News

[Hawkpeter]

According to Brian Oliver, this signifies that Lasha is retiring.

I cant say I'm surprised, there really isnt any new mountains to climb, and for his general health, he's better off retiring too early than to late.

Recency bias aside, its hard to argue against him being the most complete weightlifter of all time. We witnessed a peak that is beyond anything we have seen before during a period that is the most drug tested in history. Lasha was consistently winning on his opening C&J, undefeated for such a long period and reset the snatch in particular into the stratosphere. The fact that we may never know what he could have been pushed to hit only adds to what could become myth. A future great super would have to exceed his numbers by a lot to be able to say they were better.

[Elle]

After those 492 in 2021 I hoped to see the 500 wall broken.

A great athlete, with some shadows (like everyone), who knows how he will find himself doing a more political/administrative job.

[Hawkpeter]

LA 2028 confirmed as 5 classes only for men and women.

Far from ideal. One wonders if the IWF knew the announcement would be now - if they did, wouldnt it have made sense to delay announcing new weight classes a few more months?

[strapping]

One wonders if the IWF knew the announcement would be now.

They did, or at least should have.
The IOC announced last year that they would decide the quotas and number of events for all sports in "early 2025".

If they did, wouldnt it have made sense to delay announcing new weight classes a few more months?

You're asking for too much.

120, 5+5 are the numbers I thought were most likely. I thought it would be unlikely that the IOC would raise the quota or number of events (both increase costs), whilst the IOC is trying to downsize and include more sports. If the goal was to create all Olympic categories, 5 equitably spaced categories is certainly not ideal but it suits the Olympic program.

[Hawkpeter]

If they did, wouldnt it have made sense to delay announcing new weight classes a few more months?

You're asking for too much.

120, 5+5 are the numbers I thought were most likely. I thought it would be unlikely that the IOC would raise the quota or number of events (both increase costs), whilst the IOC is trying to downsize and include more sports. If the goal was to create all Olympic categories, 5 equitably spaced categories is certainly not ideal but it suits the Olympic program.

Sigh.

And this is one more reason why the new classes starting too low is going to be a problem. The mind boggles at the war that has already started to get certain classes included over others.

[Hawkpeter]

I wonder if it was slots or medals or both that held back any expansion. Perhaps there is concern over more classes meaning more officials - and IOC doesnt want that.

If they could have negotiated 8 more slots, making it 128 (64 per gender), and medals weren't really the problem, then they could have had 8 classes of 8. I think most people would be happy with that. Venue would probably need 1 extra day.

Then have something like-
1 per country in a category.
4 per gender in a team.

48 slots per gender on rankings (6 per class).
8 slots for next best unrepresented continent (1 per class)
3 per gender for host country.
5 universality/tripartite slots.
64 total.

That would have been better than 5 classes of 12 imo.

[strapping]

I wonder if it was slots or medals or both that held back any expansion. Perhaps there is concern over more classes meaning more officials - and IOC doesnt want that.

If they could have negotiated 8 more slots, making it 128 (64 per gender), and medals weren't really the problem, then they could have had 8 classes of 8. I think most people would be happy with that. Venue would probably need 1 extra day.

My best guess is neither per se (it's money).

For big events, the venue hire and small additional costs (transport, accommodation, dining etc.) add up very quickly. I don't think they'll want to run more than two events per day, really, so that means # of events gets cut down.

There are no good distributions of the current categories when diced and sliced. Every odd category (1,3,5,7) + supers fits the bill in terms of least political conflict and most equitable distribution of categories. Performance wise, that'll make the women's categories less interesting to watch in my opinion.

I could see them cutting 48/60, 86/110 and a middleweight category. That said, I shouldn't assume any cuts will follow logic rather than vested political interests.

[erpel]

W86 & W-SHW are the least competitive so of course they're going to be Olympic.

[strapping]

W86 & W-SHW are the least competitive so of course they're going to be Olympic.

I think your cynicism is hilarious but probably right.

The IWF has discussed changing the men's categories (again...) due to the inequitable gaps in the current 8 to form 5 but specified it was the men's categories to be changed. I can't really say I think the men's categories are particularly worse than the women's categories. The political powers that be will come up with whatever is convenient.

[strapping]

W86 & W-SHW are the least competitive so of course they're going to be Olympic.

My best guess is

M65-79-94-110-110+
W53-63-77-86-86+

Make of that what you will.