However, what seems to be emerging is a modified view with some elements from the IPF and others from the WPO.
What is your opinion: would it be better to pursue the direction the IPF is taking, or to provide a greater "show" for the audience (WPC/WPO). Personally I'd go with the former. Although the showy competition is surely a faster way to gain popularity, I feel in the long run it would be better for the sport to keep things more serious and disciplined.
Why cant the "lifter friendly" and "showy" aspect of the WPO/APF exist in a federation that has legal depth squats and gear that doesnt question the credibility? Does a federation need to be boring and "nazi" about anything else than the rules of the three lifts in order for it to be a good one?
I agree whole heartedly. I think Keirran has the power to change an aspect of the sport for the better. I believe he thinks that if he changed it too much the lifters would not be there for him, however if he changed it to be either raw or equipment like the USPF or IPF, i think the lifters would be there if he changed it all at once, since he is the owner of the AFP/WPC and WPO. Keep the monolift if need be, enforce better standards for judging, but keep the atmosphere that the WPO has.....and the prize money, and non tested, this is why the lifters are there, not because of the gear/equipment. They where the equipment because its allowed, if its allowed, then lifters will use everything to their advantage.
It sure is nice to hear some balanced and sensible discussion.
Keep the good rules..... squat depth, benches with a pause, being able to see your elbows when a bench shirt is on And junk the stupid ones....... can't wear a beanie while lifting, etc, etc....... Then we add in the lights, loud rock music, ring card girls, nosebleeds. Why the F not?