mwhities Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 12 second with #1 Time me. I timed it a few times and was in the 12's each time. Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 (edited) 12 second with #1Time me. I timed it a few times and was in the 12's each time. Michael Nice job, and that was TNS. You're probably capable of around double that with a set. Edited April 15, 2009 by Magnus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwhities Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 12 second with #1Time me. I timed it a few times and was in the 12's each time. Michael Nice job, and that was TNS. You're probably capable of around double that with a set. Thanks.. what is TNS? I'm showing my ignorance or lack of searching. Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 12 second with #1Time me. I timed it a few times and was in the 12's each time. Michael Nice job, and that was TNS. You're probably capable of around double that with a set. Thanks.. what is TNS? I'm showing my ignorance or lack of searching. Michael Table-no set. In other words, absolutely 0 set. Just pick it up and squeeze. As a matter of fact, looked like you were holding it pretty high on the handle, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwhities Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 12 second with #1Time me. I timed it a few times and was in the 12's each time. Michael Nice job, and that was TNS. You're probably capable of around double that with a set. Thanks.. what is TNS? I'm showing my ignorance or lack of searching. Michael Table-no set. In other words, absolutely 0 set. Just pick it up and squeeze. As a matter of fact, looked like you were holding it pretty high on the handle, too. Ahh, thanks. I thought I was setting it. Guess not. My thumb is hurting from trying to close the #1 with two fingers earlier. I'll try again in a few days. Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannon Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Great work Michael! You're on the board. the coin challenge In this economy, you have to squeeze every penny! ...........RB365N..11.sec....187.6# ........#3.5.....7.sec....179#Acorn.............#3.5.....9.sec....178# ...........#3.5.....5.sec....177.7# bencrush..........BBSE.....9.sec....172# CoC#3.............RB330N...3.sec....171.80# Magnus............HG350....8.sec....168# ............#3......23.sec .........RB260...17.sec .............#3......16.sec Wes...............#3......15.sec ......#3......14.sec Porkchop..........#3......13.sec....152.2# vikingsrule92.....#3......13.sec....145# ............#3.......6.sec....152# jdchmiel..........HG300....6.sec....147# lloyd80s..........#3.......5.sec student...........#3.......5.sec Turbinepro........#2.5....23.sec koura.............#2.5....19.sec Mitch.............#2.5....17.sec ..........RB240...16.sec sineparixmace.....#2.5....12.sec Powerhouse........BBSM....11.sec ...........#2.5....11.sec AnimalCage........#2.5.....7.sec ..........#2.5.....5.sec LiLMO.............RB240N...8.sec Wayne.............#2......35.sec gripcrazy.........#2......30.sec EricMilfeld.......#2......26.sec poppy.............#2......26.sec The.Bone.Orchard..#2......24.sec tja...............RB180...20.sec pawel.r...........#2......20.sec Yersinia..........#2......20.sec White.Scorpion....#2......19.sec Captain.Sam.......#2......19.sec jotto.............#2......17.sec nails.............#2......16.sec gerryq............#2......11.sec Hellmagic.........#2......10.sec egg_uk............RB180....6.sec Rockhead..........#2.......4.sec bigmatt...........#1.5....37.sec Noob.Saibot.......#1.5....22.sec MalachiMcmullen...#1.5....18.sec....filed Ari.K.............#1.5....14.sec Klesen............HG200...13.sec pete1006..........#1......65.sec lukeallard........#1......45.sec....filed superfeemiman.....#1......38.sec dimmers...........#1......33.sec....filed Nightowl27........#1......28.sec Jsmiley...........#1......24.sec Dropkick..........#1......22.sec The.Steve.Train...#1......20.sec liamcafs..........#1......20.sec Reverend.Linus....#1......17.sec Klotz.............#1......13.sec mwhities..........#1......12.sec....no set xrated618.........#1......10.sec Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannon Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Also, to those on the list, I am open to discussion about how some of these are ranked. I started thinking about Luke vs. Aaron and you can really make an argument either way about where they place. What I've done so far is favor time, because it's a coin hold challenge. So time wins in groups of similar grippers. But then I used calibrations to rank the top because even a couple pounds can make a harder gripper. But there are three #3.5s on the list so maybe those should be ranked according to time, if time wins in groups of similar grippers..? What does anyone think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannon Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 The more I think about this, the #3.5s should be ranked according to time. Maybe calibrations only break ties and give an indication of placement (for example, I would have no idea where to put bencrush's time if he didn't have the calibration as well). Feedback is welcome. the coin challenge In this economy, you have to squeeze every penny! ...........RB365N..11.sec....187.6#Acorn.............#3.5.....9.sec....178# ........#3.5.....7.sec....179# ...........#3.5.....5.sec....177.7# bencrush..........BBSE.....9.sec....172# CoC#3.............RB330N...3.sec....171.80# Magnus............HG350....8.sec....168# ............#3......23.sec .........RB260...17.sec .............#3......16.sec Wes...............#3......15.sec ......#3......14.sec Porkchop..........#3......13.sec....152.2# vikingsrule92.....#3......13.sec....145# ............#3.......6.sec....152# jdchmiel..........HG300....6.sec....147# lloyd80s..........#3.......5.sec student...........#3.......5.sec Turbinepro........#2.5....23.sec koura.............#2.5....19.sec Mitch.............#2.5....17.sec ..........RB240...16.sec sineparixmace.....#2.5....12.sec Powerhouse........BBSM....11.sec ...........#2.5....11.sec AnimalCage........#2.5.....7.sec ..........#2.5.....5.sec LiLMO.............RB240N...8.sec Wayne.............#2......35.sec gripcrazy.........#2......30.sec EricMilfeld.......#2......26.sec poppy.............#2......26.sec The.Bone.Orchard..#2......24.sec tja...............RB180...20.sec pawel.r...........#2......20.sec Yersinia..........#2......20.sec White.Scorpion....#2......19.sec Captain.Sam.......#2......19.sec jotto.............#2......17.sec nails.............#2......16.sec gerryq............#2......11.sec Hellmagic.........#2......10.sec egg_uk............RB180....6.sec Rockhead..........#2.......4.sec bigmatt...........#1.5....37.sec Noob.Saibot.......#1.5....22.sec MalachiMcmullen...#1.5....18.sec....filed Ari.K.............#1.5....14.sec Klesen............HG200...13.sec pete1006..........#1......65.sec lukeallard........#1......45.sec....filed superfeemiman.....#1......38.sec dimmers...........#1......33.sec....filed Nightowl27........#1......28.sec Jsmiley...........#1......24.sec Dropkick..........#1......22.sec The.Steve.Train...#1......20.sec liamcafs..........#1......20.sec Reverend.Linus....#1......17.sec Klotz.............#1......13.sec mwhities..........#1......12.sec....no set xrated618.........#1......10.sec Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeamdman Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 (edited) I say keep the rule the same. The point of the challenge is to use the hardest gripper you can rather than have a long hold with something easy. And besides, there are a lot of factors with grippers that make some harder than others even if the RGC number is the same. Where would you draw the line? One pound? Three pounds? A 145lb #3 for 60 seconds can beat a 155lb #3 for 10 seconds? Way too subjective. It makes it easy to say that the harder gripper wins rather than being subjective and making the call that one hold is better than the other. For example: pete1006's #1 for 65 seconds compared to a #1.5 for 14 seconds. Or bigmatt's #1.5 for 37 seconds and rockhead's #2 for 4 seconds. Edited April 16, 2009 by lukeamdman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 I'm w/ Luke. Too complicated the other way, and IMO not as accurate, strength-wise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroodingMoon Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Noticed I hadn't tried this yet so I gave it a go with my #2 and got 31 seconds RH. It was quite a painful overcrush though I actually wanted the penny to drop I might try with my #2.5 when my hands recovered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannon Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Picking strength to sort the list causes similar problems, though. Take the group of #3 closes: Do the four calibrated gripper rise to the top just because they're calibrated? Does my 6sec hold beat Derek's 13sec hold in this case because of the calibration? I really don't think it should. In my opinion, for the purposes of the challenge, a #3 is a #3. If I want to move in front of Derek, I would think I need a 14sec hold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwhities Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 I might try it again, but this time, I'm going to warm my hand up. I went cold on it the first time. Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Picking strength to sort the list causes similar problems, though. Take the group of #3 closes: Do the four calibrated gripper rise to the top just because they're calibrated? Does my 6sec hold beat Derek's 13sec hold in this case because of the calibration? I really don't think it should. In my opinion, for the purposes of the challenge, a #3 is a #3. If I want to move in front of Derek, I would think I need a 14sec hold. But that's the point; Derek wouldn't have gotten 13sec if he was using your #3 (not then, anyway). It's not fair for someone using a harder gripper to be placed behind someone who got more time on an easier one. What if someone's using a 160lb #3 and gets 10 sec,, and someone else is using a 147lb #3 but he gets 12 sec...that would mean it was the 147lb would be placed ahead of the 160lb even though the latter is clearly superior to the other. Or, look at it this way. How much time would the guy using the 160lb #3 get with the 147lb #3? ALOT more. Yet, he's still placed behind on the list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeamdman Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 AND, if someone posts lets say a 15 second time with a 160lb gripper, and someone else then posts a 10 second hold with a 162lb gripper, the incentive is going to be to use a HARDER gripper next time. I think the push for a harder gripper rather than a longer time is better, and it's harder! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acorn Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 I think the calibration number should be the first criteria if the gripper is calibrated, followed by the time. We all know that not all #3's are created equal, etc. I could prolly hold my easy #3 shut for a very very long time, but that would not be the same as a hard one which might calibrate 20-25# higher. That being said still calibrations are not 100% accurate and can be off +/- 1 to 2# due to very small variences in where you put the strap, different peoples rig's, etc. Not trying to bring this into play in this just thought it was worth noting. btw Congrats Luke and Gabriel! - Aaron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeamdman Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Aaron, stop being a slacker. You could easily take first Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acorn Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Aaron, stop being a slacker. You could easily take first Hehe, maybe but it would likely screw up my training for at least a week. I'm already riding the fine line of overtraining. So no interest right now. - Aaron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 I could prolly hold my easy #3 shut for a very very long time...btw Congrats Luke and Gabriel! - Aaron Hmmm, I don't know about that...it's going out on quite a limb... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannon Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Sounds good to me guys. It does make sense versus trying to make up some other criteria. But how would you treat groups like the #3s for example? Calibrated grippers rise to the top? Or non-calibrated grippers are assumed to be "average" like 150? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Sounds good to me guys. It does make sense versus trying to make up some other criteria. But how would you treat groups like the #3s for example? Calibrated grippers rise to the top? Or non-calibrated grippers are assumed to be "average" like 150? Yeah, I'd say non-cal'd are assumed to be 150, while others just go to the top, BUT a calibrated 150 goes above a non-calibrated #3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannon Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 I went to update the list by strength and realized that it just becomes a ranked list of "what gripper can you close". There wasn't any instance where the time of the coin hold matters until you get to the grippers that are not calibrated. To me, this is the interesting part of the challenge. HOW LONG CAN YOU HOLD THE COIN? For example, Aaron could never move in front of Luke with his #3.5 no matter the length of the hold and I think that goes against the spirit of a "hold for time" challenge. They are both #3.5s and as Luke mentioned, calibrations vary as much as grippers. I don't know the answer, but it seems if the time of the hold is secondary, then as people post more calibrated gripper results, the time of the hold will become obsolete completely, except to MAYBE break a tie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeamdman Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 I went to update the list by strength and realized that it just becomes a ranked list of "what gripper can you close". There wasn't any instance where the time of the coin hold matters until you get to the grippers that are not calibrated. To me, this is the interesting part of the challenge. HOW LONG CAN YOU HOLD THE COIN? For example, Aaron could never move in front of Luke with his #3.5 no matter the length of the hold and I think that goes against the spirit of a "hold for time" challenge. They are both #3.5s and as Luke mentioned, calibrations vary as much as grippers. I don't know the answer, but it seems if the time of the hold is secondary, then as people post more calibrated gripper results, the time of the hold will become obsolete completely, except to MAYBE break a tie. Why is this being changed anyway? I don't recall anyone complaining about how it ran for what, almost two years? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannon Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 It's not that I'm trying to change anything. The thread has evolved on it's own with changes along the way. This just occured to me while I was updating the list. As I update the list, I'm just trying to think about where this is headed. The more calibrated grippers we get on the list, it's just going to be a straight ranking of those calibrations, similar to the "post your best calibrated gripper close" thread. 156 beats 152 beats 150 beats 145 and on down the list. How is that a coin hold challenge? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeamdman Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 (edited) Since it was my #3.5 time that started this, feel free to keep me in third. I'm not going to compare my strength to Aaron's. Besides, he did his hold in December of 2007, and we all know how strong he is now compared to then. A #3.5 is a joke for him now. If you want the time to be the place holder and not the poundage of the gripper, you're going to have to set a minimum time requirement. For example something like 10 seconds minimum. That's the only way you're going to stop a 10 second 180lb hold being beat by a 190lb hold for 1 second. You'll also have to set some rule about the time of the hold being trumped by pounds if it exceeds a certain amount. Either that or take the calibration completely out of the mix and say a #2 is a #2. Edited April 17, 2009 by lukeamdman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.