Mmg Witness And Judges

[bseedot]

When a video goes to extra GripBoard judges for a ruling they are judging something other than what the witness judged. Perhaps the video should go to three judges instead of two for the two out of three white lights. Let’s use Matt Makousky’s recent attempted Certification as an example. The video went to two other judges, who both gave it a red light. It’s considered that I gave it a white light, but what I was judging and what the other two were judging are two different things. I was judging the feat, they were judging what the video camera recorded of the feat. Honestly, I would not have given the video recording a white light either.

Going forward, it seems that the video recording of the attempt is where people will really be Certified or not. The witness will take on more of an overseeing role- making sure that rules are followed, the gripper is not tampered with, etc. and less of a judging role. That may not be a bad thing at all.

If the emphasis is that of getting a close conclusively recorded on camera then perhaps something should change with the three attempts in 15 minutes rule. It’s not a question of ‘can you close it?’, it’s ‘can you properly record the close on video?’

Maybe I’m just rambling now, but I think that if we were just judging a close then three attempts in 15 minutes is more than ample. As has been stated before, if you can’t close it in that time frame then you’re not going to. But we’re judging more than just a close now. Shouldn't someone who can close it ten times be able to keep trying to obtain the required video standards if he doesn't get it in the first three tries?

I'm sure that this will not be well received because it speaks of a 'rule change' and we all know how apparently evil and satanic that is. Personally, though, I'd rather see things done the best way possible, rather than shun any rule changes simply to make a point about other Certification processes. The MMG process has already changed and bent rules, however minor.

BC.

[Adam Black]

I agree that once the witness has confirmed that the target gripper was closed as per the rules, there should not be an attempt or time limit in regard to getting good video.

To be honest I am more nervous about getting my upcoming MM1 cert on video than I am of closing it.

[Clay Edgin]

I'm one of those people whose certification was nearly denied because of the bad video for the MM2. From the angle the camera was in, it looked like I had the thing set so deep that it was almost closed, but from where the 3 Gripboard witnesses stood, they all said that it was open past parallel. But the video didn't show that. I had no trouble closing the gripper and didn't need extra attempts, but I ended up having to come back a couple days later (and one day after a heavy deadlifting session so my grip was fried) to redo the video. I closed it more than 3 times, but only to satisfy the video requirement.

For the majority of us, we have very little experience videotaping gripper closes under the MM rules. Heath is the notable exception because he and his lady have done a lot of gripper videos and they know where to stand, when to zoom (and more importantly when not to zoom), and the angles to point the camera. This is relatively new to the rest of us, although Woodchuck and I are learning how to properly document the gripper feats and think we have got it figured out.

[Bill Piche]

Here's something to consider. Witnesses so far out of position to properly judge the close (obvious by the video itself). Now what?

[Bill Piche]

Also, unless the closes were done like the guys who have done the MMG2 so far, I question whether the witnesses can actually see what's needed without instant replay? Due to the "quickness" of the event.

I'm all for making this better for the athlete by the way. For sure. So, let's continue to discuss this to make it better.

[Bill Piche]

I'm one of those people whose certification was nearly denied because of the bad video for the MM2. From the angle the camera was in, it looked like I had the thing set so deep that it was almost closed, but from where the 3 Gripboard witnesses stood, they all said that it was open past parallel. But the video didn't show that. I had no trouble closing the gripper and didn't need extra attempts, but I ended up having to come back a couple days later (and one day after a heavy deadlifting session so my grip was fried) to redo the video. I closed it more than 3 times, but only to satisfy the video requirement.

For the majority of us, we have very little experience videotaping gripper closes under the MM rules. Heath is the notable exception because he and his lady have done a lot of gripper videos and they know where to stand, when to zoom (and more importantly when not to zoom), and the angles to point the camera. This is relatively new to the rest of us, although Woodchuck and I are learning how to properly document the gripper feats and think we have got it figured out.

Clay,

Any more info that can be added to help others with video taping, please let me know so I can post it.

[Bill Piche]

The MMG process has already changed and bent rules, however minor.

The rules going forward for the MMG2 and higher have not changed. No rule change has been made mid-stream to affect any athlete adversely. When the parallel set rule was clarified, we didn't change the MMG1 per say although that's what the rule now states. However, one would expect the athlete to belly up the bar for the MMG1 and not get into the grey zone for setting for example.

[Bill Piche]

In addition, there has to be some time limit on the video. Do we allow them to keep it for a week?

That would not work.

[Clay Edgin]

Perhaps the most useful thing the certifying gripster can do in order to prove without a doubt that the set was legal is to set it, pause and show the camera, and then continue the crush. It is a little harder than just setting and blasting through it, but so is pausing a bench press at the bottom and that is how they judge in powerlifting meets. Now, I would not recommend adding this as a rule, but I would recommend that anyone trying to get certified on the MM grippers practice this so they are familiar with the motion. It just causes less drama and stress in the long run.

If a certifying gripster is right handed, it helps to have the witnesses and camera in the same place - next to the gripster's left hip, not far away. Even 3 feet away is too far. But I'm one of those people that likes to have a little bit of room when I do max gripper squeezes and don't like to feel cramped. I have to work on this if I am going to continue up the MM ladder.

But we have to keep in mind something - that, as a person trying to climb the ladder, we should only be doing this for ourself and maybe for the free t-shirt and certificate if that is your thing. If you can close the gripper, kudos to you. If you can close it but the video fails to show that, then oh well. You know you're strong enough to close it so that should be what matters. Peer approval can only take you so far!

[Matt76]

If you can close it but the video fails to show that, then oh well. You know you're strong enough to close it so that should be what matters. Peer approval can only take you so far!

Well said clay well said

[CMunger]

Crappy video is obviously becoming an issue. So I'd propose this(how I'd want to do it if I were God) Open package, close the gripper, immediately review video. If video sucks, close for video again. Immediately review video. If video still sucks, expend third attempt. If video still sucks, then life sucks. If this isn't within the rules, I think that the rules should allow for picture retakes, since you just don't know until you watch it, regardless of what actually occurred. Just a thought that might help solve the video problem.

[mANVIL]

This may require too large of a rule change but in a recent post david horne spoke of how they are using a small wooden spacer to put in btw the handles in the gripper portion of the next british grip championships. The spacer is sized so that the handles are at parallel. Not trying to start another IMcreditcard-like debate but doing the MMG's this way would probably put to rest all the hooplah about the videos, in addition it would test all gripsters on the same, consistent level. And isnt that the entire point of the MMG's anyway?

To get around people using different types of spacers bill could decide on an adequate one and then send it in the package along with the gripper.

David Hornes description of British Grip Championships:

http://www.gripboard.com/index.php?showtopic=8130

[GordonV]

Any time one is shooting video there are trade-offs. If one wants to put more information in the frame there is a loss of detail, if one wants high detail, information must be cut out of the frame. There is a similar trade off with stability v. mobility. This reveals one of the inherent problems with shooting any gripper footage. Arguably the best footage is obtained with the assistance of a tripod. With a tripod, if you want a close-up of the close, the closer cannot more their hand more than 4-6 inches in any direction from the center of the frame. Any more than 4-6 inches and the gripper is out of frame. If you want more space in the frame to move there is less detail and the close may not be clearly visible.

The good footage issue has one important ramification. With the MM grippers, It is not enough to train to close grippers, you also have to train to get good video. The positioning of the hand and the body become important, the attitude of the hand and the arm relative to a fixed point (the camera) becomes crucial, as does the stability of the hand, arm and body through the entire process. This wouldn't be a big deal if we were using a walnut cracker, but rather we are attempting to close a gripper at or close to our personal best.

I think capturing video of the event is a great idea, it provides evidence of the event and serves as motivation for other aspiring gripsters. However, I do think the expectations are a bit high. Three attempts, in 15 minutes makes perfect sense, ensuring great video at the same time is a bit more difficult. Just think of all of the COC's on the board who had problems getting a photo of their close for certification, even with unlimited attempts and rolls of film some people had trouble.

Heath's advice is correct, if you want to get good at filming gripper closes, you have to practice filming gripper closes. My one and only criticism is that this is the Gripboard and not the amateur videographers board.

There are trade-offs either way and we are substantially down the certifications road. I don't think that a rule change is appropriate at this stage, but a clarification may be useful. For example: it is much easier to get footage of the entire event if you are showing the gripster from the waist up for the entire event, no close-up no zoom. It is much more difficult to get a full frame close on tape, as a one shot deal. The rule clarification could also specify where the judge must stand for the event "in the frame but off to the side, no more than two feet away, on the gripper side of closers body." under these conditions the video judges would not so much watch for the close, but would be more focused on the conditions of the close. Is the judge positioned properly to make an accurate call, etc.

BC's observation is a valid one, if the final call is from the video it does not matter who the witness is or how many observers there are at the event, if the video does not capture the crucial two seconds of the set, sweep, and hold, the event did not happen.

Sorry, somewhere along the line this post turned into a full fledged stream of consciousness ramble. If I made a point somewhere in here, I take full credit; if not oops!

[bseedot]

When I judged Matt and Jeff I stood facing them and looked right over the top of the gripper. This way the setting hand is generally not blocking my view and I am out of the way of the camera. If a witness is going to be able to truly say that they saw the gripper closed they have to be right on top of the action and as close as they can be to the actual gripper itself. Especially when some of these attempts are max attempts for people, their hand shakes a little bit and sometimes it's tough to tell if it's closed even when I'm only 12" away from the gripper handles. Liz Talbot judged the 2002 British Grip Champs gripper for time event and I'm sure she'll attest to this. She was as close as she could possibly be to the gripper, but when the hand starts shaking it extremely difficult to tell if a gripper is still closed.

With guys like Heath, Rob, Clay, etc. these lower level MMGs seem to be more of a formality and a judge could probably hear the handles click without even watching, but the point is that each attempt is an unknown until it happens and the witness should be able to say that he saw the handles actually touching- unless we rely on the video for this.

Gordon makes good points. There are going to be trade-offs. Do we want the gripper close enough to the camera to see the handles touching or do we want to ensure that there is no assistance from the off-hand or bracing the gripper arm against the body or leg? If we're going to rely this heavily on video proof then this is perhaps where the witness can really be useful. Get the close-up of the close on video and let the witness watch to ensure that the other rules are followed.

BC.

[bseedot]

Crappy video is obviously becoming an issue. So I'd propose this(how I'd want to do it if I were God) Open package, close the gripper, immediately review video.

But not everyone will have the ability to review the video immediately and reviewing it on a tiny video camera monitor doesn't help much.

BC.

[bseedot]

To get around people using different types of spacers bill could decide on an adequate one and then send it in the package along with the gripper.

David Hornes description of British Grip Championships:

http://www.gripboard.com/index.php?showtopic=8130

What is the parallel handle distance? When I hold my #2 at parallel I get about 5/8", which is a pretty deep set as it is. 20mm is just a tad over 3/4". ::shrugs shoulders::

BC.

[bseedot]

Perhaps the most useful thing the certifying gripster can do in order to prove without a doubt that the set was legal is to set it, pause and show the camera, and then continue the crush. It is a little harder than just setting and blasting through it, but so is pausing a bench press at the bottom and that is how they judge in powerlifting meets. Now, I would not recommend adding this as a rule, but I would recommend that anyone trying to get certified on the MM grippers practice this so they are familiar with the motion. It just causes less drama and stress in the long run.

This assumes that we're going to rely on video proof as heavily as it seems we're stating and, if this is the case, then this idea makes tremendous sense. You can do it any way you like, but this would be the best way to demonstrate the set and close for the video camera.

BC.

[David Horne]

I chose 20mm, as it seemed near.

We'll see how it works out in May, but from recent training it is tougher to do, but soooo easy to ref.

And yes Brian was right about hand shake in the inverted gripper hold at the Brits a few years ago. We had it in the rules that the ref could actually hold the hand gently to stop some shaking and see what was going on.

David

[Bill Piche]

The good thing is all the big dogs are currently on the MMG2.

So, we have a bit of time before it becomes too big of an issue. The issues will result with those "close" to a close or "just close" it. In Matt's case, he wasn't even on camera. So, that has to at least be the minimum requirement.

No one is looking for a film award with these things so let's not make it out harder than it has to be.

Getting a picture of a close is EASY IMO. I had no problem myself and I am pretty sure there are plenty (BC takes some of the best closeups of gripper closes) others who had no problem. I could close the #3 multiple times for 5-6 second closes. I think again it may be harder when someone doesn't have the strength to make a close such that one doesn't have to shoot it in a microsecond to capture the handles together.

Heath has given great directions and yet I have not seen one person implement them on recent videos of closes. The best video recently is Woodchuck's videos. In the MMG replica close, if the video angle was UP as Heath suggested (it does go to that angle at the end), then I am pretty sure the set could be seen if someone did it with a set. His was basically a no-set so it was not an issue. Note the angle at the end of this video. It was UP or in other words the camera was below the hand.

http://www.castledarkmoor.com/strongman/sh...nMM1replica.WMV

[Bill Piche]

Brian, what about the set and judging that handles parallel properly?

[Bill Piche]

The question becomes....do we still need to change anything? If so, what should be changed specifically?

Would allowing a re-do of the video later the same day allow someone who missed earlier in the day to pass? I doubt it.

Maybe increase the attempts to 5 along with a timing window change for video?

[Clay Edgin]

I don't think we need to change anything, really. The responsibility of the witness(es) and closer should be known beforehand and a dry run with a Trainer would go a long way to seeing what kind of video works. As for the judge determining if the set was legal, any kind of audible grunt or "Good" from the judge could signal the closer to finish the sweep once it is set to within the rules. When Woodchuck did his #3 certification, his witness watched him set the credit card in, said "Good" and then the squeeze was on.

When I shot the video of Woodchuck doing the MM replica, I was right at his side so I could get a good shot of the set, then when it was closed I moved in front of him and pointed the camera up.

[Rick Browne]

I think having the on site attempt witness is beneficial. Especially

if the gripster can "click" the handles. However, the hand being

quicker than the eye, the positivity of a legal set could be in question.

The video being shot will at least give a more conclusive view of the

whole attempt. Stop frame by frame view is fairly foolproof. Also,

if there happens to be impartial judges involved, and even with video,

cannot conclusively judge what they are viewing, then what should

the verdict be then? Disqualified due to poor video presentation.

I don`t know, maybe the cameras should be lined up on a mark.

A liken example would be how TV studios have marks on the floor

for the actor to stand so that they are in the correct camera angle.

Maybe have the camera on a tripod with an appropriate height fascia

which has a mark directly inline with the camera lens. The gripster

can then use this reference mark to line up his hand and gripper to

cover the reference mark and be inline with the lens

[Bill Piche]

I asked David Horne via PM and here is what he said:

Bill,

We've never had a max gripper event in any of our contests before. What we were finding as referees recently was that when done so quick and with the hand moving about, with some people I honestly couldn't say what had happened. Now this was no good for a contest and was going to put undue stress on the referees on the day. But I didn't want to use the credit card because basically it's too wide an object, and even a thinner card of 20mm could bend or skid around, or even be put in slightly sideways. So hence a 20mm thick piece of wood, that is 5 1/2" long is to be used. When I suggested it, there were a few complaints, but I went with it, and then after everyone thought it was totally fair and cool. No one wants to be beaten by a dodgy lift, so it should eradicate that. I think they are still gonna go ahead with the normal rules in the European, which may put us Brit's at a disadvantage since we are now training with the block, but so be it. It's the British that I am the promoter of.

[bseedot]

What we were finding as referees recently was that when done so quick and with the hand moving about, with some people I honestly couldn't say what had happened.

I've had my fair practice, and I agree that it can be very difficult to judge a close, let alone a set that it supposed to be a certain distance. What usually happens is that the close begins nearly simultaneously with the setting hand being removed. It can almost be like trying to determine if a runner beat out a throw to first base sometimes. It happens so fast and you have to almost watch two places at once. The first to make sure that the handles are the proper distance apart at the beginning of the close and the second to make sure that the setting hand gets removed before the close starts.

When Wade Certified my #3 close I was holding it shut for several seconds but my hand was shaking. I knew it was closed because I could feel it, but Wade said that he couldn't tell because of my shaking hand. He was about to deny the attempt and I was getting tired so I gave it one last hard squeeze. With that squeeze he and I heard a click of the knurling and he passed the attempt.

I'm not saying that a rule change is in order either. Just kind of thinking out loud and wanting to hear others' opinions. I still think that Clay is on the right track with what he said earlier. The best case scenario is that you completely dominate the gripper before signing up. Completely dominating the gripper will mean that your hand won't shake. It will mean that you can set the gripper to parallel, remove the set hand, show the set clearly for the camera, and then close the gripper. If you can't do that, then you risk having your Certification denied.

But again, it comes down to how heavily we rely on the video for our proof. So how heavily do we want to rely on it?

BC.