Rip: How to Fix Powerlifting Rip: How to Fix Powerlifting - Page 3

starting strength gym
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27

Thread: Rip: How to Fix Powerlifting

  1. #21
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Murphysboro, IL
    Posts
    29,175

    Default

    • texas seminar date
    • wichita falls texas march seminar date
    • woodmere new york april seminar date
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    YouTube

    I assume this was a record. If the records are high, you've got a problem.
    Nothing to disagree with the depth of that squat. It didn't pass muster.

    Was it a USPA event? A review of the REST of the tape (to paraphrase Paul Harvey) some things initially made me skeptical about it being a USPA event. For one thing, the USPA has a distinctive banner it places behind the platform so that tapes like this show it. So I looked it up in their database for meet results. The tape shows a date of January 5, 2015. Feel free to look for yourself, but in there's a gap in the database showing no USPA events from December 20, 2014 to January 10, 2015. Perhaps you can explain that, but it appears this was not a sanctioned USPA meet. The video and the USPA records do not seem to support your assertion of this having happened under their auspices.

    In any event, my concerns that you were mocking were not about squat depth. It was about how to write the language and determine what the judges should look for to disqualify an attempt by a lifter by "heaving" in the bench press. Given the careful and precise language used in describing the OHP for judged events, SOMEONE in the SS-verse wrote a good standard. The statements so far simply deploring a "heave" in the absence of describing what constitutes a "heave" leave another big gap that would be useful for a lifter and the judges comparing the lift to some standard to be filled.

    So now, how might a "heave" be described, and what language might be used to guide the lifter and the judges in this so far nebulous concern. Mind you, I don't disagree with the original assertion, I'd just like some more detail.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    396

    Default

    Wow, a lot to unpack. What stuck is Bill Starr'’s line about what if spotters weren’t used. Think about that for a while. I am not sure that is a terrible idea on some level. But certainly wouldn’t fix everything.

    Enjoyed the article Rip. I think it’s up to the youngsters to straighten out the federations. Unfortunately we won’t be around to see it fixed.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    39,865

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark E. Hurling View Post
    So now, how might a "heave" be described, and what language might be used to guide the lifter and the judges in this so far nebulous concern. Mind you, I don't disagree with the original assertion, I'd just like some more detail.
    The rule would state that "the bar shall be lowered until it makes contact with the chest and then pressed upward to full and complete lockout. No part of the skeletal structure of the chest may be depressed or lowered by or after contact with the bar. Any contact with the chest that produces a rebound that also results in a change in the position of the shoulders and/or hips against the bench is cause for disqualification of the lift."

  4. #24
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Murphysboro, IL
    Posts
    29,175

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    The rule would state that "the bar shall be lowered until it makes contact with the chest and then pressed upward to full and complete lockout. No part of the skeletal structure of the chest may be depressed or lowered by or after contact with the bar. Any contact with the chest that produces a rebound that also results in a change in the position of the shoulders and/or hips against the bench is cause for disqualification of the lift."
    Great. That is as clear as clear could be. It would be good to see this language adopted and enforced as the standard by at least the USPA, if not all the other federations. A fool's dream perhaps, but a worthy one nonetheless.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    34

    Default

    Iíve seen that Cartwright squat before on YouTube. Iím surprised he got as low as that vid showed. He was shakin like a leaf. Nothin about that squat looked safe.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    La Jolla California
    Posts
    1,926

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    The rule would state that "the bar shall be lowered until it makes contact with the chest and then pressed upward to full and complete lockout. No part of the skeletal structure of the chest may be depressed or lowered by or after contact with the bar. Any contact with the chest that produces a rebound that also results in a change in the position of the shoulders and/or hips against the bench is cause for disqualification of the lift."
    Bad idea. We dont need more verbage, Rip (what if someone's legitimnately paused bench decompesses their rib cage a bit? Who do we distinguish between fat, muscle and bone being compressed?). We do need to ELIMINATE the juydge's command and place the duty back on the lifter to pause properly. If FUckFace bounces it - thats a red light light. The rule says motionless on the chest, the red light come out of it aint motionless. We dont need more - we need less.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    39,865

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    I disagree, for reasons I've already explained.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •