You are here: Home → Forum → General Bullshit → GBPF; new weight classes

GBPF; new weight classes

Pearce		...	08-11-2010 @ 11:44
Member 930, 160 posts SQ 280, BP 195, DL 282.5 757.5 kgs @ 134.4kgs UnEq	What tz said. Ye they gotta get tested to have record (they didnt before testing tho and soem of those records still stand)and the record that belong to people who have been suspended for life. This isnt my personal opinion...i do believe anybody who is banned should have all their records stripped of them and the record should go to the previosu holder tho.

IainKendrick		...	08-11-2010 @ 11:49
some nice relaxing jazz. Member 77, 12599 posts SQ 265, BP 165, DL 280 710.0 kgs @ 93kgs UnEq	Post Edited: 08.11.2010 @ 11:49 AM by IainKendrick Pearce said: This isnt my personal opinion...i do believe anybody who is banned should have all their records stripped of them and the record should go to the previosu holder tho. That sounds pretty sensible to me. Off course someone else may have lifted more than the old record in the interim? Wouldn't be that hard to chase up though.

tz1127		...	08-11-2010 @ 11:59
Member 1419, 2281 posts SQ 175, BP 105, DL 240 520.0 kgs @ 82kgs UnEq	It’s a reasonable thing to remove all trace of a lifetime suspended member's records, titles etc… However, it would be an administrative nightmare to have to permenantly keep every obsolete record on file and to track down everyone he/she has beaten in the pass and re-award the titles and medal etc.

Pearce		...	08-11-2010 @ 12:00
Member 930, 160 posts SQ 280, BP 195, DL 282.5 757.5 kgs @ 134.4kgs UnEq	Yes good point i wouldnt think it would be too difficult but i am not IPF admin, im sure the lifter would speak up however and provided the scoresheet can be provided as evidence (as it would in the IPF) then that would be the record, if the records registrar kept a list of say top 10 lifts per weight class, easy enough really using an excel spreadsheet or whatever cant be difficult then when someone is banned there wouldnt be any fuss???

Pearce		...	08-11-2010 @ 12:04
Member 930, 160 posts SQ 280, BP 195, DL 282.5 757.5 kgs @ 134.4kgs UnEq	I didnt say titles only record lifts/totals, i agree if that were the case it would be a nightmare, if just records i would say easily manageable. But then i spose people done out of titles would spark up and want the same to happen with titles...

Barlow		...	08-11-2010 @ 22:21
Member 1815, 4 posts SQ 230, BP 120, DL 250 600.0 kgs @ 74kgs Eq	Does anybody happen to know the qualifying lifts for under 66kg, cheers

moz		...	08-11-2010 @ 22:27
Feasting on humble pie. Member 51, 1692 posts SQ 227.5, BP 185, DL 272.5 685.0 kgs @ 90.4kgs UnEq	Barlow said:Does anybody happen to know the qualifying lifts for under 66kg, cheers Pete I'll let you know in due course in the gym mate. I'm sure the weights your pushing for your age and weight class will more than qualify you for sub-junior comps

dr_hazbun		...	08-11-2010 @ 22:31
tabbouleh and fattoush salads were very refreshing Member 267, 8548 posts SQ 220, BP 165, DL 250 635.0 kgs @ 90kgs Eq	this is all quite interesting. Thanks for posting these details. The 105 and 120 classes are going to have some beasts in them. All the 100 boys will beef up to 105 and the 110 boys have a choice of cutting or bulking depending on how full they were as 110ers.

ianshaw		...	08-11-2010 @ 22:33
StretchArmStrong Member 97, 328 posts SQ 320, BP 170, DL 322.5 812.5 kgs @ 88kgs Eq	WHAT bo***cks IS THAT IM 87K FIND IT HARD TO LOOSE WEIGHT AND WILL FIND IT HARD TO GET TO 93K WILL BE A FAT BASTERD

AdamC		...	08-11-2010 @ 22:39
Member 1519, 1476 posts SQ 320, BP 260, DL 320 900.0 kgs @ 117kgs Eq	The U93 class would actually benefit me as i go as heavy as 100kg out of comp, how ever i don't see the point in playing about with the classes and would prefer them to remain as they are

dr_hazbun		...	08-11-2010 @ 22:40
tabbouleh and fattoush salads were very refreshing Member 267, 8548 posts SQ 220, BP 165, DL 250 635.0 kgs @ 90kgs Eq	ianshaw said:WHAT bo***cks IS THAT IM 87K FIND IT HARD TO LOOSE WEIGHT AND WILL FIND IT HARD TO GET TO 93K WILL BE A FAT BASTERD You're quite lean at 87 aren't you ian? I'd lift in the 93 class if I were you. Don't think you'll be facing any more competition to be honest. The big lifters in the old 100 class are more likely to end up lifting in the new 105 class.

ianshaw		...	08-11-2010 @ 23:03
StretchArmStrong Member 97, 328 posts SQ 320, BP 170, DL 322.5 812.5 kgs @ 88kgs Eq	yea maybe your right will have to see what happens hope they do move upto the 105 class.

tz1127		...	08-11-2010 @ 23:09
Member 1419, 2281 posts SQ 175, BP 105, DL 240 520.0 kgs @ 82kgs UnEq	Given that this is a matter of concern for many members, and that GBPF will have a vote and say on it; I am suprised that the GBPF executives have not consulted their members on this issue.

Barlow		...	08-11-2010 @ 23:11
Member 1815, 4 posts SQ 230, BP 120, DL 250 600.0 kgs @ 74kgs Eq	Cheers moz Im not genna worry about ma weight, If I'm under 66 then no worries but if I'm under 74 then it's a bigger challenge

tonyjb72		...	09-11-2010 @ 09:01
abs by summer 2011? Experts opinions vary Member 290, 2552 posts	tz1127 said:Given that this is a matter of concern for many members, and that GBPF will have a vote and say on it; I am suprised that the GBPF executives have not consulted their members on this issue. I would have thought that this has come from the IPF, so maybe the GBPF wouldn't have much of a say??

1 2 3 4 5 6

You are here: Home → Forum → General Bullshit → GBPF; new weight classes

RETURN TO TOP