Weight Lifted vs. One's Bodyweight

Weight classes are stupid. So are bodyweight coefficients and not taking steriods. So are kilograms now that I am thinking about it.

Powerlifting is a strength sport. More weight wins. The first example of the 280lb guy pulling 900lbs and the 165lb ectomorph that doesnt eat enough who pulls 7 whatever kinda pissed me off. There are only something like 14 people in the history of the sport that have pulled over 900lbs.

Regardless of bodyweight, the people who lift more are stronger and they are trying harder becuase they probably weigh more. I’d much rather see some 2200+total by a SHW than see some other stupid shit article on powerlifting watch about how “Some Skinny Guy totals 1300 raw at 56lbs bodyweight.”

[quote]StormTheBeach wrote:
Weight classes are stupid. So are bodyweight coefficients and not taking steriods. So are kilograms now that I am thinking about it.
[/quote]

I see…seems like your position on the matter is stupid as well.

The only people who care about bodyweight coefficients are those who are too small and/or weak to put up big numbers.

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

[quote]StormTheBeach wrote:
Weight classes are stupid. So are bodyweight coefficients and not taking steriods. So are kilograms now that I am thinking about it.
[/quote]

I see…seems like your position on the matter is stupid as well.
[/quote]

Lifting weights is stupid. Its makes people too bulky. No one wants to be too bulky. That might hurt their wilks.

[quote]brewcrew78 wrote:
The only people who care about bodyweight coefficients are those who are too small and/or weak to put up big numbers. [/quote]

I care about bodyweight coefficients. I therefore must be small and weak.

[quote]LiquidMercury wrote:

[quote]brewcrew78 wrote:
The only people who care about bodyweight coefficients are those who are too small and/or weak to put up big numbers. [/quote]

I care about bodyweight coefficients. I therefore must be small and weak.[/quote]

Very, very small and weak… lol

[quote]fmaurice wrote:

[quote]LiquidMercury wrote:

[quote]brewcrew78 wrote:
The only people who care about bodyweight coefficients are those who are too small and/or weak to put up big numbers. [/quote]

I care about bodyweight coefficients. I therefore must be small and weak.[/quote]

Very, very small and weak… lol
[/quote]

FML. Whatever shall I do. As a side note another reason coefficients are somewhat helpful is in regards to athletic performance. Higher coefficients usually equal a better athlete (physically). I know I’m not going to be dunking at 5’8" with a coefficient of 1.5x and 1x on DL/Squat.

Side note I’m trying for 3x raw coefficient as my opener on deadlift for my first meet in Nov. We’ll see how it goes. 3.25x is going to be my last attempt providing I hit the first two solid.

The very tone of many of these responses is exactly the opposite of most elite lifters. No one cares about straight bodyweight strength ratios since the strength curve isn’t linear (as Marcus already said). Unless there is a pro meet with money at stake where formula is used, most lifters don’t worry about formulas either. Within a given weight class no one worries about the ratio, they worry about lifting the most in that weight class. At any high level meet you also won’t see smaller lifters calling the heavyweights “fat asses” because their wilks formula isn’t as good and you won’t see the heavyweights calling the smaller lifters “weak”. Most serious lifters have an idea of what is strong at various ranges of bodyweight and don’t bust out a calculator to come up with a wilks score or bodyweight ratio to compare themselves.

[quote]SRS2000 wrote:
The very tone of many of these responses is exactly the opposite of most elite lifters. No one cares about straight bodyweight strength ratios since the strength curve isn’t linear (as Marcus already said). Unless there is a pro meet with money at stake where formula is used, most lifters don’t worry about formulas either. Within a given weight class no one worries about the ratio, they worry about lifting the most in that weight class. At any high level meet you also won’t see smaller lifters calling the heavyweights “fat asses” because their wilks formula isn’t as good and you won’t see the heavyweights calling the smaller lifters “weak”. Most serious lifters have an idea of what is strong at various ranges of bodyweight and don’t bust out a calculator to come up with a wilks score or bodyweight ratio to compare themselves. [/quote]

Fair enough.

I only care about them as it pertains to my sport as an indicator of my strength rising and falling as I make weight for races. From a lifting standpoint only I agree, no one is going to care about them.

kind of ironic that the best CPU wilks score on record is by a SHW.

…for me the strongest is the one who can lift more…BW doesnt matter…

Bodyweight doesn’t matter. Just get bigger and stronger. If you participate in a sport with weight classes, be the strongest guy in your class.

Here’s an example: my son is almost sixteen and is entering his first power meet in September. He has recently done a 355 lb deadlift at 132. He would like 400 to get over triple bodyweight. I don’t think he’s quite there, but he’s getting close.

And he’s sixteen in three weeks.

[quote]tom63 wrote:
Bodyweight doesn’t matter. Just get bigger and stronger. If you participate in a sport with weight classes, be the strongest guy in your class.[/quote]

Does it not stand to reason that if you’re making a weight class, being the strongest guy in your class, often goes hand in hand with holding the most LBM, which you can hold more of if you’re leaner/shorter (within reason).

I don’t think anybody is proposing that the ultimate goal is not to be the biggest and strongest one can be. Being the strongest lifter in your weight class on meet day is a given. Examples comparing the extreme ends of the range only cloud the issue. Impressive lifting takes place in all the weight classes.

The lifters that have worked their way through several weight classes recognize this. The heavy weight may be a better lifter than the middle weight; but not simply because his total is more. It takes time for an acorn to grow into an oak tree.

All that matter’s is what is on the bar xbw ratios are for pussies.

[quote]LiquidMercury wrote:

[quote]SRS2000 wrote:
The very tone of many of these responses is exactly the opposite of most elite lifters. No one cares about straight bodyweight strength ratios since the strength curve isn’t linear (as Marcus already said). Unless there is a pro meet with money at stake where formula is used, most lifters don’t worry about formulas either. Within a given weight class no one worries about the ratio, they worry about lifting the most in that weight class. At any high level meet you also won’t see smaller lifters calling the heavyweights “fat asses” because their wilks formula isn’t as good and you won’t see the heavyweights calling the smaller lifters “weak”. Most serious lifters have an idea of what is strong at various ranges of bodyweight and don’t bust out a calculator to come up with a wilks score or bodyweight ratio to compare themselves. [/quote]

Fair enough.

I only care about them as it pertains to my sport as an indicator of my strength rising and falling as I make weight for races. From a lifting standpoint only I agree, no one is going to care about them.[/quote]

Power/Strength to weight ratio is important in some sports however here in the POWERLIFTING subsection weight on the bar is all that really matters.

[quote]tom63 wrote:
Here’s an example: my son is almost sixteen and is entering his first power meet in September. He has recently done a 355 lb deadlift at 132. He would like 400 to get over triple bodyweight. I don’t think he’s quite there, but he’s getting close.

And he’s sixteen in three weeks.[/quote]

Your kid is doing some nice work there!

[quote]IrishMarc wrote:

[quote]LiquidMercury wrote:

[quote]SRS2000 wrote:
The very tone of many of these responses is exactly the opposite of most elite lifters. No one cares about straight bodyweight strength ratios since the strength curve isn’t linear (as Marcus already said). Unless there is a pro meet with money at stake where formula is used, most lifters don’t worry about formulas either. Within a given weight class no one worries about the ratio, they worry about lifting the most in that weight class. At any high level meet you also won’t see smaller lifters calling the heavyweights “fat asses” because their wilks formula isn’t as good and you won’t see the heavyweights calling the smaller lifters “weak”. Most serious lifters have an idea of what is strong at various ranges of bodyweight and don’t bust out a calculator to come up with a wilks score or bodyweight ratio to compare themselves. [/quote]

Fair enough.

I only care about them as it pertains to my sport as an indicator of my strength rising and falling as I make weight for races. From a lifting standpoint only I agree, no one is going to care about them.[/quote]

Power/Strength to weight ratio is important in some sports however here in the POWERLIFTING subsection weight on the bar is all that really matters. [/quote]

I personally use powerlifting as my main training philosophy for my sport. And since there are Wilks formulas in POWERLIFTING obviously some in the powerlifting competitive lfiestyle do put some stock to it (maybe not a ton but enough to have a formula that some meets use).

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

[quote]StormTheBeach wrote:
Weight classes are stupid. So are bodyweight coefficients and not taking steriods. So are kilograms now that I am thinking about it.
[/quote]

I see…seems like your position on the matter is stupid as well.
[/quote]

I’m pretty sure he’s making light of the topic.

I know I LOLed.