Jump to content

World Record Page


Mikael Siversson

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Mikael Siversson

    40

  • Cannon

    4

  • daniel reinard

    2

  • jad

    2

  • 3 weeks later...
Mikael Siversson

Updated with Euro pinch for 93k, 105k and 120k. Did top20 rather than top50 in order to make it a bit more exclusive and, above all, more manageable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mikael Siversson

Updated with 1HP 120+k class. It is incomplete (from #6 and below) as I could not get hold of some of the results from the Open Griptopz comp., Salo, Finland, 23 Oct 2011

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Mikael Siversson

Updated with 1HP 120+k class, this including the results from the Salo competition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are we just counting the 93kg results from last year (Gripmas offered this class multiple years)? Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mikael Siversson

Yes that is the advice by the Collective. Last year was the first time Chris used a point-calibrated scale. With weight classes weighing competitors with precision becomes as important as weighing the implements used. There is a still a questionmark regarding some of the results in the Gripmas comp and Andrew's comp as well as point calibration (in the absence of a certified scale) needs to be done at (all) weightclass boundaries. If you use a dodgy scale and it shows 50k at an actual 50k and 100k at an actual 100k, there is no guarantee that it will show 83k at an actual 83k.

In the case of Gripmas Carol last year the scale was point calibrated at the old 82.5k class and at the 94k class. One could argue that pointcalibration at 94k is good enough for the 93k class (e.g., that a say 0.35k deviation at around 94k can be assumed to be valid at 93.00k as well) but where do you set the boundary? In my view pointcalibration should be done closer to the given weighclass boundary than to the adjacent kilogram notations, i.e., for the 93k class calibration should be done within the 92.51-93.49k interval.

In Andrew's case pointcalibration was done at 75k, 100k and 125k, i.e., he missed all weightclass boundaries.

I have referred this to the Grip Collective to resolve.

In the future though I think we should accept nothing but proper point calibration at all weightclass boundaries. It is an incredibly simple concept so there is no excuse for making a mess of it as organiser. Yes it may take half an hour to do but once it is done the scale can be used for 12 months before the process needs to be repeated. We have to remembert that these weigh-in proceedures we have in place are still not as strict as those used by IPF (from which we adopted the weight classes), where you are not allowed to use a non-certified scale for the weigh-in.

As a final note I would like to take the opportunity to express my dissatisfaction of the view of the Grip Collective to let results in lighter weightclasses overflow to heavier weightclasses if they are good enough to take a place in the top 20 (or whatever cut-off used). It creates a lot of extra work everytime someone does a great result in a light weightclass. I accept of course the view of the collective which is reflected in the top20 lists.

Edited by Mikael Siversson
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that is the advice by the Collective. Last year was the first time Chris used a point-calibrated scale. With weight classes weighing competitors with precision becomes as important as weighing the implements used. There is a still a questionmark regarding some of the results in the Gripmas comp and Andrew's comp as well as point calibration (in the absence of a certified scale) needs to be done at (all) weightclass boundaries. If you use a dodgy scale and it shows 50k at an actual 50k and 100k at an actual 100k, there is no guarantee that it will show 83k at an actual 83k.

In the case of Gripmas Carol last year the scale was point calibrated at the old 82.5k class and at the 94k class. One could argue that pointcalibration at 94k is good enough for the 93k class (e.g., that a say 0.35k deviation at around 94k can be assumed to be valid at 93.00k as well) but where do you set the boundary? In my view pointcalibration should be done closer to the given weighclass boundary than to the adjacent kilogram notations, i.e., for the 93k class calibration should be done within the 92.51-93.49k interval.

In Andrew's case pointcalibration was done at 75k, 100k and 125k, i.e., he missed all weightclass boundaries.

I have referred this to the Grip Collective to resolve.

In the future though I think we should accept nothing but proper point calibration at all weightclass boundaries. It is an incredibly simple concept so there is no excuse for making a mess of it as organiser. Yes it may take half an hour to do but once it is done the scale can be used for 12 months before the process needs to be repeated. We have to remembert that these weigh-in proceedures we have in place are still not as strict as those used by IPF (from which we adopted the weight classes), where you are not allowed to use a non-certified scale for the weigh-in.

As a final note I would like to take the opportunity to express my dissatisfaction of the view of the Grip Collective to let results in lighter weightclasses overflow to heavier weightclasses if they are good enough to take a place in the top 20 (or whatever cut-off used). It creates a lot of extra work everytime someone does a great result in a light weightclass. I accept of course the view of the collective which is reflected in the top20 lists.

Thank you for your detailed response and I would agree with you in that the class results shouldn't be mixed. If there is an overall that's one thing but otherwise what's the point?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Mikael Siversson

Updated

120k class LGC vbar 50mm

Added

120k class LGC vbar 50mm Total

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mikael Siversson

Updated with the results from the Stafford competition.

Congratulations to the new WR holders Mark Martin-Dye (2HP 66, 74k), David Horne (2HP 105k) and Elizabeth Horne (2HP 84, 84k+).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy policies.