BFWIW:
1. Don't remember why but IMO it's good to have a winner instead of playing for a tie. Hockey OT team point rule would cause a lot of 3rd period stalling to capture that team point.
2. Reversal should not be worth more than a takedown. It's a comparable event (change of control) and not more than 1 event.
3. Riding time point should be eliminated altogether -- it incentives stalling. If not eliminated, then riding ime should only accumulate when top earns near fall points. More RT points = more top stalling.
Re: #2, above.
Understand both points of view, but have to agree with the OP on this one. When you go from a situation in which you are being controlled to one in which you take control of your opponent, there physically
must be an
instant of time, however brief, during which you pass from being controlled, thru a neutral situation where neither wrestler is in control, to a situation in which you are controlling your opponent. From where I sit, an escape should not have to last any minimum length of time before being scored. The only requisite is that you defeat your opponent's control and move to a neutral situation. For this purpose, an instant of neutrality should logically be as good as seven minutes.
Takedowns and reversals are certainly
comparable events as your post states but are, just as certainly,
not equal events given that the first is initiated from a neutral situation with both wrestlers on their feet, neither in control, and the second from a situation where one wrestler is controlling the other. To receive two points on a takedown, only
one event must occur: Wrestler "A" must earn control over Wrestler "B". But to receive two points for a reversal,
two separate events must occur: (1) an escape by Wrestler "B" followed by (2) his instantaneous assumption of control over Wrestler "A", with the escape being worth one point all by itself
even if Wrestler "B" is unable to instantly gain control of his opponent to receive two reversal points. Essentially, the current approach to scoring a reversal robs Wrestler "B" of a point which he would've received if he
failed to get immediate control of his opponent and was only able to get back to a neutral situation.
Or, in a nutshell, it looks like a situation where rulemakers should possibly be more concerned with event equality as opposed to event comparability in their structuring of point awards.