Well, uh, in one you have a shirt helping you lift the weight.
In the other, you dont.
…still dont see the difference?
Or are you going to argue that the shirt doesnt help lift the weight?
No I’m not. But the mechanics of the lift are the still the same.
You have to use your muscles to push the bar.
You don’t just let the weight fall on you and then decide to start lifting when you get near to lockout.
Is that what you think happens with shirts???
[/quote]
If I told you I had a 200 pound overhead press, and you asked me to show you, and I loaded the bar accordingly, picked it up, then bent my legs and used my leg drive to help lift the weight…
would you agree that I had a 200 pound overhead press, or would you correct me and tell me that the exercise I performed was a “push press” and not an “overhead press”?
Are the two exercises the same because the movement is similar? Or is it a different exercise because a push press implies that leg drive is used and an overhead press implies that no leg drive is used?
Wow, you are lost. Can you read? I never said you couldn’t have an opinion. Have all the opinions you want, just don’t expect a sport you don’t care about to change to fit you.
[/quote]
I dont expect the sport to change.
I expect the sport to stay the same, I expect my opinion to stay the same, and I expect I’ll voice the same opinion in the future.
See, Mal, having an opinion about something doesnt mean you expect things to change to fit your opinion. My opinion is that drugs should be legalized; I dont EXPECT drugs to become legal just because I say so. My opinion is that the minimum wage should be raised. I dont EXPECT that it will be raised simply because I say so.
My opinion is that a geared lift should be called a geared lift in every context. This does not mean I EXPECT it to happen.
Read back on fatty mc-whatevers posts. In it, he’s at a meet with someone, and the BENCH PRESS is announced, saying someone will be attempting 1000 pounds (or something like that).
The person fatty was with didn’t know about bench shirts, and as such, was amazed that a human being could move all that weight without any assistance.
Now, think about this for a second… as a promoter (not a lifter, a promoter) which sounds more impressive: 1000 pound bench press tomorrow! Or… 1000 pound geared bench press tomorrow!
Which do you think is going to get more people interested?
Ya know, you keep talking about how lifters arent ashamed of using gear. But its not even the lifters I’m talking about, its all the people that promote the sport, its the people that use misleading terminology to attract more attention, its the fact that you can find a youtube video of “1008 pound bench press” or wikipedias “world record bench press” states that the record for the bench press is 1036. I suppose those people just forgot to mention that its a geared lift, right?
Or could it be that they’d just rather not mention it because it sounds cooler that way?
I see, a criminal and a politician.
Hey, remember when you asked me if I play any sports, and when I replied that I sometimes play racketball with my friends, a bunch of people used that to discredit my opinion?
Maybe I should do that here. Maybe I should just say something like “Wow two reasons not to trust your opinion about anything! No wonder you have a warped sense of honesty and integrity! I wonder why I’m even arguing about dishonesty with a CRIMINAL and a POLITICIAN in one… clearly you are dishonest on so many levels that you cant even comprehend honesty!”
…nah. That would just be an attempt to get out of actually arguing my position though an ad hominem attack.
[quote]malonetd wrote:
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Well, uh, in one you have a shirt helping you lift the weight.
In the other, you dont.
…still dont see the difference?
Or are you going to argue that the shirt doesnt help lift the weight?
No one is arguing that, but, uh, where exactly is the difference in mechanics here? Moron.[/quote]
Same question to you, then. Why is a push press called a push press and not an overhead press (when it still, clearly, involves pressing the weight overhead)?
The thought crossed my mind that perhaps in saying “apply to me” you actually meant “affect me”.
Meaning you are neither a poltician nor a criminal, but politics and crime affect you (thus you have a right to an opinion on them).
If that is what you meant, I apologize for misreading what you wrote (however, I dont think it makes much sense to say that women dont affect you, but thats another argument entirely).
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Hey, remember when you asked me if I play any sports, and when I replied that I sometimes play racketball with my friends, a bunch of people used that to discredit my opinion? [/quote]
Yes, I remember. Now I ask you to remember that I wasn’t one of them; I only asked the question. I try not to do things like that.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
malonetd wrote:
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Well, uh, in one you have a shirt helping you lift the weight.
In the other, you dont.
…still dont see the difference?
Or are you going to argue that the shirt doesnt help lift the weight?
No one is arguing that, but, uh, where exactly is the difference in mechanics here? Moron.
Same question to you, then. Why is a push press called a push press and not an overhead press (when it still, clearly, involves pressing the weight overhead)?[/quote]
Actually, I’ve always thought the push press was a type of overhead press. I’ve always took overhead press to mean any pressing overhead, strict or otherwise. Push press would be a leg-assisted overhead press and military press would be a strict, non-leg-assisted press. That’s how it makes sense to me.
Of course may have learned it differently. There’s a lot of ambiguity in these sort of terms.
However, regarding the RAW vs. geared bench press, the two lifts are nearly identical. The motion’s the same and the same criteria is used to judge the lifts.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Read back on fatty mc-whatevers posts. In it, he’s at a meet with someone, and the BENCH PRESS is announced, saying someone will be attempting 1000 pounds (or something like that).
The person fatty was with didn’t know about bench shirts, and as such, was amazed that a human being could move all that weight without any assistance.
Now, think about this for a second… as a promoter (not a lifter, a promoter) which sounds more impressive: 1000 pound bench press tomorrow! Or… 1000 pound geared bench press tomorrow!
Which do you think is going to get more people interested?
Ya know, you keep talking about how lifters arent ashamed of using gear. But its not even the lifters I’m talking about, its all the people that promote the sport, its the people that use misleading terminology to attract more attention, its the fact that you can find a youtube video of “1008 pound bench press” or wikipedias “world record bench press” states that the record for the bench press is 1036. I suppose those people just forgot to mention that its a geared lift, right?[/quote]
You know, I almost, kinda get what you are saying, but I think you are missing my point. It’s called a bench press because that’s what the event is called. It’s the bench press portion of a powerlifting meet. Are some people not going to know or understand the use of shirts? Yeah, but mostly they are going to be people that don’t follow the sport anyway.
It’s like a bowler being confused as to why a missed swing in baseball is called a strike, yet in his sport a perfect “hit” is called a strike. Sometimes sports terminology can be misunderstood by people unfamiliar with the sport. If one is really interested, they will take the time to learn more. Or they will forget it and move on. That’s sports, and that’s life.
Oh, and you do realize that you can edit Wikipedia if you don’t like it. Add “geared” if it will make you happy.
[quote]malonetd wrote:
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
malonetd wrote:
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Well, uh, in one you have a shirt helping you lift the weight.
In the other, you dont.
…still dont see the difference?
Or are you going to argue that the shirt doesnt help lift the weight?
No one is arguing that, but, uh, where exactly is the difference in mechanics here? Moron.
Same question to you, then. Why is a push press called a push press and not an overhead press (when it still, clearly, involves pressing the weight overhead)?
Actually, I’ve always thought the push press was a type of overhead press. I’ve always took overhead press to mean any pressing overhead, strict or otherwise. Push press would be a leg-assisted overhead press and military press would be a strict, non-leg-assisted press. That’s how it makes sense to me.
Of course may have learned it differently. There’s a lot of ambiguity in these sort of terms.
However, regarding the RAW vs. geared bench press, the two lifts are nearly identical. The motion’s the same and the same criteria is used to judge the lifts.[/quote]
Lets say the quote above from the article is true.
How is the lift “nearly identical” when there is even the possibility that the weight will be too light to even lower? Thats flat out impossible with raw benching.
I think the heart of the issue here is where different people “draw the line” about the bench press.
Is it not a bench press if they dont lift the weight off the floor? I’m sure, for some, especially when the racks were first introduced, it was.
Is it not a bench press if they wear a bench shirt? For some (me included), its not.
Is it not a bench press if they lift their ass of the bench or dont complete a full ROM? For most, it wouldnt be.
Mal, I’m sure theres SOME point at which, even if federations started accepting it, you’d be opposed to. If a federation started letting spotters “help a little”, or not force the lifter to pause at the bottom of the movement, or something else.
At some point, I think, you’d have the same opinion, only about whatever you feel crosses the line into “not a bench press”.
To go back to the original point of the thread: I think its an excellant attempt; I’m not his judge, as they seemed to have passed it, but my opinion (as good as anybody else’s) is that he didn’t lock ot his left arm properly.
BTW in the UK ‘shirt lifter’ means something else entirely lol!
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
“At one meet, Rychlak had to abandon an 890-pound lift because it wasn’t heavy enough to force the weight down to his pecs.”
Source:
Seriously, is this true?[/quote]
If it is, a shirt could actually add 890 pounds at the bottom position. Lol.
[quote]Old Dax wrote:
To go back to the original point of the thread: I think its an excellant attempt; I’m not his judge, as they seemed to have passed it, but my opinion (as good as anybody else’s) is that he didn’t lock ot his left arm properly.
BTW in the UK ‘shirt lifter’ means something else entirely lol![/quote]
[quote]undeadlift wrote:
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
“At one meet, Rychlak had to abandon an 890-pound lift because it wasn’t heavy enough to force the weight down to his pecs.”
Source:
Seriously, is this true?
If it is, a shirt could actually add 890 pounds at the bottom position. Lol.
Nice link, though.[/quote]
Yeah thats why I dont really believe it. Maybe a 100 pound lift, or something like that, but 890 sounds ridiculous.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
I think the heart of the issue here is where different people “draw the line” about the bench press.
Is it not a bench press if they dont lift the weight off the floor? I’m sure, for some, especially when the racks were first introduced, it was.
Is it not a bench press if they wear a bench shirt? For some (me included), its not.
Is it not a bench press if they lift their ass of the bench or dont complete a full ROM? For most, it wouldnt be.
Mal, I’m sure theres SOME point at which, even if federations started accepting it, you’d be opposed to. If a federation started letting spotters “help a little”, or not force the lifter to pause at the bottom of the movement, or something else.
At some point, I think, you’d have the same opinion, only about whatever you feel crosses the line into “not a bench press”.[/quote]
So i dont mean to cross threads as it were but in the 622 lb. bench you made a remark…“i wonder why there isn’t an apparatus to help olypmic lifters move more weight”.
Well wouldnt you be happy that there isnt and just let sleeping dogs lie or would you want one developed so you can bitch and moan about that and discredit every heavy lift made in that suit too?
[quote]Pipes06 wrote:
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
I think the heart of the issue here is where different people “draw the line” about the bench press.
Is it not a bench press if they dont lift the weight off the floor? I’m sure, for some, especially when the racks were first introduced, it was.
Is it not a bench press if they wear a bench shirt? For some (me included), its not.
Is it not a bench press if they lift their ass of the bench or dont complete a full ROM? For most, it wouldnt be.
Mal, I’m sure theres SOME point at which, even if federations started accepting it, you’d be opposed to. If a federation started letting spotters “help a little”, or not force the lifter to pause at the bottom of the movement, or something else.
At some point, I think, you’d have the same opinion, only about whatever you feel crosses the line into “not a bench press”.
So i dont mean to cross threads as it were but in the 622 lb. bench you made a remark…“i wonder why there isn’t an apparatus to help olypmic lifters move more weight”.
Well wouldnt you be happy that there isnt and just let sleeping dogs lie or would you want one developed so you can bitch and moan about that and discredit every heavy lift made in that suit too?
[/quote]
I would imagine it’s the latter since the lifter in the video was neither a competitive weightlifter or performing an olympic lift.
[quote]Pipes06 wrote:
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
I think the heart of the issue here is where different people “draw the line” about the bench press.
Is it not a bench press if they dont lift the weight off the floor? I’m sure, for some, especially when the racks were first introduced, it was.
Is it not a bench press if they wear a bench shirt? For some (me included), its not.
Is it not a bench press if they lift their ass of the bench or dont complete a full ROM? For most, it wouldnt be.
Mal, I’m sure theres SOME point at which, even if federations started accepting it, you’d be opposed to. If a federation started letting spotters “help a little”, or not force the lifter to pause at the bottom of the movement, or something else.
At some point, I think, you’d have the same opinion, only about whatever you feel crosses the line into “not a bench press”.
So i dont mean to cross threads as it were but in the 622 lb. bench you made a remark…“i wonder why there isn’t an apparatus to help olypmic lifters move more weight”.
Well wouldnt you be happy that there isnt and just let sleeping dogs lie or would you want one developed so you can bitch and moan about that and discredit every heavy lift made in that suit too?
[/quote]
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
undeadlift wrote:
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
“At one meet, Rychlak had to abandon an 890-pound lift because it wasn’t heavy enough to force the weight down to his pecs.”
Source:
Seriously, is this true?
If it is, a shirt could actually add 890 pounds at the bottom position. Lol.
Nice link, though.
Yeah thats why I dont really believe it. Maybe a 100 pound lift, or something like that, but 890 sounds ridiculous.[/quote]
Most people in the know, know that Gene supposedly can’t bench over 600 raw. Do the math.
I used to train at Mendelson’s gym in the past and he would need a shitload of weight just to get it to touch his chest.