The clinch in the two international styles of wrestling (Freestyle and Greco-Roman) was created to decrease the amount of overtimes and speed up the wrestling matches.  The clinch as described in the 2001 FILA Rule Book of International Wrestling states the following:    The wrestler who locks first will in-circle one arm over, and one arm under other wrestler's arm locking his hands in the center of the other wrestlers back.  The second wrestler will do the same and the whistle will be blown when the official feels that neither gained an advantage in locking.      If there is no score in the first period the wrestlers will lock in the clinch position in the center of the mat.  If neither wrestler has passivity then the winner of the coin toss will lock first.  If neither wrestler has scored the mandatory three points to decide the winner of the match the wrestlers will meet in the center of the mat and will lock in the clinch position.      The decision of who will lock first will be decided by the following criteria: the wrestler with the most passivity's, lowest point total, or winner of the coin toss will lock first.   The wrestler who locked first scores by forcing the other wrestler to break his lock, his own attack, stopping his opponents attack and putting his opponent in danger, or his opponent steps out of bounds.  The wrestler who clinches second can score by all of the above criteria, or keep his lock for the one-minute clinch period. (p. 49)    After several observations at major wrestling events many athletes and wrestling coaches had their concerns with the clinch itself.  But, mostly it was in the unfair advantage that the athlete who was locking second had over the athlete who was locking first.  The athlete who is locking first must perform some type of attack to score or force his opponent out of bounds.  Secondly, the athlete who is locking first by no fault of his/her own was forced to lock because they won the toss.      In all other sporting events where there is a coin toss, as well as Folk style wrestling in the United States; winning the toss allows you to choose what position or favored situation the athlete/athletes would be to their best advantage.  The current clinch rules puts the wrestler who won the toss at a distinct disadvantage without giving them a choice in when they would like to lock.      The wrestler who locks second just needs to hold good position in order for them to score the point and put their opponent in a disadvantaged position.  Currently there is no literature on this subject, but key people with-in the sport of wrestling were interviewed about the clinch position.      USA Wrestling National Team Freestyle Wrestling Coach Kevin Jackson had this to say about the reason FILA started the clinch "My opinion it was started to slow down the more aggressive wrestlers.  I do think that it puts the man who locks second at an advantage to score and possibly win the match."  (October 10, 2001)     Doctor David Bennett, long time USA Wrestling Coach, said, "The clinch was started to cut down on the amount of overtime matches, and create more action in wrestling matches.  Personally, I think it has created more overtime matches and did the opposite of what FILA wanted the clinch to do."  (October 15, 2001)    Other major rules changes that have affected the sport at the international level are: turning an opponent in par terre only once with the ankle lace and the gut wrench.  Also, breaking the match into two three-minute periods instead of one five- minute period.  After speaking to wrestlers SGT Dominic Black and SGT Keith Sieracki about the above rule changes they both felt like they were good for the sport of wrestling.      SGT Black USA Freestyle World Team member and USA Freestyle National Champion, said:     "The change with the lace and the gut wrench were very positive for the sport because one move shouldn't allow your opponent to end the match.  I mean if the guy gets you in a good lace, he turns you five times and the match is over!  The same thing with the gut wrench, and that means your opponent can come back even if you have dominated him the whole match.  I believe wrestling should be decided on who the better wrestler is not who gets the tightest turn in one attempt."  (October 25, 2001)      SGT Sieracki  USA Greco-Roman World Team member and USA Greco-Roman National Champion, talked about the changes from a one period five-minute match to having two three-minute periods for a match.  His comments follow:    "The five-minute match forced you to wrestle at a slower pace and take less chances in your attacks because five minutes of wrestling without a break is a long time.  You can't constantly wrestle five minutes and you had to pick your times when you were going to wrestle more offensively.  This caused wrestlers to be more passive in their matches.  So, I think the change was good for not only wrestlers, but for the spectators who watch wrestling." (October 25, 2001)      After these discussions there is evidence that FILA has made positive changes to the sport of wrestling to create a sport that will be enjoyed by the athlete and the spectators.  The question is, is there no significant difference in whether a wrestler wins the clinch locking first or second?    The Medthod Procedure:     The matches were not gender specific and some of the clinch situations female wrestlers were used.  The study for this research did not include if males or females did better in clinching first or second.  The only matches used in this study were matches where the coin toss was used to determine the series of which athlete was locking first.  Overall there were fifty different situations where the athletes had to go to the clinch, and in some cases the same two athletes were used where they locked at the beginning of the second period and at the start of overtime.      Procedure    The participants had no knowledge that they were going to be used in a study on the clinch.  The wrestling matches used in this study were from the 2001 Senior National Wrestling Tournament in Las Vegas, NV, and the 2001 Wrestling World Team Trials in Cincinnati, OH.  Each bout lasted until the beginning of the second period and some of them went into overtime.    Results    Out of the fifty matches randomly reviewed from the tournaments mentioned above, thirty-three wrestlers who locked second won in the clinch position.  The other seventeen matches were won by the wrestler who locked first in the beginning of the second period or at the beginning of overtime.  The results were set up in a single Chi-Squared problem and the results at the .05 level with 1 degree of freedom came out to a value of 5.12.      The critical value of a Chi-Squared problem at the .05 level with 1 degree of freedom is 3.841.  If we then look at the critical value of a Chi-Squared problem at the .02 level with 1 degree of freedom it is 5.412.  With the results from the matches and the statistical analysis we can say that with 95% degree of certainty that a wrestler who locks second will win the clinch position.      Also, by the results you could go on and look at the problem deeper and inductively reason that you have close to a 98% degree of certainty that the wrestler who locks second will win the match.  You would then reject the null hypothesis!  Because, there is a significant difference in whether a wrestler wins by when he/she locks in the clinch.    Discussion:    By looking at the results from this study we can determine it is a major disadvantage to win the coin toss.  The athlete who locks second will win more than 95% of the matches, which in turn defeats the purpose of the clinch position because the current rules gives one wrestler an unfair advantage over another based on a rule.      The clinch position problem was looked at by FILA and at the 2001 Wrestling World Championships in Sofia, Bulgaria and the rules were changed.  The most recent change does not let the athlete who locks second make any adjustments or step outside the center.  After all the research from the spring and summer matches the results would probably