if ($is_front): endif; ?> Should IPC (Paralympic) World Records Count For Singlelift All time Records? | Powerlifting Watch


Should IPC (Paralympic) World Records Count For Singlelift All time Records?

Mon, 04/27/2015 - 18:33 -- admin
Yes
67% (254 votes)
No
33% (125 votes)
Total votes: 379

Comments

Submitted by JASON MANENKOFF on
Just some food for thought which may allow others to make an educated vote .. The bench used in IPC competition allows for the lifter to be strapped down. This probably doesn't have an advantage over having your feet on the floor for stability but at the same time we are now looking at a different set of rules. Foot movement and the butt coming off of the bench does not apply in the IPC. Here are the current IPC records... Men Up to 49.00 kg (108 lbs. ) Le, van Cong VIE 181.50 kg (400 lbs.) 2014-11-19 Incheon (KOR) Up to 54.00 kg (119 lbs) Othman, Sherif EGY 205.00 kg (451 lbs.) 2014-04-06 Dubai (UAE) Up to 59.00 kg (130 lbs.) Othman, Sherif EGY 210.00 kg (462 lbs.) 2015-03-16 Dubai (UAE) Up to 65.00 kg (143 lbs.) Mohsin, Rasool IRQ 217.00 kg (478 lbs.) 2014-10-21 Incheon (KOR) Up to 72.00 kg (158 lbs.) Rostami, Roohallah IRI 220.00 kg (485 lbs.) 2013-11-05 Kuala Lumpur (MAS) Up to 80.00 kg (176 lbs.) Gu, Xiaofei CHN 236.00 kg (520 lbs.) 2014-04-08 Dubai (UAE) Up to 88.00 kg (194 lbs.) Solhipouravanji, Seyedhamed IRI 229.50 kg (505 lbs) 2014-10-14 Incheon (KOR) Up to 97.00 kg (213 lbs.) Eldib, Mohamed EGY 241.00 kg (531 lbs.) 2015-03-17 Dubai (UAE) Up to 107.00 kg (235 lbs.) Mamalos, Pavlos GRE 240.00 kg (529 lbs.) 2014-04-11 Dubai (UAE) Over 107.00 kg Rahman, Siamand IRI 292.00 kg (643 lbs.) 2014-10-24 Incheon (KOR) Women Up to 41.00 kg (90 lbs) Muslu, Nazmiye TUR 103.00 kg (227 lbs.) 2014-04-05 Dubai (UAE) Up to 45.00 kg (99 lbs) Hu, Dandan CHN 99.00 kg (218 lbs.) 2014-10-19 Incheon (KOR) Up to 50.00 kg (110 lbs.) Oyema, Esther NGR 126.00 kg (277 lbs.) 2014-08-02 Glasgow (GBR) Up to 55.00 kg (121 lbs.) Oyema, Esther NGR 125.00 kg(275 lbs.) 2014-04-08 Dubai (UAE) Up to 61.00 kg (134 lbs.) Omar, Fatma EGY 132.00 kg (291 lbs.) 2013-11-05 Kuala Lumpur (MAS) Up to 67.00 kg (147 lbs.) Tan, Yujiao CHN 137.00 kg (302 lbs.) 2014-10-21 Incheon (KOR) Up to 73.00 kg (160 lbs.) Ghazouani, Souhad FRA 150.00 kg (330 lbs.) 2013-05-25 Alexin (RUS) Up to 79.00 (174 lbs.) kg Lin, Tzu-Hui TPE 129.00 kg (284 lbs.) 2014-04-09 Dubai (UAE) Up to 86.00 kg (189 lbs.) Obiji, Loveline NGR 144.00 kg (318 lbs.) 2014-08-02 Glasgow (GBR) Over 86.00 kg (189 lbs.) Orji, Precious NGR 151.00 kg (332 lbs.) 2014-04-11 Dubai (UAE) And the frozen records due to changes in weight classes (2012) can be found here...http://www.paralympic.org/powerlifting/records Some of them are higher and perhaps someone can take the time to compare since I am unable to copy and paste. A few that stick out are 529 lbs. at 165 and 535 at 181, 498 at 147. Perhaps the administrator could sift though these records and see how many would currently change what we have listed on this site. Iron Arena Powerlifting & Performance www.iron-arena.com

Submitted by Team McCloskey on
ABSOLUTELY THE LIFTS SHOULD COUNT! WHILE THE RULES ARE DIFFERENT W/ THE LOWER BODY, THERE ARE MORE DISADVANTAGES THAN ADVANTAGES WITH THE LIFTER AND FROM WHAT IS POSTED LIGHTER WEIGHTS WOULD LEAD MOST OF THE WEIGHT CLASSES NOW ON THE ALL-TIME LIST. SO WHAT ARE WE WAITING FOR, GET THOSE NUMBERS IN THERE.WE ALL TRAIN HARD AS LIFTERS! PROUDLY SPONSORED BY: GOMETAL.COM UNBREAKABLEGEAR JOHAWKCUSTOMS

Submitted by joe routh on
yes they should. Should lamar gants deadlift count because severe scoliosis and long arms have him locking out to close to knee, or the one armed full meet competitor only locking one arm out. Here in iowa we had a wrestler with only one leg I think he wr

Submitted by ifwade on
I voted “yes,” for the following reasons: The “All-Time World Records List” compares lifts performed in many different federations, under many different conditions. Although in a sense, this comparison is “unfair” in that the comparison isn’t exact, it still is ultimately a good thing for powerlifting, as it provides some sort of meeting place for lifters in different federations. The question here should not have anything to do with whether the disabled themselves can be compared to non-disabled lifters. Many disabled competitors compete in federations outside of the IPC. Never should disabled lifters be prohibited from competition because of some perceived advantage that they gain because of their disability. In most cases, the disadvantages far outweigh any advantages. Furthermore, bench-only lifters (to use the most immediate example) often gain a similar advantage in the distribution of their body weight by merely not training their lower body. Thus, the question is not whether disabled athletes deserve to be compared alongside the wider PL community. The answer to that question is absolutely, yes. The real question is about the IPC as a federation: do the IPC’s competition rules differ so much from those accepted by the wider PL community that they should not be included in the list? Do the rules allow these lifters to gain an unfair advantage? Let’s address the IPC rules. 1. Weigh-Ins The IPC requires 2-hour weigh ins, which is consistent with the most strict weigh in policies in the PL Community. 2. Drug-Testing The IPC requires drug-testing consistent with the most stringent standards in the PL Community. We should note that many federations included in the all-time list do not require drug-testing. 3. Weight Classes The weight-classes in the IPC differ from other feds, which makes the all-time WR list issue more difficult. This is also an issue with the IPF. Note that amputees are penalized for their disabilities in the IPC: they have kgs added to their bodyweight depending on the amputation, thus preventing them from gaining an advantage from low body weight as a result of an amputation. In this sense, the IPC is more strict with disabled lifters than other federations, which do not penalize for amputation. 4. The Lift -The lifter’s head must remain on the bench. This is on the stricter end of the spectrum as far as federations go. -There is a start command. Again, many federations do not require this. -There is NOT a press command. There is, however, a required pause. If the lift is not paused on the chest, then it is redlighted. From the rulebook, the bar must “visibly stop” and there “must be a noticeable definitive break between the eccentric and concentric.” -There is a rack command, like most federations. -Lifters are allowed to be strapped to the bench for stabilization. This is not something you’ll find in other federations. - IPC Benches are wider than many competition benches, however, many powerlifting federations have no rule regarding the max width of a competition bench. The SPF does not have any rule regarding a max width requirement. -Summary- There are other variables, but these are the most significant. In many regards the IPC is quite stringent in its requirements: drug-testing, 2 hour weigh-ins, even penalizing amputee lifters by artificially adding to their bodyweight. The perceived advantages lifters in this federation would gain would be from having their bodies strapped to the bench, and not having a press signal. Since, however, the bar is required to pause on the chest or the lift will earn red lights, this should not present an advantage. In fact, all of the IPC presses I have seen have been performed with a significant pause, which is the goal of the press signal. To conclude, the IPC rulebook is not radically different from that of other federations. If we can compare records from federations that drug test with two hour weigh ins to those performed in un-tested feds with 24 hour weigh ins, we clearly accept a large variety of performance conditions for the lifts included on the All-Time WR list. The IPC, as a federation, does not enough from the rest of the PL Community that it should be excluded.

Submitted by JASON MANENKOFF on
[quote=ifwade]I voted “yes,” for the following reasons: The “All-Time World Records List” compares lifts performed in many different federations, under many different conditions. Although in a sense, this comparison is “unfair” in that the comparison isn’t exact, it still is ultimately a good thing for powerlifting, as it provides some sort of meeting place for lifters in different federations. The question here should not have anything to do with whether the disabled themselves can be compared to non-disabled lifters. Many disabled competitors compete in federations outside of the IPC. Never should disabled lifters be prohibited from competition because of some perceived advantage that they gain because of their disability. In most cases, the disadvantages far outweigh any advantages. Furthermore, bench-only lifters (to use the most immediate example) often gain a similar advantage in the distribution of their body weight by merely not training their lower body. Thus, the question is not whether disabled athletes deserve to be compared alongside the wider PL community. The answer to that question is absolutely, yes. The real question is about the IPC as a federation: do the IPC’s competition rules differ so much from those accepted by the wider PL community that they should not be included in the list? Do the rules allow these lifters to gain an unfair advantage? Let’s address the IPC rules. 1. Weigh-Ins The IPC requires 2-hour weigh ins, which is consistent with the most strict weigh in policies in the PL Community. 2. Drug-Testing The IPC requires drug-testing consistent with the most stringent standards in the PL Community. We should note that many federations included in the all-time list do not require drug-testing. 3. Weight Classes The weight-classes in the IPC differ from other feds, which makes the all-time WR list issue more difficult. This is also an issue with the IPF. Note that amputees are penalized for their disabilities in the IPC: they have kgs added to their bodyweight depending on the amputation, thus preventing them from gaining an advantage from low body weight as a result of an amputation. In this sense, the IPC is more strict with disabled lifters than other federations, which do not penalize for amputation. 4. The Lift -The lifter’s head must remain on the bench. This is on the stricter end of the spectrum as far as federations go. -There is a start command. Again, many federations do not require this. -There is NOT a press command. There is, however, a required pause. If the lift is not paused on the chest, then it is redlighted. From the rulebook, the bar must “visibly stop” and there “must be a noticeable definitive break between the eccentric and concentric.” -There is a rack command, like most federations. -Lifters are allowed to be strapped to the bench for stabilization. This is not something you’ll find in other federations. - IPC Benches are wider than many competition benches, however, many powerlifting federations have no rule regarding the max width of a competition bench. The SPF does not have any rule regarding a max width requirement. -Summary- There are other variables, but these are the most significant. In many regards the IPC is quite stringent in its requirements: drug-testing, 2 hour weigh-ins, even penalizing amputee lifters by artificially adding to their bodyweight. The perceived advantages lifters in this federation would gain would be from having their bodies strapped to the bench, and not having a press signal. Since, however, the bar is required to pause on the chest or the lift will earn red lights, this should not present an advantage. In fact, all of the IPC presses I have seen have been performed with a significant pause, which is the goal of the press signal. To conclude, the IPC rulebook is not radically different from that of other federations. If we can compare records from federations that drug test with two hour weigh ins to those performed in un-tested feds with 24 hour weigh ins, we clearly accept a large variety of performance conditions for the lifts included on the All-Time WR list. The IPC, as a federation, does not enough from the rest of the PL Community that it should be excluded. [/quote] Very good Ifwade. I was hoping someone would take the time to research and write what you wrote in an effort to educate folks. In regards to the size of the bench. The top part of the bench where the shoulder go is in fact the same as the benches we use. Right around 12 inches. It only get's wider under the torso so that the legs may be strapped down. I originally was going to say we cannot count these lifts simply because if we did we must then accept lifts done with the Thompson Fat pad WHICH IS INFACT AN ADVANTAGE and is not accepted in the rankings by powerliftingwatch. A few organizations have tried to use this. They were not ranked.

Submitted by Iaink on
[quote=ifwade]I voted “yes,” for the following reasons: The “All-Time World Records List” compares lifts performed in many different federations, under many different conditions. Although in a sense, this comparison is “unfair” in that the comparison isn’t exact, it still is ultimately a good thing for powerlifting, as it provides some sort of meeting place for lifters in different federations. The question here should not have anything to do with whether the disabled themselves can be compared to non-disabled lifters. Many disabled competitors compete in federations outside of the IPC. Never should disabled lifters be prohibited from competition because of some perceived advantage that they gain because of their disability. In most cases, the disadvantages far outweigh any advantages. Furthermore, bench-only lifters (to use the most immediate example) often gain a similar advantage in the distribution of their body weight by merely not training their lower body. Thus, the question is not whether disabled athletes deserve to be compared alongside the wider PL community. The answer to that question is absolutely, yes. The real question is about the IPC as a federation: do the IPC’s competition rules differ so much from those accepted by the wider PL community that they should not be included in the list? Do the rules allow these lifters to gain an unfair advantage? Let’s address the IPC rules. 1. Weigh-Ins The IPC requires 2-hour weigh ins, which is consistent with the most strict weigh in policies in the PL Community. 2. Drug-Testing The IPC requires drug-testing consistent with the most stringent standards in the PL Community. We should note that many federations included in the all-time list do not require drug-testing. 3. Weight Classes The weight-classes in the IPC differ from other feds, which makes the all-time WR list issue more difficult. This is also an issue with the IPF. Note that amputees are penalized for their disabilities in the IPC: they have kgs added to their bodyweight depending on the amputation, thus preventing them from gaining an advantage from low body weight as a result of an amputation. In this sense, the IPC is more strict with disabled lifters than other federations, which do not penalize for amputation. 4. The Lift -The lifter’s head must remain on the bench. This is on the stricter end of the spectrum as far as federations go. -There is a start command. Again, many federations do not require this. -There is NOT a press command. There is, however, a required pause. If the lift is not paused on the chest, then it is redlighted. From the rulebook, the bar must “visibly stop” and there “must be a noticeable definitive break between the eccentric and concentric.” -There is a rack command, like most federations. -Lifters are allowed to be strapped to the bench for stabilization. This is not something you’ll find in other federations. - IPC Benches are wider than many competition benches, however, many powerlifting federations have no rule regarding the max width of a competition bench. The SPF does not have any rule regarding a max width requirement. -Summary- There are other variables, but these are the most significant. In many regards the IPC is quite stringent in its requirements: drug-testing, 2 hour weigh-ins, even penalizing amputee lifters by artificially adding to their bodyweight. The perceived advantages lifters in this federation would gain would be from having their bodies strapped to the bench, and not having a press signal. Since, however, the bar is required to pause on the chest or the lift will earn red lights, this should not present an advantage. In fact, all of the IPC presses I have seen have been performed with a significant pause, which is the goal of the press signal. To conclude, the IPC rulebook is not radically different from that of other federations. If we can compare records from federations that drug test with two hour weigh ins to those performed in un-tested feds with 24 hour weigh ins, we clearly accept a large variety of performance conditions for the lifts included on the All-Time WR list. The IPC, as a federation, does not enough from the rest of the PL Community that it should be excluded. [/quote] This actually changed my mind on the issue. Not that I held a strong opinion on it though. The PLW All Time List isn't that important a deal for many/most lifters across the world so adding in the IPC lifters seems fair enough. Given the fact that it already compares lifts that are not really comparable due to various differences in rules between feds.

Submitted by eggsurplus on
The major issue I can see for records is if one or more limbs are missing resulting in a lifter competing in a lighter weight class than would have been possible. This doesn't discount the huge accomplishment at all. Just that it's hard to compare lifts when lifting under such different circumstances. All other differences in rules, etc would certainly be close to a wash given the challenges that have had to be overcome.

Submitted by ifwade on
[quote=eggsurplus]The major issue I can see for records is if one or more limbs are missing resulting in a lifter competing in a lighter weight class than would have been possible. [/quote] I can't blame you for not reading my stupidly long post above, but as I wrote, the IPC actually adds the theoretical weight of limbs back on to competitors' body weights in the case of amputees! In this sense, IPC is actually more strict: there is no rule barring a leg amputee from competing in, say, SPF, and setting a WR bench-only lift with no penalty for the missing limb.

Submitted by gopostal42 on
[quote=ifwade] I can't blame you for not reading my stupidly long post above, but as I wrote, the IPC actually adds the theoretical weight of limbs back on to competitors' body weights in the case of amputees! In this sense, IPC is actually more strict: there is no rule barring a leg amputee from competing in, say, SPF, and setting a WR bench-only lift with no penalty for the missing limb.[/quote] From Dr. Kyle Pierce Director of the USA Weightlifting Center for High Performance and Development at Louisiana State University-Shreveport. Additions to the lifters' body weight are made for amputees as follows: - For each through-ankle amputation, add 0.5kg. in all weight categories - For each below-knee amputation, add 1 kg. up to 67 kg. body weight and 1.5 kg. for 67.01 kg. body weight and over - For each above-knee amputation, add 1.5 kg. up to 67 kg. body weight and 2 kg. for 67.01 kg. body weight and over - For each complete hip disarticulation, add 2.5 kg. up to 67 kg. body weight and 3 kg. for 67.01 kg. body weight and over. I coach a para-athlete and still can't consider this fair at all. The penalty for a larger person missing an entire leg up to the hip is only 3kg/6.6lbs................ The able bodied lifters in the lower weight classes will be at a significant disadvantage specifically as it's pretty goofy to think 3kg compensated for an entire legs worth of lean mass redistribution to the upper body. These para-athletes have no advantages over each other but compared to able bodied athletes the numbers can be skewed up to possibly 2 weight classes. Just something to think about here.

Submitted by ifwade on
This is a thoughtful point, but your claim that the weight classes are skewed really applies to every federation, not just the IPC. Amputees can compete in other feds with no penalty at all, and this would still skew the weight classes. They cannot be strapped to the bench, but still, these lifters likely gain relatively little stability from being strapped down compared to an athlete with legs. In this way, your point is less about the IPC and more about the lifters themselves. Does that make sense? Are you arguing that we should not count Adrian Larsen's records because of the small mass of his legs which skews the weight class? If you would argue this, I'd have to argue that bench-only lifters like Joe Mazza, who have no disability, but purposefully have small legs, should also have their lifts discounted. Furthermore, I'm not aware of any top IPC lifters who are amputees. I'm quite sure there are a few, but most of them that I've seen have a disability that has caused their legs to be nonfunctional, or not very functional. This is more akin to bench-only lifters who don't work out their legs because they'd like to focus on bench, or lifters like Larsen, who have been setting records in non-IPC feds for quite a while. An interesting debate to be sure.

Submitted by gopostal42 on
[quote=ifwade]This is a thoughtful point, but your claim that the weight classes are skewed really applies to every federation, not just the IPC. Amputees can compete in other feds with no penalty at all, and this would still skew the weight classes. They cannot be strapped to the bench, but still, these lifters likely gain relatively little stability from being strapped down compared to an athlete with legs. In this way, your point is less about the IPC and more about the lifters themselves. Does that make sense? Are you arguing that we should not count Adrian Larsen's records because of the small mass of his legs which skews the weight class? If you would argue this, I'd have to argue that bench-only lifters like Joe Mazza, who have no disability, but purposefully have small legs, should also have their lifts discounted. Furthermore, I'm not aware of any top IPC lifters who are amputees. I'm quite sure there are a few, but most of them that I've seen have a disability that has caused their legs to be nonfunctional, or not very functional. This is more akin to bench-only lifters who don't work out their legs because they'd like to focus on bench, or lifters like Larsen, who have been setting records in non-IPC feds for quite a while. An interesting debate to be sure.[/quote] The weight class perspective is one aspect of my issue with it. It's not really the issue of leg mass specifically that i have an issue with at all. It's simply the fact that special rules and allowances must be made for the disabled athletes to compete which able bodied athletes aren't allowed. Mr. Larson can walk and at the very least with riser plates (which are within the rules) could presumably place his legs on a floor surface like everyone else so special separate rules aren't required for him to compete. Different standards seem call for seperate lists. However if lists were kept of para/non para lifts done all-time i guess that would be ok but I'm also not in danger of having an all-time record nullified by reclassification. Why not ask the guys who would lose the recognition for their all-time world record (IMO the highest title in our entire sport) how they would feel about losing that? If they are ok with it i would have 0% objection to it.

Submitted by ifwade on
[quote=gopostal42][quote=ifwade]This is a thoughtful point, but your claim that the weight classes are skewed really applies to every federation, not just the IPC. Amputees can compete in other feds with no penalty at all, and this would still skew the weight classes. They cannot be strapped to the bench, but still, these lifters likely gain relatively little stability from being strapped down compared to an athlete with legs. In this way, your point is less about the IPC and more about the lifters themselves. Does that make sense? Are you arguing that we should not count Adrian Larsen's records because of the small mass of his legs which skews the weight class? If you would argue this, I'd have to argue that bench-only lifters like Joe Mazza, who have no disability, but purposefully have small legs, should also have their lifts discounted. Furthermore, I'm not aware of any top IPC lifters who are amputees. I'm quite sure there are a few, but most of them that I've seen have a disability that has caused their legs to be nonfunctional, or not very functional. This is more akin to bench-only lifters who don't work out their legs because they'd like to focus on bench, or lifters like Larsen, who have been setting records in non-IPC feds for quite a while. An interesting debate to be sure.[/quote] The weight class perspective is one aspect of my issue with it. It's not really the issue of leg mass specifically that i have an issue with at all. It's simply the fact that special rules and allowances must be made for the disabled athletes to compete which able bodied athletes aren't allowed. Mr. Larson can walk and at the very least with riser plates (which are within the rules) could presumably place his legs on a floor surface like everyone else so special separate rules aren't required for him to compete. Different standards seem call for seperate lists. However if lists were kept of para/non para lifts done all-time i guess that would be ok but I'm also not in danger of having an all-time record nullified by reclassification. Why not ask the guys who would lose the recognition for their all-time world record (IMO the highest title in our entire sport) how they would feel about losing that? If they are ok with it i would have 0% objection to it.[/quote] Well, I don't know that I agree that it is the highest title in the sport as it isn't actually a record kept by any federation, but rather a list kept on a powerlifting website. I view the point of the list not so much as a way to record the best of the best, since this varies so much from fed to fed, but a way to provide a meeting place for lifters of different feds in order to compare lifts, even if it is somewhat apples to oranges. You claim that "different standards call for different lists." So, I'd ask you: Does strapping down athletes provide a bigger advantage than-- Tested athletes vs. non-tested athletes? Monolift vs. no monolift? Full meet deadlift vs. Deadlift only? 2 hour weigh ins vs. 24 hour weigh ins (or even 48 hour weigh-ins in the case of WPO)? Single-ply vs. multi-ply? For all of the above, we have hugely different standards, but include them on the same list. Any competitor knows that a 2 hour weigh in vs. a 24 hour weigh in can skew a weightclass by as much as 20 lbs. (At least it has for me.) I know there are differences in the IPC, but they seem small when compared to the huge differences that we already include in the all-time lists! For example, Ed Coan's full meet, 2 hour weigh in, deadlift records were beaten by a 24 hour weigh in deadlift-only lift. So, I'm not claiming that there aren't any differences, but just that these are small when compared to the differences already included in the lists. For example, on the current all-time record lists right now, if a lifter performs a squat in the IPF, walked out, drug-tested, 2 hour weigh in, single-ply, it is compared to the other 24 hour weigh in, untested, multiply, monolift squats. So, lifters who competed in un-tested, monolift, 24 hour weigh in feds have an ENORMOUS advantage when it comes to getting on the all-time record lists. I would argue these advantages are far greater than the minimal advantages provided by a lifter being strapped to a bench. And why would we only ask those whose records will be nullified? They would be the part of the PL community who would likely have a difficult time being objective about the decision.

Submitted by gopostal42 on
[quote=ifwade][quote=gopostal42][quote=ifwade]This is a thoughtful point, but your claim that the weight classes are skewed really applies to every federation, not just the IPC. Amputees can compete in other feds with no penalty at all, and this would still skew the weight classes. They cannot be strapped to the bench, but still, these lifters likely gain relatively little stability from being strapped down compared to an athlete with legs. In this way, your point is less about the IPC and more about the lifters themselves. Does that make sense? Are you arguing that we should not count Adrian Larsen's records because of the small mass of his legs which skews the weight class? If you would argue this, I'd have to argue that bench-only lifters like Joe Mazza, who have no disability, but purposefully have small legs, should also have their lifts discounted. Furthermore, I'm not aware of any top IPC lifters who are amputees. I'm quite sure there are a few, but most of them that I've seen have a disability that has caused their legs to be nonfunctional, or not very functional. This is more akin to bench-only lifters who don't work out their legs because they'd like to focus on bench, or lifters like Larsen, who have been setting records in non-IPC feds for quite a while. An interesting debate to be sure.[/quote] The weight class perspective is one aspect of my issue with it. It's not really the issue of leg mass specifically that i have an issue with at all. It's simply the fact that special rules and allowances must be made for the disabled athletes to compete which able bodied athletes aren't allowed. Mr. Larson can walk and at the very least with riser plates (which are within the rules) could presumably place his legs on a floor surface like everyone else so special separate rules aren't required for him to compete. Different standards seem call for seperate lists. However if lists were kept of para/non para lifts done all-time i guess that would be ok but I'm also not in danger of having an all-time record nullified by reclassification. Why not ask the guys who would lose the recognition for their all-time world record (IMO the highest title in our entire sport) how they would feel about losing that? If they are ok with it i would have 0% objection to it.[/quote] Well, I don't know that I agree that it is the highest title in the sport as it isn't actually a record kept by any federation, but rather a list kept on a powerlifting website. I view the point of the list not so much as a way to record the best of the best, since this varies so much from fed to fed, but a way to provide a meeting place for lifters of different feds in order to compare lifts, even if it is somewhat apples to oranges. You claim that "different standards call for different lists." So, I'd ask you: Does strapping down athletes provide a bigger advantage than-- Tested athletes vs. non-tested athletes? Monolift vs. no monolift? Full meet deadlift vs. Deadlift only? 2 hour weigh ins vs. 24 hour weigh ins (or even 48 hour weigh-ins in the case of WPO)? Single-ply vs. multi-ply? For all of the above, we have hugely different standards, but include them on the same list. Any competitor knows that a 2 hour weigh in vs. a 24 hour weigh in can skew a weightclass by as much as 20 lbs. (At least it has for me.) I know there are differences in the IPC, but they seem small when compared to the huge differences that we already include in the all-time lists! For example, Ed Coan's full meet, 2 hour weigh in, deadlift records were beaten by a 24 hour weigh in deadlift-only lift. So, I'm not claiming that there aren't any differences, but just that these are small when compared to the differences already included in the lists. For example, on the current all-time record lists right now, if a lifter performs a squat in the IPF, walked out, drug-tested, 2 hour weigh in, single-ply, it is compared to the other 24 hour weigh in, untested, multiply, monolift squats. So, lifters who competed in un-tested, monolift, 24 hour weigh in feds have an ENORMOUS advantage when it comes to getting on the all-time record lists. I would argue these advantages are far greater than the minimal advantages provided by a lifter being strapped to a bench. And why would we only ask those whose records will be nullified? They would be the part of the PL community who would likely have a difficult time being objective about the decision.[/quote] Of course, relevance of titles are opinion based and that's just mine. I believe we're venturing away from the same page. If you're simply talking about the all-time bench press list sure they should be included but that includes equipped benches which the IPC doesn't sanction so it's a mute point as they are nowhere near the records in shirts. As far as the other divisions of the sport you mentioned most of those circumstances DO have their own lists raw, raw and wraps, single ply, multi ply and drug tested and untested for many of those. They're kept up with very well by the people on this site just as Michael Soong has done such a great job keeping up with the overall records for a very long time. These lifters carry much honor to be on just as the para-bench press athletes who hold their records are very honored. And asking the people who's numbers would be bumped down would just be completely convincing as no one else could have more of a legitimate issue with it.

Submitted by eggsurplus on
[quote=ifwade] I can't blame you for not reading my stupidly long post above, but as I wrote, the IPC actually adds the theoretical weight of limbs back on to competitors' body weights in the case of amputees![/quote] Ha! Caught skimming after a few paragraphs. Thanks for clarifying.

Submitted by admin on
FYI guys Im gonna do what ever this poll says! So pass it along. It will run for another week. Today is 4/28/15 will run 5-5-15

Submitted by ifwade on
Yes, Jason, you are correct--the bench is narrower at the shoulders. I still think a case can be made for not including the lifts if someone really feels that strapping the lifters to the bench makes a big difference, but in my judgment, the fed rules are not really different enough to discount them from the list.

Submitted by ifwade on
I think you may be confused. The original post asks about the all-time RECORDS. You seem to be speaking of the All-time RANKINGS. These are kept separately. Because of this confusion, you aren't really addressing what I stated. I didn't mention raw with wraps vs. raw, so that doesn't matter, but the other things you cite are grouped together on the records list. You may view it here: https://www.powerliftingwatch.com/records You'll see that- -Tested and Untested ARE grouped together on all-time equipped records. -Multiply and Single-ply ARE grouped together on the all-time equipped records list. So my critique still stands. The issue of weight class, which is the one you view as most pressing, is most influenced by 2 hour weigh ins vs. 24 hour weigh ins. No where on PLWatch are these differences in weigh in time separated, on any list. The fact remains that IPC is not listed on ANY list on PLWatch: they have been excluded from not only the all-time lists, but as far as I know, the all-time rankings as well. My point is that for the all-time records page, IPC is not very different at all from the other feds that are grouped together. In light of this, IPC should probably be included. Sure, for the rankings, things may be divided up as much as one likes, and this is in fact useful for seeing how one is doing across federations. So I think we may ultimately agree?

Submitted by JASON MANENKOFF on
Great stuff guys. Keep it up. hopefully more people could contribute. I would then further venture and ask this then (even if it's slightly off topic) ... if this does happen will IPC lifters suddenly be included in the rankings as well? Johnny Vasquez, have you thought this far ahead? Iron Arena Powerlifting & Performance www.iron-arena.com

Submitted by Lance Kirchner on
I will be the first one to state it since I have no qualms about stating a non PC fact. Weight classes are there for a reason. Bwt is the major factor for how much muscle for leverage, tendon and ligament strength and muscle fibers available for recruitment. If a 150 lb man has 20lb legs vs the normal 45-60lbs for a man. I grasp the leg drive and arch issue but your comparing 2 different things. Are we talking weight classes or rules of performance? If we add the standard Paralympic 16% to bodyweight I would be on board with adding them. I do realize 16% is added per leg missing, they are not missing but have dilapidated to the point they weigh next to nothing so they may have an enormous advantage.

Submitted by JASON MANENKOFF on
[quote=Lance Kirchner]I will be the first one to state it since I have no qualms about stating a non PC fact. Weight classes are there for a reason. Bwt is the major factor for how much muscle for leverage, tendon and ligament strength and muscle fibers available for recruitment. If a 150 lb man has 20lb legs vs the normal 45-60lbs for a man. I grasp the leg drive and arch issue but your comparing 2 different things. Are we talking weight classes or rules of performance? If we add the standard Paralympic 16% to bodyweight I would be on board with adding them. I do realize 16% is added per leg missing, they are not missing but have dilapidated to the point they weigh next to nothing so they may have an enormous advantage. [/quote] Make sure you thoroughly read what if wade has posted above in regards to what you said which may change your thinking. IPC has a 2 hours weigh in along with drug testing testing so there may not be much a a difference in those IPC lifters who weight 16% less vs. those lifters who cut 16% with a 24 hour weight in with lasix. The With all the variables such as weigh ins, drugs, commands, foot and head positions etc. the All-time list is already comparing apples to oranges so why not throw in a few grapes.

Submitted by Lance Kirchner on
That was terrible wording in my post, but I think you understand my concern with this and the lower-middle weight classes.

Submitted by Altered Beast on
Drug testing at Meets, BBing Shows, etc are the cheapest and weakest version of testing. Lets not start that weak bullshit. I'm not into feel good PC nonsense either. A bit strong at the start, but hear me out. NO, they should not. A 275 Bencher and a 275 Para Bencher are not the same. I've also been strapped to a Bench and it works a HELL of a lot better than a Belt. Plus my legs are long, thick and probably weigh well over 100 pounds together. Get what I'm saying? It's simply nowhere near the same. Is it impressive? ABSOLUTELY and I support it strongly! Should it count towards records and rankings? No. Just my opinion. Jason we agree on many things, just not this =)

RAW POWERLIFTERS PUT IT DEEPER IN THE HOLE! THE IRON NEVER LIES!

Submitted by ifwade on
[quote=Altered Beast]Drug testing at Meets, BBing Shows, etc are the cheapest and weakest version of testing. Lets not start that weak bullshit. I'm not into feel good PC nonsense either. A bit strong at the start, but hear me out. NO, they should not. A 275 Bencher and a 275 Para Bencher are not the same. I've also been strapped to a Bench and it works a HELL of a lot better than a Belt. Plus my legs are long, thick and probably weigh well over 100 pounds together. Get what I'm saying? It's simply nowhere near the same. Is it impressive? ABSOLUTELY and I support it strongly! Should it count towards records and rankings? No. Just my opinion. Jason we agree on many things, just not this =)[/quote] So do you not support disabled athletes such as Adrian Larsen who compete in normal competition because of their disabilities? You cited weight class as the problem. You don't seem to grasp that it is not an issue of being politically correct: these lifters are outlifting non-disabled lifters, plain and simple. Very few are amputees, many have small legs, but some of them have no leg disability whatsoever and compete in non IPC feds as well. Many bench specialists have small legs as well. These paralympic athletes at least have an excuse for it! Being strapped to a bench helps more than a belt? OK. But how about comparing multiply and singleply? Those are listed together on the all-time equipped records list. Are you really going to tell me that this difference is smaller than the difference of being strapped to a bench? The biggest multiply bench of all time is several hundred more pounds than the biggest single-ply. In the end, I'm not arguing for a politically-correct records list. I'm also not interested in a list that will shield the bruised egos of those who are outlifted by others in another fed, plain an simple. Again, you guys are taking easy shots at things like drug testing, but ignoring the issues like 24 hour weigh ins. I have cut to 181 from a walking around weight of 200+. That's roughly 20 lbs and I know others who can do more. Cutting for a 2 hour weight, I can hardly manage to cut anything compared to that. Does anyone want to address the problem with 24 hour weigh ins vs 2 hour weigh ins being compared? Again--my argument is not that the IPC isn't different. It's that there are other feds with BIGGER differences which we DO include on the all-time records list. This is what everyone on the other side of the issue seems unable to grasp!