|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2011 18:06:57 GMT -5
Seems there's a trend (on the internet at least) where some folks want to change the term for unequipped lifting from "Raw" to "Classic". I say we approve if they change "Equipped" to "Assisted"! On the other hand, the term RAW has an edge to it and anything else just sounds like a watered down compromise.
Btw, most this talk has been on boards run by equipped federations.
|
|
|
Post by thatnuckolskid on Mar 24, 2011 19:52:33 GMT -5
i like the connotations of "classic." i have no problem with that. thinking of all the great lifters that lifted without suits and shirts, i think it would be an honor for my style of lifting to be associated with them.
|
|
|
Post by crazy on Mar 25, 2011 7:08:52 GMT -5
In my humble opinioin,
Unequipped = Raw = Real Equipped = Assisted = Cheater
;D
|
|
|
Post by Rosario-546 on Mar 25, 2011 7:38:57 GMT -5
In my humble opinioin, Unequipped = Raw = Real Equipped = Assisted = Cheater ;D I disagree about the notation of Equipped = cheating. I like to explain to people who don't know the sport of Powerlifting like Track and Field, everyone knows Track and Field. You have the High Jump and you've got Pole Vault, both are judged at the end of the end how high I you can set the bar and clear without knocking over, and both Track and Field. Same thing as equipped vs raw, plain and simple there too different events under the envelope of Powerlifting. If you were complete in the High Jump against someone using a Pole, now that would be "cheating" if you get my drift.......just my two cents.
|
|
|
Post by 3speed on Mar 25, 2011 7:59:04 GMT -5
The term "Classic Powerlifting" has been around for several years now and generally indicates the use of a singlet, belt and wraps.
It refers primarily to powerlifting in the 70's - the age before squat suits, bench shirts and wraps designed for lifting. Lifters used any advantage they could that wasn't specifically prohibited in the rule book. (I say book - singular - because the AAU was the only game in town for several years.) These attempts to gain an advantage included the use of ace wraps around the knees. Some lifters would even wrap a tennis ball behind their knees.
'Raw' and 'unequipped' are pretty much used interchangeably now, and depending on whom you are talking to, can mean several different things. The interesting thing is that when this federation was founded, "RAW" was a play on words. It described the style of lifting, but it was also an acronym for "Redeemed Among the World". The founder of 100% RAW was Spero Tshontikidis. He now uses the acronym for his R.A.W. United federation.
|
|
|
Post by Rosario-546 on Mar 25, 2011 8:19:37 GMT -5
Nice 3speed, for the History lesson. Count me a one who had now idea the route of the term of R.A.W. Very interesting to say the least. And as a prior service member pretty cool. Spero has an interesting write up on this Rawunited site, under his Rulesbook.
|
|
|
Post by crazy on Mar 25, 2011 9:08:25 GMT -5
;D[/quote]
I disagree about the notation of Equipped = cheating. [/quote]
I respect that. I also respect your powerlifting.
And hopefully our discussion is productive for the forum.
In my opinion, just two different ways to say tomato...
Pole in high jump = suits in powerlifting.
On another angle, isnt the equipped aspect of powerlifting one of the reasons it is not in the olympics?
|
|
|
Post by thatnuckolskid on Mar 25, 2011 11:11:30 GMT -5
thanks 3speed! i did not know that!
|
|
|
Post by George on Mar 26, 2011 12:01:49 GMT -5
Crazy: Being a raw forum, you can be sure that the Gear vs. Raw debate periodically comes up. I think most of us who have been around a while feel like it is a dead horse issue. The same goes for the olympic argument.
That being so, I will stll throw some food for thought out there: As suggested, look at equipped lifting as it's own entity, respect those who do it, yet hold your own negative opinion. Sounds crazy, but over the years my view has evolved into the opinion that gear is not easy to master and many world class guys use it. It can also be outright fun as the training calls for so many new and innovative techniques. regardless of how many pounds the gear gives, those who compete in gear federations have an even par advantage. Therefore, it is not cheating among them, rather it is an enhanced strategy game being able to not only project numbers, but also in toggling/adjusting the gear.
Although I have learned not to gear bash, I still hold firm on some key points. My biggest is that raw/classic/unequipped numbers can stand the test of time. I doubt we humans evolve beyond the point that we can see a noticable gene difference anytime over the next few thousand years. Hades, if anything we might be devolving with the obesity, etc. So, gene doping aside, the raw/classic/unequipped numbers of 2011 can be readily compared to those of 1960, 1970, 1980, etc. There are still all time raw numbers standing from over thirty years ago. You'd be hard pressed to find gear records older than five years. (Take a gander at powerliftingwatch.com all time records. you'll notice the only lifts not listed under raw that have stood the test of time are...the deadlift of course...the least gear modified). Therefore, although I fully respect gear lifting, it is certainly an"in the moment" game of pitting the best against the best...and nearly impossible to make generation comparisons to. I think this is a real shame, because there are some great talents in raw/single and unlimited ply's who cannot compare now, and will lkely not even be able to compare themselves to their own federations (geared guys) years later. Perhaps the legacy does not mean anything, but to me it does. I would hate to be one of the strongest multi-ply guys in the world (and there are some amazing cats out there), only to be a footnote ten years later as the technology advances. This likely does not matter to those competing now whom are seeking huge numbers without worrying about legacy. There are still some geared guys colorful enough to be remembered beyond what the numbrs say anyways.
My second point was illustrated at the USAPL meet held at the Arnold Classic. For anyone who has not been to the Classic, this place is flooded with all walks of life. When any event is going on, you will get flocks of people who have no clue, simply looking for a free show or a place to sit. I spent over five hours watching the USAPL single ply meet (all except Beau Moore who was raw) and seen countless seat changes. I cannot count how many times I had to hear explanations between people with no clue behind or beside me. One scenario: Guy one asks "why do they seem to be walking like zombies...like they can't put their arms down, to the bench?". You will then hear the explanation about a bench shirt, what it does, etc. Each time the lay person responds with a negative remark, from "that doesn't seem fair" to "that's bullshit". As much as I agree with my above rambling, this is still going to be a constant reality and it is embarrassing to endure as a non-geared lifter. We can say to each his own, and I can say we need to respect the other side, but both of these issues, to me are undeniable negatives.
|
|
|
Post by George on Mar 26, 2011 13:47:16 GMT -5
Crazy: As for the Olympics- You will have to provide a link which shows definitively that gear is the reason the sport has been rejected for so many years. Here is an excerpt from the olympic.org website... "How does a sport become Olympic? To make it onto the Olympic programme, a sport first has to be recognised: it must be administered by an International Federation which ensures that the sport's activities follow the Olympic Charter. If it is widely practised around the world and meets a number of criteria established by the IOC session, a recognised sport may be added to the Olympic programme on the recommendation of the IOC's Olympic Programme Commission." Also, here is a link which on slightly better explains the criteria: www.olympic.org/Documents/olympic_charter_en.pdfNow, the IPF is conducts Paralympics and World Game events under the International World Games Association, which is under the International Olympic committee. Their executives would likely have the most knowledge as to why the sport has not been inducted. If it was simply because of gear, I would assume the IPF and its affiliates (such as the USAPL and others aspiring to comply with IPF standards) would make a strong push for a raw movement. While raw may be gaining steam, I do not see any direct push or initiative for this to happen, which tells me it's not the prime player if at all involved. Also consider this: Baseball took years to be adopted (1992) and softball was likewise adopted in 1996...and both sports are now out of the games. (Citing lack of member nations participation. It can't always be Cuba, Japan and the United States playing for medals). Using the above logic, Baseball, a sport as popular as it can get (to us), also uses gear (bats, balls, etc.), has subjective rules (strike zones, close calls) and as of late has a steroid notoriety. Yet it was adopted and subsequently dominated by a select few countries...enough to make it undesirable for most other participating nations and likewise causing it to be the first sport dropped since Polo in 1936. If the IPF is rightfully looked upon as the closest we have to breaking into the Olympics...take a hard look at the IPF world championships here... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Powerlifting_FederationIf you glance over the results, aside from a certain lifter dominating an era (like Hideaki Inaba from Japan winning 17 of Japan's 26 titles), you will see that in the early years the U.S. dominated with 153 champions, while in modern times the front runners are the Russians with 58 and Ukraine with 32 champions. Perhaps this is a deciding factor...no enough parity. I think issues like above (participation and equality) are more important than rule particulars such as gear. I would use wishful thinking and assume if the above becomes a reality that the IOC would want a raw policy, but who knows.
|
|
|
Post by George on Mar 26, 2011 13:58:07 GMT -5
Crazy: I would have to think that we are as close as it gets to getting a foot in the door. Other sports have limited parity, such as Ice Hockey (typically dominated by Canada, Sweden or Russia) and likewise there are other similar factors. I believe it is only the consensus versus esxclusiveness. (Who goes so we enter, etc.)
|
|
|
Post by buckeye2010 on Mar 26, 2011 17:03:26 GMT -5
George, you have some very solid thoughts regarding raw verses equipped. I have some of the v. ery same ideas. Even though I lift only raw I have great respect for the guys doing equipped. That's the road they chose and more power to them. I can say I have enjoyed watching some equipped competitions and seeing the amount of weight they can move.
My first competitio.n was in 1972 and Larry Pacifico was the announcer and also put on a bench press exhibition. That was quite a thrill for a 19 year kid. Being from Ohio I had the honor of belonging to a gym where Steve Wilson, Roger Estep, and Dave Waddington worked out. I have a hard time adjusting to the equipped numbers because I am kind of old school.
Ialso have been to Arnold's show a few times when I lived in columbus. Anyone with an interest in weightlifting should take time to go. Great show! I will always be Raw but have no problem with the equipped guys. I do have to admit that it does feel good to go to a mixed competition and beat the equipped guys
|
|
|
Post by George on Mar 26, 2011 18:01:39 GMT -5
Larry Pacifico is a legend. I considered going to his gym in Dayton for deadlift advice a while back )he still personal trains)
|
|
|
Post by crazy on Mar 27, 2011 13:27:53 GMT -5
George,
I guess much of my feelings on the equipped issue is that in most of the meets that I have competed in that were equipped, 14 or so, the respect of the real powerlifter is not there.
In fact, a meet last year for USAPL did not have a raw division and judged everyone the same. The meet directors comment after was that he may offer an overall Raw award next year...that was it. The reason he was going to do it next year was because raw was becoming popular. This director was a MAJOR equipped bencher.
I knew this going in and expected no less. Got 4rth...cheaters beat me. Beat 2 other.
I agree that the weight they are using is many times tremendous. That is a risk for the lifter and should be noted.
The other thing that concerns me is that I seem to be seeing alot more young competitors lifting equipped. Highschool and below. To me it seems that these lifters need to develop raw abilities first with good technique.
Thank you for your thoughts. There were several points that I have not considered. I guess in my old age, I have a tendency to let my past experiences override a good arguement.
Unfortunately, of course, I have no link to the olympics issue. I have read about it through the years and did not collect anything on it.
I really enjoyed your comments.
|
|
|
Post by George on Mar 27, 2011 16:03:40 GMT -5
Crazy: I have run the gamut of emotions on the issue. I do have faith hat more and more raw competitions seem to be popping up. ( I mean, this fed is just over the ten year mark).
I think the most positive way to encourage raw is to keep having these massive raw lifters come to the table and providing attention. When I started in 2007, 242 totals were averaging around mid 1600's. Today we have seevral guys knocking on 2,000lbs raw. Drug tested or not, most peoiple in the know will appreciate an 800 raw squat, 500+ raw bench. The more raw guys stepping up and hitting big numbers, the more the audience is going to recognize observations such as those at the Arnold meet. (Man...he did that without a bench shirt?)
|
|