worklifting

Discussion in 'Strength-Specific Training (SST)' started by Paul Brewer-Jensen, May 9, 2007.

  1. Paul Brewer-Jensen

    Paul Brewer-Jensen New Member

    Being a taller than average and leaner than average lifter I have thought about ways to set up strength competitions that would not put taller, leaner lifters at a disadvantage.

    The shorter lifter in a given weight class has a decided biomechanical advantage over the taller lifters. So, no weight classes.

    Unlean lifters make strength sports look bad and being obese like the superheavyweights is unhealthy. So, I would use the classical formula (divide total by bodyweight to the two thirds power) or incorporate the distance the weight is moved into the calculations to get a work total. (work = force x distance)

    Missed attempts annoy me so I would include all successful lifts of three attempts toward calculating the total.

    As a worklifting example, the clean and jerk would be the first lift. Distance (D) would be foot heel to hand heel height (with arms overhead) minus the height of the bar at rest on the floor. Work for C&J would be
    (weight of lift 1 + weight of lift 2 + weight of lift 3) x D for C&J
    The second lift would be the weighted full pullup. This lift would reward lifters for being leaner. It is also a good complement to the C&J, whereas the C&J and the snatch are redundant. D for pullups would be knuckle to knuckle wingspan divided by 2. Again, all successful attempts will be included in the total calculation.

    A successful attempt in the C&J will be a lift that is held at the top until the judge says "down" and then the lifter must lower the weight (with soft knees and hips) to the shoulders for a second rack (standing tall with the bar on the shoulders) and then lower the weight down to the top deadlift position and then lower it under full control with hands firmly gripping bar until bar is at rest on floor. Dropping the weight contitutes a failed lift.

    A successful attempt in the pullup will be a lift that is held at the top (top of sternum touching the bar) until the judge says "down". then the lifter must lower the weight all the way down to the bottom under full control before dismounting.

    Another pair of lifts that I would like to see done is the snatch with the muscle up, but more people can do pullups than can do muscle ups so the first pair of lifts is more feasable.

    A competition would have only one first place and one second place and so on.

    what do y'all think?

    Happy lifting,
    Paul
     
  2. Totentanz

    Totentanz Super Moderator Staff Member

    <div>
    (Paul Brewer-Jensen @ May 09 2007,18:24)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">A successful attempt in the C&amp;J will be a lift that is held at the top until the judge says &quot;down&quot; and then the lifter must lower the weight (with soft knees and hips) to the shoulders for a second rack (standing tall with the bar on the shoulders) and then lower the weight down to the top deadlift position and then lower it under full control with hands firmly gripping bar until bar is at rest on floor. Dropping the weight contitutes a failed lift.</div>
    Curious about the reasoning behind the bolded line?
     
  3. Paul Brewer-Jensen

    Paul Brewer-Jensen New Member

    Totentanz,

    Lowering the weight under control is the other half of the movement that is more important for hypertrophy.   So, I guess vanity is the rationale.  

    Or, dropping the weight does not show as much mastery over the weight as lowering under control.  

    Also I meant to type &quot;constitutes&quot;.  Oops.  

    Paul
     
  4. Paul Brewer-Jensen

    Paul Brewer-Jensen New Member

    check out some of the images in the photo gallery of the link below. in one photo the gold medalist is not much taller than the silver and bronze medalists... while they are standing on the podium! Biomechanical advantage? Uh, yeah. Height classes anyone?


    http://www.olympic.org/uk....Code=WL
     
  5. scientific muscle

    scientific muscle New Member

    I don't think your idea will ever catch on...theoretically you could have classes for everything....the long arms class, the short legs class, the big wrists class...etc.
     
  6. Paul Brewer-Jensen

    Paul Brewer-Jensen New Member

    <div>
    (scientific muscle @ May 11 2007,18:20)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I don't think your idea will ever catch on...theoretically you could have classes for everything....the long arms class, the short legs class, the big wrists class...etc.</div>
    SM,

    I'm sure my idea will not catch on. So, why am I sharing it? Just bitching I guess, and being a wide eyed idealist at the same time.

    As far as many different classes goes, in my first post I suggested using the classical formula (total divided by bodyweight to the two thirds power) or calculating work by multiplying the weight lifted by the distance the weight is lifted (thus the title &quot;worklifting&quot;). Either of these methods would require only one class.

    For now, I'll be satisfied with simply competing against myself and I won't worry too much about competing against others.

    Happy lifting,
    Paul
     
  7. Lol

    Lol Super Moderator Staff Member

    <div>
    (Paul Brewer-Jensen @ May 14 2007,15:26)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">For now, I'll be satisfied with simply competing against myself and I won't worry too much about competing against others.</div>
    That's the fun in it for me right there. In my book, getting a new a PR is definitely worth all the blood, sweat and tears. Just knowing I am stronger this year than I was last year is a great thing to me and the day I pull that 500lb dead I will be ecstatic.
     
  8. Paul Brewer-Jensen

    Paul Brewer-Jensen New Member

    <div>
    (Lol @ May 15 2007,00:00)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">That's the fun in it for me right there. In my book, getting a new a PR is definitely worth all the blood, sweat and tears. Just knowing I am stronger this year than I was last year is a great thing to me and the day I pull that 500lb dead I will be ecstatic.</div>
    Ditto, Lol.

    But, as an example of how the classical formula works I will apply it to the 2000 olympic games weightlifting results.

    weight class...BM to the 2/3 power...total divided by BM to the 2/3 power
    56                      14.57                          20.93
    62                      15.59                          20.85
    69                      16.79                          21.29
    77                      17.97                          20.45
    85                      19.19                          20.32
    94                      20.39                          19.86
    105                    22.21                          19.14
    and for the fat slobs (Rezazadeh)
    105+                 27.91                           16.93
    the best in the 105+ class was Jaber
                            24.82                           18.53

    It is amazing to me how close all of the gold medalists were to eachother (excluding the 105+ class) when the classical formula is applied to them.  

    Note- multiply the second and third columns together to calculate the totals.  

    Boevski of the 69 kg class would have won top honors by the classical formula.  

    Anyway, all of the weight classes would be unecessary if results are compared thusly, and the larger lifters would not be able to get away with being obese.  The level of obesity of the larger lifters really bugs me.  My dad is living proof of the long term effects of being a super heavyweight lifter for many years.  He fell off a bus last year and tore his left quad right off his knee cap.  Being 370# has its disadvantages.  

    Paul
     
  9. Lol

    Lol Super Moderator Staff Member

    <div>
    (Paul Brewer-Jensen @ May 11 2007,23:13)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">check out some of the images in the photo gallery of the link below.  in one photo the gold medalist is not much taller than the silver and bronze medalists... while they are standing on the podium!  Biomechanical advantage?  Uh, yeah.  Height classes anyone?  


    http://www.olympic.org/uk....Code=WL</div>
    Hey Paul, did you mean this image? Very amusing. [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  10. Aaron_F

    Aaron_F New Member

    <div>
    (Paul Brewer-Jensen @ May 11 2007,04:51)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Totentanz,

    Lowering the weight under control is the other half of the movement that is more important for hypertrophy. So, I guess vanity is the rationale.

    Or, dropping the weight does not show as much mastery over the weight as lowering under control.</div>
    Great way to hurt people.
     

Share This Page