Michael Ignatz
Bronze Member
Tennessee Armwrestling Association
Posts: 114
|
Post by Michael Ignatz on Jun 8, 2011 0:49:33 GMT -5
Awesome Josh! I think your the right man for the job. Keep it up bro!
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Kaufman on Jun 8, 2011 8:34:15 GMT -5
Josh I can see how that might get him in the top 10, but definitely not 2nd. I'd be willing to bet that the match-up between Bishop and him was more of a styles mismatch as opposed to overall power. Trying to go side-ways with Tony (like I'm assuming Mike did) is an obvious mistake.
I'm not sure how you calculate your rankings, but I would assume you'd have to at least beat some of the people on the list and/or be able to beat them. JMO, but I still don't think he could beat the rest on the list. Give them tons of trouble yeah, but not beat.
|
|
|
|
Post by Don Underwood on Jun 8, 2011 16:52:11 GMT -5
220 needs to stay it keeps the class more up to speed for nationals
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on Jun 8, 2011 19:03:53 GMT -5
True Josh but thats because Chad was holding onto Ron without straps if he would have just let go and went to straps completely different story He didn't wanna let him slip which is his style of pulling. I wanna see Robertas beat more of those guys in a big tournament before jumping him to #1. To add to that though, Mr. Klemba has been looking really good lately. When is last time him and Robertas have pulled?
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on Jun 8, 2011 19:04:51 GMT -5
Josh when you say Bob Bishop you mean Robert Bishop from Michigan right??
|
|
|
|
Post by Jacob Hale on Jun 8, 2011 20:37:04 GMT -5
I think you should reconsider your elimination of the 220lbs class for a couple of reasons. First of all, the difference between weight classes is way out of whack. The difference between 70kg and 80kg in 22 lbs. The difference between 80 kg and 90kg is 22 lbs. The difference between 90kg and 110kg is 44lbs! Given this logic, it would make as much sense to elimate the 176 lb class and only have 154, 198, 242, and +. Lumping guys like Fritz Corey, Tim McPherson and Karl Stanley with guys like Ron Bath and Dave chaffee makes about as much sense as putting guys like Luke Kindt and Harold Ryden in the same class with Bill logsdon and Brent Rakers!!!!That is a huge difference. Secondly, your argument that the best 220 guys are also the best 242 pound guys is irrelevent. What do you do if in 3 years, the top 7 242 Lbs guys all have to cut down from 270??? Are you still gonna rank guys who walk around at 215 with guys who walk around at 270??? Roman is the best 154 and 176 lb guy right and left. Based on your logic, why dont you eliminate the 154 lbs class then??? Third, your argument that MOST tournaments have one class or the other is a little shortsighted because most tournaments are small local events, and in order to ensure that classes have more than just a couple of people in them, it makes sense to put the "big boys" together. However, we arent talking about small local rankings here. We are talking about USA and North America rankings. Therefore the weight classes you rank should reflect international and national tournament structures. Therefore, a 100kg class has to be included in your rankings. There are just too many solid armwrestlers that are 220lbs and below that would never get the proper recogition for all their hard work if you do not rank the 220's. They will have to (if not presently, then later) either give up 20lbs on the table or cut to 198lbs. That makes no sense. Telling a guy like John Wilson that all he has to do in order to be ranked #1 in his class is beat Ron Bath is like telling Jake Smith that all he has to do to be #1 in his class is beat a 198lb John Brzenk... or cut to 154lbs  |
|
|
|
Post by John Milne on Jun 8, 2011 20:39:42 GMT -5
Excellent post Mr. Hale.
I'd love to see the 220 class back.
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh Handeland on Jun 8, 2011 22:04:05 GMT -5
Just fyi Eric was in agreement with me on our decision to eliminate the 220 class rankings. I think you should reconsider your elimination of the 220lbs class for a couple of reasons. First of all, the difference between weight classes is way out of whack. The difference between 70kg and 80kg in 22 lbs. The difference between 80 kg and 90kg is 22 lbs. The difference between 90kg and 110kg is 44lbs! Given this logic, it would make as much sense to elimate the 176 lb class and only have 154, 198, 242, and +. Lumping guys like Fritz Corey, Tim McPherson and Karl Stanley with guys like Ron Bath and Dave chaffee makes about as much sense as putting guys like Luke Kindt and Harold Ryden in the same class with Bill logsdon and Brent Rakers!!!!That is a huge difference. I've seen Corey Miller beat Bill Logsdon, and I've seen Luke Kindt beat Michael Vaz. The thing is, most tourneys I see have a 54, 76, AND a 98 but the vast majority of them only have either a 220 OR a 242. If most tourneys only had a 76 OR a 98 then I would agree that only one of the classes should be ranked, since in those instances guys such as Luke Kindt, Chad Silvers, Klemba, Dye, ect. would be competing at 198 (while weighing less) just as much as they would be competing at 176. As long as the best 220 guys can compete with these 270 lbs. shrinking monsters then why not? If I made the rankings 0-176, there would probably be only 1 or 2 54's on there as opposed to 6 on the top 10 242 rankings... over half of the guys on the 242 rankings are 220's. No, I'm actually not talking about just toe small local events - some of the big NATIONAL LEVEL events only have one of the other - Harley Pull 225 and supers, ROTN and Arnold's 199+, UAL has had 201-230 and 230+ and 186-205, 205+, USAA Nationals is ALWAYS 199-242 and 243+, MOST state level tourneys I have been to have only one of the other - IL States is the exception and it has both 220 and 242 right handed but ONLY 242 left handed. NEMIROFF had only 190-209 and 210+. These are all international and national tournaments. |
|
|
|
Post by Josh Handeland on Jun 8, 2011 23:24:36 GMT -5
Josh when you say Bob Bishop you mean Robert Bishop from Michigan right?? Yeah that's what I meant. Josh I can see how that might get him in the top 10, but definitely not 2nd. I'd be willing to bet that the match-up between Bishop and him was more of a styles mismatch as opposed to overall power. Trying to go side-ways with Tony (like I'm assuming Mike did) is an obvious mistake. I'm not sure how you calculate your rankings, but I would assume you'd have to at least beat some of the people on the list and/or be able to beat them. JMO, but I still don't think he could beat the rest on the list. Give them tons of trouble yeah, but not beat. I would like to hear some other people's opinions on this if anybody has an opinion. Tony also placed above Ryan Clark at 2009 Unified's but I am not sure if they pulled each other there or not. I would like to hear opinions from others and would be willing to make an adjustment if others are in disagreement with Tony's ranking. Good Luck Josh. I think you will do a great job. Thanks, Bob! I wanna see Robertas beat more of those guys in a big tournament before jumping him to #1. To add to that though, Mr. Klemba has been looking really good lately. When is last time him and Robertas have pulled? Big tournament? Dude he destroyed everybody at National's last year and destroyed everybody at the Harley Pull in 2009. Are those "big tournaments"? As for the last time he pulled Klemba, is was at Unified's last year, August 2010. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on Jun 9, 2011 0:00:51 GMT -5
lol hopefully he shows up at UAL and we will see. Chad has lost to nobody at 176 except Roman.
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh Handeland on Jun 9, 2011 0:09:04 GMT -5
I do hope they meet up soon - I would not be surprised if Chad beats Robertas, but I also won't be surprised if Robertas wins
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim Lewis on Jun 9, 2011 2:30:47 GMT -5
I agree with the decision to eliminate the 220s from the rankings.
220s seem to be favored in certain areas of the country at tournaments and 242s in others.
The 242 or 220 class is kind of like a "light heavyweight" class rather that a specific weight in the USA. I've seen 210, 220, 225, 231, and 242 be offered but rarely are there two light heavyweight classes.
So it would be very difficult to rank pullers of 220 only and under only if we did not actually get to see these matches happen due to a regional cut off.
220 pullers (that refer to themselves by that distinction) tend to come either from the Northeast, Florida, or the Missouri Region and therefore I think that the national 220 rankings would be biased towards these areas and therefore not true national rankings. There are a lot of guys at 230-232 that could make weight at 220 if it were a standard nationwide, but don't and in fact gain weight pre-tournament to be closer to 242 because that is what is offered in their region.
15 lbs is not a big difference in the 210-230 range like it is in the 154, 176,198 range....at least in America. Internationally whole different ballgame entirely.
|
|
|
|
Post by tomnelson on Jun 9, 2011 6:23:18 GMT -5
if there were no 220 and just 242s at WAF that would be the BADDEST class on earth...i say 220 is fine but i REALLY would like 199-242s
|
|
|
|
Post by David Owens on Jun 9, 2011 9:02:39 GMT -5
ya I'm with Josh on this
these are national rankings, if the top 5 or 6 in the 220/242 are the same guys then it doesnt make sense to ranke both unless you are gonna rank guys in multiple classes, and thats a nightmare nobody doing rankings wants.........and if you do both and the 242 class is missing its top 5 or 6 because they are able to make 220 then how much value is that 242 ranking?
|
|
|
|
Post by Karl "SUPERMAN" Stanley on Jun 9, 2011 9:04:09 GMT -5
I would think at most tournaments there would be a 220 class or a 209 class but I could be wrong, maybe do a vote on keeping that class or not.... but either way I'm sure you will do a great job Josh, regardless Tom Nelson will loose his number one spot left handed soon  |
|
