[quote]jerkwad55 wrote:
[quote]S.Fisher_47 wrote:
Does anyone have any insight on my original question? If I didn’t word it clearly in my first post, I was asking if anyone knew the process of how coefficients were made, any science there may be behind them? [/quote]
A google search revealed the following:
"The formula is:
reduced total = total lifted 500/(a+bx+cx^2+dx^3+ex^4+fx^5)
Where x is the body weight of the lifter in kilograms
The coefficients for men are:
a=-216.0475144
b=16.2606339
c=-0.002388645
d=-0.00113732
e=7.01863E-06
f=-1.291E-08
The coefficients for women are:
a=594.31747775582
b=-27.23842536447
c=0.82112226871
d=-0.00930733913
e=0.00004731582
f=-0.00000009054"
and the following q&a @ http://www.isu.edu/~andesean/wform.htm
"Questions and Answers Regarding Wilks and Other Handicapping Systems:
Q: What research and physiology science is there behind these handicapping systems such as the Schwartz, Malone, and Wilks formulae?
***Generally, all that these folk have done is to use various regression methods to fit a curve to the world’s records for all bodymass divisions, with no attempt to explain any underlying physiology.
Q: Are there published and peer-reviewed studies that explain the methods used to construct the Wilks system? Where is the evidence that the other systems are biased and that the Wilks corrects them?
***Siff’s regressions and those of Sinclair have been published in academic journals.
Q: How can USAPL (USA Powerlifting) meet directors and referees explain coherently to second or third-placing lifters why the Wilks coefficients were used to rank them as they did?
***Robert Wilks was a member of the International Powerlifting Federation at the time the Wilks formula was adopted. The formmula developed of the late Mel Cunningham Siff, a South African professor of civil engineering who had a passionate interest in Olympic weightlifting and other strength sports, had a coefficent of correlation between the actual data and the values of the Siff formula values of better than 99.6 percent which is far better than the other formulae, hence it has led to far fewer conflicts…"
…“***The problem here is that the Wilks vales were developed for t-o-t-a-ls and not for individual lifts. Therefore it is even more inappropriate to use any of the systems for ranking anything but what they were determined for - namely TOTALS. Therefore when the Wilks coefficients are applied to single lifts different effects occur. Bench increases most with body weight so when the Wilks coefficients are used to rank bench press meets this greatly favors the heavier lifters. When the Wilks coefficients are used on a single lift deadlift meet it greatly favors the lighter lifters since deadlifts alone do not increase as fast with body weight as total does. It may be appropriate for squats but it probably favors the lighter lifters again if it is applied to single lift squats. A fit to individual lift data is what is needed if individual lifts are compared…”
[/quote]
Ok thanks, I get the gist of it, more or less.