Weight Over Bar

by Thom Van Vleck

Thom Van Vleck tossing the 42lb weight at the 2011 Kirksville Games

Some of you may know that several of our USAWA members are currently, or have been, participants in the Scottish Highland Games.  These are strength events, but mostly involve throwing or tossing weights.  One of the events, and my personal favorite, is the “Weight Over Bar”.  I thought I might give a little background on this event, discuss the rules, and explain why I think throwing this type of movement into your training occasionally might be a good way to mix things up and avoid a training rut.

This event involves throwing a weight with a handle over a cross bar for height using one hand only.  Women use a 28lb weight, masters men and under 190lb throwers use a 42lb weight, and all other men use a 56lb weight.  It is thought the weights were originally balance beam scale weights.  In the old system in Scotland a “hundredweight” equaled 112lbs.  Half that was 56lbs and half that was 28lbs.  A “stone” was 14lbs and the 42lb weight was half way between the 28 and 56.  So, basically the 28 was 2 stones, the 42 was 3 stones, and the 56 was 4 stones!  It should be noted old English Anvils also used this measuring system and that is why if you find an English anvil and it says 112 on the side, it’s NOT 112lbs, but 1 hundred weight (112lbs), 1 Quarter Hundred weight (28lbs) and then 2 odd pounds.  So it would be 112 + 28 + 2 = 142lbs!  I know, pretty complicate, just know in the Highland games we throw a 28lb, a 42lb, and a 56lb weight!

There are two ways to get the weight over the bar.  You can “stand” and basically do what would be a “super one hand snatch” and pull the weight up and over your head and over the bar.  Or you can do the “spin” and basically do a “turn” (much like the rotation on the shot put).  That technique is not widely accepted (such as by our USAWA secretary!) plus it’s very difficult to master so unless you are going to take this up as a sport let’s focus on the standing style.  Typically, in competition, you would have “standards” that look much like a high jump bar or pole vault set up.  The bar goes up until only one competitor is left.  Out of the 9 events in the Highland Games, this is the most basic.   It requires the least technique and is often dominated by the strongest athletes.

That is why I think it would make a good training tool to add to the rotation of your training routine.  It would be a good event to use to train for the one arm snatch, the DB Swing, DB Snatch….any movement where you have to move the bar quickly from the floor to overhead!  You could use a kettlebell to practice this event, or a solid dumbbell.  Since the idea is to throw it as high as possible I would only do this outside where the weight can fall safely on the ground.  Use a weight you can get up in the air 12 to 15ft.  You don’t need a cross bar, just get out there and get some rips in and see what happens.  Pulling a weight hard enough to toss it several feet over your head should develop explosive power and speed.  Plus, it’s just a lot of fun!  If you do it in your back yard you can give your neighbors something to talk about!

Sometimes this event is called the Weight for Height.  I have no problem with this, but just so you know it is thought the Weight for Height actually refers to how the Irish  would perform this event.  Instead of tossing the weight over a bar (the term “toss” is used whenever you speak of height events and “throw” whenever it is a distance event) you have a target, often made of wood, hanging in the air and you try and hit the target.  If you hit it, it is raised and you go again.  Some of the other rules for the Weight Over Bar include you have three tries at each height.  If you make it, the bar goes up and you get three fresh attempts.  So, in competition it’s not unusual to take 5, event 10 or more attempts.

So, mix up your training a little, the kilt is optional!   Try some Weight Over Bar!

Your First Set of Weights

by Thom Van Vleck

One of my granddad's original York plates from his "first set" of weights

Do you remember your first set of weights?  When I was 10 I was in a terrible car accident and was injured pretty badly.  I broke both legs, both arms, my hip and various other injuries….I still hurt!!!!   As I recovered from that, I could not go to the JWC gym so my Mom bought me some plastic coated cement weights.  They were “Randy White” weights, he was a defensive lineman for the Dallas Cowboys.  I made it a goal to lift the entire set  of 110lbs overhead.

I also remember, around 1977, sitting with my Uncle Wayne Jackson as he ordered a brand new York set of weights, a 400lb set of the “top of the line” olympic weights.   A short time later, somebody STOLE that set and I remember being angry and heartbroken.  Luckily, insurance covered it’s replacement and soon we were back in business.  Although, I have to admit, I still wonder where that bar ended up!

I also recall my grandfather Dalton Jackson talking about waiting 10 YEARS to order his first set of weights.  Before that, he made weights out of buckets of cement and old metal rods and supplemented that by lifting anvils, rocks, whatever was around.  He had an assortment of flywheels and other scrap metal discs that had odd shaped holes in them he used for weights.  It was 10 years and he was even married by then before he could order his first weight set.  It was a York 1″ set, I think it was 110lbs.  I have a good portion of that set, and that’s a story unto itself as part of that was out of our family for over 40 years and only recently was reacquired!  I’m sure my Grandfather very much appreciated that first set!

Finally, my kids have all the best stuff.  When my daughter started lifting I bought her a “top of the line” 33lb women’s Olympic bar.  I try to make sure they have all they need, but I wonder, will they have an appreciation for what they have?  Will they have that feeling that comes with that “First Set of Weights”?  I hope so, it’s a good feeling, a special one.  And a feeling I get almost every time I get a new toy to lift in my gym.

Introduction To The Lynch Formula

(WEBMASTERS COMMENTS:  The following story was given to me by Roger Davis some time ago.  I just “found it” again as I was cleaning off a portion of my desk looking for something else.   As most of you know,  the Lynch Formula is the formula we use in the USAWA & IAWA to make the correction adjustments for lifters of different bodyweights.  I’m not even sure what publication this article is from, but it does outline the ideas Ian Lynch had when he developed the Lynch Formula.  It appears to have been written in 1988, which is about the time we started using the Lynch Formula.  I’m still thankful to Roger for keeping this information with the original Lynch Formula so the Lynch Formula Factors could be extended to lifters of higher bodyweights, which we did a couple of years ago.  I won’t rehash the fairness of the Lynch Formula at this time.  That was covered in depth a couple of years ago, and for those of you interested, those blogs are still on the website.  This story should have been ran at that time, but I’m doing it now so it will be saved on the website before I lose this paper again.  I know it is a little boring if you are not the mathematical type, and if you don’t want to read all of it that is fine.   Come back tomorrow and I promise to have some entertaining  “feel good” piece full of fluff by Thom Van Vleck!!)

by Ian Lynch (October 1988)

The O’Carroll Formula is familiar to most Guild members, and is used to handicap lifters of different weights.  In devising the Formula, Mike O’Carroll used both statistical and physiological evidence to arrive at a fairly complex mathematical function:

Y + (75 – 35)1/3  / (B – 35)1/3

Y is the O’Carroll coefficient used in tables
75 is to make the coefficient 1.000 at this weight.
B is the assumed weight of the lifter’s “non-muscular” mass, eg. bones, brain, etc.

Lynch Formula Graphs

There are many other Formulas, eg Austin, (the original one used in Britain) Lietzke, Vorobyev and , of course, Schwartz.  The strength of the O’Carroll system is that Dr. O’Carroll looked at the physiological reasons to arrive at a basis for the mathematics then cross-referenced this against actual performances to arrive at the constraints, eg. 35 kg.  The Formula is tried and tested and was worked out before the drugs era, which is important since it is difficult to say how “Smartie-taking” might change the physiological factors on which the Formula is based.

Unfortunately for the Guild, however, the Formula was designed before even a 52 kg. weight class appeared, and is very unreliable at weights below this.  This is because the 35 kg. “non-muscular” component of a person’s body is not, in practice, constant.  If it was, anyone weighing 35 kg. would be a totally non-muscular skeleton like me or, in Cookie’s case, a 35 kg. tub of lard, and indeed, no one would weigh less than 35 kg.  In the Guild we have opened up competition to more ladies and younger people who, invariably, are lighter than the weight classes provided for by the formula.  To combat this I have taken a small liberty with the Formula.  Instead of assuming that the non-muscular weight is constant, I have assumed it to be a non-linear function.  The particular function was chosen because it means that the final curve produced fits very closely to the O’Carroll curve at greater weights than 52 kg., but at lighter weights produces realistic allowances down as far as we likely to need.  See Fig. 1 .  There is no deliberate physiological reason for choosing the function I have used other than it fits experience and data so far available.  I suspect that there are too many other factors such as age, sex and such like, to arrive at a simple system that is perfectly fair to everyone, but I feel we should make every effort to develop good practice  to cater for as many as possible.

For those who like maths, I have replaced the constant 35 by 39.53 – (300/w) – (3000/w^2), in order to preserve the 1.0 coefficient at 75 kg. and modify the curve as illustrated in Fig. 1.  Fig. 2 shows how what was previously a value fixed at 35 kg. varies with the weight of the lifter.  In practical terms it means that a 40 kg. lifter is assumed to have a non-muscular weight of about 30 kg., a 75 kg. lifter 35 kg. (as in the old system) and a 120 kg. lifter about 37 kg.  This marginally helps lifters heavier than 75 kg. and marginally hinders those less than 75 kg.  I have stuck to kgs, but it would not be difficult to convert this to pounds if required. 

*** Ed’s Note:   Curious isn’t it, that someone like Ian who, you must agree, exhibits at the very least a modicum of Intelligence, has a non-muscular constant (head) of 2.25 kg.  However, this was mostly bone as brain mass wasn’t discovered and the question was mooted that perhaps he was a Scots Powerlifter.  Close.  Still, when his teaching days are over he always has his legs to fall back on as those who have enjoyed the dubious pleasure.

Right.  now we are even on insults.

Seriously, we cannot thank Ian enough because his expertise will give us a greater platform on which to base the accuracy of our results in the coming years.  We have used the O’Carroll Formula in every aspect of our activities and now we will use the”LYNCH FORMULA” with the same degree of confidence and to the same satisfying effect.  For the moment – at least – I am only publishing the new figures in Kilos.  If it becomes a trial to those applying the new system, then I’ll publish in Imperial Pounds, but I’d prefer if everybody used the metric Kilos from now on – as a matter of course – for uniformity and ease of application

Dale is Again Back

by Dale Friesz

Dale Friesz in action at Art's Birthday Bash performing a 122 pound Ring Fingers Deadlift for a new USAWA Record.

After some 15 months away from the platform, I was finally able to try my hand at Art’s Birthday Meet, October 16th, 2011.  This is the longest period I have gone without training or competitive lifting in the last 31 years.  What I find amusing is I lifted at Art’s with very limited training in the 5 weeks preceding the meet.  I was able to do three singles per workout 2-3 times per week on the two hand finger lifts.  The reason for the finger lifts was that they have been a consistant part of my training since 2005.  During the 15 months after losing my leg I was unable to stand as the stump would not heal and I have 2 injured shoulders thus no bench work.

Since 2000, I have normally had one or more fairly major medical issues each year.  These include joint replacements (hip and shoulder), aorta reconstruction, triple heart by pass, three heart attacks, stent implants in the bypass, two congestive heart failures, implanting of a defibrillator/pace maker, two gastric bleeds, several episodes of MRSA, right leg vein reconstruction and compression surgery, eight vein transplants to establish blood flow in my left leg, the loss of two toes, and then finally the loss of my left leg.  After the loss of the left leg there have been some seven additional surgeries on the left stump so that it would heal.  It is now about 95%.  I have no word on when I will be fitted with a permanent prosthesis.

I am extremely fortunate to have the Doctor I do.  He understands my compulsion to lift weights.  He has also said that the weights are the reason I am still breathing.  Without my wife, my care giver, I would not have made it. 

Al Myers has asked how do you train when you have all this down time?  Prior to the last 15 months I always returned to the all-round basics plus the finger lifts using 3 to 4 sets of one rep on each exercise.  As limited as I now am I am trying to figure out balance on next years national lifts and hope for a prosthesis with ankle flexibility.  I still do the finger lifts!!

Updated Rules Test

by Al Myers

USAWA President Denny Habecker (left) and the late Wilf Chapman (right) of Australia officiating at the 2007 IAWA World Championships in New Zealand.

I just want to announce that the USAWA Rules Test has been updated. The USAWA Official’s Director Joe Garcia and myself have made a few changes to the Open Book Rules Test that must be passed in order to become an USAWA Certified Official. Joe had identified some “bad questions” on the old exam and these questions  have been changed or modified.  Now I’m not saying we made the test easier – because a few new “hard” questions were added as well.  From this point on, this new test must be the one taken.  Don’t fill out and send in the old test!  If you do, you will be asked to take this new one instead. So this is YOUR WARNING!!!!!  Also, due to some rule changes in the past couple of years, the answers to some questions have changed. This new test is much improved, with very few “open ended” questions. 

There are actually rules for the Rules Test.  Since there are no questions covering these rules of the Rules Test in the Rules Test (wow, say that three times quick!), I’m going to go over them.  This is taken from Section VII of the USAWA Rule Book as it applies to the Rules Test:

10.   There will be two levels of classification for Certified USAWA officials.

  • Level 1 Test Qualified – The official has passed the USAWA Rules Test.
  • Level 1 Experience Qualified – The official has the experience of officiating in 25 or more competitions or events.
  • Level 2 – The official has passed the USAWA Rules Test and has the experience of officiating in 25 or more competitions or events.  

11.   The USAWA Secretary will maintain a list of certified officials, their level of classification, and their active/inactive status. This list will be available to the membership.

12.   The USAWA Rules Test will consist of 100 open book questions regarding rules within this rulebook.  The test must be completed and returned to the Officials Director to be judged.  There is no time limit in taking the test. To pass the test, an applicant must score over 90 percent.  The Officials Director will inform you only of a pass or fail.  You will not be told the questions you missed. If you fail, you may retake the test as many times as you like.  Once an applicant has passed the test, the Officials Director will inform the USAWA Secretary to include you on the list of Certified USAWA Officials.

13.  Once an official has passed the Rules Test, the Officials Director will issue an Officials card that will be valid for 3 years from the date the official passed the test.  Level 1 Test Qualified Officials will be required to retake the Rules Test after 3 years to maintain Certified Official Status. Level 1 Experience Qualified Officials will receive an Officials card that is valid for 3 years and will be automatically renewed unless the official has been inactive as an official during the previous three year period, in which a new Officials Card will not be issued unless the individual makes a written request to the Officials Director. Level 2 Officials are exempt from recertification, and are issued a lifetime officials card.

14.   An individual must make a written request to the Officials Director in order to apply for Level 1 Experience Qualified Certified Status and provide proof that the individual has the 25 competition experience requirement. This also applies to an official who wants to change their level of certification from Level 1 Test Qualified to Level 2.  

 In a couple of years  (2013) we will begin to have a few officials that will need to renew their certification.  Joe and I have discussed this, and we have decided that we will work up a new test in a year from now.  This way those re-certifying will have a new and different test to take.  I’m sure some questions will remain the same or just be changed slightly.  I KNOW  myself  (and Joe) will hear some complaining and bellyaching when this happens, but THAT IS JUST THE WAY IT IS in order to have a good officials program.  Our officials program already lets the “experienced” officials “off the hook” when it comes to taking the Rules Test.  That is why there is that “25 event” loophole in the rules now.   My opinion is that EVERYONE should be taking the test and this is why – we have over 200 official lifts in the USAWA, and the rules are being changed and amended every year now, plus new lifts are being added.  Even the experienced officials have to “stay on top of things” in order to be a good official.   The main reason of the Rules Test is to insure that the officials are familiar with the current USAWA Rulebook.   All the questions on the test can be “looked up” and answered, since it is an open book exam.  This process FORCES someone to at least know where to look for the answers to judging questions or where the individual lifts rules are located in the Rulebook.  Since I’m on a “soapbox” right now, let me tell you about another gripe I have with officiating (besides the USAWA and IAWA(UK)  rules differences).  First of all, wrong calls on lifts will always be made by officials.  I even see it watching NFL games with instant replay, and these guys are paid “big bucks” to be professional officials.  Making a bad call doesn’t bother me – and I believe the officiating is as good in the USAWA as it ever has been.  Judgement calls are judgement calls – and everyone sees things differently. What bothers me is when “experienced officials” really don’t even KNOW THE RULES.  That is inexcusable.  All you have to do is have a rulebook and READ THE RULE of the upcoming lift before sitting in the chair.  I watch outstanding seasoned officials like Denny Habecker and this never happens to him, and this is why.  He is always carrying his Rulebook with him when officiating  and reads over the rules for the upcoming lift (which he probably knows like the knurling on his favorite bar) just TO BE SURE he hasn’t forgot something.  That’s what it takes to be an outstanding official!!!

This new Rules Test is located on the website under “USAWA Information – Officials & Rules Test” .

1 … 354 355 356 357 358 … 496