[quote]Invictica wrote:
better not Sprint with clits
[/quote]
this is clearing cheating and probably painful!!
[quote]ouroboro_s wrote:
Wilba wrote:
Now I’m mandating? I called it silly you stupid fuck. What part of that didn’t you see in the 15 other posts?
ouroboro_s - as I said, didn’t realize. You still come off as angry.
Perhaps. I can’t argue with you there. Your statements angered me because the way in which you originally posted came off as ‘holier than thou’. That may not have been your intention but that is, nonetheless, how it appears.[/quote]
Fair enough. That wasn’t my intention. My bad. I didn’t think about how it would be perceived before posting.
It’s almost a different sport with/without gear. You can’t compare! Lifters wearing gear are essentially competing in a different event to those without.
I think the argument stems from raw lifters being scared that some assisted lifter is going to come along and smash his total-thats what prompts people to put the gear on- to compete! It’s just a matter of grasping that it’s completely different and learning to live with it.
I’m sure if it was the other way round and people could lift more with gear off then you’d have the opposite situation!..or understandably no gear at all 
It’s like trying to compare a rugby league player and a rugby union player, or field hockey with ice hockey. Just a pointless argument. Equipped lifters shouldn’t be stuck up about it, and raw lifters shouldn’t get bummed out about it and just relax, everyone would be much happier
lol will everyone quit bitching, its about what you enjoy doing, we dont need any dang arguments on T-Nation, were all here TOGETHER, as bodybuilders, powerlifters, fitness enthousiasts, and (hopefully, like really hopefully not)(unfortunately) cross fitters.
you like what you like, thats all there is to it
i could care less if you dont think i squat 375 raw at 16 and 210 bw. your just some guy on a computer.
i do raw powerlifting, and what do you never see raw? an 870 pound squat. why?
YOULL BLOW YOUR GROIN OUT, ITS NOT POSSIBLE.
i mean cmon, half of that suit is there for support in your groin and such, it gives you rebound.
bench shirts, idk why i wanna use one and im using one tomorrow, but i just want to see what they are like.
deadlift suits, i only deadlift RAW.
so thats my 2 cents, dont quote or reply please
I have gear but no longer use it. My preference is raw but have no problem with someone wanting to compete equipped. I do, however, take issue with people missing attempts because their shirt wouldn’t allow the weight (sometimes 600-700 lbs. or more) to touch their chest. This IMO is taking it too far. That being said, does anyone know what improvements in gear have been made in Olympic lifting?
[quote]Wilba wrote:
Now I’m mandating? I called it silly you stupid fuck. What part of that didn’t you see in the 15 other posts?
[/quote]
I wasn’t responding to you calling anything silly, you stupid fuck.
I was responding specifically to:
[quote]Wilba wrote:
Never said I was but a squat is a squat and if you do something else (less than full ROM, assitance gear, etc.) it’s now something else and not a squat.
[/quote]
Wilba wrote:And your high squat is not a squat. Deal with it.
Wilba wrote:
Never said I was but a squat is a squat and if you do something else (less than full ROM, assitance gear, etc.) it’s now something else and not a squat.
You all should have stopped replying after he posted that comment.
Obviously he is a retard.
“Mommy mommy some meanie at the gym/on the interwebz claimed he could outsquat me but it turns out he was claiming cheater gear numbers! WAHHH my feelings are so hurt.”
Those are my favorite responses in this thread. If your ego gets bruised because random douchebags claim geared squat numbers, you are lifting for the wrong reasons. Why do you care what other people are lifting anyway? Are you fucking 12 years old? Are you afraid they’ll steal your girlfriend or something. Grow the fuck up.
[quote]brauny96 wrote:
lol will everyone quit bitching, its about what you enjoy doing, we dont need any dang arguments on T-Nation, were all here TOGETHER, as bodybuilders, powerlifters, fitness enthousiasts, and (hopefully, like really hopefully not)(unfortunately) cross fitters.
you like what you like, thats all there is to it
i could care less if you dont think i squat 375 raw at 16 and 210 bw. your just some guy on a computer.
i do raw powerlifting, and what do you never see raw? an 870 pound squat. why?
YOULL BLOW YOUR GROIN OUT, ITS NOT POSSIBLE.
i mean cmon, half of that suit is there for support in your groin and such, it gives you rebound.
bench shirts, idk why i wanna use one and im using one tomorrow, but i just want to see what they are like.
deadlift suits, i only deadlift RAW.
so thats my 2 cents, dont quote or reply please[/quote]
A post that ridiculous deserves to be replied to.
There’s been plenty of raw squats over 870lb which haven’t resulted in BLOWN OUT GROINS.
I don’t think anyone actually cares what you squat either. What irks people is keyboard warriors who never have and never will compete telling the lifters how their sport should be run.
Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner.
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
Wilba wrote:
Now I’m mandating? I called it silly you stupid fuck. What part of that didn’t you see in the 15 other posts?
I wasn’t responding to you calling anything silly, you stupid fuck.
I was responding specifically to:
Wilba wrote:And your high squat is not a squat. Deal with it.
Wilba wrote:
Never said I was but a squat is a squat and if you do something else (less than full ROM, assitance gear, etc.) it’s now something else and not a squat.
[/quote]
Where was I mandating anything as you assininely claimed?
That doesn’t mean a modified squat has no value or that your work means less somehow or any ridiculous thing like that. It just means it’s not a plain old squat. it’s different. Is that so hard to understand? So offensive? I’m really suprised by the responses my posts have recieved regarding this topic.
[quote]Wilba wrote:
Stronghold wrote:
Wilba wrote:
Now I’m mandating? I called it silly you stupid fuck. What part of that didn’t you see in the 15 other posts?
I wasn’t responding to you calling anything silly, you stupid fuck.
I was responding specifically to:
Wilba wrote:And your high squat is not a squat. Deal with it.
Wilba wrote:
Never said I was but a squat is a squat and if you do something else (less than full ROM, assitance gear, etc.) it’s now something else and not a squat.
Where was I mandating anything as you assininely claimed?
That doesn’t mean a modified squat has no value or that your work means less somehow or any ridiculous thing like that. It just means it’s not a plain old squat. it’s different. Is that so hard to understand? So offensive? I’m really suprised by the responses my posts have recieved regarding this topic.
[/quote]
Unless you’re 6’8, you aren’t doing a real squat. Anyone shorter than that isn’t squatting a full ROM.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying there’s no value in shorter people doing “squats”, it’s not not a real squat.
[quote]Wilba wrote:
Stronghold wrote:
Wilba wrote:
Now I’m mandating? I called it silly you stupid fuck. What part of that didn’t you see in the 15 other posts?
I wasn’t responding to you calling anything silly, you stupid fuck.
I was responding specifically to:
Wilba wrote:And your high squat is not a squat. Deal with it.
Wilba wrote:
Never said I was but a squat is a squat and if you do something else (less than full ROM, assitance gear, etc.) it’s now something else and not a squat.
Where was I mandating anything as you assininely claimed?
That doesn’t mean a modified squat has no value or that your work means less somehow or any ridiculous thing like that. It just means it’s not a plain old squat. it’s different. Is that so hard to understand? So offensive? I’m really suprised by the responses my posts have recieved regarding this topic.
[/quote]
You are applying YOUR definitions of how things SHOULD be in YOUR mind. Just because YOU don’t think it is a squat because my ass isn’t scraping the floor and I’m wearing 3-4 plys of polyester doesn’t mean that I’m not squatting.
What does and does not constitute a squat is determined solely by the rules and judges of a federation, not some random internet warrior who has never and will never compete.
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
Wilba wrote:
Stronghold wrote:
Wilba wrote:
Now I’m mandating? I called it silly you stupid fuck. What part of that didn’t you see in the 15 other posts?
I wasn’t responding to you calling anything silly, you stupid fuck.
I was responding specifically to:
Wilba wrote:And your high squat is not a squat. Deal with it.
Wilba wrote:
Never said I was but a squat is a squat and if you do something else (less than full ROM, assitance gear, etc.) it’s now something else and not a squat.
Where was I mandating anything as you assininely claimed?
That doesn’t mean a modified squat has no value or that your work means less somehow or any ridiculous thing like that. It just means it’s not a plain old squat. it’s different. Is that so hard to understand? So offensive? I’m really suprised by the responses my posts have recieved regarding this topic.
You are applying YOUR definitions of how things SHOULD be in YOUR mind. Just because YOU don’t think it is a squat because my ass isn’t scraping the floor and I’m wearing 3-4 plys of polyester doesn’t mean that I’m not squatting.
What does and does not constitute a squat is determined solely by the rules and judges of a federation, not some random internet warrior who has never and will never compete.[/quote]
Just because YOU don’t think it is a squat because my ass isn’t scraping the floor and I’m wearing 3-4 plys of polyester doesn’t mean that I’m not squatting.
Actually it does.
Squats existed long before some “federation” made up their own rules. You need to look no further than wikipedia to see all of the variants I was talking about.
You are getting your opninns from a site that suggests squatting in a smith machine.
So let me get this right… Becasue Chris Jenskins used a squat suite and only “half squats” his 800+ pound squat @ 181 did not count?
How about his world record deadlift? He wore a deadlift suite so it was a waste of time for him to obtain that record.
I’ll say it again YOU ARE A RETARD
[quote]DF85 wrote:
You are getting your opninns from a site that suggests squatting in a smith machine.
So let me get this right… Becasue Chris Jenskins used a squat suite and only “half squats” his 800+ pound squat @ 181 did not count?
How about his world record deadlift? He wore a deadlift suite so it was a waste of time for him to obtain that record.
I’ll say it again YOU ARE A RETARD[/quote]
You’re right that’s exactly what I said.
My own personal opinion.
I compete raw (read nothing but chalk) because that is how I prefer to train and compete.
Ever since I started lifting weights I have not seen the need to wear a belt et al because it never occurred to me to do so.
Once I was introduced to it I never seen the point I just like the idea of being able to rock up to a bar and do my thing.
That being said I have zero issue with equipped lifters its all part of the sport.
Now from my opinion I would like to see all lifters under one banner, doing one sport with the same rules.
I would prefer it to be all raw (same supportive gear as allowed in oly lifting.) because it seems a lot more organic and a better sceptical.
I have massive respect for brutally strong equipped lifter (single, multi or whatever).
Just my 2 cents.
[quote]Wilba wrote:
Squats existed long before some “federation” made up their own rules. You need to look no further than wikipedia to see all of the variants I was talking about.
[/quote]
Wait…so what we do in multiply lifting isn’t a squat?
From the link you posted:
and:
You are basing your definition on what the lifter is wearing when he performs the lift, and not the actual movement. What if I was wearing a hat when I was squatting? Would that mean I was no longer squatting but doing something else? How about special shoes that elevate my heels and make it easier to get really deep? Or high socks?
Of course, all of this doesnt really matter since you aren’t a powerlifter, aren’t involved in powerlifting, and your opinion doesn’t matter to people who are powerlifters.
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
Wilba wrote:
Squats existed long before some “federation” made up their own rules. You need to look no further than wikipedia to see all of the variants I was talking about.
Wait…so what we do in multiply lifting isn’t a squat?
From the link you posted:
The quads parallel or powerlifting legal squat descends until the crease of the top of the thighs at the hips is lower than the tops of the knees.
and:
The squat is performed by bending the legs at the knees and hips, lowering the torso between the legs, and then reversing direction to stand up straight again. The torso leans forward to maintain balance.
You are basing your definition on what the lifter is wearing when he performs the lift, and not the actual movement. What if I was wearing a hat when I was squatting? Would that mean I was no longer squatting but doing something else? How about special shoes that elevate my heels and make it easier to get really deep? Or high socks?
Of course, all of this doesnt really matter since you aren’t a powerlifter, aren’t involved in powerlifting, and your opinion doesn’t matter to people who are powerlifters.[/quote]
High socks allow you to squat 5.318692745% more than low socks because of the compression on your calves and shins. If you don’t already wear them, you might as well start since you are a cheater already 
[quote]DF85 wrote:
You are getting your opninns from a site that suggests squatting in a smith machine.
[/quote]
Well of course…in a smith machine I can squat 895lbs, but can only free squat 275. Why wouldn’t you get your opinion from somewhere that allows you to squat 3x more? Duh.