Most Recent Milo

Training Powerlifting
41

[quote]KBCThird wrote:
heavythrower wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
derek wrote:
scan7 wrote:
people who don’t compete i don’t care about, who cares what you think?
Just like changing channels whenever “the Swan” comes on, you can simply watch some other sport if you don’t care for it

Not unlike you NOT reading this thread anymore right?

It’s not such a smart notion to exclude non-competitors from the roundtable.

Try and apply that in other areas and you’ll soon see how silly it is.

Maybe I shouldn’t discuss how the Patriots will do with the new guys they got this season. I don’t play in the NFL. Better not put in my 2 cents.

the analogy doesnt hold. the competitors, not the spectators, financially support powerlifting. And that is NEVER going to change, just like tom said, the VAST majority of the public couldnt care less

not sure i agree with that rational, i don’t pay to see NFL football games, nor do i by any NFL products. but i catch a game on free TV every once in a while, or read about a game on ESPN.com, and catch highlights on sports center. so K, does that mean i am not allowed to talk football with my buddies?

what a load of bullshit. i know lots of guys who like me, may have competed in the past in some sort of strength sport, or just your typical gym junkie that likes to lift as heavy as he/she can, that follow the iron game, pl, ol, strongman, etc. but we don’t have a subscription to PLUSA, don’t pay to see PL meets, and don’t tithe 10% of our annual salary to Inzer, so all of us have to STFU?

I am sooooo sick of this attitude. who the hell are you or anybody else who happens to still actively compete to tell others what they can and cant talk about. sure, you can join into a discussion and take the “mightier than thou” attitude and claim your opinion is more relevant because you compete, but what irks me is many do not want a conversation about this stuff going on PERIOD.

Whoa, whoa, whoa, mike. I probably could’ve been clearer: I am not saying that non-competitors should shut up. I am saying that PL does not compare to the NFL (for the reasons I stated in my post.)

I do differentiate between opinions posted by guys who’ve never used gear (who, imo, dont knwo what theyre talking about, but hey, everyones entiteld to an opinion) and guys, such as yourself, who have. But I wasnt the one who told everyone who doesnt compete to shut up, just the guy who pointed out the flaw with the analogy between PL and the NFL

Also, for the record, if you watch the nfl on tv, you ARE supporting the nfl financially - by watching their broadcasts, you justify the INSANE amount of $$$ the nfl gets from the networks, who in turn get it from their advertisers, who pay these princely sums for the right to hawk their products to the 10s of millions of people who watch football every weekend. [/quote]

sorry, i did not mean to snap, and your point about the football analogy is well taken.

42

[quote]apwsearch wrote:
Hey Bro.

I am staying out of this one, but I did want to say to you that I think you may be kind of jaded from the time you spent at Diablo.

Which, quite honestly, I would be too.

The thing that keeps me positive on the sport is the great lifters whom I have around me that focus HARD on strength outside of gear, and are truly strong, then put it on and bang with the best of them.

I can assure you that if you came up here and trained in MN, some of your faith would be restored.

Bottom line, I respect you and your opinions, and wish you nothing but success in your future endeavors.

[/quote]

no problem, and thanks. on my time at diablo.

first off, it is a great gym. i got pretty big a strong there, and it is overall a good bunch of guys who are very supportive of each other.

there are some older guys (frank and dan v ) that were old school lifters(both over 50 years old) that built RAW 500lb benches a long time ago that i respected a lot, so not EVERYONE at Diablo was a gear fanatic.

Andy was built like a tank, and totaled elite recently while injured, and though i think outside of the gym he is kind of “unique” LOL, he has tons of potential and will eventually be a WPO lifter.

Garrett though is a gear guy and totaled elite, to me would be a tremendous strongman competitor. big, rugged, cock-strong SOB if you ask me.

i could go on and on.

i had some issues with a very few of the “team” there after i left, which i have put behind me, but overall my experience there was positive.

43

What’s the future of powerlifting? Will the pursuit of numbers continue to drive the evolution of equipment until the comps consist of leg presses and bench machines?

44

Referring to the gear, not the crew.

No doubt, a strong and very dedicated group of lifters whom I also wish much success.

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
apwsearch wrote:
Hey Bro.

I am staying out of this one, but I did want to say to you that I think you may be kind of jaded from the time you spent at Diablo.

Which, quite honestly, I would be too.

The thing that keeps me positive on the sport is the great lifters whom I have around me that focus HARD on strength outside of gear, and are truly strong, then put it on and bang with the best of them.

I can assure you that if you came up here and trained in MN, some of your faith would be restored.

Bottom line, I respect you and your opinions, and wish you nothing but success in your future endeavors.

no problem, and thanks. on my time at diablo.

first off, it is a great gym. i got pretty big a strong there, and it is overall a good bunch of guys who are very supportive of each other.

there are some older guys (frank and dan v ) that were old school lifters(both over 50 years old) that built RAW 500lb benches a long time ago that i respected a lot, so not EVERYONE at Diablo was a gear fanatic.

Andy was built like a tank, and totaled elite recently while injured, and though i think outside of the gym he is kind of “unique” LOL, he has tons of potential and will eventually be a WPO lifter.

Garrett though is a gear guy and totaled elite, to me would be a tremendous strongman competitor. big, rugged, cock-strong SOB if you ask me.

i could go on and on.

i had some issues with a very few of the “team” there after i left, which i have put behind me, but overall my experience there was positive. [/quote]

45

[quote]KBCThird wrote:

to be honest - and this may seem to some to be splitting hairs - the problem is not with the attitude, the problem is with people who compare lifts. If everyone were to keep in mind the context of the lift, this wouldnt be a problem. For instance, i saw a guy bench 600, I’d say awesome, good job, Im sure it took a lot of work to get there. If I saw someone bench 600 raw, I’d be thinking this is one of the top bench pressers in the world. I dont think I’ve ever heard anyone say “well, reinhoudts squat was only 900” everyone understands that he did it raw.

I wholeheartedly disagree with this paragraph. If PL is objective, how do you not take into account limb length, predominant muscle fiber type, drug usage, nutrition … all of these things affect PL, O lifting, or for that matter, any sport. It is impractical to limit, or classify, or quantify the advantage that the above qualities grant, just as I feel it is impractical to do with gear.

[/quote]

I don’t see how you can say people don’t compare lifts when one record replaces another one. That is whole point of keeping records. Brian Siders has the IPF World Record in the bench of 773 or something. James Henderson used to have it at 711 for a long time.

Brian Siders is a stud and super strong but his 773 is (to me) not as impressive as James Henderson’s lift, which was raw, especially since Brian benches just over 600 raw. However Brian has the record, so you are supposed to say that he is stronger than James in that lift, but to me he wasn’t.

If somebody wore special shoes in a race and set a new record, I don’t think it should replace the old record.

For your second point I don’t agree with how you are looking at things. Of course everybody is different and some people are genetically predisposed to be good at some things. You try to test for drugs, you control your nutrition, and you do the best with what you have.

If someone benches 10 more lbs than me, they are stronger than me in that lift. It doesn’t matter how long their arms are or the size of their chest, they benched more than me. The definition of maximal strength is how much weight you can lift 1 time, period. Not how hard it is for you to overcome your own biomechanics.

And the beauty of powerlifting is that it does a pretty good job of measuring the total body and if you are particularly blessed in one lift, say short arms in the bench, it screws you on another lift (the deadlift in this case).

To me going around comparing body types and muscle fiber types is a cop-out. You don’t know what your genetics are unless you basically devote your life to exploring their limits. You go in with what you have and do the best you can do, there will always be somebody more gifted and someone less gifted.

46

[quote]nptitim wrote:
KBCThird wrote:…

I don’t see how you can say people don’t compare lifts when one record replaces another one. [/quote]

I didnt say they dont, I said they shouldnt

[quote]
That is whole point of keeping records. Brian Siders has the IPF World Record in the bench of 773 or something. James Henderson used to have it at 711 for a long time.

Brian Siders is a stud and super strong but his 773 is (to me) not as impressive as James Henderson’s lift, which was raw, especially since Brian benches just over 600 raw. However Brian has the record, so you are supposed to say that he is stronger than James in that lift, but to me he wasn’t. [/quote]

Just because somebody benches more than someone else, that definitely doesnt make them stronger. My little brother has brute strength, but his technique on the bench, as well as his body mechanics arent as good as mine, so I outbench him (and yes, we are comparing raw benches here.) That doesnt make me stronger, it makes me a better bencher.

well, then you better go complain to the world track assoication because this generation of shoes is nothing like what was worn a half centruy ago, and if you think running on the rubber they run on todya is the same as the onld cinder-rock gravel they used to use, well, I assume you’ve never run on either.

[quote]
For your second point I don’t agree with how you are looking at things. Of course everybody is different and some people are genetically predisposed to be good at some things. You try to test for drugs, you control your nutrition, and you do the best with what you have.

If someone benches 10 more lbs than me, they are stronger than me in that lift. It doesn’t matter how long their arms are or the size of their chest, they benched more than me. The definition of maximal strength is how much weight you can lift 1 time, period. Not how hard it is for you to overcome your own biomechanics.

And the beauty of powerlifting is that it does a pretty good job of measuring the total body and if you are particularly blessed in one lift, say short arms in the bench, it screws you on another lift (the deadlift in this case).

To me going around comparing body types and muscle fiber types is a cop-out. You don’t know what your genetics are unless you basically devote your life to exploring their limits. You go in with what you have and do the best you can do, there will always be somebody more gifted and someone less gifted.[/quote]

the part that i bolded is MY WHOLE POINT. SPORTS ARE INHERENTLY UNEQUAL. It’s ridiculous to point to one advantage (such as gear proficiency) and say “that shouldnt be allowed.” If I hear one more short-armed, barrel-chested, fast-twitch dominant guy complain “well, he has a better tolerance for drugs than I do” or “well, his shirt is better” I think I may throw up in my mouth

47

[quote]heavythrower wrote:

so since the bottom portion of the squat is soooooo dangerous, and the set up out of the rack(as you claim) why not eliminate both form the competition,

[/quote]

Dude… where have you been the WPO did that years ago!! :wink:

My thoughts on the subject basically come down to this… PL is a niche sport. It’s there for the lifters. Compete how you want to compete. Fuck the haters. (HT this isn’t directed at you cos we all know that you’re an incredibly strong SOB who’s as qualified as anyone on this board to talk about it, my problem, as someone else has already stated, is with the casual observer)

If you squat 1000lb in 3x ply are you strong enoguh to do it raw?? HELL NO!! Let’s not have any illusions here. I really don’t care tho!! 1000lb equipped and 700 raw both blow me away. I love this sport and I think we all need to rememeber it’s about strength. Strength guys. It’s just plain and simple.

Do you honestly think that Chuck V or anyone else gives 2 shits about what people think about the gear they use?? I sincerly doubt it.

At an elite level I think anyone slagging off the gear they use is so junvenile. Does the gear give the the ability to move more weight?? You bet your ass it does. If they took off the gear would you be anywhere near the strength levels?? Hell fucking no, get over it.

As for the guy who said about a bench shirt giving 500lbs to a 135lb bencher. The shirt doesn’t support the weight while it’s locked out… He still has to lower it. There’ll always be limits.

48

[quote]KBCThird wrote:
the part that i bolded is MY WHOLE POINT. SPORTS ARE INHERENTLY UNEQUAL. It’s ridiculous to point to one advantage (such as gear proficiency) and say “that shouldnt be allowed.” [/quote]

Unequal because why? Because my arms are looong and my bench SUCKS because of it? Who cares? I dont.

If a 5’-7" 280 lbs, short-armed, barrel-chested guy benched 90lbs MORE than me (looong-limbed, NOT barrel-chested, small joints etc), I say good for him, he out benched me and I don’t care why. He’s the winner, not me.

If I bought a shirt, got proficient at using it and then out benched him by 10lbs, my “win” is pointless. Not to mention so inaccurate so as to be laughable.

Equipment allows you to ARTIFICIALLY improve your totals, period.

If everyone is comfortable with artificially improved nubers, so be it. Just admit it.

49

[quote]derek wrote:

If I bought a shirt, got proficient at using it and then out benched him by 10lbs, my “win” is pointless. Not to mention so inaccurate so as to be laughable

[/quote]

Em… what are you even talking about. If it’s about equipped powerlifting, then yes, you would win, and yes it would be accurate. Like it or not it’s about totalling as high as possible by any means possible.

I actually think this reply is pointless but whatever. At least I can understand both sides of the arugment.

50

[quote]derek wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
the part that i bolded is MY WHOLE POINT. SPORTS ARE INHERENTLY UNEQUAL. It’s ridiculous to point to one advantage (such as gear proficiency) and say “that shouldnt be allowed.”

Unequal because why? Because my arms are looong and my bench SUCKS because of it? Who cares? I dont.

If a 5’-7" 280 lbs, short-armed, barrel-chested guy benched 90lbs MORE than me (looong-limbed, NOT barrel-chested, small joints etc), I say good for him, he out benched me and I don’t care why. He’s the winner, not me.

If I bought a shirt, got proficient at using it and then out benched him by 10lbs, my “win” is pointless. Not to mention so inaccurate so as to be laughable.

Equipment allows you to ARTIFICIALLY improve your totals, period.

If everyone is comfortable with artificially improved nubers, so be it. Just admit it.
[/quote]

first of all I dont understand this question: “unequal because why?” I just listed reasons why.

As far as “artificially inflating” - when you give your squat max, are you “artificially inflating” it because you only when to parallel? Come on, isnt that “artificial” considering that oly guys go ass to grass?

51

There’s also one other thing to measuring strength and this is bodyweight. I mean if I am 188 and am pressing 285, this is more impressive than some fat ass benching his bodyweight@285 or 300. Especially if they are heaving it off of their fat stomachs.

52

[quote]KBCThird wrote:
first of all I dont understand this question: “unequal because why?” I just listed reasons why.

As far as “artificially inflating” - when you give your squat max, are you “artificially inflating” it because you only when to parallel? Come on, isnt that “artificial” considering that oly guys go ass to grass?
[/quote]

Two guys without gear performing ANY lift, not only the big three, is EQUAL regardless of leverages. It’s man against man. Sure weight class can be factored in but that only goes so far. You will see two completely different body types at the same approximate bodyweight.

And what the heck does ATG or just parallel have to do with this argument? Don’t we assume the actual LIFT is the same or are we trying to throw the debate off of gear vs. raw?

No, squat depth isn’t artificial. Artificial is when a foreign material helps you lift much more than you can lift on your own. Simple.

OK, so the gear users don’t care what anyone else thinks. Aside from that statement being a very easy way out of the debate, just explain the excitement you get out of watching a guy squat 250 lbs more than his BODY is capable of?

Sure a 700lb squat is an awesome feat. Why not leave it at that? Why is the extra 300lbs so “magical” knowing full well it’s the gear doing most of that 300 extra?

We know pl-ers are strong sons-of-bitches. No argument here. Just tell me what is so cool about all the extra help you get from your shirts etc.

53

If people just said “I 2ply squated xxx lbs” or “I single-ply benched yyy,” that would make the argument largely moot. It’s when these apples to oranges comparisons are made as if the lifts are the same that so many get wrankled.

54

For myself, since I do not have access to many different shirts/suits/gear, the one and only way I can compare myself to anyone is via a raw (or chalk/belt if you must know) drug-tested lifter.

Whatever records are out there, whatever has been done … the only thing that I can measure myself against is a raw max. So be it. I can’t take time out of my day to “be a hater” on those who I can’t compare myself to. They are doing something different than what I do.

Regards,
Mark

55

[quote]Julius_Caesar wrote:
There’s also one other thing to measuring strength and this is bodyweight. I mean if I am 188 and am pressing 285, this is more impressive than some fat ass benching his bodyweight@285 or 300. Especially if they are heaving it off of their fat stomachs.[/quote]

benching 285 is not impressive unless you’re a woman, 16 years old, or going through chemo.

and if you’re looking to impress others, wouldnt you rather have them say “thats impressive” not “thats impressive FOR SOMEONE HIS SIZE”

56

[quote]derek wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
first of all I dont understand this question: “unequal because why?” I just listed reasons why.

As far as “artificially inflating” - when you give your squat max, are you “artificially inflating” it because you only when to parallel? Come on, isnt that “artificial” considering that oly guys go ass to grass?

Two guys without gear performing ANY lift, not only the big three, is EQUAL regardless of leverages. It’s man against man. Sure weight class can be factored in but that only goes so far. You will see two completely different body types at the same approximate bodyweight.

And what the heck does ATG or just parallel have to do with this argument? Don’t we assume the actual LIFT is the same or are we trying to throw the debate off of gear vs. raw?

No, squat depth isn’t artificial. Artificial is when a foreign material helps you lift much more than you can lift on your own. Simple. [/quote]

ridiculous. so you are just as impressed by a 500 lb squat to parallel as you are by a 500 lb squat atg?!?!

because you didnt JUST put the suit on and immediately add 250 lbs to your squat - or the bench for that matter - you had to work at improving the top end of your ROM.

If you’ve ever used gear, then I shouldnt have to explain this to you. If you’ve never used gear, then you may never understand the absolutely crushing feeling you have when you have a heckuva lotta weight - way more than your raw max - crushing down on you.

57

[quote]derek wrote:
Two guys without gear performing ANY lift, not only the big three, is EQUAL regardless of leverages. It’s man against man. Sure weight class can be factored in but that only goes so far. You will see two completely different body types at the same approximate bodyweight.

And what the heck does ATG or just parallel have to do with this argument? Don’t we assume the actual LIFT is the same or are we trying to throw the debate off of gear vs. raw?

No, squat depth isn’t artificial. Artificial is when a foreign material helps you lift much more than you can lift on your own. Simple.

OK, so the gear users don’t care what anyone else thinks. Aside from that statement being a very easy way out of the debate, just explain the excitement you get out of watching a guy squat 250 lbs more than his BODY is capable of?

Sure a 700lb squat is an awesome feat. Why not leave it at that? Why is the extra 300lbs so “magical” knowing full well it’s the gear doing most of that 300 extra?

We know pl-ers are strong sons-of-bitches. No argument here. Just tell me what is so cool about all the extra help you get from your shirts etc.

[/quote]

I totally agree

58

[quote]KBCThird wrote:
I don’t see how you can say people don’t compare lifts when one record replaces another one.

I didnt say they dont, I said they shouldnt
[/quote]

Then we are in agreement. There should be a geared federation and a non-geared federation (which I realize there are) but in an ideal world (I realize this would be hard) the IPF or ADFPA would retroactively publish raw lifts as records again, and the top 100 in PLUSA would have one set for gear and another for raw.

[quote]KBCThird wrote:
Just because somebody benches more than someone else, that definitely doesnt make them stronger. My little brother has brute strength, but his technique on the bench, as well as his body mechanics arent as good as mine, so I outbench him (and yes, we are comparing raw benches here.) That doesnt make me stronger, it makes me a better bencher.
[/quote]

Yes, it does make you stronger than him. If you can lift more than someone else, you are stronger than that person. Obviously an exercise is only as good as what it represents. If you don’t like and/or agree with the definition of maximal strength being: “the most weight you can lift one time” please provide another one that is objective and measureable

[quote]KBCThird wrote:
well, then you better go complain to the world track assoication because this generation of shoes is nothing like what was worn a half centruy ago, and if you think running on the rubber they run on todya is the same as the onld cinder-rock gravel they used to use, well, I assume you’ve never run on either.
[/quote]

As I mentioned in an earlier post I realize that some equipment that is deemed NECESSARY for the sport will improve that will result in improved performance. I would say that shoes are generally necessary for a sprint. I would say that a bench shirt is absolutely not necessary for a bench press.

A bar is necessary, so if the bar is a bit better balanced or doesn’t flex as much and somebody can lift 10 more lbs with that I am cool with that. And while better shoes and tracks may be helping sprinting, stricter judging (not timing the gun, etc) is hurting it and the simple point is that in the past 20 years the 100 M sprint times have not improved 10-20% like gear improves the lifts.

If the shoes caused somebody to run under 8 secs you can believe there would be a lot of talk about it and whether it should be legal or not.

59

[quote]nptitim wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
I don’t see how you can say people don’t compare lifts when one record replaces another one.

I didnt say they dont, I said they shouldnt

Then we are in agreement. There should be a geared federation and a non-geared federation (which I realize there are) but in an ideal world (I realize this would be hard) the IPF or ADFPA would retroactively publish raw lifts as records again, and the top 100 in PLUSA would have one set for gear and another for raw.
[/quote]

This is one area in which we are in agreement. If I were emperor there would be 1 fed, 4 divisions. raw- drug tested; raw - untested; geared - tested; geared - untested.

By the way, i firmly believe most people would watch the last one. People want the freaks.

[quote]
KBCThird wrote:
Just because somebody benches more than someone else, that definitely doesnt make them stronger. My little brother has brute strength, but his technique on the bench, as well as his body mechanics arent as good as mine, so I outbench him (and yes, we are comparing raw benches here.) That doesnt make me stronger, it makes me a better bencher.

Yes, it does make you stronger than him. If you can lift more than someone else, you are stronger than that person. Obviously an exercise is only as good as what it represents. If you don’t like and/or agree with the definition of maximal strength being: “the most weight you can lift one time” please provide another one that is objective and measureable [/quote]

no, it DOESNT make me stronger than him, it makes me BETTER than him AT THAT LIFT. There is technical proficiency in all these lifts. You hint at as muchy when you say “stronger in that lift.” So let me ask you, if you squat more than me, and i deadlift more than you, who is stronger? Not “stronger ata particular lift” just STRONGER? Theres no way to know.

Or think about this - which is stronger, a 500 lb C&J or a 950 DL?

[quote]KBCThird wrote:
well, then you better go complain to the world track assoication because this generation of shoes is nothing like what was worn a half centruy ago, and if you think running on the rubber they run on todya is the same as the onld cinder-rock gravel they used to use, well, I assume you’ve never run on either.

As I mentioned in an earlier post I realize that some equipment that is deemed NECESSARY for the sport will improve that will result in improved performance. I would say that shoes are generally necessary for a sprint. I would say that a bench shirt is absolutely not necessary for a bench press.

A bar is necessary, so if the bar is a bit better balanced or doesn’t flex as much and somebody can lift 10 more lbs with that I am cool with that. And while better shoes and tracks may be helping sprinting, stricter judging (not timing the gun, etc) is hurting it and the simple point is that in the past 20 years the 100 M sprint times have not improved 10-20% like gear improves the lifts.

If the shoes caused somebody to run under 8 secs you can believe there would be a lot of talk about it and whether it should be legal or not.[/quote]

no you said “a special shoe” dont try to change your words now.

60

[quote]derek wrote:

OK, so the gear users don’t care what anyone else thinks. Aside from that statement being a very easy way out of the debate, just explain the excitement you get out of watching a guy squat 250 lbs more than his BODY is capable of?

[/quote]

Powerlifting isn’t exciting to watch. That’s why it gets no TV time ever and doesn’t have any money in it besides the money powerlifters or gear companies put in it.