs. I added a column to your table with margin of victory in the team race. There is a weak correlation