In Light of the 3005 Total

[quote]frankjl wrote:

[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:
He was accused of using a blast shirt under two t-shirts (most definitely used to conceal said blast shirt) to bench in the raw division at a supertraining meet a while back. It seemed to have been an issue that naturally fizzled out, but to denounce his own squat later in light of all of this would be a smart move by him.

If you read The 48 Laws of Power by Robert Greene, you’ll notice Lily used one of the EXACT ideas in the books; Build a reputation of being righteous and truthful in the eyes of the public, so you can lie and deceive when you get the chance.[/quote]

I don’t know if you’ve ever spoken to Brandon, but I don’t think he would be familiar with that particular book. He’s a pretty clever guy, but having been around him he is pretty (brutally) honest and typically says what he thinks. I can’t imagine him saying things like that to put himself in a position of righteousness. And I certainly don’t think he is political enough to read that book and plan it out like that.

That being said, do you think he had a shirt on at that meet? I’ve seen the video, and while it looks bad I can’t see how that could happen. Nobody saw him put it on in the warmup room? Nobody questioned him at the meet? Those blast shirts aren’t easy to get on either. He’s since gone to hit larger numbers in a tank top – probably to remove all doubt.

[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:
In PL terms, that translates into the following: “In the light of all these atrociously high squats being passed in todays PL meets, I’ll be the bigger man and publicly denounce one of my questionably high squats so I can get away with pulling shit like using gear in a raw division.”
[/quote]

Maybe? But I don’t see it. Like I said, he’s gone to hit bigger benches in recent meets.[/quote]

I haven’t directly spoken to Brandon, but as someone who trains at ST and is present for nearly every meet, I’ve overheard numerous conversations with him. I’d agree with you that he’s pretty brutally honest, I’d agree with you that he’s not exactly ‘political’, and I’d agree with you that he’s never read that book, but some people have innate abilities to figure this shit out. I mean, that ‘law’ that I posted above isn’t exactly rocket scientist. (I doubt all of the powerful people before that book was published hadn’t read it either, and they seemed to have figured it out :wink: )

As for whether or not I think he had a blast shirt on…

Not only was I at the meet, I was one of the side-spotters for his benches, and I didn’t think he had a blast shirt on - merely because it hadn’t crossed my mind to look out for one and as a side spotter, you’re looking for downward movement of the bar, not some dudes bare triceps.

THAT said, in the few days after, after I saw some of the photos from a high quality camera of the lifters of the meet (that WEREN’T passed around online), I do think he had a blast shirt on. But that’s just me.

It’s bullshit because, like you asked… No one questioned him at the meet because no one suspected it of him. His bar path looked a little weird, but certainly nothing like that of one in a [real] bench shirt, so it didn’t seem suspicious. As for the ‘no one saw him in the warm up room’ thing… It was one of those “oooh yeah, he did seem to disappear for a minute” piecing-things-together-in-hindsight sorta thing, not something you’d notice in the moment.

(Of course, navid said he saw him, so I’m not entirely sure - like I said, it’s fucking powerlifting and I don’t give nearly enough of a shit to pay this much detail to anything even remotely related to it). I even overheard someone (however, a random lifter, not anyone I knew by name or character - so I’d take the comments validity with a grain of salt) comment that it looked like he had faint bite marks on his arms (which, as you know, the blast shirt would have to be loose to leave FAINT bite marks - which would also solve the “they’re hard to put on” aspect.)

It’s just bullshit, in my opinion, because I think if there was suspicion of foul play at that meet, someone would have called him on it. You can’t call someone on something and expect to prove something days after the fact. I’ve known mark for almost 5 years and I consider him to be a legitimately good guy who puts on a legit meet - I truly don’t think he or anyone else at ST would let that sort of shit fly. Well, maybe Cara. She’s a total cunt.

As for Brandon and your opinion of him not putting himself in a position of righteousness, did you happen to read the obnoxious post from him talking about how he hates that people aren’t getting stronger and are just putting on tighter/better gear to put up big numbers? It sure as shit sounded holier than thou/righteous, to me. I have no idea where one would find said rant, though, maybe on his FB? It’s like the whole tattoo thing. The difference between people with tattoos and people without tattoos is that people with tattoos don’t talk shit about without them. Similarly, despite the fact that there’s TONS of hating on geared lifters, geared lifters don’t seem to give much of a shit about raw lifters.

ALL of that said, I didn’t mean to turn this thread into a hate on Brandon thread. He’s strong as fuck and as far as this issue is related, has gone on to bench bigger numbers in a tank top to prove he’s strong enough to have made that bench. Fine. I just think it’s pretty obvious - from this thread alone - that there’s some pretty sheisty shit that goes on in PL.

I’m not gonna say anymore in this thread, though, and keep in mind that this is all just, you know, my opinion, man.

Anyway, for me (and I think many others have this as well) the biggest problem with multiply + loose standards is that I can’t relate at all to the numbers. I have a decent understanding how badass squatting 500,600,700,800, and 900lbs raw (with or without knee wraps) to proper depth is, but I don’t know that about multiply lifting as it is done now. It is also more difficult with single-ply lifting because the suits get better with time BUT the IPF at least has consistent standards + the depth of lifters is pretty good.

Maybe one can deduce something from Yarymbash’s performance, since we know roughly what he squats raw, single-ply, and multiply to decent depth…

[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
Anyway, for me (and I think many others have this as well) the biggest problem with multiply + loose standards is that I can’t relate at all to the numbers. I have a decent understanding how badass squatting 500,600,700,800, and 900lbs raw (with or without knee wraps) to proper depth is, but I don’t know that about multiply lifting as it is done now. It is also more difficult with single-ply lifting because the suits get better with time BUT the IPF at least has consistent standards + the depth of lifters is pretty good.

Maybe one can deduce something from Yarymbash’s performance, since we know roughly what he squats raw, single-ply, and multiply to decent depth…

http://youtu.be/eZxjRwOeHAM

[/quote]

Trivia fact! That was my video that someone from Russia downloaded and put up under their name. That’s my voice saying “nuh uh” when the lady in front decided to stand up in front of a sea of people.

I would invite you to look at other videos of squats at that event (XPC Finals 2013) while you’re at it.

[quote]frankjl wrote:

[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
Anyway, for me (and I think many others have this as well) the biggest problem with multiply + loose standards is that I can’t relate at all to the numbers. I have a decent understanding how badass squatting 500,600,700,800, and 900lbs raw (with or without knee wraps) to proper depth is, but I don’t know that about multiply lifting as it is done now. It is also more difficult with single-ply lifting because the suits get better with time BUT the IPF at least has consistent standards + the depth of lifters is pretty good.

Maybe one can deduce something from Yarymbash’s performance, since we know roughly what he squats raw, single-ply, and multiply to decent depth…

[/quote]

Trivia fact! That was my video that someone from Russia downloaded and put up under their name. That’s my voice saying “nuh uh” when the lady in front decided to stand up in front of a sea of people.

I would invite you to look at other videos of squats at that event (XPC Finals 2013) while you’re at it.[/quote]

That meet is pretty strict. I was there at the 2012 one, and like 75% of the lifters bombed because the judges were going for legit depth.

[quote]infinite_shore wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:
Lol my training partners and I don’t use boards very often, but whenever we do we usually just stick the 2-board under our shirt to hold it in place. We call them Hoff presses haha.[/quote]

And now we have “Hoff squats” aka quarter squats.[/quote]
We used to call those Wilkersons lol.

Or maybe it goes like this:

You have the Anderson squat, which is just the lockout.

Hoff squats are about a quarter.

And Wilkersons are about half.

[quote]csulli wrote:
Or maybe it goes like this:

You have the Anderson squat, which is just the lockout.

Hoff squats are about a quarter.

And Wilkersons are about half.[/quote]
I thought an Anderson squat was a bottom up squat.

[quote]deepsquats220 wrote:

[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:

[quote]deepsquats220 wrote:
When thinking of BS judging people generally flame multi-ply first because lets face it, there is more BS judging in multi-ply. Sure there are some feds that have strict judging, but as a whole a lot more junk is passed through multi-ply than raw or single. Honestly you dont see nearly as many dudes burying squats in gear as you do raw.

It’s foolish to say you don’t care about the standards because it is another fed. We’re all in this together and it would everything much easier if standards were actually enforced. [/quote]

But we aren’t all in this together though.

To me, it’s like getting upset over someone playing Monopoly with house rules. This is just a game, and I’m playing for fun. If I don’t like high squats, that means that, when I compete, I squat to depth. If other folks don’t want to do that, and they join a fed that allows them to, then that’s cool.[/quote]

I understand what you are saying, but wouldn’t it be so much easier if all the feds were consistent and you could just determine who the actual strongest lifter was (comparing different feds) by just looking at numbers? I understand you are always going to have tolerances and the judging will never be the exact same. Just seems silly to me that it’s like well this dude squatted 650 in usapl but this dude did 725 in spf so who is truly stronger. I like your thoughts that you don’t care when its not your fed, and I have some of the same thoughts. It just discredits powerlifting in my eyes, might be stupid but it does.[/quote]

I don’t really care about things being easier/being able to determine who the strongest lifter is.

Powerlifting isn’t about who is the strongest person, it’s about who can lift the most weight. There have been tons of times where the strongest person at a meet did not win because they did not have the right technique or strategy to hit the biggest numbers. For a lifter, this includes knowing how the judging is going that day and taking advantage of it, at least if the goal is winning.

This stuff doesn’t discredit powerlifting to me, it discredits that fed. Again, these guys are playing with house rules that I don’t like, so I’m not going to play Monopoly with them.

[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:

[quote]deepsquats220 wrote:

[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:

[quote]deepsquats220 wrote:
When thinking of BS judging people generally flame multi-ply first because lets face it, there is more BS judging in multi-ply. Sure there are some feds that have strict judging, but as a whole a lot more junk is passed through multi-ply than raw or single. Honestly you dont see nearly as many dudes burying squats in gear as you do raw.

It’s foolish to say you don’t care about the standards because it is another fed. We’re all in this together and it would everything much easier if standards were actually enforced. [/quote]

But we aren’t all in this together though.

To me, it’s like getting upset over someone playing Monopoly with house rules. This is just a game, and I’m playing for fun. If I don’t like high squats, that means that, when I compete, I squat to depth. If other folks don’t want to do that, and they join a fed that allows them to, then that’s cool.[/quote]

I understand what you are saying, but wouldn’t it be so much easier if all the feds were consistent and you could just determine who the actual strongest lifter was (comparing different feds) by just looking at numbers? I understand you are always going to have tolerances and the judging will never be the exact same. Just seems silly to me that it’s like well this dude squatted 650 in usapl but this dude did 725 in spf so who is truly stronger. I like your thoughts that you don’t care when its not your fed, and I have some of the same thoughts. It just discredits powerlifting in my eyes, might be stupid but it does.[/quote]

I don’t really care about things being easier/being able to determine who the strongest lifter is.

Powerlifting isn’t about who is the strongest person, it’s about who can lift the most weight. There have been tons of times where the strongest person at a meet did not win because they did not have the right technique or strategy to hit the biggest numbers. For a lifter, this includes knowing how the judging is going that day and taking advantage of it, at least if the goal is winning.

This stuff doesn’t discredit powerlifting to me, it discredits that fed. Again, these guys are playing with house rules that I don’t like, so I’m not going to play Monopoly with them.
[/quote]

True, should have said who is the best lifter between a 650 buried and a high 725.

[quote]Silyak wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:
Or maybe it goes like this:

You have the Anderson squat, which is just the lockout.

Hoff squats are about a quarter.

And Wilkersons are about half.[/quote]
I thought an Anderson squat was a bottom up squat. [/quote]
Paul Anderson used to like to do these crazy heavy squat lockouts which became named after him.


Although Paul Anderson could certainly bury a squat like a son of a gun when he wanted to. Still possibly the strongest dude ever.

The dude doubles my squat so what I think doubtfully means anything to him. Here’s what bothers me; you had to know your squat was short. The video was from the front, the hardest place to tell. Get somewhat close and the head judge gives it to you.

The second thing that gets me is all his boys got so amped up over getting it. The dudes I lifted with would have just stood there and said, “Bro, you’s was short”

I will say that was the the heaviest and deepest 1/4 squat I have seen.

^^ Pretty much that. I’m waaaaaay weaker than that guy but my lifting partner would’ve just shook his head at me if I tried to call that a PR.

what bothers me most about this thread is how Kaz’s first squat was actually red lighted by a judge

[quote]MattyXL wrote:
what bothers me most about this thread is how Kaz’s first squat was actually red lighted by a judge[/quote]
Yes. I was wondering wtf that was lol.

[quote]Kristoph wrote:
^^ Pretty much that. I’m waaaaaay weaker than that guy but my lifting partner would’ve just shook his head at me if I tried to call that a PR.

[/quote]

I think you guys are misunderstanding the difference between training and a competition.

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]MattyXL wrote:
what bothers me most about this thread is how Kaz’s first squat was actually red lighted by a judge[/quote]
Yes. I was wondering wtf that was lol.[/quote]
Also, in the same video, Kaz’s third bench was disallowed, but it looked like he got it. What happened there? Was he too sideways or did one of the spotters touch it?

Powerlifting watch had a letter from Donnie Thompson where he claims that he has a side view video of Hoff’s squat that shows him hitting depth. Has anyone been able to find that video posted anywhere?

[quote]Re.po wrote:
Powerlifting watch had a letter from Donnie Thompson where he claims that he has a side view video of Hoff’s squat that shows him hitting depth. Has anyone been able to find that video posted anywhere?[/quote]

I could be wrong but there always seems to be a “phantom” side video that proves depth

If you don’t like how a fed judges then don’t lift in their meets.

If you don’t like gear, lift raw.

If there’s an organization or brand who’s values run counter to yours, act like they don’t exist (enough people do this and they go away), find one that does match your values and help build that brand by engaging with it and spreading the word to others.

Pretty simple.