Hey, its official, my first bench shirt has exploded. I was on my first rep, it was only 350, but my shirt was on its last legs, so it split down the middle when I was lowering the bar down. Since that happened, I had to rush two new ones in from Inzer, they should be good enough. This ever happen to anyone?

Hey, its official, my first bench shirt has exploded. I was on my first rep, it was only 350, but my shirt was on its last legs, so it split down the middle when I was lowering the bar down. Since that happened, I had to rush two new ones in from Inzer, they should be good enough. This ever happen to anyone?

I've never used a bench shirt before, but an exploding bench shirt seems like a recipe for bad things. Don't they usually explode at the bottom of the lift? Seems like, in those situations in which one is lifting maximal loads that exceed one's raw capacity, that an exploding shirt could result in shoulder/pec injuries. Did you get hurt?

Bench shirts kinda scare me -- Not only for the exploding reason, but because people get out of their "groove" and end up dropping the bar on themselves. I was reading an account on BB.com of some guy who got out of his groove and dropped a few hundred pounds on his face. Ouchies.

Yeah, I don't think I will ever use a bench shirt.

Im just curious about these. Isnt the point to lift weights to see how much you can lift? So why would you use something that is going to increase your bench while not giving you a real test of strength since its enbabling you? Sorry if that doesnt make sense lol. Its early and Im about to go do cardio.

Also, glad to hear you werent hurt. I think a situation like that could have gone alot worse.

Im just curious about these. Isnt the point to lift weights to see how much you can lift? So why would you use something that is going to increase your bench while not giving you a real test of strength since its enbabling you? Sorry if that doesnt make sense lol.
Haha. It'd be better if you never asked that question. :bang: I'll be surprised if this thread doesn't reach 3+ pages after it.

I guess you can sum it up by saying: in a powerlifting competition, the point is simply to lift the most weight.

Im just curious about these. Isnt the point to lift weights to see how much you can lift? So why would you use something that is going to increase your bench while not giving you a real test of strength since its enbabling you?

For a lot of guys, the point is to win. And if those guys use the shirt, and you don't, you will not win. Everyone draws their own line somewhere - what you would not do just to win. My brother went along with the shirt and squat suit, but never drugs. He eventually retired from the "natural" competition because he became convinced that not everyone in those was really natural. He didn't feel wonderful about the shirts and suits, but it wasn't that different than using a belt in his mind. But he's always liked deadlifting best because the clothes do not make the man. IF you ask him his max lifts, he always says "but that was with a suit" about his squat. He's proudest of his deadlift, which had no shirt and no suit.

If you're going to compete in an event with equipment, you will end up using the equipment that works best for you. Because if you're the sort of person that doesn't really desire to win the competition, then you're the sort of person that doesn't really need to even enter the competition at all, either.

Haha. It'd be better if you never asked that question. :bang: I'll be surprised if this thread doesn't reach 3+ pages after it.

I guess you can sum it up by saying: in a powerlifting competition, the point is simply to lift the most weight.


And it's getting crazy!!!!

If you're going to compete in an event with equipment, you will end up using the equipment that works best for you. Because if you're the sort of person that doesn't really desire to win the competition, then you're the sort of person that doesn't really need to even enter the competition at all, either.
Very true. You make good points. Maybe they should have a no suit competition and a suit enabled one.

How many pounds can it add to your bench anyway? I see guys at the Y using them. They really pack themselves in those things boy.

I wasnt hurt or anything, I had a good spot, so everything turned out ok. I actually got that shirt off of ebay, so it was used, thats why it gave way. I'm going to wear the new shirt for a contest this saturday, thats why I need it.

Very true. You make good points. Maybe they should have a no suit competition and a suit enabled one.

How many pounds can it add to your bench anyway? I see guys at the Y using them. They really pack themselves in those things boy.A lot. World record with a shirt is 1000 lbs or so and that guy can only do 600 or so raw. Best raw bench in the world is 733 or something around there. I think they are stupid as sh*t and a total travesty to all that is right with the world, but then, as mentioned earlier, we've had threads on this topic ad tedium, so I don't need to expound on it ;)

Im just curious about these. Isnt the point to lift weights to see how much you can lift? So why would you use something that is going to increase your bench while not giving you a real test of strength since its enbabling you? Sorry if that doesnt make sense lol. Its early and Im about to go do cardio.

Also, glad to hear you werent hurt. I think a situation like that could have gone alot worse.

I agree with fender. I am a total weightlifting noob so indulge me. What the f*ck is a bench shirt?

That may be the No. 1 silliest thing I have ever heard. Like cheating on your SATs then failing out of college.

There aren't separate divisions in PLing for people who want to lift raw?

Many feds have raw divisions. There are raw federations. In the old days, lifters would lift in a tight cotton t-shirt and wrap their elbows and wrists. Elbow wraps are now illegal. Some feds are single-ply, meaning the shirt is single ply polyester. Carryover varies widely, depending on bench style and shirt type, but this whole +300/400 lbs is strictly urban legend...lift raw if you want, I'm going raw this weekend....just me and my belt.

Ok, I've been quiet lately. I'll throw gas on the fire.

The achievement is as real as it is false. In and of itself, even with the shirt, the weight was lifted by a human being capable of awesome, raw power. Knowing nothing of powerlifting, I'll say that if it's in a competition where some use a shirt and others don't, those who use it should get the same "asterisk" by their name(s) a la Mark McGuire and Barry Bonds. I dunno about y'all, but I can't live with a false achievement. They'd have to live it for the rest of their lives.

Disguise it however they may, performance enhancement is performance enhancement and the achievement, in my opinion, is no achievement at all. It's not valid to me.

-R

Ok, I've been quiet lately. I'll throw gas on the fire.

The achievement is as real as it is false. In and of itself, even with the shirt, the weight was lifted by a human being capable of awesome, raw power. Knowing nothing of powerlifting, I'll say that if it's in a competition where some use a shirt and others don't, those who use it should get the same "asterisk" by their name(s) a la Mark McGuire and Barry Bonds. I dunno about y'all, but I can't live with a false achievement. They'd have to live it for the rest of their lives.

Disguise it however they may, performance enhancement is performance enhancement and the achievement, in my opinion, is no achievement at all. It's not valid to me.

-R

I agree -- Now instead of a competition of strength, we get a competition to see who can obtain the most optimal combination of strength + ability to use a piece of lifting equipment. I don't necessarily have a problem with people who do shirted lifts, but I don't think the shirted record (now held by Mendelson at 1,008 pounds), should get the same sort of prestige as the raw lift -- Because eventually, somebody is going to crawl under the bar in some bulletproof hydraulic shirt with industrial springs inside and bench 2000 pounds. To which I say, big deal. I am much more impressed with raw lifts.

That is one reason why I'd never use a shirt -- mainly because I am more interested in getting stronger than I am in getting my bench up. I don't blame Eman7673 though, because he has to play by their rules in order to compete ... but, I think the powerlifting world would be much better off without all this bogus equipment.

if it's in a competition where some use a shirt and others don't, those who use it should get the same "asterisk" by their name(s) a la Mark McGuire and Barry Bonds.

Should everyone who beat Zola Budd get an asterisk by their name because they wore shoes? If I go to a meet and lift raw in the open division, which I can certainly do if I want, or even if I go to a meet and lift in the open division but say without all the allowed equipment - knee wraps but no squat suit, why does everyone else get an asterisk by their name because they used the equipment allowed by the rules (which in my fed is a single-ply suit or shirt)?

The argument for giving the records of certain baseball players asterisks is because they used steroids when steroids were NOT ALLOWED by their sport. Wearing LEGAL equipment is not comparable.

I'm not speaking of it in terms of legal or illegal; I could care less about the status of the shirts in the sport. It's performance enhancement and without it, the feat could not have been achieved.

Zen expressed the rest of the sentiment appropriately. I've said my piece and will let it stand at that.

-R

Should everyone who beat Zola Budd get an asterisk by their name because they wore shoes?

Stupid comparison (on numerous levels). If everyone that beat Zola Budd were riding a Yamaha YZ80, then you could give an asterisk.

I'm gonna invent a bench 'shirt' that has a 6-ton double ram bottle jack in the sleeves and kick all your asses anyway. Wouldn't matter that I can only bench 180 x 3.

It's performance enhancement and without it, the feat could not have been achieved.

I've said my piece and will let it stand at that.

-R

You pop in to "throw gas on the fire" and then leave?

"without it, the feat could not have been achieved"...How many world swimming records do you place asterisks by in your book? The introduction of the bodysuit was very controversial at the time - it changed the interface between the skin and the water, increased buoyancy, and muscle compression enhances muscular function. Yet there have been other advancements that have altered the swimming world...the old lane lines used to be nylon cord with a cork every three feet, now they're triple-stack large-baffle wave-breakers - do you think world record times could be achieved in a pool without wave-breakers? The old suits used to be cloth, then paper - now the once-controversial bodysuit...
Do you put asterisks by triathlon winners as well? The triathlon wetsuit reduces surface friction and enhances buoyancy - I daresay most winners couldn't "achieve the feat" of their times without it...
There is an exhibit at the Smithsonian on technological advancements and running...sole design, lightweight materials, resilient materials, bringing biomechanists and material scientists together to design shoes...do you think the NYC Marathon winner could run the same time in Chuck Taylors? Or barefoot? Better keep that asterisk handy...

How about the synthetic composite pole versus the bamboo pole in track and field? The clap skate in speedskating? Let me know what you consider "valid" and "invalid" achievements.

There is no "ONE" world record in bench. (Or squat, or deadlift..) There are world records in the different federations. (Mendelson's is not a federation record, because it was a demonstration. Rychlak still has one fed's record.) Each federation has different rules governing equipment. Many have raw divisions, and keep raw records. There is no need for asterisks. I lift single-ply or raw, that's my choice, but I don't disrespect the achievements of others, particularly at the elite level. These guys compete against others wearing the same equipment, and they beat them. Nothing to sneeze at...

As an engineer, you should appreciate that the clothes you wear will help your lift if they have any tightness whatsoever. Tight cotton t-shirt will help your lift. (Read Gordon's Structures or Science of Strong Materials for interesting discussion of fabric strength, cut, and orientation.) The three variables are fabric properties, cut, and tightness (fit). The greater muscle compression, the greater muscle function. East Europeans and Japanese are known for the tightest suits around. Short of lifting naked (unappetizing) or in a muu-muu, engineered fabric advances will increase muscle compression, and increase the weights lifted. Feds can limit fabrics and plies, but with the proliferation of powerlifting federations, anything's legal somewhere...

Stupid comparison (on numerous levels). If everyone that beat Zola Budd were riding a Yamaha YZ80, then you could give an asterisk.

I'm gonna invent a bench 'shirt' that has a 6-ton double ram bottle jack in the sleeves and kick all your asses anyway. Wouldn't matter that I can only bench 180 x 3.

Mind explaining how it's stupid? R said that if one person in a competition uses a shirt, and one doesn’t, the one who does should get an asterisk. My example is of a competititor failing to avail themselves of legal equipment - which is precisely similar to R's. Similarly, should a swimmer in a bodysuit get an asterisk if they beat a swimmer in a cloth suit?

For someone who admits to being a noob, my advice would be to listen more before opening your mouth…bench shirts do not have jacks in them, noob. The only variances are fabric (material and thickness) and cut. The only factors which can improve the performance are fabric and tightness. Can you speak intelligently on this subject, or are you just trying to bust my chops?

Last time, there's plenty of feds, bench in a cotton-t if you want. (I'd still recommend you get a tight one.) It's not like you're going to go to a raw meet and compete against someone in a triple-ply denim shirt. :rolleyes:

(From the Irontrybe discussion boards: "I go so raw I won't even use a bar to lift the plates, I mean that's just plain cheating if you ask me." )

You pop in to "throw gas on the fire" and then leave?
Yup.

http://smiley.onegreatguy.net/seesaw.gif

-R

To paraphrase an article I read, you can put a bench shirt on the bench and it won't even hold up the bar.

I think most people just don't understand what a bench shirt is or does. It doesn't "jack" up the weight by being stiff.

Instead of comparing it to steroids in baseball (which is flawed in many ways), I would say compare it to golf and golf clubs. Do you put asterisks behind Tiger Woods win because he plays Nike's newest driver? NO!! This equipment is deemed legal by the sanctioning body, improves the performance, and generates popularity in the sport. A callaway golf club won't hit a ball by itself. A bench shirt certainly doesn't bench 1000's by itself.

Should everyone who beat Zola Budd get an asterisk by their name because they wore shoes?I think the problem is not black and white. However, there are certain expectations. For instance, in cycling one needs a bike. In sailing one needs a boat. Without that equipment, the sport does not exist. In running, shoes can be eschewed, though most people prefer them and in some practical areas they are necessary (you will find a scant number of people running on gravel in bare feet). A bench shirt is not necessary; removing it is not akin to removing a cyclist's bike. Removing it woulid be akin to removing a cyclist's extra motor.

More than these sports, though, a bench shirt is responsible for making the record 50% higher than raw. I am not aware of a single other sport in which the dynamics of the sport have changed so massively because of a single piece of equipment. Shirts truly are like allowing cyclists to put motors in their back wheel or wheels under the shoes of runners, to coast down hills.

On the other hand, i don't powerlift, so if they want to get up to 5000 lb bench with a shirt even if they can't do more than 125 without one, so be it. Most sports do have a degree of equipment and as this equipment gets better, so do the athletes' performance. In fact, running technology has progressed little if at all, so in the case of running, athletes these days are simply _faster_. In cycling, the bikes have gotten better and in sailing the boats have gotten better. Every sport's popularity is fueled in some part by new gear. People love to buy their new gear and try it out. Pros don't care, they want results, but many recreational riders, for instance, like to buy new bike parts. Runners like to buy new shoes (even though performance isn't enhanced), so that's part of it. I imagine PLers love new shirts.

For someone who admits to being a noob, my advice would be to listen more before opening your mouth…bench shirts do not have jacks in them, noob. The only variances are fabric (material and thickness) and cut. The only factors which can improve the performance are fabric and tightness. Can you speak intelligently on this subject, or are you just trying to bust my chops?

He knows that. Lighten up Cajunman. Not everyone here is a powerlifter and sees the point in lifting as much weight as possible by any means necessary. He can speak intelligently. Can you speak without getting defensive and offensive? I see a lot of intelligent posts from you but not much tolerance for opinions different from yours.

Mind explaining how it's stupid? R said that if one person in a competition uses a shirt, and one doesn’t, the one who does should get an asterisk. My example is of a competititor failing to avail themselves of legal equipment - which is precisely similar to R's. Similarly, should a swimmer in a bodysuit get an asterisk if they beat a swimmer in a cloth suit?

For someone who admits to being a noob, my advice would be to listen more before opening your mouth…bench shirts do not have jacks in them, noob. The only variances are fabric (material and thickness) and cut. The only factors which can improve the performance are fabric and tightness. Can you speak intelligently on this subject, or are you just trying to bust my chops?

Last time, there's plenty of feds, bench in a cotton-t if you want. (I'd still recommend you get a tight one.) It's not like you're going to go to a raw meet and compete against someone in a triple-ply denim shirt. :rolleyes:

(From the Irontrybe discussion boards: "I go so raw I won't even use a bar to lift the plates, I mean that's just plain cheating if you ask me." )


Interesting... you call someone names (noob) and then talk about speaking intelligently :rolleyes: ... rule number 1 for this board is to not disrespect anyone by calling them names... I just thought I'd point that out (and I know, I know... there's also a rule about not responding to rule breakers :p but this wasn’t a very big indiscretion so I did not report it)... everyone is entitled to their own opinion on this board, whether it be about lifting shirts, routines, diet... whatever... your opinion is that it's allowed in certain federations... others opinions are that they should not be allowed at all and that everyone should lift raw... that's their opinion and nothing you say is going to change that... calling someone names is not going to change that fact... no matter where you go there will be purists that feel that no one should use any kind of performance enhancement, then there will be others who, naturally, disagree... the great thing about this board, is that you can have your opinion and not worry about someone flaming you for having a different opinion than their own. :tu:

To paraphrase an article I read, you can put a bench shirt on the bench and it won't even hold up the bar.

I think most people just don't understand what a bench shirt is or does. It doesn't "jack" up the weight by being stiff.

Instead of comparing it to steroids in baseball (which is flawed in many ways), I would say compare it to golf and golf clubs. Do you put asterisks behind Tiger Woods win because he plays Nike's newest driver? NO!! This equipment is deemed legal by the sanctioning body, improves the performance, and generates popularity in the sport. A callaway golf club won't hit a ball by itself. A bench shirt certainly doesn't bench 1000's by itself.Did you know there is a squat suit now that literally stands up on itself as if an invisible person is in it? I think the inzer site has pics of it! A bench shirt will not hold up the bar, but I've heard about them being so stiff on some people that the person could not even pull the bar down to their chest. I am not sure if that's an exaggeration, but when the shirt is increasing the max bench by 50%, it's pretty major.

Did you know there is a squat suit now that literally stands up on itself as if an invisible person is in it? I think the inzer site has pics of it! A bench shirt will not hold up the bar, but I've heard about them being so stiff on some people that the person could not even pull the bar down to their chest. I am not sure if that's an exaggeration, but when the shirt is increasing the max bench by 50%, it's pretty major.

a guy who used to lift at the gym I work out at used those shirts and it's true, he could barely move in the stupid thing :rolleyes: and if I recall correctly I remember him saying something about having a hard time getting the bar all the way down to his chest :rolleyes:

Mind explaining how it's stupid? R said that if one person in a competition uses a shirt, and one doesn’t, the one who does should get an asterisk. My example is of a competititor failing to avail themselves of legal equipment - which is precisely similar to R's. Similarly, should a swimmer in a bodysuit get an asterisk if they beat a swimmer in a cloth suit?

For someone who admits to being a noob, my advice would be to listen more before opening your mouth…bench shirts do not have jacks in them, noob. The only variances are fabric (material and thickness) and cut. The only factors which can improve the performance are fabric and tightness. Can you speak intelligently on this subject, or are you just trying to bust my chops?

Last time, there's plenty of feds, bench in a cotton-t if you want. (I'd still recommend you get a tight one.) It's not like you're going to go to a raw meet and compete against someone in a triple-ply denim shirt. :rolleyes:

(From the Irontrybe discussion boards: "I go so raw I won't even use a bar to lift the plates, I mean that's just plain cheating if you ask me." )

Edit, edit, edit.....I have to say at least say this. The JOKE was that there would be jacks in the shirt, sir. See? That is the joke. I even named a specific type of jack to make the joke more clear....see? I'm sorry if you didn't get it.

The shirt would of course have to be long sleeved.

a guy who used to lift at the gym I work out at used those shirts and it's true, he could barely move in the stupid thing :rolleyes: and if I recall correctly I remember him saying something about having a hard time getting the bar all the way down to his chest :rolleyes:

We agree on something...its apocolyptic.:p

Well from what I've seen they really pack themselves into those things. They quite literally walk around with their arms out like a zombie.

Myself? I would rather say I can bench 375 raw than saying 500, but with a shirt.

More than these sports, though, a bench shirt is responsible for making the record 50% higher than raw. I am not aware of a single other sport in which the dynamics of the sport have changed so massively because of a single piece of equipment. Shirts truly are like allowing cyclists to put motors in their back wheel or wheels under the shoes of runners, to coast down hills.


They do allow riders to put motors on their wheels and race. They call it motorcycling. You see, in motorcycling they allow everyone to be at the same level with the same equipment and the specific skills required to win determines the best.

No one every said raw benchers should compete with shirted benchers. There are classified entirely differently.

Trust me. If you loaded a bar up with 1000 pounds, any bench shirt will let the bar touch your chest. I don't see how the sport has changed so dynamically. You load the bar. Drop it to your chest. Wait for the signal and push. The weight has gone up dramatically, but it's still you and the bar and the weights vs your competition.

They do allow rider to put motors on their wheels and race. They call it motorcycling. You see, in motorcycling they allow everyone to be at the same level with the same equipment and the specific skills required to win determines the best.

No one every said raw benchers should compete with shirted benchers. There are classified entirely differently.

Trust me. If you loaded a bar up with 1000 pounds, any bench shirt will let the bar touch your chest. I don't see how the sport has changed so dynamically. You load the bar. Drop it to your chest. Wait for the signal and push. The weight has gone up dramatically, but it's still you and the bar and the weights vs your competition.It's changed because in a couple of decades the max bench has gone up 50%! It would be like some miraculous thing coming out to allow sprinters to do 7 second 100 m dashes!

Since there are shirted and non-shirted competitions, I guess it doesn't matter. I would care more about results from non-shirted, personally.

Since there are shirted and non-shirted competitions, I guess it doesn't matter. I would care more about results from non-shirted, personally.

Therein lies the difference. If someone asked me how fast I can swim a mile and I told them "2 minutes, but I was being pulled behind a boat..."

Somehow this thread reminds me of the Dr. Suess book about a pair of empty pants....

:blank:

R- thanks a lot! Chic should be happy this will hit 3+ pages as predicted.

Skoorb:
You have to wear a shirt in every federation for squat and bench. Deads can be singlet only (for the men). Shirts have to be worn, I assume for hygienic purposes (sweat, etc.) - so the question becomes fabric limitations. The only difference between a bench shirt and a cotton t-shirt is fabric properties and seam location. No moving parts, the motor analogy is not valid. Repeating it does not make it so. Muscle compression enhances muscle function. The greater compression, the greater force the muscle can generate (or the greater force can be generated at the joint) - wrapping your knees does not push up on the bar, it merely creates greater knee compression, which allows greater force to be transferred - but the force is still muscular.

Please cite for me the fed that has a 50% higher equipped bench than raw, because I am not aware of it. Comparing raw to equipped records are problematic because (a) it’s not the same lifter most cases, (b) the guys who are competitive enough to wear gear probably treat the raw meet (and record) as a tune-up, not a peaked meet. Also, the rules between feds vary as far as lift performance. Another problem is records are a reflection of chosen attempt weights - they are not exact, and if there is a big jump between attempts, the real "max" is somewhere in the middle. Comparing a "right on the money" max lift with a "gas in the tank" lift isn't completely accurate.

"5000 bench when they can’t do 125"?? :lol: What are you smoking? :rolleyes:

Running technology has not progressed?? I don't even know where to start with this statement. That sure will be news to my marathoner fiancée…I suppose the shoes are same as 100 years ago…better call the Smithsonian and tell them to cancel their exhibit.

My advice is instead of going by “what you heard”, and second-hand gossip, or trying to tell me how things are, why not try to listen to someone who knows? You don't see me barging in the running threads spouting off all kinds of garbage...

To all others:
Coach called himself a noob in his post. Read my first post in this thread if you think I just barged in here breathing fire…yet people who have never worn a bench shirt start making statements like “stupid as shit” , “total travesty”, "silliest thing ever", "like cheating on your SAT’s", etc. Raise your hand if you’ve worn a bench shirt…Bueller…Bueller…yet instead of pausing to listen to someone who has, Coach wants to pop off and tell me my comparison is “stupid”. No justification, no explanation, just "stupid"...whatever. You come at me hard, you're going to get hard back. I give respect, but you disrespect, and I'll let you know what's what.

Tolerance. You want to lift raw, I’m cool with that. (AAU, USAPL, ADFPF have raw divisions. 100% Raw ADAU is a national fed – young, though, and competition is scarce. Hell, I got a regional raw fed in my neck of the woods.) Go for it. You want to wear triple-ply denim? OK, I respect it, not for me, but OK. So exactly WHO IS the intolerant one here?? With this "you better do a bench wearing what I say you can wear, or you're stupid and your shirt is stupid" attitude? Take a look in the mirror.

I respect others opinions, but if you have an intolerant opinion with logical inconsistencies, inconsistencies that you do not apply to other sports, I’m going to point out those inconsistencies. You want to address my points, have at it; you want to ask a question, I'll answer it. You want to play "my analogy is better than yours"....:rolleyes:

I'm out of this thread. Should have stayed out. Chic, sorry, 3+ pages will not come from me. R, thanks for the gas, buddy.

For a lot of guys, the point is to win. And if those guys use the shirt, and you don't, you will not win. Everyone draws their own line somewhere - what you would not do just to win. My brother went along with the shirt and squat suit, but never drugs. He eventually retired from the "natural" competition because he became convinced that not everyone in those was really natural. He didn't feel wonderful about the shirts and suits, but it wasn't that different than using a belt in his mind. But he's always liked deadlifting best because the clothes do not make the man. IF you ask him his max lifts, he always says "but that was with a suit" about his squat. He's proudest of his deadlift, which had no shirt and no suit.

If you're going to compete in an event with equipment, you will end up using the equipment that works best for you. Because if you're the sort of person that doesn't really desire to win the competition, then you're the sort of person that doesn't really need to even enter the competition at all, either.

Good points.

Somebody might have already mentioned this, but I just wanted to point out something that I feel is fairly obvious.

You can't golf without golf clubs. You can bench press without a shirt. It's not the same thing at all.

Also, the sports are different. There's no "golf world record". You play to win tournaments. You bench press to lift the most weight.

Edit: I finished reading the thread. Skoorb covered this in detail, I agree with his points. He explained it well.

One thing I definitely believe is that raw bench records are at least more MEANINGFUL. If you tell someone how much you bench, and they ask for a demonstration, they are going to be more than a little disappointed when you can't do it until you stuff yourself into some ridiculous shirt that you can barely move in.

While this conversation is all well and good, but on this forum, it exists in nearly a pure vacuum. 95% of the folks here have never and probably will never reach levels where they are benching in the 500s and start contemplating a shirt. You can argue yourself in a circle, but hardly anyone chiming in has real world experience.

Nor do I, so why the hell did I say anything?

You can't golf without golf clubs. You can bench press without a shirt. It's not the same thing at all.

Also, the sports are different. There's no "golf world record". You play to win tournaments. You bench press to lift the most weight.


It's not golf clubs per se, it's the technology in them. You can golf without titanium. But with the titanium, you can fit it farther, higher, straighter or with better control. Why not insist everyone hit with old fashioned wood clubs? How is it not the same?

No golf records? Lowest rounds, longest drive, most greens in regulation, fewest putts per round, etc. Golf probably has some of the most statistics kept.

It's not golf clubs per se, it's the technology in them. You can golf without titanium. But with the titanium, you can fit it farther, higher, straighter or with better control. Why not insist everyone hit with old fashioned wood clubs? How is it not the same?

No golf records? Lowest rounds, longest drive, most greens in regulation, fewest putts per round, etc. Golf probably has some of the most statistics kept.

Yeah, but the focus is on winning tournaments, and clubs don't change that because they all have them. But, I guess what you're saying makes sense because although you can't really compare golf stats of today to those of the past, that's probably largely because of club advancements (although obviously today's players are better as well.)

I still don't think it's exactly the same because golf clubs had to exist to play golf. You can't have golf without clubs. It's given that people would try to improve them. Bench shirts were CREATED to spike performances.

Read what Skoorb wrote, he articulates it better...

95% of the folks here have never and probably will never reach levels where they are benching in the 500s and start contemplating a shirt.

The shirts aren't just for 500 pounds. My brother was a 132 for a long time until he moved up to 148. His bench (despite his big arms not his best lift) got up to something like 280 with a shirt, but he used shirts even at the 132 class. Those were early days of shirts and so they wouldn't compare to today's shirts, but he said they helped a lot.

It's not only that.
Bench shirts were originally created as a safety device like lifting belts. Protecting the shoulder and pecs during heavy lifting.
There's good in that evil little shirt.

The good thing is, they help you bench more. The bad thing is that they tear your freaking arms apart, and leave you feeling sore for a few days, even after 4-5 reps.

Nor do I, so why the hell did I say anything?
Because we all have opinions. A lack of hands-on experience is no reason not to form and express your own opinions, as long as they're reasonably well-informed and put forth as such.

-R

cajunman, I think you had some valuable input into this thread. I don't think you were speaking intolerantly.

Any equipment that is not standardized across all users is controversial.

I think supplying identical running shoes to each marathon competitor would not be a bad idea. Same with golf, swimming, etc.
The good thing is, they help you bench more. The bad thing is that they tear your freaking arms apart, and leave you feeling sore for a few days, even after 4-5 reps.
I don't see how benching more with the aid of a shirt is a good thing. From what I've heard, shirts are only bad news, but I don't see how you could logically compete without one.

The greater compression, the greater force the muscle can generate (or the greater force can be generated at the joint) - wrapping your knees does not push up on the bar, it merely creates greater knee compression, which allows greater force to be transferred - but the force is still muscular.Whatever is at work, if one can move more with a shirt, the shirt is assisting the movement.Please cite for me the fed that has a 50% higher equipped bench than raw, because I am not aware of it. Comparing raw to equipped records are problematic because (a) it’s not the same lifter most cases, (b) the guys who are competitive enough to wear gear probably treat the raw meet (and record) as a tune-up, not a peaked meet. Also, the rules between feds vary as far as lift performance. Another problem is records are a reflection of chosen attempt weights - they are not exact, and if there is a big jump between attempts, the real "max" is somewhere in the middle. Comparing a "right on the money" max lift with a "gas in the tank" lift isn't completely accurate.World record raw bench is around 733 or something like that. Shirted, it's 1008, which is a damn lot more. My 50% number was due to an oversight in mental functioning at the time; it's almost 40%. No, they aren't the same lifters. The guy who did 1008 with a shirt is reputed to have a raw max in the 600s. There was an article posted some months ago talking about how the bench max increased very slowly--until shirts came out, then it rocketed up.Running technology has not progressed?? I don't even know where to start with this statement. That sure will be news to my marathoner fiancée…I suppose the shoes are same as 100 years ago…better call the Smithsonian and tell them to cancel their exhibit.It has advanced very little--meaningfully one can argue it's not progressed at all. Although the "best shoes" now can cost $160 or more, the world's elite athletes continue to set records in 7-8 oz tiny pieces of nothing that do barely more than protect against puncture wounds. Indeed, there has been absolutely no proof whatsoever that the shoes of today vs the shoes of 30 years ago make a) injuries less likely to occur in a biomechanically sound runner and b), more importantly, make a person faster. Shoes do not increase speed, they lessen it. The only exception to this is spiked shoes for track use. The best marathoner today could run about as fast in racing flats from 30 years ago. A great runner can run the crap out of 99.9% of people in his barefeet. However, with a bench shirt a pretty good, but not spectacular powerlifter could take out a non-shirted pro. A decent club cyclist could take out a tour de francer, if that tour de francer was riding on a $80 huffy. Shoes are an almost meaningless part of the performance equation in running.My advice is instead of going by “what you heard”, and second-hand gossip, or trying to tell me how things are, why not try to listen to someone who knows? You don't see me barging in the running threads spouting off all kinds of garbage...Not agreeing with you doesnt' make it garbage. I assert that the world powerlifting records now are _substantially and massively and unequivocally_ greater with shirts than they are without them. That is an obvious fact . The sport could do fine witout them, but the poundages would not increase very quickly. Allowing them is akin to introducing 100m competition on downhill courses. In time, the courses would be more and more downhill, following the trend of these shirts encouraging more and more weight moved. Shirts are a non-integral-to-the-sport addition that has substantially changed its course.It's not golf clubs per se, it's the technology in them. You can golf without titanium. But with the titanium, you can fit it farther, higher, straighter or with better control. Why not insist everyone hit with old fashioned wood clubs? How is it not the same?It isn't the same because golf clubs are an integral, necessary part of golf, just as a bike is to a cyclist. In these cases, the equipment gets better and the athlete's results are better. Bench shirts are not an integral part of powerlifting and the activity can exist perfectly without them

You don't see me barging in the running threads spouting off all kinds of garbage...

Zola Budd? Your marathoner fiance'? Both runners. Zola Budd (with shoes or not) set the world record for 5000m. You? Not a runner (I presume).

1. I said I was a weightlifting noob -- not a running noob. I also fly fish, collect beer cozies and read books without pictures.

2. Perhaps we got off on the wrong (bare) foot. I made a joke about bench shirts (actually two jokes). My experience with bench shirts could fit on the end of a No. 2 pencil. Had you merely explained what a bench shirt was, I would have been satisfied. Yet, you took the opportunity to pile on me and others stood up for me -- which seemed to only froth you up more. I was only stirring the pot.

3. I read through your posts. You clearly have a lot of knowledge re: powerlifting, weight training, etc. However, until you post about something else, I will regard my knowledge of running, endurance training, Kant, house music, UCLA sports and Shimano Components (while hardly world-class) superior to that of yours. I'm sorry, this is as hard as I can come. Grrrrrrr!

Please realise that 95% of this is tongue in cheek as we are on an anonymous website 'arguing' over essentially, well, nothing.

Good day sir!

:gl:

So what is the difference between steroids and creatine?
Other than the legality?
Creatine is occurs naturally as do steroids (test-based).

I am impressed with raw lifts and I am impressed with shirted. I am impressed with myself. I don't use a weight belt. I don't use knee wraps. I do use wrist straps. I am an f'ing hypocrit!

Please, I did not bring up the steriod thing to get in a big pissing match. Much of the arguments here can be applied to them and other arguments. IMO, this is a powerlifting argument with people who are doing bodybuilding who don't really understand the difference. The goals of the two people are different.

Shirts are a non-integral-to-the-sport addition that has substantially changed its course.It isn't the same because golf clubs are an integral, necessary part of golf, just as a bike is to a cyclist. In these cases, the equipment gets better and the athlete's results are better. Bench shirts are not an integral part of powerlifting and the activity can exist perfectly without them

I know I'm arguing a minor point, but what the hell, I'm just waiting to start at work.

Like I said, it's not the golf clubs themselves. It's the titanium and other -nium metals they are putting in clubs. Golf can exist without titanium. Titanium is not integral. Make the clubs out of wood. Just like in powerlifting, the new technology has destroyed old courses making them a drive and chip affair.

I know I'm arguing a minor point, but what the hell, I'm just waiting to start at work.

Like I said, it's not the golf clubs themselves. It's the titanium and other -nium metals they are putting in clubs. Golf can exist without titanium. Titanium is not integral. Make the clubs out of wood. Just like in powerlifting, the new technology has destroyed old courses making them a drive and chip affair.

Drive for show, put for dough Johnny Boy!

So what is the difference between steroids and creatine?

Steroids work.

So what is the difference between steroids and creatine?
Other than the legality?
Creatine is occurs naturally as do steroids (test-based).

I am impressed with raw lifts and I am impressed with shirted. I am impressed with myself. I don't use a weight belt. I don't use knee wraps. I do use wrist straps. I am an f'ing hypocrit!

Please, I did not bring up the steriod thing to get in a big pissing match. Much of the arguments here can be applied to them and other arguments. IMO, this is a powerlifting argument with people who are doing bodybuilding who don't really understand the difference. The goals of the two people are different.

THANK YOU! Why is it that just because someone found steroids illegal for use in powerlifting and other sports, they have been given such a BAD reputation and condemned so completely. Steroids are used regularly in the medical profession treating everything from rashes to asthma to life threatening organ rejection in transplantation. And yes, they are used for improvement in mass as well.

What if tommorow they deem whey protein illegal. Should we ostracize everyone that has drunk a protein shake? What about creatine, or NoXplode or a dozen others?

Probably the wrong thread to bring this up so I'll just stop.

Drive for show, put for dough Johnny Boy!

And John Daly is so popular for his delicate around the green work, right? (although he does have a great short game)

And John Daly is so popular for his delicate around the green work, right? (although he does have a great short game)

OK, you can add golf to my list as well.

Daly can't putt worth a sh*t. That is why (among other reasons) he has 'only' won 5 times out of 371 tournaments on tour. He won the 1991 PGA and the 95 British because he happened to get hot with the putter. I watched him live here in SF in October at the AMEX. Know why he lost to Tiger in the playoff? Missed a 4 footer.

He is popular because a) he hits the ball a mile; b) he is a 'good ole boy'; c) he is a classic American underdog in a country club sport.

If Daly were truly 'popular' as in marketing 'popular' and could get his fans to buy his stuff (like Tiger) then his major sponsor wouldn't be Lumber 86 or Piggly Wiggly!

:gl:

I am impressed with raw lifts and I am impressed with shirted. I am impressed with myself. I don't use a weight belt. I don't use knee wraps. I do use wrist straps. I am an f'ing hypocrit!


I use wrist wraps too. The first time ever on Tuesday.:o :o :o

I know I'm arguing a minor point, but what the hell, I'm just waiting to start at work.

Like I said, it's not the golf clubs themselves. It's the titanium and other -nium metals they are putting in clubs. Golf can exist without titanium. Titanium is not integral. Make the clubs out of wood. Just like in powerlifting, the new technology has destroyed old courses making them a drive and chip affair.This is why, more than before, I can at least appreciate one side of the pro-shirt argument. As I've gotten into cycling a bit, i can see that buying equipment is fun. Although records now are not applicable to records of yesteryear, such as fastest time-trial ever and things like that, I have to wonder if the sport would be just a bit more boring if all competitors were allowed to ride just the same $300, 28 lb bike. It would even it up, but there is a certain amount of fun by tweaking components and buying new gadgets. It drives interest.

I have to wonder if the sport would be just a bit more boring if all competitors were allowed to ride just the same $300, 28 lb bike.

Yuck. They already have Nascar.

:nono:

:bang: :bang: :bang: why, oh why....

Whatever is at work, if one can move more with a shirt, the shirt is assisting the movement.
Shoes do not increase speed, they lessen it.
Shoes are an almost meaningless part of the performance equation in running.

Mile: 5:55
10 Miles: 1:13:15
Marathon: 3:52:54
Can you run these times in dress shoes? Can you run these times in Chuck Taylors? Can you run these times barefoot? Whatever is at work, if one can move faster in a shoe, the shoe is assisting the movement…If you assert that your choice of running shoe does not assist your movement, I have a challenge for you. PM me the weight of your running shoes, I will provide you with footwear of equal weight, and see if you can hit that 10 mile time…let me know how much money you want to put on this...

However, with a bench shirt a pretty good, but not spectacular powerlifter could take out a non-shirted pro.

Do you have numbers to back this up or are you just throwing out an assertion as fact without any knowledge? (Ano-rectal vocalization...)
Fact: at the NERB, Jeremy Hoornstra and Rock Lewis did 605 and 580, respectively at 239 and 240 (242 class). This would have put them at 3&4 in the Top 20 rankings of shirted (single-ply) lifters in the USAPL, and placed 2nd and 4th in the IPF's World Bench Press Championships (single-ply). They would have come in 7th and 8th at the WPC Worlds (multi-ply, unlimited), and won their weight class at the APF Nationals (US arm of WPC, multi-ply, unlimited). Nick Winters and Mike Wolfe in the SHW did 650 and 600 at the NERB. This would have put them at 2 and 8 in the Top 20 rankings of shirted (single-ply) lifters in the USAPL, and 8th and 9th in the IPF's World Bench Press Championships (single-ply). OK, I'm getting tired of doing the legwork for you...suffice it to say, this is NOT a true statement, and unless you have names and numbers to justify this statement of fact you are making, I think you should back away from this assertion...

Not agreeing with you doesnt' make it garbage.

It’s not garbage because someone doesn’t agree with me. What is garbage is two people in this thread who have made claims as to what lifting in a shirt is like – “swimming being pulled behind a boat”, “riding a bike with a motor on it” – who have NEVER worn a shirt, and when someone who has says “no, it’s NOT like that”, they keep on repeating it. What is garbage is someone who has no hands-on experience, only hearsay, deliberately pass on the opportunity to learn something from someone who HAS hands-on experience and tell THAT PERSON how things are. You are entitled to your opinion, but when I explain the way things work, the ways in which your analogies don’t apply, the ways in which the same charges could be leveled against other sports equipment, your apparent misunderstanding of the structure of the sport of powerlifting and the various powerlifting federations, and you still want to sit here and lecture me, then that is garbage. I don’t know where your bias or disdain for powerlifters comes from, a bias and disdain that is evident in other threads, and frankly I don’t care…but I don’t respect someone who has nothing of value to add to a thread, only a desire to come in and piss all over the place without learning a damn thing. That is what is garbage.

:bang: :bang: :bang:

Can you run these times in dress shoes? Can you run these times in Chuck Taylors? Can you run these times barefoot? Whatever is at work, if one can move faster in a shoe, the shoe is assisting the movement…If you assert that your choice of running shoe does not assist your movement, I have a challenge for you. PM me the weight of your running shoes, I will provide you with footwear of equal weight, and see if you can hit that 10 mile time…let me know how much money you want to put on this...I could achieve that mile time in barefeet. I am not sure I'd want to do it because my feet are soft, like most people's. I am not a barefoot runner. Same applies for the 10 mile and marathon times. The shoes that I have worn do not assist with my speed, but rather personally my comfort, because I'm used to something with padding. In actual fact, I've been running lately in $5 aqua socks, which do nothing but prevent puncture wounds and are no more an assist to running than a 30 year old training flat would have been. Shoes do impact performance, just like I couldn't sprint quickly in steel-toe work boots, but they do not increase it. The reason most elites will use a shoe instead of barefoot is for comfort's sake and that landing on something like a nail when barefoot really sucks. They are using cheap shoes, though. The first US woman to ever break 2:20 in a marathon did so a couple of weeks ago in shoes that cost less than $100. I think the winner of the boston marathon recently used shoes even cheaper than that.

For somebody without a biomechanical deficiency, shoes will not increase speed. The more shoe, the slower the runner will be. Now, if somebody comes out with shoes that somehow actively make the person faster, then you'll see debate, and that is what we've seen a bit of with Spira, a company that makes shoes with springs in it. If those shoes somehow made a person 30 seconds faster on the mile, many people would call for their abolishment in competition and many people would run off to the shoe store and buy a pair! Eventually you'd have "active shoe" and "non-active shoe" events, rather like you've got in powerlifting with shirt assisting and non-assisting, but running isn't there yet.Do you have numbers to back this up or are you just throwing out an assertion as fact without any knowledge?Mendelson has, I think, the raw bench record at 713. How many people can bench more than 713 with a shirt? Considering the record is 1008, quite a few, so that is what I mean.It’s not garbage because someone doesn’t agree with me. What is garbage is two people in this thread who have made claims as to what lifting in a shirt is like – “swimming being pulled behind a boat”, “riding a bike with a motor on it” – who have NEVER worn a shirt, and when someone who has says “no, it’s NOT like that”, they keep on repeating it. What is garbage is someone who has no hands-on experience, only hearsay, deliberately pass on the opportunity to learn something from someone who HAS hands-on experience and tell THAT PERSON how things are. You are entitled to your opinion, but when I explain the way things work, the ways in which your analogies don’t apply, the ways in which the same charges could be leveled against other sports equipment, your apparent misunderstanding of the structure of the sport of powerlifting and the various powerlifting federations, and you still want to sit here and lecture me, then that is garbage. I don’t know where your bias or disdain for powerlifters comes from, a bias and disdain that is evident in other threads, and frankly I don’t care…but I don’t respect someone who has nothing of value to add to a thread, only a desire to come in and piss all over the place without learning a damn thing. That is what is garbage.I take your point. When it really comes down to it, this is what I think happened: Some guys were sitting in the gym thinking "Damn, this is really tricky raising my bench strength. I'm so tired of the slow gains. If only I could fiure out a way to get my shirt to help, I'd be able to surely throw a hundred lbs on my bench." and presto, out comes Inzer with a bench shirt. Eventually somebody will be training for the tour de france thinking "Damn, these hills are really tough. If only I could fit a tiny motor in my rear wheel and a solar panel on my helmet, I could get a few extra watts when climbing hills and get some faster splits.".

I'd like to see this thread remain open. For the most part people have been pretty well behaved. There's no need to bang heads and get upset, it's just an Internet discussion. Everyone please take a deep breath and realize that you're not going to necessary get everyone agree with your PoV, or even consider it.

Thanks. :)

Mile: 5:55
10 Miles: 1:13:15
Marathon: 3:52:54
Can you run these times in dress shoes? Can you run these times in Chuck Taylors? Can you run these times barefoot?

See the thing you might be missing here is that he can run pretty close to those times. I used to run cross country in Adidas 'Antelopes'

http://www2.u-netsurf.ne.jp/~warabi/iwazaki/adidas_antelope2.jpg

and then a year or so later I was running similar distances overland in WWII pattern (e.g. Corcoran) Jump Boots.

http://www.uscav.com/prodinfo/enlarged/17320L.jpg

The difference was probably less than you seem to think. And Jump boots have steel shanks and are not light. You can run almost as fast in Jump Boots.

Can most lifters bench almost as much with a shirt? My brother, the former shirt-using competition power lifter, says no.

http://www2.u-netsurf.ne.jp/~warabi/iwazaki/adidas_antelope2.jpg


Those are sweet!:spaz:

I bet I can bowl in them.

Page 4. Cant say I didnt see this coming. We wont get off this one though I bet.

Mendelson has, I think, the raw bench record at 713. How many people can bench more than 713 with a shirt? Considering the record is 1008, quite a few, so that is what I mean.

Skoorb, the problem is you think you know what you are talking about when you don't. There are probably less than 20 (or right around 20) people in the entire world who ever have benched over 713 in a shirt. Hell, at the WPC World's only ONE lifter benched over 700, and it was 704. You are not talking facts, you are talking "common knowledge" that unfortunately is NOT TRUE. Unless you are saying that being among the top 20 in the world is "pretty good, but not spectacular"...

When it really comes down to it, this is what I think happened: Some guys were sitting in the gym thinking "Damn, this is really tricky raising my bench strength. I'm so tired of the slow gains. If only I could fiure out a way to get my shirt to help, I'd be able to surely throw a hundred lbs on my bench." and presto, out comes Inzer with a bench shirt.

John Inzer was a powerlifter, 165 lb weight class I believe. National-level. Great deadlifter. Bench press was his weak lift. Everyone knew about the tight cotton t-shirt trick to get a few pounds...he experimented with different materials, and different seam locations/cuts, to get a tighter shirt. The reason the shirt advances have been the last 20 years is the material advances in the last 20 years. Bench shirts have only been around since 1983. Comparing them with the last 30 years of running technology when running technology turned the corner earlier is disingenuous.

I've run in combat boots. I've taken the Army PT test in combat boots. If you claim that you can match your 10-mile times and marathon times in combat boots, again, pony up. Army 10-miler and Marine Corps are in October. Pick your meet and let's ante up...

Pick your meet and let's ante up...

I'm out of this thread. Should have stayed out.

:sleep:


***

Skoorb, the problem is you think you know what you are talking about when you don't. There are probably less than 20 (or right around 20) people in the entire world who ever have benched over 713 in a shirt.With the world record at a thousand lbs I find it HIGHLY unlikely that only 20 people have gotten over 713 with a shirt. If that is true, I retract my point. :tucool: Comparing them with the last 30 years of running technology when running technology turned the corner earlier is disingenuous.I don't know that running technology ever really turned a corner! They throw more crap into the shoes but it's of highly debateable effectiveness. That is beside the point, though.I've run in combat boots. I've taken the Army PT test in combat boots. If you claim that you can match your 10-mile times and marathon times in combat boots, again, pony up. I've never run in them; they would make me slower. Extra weight on a show decreases performance. The only obvious advancement in shoe technology is making them lighter, but even the lightest flats decades ago were within spitting distance of the weight of flats now, so shoes havce not increased runner's speeds. I am sure that most, if not all decreases in record times for running are due to better runners, not better shoes.

I've run in combat boots. I've taken the Army PT test in combat boots. If you claim that you can match your 10-mile times and marathon times in combat boots, again, pony up. Army 10-miler and Marine Corps are in October. Pick your meet and let's ante up...


I have run in combat boots as well. 10 miler? I want in on that bet too. You might be able to do it for a mile, but not 10. You won't come close to your time with normal shoes.


Cajun, you obviously have some experience with powerlifting. I have to say I agree with what you are saying. I just think that people's points of view are too different here.

I used to work out at Kaz's gym in Auburn. I would have loved to have seen Kaz with a shirt on in those days. Funniest thing about him was that at his gym he would throw people out for doing stupid exercises or incorrect form. Funniest thing to see that happen.

Funniest thing about him was that at his gym he would throw people out for doing stupid exercises or incorrect form.

Did he rip up your contract too in front of everyone or did they eventually let the bandit back in. :D

Clipped from a simliar discussion on another website. My views are EXACTLY the same however, I am not articulate enough to write this myself.

I can understand why some people have reservations about this kind of bench technique. Maybe it's because I'm a big fan of strongman, but I like to think the reason most guys lift/are inspired by lifting is because of the implied natural power in it. Yeah, many of us want to be big, but not so we can carry around extra bodyweight-- it's because it makes us look formidable. Impressive gym feats are formidable in the same way-- you see all that weight moving in a deep squat, and there's something inherently "translatable" about it.

What I'm getting at is that when we see "reduced range of motion" in regular gym lifts, we normally laugh our asses off, now matter how much weight is on the bar/stack. I'm not at all saying guys like Sean Lattimer and Brian Siders aren't incredibly strong--if they were to do a maximum bench press the way I do one, they'd still make me look like a little girl. It's just tough for me to get excited about a lift with a three inch ROM; I don't care what the poundage number is. It doesn't help that those silly bench shirts are added to the equation. If you have to put on a special truss that doesn't allow you to lower your arms, for no other reason than to add a few pounds, the spectacle has truly outpaced the intrinsic value. There's a reason most stonelifters don't use tacky/wear special harnesses to pick those 300 pound boulders up--because it's understood that the true strongman is strong because he can just go over there and pick the damn thing up! If safety and efficiency with the heaviest weight number is the name of the game, go rent a crane and pick up 800 pound boulders with it!



I know, I know, powerlifting is all about the number, not some intangible definition of 'strength' or 'formidability'-- that's fine. But I think it's perfectly acceptable to believe that just chasing numbers can often dilute what's special or intrinsically impressive about a big lift.

Clipped from a simliar discussion on another website. My views are EXACTLY the same however, I am not articulate enough to write this myself.

I can understand why some people have reservations about this kind of bench technique. Maybe it's because I'm a big fan of strongman, but I like to think the reason most guys lift/are inspired by lifting is because of the implied natural power in it. Yeah, many of us want to be big, but not so we can carry around extra bodyweight-- it's because it makes us look formidable. Impressive gym feats are formidable in the same way-- you see all that weight moving in a deep squat, and there's something inherently "translatable" about it.

What I'm getting at is that when we see "reduced range of motion" in regular gym lifts, we normally laugh our asses off, now matter how much weight is on the bar/stack. I'm not at all saying guys like Sean Lattimer and Brian Siders aren't incredibly strong--if they were to do a maximum bench press the way I do one, they'd still make me look like a little girl. It's just tough for me to get excited about a lift with a three inch ROM; I don't care what the poundage number is. It doesn't help that those silly bench shirts are added to the equation. If you have to put on a special truss that doesn't allow you to lower your arms, for no other reason than to add a few pounds, the spectacle has truly outpaced the intrinsic value. There's a reason most stonelifters don't use tacky/wear special harnesses to pick those 300 pound boulders up--because it's understood that the true strongman is strong because he can just go over there and pick the damn thing up! If safety and efficiency with the heaviest weight number is the name of the game, go rent a crane and pick up 800 pound boulders with it!



I know, I know, powerlifting is all about the number, not some intangible definition of 'strength' or 'formidability'-- that's fine. But I think it's perfectly acceptable to believe that just chasing numbers can often dilute what's special or intrinsically impressive about a big lift.
Concur. There are few debates around running shoes or golf club materials because people just don't see them and immediately think "wow, that is ridiculous!". I've come across many people who hear about bench shirts and think "wow, that is ridiculous!". Ignorance or not, that is the opinion many lay people have when they hear about them. Powerlifters don't care about those opinions, and, in turn, wearing the shirts makes regular people care even less about powerlifting.

Great cut/paste, Coach.

Concur. ... Powerlifters don't care about those opinions, and, in turn, wearing the shirts makes regular people care even less about powerlifting.
Bingo.

-R

With the world record at a thousand lbs I find it HIGHLY unlikely that only 20 people have gotten over 713 with a shirt. If that is true, I retract my point. :tucool:

There's only 16 members in Westside's club that bench 700+. However, I couldn't find a list of others. Kinda would think there would be over 4 more in the entire world. But still, it's a very small number.

http://www.westside-barbell.com/elite_members.htm

The only obvious advancement in shoe technology is making them lighter, but even the lightest flats decades ago were within spitting distance of the weight of flats now, so shoes havce not increased runner's speeds. I am sure that most, if not all decreases in record times for running are due to better runners, not better shoes.

Did you know that sprinters and hurdlers shoes come with spikes?
Shame on them! :p

Great cut/paste, Coach.


Bingo.

-R
Thats exactly the way I feel. I might be able to press 450 with a bench shirt, but would that really how strong I judge myself? No. I dont walk around all day in real life with a bench shirt on. So I find a TRUE sense of strength is to do it raw baby.

Did you know that sprinters and hurdlers shoes come with spikes?
Shame on them! :p
But do some of them put tiny springs in the soles to get a better bounce?

Did you know that sprinters and hurdlers shoes come with spikes?
Shame on them! :pOf course. A sprinter's time without spikes will be substantially higher. For a sprinter, their spikes are the bench presser's shirt :)

Did you know that sprinters and hurdlers shoes come with spikes?
Shame on them! :p

And have for decades and decades. They were detachable though -- did you know that? Also, the spikes that you see today were invented in direct reponse to the all-weather track surfaces.

I'm afraid I fail to see your point sir.

Clipped from a simliar discussion on another website. My views are EXACTLY the same however, I am not articulate enough to write this myself.

I can understand why some people have reservations about this kind of bench technique. Maybe it's because I'm a big fan of strongman, but I like to think the reason most guys lift/are inspired by lifting is because of the implied natural power in it. Yeah, many of us want to be big, but not so we can carry around extra bodyweight-- it's because it makes us look formidable. Impressive gym feats are formidable in the same way-- you see all that weight moving in a deep squat, and there's something inherently "translatable" about it.

What I'm getting at is that when we see "reduced range of motion" in regular gym lifts, we normally laugh our asses off, now matter how much weight is on the bar/stack. I'm not at all saying guys like Sean Lattimer and Brian Siders aren't incredibly strong--if they were to do a maximum bench press the way I do one, they'd still make me look like a little girl. It's just tough for me to get excited about a lift with a three inch ROM; I don't care what the poundage number is. It doesn't help that those silly bench shirts are added to the equation. If you have to put on a special truss that doesn't allow you to lower your arms, for no other reason than to add a few pounds, the spectacle has truly outpaced the intrinsic value. There's a reason most stonelifters don't use tacky/wear special harnesses to pick those 300 pound boulders up--because it's understood that the true strongman is strong because he can just go over there and pick the damn thing up! If safety and efficiency with the heaviest weight number is the name of the game, go rent a crane and pick up 800 pound boulders with it!



I know, I know, powerlifting is all about the number, not some intangible definition of 'strength' or 'formidability'-- that's fine. But I think it's perfectly acceptable to believe that just chasing numbers can often dilute what's special or intrinsically impressive about a big lift.

So basically he's arguing that he doesn't care about what people lift with shirts. Fine. No one will likely change his or your opinion.

That doesn't change the fact that benching shirts are here. They are deemed legal for now. They are used extensively in competition and they increase the weight lifted. But, everyone uses them. Your weight goes up, but so does the competition's. It still requires work, work and more work to lift 800+ pounds. The most important thing is everyone is on a relatively level playing field.

I think you can basically cry all you want about how benching shirts are a travesty to powerlifting and soils the purity of the sport. But until they oulaw them, if you are a powerlifter(which you are not), and you compete(which you don't but the original poster does) you WILL be wearing a shirt(unless you are competing raw).

Short of powerlifting, I think a mild bench shirt or just a tight t-shirt is still a useful thing, like a weight belt.

And have for decades and decades. They were detachable though -- did you know that? Also, the spikes that you see today were invented in direct reponse to the all-weather track surfaces.

I'm afraid I fail to see your point sir.

I guess I have to be more clear.

Running barefoot or running with spikes. Which is faster in a sprint or hurdle, sir?

My point is that there have been advancement in shoes, sir.

Edit- Are you going to go over to the running web sites, get on your box and decry running spikes? No, because everyone wears them and are on the same playing field. Fastest man with best technique still wins.
Bench shirt or not. Strongest man with the best technique still wins.
Lastest Nike golf club or not, best player with the best game wins.
Made my point clear yet, sir?

They were detachable though -- did you know that?.

And my feet smell after wearing shoes all day.
What is your point, sir?

Ah, that was therapeutic. I'll probably regret what I just wrote, sorry. :)

And my feet smell after wearing shoes all day.
What is your point, sir?

That's what happens when men wear high heels.

That's what happens when men wear high heels.

:lol:

I've run in combat boots. I've taken the Army PT test in combat boots. If you claim that you can match your 10-mile times and marathon times in combat boots, again, pony up. Army 10-miler and Marine Corps are in October. Pick your meet and let's ante up...

I ran a lot more like two or three miles when I did that. (Army test is 2 miles as well, right?) I don't have any combat boots at the moment, though. Back in those days, the running shoes were a little under a pound each, and the boots were a little over two pounds each. Basically the same weight difference between running shoes and barefoot was the difference between combat boots and running shoes.

Having to run two marathons to prove the point seems like a big deal. Especially since you have to break in the boots too. But a couple miles seems like a reasonable idea.

Now I have a recent fastest (treadmill) mile time of 6:20 (I'm 47 so that's an honestly fast mile). Using the ratio of highest shirt bench press to highest raw bench press of (1000 / 700) = 1.43 then here is what the same ratio would imply - a time of (6:20) * 1.43 = 9:03.

So would you agree that if I run a mile in combat boots faster than 9:03 then boots are less important in running than shirts are in bench pressing?

If you do, I have to figure out if the gym would let me run on the treadmill in combat boots, get some boots, break them in, get good socks happening, and run the mile. Or I could run a mile each way on a road course near my house, etc., but that would be based on different times.

I feel pretty good about running a mile under 9 minutes in boots.

Using the ratio of highest shirt bench press to highest raw bench press of (1000 / 700) = 1.43 then here is what the same ratio would imply - a time of (6:20) * 1.43 = 9:03.



Did you call NASA to get that info?:D :D

Did you call NASA to get that info?:D :D

Nah. I used Google to get this. (http://www.slate.com/id/2104915/)

At the time of that writing, (Aug 9, 2004), the raw record was 713, (Scot Mendelson) and with a shirt he's done 1008.

Concur. There are few debates around running shoes or golf club materials because people just don't see them and immediately think "wow, that is ridiculous!". I've come across many people who hear about bench shirts and think "wow, that is ridiculous!". Ignorance or not, that is the opinion many lay people have when they hear about them. Powerlifters don't care about those opinions, and, in turn, wearing the shirts makes regular people care even less about powerlifting.


Well, the reason is that the golf clubs don't hit/aim the ball for you, and the running shoes don't propel you down the track! Bench shirts actually do some of the lifting for you. When I read stories about how Gene Rychlak had to abandon a bench attempt because he couldn't get an 800 pound bench press down to his chest, I just bust out laughing...as do most people. A proper analogy would be that of a swimmer attaching a little motorized propeller onto his back, and then claiming that his record is valid because everyone else also uses a motor.

The problem I have is that future records are going to be based on the shirt technology rather than the person's bench press strength. It then becomes less a contest of strength, and more a contest of who can develop the best combination of strength + equipment savvy -- with the equipment playing a bigger and bigger role as it continues to advance. I think it is pretty safe to say, that some years down the line when somebody inevitably bench presses 1200 pounds, it won't be because he is a better bencher than Scot Mendelson, it will be because he has the advantage of a much better shirt. THAT is why most people don't like this assisted lifting nonsense. Records should be broken because a more talented/stronger/better competitor comes along, not because some geeks in a lab invented a better shirt.

Well, the reason is that the golf clubs don't hit/aim the ball for you, and the running shoes don't propel you down the track! Bench shirts actually do some of the lifting for you. When I read stories about how Gene Rychlak had to abandon a bench attempt because he couldn't get an 800 pound bench press down to his chest, I just bust out laughing...as do most people. A proper analogy would be that of a swimmer attaching a little motorized propeller onto his back, and then claiming that his record is valid because everyone else also uses a motor.

The problem I have is that future records are going to be based on the shirt technology rather than the person's bench press strength. It then becomes less a contest of strength, and more a contest of who can develop the best combination of strength + equipment savvy -- with the equipment playing a bigger and bigger role as it continues to advance. I think it is pretty safe to say, that some years down the line when somebody inevitably bench presses 1200 pounds, it won't be because he is a better bencher than Scot Mendelson, it will be because he has the advantage of a much better shirt. THAT is why most people don't like this assisted lifting nonsense. Records should be broken because a more talented/stronger/better competitor comes along, not because some geeks in a lab invented a better shirt.

That's assuming Mendelson can't go and use the very same shirt. Level playing field.

That's assuming Mendelson can't go and use the very same shirt.

Unless they have the same exact measurements, he can't.

That's assuming Mendelson can't go and use the very same shirt. Level playing field.

Or he turns 80. Remember, records will be broken after he can no longer compete.

Well, crap. All those powerlifters and bodybuilders have different genetics than me. Those raw lifts should have an asterick by them because of this.

Or, shouldn't they test their testosterone levels and allow those who are below the highest level to juice to get their levels up so it is a level playing field? Or, we should use the same Zenph ratio to compute how much each lifter really lifted.

First things first -

Eman, kick ass on Saturday!! Take names and OWN THAT WEIGHT!!

Now, back to the wall-banging...

Zen, what is the point? I mean, really... Why are people in this thread so peevish about a sport in which they don’t even COMPETE (hell, don't even spectate)? Is it that hard to just admit that EVERY SPORT has modifications to the clothing/attire/equipment/environment that enhance the performance of the sport itself? Why are the “Zen Purists” (no offense) applying this “if you can’t do it naked, it doesn’t count” attitude to powerlifting and no other sport? I could see if someone was just a crotchety old school type who said runners should run in leather shoes with flat vulcanized rubber soles, swimmers should wear cloth suits and swim in pools with nylon rope lane lines, golfers should use wooden clubs, skiers should use wooden skis, pole vaulters should use wooden poles, skaters should use one-piece nonhinged skates, etc. etc. – but they’re NOT. The only sport that they apply this zen-pure philosophy to is powerlifting, and it seems to only be to put down powerlifters.

Gear is controversial WITHIN powerlifting. That’s understandable. WE are the competitors. Much like the bodysuits being controversial within swimming for a time, but…I don’t see anyone on these boards frothing at the mouth over Ian Thorpe’s records not being a “valid achievement” or being “false”…(and when was the last time YOU went to the pool or beach in a fitted bodysuit?) Damn, I got to pull teeth just to get the runners to admit that their shoes make a difference, now it’s quibbling over “well, it’s not as much difference as a multi-ply canvas bench shirt”…or “well, the average American thinks bench shirts are stupid”…(and what does the average American think about whey protein, creatine, six meals a day?)

Simple fact…there are raw feds. There are raw world records. There are single-ply feds. There are single-ply world records. (In the AAU, the difference between raw WRs and shirted WRs is as little as 20 lbs in some weight classes…) Then there are multi-ply feds, unlimited feds, and multi-ply and unlimited WRs. There is NO SUCH THING as “THE BENCH WORLD RECORD"…there are ONLYfed world records. Powerlifting is a sport where you can compete in as little equipment (belt, no belt) or as much equipment as you want – against other people wearing the same stuff, making the same choice. I have said before, I go single-ply and raw. That’s my choice. If someone wants to go multi-ply, I have no problem with that. They compete in multi-ply feds that keep multi-ply records.

I have explained the way bench shirts work. It is similar to a belt, knee wraps, squat suit, etc…muscle compression enhances muscle function. Tight cotton t-shirt will up your bench. Bike compression shorts will up your squat. If you are against external compression to enhance muscle function, are you also against football players, soccer players, rugby players, baseball players, etc…who wear compression shorts in their sports under their uniforms? Are you against bodysuits in swimming? Bike shorts in cycling? Speedskating or skiing costumes? Because they all do the SAME thing – apply external compression to the muscles…to, yes, ENHANCE the performance...

Re: Coach's clip and its strongman allusions – you are kidding yourself if you think strongman is “raw strength” – depends on the meet, but you are allowed tacky, belts, squat suits, knee wraps, elbow wraps, neoprene sleeves, etc…hell, there was one competition that had 2” axle deadlift for reps – WITH STRAPS!! (For those who don’t know, a 2” bar is harder than a regular bar, a 3” bar is harder than a 2”…using straps makes the choice of a 2” bar pointless…)…Strongman is even worse than powerlifting. At least if I register for a PL contest, I know what gear is allowed when I register. Strongman, you find out day of the contest, unless you email the promoter before (and even then it can change). (And when tacky is not allowed, it is not out of some "raw strength" consideration - it is because under very hot temperatures, tacky turns to grease…)

I will compete Sat in the raw division of a single-ply fed. When I lift, single-ply lifters will cheer me on. When the single-ply lifters lift, I will cheer them on. I could go raw in a double-ply fed and get cheered on. Anyone on this board could show up at a PL meet with a 180 bench and get cheered on by a 500 lb bencher. There's a lot of shit thrown on internet boards, but when it comes to the meet, if you get on the platform, you get respect - regardless of numbers, gear, age, or sex.

In conclusion, I look forward to all of you whose panties are in a bunch over the purity (or honesty, integrity, etc.) of raw powerlifting registering and competing in a raw contest this year - or volunteering as a spotter or loader at a raw contest. (BTW, 100% Raw fed nationals are in Orlando, FL in August - a 7-year old fed, competition is spotty, but there are some very high-quality lifters there: 485 raw bench in the 181s, 400 raw in the 165s, 455 raw in the 198s, 515 in the 220s - most of these numbers would be top 10 in a single-ply fed, all top 20. Show your support for a young fed (and purity, honesty, truth, integrity, whatever) by going to spectate - if this is all about purity, honesty, integrity, etc…:rolleyes: )

(Oh and Zen, if you're still going to do your treadmill experiment - why don't you use Mendelson's numbers from the same year…May 31, 2005, 715 raw (New England); June 2005, 881 (APF Seniors - miss 903 twice); Aug 2005 (APF California) 914, (1008 - miss)? Why don't you compare the single-ply poly IPF WR (772)?? (Gee, a whole 8% out of a shirt - you'd have to run that combat boot mile in 6:50!!))

Regarding "geeks in a lab" - hmmm, swimming bodysuits are modelled using computational fluid dynamics, Nike has a Research Lab with design engineers with knowledge of "polymers, biomechanics, pneumatic cushioning,..." :rolleyes: yeah, but let's all bitch about "bench shirts" and pretend we all run marathons in deerskin moccasins and swim in loincloths...

Eman, kick ass on Saturday!! Take names and OWN THAT WEIGHT!!


Regarding "geeks in a lab" - hmmm, swimming bodysuits are modelled using computational fluid dynamics, Nike has a Research Lab with design engineers with knowledge of "polymers, biomechanics, pneumatic cushioning,..." :rolleyes: yeah, but let's all bitch about "bench shirts" and pretend we all run marathons in deerskin moccasins and swim in loincloths...


First thing... I agree! Eman good luck on Saturday!:bb:


Second of all, Cajun. I think you might be gettin a bit too excited here man. I didnt see anyone bitching. I see people stating opinions and reasons for those opinions. Some people see things differently than you do. It doesnt mean they dont respect you or what you do. Benching 1000lbs with a shirt is still a hell of an achievment. Obviously its a feat which could not be done except by someone who has spent many hours training and deserves the respect that comes with it.
:tu: :tu:

First things first -

Eman, kick ass on Saturday!! Take names and OWN THAT WEIGHT!!

Now, back to the wall-banging...

Zen, what is the point? I mean, really... Why are people in this thread so peevish about a sport in which they don’t even COMPETE

(Oh and Zen, if you're still going to do your treadmill experiment - why don't you use Mendelson's numbers from the same year…May 31, 2005, 715 raw (New England); June 2005, 881 (APF Seniors - miss 903 twice); Aug 2005 (APF California) 914, (1008 - miss)? Why don't you compare the single-ply poly IPF WR (772)?? (Gee, a whole 8% out of a shirt - you'd have to run that combat boot mile in 6:50!!))

1. The point is that it's really clear that the shirt makes the lift. You can say it doesn't all you want. The record book is very consistent with this. My brother, who competed for years in power lifting, and has his personal best bench and squat with the bench shirt and squat suit, told me this. You think I'm not going to believe him? He was not a champion, but he was competitve - deadlifted over 3.3 times his body weight in competition.

2. I was pretty sure I could run under 7:00 in the boots - that was the number I sort of had in mind. I expect I'd get the 6:50 with the same sort of maximum effort that got me the 6:20 in running shoes. Dunno how much below that I would get. I figured the boots would be an impediment of less that 10%. I got reasons to believe this, although it's been twenty years since I did much running in boots.

If I run under 6:50 in boots will see if you can win a bench press competition with only a cotton T-shirt? One of those things is easier than the other.

First thing... I agree! Eman good luck on Saturday!:bb:


Second of all, Cajun. I think you might be gettin a bit too excited here man. I didnt see anyone bitching. I see people stating opinions and reasons for those opinions. Some people see things differently than you do. It doesnt mean they dont respect you or what you do. Benching 1000lbs with a shirt is still a hell of an achievment. Obviously its a feat which could not be done except by someone who has spent many hours training and deserves the respect that comes with it.
:tu: :tu:

A shirt needs to be invented to 'lift' the chip off of cajunman's shoulder...

OK, I think we're about done here.