|
Post by Robert Bishop on Sept 2, 2011 21:47:24 GMT -5
i am with Tom on this one
not much for supermatches myself but they are fun to watch ;D
|
|
|
Post by David Owens on Sept 2, 2011 22:23:04 GMT -5
The only bs part of supermatches is i have to pin someone 5 times before i can say im stronger....what really matters is the first match.... If you want to be in a sport that shows who is stronger you should take up bench press competetion, what makes armwrestling great is that it is a mix of strength, speed, endurance and skill .....furthermore even the strength aspect is subject to all differenct types of strength My dad thinks everyone should be forced to load with him....of course thats where he is strong, hookers all think they should get to start with their wrist bent ...wonder why? I think Tom has a point, depending on the amount of time in between in a supermatch the first match is the only one that i really fresh for fresh, I think 2 of 3 is probably best for finding out who is better fresh for fresh, but honestly until athletes are getting paid contracts this is always going to be speculation anyway but hey thats half the fun right?
|
|
|
Post by kyledarby on Sept 2, 2011 23:08:48 GMT -5
First match sets a presidency for the strongest fresh for fresh. But that doesn't necessarily demonstrate fact. Look at Chad vs Frode. Frode flashed Chad the first match and Chad came back and convincingly beat Frode the next five matches. Anyone is capable of being flashed. Not taking anything away from Frode. In a tournament you still need stamina. Plenty of times you see an A side Puller get beat twice from someone they put on the B side. Both are an accurate measuring device for someones talent level. Like em or not super match is a direction the sport is going in.
|
|
|
Post by David Owens on Sept 2, 2011 23:19:19 GMT -5
First match sets a presidency for the strongest fresh for fresh. But that doesn't necessarily demonstrate fact. Look at Chad vs Frode. Frode flashed Chad the first match and Chad came back and convincingly beat Frode the next five matches. Anyone is capable of being flashed. Not taking anything away from Frode. In a tournament you still need stamina. Plenty of times you see an A side Puller get beat twice from someone they put on the B side. Both are an accurate measuring device for someones talent level. Like em or not super match is a direction the sport is going in. I know this will be slightly off subject but Kyle you and i must have watched a different supermatch because the first match chad thought he pinned frode and then laid it down and took the loss the second match frode stopped chad in the Center held him there played to the audience a little then crushed chad, finally chad started to figure him out and flashed frode 4 strait .....imo if frode stopped chad at anytime he owned him......it was frode who was the stronger of the Two chad was faster and more experienced....just saying thats what i saw
|
|
|
Post by kyledarby on Sept 2, 2011 23:28:57 GMT -5
My mistake in the outcome. But to me 4-1 still doesn't support the strength argument. I do recall Chad thought he won and lost. You can see things how you want to but I'm inclined to disagree. I think the totality of circumstances is relevant in a tournament and super match.
|
|
|
Post by David Owens on Sept 2, 2011 23:43:17 GMT -5
In the one match that was not a flash pin frode held chad screamed and then won easily, i think that supports the strength argument.....chad was definatly the better puller but not the stronger of the Tow imo.....of course like i said if it was only about who was stronger it would be weight lifting or strongman
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on Sept 3, 2011 16:49:08 GMT -5
^maybe you should ask Chad what happened since he was the one pulling?? He was actually injured the last 4 matches that he won.......... His arm was black and blue afterwards around his bicep.
|
|
|
Post by tomaszwisniowski on Sept 4, 2011 14:40:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on Sept 4, 2011 18:22:18 GMT -5
Mike Todd didn't get any wins on Voevoda did he?
|
|
|
Post by Neil Pickup on Sept 5, 2011 7:30:34 GMT -5
The first thing that is required to do Rankings is a standardized set of criteria within which the athletes are being Ranked.
Number of Rounds (as both ARM WARS & PAL utilize 6 Rounds) I would suggest that this duration would be the one to run with right now.
The Ranking would need to be STRICTLY on a 1 Man Vs. 1 Man format. That means that ARM WARS "BATTLEGROUND" & "BABY BATTLEGROUND" results are in the most part NOT viable sources of information from which to formulate an accurate ranking.
Only the First Round of a Battleground Format event such as "THE GATHERING" would be practical for use when formulating accurate athlete Rankings - ie. Richard Lupkes Vs. Devon Larratt would be viable whilst Tim Bresnan Vs. Devon Larratt or Don Underwood Vs. Devon Larratt WOULD NOT.
Ron Bath Vs Yoshi Kanai is viable as is Michael Todd Vs. Devon Larratt or John Brzenk Vs Devon Larratt as these matches took place on a 1 on 1 basis with BOTH athletes 100% fresh and ready to compete.
Conjecture, Opinion & Logic etc. from WHATEVER expert be that myself, Engin, Eric OR ANYONE ELSE you care to think of however valid, should remain simply conjecture and opinion. However valid and justifiable Opinions, Logic & Conjecture may or may not be, they should form no part of any Official Ranking. The manner in which such conjecture WILL & DOES influence Rankings in the long term, is via the weight of public opinion being swayed by that of recognized Authorities within the sport, which in turn might create demand for a particular match ahead of the point it might otherwise have taken place and at which time therefore any such opinion or conjecture can be tested.
Finally (for now) giving Athletes whom have not actively competed in the Sport for a period of more than 18 Months a Ranking, IS RIDICULOUS. I hear many people discussing why Rankings are flawed because one or other athlete who was on a tear in 2005 could beat this or that current Puller ! In any other Sport IF an athlete wishes to be Ranked or recognized by that sport they are forced the compete against a Mandatory challenger at least simply to maintain their recognition. Alexey Voevoda for example was an EXCEPTIONAL Heavyweight when he was in his Prime and was focussed on Armwrestling however it is totally unjustifiable to Rank him currently as he is no longer active in the Sport.
1 on 1 FORMAT, (whether it is contested over 1 Round or 50 Rounds) IS THE ONLY TRUE MANNER IN WHICH A LEGITIMATE RANKING CAN BE OBTAINED. What is ESSENTIAL is that the duration is consistent with other variables, circumvented.
Cheers
Neil
|
|
|
Post by enginterzi on Sept 5, 2011 8:14:03 GMT -5
Only the First Round of a Battleground Format event such as "THE GATHERING" would be practical for use when formulating accurate athlete Rankings - ie. Richard Lupkes Vs. Devon Larratt would be viable whilst Tim Bresnan Vs. Devon Larratt or Don Underwood Vs. Devon Larratt WOULD NOT. agreed
|
|
|
Post by enginterzi on Sept 5, 2011 8:18:35 GMT -5
Finally (for now) giving Athletes whom have not actively competed in the Sport for a period of more than 18 Months a Ranking, IS RIDICULOUS. I hear many people discussing why Rankings are flawed because one or other athlete who was on a tear in 2005 could beat this or that current Puller ! In any other Sport IF an athlete wishes to be Ranked or recognized by that sport they are forced the compete against a Mandatory challenger at least simply to maintain their recognition. Alexey Voevoda for example was an EXCEPTIONAL Heavyweight when he was in his Prime and was focussed on Armwrestling however it is totally unjustifiable to Rank him currently as he is no longer active in the Sport. who is here that has not been active for 18 months but is still ranked? www.worldofarmwrestling.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=34&Itemid=60 if no one then why say such thing?
|
|
|
Post by enginterzi on Sept 5, 2011 8:47:31 GMT -5
all supermatches should be organised by the international rules.there must be no special rules to give advantage to any athlete who is promoted by the organiser.
there should be no different rule to help anyone's explosiveness or endurance.otherwise it will not be a real sport but a business of the organiser who creates his champions that he promotes.
|
|
|
Post by enginterzi on Sept 5, 2011 12:47:11 GMT -5
Hey Engin! how are you doing? hi Devon,i am doing just fine.i hope you are doing fine as well.would you pull Arsen in Istanbul in new year? I think establishing the rankings will not be so tough.. just use your current rankings as a start point. I think they are the current world standard anyways? I do feel that this is going to get really tough for you to maintain, 2 sets of current rankings... i believe it will become the biggest headache. will it result in a guy having to beat a guy in both scenarios? tournament and supermatch? A little story for you - Many years ago I pulled in many tournaments. I won many, beating WAF champions. I pulled at what were supposed to be the "biggest" tournaments in N.A. only to find that it really really didn't matter unless the top guys were there. It is not about the tournament it is about the man... and even then there are excuses. @ that point i really decided that the only way to clearly (and even then there will be discussion) rank above an individual is to face him in 1 on 1 competition of an agreed format when both athletes are fresh. Armwrestling is a 1 on 1 combat sport. I now think that the format really just depends on what you think armwrestling is. And obviously there can be huge flex here. my person opinion is that Armwars is the current global leader when it comes to Armwrestling, due to a great number of reasons. bottom line - results are not rankings, And to make 2 sets of rankings i believe that there will be some results starting to take place in one of them. And.. don't think that it will be years before these big matches happen. I don't plan to stop armwrestling anytime soon, and i am most interested in pulling the guy who has a lowest # beside his name. left and right. it will happen. IMO i believe that Global leader of the sport is WAF without any doubt in my mind.it has most of the best pullers in the world in most classes,while has the ALL the best ones in some classes.also WAF to have doping test limits the steroid use unlike the none tested events and this creates a fair play as much as possible unlike the other events. i think the biggest problem in our sport is with other events that dont really pay anything enough to be considered as a globally pro events.what happens in the west is limited with the west and what happens in the east is limited with the east. since supermatches do not serve even to half of the best armwrestlers then no matter what we think of them the reality is with the tournaments because WAF,EAC,Zloty and some other events gathers about 90% of the top athletes in the world. so it is necessary to give chance to the athletes who has no opportunity to meet others in supermatches to be able to reach to the top by being no1 in top tournaments. i think world rankings for tournaments will stay as how its now but Zloty,WAF,EAF type of events will chang the tournament rankings. soon i will also prepare an unlimited class supermatch ranking and this ranking will change only by supermatch results.
|
|
|
Post by enginterzi on Sept 5, 2011 12:56:14 GMT -5
The only bs part of supermatches is i have to pin someone 5 times before i can say im stronger....what really matters is the first match.... agreed but i think it is 4 times.a tie in an armwrestling match is worser than not organising that supermatch at all IMO.so maximum 5 rounds is the best because if you beat someone 3 out of 5 times then you deserve to win, JMO.
|
|