[quote]Power GnP wrote:
ouroboro_s wrote:
Power GnP wrote:
ouroboro_s wrote:
One of the kids I train with is 5’5" and 220lbs. He’s been pretty successful. Wide as hell but successful.
Which kid if you don’t mind me asking? A CPU lifter?
Andrew Cameron. He competed Sub-j and started competing junior this year. I don’t think he’s set any records but I think he will once he get’s his head out of his backside. His issue is mental rather than physical. He’ll be in Moosejaw with me in April. Will you be there?
Oh so he’ll be 100kg Jr at Nationals? I didn’t see him in any CPU results, has he done some meets?
Yup, I’ll be there March 31st to April 4/5th as I’ve got some AGM related things to attend to early on then I lift as Junior a few days in, its good to see your making the trip all the way out to Sask![/quote]
He’s done a number of meets. He hasn’t hit any spectacular numbers yet but he will. I sound like his mom pimping for him 
He actually competed juniors last year. I just checked Rheas list on the forums and his name isn’t there but he’s supposed to be. He’s a bit short bus sometimes.
I’m pretty stoked for the meet. I’ve hear MJ has some nice hotsprings. My eyes are on the Czech Republic in September.
Sorry for the hijack.
I know what you mean… at the moment I’d be competing in the 75kg class, but seeing as I’m only 5’9, its way too light to actually compete and do well against lifters are a few inches shorter than me.
As mentioned above, you have more room with weightclasses, so it’s up to you to decide. If you wanna be big, then go for for 198s or 220s.
I plan on doing my first meet this summer, and I’m coming to grips with the fact that 165 is definitely not ideal. Down the road I want to get compete in or around 200-220.
(I finally go to 170lbs and it was a letdown, I thought I’d be a lot bigger. You will probably get to 181 and be like… is this it?)
No matter what weight class. Seriously try it by yourself. Cut to 165 see what happend. Get up to 181 and see. Don’t be afraid to play with your weight. Like myself i hit bigger number as a 90 but my wilks is lower so waht matter? bigger lift or better placing? it’s your choice
Jon
[quote]Jonathansucks wrote:
No matter what weight class. Seriously try it by yourself. Cut to 165 see what happend. Get up to 181 and see. Don’t be afraid to play with your weight. Like myself i hit bigger number as a 90 but my wilks is lower so waht matter? bigger lift or better placing? it’s your choice
Jon[/quote]
X2…it doesn’t matter what weightclass your in as long as your kicking ass and happy being in it. Just remember being short in general gives you a leg up in this sport…Jonahtonsucks, dude where have you been? that mofo barbell thread still going or is it lost? I enjoyed that alot.
[quote]Jonathansucks wrote:
No matter what weight class. Seriously try it by yourself. Cut to 165 see what happend. Get up to 181 and see. Don’t be afraid to play with your weight. Like myself i hit bigger number as a 90 but my wilks is lower so waht matter? bigger lift or better placing? it’s your choice
Jon[/quote]
So I looked up this Wilks thing and I honestly can’t believe powerlifting bothers with arbitrary nonsense like that. You win by putting up the biggest total in your weight class, right?
If you’re going to do stats in sports, make them clear cut, not this crock:
[quote]reduced total = total lifted 500/(a+bx+cx^2+dx^3+ex^4+fx^5)
Where x is the body weight of the lifter in kilograms
The coefficients for men are:
a=-216.0475144
b=16.2606339
c=-0.002388645
d=-0.00113732
e=7.01863E-06
f=-1.291E-08
The coefficients for women are:
a=594.31747775582
b=-27.23842536447
c=0.82112226871
d=-0.00930733913
e=0.00004731582
f=-0.00000009054[/quote]
Why can’t it be as simple as pound for pound?
[quote]muscleshark wrote:
Jonathansucks wrote:
No matter what weight class. Seriously try it by yourself. Cut to 165 see what happend. Get up to 181 and see. Don’t be afraid to play with your weight. Like myself i hit bigger number as a 90 but my wilks is lower so waht matter? bigger lift or better placing? it’s your choice
Jon
So I looked up this Wilks thing and I honestly can’t believe powerlifting bothers with arbitrary nonsense like that. You win by putting up the biggest total in your weight class, right?
If you’re going to do stats in sports, make them clear cut, not this crock:
reduced total = total lifted 500/(a+bx+cx^2+dx^3+ex^4+fx^5)
Where x is the body weight of the lifter in kilograms
The coefficients for men are:
a=-216.0475144
b=16.2606339
c=-0.002388645
d=-0.00113732
e=7.01863E-06
f=-1.291E-08
The coefficients for women are:
a=594.31747775582
b=-27.23842536447
c=0.82112226871
d=-0.00930733913
e=0.00004731582
f=-0.00000009054
Why can’t it be as simple as pound for pound?[/quote]
Complete these sentences with properly descriptive adjectives:
“A 150 lb guy pulling 450 is _____. A 300 lb guy pulling 900 is _____.”
“A 150 lb guy benching 300 is _____. A 300 lb guy benching 600 is _____.”
“A 150 lb guy squatting 375 is _____. A 300 lb guy squatting 750 is _____.”
I doubt you’ll use the same words for both lifters.
Haha, I’m sorry I even mentioned pound for pound. Yes, the higher the bodyweight, the lower the pound for pound numbers seem to get and thus a heavier guy that is pound for pound as strong is more impressive.
Although, if I may, I’d prefer you use a 200 pound and 300 pound example. I don’t yet understand why an adult strength athlete would want weigh 150 pounds. I mean, wouldn’t they want to be identifiable as a strength athlete?
Also, do you think comparisons between weight classes are necessary in this sport? It’s understandable if people fantasize “if Fedor and GSP were the same weight,” but thats a different sport with many more intangibles, no?
Thanks.
[quote]masonator wrote:
I always kind of wish I was shorter when I’m lifting. 6’1 @220 sucks compared to 5’8 @220.[/quote]
Tell me about it. My lifting partner is short and weighs the same as I do. It’s infuriating because I have to squat 2x the distance he does…and bench…and pull…
[quote]muscleshark wrote:
Haha, I’m sorry I even mentioned pound for pound. Yes, the higher the bodyweight, the lower the pound for pound numbers seem to get and thus a heavier guy that is pound for pound as strong is more impressive.
Although, if I may, I’d prefer you use a 200 pound and 300 pound example. I don’t yet understand why an adult strength athlete would want weigh 150 pounds. I mean, wouldn’t they want to be identifiable as a strength athlete?
Also, do you think comparisons between weight classes are necessary in this sport? It’s understandable if people fantasize “if Fedor and GSP were the same weight,” but thats a different sport with many more intangibles, no?
Thanks.[/quote]
You seem to be forgetting that women and teens compete too. 200 pounds isn’t a magical number that you have to reach to look strong. There are little guys and plenty of women that look like they lift at less than 200lbs.
You need to compare between weight classes somehow if you want to pick an overall winner at a meet.

Yes the thread is back now. You seem to forget two important things . First off stop worrying about wich weight class you want to compete, just fuckin’ compete. Stop worrying about the look you will have, if you lift you will look as it. Lift seriously and you will look muscular.
Look at the guy, middle row in the center , does he looks like he lift? He’s sitting a 152 pounds
[quote]Pipes06 wrote:
muscleshark wrote:
ahh, well a consensus seems to have been reached.
Any teaching bench form advice?
uumm…hmmm…its really hard for me to explain it. I believe dave tate has a short article on this site on how to properly set up for a bench. But for me and my dumbed down version. I like feet out wide, but FLAT on the floor with a nice stretch in your quads. legs would resemble the greater than sign >. At that Go for an accordian back with just your traps and butt on the bench, so an arch in your back. Tuck elbows and go down to the bottom of your pec. Not your belly, not your nipples. [/quote]
Hey, thanks for reminding me about leg drive!! Just got a 10pound PR with it. I was worried my DL was going to double my bench but now I’ve widened the gap a bit.
[quote]buckeye girl wrote:
You need to compare between weight classes somehow if you want to pick an overall winner at a meet.[/quote]
Sorry, I guess in my newbie status, I didn’t consider they pick overall winners at meets. Figured it was weight classes, (and age and sex) and that’s it. Don’t you think Wilk’s is a bit overcomplicated for its purpose though?
[quote]muscleshark wrote:
buckeye girl wrote:
You need to compare between weight classes somehow if you want to pick an overall winner at a meet.
Sorry, I guess in my newbie status, I didn’t consider they pick overall winners at meets. Figured it was weight classes, (and age and sex) and that’s it. Don’t you think Wilk’s is a bit overcomplicated for its purpose though?
[/quote]
nahh…just leave it to the people that are going to award the trophy or simplify it by this:
http://www.marylandpowerlifting.com/wilks.asp
[quote]muscleshark wrote:
buckeye girl wrote:
You need to compare between weight classes somehow if you want to pick an overall winner at a meet.
Sorry, I guess in my newbie status, I didn’t consider they pick overall winners at meets. Figured it was weight classes, (and age and sex) and that’s it. Don’t you think Wilk’s is a bit overcomplicated for its purpose though?
[/quote]
Most meets don’t have a large enough volume of lifters in any given weight/age class so awarding awarding a gold medal to a lifter who beat no one is kind of pointless.
Wilk’s and related relative strength formulas are good in that they allow a true champion to be crowned, and also help to determine the best lifters at smaller meets…regardless of bodyweight/gender.
[quote]Pipes06 wrote:
muscleshark wrote:
buckeye girl wrote:
You need to compare between weight classes somehow if you want to pick an overall winner at a meet.
Sorry, I guess in my newbie status, I didn’t consider they pick overall winners at meets. Figured it was weight classes, (and age and sex) and that’s it. Don’t you think Wilk’s is a bit overcomplicated for its purpose though?
nahh…just leave it to the people that are going to award the trophy or simplify it by this:
http://www.marylandpowerlifting.com/wilks.asp[/quote]
thanks! by lift, it’s referring to total, right? because there’s no way to specify the lift.
According the another source posted in this thread, 120+ wilks numbers are some of the best all time but I plugged in my deadlift and got a 155. An approximated total gives me a 324 wilks, so I’m confused as to which to go with.
Also, when do wilk’s numbers start getting “good?” Great? Elite?
And, is this statement true: As I put on bodyweight, if I remain pound for pound as strong or get pound for pound stronger, my wilks goes up.
For example, if I gain 1 pound and improve by 5 pounds on a lift, does my wilks go up?
Lol, thanks for putting up with my bs.
the 120 wilks os for bench press my friend. And, is this statement true: As I put on bodyweight, if I remain pound for pound as strong or get pound for pound stronger, my wilks goes up.
For example, if I gain 1 pound and improve by 5 pounds on a lift, does my wilks go up?
If you up enought the lift to match the weight gain. That being said now you know that you capable of a 324 wilks, strive for a 400 wilks and then a 500 wich is elite class.
[quote]Jonathansucks wrote:
the 120 wilks os for bench press my friend. And, is this statement true: As I put on bodyweight, if I remain pound for pound as strong or get pound for pound stronger, my wilks goes up.
For example, if I gain 1 pound and improve by 5 pounds on a lift, does my wilks go up?
If you up enought the lift to match the weight gain. That being said now you know that you capable of a 324 wilks, strive for a 400 wilks and then a 500 wich is elite class. [/quote]
Yes, if you remain pound for pound as strong, your wilks will go up. As you get heavier, the ratio of (increase in total)/(increase in weight) needed to maintain your wilks decreases.
Hey all, I figured I’d update this thread. Just had my first meet. As far as weight classes, I’ve seemingly stopped gaining weight at 175-176, but strength is going up and fast. There’s still 10ish pounds until I’m out of range for 181.
First meet was a great experience.
BTW, not exactly scientific or anything, and it is for a different sport, but in the “Weightlifting Encyclopedia,” Artie Drechsler gives Roman’s recommendations of the “ideal” bodyweights based on your height (Page 408, figure 4).
At 5’6" (based on the older OL weightlifting classes which have changed since this book was written) Roman suggests that 82.5 kg (181.5 lbs.) would be the ideal weight class. But body structure might change that reasonably up or down one weight class (165-198).
Obviously, as I mentioned, differences between powerlifting and OL’ing might make a difference in these recommendations. Also, Drechsler is a little less dogmatic about ideal weight classes than Roman and lists a number of factors that might come into play.
hahahah man your smiles after you did your last 2 attempts in the deadlift…priceless lol
keep it up lol