Clarification For The Mmg Certs

[Bill Piche]

I posted this in Martin's thread, but it seems some people can't read or comprehend what I posted. So, I am reposting it here for all to read. If someone needs clarification just reply to this thread.

Let me clarify again with the history. We had gotten started with the MMG1 and we ran into a "set depth" consistency issue. We had yet to start the MMG2. Since several had already certified with the MMG1, and allowing a deep set, we felt that changing the rules to be more strict mid-stream for others was not cool (no rule changes mid-stream!).

So, we decided that going forward for the MMG2 and above that there would be strict set rules. The set must clearly be shown to be parallel at the start of the close. The other hand can't block, yada yada. There's a picture post in this mashmonster forum that shows what parallel is with a gripper from various angles.

Anyway, so for the MMG1 and lower we would ask that the "spirit" of the strict set rule be adhered to, but it's not a requirement for cert.

Thanks everyone.

[BigT]

Thanks Wanna for showing the rules again, guys like me who want those certs in the future definitely need to know

[Jedd Johnson]

Good job announcing that Bro!

-Jedd-

[gamidon]

The rule was always a minimum of a parallel set. The rule also always stated you must set and remove your hand so that the witness can see it. I don't understand why it was ever allowed to be watered down. The change was only to have it clearly captured on video. It seems to me that this does not negate the witnesses job of enforcing the original rule.

Greg

[Bill Piche]

The rule was always a minimum of a parallel set.  The rule also always stated you must set and remove your hand so that the witness can see it.  I don't understand why it was ever allowed to be watered down.  The change was only to have it clearly captured on video.  It seems to me that this does not negate the witnesses job of enforcing the original rule.

Greg

←

No, it has not. It was 1 inch. I have the original rules. There was an issue with it and being able to properly judge. So, the rule was changed to parallel handles. However, there were already guys who certed. This was discussed ad nauseum by gripboard members and all agreed that it would not be fair to those coming after that they had to abide by a new rule. Remember how everyone bitched about IronMind's rule change? We did NOT want to pull the same thing. Switch the rules mid-stream. Prior to this rule tweak, attempts were passed BOTH by the witness AND three judges via video. That's why it was clarified several times that the "spirit" of the parallel set rule should be abided by but it would not be strictly enfoced on the MMG1. But, and we have done this, it would be as best we could on the MMG2 and above. We even went so far as helping the witnesses and judges with pictures in the MM forum.

I don't have any problem switching like IronMind did and just saying we enforce it going forward as written. But, then you'll have people whining about it. And, one other problem, do I brow beat witnesses who can't even judge properly and it's obvious when I get the video it was not per the rules and the video judges ok it as well? What then?

Again, keep in mind this is JUST the MMG1 and MMG0 certs. The MMG2 and above must be strict adherence to the set rule. I would hope members try and follow the set rules regardless when certifying at these levels (MMG1 and MMG0). I know I would.

[jad]

And, one other problem, do I brow beat witnesses who can't even judge properly and it's obvious when I get the video it was not per the rules and the video judges ok it as well?  What then?

As far as MM2 and above, anytime you have to call in judges as far as set depth then it's obviously not "clearly" shown or you wouldn't need to pause it on Media Player and have third parties judge it. That said, if someone closes a gripper with the parallel set and it takes the pause button to clarify it, then they should still get credit. They closed the gripper, with the required set, they did their part. It's not their fault the judges reflexes weren't fast enough.

I think the video should be the final word. IMO, the witness's main job is to make sure no cheating goes on (extra attempts, different grippers with lookalike stamps, etc.) What's gonna happen first time the witness and video disagree? For example, Gripster A closes the MM2 with a parallel set but the witness says his set hand got in the way and he couldn't see the set or close but upon reviewing the video on media player, it does in fact show that Gripster A has closed it with a parallel set?

Edited April 5, 2005 by jad

[Bill Piche]

I think the video should be the final word. IMO, the witness's main job is to make sure no cheating goes on (extra attempts, different grippers with lookalike stamps, etc.)

I think this is pretty much how it has evolved.

[Clay Edgin]

What's gonna happen first time the witness and video disagree? 

←

Then I ain't picking that guy for a witness again! The witness is only one of 3 judges - if the other two see the good close on video they can overrule him.

[mooinabc1]

Keep the parellel Wannagrip=I feel it is the best there and fair and levels the playing flied.

The MM is very respected and must be keep that way no changes like the Ironmind. No wonder people spoke against the tranny because it was unjust and not fair for other came after the parellel. Yes keep hands were we can see them is a good rules. I donot have the MM cert yet but I feel it mine. Stablity cause people to feel that way. Some thing that can be attained in a fair manner that is something to be proud off. I like to go in te MM ladder soon and get to the MM5.

[gamidon]

No, it has not. It was 1 inch. I have the original rules.

I will restate what I said "The rule was always a minimum of a parallel set."

The rule was never below the parallel. 1" is wider than parallel, so there has never been a rule that would have allowed a less than parallel set. The fact that less than parallel sets are being passed is a problem.

[Bill Piche]

No, it has not. It was 1 inch. I have the original rules.

I will restate what I said "The rule was always a minimum of a parallel set."

The rule was never below the parallel. 1" is wider than parallel, so there has never been a rule that would have allowed a less than parallel set. The fact that less than parallel sets are being passed is a problem.

←

Greg, as I said, it was on the MMG1 only not MMG2 and above. For the MMG2 and above the set rule MUST be adhered to. I would also encourage you to view the latest MMG1 closers. Who do you think hasn't met this requirement? Has anyone been watching these videos? I guess no one has just stated until now they perceive it as a problem even though it was hashed out ad nauseum before?

What would you suggest from this point forward?

[mooinabc1]

No problem I enjoy the vids.

There real cool.

I learn lots from them

[Bill Piche]

Ok, here's one proposal.

We make a rule change mid-stream just like IM did. We tried to avoid this the first time this came up but so be it.

The rules stand as is for the MMG0 and MMG1 as well concerning the clear vision of the set at parallel.

No special means should be necessary to see the set at parallel. A simple stop of the video is allowed to see that the handles truly were at parallel on the start.

[Bearcat 74]

To me, the best way to do this would be to have the rule on any MMG gripper, parallel set is as deep as allowed. If it can not be clearly seen, it's thrown out. There is no reason why in the video the set should be obstructed. Set it, get your hand away and squeeze. I would be in favor of a pause. Set, pause, so the hand is gone, clear view of the set and squeeze. That way there are no questions.........

[ishred]

To me, the best way to do this would be to have the rule on any MMG gripper, parallel set is as deep as allowed.  If it can not be clearly seen, it's thrown out.  There is no reason why in the video the set should be obstructed.  Set it, get your hand away and squeeze.  I would be in favor of a pause.  Set, pause, so the hand is gone, clear view of the set and squeeze.  That way there are no questions.........

←

set, pause sound good to me

[Clay Edgin]

Set, pause, close is the easiest to judge for sure.

[gamidon]

I honestly do not think a rule change is needed, enforce the one that exists. Since parallel is more leanient than the original 1" rule I think it should stand. If the gripper does not get his hand out of the way or sets and squeezes so fast that it is impossible to tell where it starts and ends, then he is taking the risk that the judges will find his set too deep. I do not think this is a change to the rules, I think it is an enforcement of them.

I PMed Billl some specific details so as not to embarrass someone publically on their certification. I am not angry, mad or anything else. I am only bringing up a point that I think is valid and WORTH discussing. Anyone who has closed the MM1 has my respect as I could not close it myself.

Greg Amidon

[Bill Piche]

I think set clearly seen should be enough. Otherwise, how long of a pause is good enough?

Now, what the issue to resolve is whether a Video stoppage would be allowed to view the set at parallel?

Not allowing any stoppage of video to see the set might take care of what's needed as far as a quick pause?

Thoughts?

[Bill Piche]

What comes into play is that the MMG0 and MMG1 certs ALSO get the "clear set" rule clearly enforced.

So, it's not a rule change, but an enforcement change of the MMG0 and MMG1 rules.

[Rick Browne]

All one has to do, is study the Dave Morton, Clay Edgin and Shane Larson

Vids, mimic those and your golden..........

The very best of the best vids in my opinion, are Dave`s and Clay`s MMG 3 certs

[Rick Browne]

I think set clearly seen should be enough. Otherwise, how long of a pause is good enough?

Now, what the issue to resolve is whether a Video stoppage would be allowed to view the set at parallel?

Not allowing any stoppage of video to see the set might take care of what's needed as far as a quick pause?

Thoughts?

←

I would not stop the video, it might throw the timing of the athlete off.

I feel it should be the responsibilty of the witness to make the call to

the athlete.

The athlete is focused solely on setting the gripper and may be unaware

exactly where he may have it. This is where his witness should be on the ball

to help view the parallel set, and yell at him, "you`re GOOD! squeeze it"

[FrankyBoy]

IMHO the video should show the set and the close.

That might be just one single frame, please check the following sample:

MM1 Set

That was the set on my MM1 attempt.

That is not a good pic since I tend to move the hand upwards after the set, but it gives an idea what I mean.

A stop and go makes the close much more difficult so I wouldn't enforce that.

[Bill Piche]

Rick. I meant after the video is taken and reviewed. Not during the attempt!

I think set clearly seen should be enough. Otherwise, how long of a pause is good enough?

Now, what the issue to resolve is whether a Video stoppage would be allowed to view the set at parallel?

Not allowing any stoppage of video to see the set might take care of what's needed as far as a quick pause?

Thoughts?

←

I would not stop the video, it might throw the timing of the athlete off.

I feel it should be the responsibilty of the witness to make the call to

the athlete.

The athlete is focused solely on setting the gripper and may be unaware

exactly where he may have it. This is where his witness should be on the ball

to help view the parallel set, and yell at him, "you`re GOOD! squeeze it"

←

[Rick Browne]

Shooo, I read into that one way wrong . The hand being quicker

than the eye, it is imperative to use slow mo-stop action of the vid, (in review)

if a set is in question. Now I`m with ya.

Rick. I meant after the video is taken and reviewed. Not during the attempt! 

I think set clearly seen should be enough. Otherwise, how long of a pause is good enough?

Now, what the issue to resolve is whether a Video stoppage would be allowed to view the set at parallel?

Not allowing any stoppage of video to see the set might take care of what's needed as far as a quick pause?

Thoughts?

←

I would not stop the video, it might throw the timing of the athlete off.

I feel it should be the responsibilty of the witness to make the call to

the athlete.

The athlete is focused solely on setting the gripper and may be unaware

exactly where he may have it. This is where his witness should be on the ball

to help view the parallel set, and yell at him, "you`re GOOD! squeeze it"

←

←