Weight Classes

[climber511]

Any light weight may lift in the open class if you choose to ahead of time.

Above is the wording from Gripmas - the only thing is you have to make your choice before the meet starts and then you are stuck with it.

[jad]

Something to think about with meets with weight classes is weigh-in times. I know in AW you can sometimes weigh in the night before. How early will we let people weigh in?

[climber511]

Something to think about with meets with weight classes is weigh-in times. I know in AW you can sometimes weigh in the night before. How early will we let people weigh in?

Josh - for this first time - I plan to have a one hour before start time window - at most grip contests - nobody is around before then. Later on - if this seems to be something we want - a rule can be made. Olympic Lifting is something I am familiar with - it's two hours before - and people do all kinds of stuff to make weight - I certainly don't want you using my home bathroom with "colon blow" trying to drop another pound. I have seen the results of that - it wasn't pretty!

At this point I'm looking at this as an experiment - if it helps attendance and people like it - great - if not - we tried and can always go back.

Edited September 4, 2008 by climber511

[jad]

Sounds good Chris, a longer window would be nice but that puts a bigger burden on the promoter, so for now, I'm fine with whatever.

[climber511]

Sounds good Chris, a longer window would be nice but that puts a bigger burden on the promoter, so for now, I'm fine with whatever.

Powerlifters sometimes have a two day window - and a few compete way way way heavier than the weight class limit, I have heard of 40# over - that sounds dangerous to me - my goal is to have people actually compete within the weight class - I've even thought about a weigh in at the end of the comp just to stop that nonsense but it's to early for that I think. Are any of you old enough to remember when they weighed the lifter and the complete barbell after a WR attempt in the Olympic Lifting contests?

[jad]

Sounds good Chris, a longer window would be nice but that puts a bigger burden on the promoter, so for now, I'm fine with whatever.

Powerlifters sometimes have a two day window - and a few compete way way way heavier than the weight class limit, I have heard of 40# over - that sounds dangerous to me - my goal is to have people actually compete within the weight class - I've even thought about a weigh in at the end of the comp just to stop that nonsense but it's to early for that I think. Are any of you old enough to remember when they weighed the lifter and the complete barbell after a WR attempt in the Olympic Lifting contests?

I'm certainly not! That's bizarre! Weighing in after a comp would be more dangerous than the rapid weight gain as it would promote dehydration; "Gee I'm really thirsty after that bending but I better not drink anything so I can make weight".

[barbe705]

has the idea of skill classes been discussed? like, a and b level athletes?

Brent

[climber511]

has the idea of skill classes been discussed? like, a and b level athletes?

Brent

That hasn't been discussed that I remember Brent - a novice class has been thrown out several times but has gone nowhere it seems like. Are you thinking like in the HG? I still haven't figured that out yet either - winning a B class doesn't put you into the A's - that whole system doesn't seem to amount to much from what I can figure out - people just go where they choose it looks like - appears to be some sandbagging going on there too.

[barbe705]

in some cases it's regional as well. I'd be a top b thrower in florida. I throw with the a's here and did okay before I started having back trouble. sandbagging is always an issue. I think that the AD could dictate which class you fall in if they feel you were holding back. In throwing it also allows 2 classes to run at the same time. grip comps don't have enough support staff for that kind of set up that I've seen. Other than splitting the group I guess the a/b doesn't really solve any problems.

If there was a qualifier of some sort that would add prestige to the a class. let people know that it is the higher level athletes.

has the idea of skill classes been discussed? like, a and b level athletes?

Brent

That hasn't been discussed that I remember Brent - a novice class has been thrown out several times but has gone nowhere it seems like. Are you thinking like in the HG? I still haven't figured that out yet either - winning a B class doesn't put you into the A's - that whole system doesn't seem to amount to much from what I can figure out - people just go where they choose it looks like - appears to be some sandbagging going on there too.

[Too Tall]

I think hand size maybe a way to go...BUT, I can remember in 2005 when Tommy Helsep beat me in the GGC(as for what he did in each event) and if he had not failed on the sledge event at Tarheels Hands of Steel...he would've beaten me at that comp too. I know he is an exception to the rule...but their are guys like him out there. I would go with hand size over body weight...but I am not a promoter and I know my vote does not count.

Just my 2 cents

Chad

[Jedd Johnson]

I am interested in seeing how this pans out. I know Chris and Zach are having weight classes for their contests. You guys think this might be the future for grip?

2 weight classes doesn't bother me. Coming from a powerlifting background, my biggest concern is that we will go the route of a million classes and no competition. Now I don't think we are heading in that direction by any means, and I don't think this idea is bad. I just think it is prudent to take this stuff slow. Our sport has a great level of competition, and it is relatively prestigious to win one of the big events.

Anyways, I am looking for any excuse to run away from Jedd, Thorton, Klein, Durniat, or anyone else who scares me . Glad I am a little guy now.

If you want to get away from Durniat then weight classes aren't the answer. Don't you guys weigh about the same?

[lone Wolf]

Something to think about with meets with weight classes is weigh-in times. I know in AW you can sometimes weigh in the night before. How early will we let people weigh in?

Josh - for this first time - I plan to have a one hour before start time window - at most grip contests - nobody is around before then. Later on - if this seems to be something we want - a rule can be made. Olympic Lifting is something I am familiar with - it's two hours before - and people do all kinds of stuff to make weight - I certainly don't want you using my home bathroom with "colon blow" trying to drop another pound. I have seen the results of that - it wasn't pretty!

At this point I'm looking at this as an experiment - if it helps attendance and people like it - great - if not - we tried and can always go back.

At the Grip contest that we used to have out here at the weigh was half the fun watching Fatboy strip to his boxers

and still weigh-in at over 240 lbs. that was priceless. But after the weigh-in we would all go out for breakfast

[Jedd Johnson]

One thing we have not brought up is fairbar, which is a bar that is as big around as your hand size.

For instance, maybe for the true hand size events, like Rolling Thunder, for instance, we could use one normal sized rolling thunder handle and another one that is smaller with hopefully the same action?

[matthcarl]

Speaking as someone on the borderline, I am completely neutral. If there was a 200 lb. divider, you can bet I would make sure I was under it on contest day, but it's really not that big of a deal. I would compete (and lose) either way.

Just out of curiosity, if weight classes were instituted, would that change anything as far as qualifying for the GGC/National Championship? Say, maybe I only have to pull 250 on the axle instead of 293? Just curious, and like I said, neutral.

[The Natural]

Guys,

I see variations of this debate all the time, whether it be powerlifting, grip, or strongman, and I'm going to give an answer that I regard as correct, but that probably will not satisfy very many people.

What this boils down to is whether we want to evaluate someone's relative strength or absolute strength. If we want to evaluate relative strength, then certain physical limitations come into play, and the limitation in question is mentioned to make it clear that this is the sort of strength we have in mind. So we might say that someone's 250 pound Axle DL is good for having just a 7" hand. Absolute strength, on the other hand, is just that--there are no qualifications.

The problem is that there is actually no good reason to prefer one sense of 'strong' over the other sense of 'strong'. They will forever be incommensurable types of strength. Guys who excel at absolute strength will invent sophistical arguments for thinking that absolute strength is what really matters, while the guys who excel at relative strength will try to make the case for it (unsuccessfully). That's how you get conversations like this:

Relative: "Your bench of 500 pounds is horrible. You weigh 400 pounds."

Absolute: "I still am stronger than you. You only bench 350."

Relative: "No, you're weaker than me. I can get twice my bodyweight. You can't even get 1.5 times your bodyweight."

Absolute: "Can I lift more weight than you?"

Relative: "Yes, but..."

And so on.

Therefore, the only good reasons for favoring one type of strength over the other--and thus the only good reasons for instituting or not instituting hand size classes--are practical reasons.

And to my mind, the practical reasons vary depending on the contest.

For example, I think the practical purpose of the US Grip Championship is to identify the person with the strongest hands in the US grip world. We want to know who is "the man" when it comes to grip in this country, and we don't want the title of being 'the man' watered down by some qualification about hand size. This suggests that, given the practical purpose of this particular contest, it is absolute strength that matters.

But others contests might have no such practical aim in mind. For those contests, relative strength may very well be what interests us.

All of this goes to show that it is mere stipulation that determines what the goals of the contest are, and thus it is mere stipulation (fiat) that determines whether there will or will not be hand size classes.

If we want to have a productive conversation about hand size classes, we need to specify the practical aims of the contest in question. Otherwise, we are wasting our time.

-Rex

[Scott Styles]

Fairbar - Yes!

IMO there are not enough people competing to support classes. Which should come first, I dunno.

[Bob Lipinski]

This argument is all in good fun for me. I can go with the flow. 2 classes are fine, I'll state my opinion but could honestly go either way. More than that and I would not.

Jedd, I think I am a little lighter than Andrew? Maybe not! I am about 205-210 right now. I was kidding though, I will compete regardless of weight classes or whatnot.

[climber511]

Guys,

I see variations of this debate all the time, whether it be powerlifting, grip, or strongman, and I'm going to give an answer that I regard as correct, but that probably will not satisfy very many people.

What this boils down to is whether we want to evaluate someone's relative strength or absolute strength. If we want to evaluate relative strength, then certain physical limitations come into play, and the limitation in question is mentioned to make it clear that this is the sort of strength we have in mind. So we might say that someone's 250 pound Axle DL is good for having just a 7" hand. Absolute strength, on the other hand, is just that--there are no qualifications.

The problem is that there is actually no good reason to prefer one sense of 'strong' over the other sense of 'strong'. They will forever be incommensurable types of strength. Guys who excel at absolute strength will invent sophistical arguments for thinking that absolute strength is what really matters, while the guys who excel at relative strength will try to make the case for it (unsuccessfully). That's how you get conversations like this:

Relative: "Your bench of 500 pounds is horrible. You weigh 400 pounds."

Absolute: "I still am stronger than you. You only bench 350."

Relative: "No, you're weaker than me. I can get twice my bodyweight. You can't even get 1.5 times your bodyweight."

Absolute: "Can I lift more weight than you?"

Relative: "Yes, but..."

And so on.

Therefore, the only good reasons for favoring one type of strength over the other--and thus the only good reasons for instituting or not instituting hand size classes--are practical reasons.

And to my mind, the practical reasons vary depending on the contest.

For example, I think the practical purpose of the US Grip Championship is to identify the person with the strongest hands in the US grip world. We want to know who is "the man" when it comes to grip in this country, and we don't want the title of being 'the man' watered down by some qualification about hand size. This suggests that, given the practical purpose of this particular contest, it is absolute strength that matters.

But others contests might have no such practical aim in mind. For those contests, relative strength may very well be what interests us.

All of this goes to show that it is mere stipulation that determines what the goals of the contest are, and thus it is mere stipulation (fiat) that determines whether there will or will not be hand size classes.

If we want to have a productive conversation about hand size classes, we need to specify the practical aims of the contest in question. Otherwise, we are wasting our time.

-Rex

Dang Rex - not all that weight is muscle - just a touch of it might be brains hehe! I agree totally on the Nationals level at this time - the object was simply to find the strongest hands in the country and I think we did that. I'm just thinking of trying to get more people willing to compete at my contest and at grip contests in general. For most events we have no qualifying standards like GGC - and if all contests are all about absolute strength - we will end up with zero small guys - zero older guys etc and 6 or 8 guys at the Nationals next year. We had 13 at GGC - I would love to see 20+ people there next year - it's just my two cents that some type of division will hopefully attract more people overall - who will bring their friends along and help us grow. Is this going to work - man - I wish I knew - two classes is three times the trouble at the promoter level. But I for one am not willing to work hard at both the competitor level and the promoter level to only provide a sport for a few 300# monsters and no one else. I compete in Masters Olympic lifting which has both weight and age classes. I compete in Masters HG Games which has a light and heavy class plus age groups. So in both of those I can compete with people who can be considered my peer group to one extent or another. And I compete in Grip - where I compete with all ages, hand sizes, bodyweights and heights. Obviously if it was just all about doing well, I could go to other contests than grip and have a better chance of doing well - and we DO NOT have enough people involved to do divisions like other sports yet -but I think we need to start somewhere. Thanks for your analysis and input - it made more sense to me than anything so far. That said - an Olympic Gold Medal in a lighter weight class is just as Gold as the one for the Heavyweights. I don't think it's fair to deny people that chance.

[jad]

Guys,

I see variations of this debate all the time, whether it be powerlifting, grip, or strongman, and I'm going to give an answer that I regard as correct, but that probably will not satisfy very many people.

What this boils down to is whether we want to evaluate someone's relative strength or absolute strength. If we want to evaluate relative strength, then certain physical limitations come into play, and the limitation in question is mentioned to make it clear that this is the sort of strength we have in mind. So we might say that someone's 250 pound Axle DL is good for having just a 7" hand. Absolute strength, on the other hand, is just that--there are no qualifications.

The problem is that there is actually no good reason to prefer one sense of 'strong' over the other sense of 'strong'. They will forever be incommensurable types of strength. Guys who excel at absolute strength will invent sophistical arguments for thinking that absolute strength is what really matters, while the guys who excel at relative strength will try to make the case for it (unsuccessfully). That's how you get conversations like this:

Relative: "Your bench of 500 pounds is horrible. You weigh 400 pounds."

Absolute: "I still am stronger than you. You only bench 350."

Relative: "No, you're weaker than me. I can get twice my bodyweight. You can't even get 1.5 times your bodyweight."

Absolute: "Can I lift more weight than you?"

Relative: "Yes, but..."

And so on.

Therefore, the only good reasons for favoring one type of strength over the other--and thus the only good reasons for instituting or not instituting hand size classes--are practical reasons.

And to my mind, the practical reasons vary depending on the contest.

For example, I think the practical purpose of the US Grip Championship is to identify the person with the strongest hands in the US grip world. We want to know who is "the man" when it comes to grip in this country, and we don't want the title of being 'the man' watered down by some qualification about hand size. This suggests that, given the practical purpose of this particular contest, it is absolute strength that matters.

But others contests might have no such practical aim in mind. For those contests, relative strength may very well be what interests us.

All of this goes to show that it is mere stipulation that determines what the goals of the contest are, and thus it is mere stipulation (fiat) that determines whether there will or will not be hand size classes.

If we want to have a productive conversation about hand size classes, we need to specify the practical aims of the contest in question. Otherwise, we are wasting our time.

-Rex

The problem is hand size dependent events don't measure absolute strength, equally for each competitor. For example, if your hand is 9" long and you pull 355 on the axle and the the guy with an 8" hand pulls 350, and you think you're stronger, you're just kidding yourself. So when you throw handsize events in the mix and don't account for them, the winner's status might be watered down. It's like having a vertical jump contest by seeing who can touch the highest mark on the wall with no consideration for height. When the 6'8" guy beats all the 5'8" guys, it doesn't necessarily mean he's got a better vertical.

[The Natural]

Dang Rex - not all that weight is muscle - just a touch of it might be brains hehe! I agree totally on the Nationals level at this time - the object was simply to find the strongest hands in the country and I think we did that. I'm just thinking of trying to get more people willing to compete at my contest and at grip contests in general.

Yeah, I get that all the time. People always put me in the 'meathead' category. But I went to an "elite" school (graduated Phi Beta Kappa), perfect 800 on the math section of the GRE, blah blah blah. It's a mystery, then, that I'm about to drive down to Speedway and put in a bouncer application at a strip club.

Getting more people to join the sport is a legitimate practical end, one that warrants hand size classes for those contests that might appeal most to a first-timer.

-Rex

[Matt Brouse]

Yeah, I get that all the time. People always put me in the 'meathead' category. -Rex

It might be because your name is 'Rex." Heh...just tossing that out there...

Also, Meathead is a compliment where I come from.

Anyway, back on topic.

[bencrush]

I'm curious too if the GGC qualifying standards for next year would change if there was enough contest interest in the 207lbs and under division. It definitely shouldn't be a linear drop, because it's definitely easier to lift higher relative numbers when you're lighter.

[jad]

I'm curious too if the GGC qualifying standards for next year would change if there was enough contest interest in the 207lbs and under division. It definitely shouldn't be a linear drop, because it's definitely easier to lift higher relative numbers when you're lighter.

I think if there is enough interest then there should be a separate division. IMO, it doesn't do much good to build up the interest among the lighter/small handed guys and then have a nationals every year where they don't have any real chance of winning due to event selection.

[mobsterone]

Change the events.

[jad]

Change the events.

That would be the best solution but probably the most unlikely due to the popularity of certain events.