|
Post by tomnelson on Jun 9, 2011 14:58:59 GMT -5
Give up steven...RVJ and i are going to smash johnny brzit by this time next year right hand....i will smash rob after he beats johnny boy
|
|
|
Post by Frank "The PREZ" Hirst on Jun 9, 2011 16:02:51 GMT -5
I used to give a crap. I could care less now. Just attend one of two tournaments a year. Get one good win and your on the list. Its as simple as that. Pathetic
|
|
|
Post by Jacob Hale on Jun 9, 2011 16:02:53 GMT -5
I see where Josh, Eric, and others are coming from on this but I think that is a mistake to eliminate the 220 rankings because of who is where, and how much they weigh, and how much they can or can not cut to make 198, and so on. The fact that the top 220lb guys are also the top 242lb guys is irrelevant because THAT COULD ALL CHANGE TOMORROW. It seems you are basing your argument on the fact that both John and Tom and others are at the top and they can make both weights. So what? If in 2 years, the top 10 242 guys are all walk around 265lb guys, are you going to include a 220lb ranking then? And if so, if in 2 years after that the best 242lb guys are 220lb guys again, are you going to eliminate it again? Who is what and how much they weight and how much they can cut should not even come in to the equation here. If next year, the top 10 198lb guys in the world all happen to be 185lb walk around guys and therefore can easily make 176's, are you then going to eliminate the 176lb class? By your logic, it would seem that you would be forced to. If so, you will have to adjust not only the rankings, but also your weight classes every so often based on who is in the class and "if" they could make another one.
The classes should be permanent and should reflect ONLY the natural progression of weight of the competitors, 22-25 lbs differentials. It seems like AAA nationals, Unified nationals, and the WAF all see it the same way. If we were talking about state or even regional rankings I could see where Josh and Eric are coming from. But we arent. We are talking about USA and North American rankings. Therefore, an INTERNATIONAL or NATIONAL ranking system should reflect NATIONAL and INTERNATIONAL weight classes.
Just my opinion. Josh, I am sure you are gonna do a great job either way. You are defintiey the guy for it! Good luck and thanks for listening!
|
|
|
Post by Steven Green on Jun 9, 2011 17:21:33 GMT -5
:DNever Tommy boy.
I am 2.5 years in and in a few more I am coming for you if you are not too bored of beating everyone and retired, LOL.
|
|
|
Post by TK on Jun 9, 2011 17:52:37 GMT -5
Insanity doing away with the 220 class.... 242 is possibly the least valuable class I've seen.....220+ will be the best idea. IMO. Talk about whining?... I'm around 285-290... Some of the guys I have to pull are friggin 350 or more... JMO guys TK
|
|
|
Post by David Owens on Jun 9, 2011 18:23:21 GMT -5
WHAT!!! You AGREE WITH KARL, never saw that coming ;D just busting your balls TK
you only see the 242 class being worthless when offered with a 220 class, of course the class will be watered down by cutting it in half, the USAA offers 199-242 at almost every event they hold and its always a deep class
the moral of the story is you dont need both, so where the superheavy weight cut off is, is the real question....obviously if you have only a 242 you piss off the lower end of the 220 class who dont rank in the 242
on the other hand if you have 220 plus then you throw everyone who cannot make 220 into the supers and many of them will not make the list
|
|
|
Post by TK on Jun 9, 2011 21:02:35 GMT -5
WHAT!!! You AGREE WITH KARL, never saw that coming ;D just busting your balls TK you only see the 242 class being worthless when offered with a 220 class, of course the class will be watered down by cutting it in half, the USAA offers 199-242 at almost every event they hold and its always a deep class the moral of the story is you dont need both, so where the superheavy weight cut off is, is the real question....obviously if you have only a 242 you piss off the lower end of the 220 class who dont rank in the 242 on the other hand if you have 220 plus then you throw everyone who cannot make 220 into the supers and many of them will not make the list True I have more pullers enter when it's 220.
|
|
|
Post by Josh Handeland on Jun 9, 2011 21:30:14 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? That is exactly what I was trying to get at - thanks, Dave!
|
|
|
Post by David Owens on Jun 9, 2011 22:47:25 GMT -5
WHAT!!! You AGREE WITH KARL, never saw that coming ;D just busting your balls TK you only see the 242 class being worthless when offered with a 220 class, of course the class will be watered down by cutting it in half, the USAA offers 199-242 at almost every event they hold and its always a deep class the moral of the story is you dont need both, so where the superheavy weight cut off is, is the real question....obviously if you have only a 242 you piss off the lower end of the 220 class who dont rank in the 242 on the other hand if you have 220 plus then you throw everyone who cannot make 220 into the supers and many of them will not make the list True I have more pullers enter when it's 220. so you have tried offering only 242 and no 220 and got less entrees? so your 220 guys are scared of the 242 and refuse to pull if there is no 220 class, thats dedication how bout at the USAA events like show of champions, who shows for the 242 class, and who usually wins .....Karl right? so whats the difference, just saying
|
|
|
Post by Pete & Tim on Jun 10, 2011 7:27:53 GMT -5
After looking at the list I would have to agree with Josh. All of the guys on the 242 list with the exception of Dave Chaffee can cut to 220 without any issues of losing too much and with that being said, most of the 220 guys that think they would make the list would not. I will say that some of the spots would move around to different people but the overall list would be somewhat the same. So I really don't see any point in making a 220 list.
Now if you wanted to make a "B" class lust for the 242 or rank past 10, that might stop some of the crying going on here.
|
|
|
Post by kyledarby on Jun 10, 2011 18:12:05 GMT -5
If you offer a 220 you might as well offer a 143,165,187 and amateurs. But then you have guys ranked in multiple classes and it becomes increasingly difficult to maintain. Of course some are in favor because that is Josh's problem. Jmo
|
|
|
Post by jamesretarides on Jun 10, 2011 20:18:24 GMT -5
I think getting rid of the 242 is a better idea. It seems to me like the 242 class is starved for competitors at a lot of tournaments I go to. Maybe it is just me but the 176, 198, and 220 seem to have the most competitors so I am not sure why one of those classes would go bye bye.
|
|
|
Post by Gene Spiker on Jun 10, 2011 20:27:39 GMT -5
I think getting rid of the 242 is a better idea. It seems to me like the 242 class is starved for competitors at a lot of tournaments I go to. Maybe it is just me but the 176, 198, and 220 seem to have the most competitors so I am not sure why one of those classes would go bye bye. I AGREE........
|
|
|
Post by TK on Jun 10, 2011 20:40:17 GMT -5
I think getting rid of the 242 is a better idea. It seems to me like the 242 class is starved for competitors at a lot of tournaments I go to. Maybe it is just me but the 176, 198, and 220 seem to have the most competitors so I am not sure why one of those classes would go bye bye. I AGREE........ Me too!
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Cadorette on Jun 10, 2011 21:48:14 GMT -5
I am a huge fan of the 242's. I would hate to see this class removed. I say take out the 220's. The difference of a 220 vs a 242 is far less than a 225 vs a 300. So if you weigh 220 either suck the weight to get under 200 or pack on 20lbs and come in on top of your class.
|
|