Record Days

[KCSTRONGMAN]

Though I was not at the national meeting, I would like to speak about the new rule on record days. I am in favor of this rule, though I find it troubling that it was necessary. I do believe that the only reason to have a record day or participate in a record day is to set or break records, thus padding your record count. I have only participated less than a handful or record days. The last one I completed 7 lifts. I was able to go all out on all of them, because they were all individual finger lifts. And since there were only 4 lifters, it didnt really detract from others, it seems. That being said, it is obvious that there is a limit to how many lifts you can actually go all out on. And if you are not going all out, of how much value is that record, really? With the exception of one record day (where I just chose records from the book when I got there), I have actually trained for the lifts of the records I go after (whether it be in a record day or a record session after a meet). I feel like it gives a little more merit to the record itself. Clearly, if I am breaking 75 records during a record day, I am merely going through the motions on some, if not many-most. I might be taking token lifts on obscure lifts that maybe have no records. And if I am involved in a record day and I am not officiating or loading my a*& off for others, but instead I am soley focussed on setting 400 records, than I am clearly in it for entirely selfish reasons, thus making it BS. Anyhow, I was not at the national meeting, so I dont get a vote. I am looking forward to my next record day-the World Cup. I have already picked out my lift, and have been training on it for a month. That way when I set a mark, it will be worth something and maybe even stand for a while…

I'm the lyrical Jesse James

[Al Myers]

Good post ET, your views here are pretty much the opinions of those at the meeting. I agree that it is a shame this rule had to be made, but this problem has only begun in the past few years. Before that lifters did not become “recond mongers” at record days. No one was setting 20 plus records at record days then. I know I am probably a big part to blame for this – as it really started when I started keeping track on everyone’s record count!

[dwagman]

Like ET, I wasn’t at the meeting either, and so my voice means little now. Suffice to say, the new rule is the new rule and that’s that.

With that said, however, I actually don’t understand what the fuss was all about. I mean, if there’s a beast out there who can break 10+ records in a day, I feel that person should be encouraged not only to break as many records as possible, but also to ensure that he/she continues with USAWA and breaks even more records in the future. Besides, isn’t the entire purpose of records to create the drive and motivation to break ’em?

Another consideration that would speak against this rule is “making the RD worth it.” I mean, to make it to a RD usually involves a great deal of travel. So, if a lifter can only go for 5 records after that much travel, he/she just might not do it at all, in which case USAWA loses, not the lifter.

The argument about setting up lifts, in my mind, isn’t a solid one as I’ve been to several RD’s and have witnessed the record-setting lifter setting up the equipment his-/herself. In addition, when you do several related lifts there’s really no set-up consideration, e.g., bp-fia and bp-reverse grip; various deadlift versions; finger lifts; etc.

Some time back Al had mentioned on this topic that he felt that if a lifter goes all out, he/she couldn’t really do more than 5 lifts anyway. While I personally agree with that–I got my ass kicked with Al judging me at one of his RD’s with repping weight in the cheat curl-db and I still have nightmares about Al laughing at me–I do think that this depends on the type of lifts performed; clearly grip stuff isn’t systemically as demanding as a Steinborn, People’s, clean and press, etc. But gender is also a consideration….

Gender specific physiology would have to be considered. Research is clear that when it comes to maximal resistance training, a woman’s physiology is less stressed than a man’s. Put another way, men get smoked much sooner than women. With that said, this new rule would add a sex-based bias as a woman could do 10 lifts with significantly less physiological demand as a man doing the same lifts.

Frankly, I find it far more perturbing that a group of lifters in England can set new world records with basically every lift they attempt at any competition. Who else in the world has that option? On a scale of priorities, I think THAT is far more important to discuss than a lifter attempting more than 5 USAWA records on a RD.

• This reply was modified 7 years, 9 months ago by dwagman.

—
Dan

For Body Intellect Brochure click here: https://www.icloud.com/keynote/0fcsokZWooW_1B1uZmL1AI5fA#BI-DW

Those who are enamored of practice without science
are like a pilot who goes onto a ship without rudder or
compass and never has any certainty to where he is going.
Leonardo Da Vinci; 1452-1519

[Al Myers]

Great post Dan! You brought up some very good points.

As I read through your post there was not really much I completely disagreed with. Most meets (not record days) we have now only have 5-6 lifts in them so worrying about “making the RD worth it” by limiting to 5 is not any difference than going to a meet with pre-set lifts and doing 5 lifts in a meet.

I do somewhat disagree with the setup required when lifters do large number of record attempts. I don’t even attempt to do record lifts at the same time during the record day meets I’ve hosted. I feel all I do is help out others get their lifts done – setting up the equipment required, load, and officiate. Now some lifters know what to do here (like you) so obviously that’s not the issue with all lifters.

As for going “all out” on lifts I’ve always said I’m good for only 5-6 per day, but again, that is on big lifts. Lots of our lifts do not severely tax the body so more can be done of course than 5 “all out” if picking these type of lifts. Or picking lifts that that require different muscle groups, ie finger lifting or other grip stuff. I absolutely agree with your statement regarding women and muscle resistance having more muscular endurance. I feel I have read this research in one of your journals. This could also apply to some men as well, depending on their age, strength levels, and prior training emphasis.

At the meeting when Art proposed this, he picked the number 5 because that is what he has always limiting his record days to. My issue with all this is not truly with a number that low, but with lifters who main goal is to set a record number of records instead of records.
We are a democratic organization. This rule can always be changed if come next year lifters feel that 5 is too low.

As for World Records, those can be set at any sanctioned USAWA meet/record day if 3 certified officials are present to officiate the lift. In the USAWA we allow the “one official system” to be used which qualifies a lift for USAWA record, but the IAWA(UK) has always required three officials in all competitions. Our problem is a lack of certified officials. This problem could be solved if more stepped up and became certified USAWA officials so three officials could be used in all competitions.

[dwagman]

OK Al, FIRST THINGS FIRST…

So that 180-pound db cheat curl I failed at when you judged me on your RD; I just got done doing it for 2×2…after 90% 3-RM x2x3 barbell strict curl (real curl style, not the all-round way) and concentration curls 90% 3-RM x2x3. My Al nightmares are over!!

You know, I don’t completely disagree with anything you had to say, either.

Can you believe it?!

Are we getting old, or what? LOL

I suppose my main problem is with having a rule limiting the lifts a person can do on a RD. You have Ruth, as an example, who went out there to set some standards for 50 kg’ers with 41 records. Then you have Thom back in 2009 cranking out 32 records! I think that’s just awesome. That same year you, Al, broke 11 records at the JWC RD. This is all L-E-G-E-N-D-A-R-Y lifting to me…and should be encouraged.

Pad that record book and dare anyone to wipe your name from that book! YEAH!!

But I also see the other side, which is poor Art having to sit through John McKean breaking 14 records in 2014 and 10 in 2011. But rather than limiting the number of records a lifter can attempt outright, perhaps it would be better to give the meet director the power of telling lifters when enough is enough?

On the other hand, RD’s could also be used to help USAWA’s financial woes. Although I’ve always thought it’s a wonderful gesture to have meets without an entry fee, I also feel that it’s fiscally irresponsible and detrimental to the organization. From a RD perspective, then, what could be done is have the lifter pay for his/her records. As an example, a RD could have a basic entry fee that covers up to 5 records. Then a lifter could have a choice to pay, say, $10 for each additional 5 records.

I suppose you’re right, Al, that this rule could be changed. In the mean time, however, I feel as though this thread and discussion should’ve taken place before the vote, not after. I have not been a good USAWA “citizen.”

• This reply was modified 7 years, 9 months ago by dwagman.

—
Dan

For Body Intellect Brochure click here: https://www.icloud.com/keynote/0fcsokZWooW_1B1uZmL1AI5fA#BI-DW

Those who are enamored of practice without science
are like a pilot who goes onto a ship without rudder or
compass and never has any certainty to where he is going.
Leonardo Da Vinci; 1452-1519

[Al Myers]

I always like to have debateable topics announced and discussed before being voted on. That’s why I present the meeting agenda online way in advance of the meeting. Plus that’s why I pushed for new presented lifts be put through a review process by the EB before being presented and passed at the meeting. Lots of times at meetings votes become emotional based and people tend to go along with the majority because they haven’t had the time to “take in” all the factors of the issue at hand. Lots of organizations have eliminated New Business from their agendas all together because of this, and require any new business to be put on the agenda ahead of time or it does not get discussed. Thats a way to prevent a new rule or law getting passed on a whim. However with this 5 lift limit rule proposed by Art in New Business, everyone in the meeting room seemed 100% on board with it and no one was opposed. It passed with unanimous vote.

[Al Myers]

Another thing –

We are very fortunate at this point in the USAWA that we don’t have financial problems keeping our organization going. We don’t spend much money. Our expenses are only the award program and our drug testing program.

Dan, I found that idea of charging extra for records very interesting. I would be interested if any lifters would actually do this. I know several don’t even send in their membership dues each year in case they decide not to compete that year! Actually the precident of “charging for records” was done several years ago at a Gold Cup. Back then the Gold Cup had so many lifters that lifters were limited to their one GC lift only. A great supporter of the USAWA (both participating and financial) Rex Monahan wanted to take another lift for record so he proposed AT THE MEET after his first lift that he wanted to buy a second lift. Bill Clark made the executive decision that yeah, he could have another lift but the price was five hundred dollars! Rex wrote the check on the spot and went on to take another lift!

[dwagman]

Al, please don’t misunderstand my comment about bringing this up now, after the vote took place. I’m fully aware that you had raised this topic before the vote…I was the one asleep at the barbell.

My comment regarding finances was based on your financial report from nationals. I was saddened to read about a $1,000 loss and that it would take 5 years for the website redisign costs to be paid off. Overall, not good.

And at the same time, I’m one of those people you mention who doesn’t pay his membership until such time as I chose to compete. But that shouldn’t really matter too much since USAWA operates on the calendar year; last year I paid my membership when I competed a few days after X-mas, meaning I paid $25 for a 4-day USAWA membership in 2015. This year I paid my membership in April. At the end of the day, USAWA has 25 bucks either way.

At any rate, if Bill Clark could make that executive decision, I think you should send Ruth a bill for, say, $90 for all of the records she broke a few years back. That’ll learn ‘er!

• This reply was modified 7 years, 9 months ago by dwagman.

—
Dan

For Body Intellect Brochure click here: https://www.icloud.com/keynote/0fcsokZWooW_1B1uZmL1AI5fA#BI-DW

Those who are enamored of practice without science
are like a pilot who goes onto a ship without rudder or
compass and never has any certainty to where he is going.
Leonardo Da Vinci; 1452-1519

[Ben Edwards]

When I attend Record Days, I am very respectful of the time it will take out of everyone else’s lifting to “take care of” me when I’m doing my record attempts. I’m sure almost all of us are thoughtful and considerate about this. There are times when it is a bit intoxicating to set a bunch of records if you’re on a roll though. I definitely understand that. Been there a few times myself! I remember the first Record Day I did at Bill Clark’s gym in December of 2003. Tom Ryan and I were setting a bunch it felt like. Not much rest, just getting it done and enjoying some new (for me) lifts and some that I was quite familiar with.

I would support the idea of paying for extra record attempts – to add a little bit to the USAWA coffers. That is very reasonable.

I was pretty surprised when I read that he paid $500 for an extra lift though! That is hardcore.

https://goalorientedtraining.wordpress.com/

[Author]

Posts