[dwagman]

When I was the Health & Science Editor at Muscle & Fitness I had to go to many an “Arnold.” Arnold and Jim Lorimer were pretty good friends for a long time. I wonder what happened.

One of the years I went I reported in Powerlifting USA on what I observed when Anthony Clark reverse benched 700-something. I was on the platform right next to the right-side judge. The huge crowd was roaring with enthusiasm for Anthony and as he drove the bar off his chest it ended up against the uprights and he slid it up the uprights but it got caught under the lips at the top and he wasn’t able to lock it out nor rack it without help. He got white lights nevertheless and I wrote that this was in error as it was clearly a bad lift. Somehow Jim Lorimer found out about that and wrote a nasty letter to Muscle & Fitness about me and accused me of prevarications. What a jerk. Since we were lifting buddies who went way back to the first ever Bench Press World Championships, Anthony called me and wanted to know why I wrote that. I told him why and he ended up agreeing with my assessment but also stating…and I could just see the smirk on his face over the phone…”I did get white lights though.” I always knew him to be a class act.

Anyway, the Arnold was a zoo then, I can’t even imagine what it must be like since then. I thought that there were too many sports and events as it is. So perhaps this’ll be a good thing. Ever since I got involved in all-round I couldn’t help but wonder why USAWA didn’t have an annual event there showcasing some of the historically great lifts…

—
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

[dwagman]

Denny, this is an interesting question that goes to the heart of what an athlete needs to do to perform at his/her best. Thanks for bringing it up.

I take my training and competing extremely seriously and approach it from a peak performance perspective. I employ a scientific approach and incorporate the newest scientific findings as they become available to optimize and maximize my physiological adaptations to the training stimulus and also use sport psychological techniques to minimize if not eliminate any distractions and to keep my drive high when it needs to be. Meet day, then, becomes the testing ground for all of those focused efforts over months on end to see if I can put it all together and rise to the challenge. Nothing provides me with more satisfaction than to see that I’ve been able to do so.

To reach that goal, however, a properly designed macrocycle requires training the day before the meet. Adding socializing before competition with fellow lifters and friends, or especially attending the national meeting, represents a distraction that will interfere with the attainment of my goals. My mind need not be distracted by talking about stuff that won’t enhance my performance and my body need not be running around when it ought to be resting for the next day’s competition.

With that said, and now removing myself from the equation, socializing in and of itself as a single variable doesn’t necessarily represent something that would destroy what an athlete has set out to achieve. For one it depends on what “socializing” means and what the athlete actually engages in during such activities. Regardless of that, however, it does represent a potential weakening effect on one or more links in the overall chain of peak performance. Since in the end it is difficult to ascertain with 100% accuracy what caused a lifter to garner 2 red lights or miss an attempt/PR outright, it behooves the lifter to step on the platform with all links in the chain being as strong as possible. And so, within the larger context of performing at one’s peak, any lifter would benefit from not socializing the night before competing; the time for that is after the meet.

Competing, of course, also means different things to different people and different people are also motivated for different reasons. So since you mentioned that you don’t believe that you would do any better on the platform if you didn’t socialize the night before, that may or may not be true. It would depend on what the competition actually means to you, what motivates you, what goal(s) you have set for yourself, what challenges you have encountered within your training cycle and those that might present on the platform, and your training approach. Determining the accuracy of your statement, then, would require some investigation. Of note, the approach to attain peak performance differs between sports of different categories (e.g., closed- vs. open-skill) but also within those categories to include athlete skill level, gender, age in sport, level of accomplishment, etc.

In returning to the original thread, where do we stand y’all all-rounders?

—
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

[dwagman]

ET, thank you for the link to the previous discussion about this. I think that all of the chalk I’ve been breathing in over the decades has clogged certain neural activity in my brain…I didn’t remember that I started a similar thread back in 2017. How pathetic!

I believe there is no need to go through the same arguments again; three points suffice:

1. It is hardly relevant how many people actually participate and vote, rather that the organization cares enough about its membership to provide all who care to participate in the democratic process to actually do so.

2. Clint’s right on track about how easy this could be, not to mention additional possibilities to ponder. But first USAWA needs to decide if it wants to make voting more accessible to its membership.

3. Clint, don’t ever hesitate to share your ideas. My perspective is that it’s about putting something out there that could improve the organization. Any idea that could accomplish that is a good idea, such as the one you just shared. If the organization doesn’t believe in the idea, or doesn’t care to improve, it’s at USAWA’s peril, not yours.

And Al, just a correction…I am not the exception…I am the guy who goes to a meet to lift and will not be distracted, hence I don’t go to meetings before competition day. But I most certainly would review a ballot and cast my vote.

—
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

[dwagman]

Agreed. I’ll add that to my list of things to submit.

—
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

[dwagman]

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Thanks for clarifying, ET.

—
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

[dwagman]

ET, I’m absolutely horrified by what you shared with us. It must be really hard for you, being the father to a juvenile delinquent. In wishing you a happy New Year, I hope you’ll be able to control that beast of yours in 2022.

Her abominable behavior reminds me of that one time when Al did a lift and forgot to take his baseball cap off. He really got chastised for that and I think Phoebe should be punished as well. Send her to a salon to receive Chad’s hairdo. That’ll learn ‘er!

OK, so I completely see your point. There are certain instances where it seems perfectly sensible to “break” a rule. Phoebe’s headband and Al’s baseball cap would hardly provide an unfair advantage on a lift. But where do you draw the line? This sorta reminds me of Thomas Jefferson and Theodore Rosevelt and our country’s rule book—the Constitution. The former believed that if the rule book didn’t specifically allow him to do something, he couldn’t do it. The latter believed that if the Constitution didn’t forbid it, he could do it. I see merit in both points. But how does this relate to USAWA, our rules, and more specifically the bench press and allowing blocks, plates, etc. being placed beneath a lifter’s feet?

I think that if anyone out there can point to a precedent, then we’d be covered. And perhaps this is another issue to be raised at the National Meeting. It would only require adding one sentence to the bench press rule. Thomas Jefferson believed that the Constitution should be adjusted with every generation; in other words it’s not written in stone and we do have in fact 27 Amendments to that document. So is that the way to go for us? Or can we simply say that there are some things that are just so axiomatic, that they need not be put in writing…like wearing a headband shouldn’t disqualify a lift? Seems that Denny’s experience would indicate that we can just place plates or a block under a lifter’s feet if she/he needs it.

Are we in agreement on this or should it be raised at the National Meeting?

—
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

[dwagman]

Whoever intends to travel to Ireland for the GC needs to consider that there are entry restrictions in place for people from the U.S.A. See more detail here:

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/traveladvisories/ireland-travel-advisory.html

—
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

[dwagman]

Al, you just ruined my day. I was just trying to be funny with my workout vs. training comment. I had no idea that’s where you’re at. Well, there’s aways bodybuilding…

Thank you for sharing your view. Please consider that this is not a bylaws issue, rather a Rule Book one. And here, the Rules have never allowed for Senior records. Regarding the remainder of your reply, I do believe it has already been addressed. I don’t believe, however, that the Records Director would look like a bad guy for simply pointing out that, “…back then, the rules didn’t provide for a Senior record category; we can’t go back now and add records that occurred before the rules have been updated.” But I’m sure there would be some unreasonable individuals out there. I don’t believe decisions should be based on the few that might lack reason and thus maintain a fundamentally unfair rule that affects all in the future.

As to USAWA vs. IAWAUK, on one hand I certainly agree that there are differences in the rules. But then again everybody knows that if you compete in an IAWAUK meet, those rules apply. So if you want to enter that meet, read up on the rules. Not a big deal. Also, in sport we see that local organizations of a particular sport want to maintain a certain degree of autonomy over the world-governing body. That’s pretty natural and not much different from KS’ gun laws being different than CO’s.

Thanks again, Al. And if you’re a good boy, I’ll make you a wheelchair for your trips to your “workout” with bumper 55 kg’s as back wheels and regular York 10’s for the front. And if you’re REALLY good, I’ll make the hand controls out of Captain’s of Crush that have to be crushed first, before you can manipulate the chair.

—
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

[dwagman]

Geeez ET, thanks for nothing!

I’ve been giving some thought to the Wagman-Todd lift where you combine the multiple Wagman lifts with the multiple Todd lifts…

—
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

[dwagman]

Hey Abe, that’s some awesome lifting. If watching you wasn’t like giving Bill a caffeine injection, nothing will wake that boy up.

Sorry to hear about the stiff-leg DL. I had a Forum discussion about how horrible a lift it is a few years back. You felt what every exercise physiologist and functional anatomist knows—DON’T DEADLIFT THAT WAY! I have to admit that it bothers me deeply when I hear/read things like your story because it just doesn’t have to be that way. If there has ever been a lift that all-round should retire it’s that one, followed by the good morning (at least the way the rules read it must be executed—EXECUTE THAT MOTHER, TOO!).

Thanks for sharing and I hope your injury will heal quickly so that you can continue to set new records.

—
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

[dwagman]

Lance and Abe have been correct, of course. I was hoping to get more detail from Al, but I’ll go ahead and write up a rule change proposal for the membership to consider.

I’d like to thank y’all for contributing your thoughts on this topic; they will prove instrumental in me being able to present something coherent to the members.

—
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

[dwagman]

Al, you WORK OUT? WHAT THE…

Athletes TRAIN, fitness enthusiasts “work out.” Oh, the shame of it!

So Al, perhaps “deny” is a bit too strong a word and “exclude” would be sufficient to accurately describe what Rule V.9. does to the Senior age group.

I’m wondering if you might explain your reasoning for why you’d want to add Seniors retroactively. I explained earlier why I’m against that, but in addition and to be frank, from a lifter’s perspective and someone who most recently competed in the Open Division at the 2019 Worlds, I don’t see by what stretch of the imagination I would contact USAWA to have my records retroactively recognized if there’s a rule change. I’d consider making that request inane. Maybe that’s just me.

From a purely organizational perspective, ET’s on the money with his assessment. Nevertheless, I would like to have a chance to consider your reasoning.

As to you not receiving Senior questions/requests, the reason for that is simple: The Rule Book doesn’t allow it and nobody wanted to rock the boat.

Johnny, what you just mentioned is the whole point of this. Anybody can set an All record but only the Senior/Open guys/gals don’t get their own records, have to go up against everybody else for the All glory, don’t get to have their records count in the All and Senior group, and therefore don’t get to “double dip” the records count like everybody else as Al so astutely observed some time ago. This is just so unfair and…but no need to circle back to the obvious points already made.

—
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

[dwagman]

Oh, one more thing…Johnny is also correct about the women probably not taking up that much time because there are much fewer women competing than men. The same thing holds true for Seniors as there are significantly fewer Seniors competing than Masters, both on the women’s and men’s side of the equation.

Notwithstanding that observation, and the issue of fairness, as an organization we should collectively look to the future and what we can do to attract new talent to our great strength sport. Allowing 20 to 39-year olds to set records just like any age group would, at least in my mind, go a long way.

—
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

[dwagman]

Getting back to the main theme of the thread, USAWA’s Bylaws offer consideration regarding the Senior age category and why it should be added to the Record List.

USAWA Bylaws Article 2.E calls for the organization “To maintain a current Record List of the USAWA official lifts.” It therefore follows that if the organization offers different age groupings for all official lifts, that naturally all age groupings must be represented in the Record List.

Since the Bylaws govern the organization and Rule Book, they rank superior to the Rule Book. Since the Rule Book has omitted the Senior age group from record-keeping, that represents an oversight that is easily corrected, indeed must be corrected in an effort to conform to the Bylaws.

Therefore a change to the Rule Book V.9., first sentence, is necessary From:

“Records will be kept for men and women in all weight classes within subgroups of the Junior and Master age groups.”

To:

“Records will be kept for men and women in all weight classes and age groups.”

—
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

[dwagman]

Fundamental to this thread is fairness. If fairness dictates a certain progression of the rules, then just because implementing it may be time consuming, that should not be a reason not to proceed. Fairness is, after all, the bedrock of sport.

I also think that this thread is veering a bit away from its original purpose, the unfairness of not keeping records for Seniors. But to address Johnny…

I’d go a step farther than Johnny in saying that he is not only absolutely correct that a standardized means of informing the record-keeper would “go a long way” and add that it is absolutely essential.

So why not develop a standardized form specifically for that purpose? Why not also make it the responsibility of the lifter to submit his/her record(s) with that form and within a specified time-period such as 15 days post meet? If the lifter doesn’t do that, or the lifter doesn’t follow the specified format, there will be no record added to the list. That standardized form should be on the website to fill out, which they could even do on their phone at the meet site. Pulldown tabs could have the correct name of the lift that the lifter selects, along with all other pertinent information. That would then allow Johnny to import that data directly in to Excel after having just a quick look at the meet director’s results for confirmation. Conversions from kg to lbs, vice versa, could also be automated via formulae within Excel.

I think we should be thankful that Al and Johnny have taken on the records and there are most definitely ways to simplify the task. Excel and website technology allows for this and USAWA should take full advantage of that. Yes, it takes some time to set up the code and to test it before going live, but every hour invested in doing that will save the record keeper days worth in the future.

Check out some very cool examples:

https://usapl.liftingdatabase.com/records

http://www.gripsport.org/lists.htm

Johnny makes another good point regarding the Masters age groupings. Not only does the present grouping system not share any exercise science research support, but it could represent a nightmare for the record keeper. So let’s go ahead and change the increments from 5-years to 10-years, better still, start Masters at 50 or 55 (randomly chosen), better still 60 or 65 (evidence-based). Any concerns about existing records would be ameliorated by keeping them “alive” and available to download on the website via a link called something like “Masters Records up to 2022.”

—
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

[Author]

Posts