Weightlifting Forums

https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles ... wins-again

Koanda NOR wants to lift 270+ totals at 81, interesting. I thought she would qualify as 87 as she's top 10 in the "81+" field. Though I will say her 155 yesterday would've been red lights at past WWC/OG.

That were rough SHW sessions, for both genders. Campbell GBR apparently injured. No starts and reds for lots of men.

I think Talakhadze will lift enough to win until he retires.

https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles ... third-gold

Koanda NOR did 272 @ 83.86

Wang Zhouyu previously did 280 @ 81.38 and 286 @ 84.80 - but she wasn't in that shape last year.

Liang Xiaomei can probably do 120+155 @ 81.

WWC will be exciting assuming the trajectories hold up.

Was waiting for this one :

https://www.sportivnypress.com/2023/the ... n-yerevan/

Lots of words but not much to say t think

Guima73 wrote: ↑Tue May 09, 2023 3:50 pm Was waiting for this one :

https://www.sportivnypress.com/2023/the ... n-yerevan/

Lots of words but not much to say t think

This has been an unfortunate trend of Bud's recent writings. Just an old man yelling at clouds. He ran out of interesting things to talk about, which is understandable in weightlifting.

I used to really enjoy his write-ups and commentary. His original articles from 15-20 years ago had some useful gems, insights, and suggestions behind them; he takes phenomenal photos. His peak writings were "Relative Value of Pulling Exercises," "More about the Jerk," and his two squat articles.

However, as of late Charniga has been incredibly terse, nocebic, and unperceptive in his write-ups. If it is anything but snatch, CJ, and squat singles it is a disruptive and "out of sync" exercise that is detrimental to the lifter's coordination structure. There is a lot of nocebic language and dismissal of athletes performing accessory movements "in spite of their success" with little to no explanation afterwards. It has also been weird of him to completely ignore USA winning medals and championships in his competition write-ups; he completely omitted the W71 from the 2019 report.

If I'm going to be serious and sincere for a moment (I know, unprecedented) - I speculate that Charniga's writing suffers primarily from hubris. He writes with a conclusion first and an argument second.

He writes extensively about mechanistic justifications for his views, but never provides a balanced view with real world results. He hand-waves over the situations and successes that do not fit his narrative as Brian mentioned (e.g. do pull or push press = snatch and jerk die).

He rarely cites modern papers in regards to weightlifting and sport science, especially in regards to the theoretical understanding of various phenomena relevant to the sport (e.g. contributors to injury, motor control/learning/expression). He does extensively cite Soviet papers and... himself. Soviet papers are sometimes great, and thanks to him I have managed to use them as part of a foundation for learning. But time moves forward, and so does scientific literature, understanding and consensus. Where he does cite recent papers, none of them are engaging with recent ideas and developments.

As a result, his writing is travelling down the same rabbit holes as before, but going deeper and deeper. Sometimes this produces interesting results, but usually it results in a total loss of context and detachment from observable results/reality. I think this is also part of why his writing is getting more curmudgeonly - his progressively more myopic ideals are at greater odds with how people actually practice weightlifting. So according to him, people are training more and more "incorrectly".

(note: which I wouldn't even disagree with entirely. However, to the extent that he believes? No way)

Somewhat unrelated, he writes in a uniquely anti-American way that could only be produced by an American. I can't quite put my finger on what it is exactly that gives that style, but it feels like cases of self-hating Americans I've seen before. Also anti-Americanism isn't a real ideology. There are enough legitimate reasons to talk shit about the USA, you don't need to make things up.

I don't even get the impetus & intent for a lot of these articles. What's the goal? To criticize, yes but to what end? What is the gold standard which so many fail to achieve? Calling out Chinese lifters for pressing variations when they're the most successful country not just contemporary, but in history, just makes you look stubborn.

The problem with referencing the past as somehow superior is other people can observe video and protocols too. The lifting wasn't prettier or more balanced. Some years ago you could watch many full competitions from the Schödl archives with all the big names of the 70s-80s. Great lifting and garbage lifting, just like today. Also, David Rigert (with his antics) infamously bombed out of two Olympics. Humans are as they always were.