Chuck V is awesome.
So I have been out of the competitive powerlifting circuit for a few years, but has the standard changed that much? What is legit competition depth for squats now? Is it actually different for differnt federations? You will always see high squats passing, but I always thought it was the judges turning a blind eye. I am really not trying to stir up a brawl here guys but I am just curious if this is actually the standard now.
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
charger21 wrote:
questionable depth on squats and if you watch he has a hard time getting his butt down when deadlifting which means he probably is wearing briefs under the singlet. He is an awesome lifter. I still believe it was very impressive.
Squats were not questionable. Maybe in USAPL, but definitely not for multiply and DEFINITELY not for SPF.
You do realize that he is allowed to wear briefs under his singlet when he pulls…so why bring it up?
[/quote]
What does that say about SPF? Just pause it on youtube at 1:04, that’s just nowhere near parallel. I don’t care if it’s strong or not, rules are rules, they are there for a reason.
[quote]arnoud verschoor wrote:
Stronghold wrote:
charger21 wrote:
questionable depth on squats and if you watch he has a hard time getting his butt down when deadlifting which means he probably is wearing briefs under the singlet. He is an awesome lifter. I still believe it was very impressive.
Squats were not questionable. Maybe in USAPL, but definitely not for multiply and DEFINITELY not for SPF.
You do realize that he is allowed to wear briefs under his singlet when he pulls…so why bring it up?
What does that say about SPF? Just pause it on youtube at 1:04, that’s just nowhere near parallel. I don’t care if it’s strong or not, rules are rules, they are there for a reason.
[/quote]
Oh God. Here we go again.
Multiply means unlimited supportive gear. That is in the rules.
Multiply has a standard of depth that is different than that of the IPF and its affiliates. This standard of depth, however, is still within the definition of the rules. This squat met that standard.
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
arnoud verschoor wrote:
Stronghold wrote:
charger21 wrote:
questionable depth on squats and if you watch he has a hard time getting his butt down when deadlifting which means he probably is wearing briefs under the singlet. He is an awesome lifter. I still believe it was very impressive.
Squats were not questionable. Maybe in USAPL, but definitely not for multiply and DEFINITELY not for SPF.
You do realize that he is allowed to wear briefs under his singlet when he pulls…so why bring it up?
What does that say about SPF? Just pause it on youtube at 1:04, that’s just nowhere near parallel. I don’t care if it’s strong or not, rules are rules, they are there for a reason.
Oh God. Here we go again.
Multiply means unlimited supportive gear. That is in the rules.
Multiply has a standard of depth that is different than that of the IPF and its affiliates. This standard of depth, however, is still within the definition of the rules. This squat met that standard.[/quote]
Agree until you got to the last part. From the SPF rule book: “Upon receiving the head referee’s signal, the lifter must bend the knees and lower the
body until the top surface of the legs at the hip joint are lower than the top of knees.” Most feds have something similar in their rulebooks. The IPF rulebook is virtually identical in its depth description. Chuck’s squats meet the standard set by recent judging at multiply meets but not the letter of the rulebook.
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
arnoud verschoor wrote:
Stronghold wrote:
charger21 wrote:
questionable depth on squats and if you watch he has a hard time getting his butt down when deadlifting which means he probably is wearing briefs under the singlet. He is an awesome lifter. I still believe it was very impressive.
Squats were not questionable. Maybe in USAPL, but definitely not for multiply and DEFINITELY not for SPF.
You do realize that he is allowed to wear briefs under his singlet when he pulls…so why bring it up?
What does that say about SPF? Just pause it on youtube at 1:04, that’s just nowhere near parallel. I don’t care if it’s strong or not, rules are rules, they are there for a reason.
Oh God. Here we go again.
Multiply means unlimited supportive gear. That is in the rules.
Multiply has a standard of depth that is different than that of the IPF and its affiliates. This standard of depth, however, is still within the definition of the rules. This squat met that standard.[/quote]
The rules read the same; point of knee higher than crease of hip. But judging is definately different, more liberal in some than others. I brought up the briefs issue because someone stated it was done in just a singlet. Briefs don’t give you much but it was asked about. I lift mostly USPF and APF. I know my squats have to be deep when I left USPF versus APF. I only compete in single ply due to my beliefs on equipment. However I get alot out of my singleply, sometimes just as much as guys get out of multilayer suits. Its too bad the rules read the same in most organizations but are so differently judged. In my opinion it was HIGH but for that org. they think its good so he now owns one of many world record squats.
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
apwsearch wrote:
Stronghold wrote:
Squats were not questionable. Maybe in USAPL, but definitely not for multiply and DEFINITELY not for SPF.
You do realize that he is allowed to wear briefs under his singlet when he pulls…so why bring it up?
What you just posted echoes my thoughts on the topic almost indentically.
As someone who has watched Chuck for many, many years all I can say is his longevity and ability to continue to make progress and challenge/beat/set records in any fed he competes in is awesome.
You just can’t knock the guy.
Chuck is a monstrous lifter. Cool guy, too.
I only wish that he had done this in a meet that wasn’t so tainted by judging issues.[/quote]
You are right. Judging issues is what this is about. The lifter is a damn good lifter
Two things:
-
As someone that isn’t generally all that interested in multiply lifting this is fucking awesome.
-
What is the name of the Disturbed song that is playing during Chuck’s squat opener?
It’s ‘Numb’, from the ‘The Sickness’ album. Good song… great album, in fact.
[quote]Element_26 wrote:
It’s ‘Numb’, from the ‘The Sickness’ album. Good song… great album, in fact.[/quote]
Thanks
[quote]burt128 wrote:
Stronghold wrote:
arnoud verschoor wrote:
Stronghold wrote:
charger21 wrote:
questionable depth on squats and if you watch he has a hard time getting his butt down when deadlifting which means he probably is wearing briefs under the singlet. He is an awesome lifter. I still believe it was very impressive.
Squats were not questionable. Maybe in USAPL, but definitely not for multiply and DEFINITELY not for SPF.
You do realize that he is allowed to wear briefs under his singlet when he pulls…so why bring it up?
What does that say about SPF? Just pause it on youtube at 1:04, that’s just nowhere near parallel. I don’t care if it’s strong or not, rules are rules, they are there for a reason.
Oh God. Here we go again.
Multiply means unlimited supportive gear. That is in the rules.
Multiply has a standard of depth that is different than that of the IPF and its affiliates. This standard of depth, however, is still within the definition of the rules. This squat met that standard.
Agree until you got to the last part. From the SPF rule book: “Upon receiving the head referee’s signal, the lifter must bend the knees and lower the
body until the top surface of the legs at the hip joint are lower than the top of knees.” Most feds have something similar in their rulebooks. The IPF rulebook is virtually identical in its depth description. Chuck’s squats meet the standard set by recent judging at multiply meets but not the letter of the rulebook.[/quote]
Judging at many usapl and uspf meets dont meet the letter of the rulebook either, as those feds make you go above and beyond what is required by the rulebook
[quote]KBCThird wrote:
burt128 wrote:
Stronghold wrote:
arnoud verschoor wrote:
Stronghold wrote:
charger21 wrote:
questionable depth on squats and if you watch he has a hard time getting his butt down when deadlifting which means he probably is wearing briefs under the singlet. He is an awesome lifter. I still believe it was very impressive.
Squats were not questionable. Maybe in USAPL, but definitely not for multiply and DEFINITELY not for SPF.
You do realize that he is allowed to wear briefs under his singlet when he pulls…so why bring it up?
What does that say about SPF? Just pause it on youtube at 1:04, that’s just nowhere near parallel. I don’t care if it’s strong or not, rules are rules, they are there for a reason.
Oh God. Here we go again.
Multiply means unlimited supportive gear. That is in the rules.
Multiply has a standard of depth that is different than that of the IPF and its affiliates. This standard of depth, however, is still within the definition of the rules. This squat met that standard.
Agree until you got to the last part. From the SPF rule book: “Upon receiving the head referee’s signal, the lifter must bend the knees and lower the
body until the top surface of the legs at the hip joint are lower than the top of knees.” Most feds have something similar in their rulebooks. The IPF rulebook is virtually identical in its depth description. Chuck’s squats meet the standard set by recent judging at multiply meets but not the letter of the rulebook.
Judging at many usapl and uspf meets dont meet the letter of the rulebook either, as those feds make you go above and beyond what is required by the rulebook[/quote]
I was going to bring that up too…
[quote]mrodock wrote:
Two things:
-
As someone that isn’t generally all that interested in multiply lifting this is fucking awesome.
-
What is the name of the Disturbed song that is playing during Chuck’s squat opener?[/quote]
Anyone know the name of the song that plays as we walks upto the Mono for his second squat of 1100?
[quote]dheeel wrote:
mrodock wrote:
Two things:
-
As someone that isn’t generally all that interested in multiply lifting this is fucking awesome.
-
What is the name of the Disturbed song that is playing during Chuck’s squat opener?
Anyone know the name of the song that plays as we walks upto the Mono for his second squat of 1100?[/quote]
Stupify?
[quote]buckeye girl wrote:
dheeel wrote:
Anyone know the name of the song that plays as we walks upto the Mono for his second squat of 1100?
Stupify?[/quote]
yup.
[quote]buckeye girl wrote:
dheeel wrote:
mrodock wrote:
Two things:
-
As someone that isn’t generally all that interested in multiply lifting this is fucking awesome.
-
What is the name of the Disturbed song that is playing during Chuck’s squat opener?
Anyone know the name of the song that plays as we walks upto the Mono for his second squat of 1100?
Stupify?[/quote]
Thanks - think I might have to download that!
[quote]apwsearch wrote:
buckeye girl wrote:
dheeel wrote:
Anyone know the name of the song that plays as we walks upto the Mono for his second squat of 1100?
Stupify?
yup.[/quote]
Thanks - do you know who it’s by dude?
[quote]dheeel wrote:
apwsearch wrote:
buckeye girl wrote:
dheeel wrote:
Anyone know the name of the song that plays as we walks upto the Mono for his second squat of 1100?
Stupify?
yup.
Thanks - do you know who it’s by dude?[/quote]
Disturbed.
[quote]dheeel wrote:
apwsearch wrote:
buckeye girl wrote:
dheeel wrote:
Anyone know the name of the song that plays as we walks upto the Mono for his second squat of 1100?
Stupify?
yup.
Thanks - do you know who it’s by dude?[/quote]
What do you all think he could do on a 1 rep max squat without the suit gear and wraps and such? Maybe give him a belt and that’s it.
I would rather watch someone power lift without all the extra stuff, I think the end products would be even more impressive because to get to the super high weight you have cannot rely on something like a suit or knee wraps for that extra help. Let people use a belt and chalk if they want but that’s it, you can only wear boxers and gym shorts and a shirt.