A forum for the discussion of the sport of weightlifting.
https://wlforums.net/forum/
Paywalled unfortunately. I'm reluctant to take it seriously with a lack of evidence being presented openly.Hawkpeter wrote: ↑Wed Jul 30, 2025 4:22 am I missed reading this article when it was first published. Some significant claims.
https://www.the-inquisitor-magazine.com ... mr-jalood/
As it turns out President Jalood was not elected to the ASOIF.
The IWF will now have until the end of 2025 to define the six categories for both men and women to be contested at the 2028 Olympic Games.
This is kind of what I was arguing before earlier this year. If they can only get a certain number of slots, why not argue for additional classes but fewer slots per class.Hawkpeter wrote: ↑Wed Apr 09, 2025 11:33 pm 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.
These conversations were going on for some time but I did not expect them to achieve much. Glad to be wrong!erpel wrote: ↑Fri Sep 19, 2025 3:42 pm IOC approves two additional bodyweight categories for LA2028
https://iwf.sport/2025/09/19/ioc-approv ... or-la2028/
The IWF will now have until the end of 2025 to define the six categories for both men and women to be contested at the 2028 Olympic Games.
I think the IOC would have been extremely resistant to any quota change. I believe the key deciding factor would be that the categories could be run in the same number of days i.e. no additional venue hire cost. Therefore, the extra costs of another event are trivial, which means it's a free win for the IOC and for weightlifting.Hawkpeter wrote: ↑Fri Sep 19, 2025 8:18 pmThis is kind of what I was arguing before earlier this year. If they can only get a certain number of slots, why not argue for additional classes but fewer slots per class.Hawkpeter wrote: ↑Wed Apr 09, 2025 11:33 pm 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.
This story hasn't gone away.Hawkpeter wrote: ↑Wed Jul 30, 2025 4:22 am I missed reading this article when it was first published. Some significant claims.
https://www.the-inquisitor-magazine.com ... mr-jalood/
As it turns out President Jalood was not elected to the ASOIF.
I have seen the same thing go around, we will have to wait and see. I am not discounting it but it is not unusual for speculation in a training hall to turn into a myth through repetition. Logic rarely has anything to do with political decisions anyhow.