First and foremost, we must commend the audacity and determination of Baye Ndiaye and, through him, all the promoters who are tirelessly building our national sport. Thanks to their perseverance, Senegalese wrestling has reached a historic milestone, now exporting itself beyond our borders through international TV rights, prestigious contracts, and matches held abroad. This cultural gem has become an attractive industry. However, this evolution toward modernity must not come at the expense of the very essence of our discipline. Baye Ndiaye's proposal to replace the single fall with a three-round system is an appealing idea, but it requires careful consideration before any implementation.

An opportunity for technical clarity

From a sporting justice perspective, the idea is brilliant. It would definitively dispel any doubts about an athlete's superiority. In wrestling folklore, isn't there a common saying, to assert dominance: "Diw daan nako niari yoon" (I've knocked him down twice)? Moving to rounds would give wrestling the opportunity to confirm talent over time rather than relying on a stroke of luck.

The challenge of sealing the arena

The success of such a reform hinges on absolute organizational rigor. The wrestling crowd, passionate and sometimes volatile, must be managed. To ensure the rhythm of the rounds is maintained, the arena must become an inviolable sanctuary. Indeed, once the fight begins, the wrestlers must not leave the arena until all three rounds are completed. Even after a stage victory, the "Bakk" celebration must take place within the arena, without any break in concentration or organization.

Restricted access

Once the match has started, only the coach and the strength and conditioning coach should be allowed in the area between rounds. The arena must be physically protected against any outside intrusion (spectators or other "foreign bodies") until the final verdict is reached.

Areas of uncertainty and necessary adjustments

The introduction of rounds may also raise crucial regulatory questions that the wrestling federation and promoters will have to resolve:

1. The medical verdict

If an injury occurs after a round won by one of the protagonists, should the fight be declared "without verdict" or should the victory go to the one who gained the advantage?

In the event that the opponents are tied after two rounds and an injury forces the referee to interrupt the proceedings, a question remains: should the victory be awarded to the able-bodied fighter, or should the duel be declared a draw, or even without a verdict?

2. Managing the in-between

Will wrestlers be allowed mystical practices between rounds, or will they have to limit themselves to strictly athletic recovery? (resting, cooling down, and warming up)

3. Timing and the draw

A 10-minute round format seems appropriate. If no decisive contact occurs within this time, the round should be declared a draw, leaving the subsequent rounds to determine the winner.

4. Rest

A 4-minute interval (2 minutes for recovery, 2 minutes for re-tensioning) would help maintain the intensity of the spectacle and the wrestler's freshness. (To be studied carefully).

Beyond logistics, this reform requires a genuine psychological rearmament of the athletes. For a wrestler accustomed to the dreaded single fall, going down in the first round should no longer be seen as a fatal blow, but simply a tactical setback. It is imperative to instill in the fighters this new culture of resilience: knowing how to get back up, releasing frustration during rest periods, and returning to the ring with renewed determination to turn the tide. The final victory will no longer belong solely to the fastest, but to the most mentally resilient, capable of transforming an initial defeat into a triumph of endurance.

This reform also presents an ideal opportunity to clarify persistent disputes, particularly regarding controversial falls on all fours or onto the head. If implemented with robust logistics, Baye Ndiaye's proposal could transform our wrestling into a more transparent, fairer, and, above all, more compliant sport, one that aligns more closely with the standards of major international combat disciplines while preserving its cultural significance. Evolution is necessary, but the method will be the key to its success.