KCSTRONGMAN
Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Hey Dan, you may remember this conversation a few years ago?
USAWA DemocracyI guess with an org as small as ours, doing some kind of online discussion and vote would be possible. My concern is with how little online participation we currently have. Our forum participation is WAY down from where it was the first number of years it was available to us. I also feel the long droughts of posts on the forum lends itself to members not returning to check it. I am doing what I can to increase our facebook participation, but it is still pretty lean. So, how many people would participate in an online discussion and vote? And would doing it online exclude other members who currently vote at the national meeting? I will see what I can do to drum up a little traffic here and see if we can get people to chime in.
I'm the lyrical Jesse James
Latest update from ClarK: A bit belated in getting this to you, but a Thursday report from Cindy said that Joe had been able to walk 50 feet with a walker and did 50 seconds on an exercise bike. Great news. The first step in running a marathon is the hardest one. Same applies to recovery from covid-19.
I'm the lyrical Jesse James
The last thing I heard on Joe (from Feb 3) Cindy sends word that Joe’s feeding tube is out, he’s sitting up, has been able to feed himself, and is trying to teach math to the nurses. Looks like he’s back in action. Keep him in your thoughts and prayers. He’s not home yet.
I'm the lyrical Jesse James
Got this update from Bill Clark today:
Joe Garcia is now off the ventilator and breathing on his own. He’s very groggy, but on the mend.
The news continues to be great. We will dedicate tomorrow’s Zercher to his recovery. Keep doing what you do to bolster Joe’s recovery.
BILL CLARK
I'm the lyrical Jesse James
Shoot, it looks like he died during a training session. Cause not yet known.
I'm the lyrical Jesse James
I am more at an inclination to raise this at the national meeting, so that the rule is written properly in the rulebook to allow for such a modification.
I'm the lyrical Jesse James
No sweat, Dan.
ETI'm the lyrical Jesse James
It is from the time of the update. So, Scottish Johnny updates the record list. He sends it to me, and I post it. When I post it, I post the date of the update. That is when the 90 days starts. It is not from the date of the meet, rather the day that I post it as an update. Hope this makes sense. I do plan on adding this to the records page soon.
ETI'm the lyrical Jesse James
I apologize for the typos, but I guess you all get the gist of it. “My kids are not participating’ should read “My kids are now participating’ and “dopey looking sweat bands that people work on their heads” should read “dopey looking sweat bands that people wore on their heads.”
I'm the lyrical Jesse James
You bring up a good point, Dan. Some of our rules allow for modifications to the original rules in instances that warrent it, such as we have very specific rules in regards to the barbell being used, with the exception of “allowing a lighter
and shorter bar to be used for women, older lifters and junior lifters.” What about senior lifters who want to participate, but cannot lift a 45 pound bar? My kids are not participating in all-round and love doing so, but could not complete a completely legal fulton bar bench press, as they could not get their feet on the floor. I would be lying if I said we at KCSTRONGMAN have never used crates to build up the floor for a bench press by one of our members. My daughter and my nephew both have records in the Bench Press-Fulton Bar in our record list. Should those records be discounted due to not explicitly following the rules as written, even though they were done within the spirit of the rules? That the infraction did nothing to aid in the lift other than to allow our junior members to be able to do the lift in the first place? I would have to look more closely, but I would suggest that there are other places in the rule book where there were rules written in a fashion that would apply to the majority of lifters, but not to all. My daughter Phoebe wears a headband almost everywhere she goes. A primary function of the headband is to keep her long,luxurious golden locks out of her face. It would be beneficial to her to wear one while lifting, but our rule book reads “Headgear of any kind is not allowed except for religious purposes. This would include stocking caps, ball caps, headbands, or any other covering of the head.” So, Phoebe is constantly blowing hair out of her face while lifting. Is that the intent to the rule? If so, why not ban hair ties, bows, barrettes and other hair accessories? I reckon it was in an effort to keep our org looking professional, and the org was starting in a time not far removed from the days of those dopey looking sweat bands that people work on their heads. so, while if i let Phoebe wear her headband while she lifts, it would violate the rule as written, but would not be in violation of the spirit of the rules. I recognize this is a digression from the original post about bench pressing, but it is an acknowledgement that perhaps there is a rule or two in there that might need to be looked at in regards to their relevancy at this moment in time and whether there are some modifications to them that make the sport accessible to all without violating the sprit in which the rules were written. Thoughts?I'm the lyrical Jesse James
Thank you Johnny. I know this is a typically thankless job. You are doing a great service to us all.
I'm the lyrical Jesse James
Never met Jack, but Stevie was quite a character!
ETI'm the lyrical Jesse James
Sounds like a fun time. Thank you for sharing Abe.
I'm the lyrical Jesse James
And by “they” I mean where the banquet is held.
I'm the lyrical Jesse James
How far are they from where you are Den? and who would I go about contacting for a newsletter?
I'm the lyrical Jesse James
-
AuthorPosts