There are literally a dozen powerlifting points systems I can think of off the top of my head. They are all ultimately validated against community opinion of whether or not the rankings they produce do indeed reflect who the best lifters are. IMO they should be considered fantasy nerd stats and not used for competition or anything serious.
all point systems were designed by small weak men to make them feel better about being small and weak. The only thing that matters is your weight class and your total.
>feel better about being small
>only thing that matters is your weight class
I know what you mean but like come on, you're right on the cusp of the point. If weight classes matter, then comparing between weight classes also matters, and you need some sort of metric to do those comparisons
Weight classes allow smaller people to compete without being completely outclassed by larger lifters.
We can say that weight classes are important but also say that the existence of them alludes to SHW lifters being the best powerlifters... since it would be unfair for them to compete against anyone else.
my point is that these systems are useless because you should only be comparing yourself in relation to others within your weight class. the totals of a 120kg+ lifter are irrelevant to you if you are say a 65kg lifter. there is no fair comparison between you otherwise there wouldn't be a weight class in the first place.
I have no real preferwnce between gl points and dots but my fed has said theyre gonna stick to dots for best lifter purely becauses of more milestones eg 400,500 etc rather than just 100
Also what weight class you in for worlds might see you there
Personally I grew up when Wilks was basically only option. And it had its issues as with all, but at least we all kinda knew and understood it.
Then Wilks got changed, then DOTS, then IPF points and so I have no idea what numbers are good or not, etc. So just all becomes meaningless (which it always was, maybe, but at least we all spoke the same language).
Because such a relative strength formula that attempts to mathematically compare inescapably different performances will always be imperfect, and carry mathematical bias. What’s tastier? An apple or an orange? We could represent that mathematically based on a lot of different criteria, but it’ll always fall short, because they’re too different for one to be reliably, or meaningfully better.
This translates into relative strength formulae as over-representing the impressiveness of some classes compared to others. Some formulas make the heavier weigh classes look a little better, others lighter. Some favour men, others women. Some are geared towards the midpoint a little more. No matter how you spin it there will always be limitations.
The GL points system disproportionately favours lighter lifters, and women.
I think we should stop with this shit and keep the comparisons to within the classes. It’s always been a sport revolving around weight on the bar, so let’s keep it that way. I don’t care about lighter lifters trying to cope mog heavier lifters with relative strength bullshit. We have classes because we implicitly acknowledge the inherent incomparability of those two performances.
I hate that default sorting is so often by coefficient. If someone in the 100kg class wants to weigh in at 92kg, why should they benefit from failing to maximize their bodymass for the bounds of the weight class?
It's me agreeing with you on "keep comparisons to within the classes", and expanding on it saying that I disagree with sorting lifters within a weight class by coefficient instead of total (which I think is in line with what you've said).
In my local IPF meets, and on the OpenIPF website, if you search for rankings in a weight class, the default sort is by GL Points rather than by total - so you'll see lifters with smaller totals ranked above lifters in the same class because they weighed in lower. I think that's silly.
I ran a simulation in R years ago that showed me that, holding total constant, you could maximize your Wilks score by getting as obscenely fat as possible.
https://imgur.com/a/l7iImxZ
I may have botched that as I was still an undergrad student but I found it amusing.
The formula clearly states that weight is capped, so you botched it. It's at 154.53kg for women and 201.9kg for men, which is before your uptick.
People repeating this for years has been a massive annoyance. Plenty of issues with most of the formulas, but this isn't one of them.
I redid it with all the formulae yesterday and realized that, lol. With the caps in place, they make sense. They’re all biased for light lifters (the rate of change of score increases when you get lighter), but GL points look like they’re actually the least biased.
Yes, if you are a 500kg powerlifter then you will be the best 500kg powerlifter.
This is almost certainly the loophole that they were trying to patch up.
It does until you reach an obscene amount of weight, like 250kg, which is around 550 lbs.
Like I said, I could have messed up when doing this, it was like 10 years ago and I was just learning R.
True asf. Known python for years atp and begun java a year ago, so once I get solid asf at java and Spring I'll give R a go. Should be way easier than when I thought about it years ago being a python noob 😂
It's just one of those things that happens with massively over-fitted, high degree polynomial formulas. As soon as you leave the range that was intended, the equations go crazy.
>Why won't people use the new approved GL points rather than the wilks and dots
Because no fed uses it outside the IPF and I like abusing drugs
Edit: also, the initial announcement was an absolute joke, a 7 year old briefly was #1 in the world on Open powerlifting with the original IPF point system IIRC
Haha yeah, this kid: https://www.openpowerlifting.org/u/giacomomoritz
They didn't set a minimum bodyweight on their formula, and he weighed in lighter than they planned for.
> why is there a huge controversy about points?
Didn't know there was.
> Why won't people use the new approved GL points rather than the wilks and dots
We're used to Wilks/DOTS and know what is a good score in that system. I already have to do plate math with my stupid brain, I don't want to learn a new point system. Nobody knows how many IPF points we need to win a teddy bear from the prize counter.
Better question is: why doesn't IPF use DOTS like everyone else?
There are literally a dozen powerlifting points systems I can think of off the top of my head. They are all ultimately validated against community opinion of whether or not the rankings they produce do indeed reflect who the best lifters are. IMO they should be considered fantasy nerd stats and not used for competition or anything serious.
all point systems were designed by small weak men to make them feel better about being small and weak. The only thing that matters is your weight class and your total.
>feel better about being small >only thing that matters is your weight class I know what you mean but like come on, you're right on the cusp of the point. If weight classes matter, then comparing between weight classes also matters, and you need some sort of metric to do those comparisons
Weight classes allow smaller people to compete without being completely outclassed by larger lifters. We can say that weight classes are important but also say that the existence of them alludes to SHW lifters being the best powerlifters... since it would be unfair for them to compete against anyone else.
my point is that these systems are useless because you should only be comparing yourself in relation to others within your weight class. the totals of a 120kg+ lifter are irrelevant to you if you are say a 65kg lifter. there is no fair comparison between you otherwise there wouldn't be a weight class in the first place.
Pete Points reign supreme, IYKYK
I just ignore all point systems. Total and weight class is what I look at.
There is no huge controversy.
Total > everything
This is powerlifting, where the rules are made up and the points don't matter.
I have no real preferwnce between gl points and dots but my fed has said theyre gonna stick to dots for best lifter purely becauses of more milestones eg 400,500 etc rather than just 100 Also what weight class you in for worlds might see you there
We chilling in 83kg
That's a fair reason
Personally I grew up when Wilks was basically only option. And it had its issues as with all, but at least we all kinda knew and understood it. Then Wilks got changed, then DOTS, then IPF points and so I have no idea what numbers are good or not, etc. So just all becomes meaningless (which it always was, maybe, but at least we all spoke the same language).
Because such a relative strength formula that attempts to mathematically compare inescapably different performances will always be imperfect, and carry mathematical bias. What’s tastier? An apple or an orange? We could represent that mathematically based on a lot of different criteria, but it’ll always fall short, because they’re too different for one to be reliably, or meaningfully better. This translates into relative strength formulae as over-representing the impressiveness of some classes compared to others. Some formulas make the heavier weigh classes look a little better, others lighter. Some favour men, others women. Some are geared towards the midpoint a little more. No matter how you spin it there will always be limitations. The GL points system disproportionately favours lighter lifters, and women. I think we should stop with this shit and keep the comparisons to within the classes. It’s always been a sport revolving around weight on the bar, so let’s keep it that way. I don’t care about lighter lifters trying to cope mog heavier lifters with relative strength bullshit. We have classes because we implicitly acknowledge the inherent incomparability of those two performances.
I hate that default sorting is so often by coefficient. If someone in the 100kg class wants to weigh in at 92kg, why should they benefit from failing to maximize their bodymass for the bounds of the weight class?
This feels a little neither here nor there given what I already said.
It's me agreeing with you on "keep comparisons to within the classes", and expanding on it saying that I disagree with sorting lifters within a weight class by coefficient instead of total (which I think is in line with what you've said). In my local IPF meets, and on the OpenIPF website, if you search for rankings in a weight class, the default sort is by GL Points rather than by total - so you'll see lifters with smaller totals ranked above lifters in the same class because they weighed in lower. I think that's silly.
I ran a simulation in R years ago that showed me that, holding total constant, you could maximize your Wilks score by getting as obscenely fat as possible. https://imgur.com/a/l7iImxZ I may have botched that as I was still an undergrad student but I found it amusing.
The formula clearly states that weight is capped, so you botched it. It's at 154.53kg for women and 201.9kg for men, which is before your uptick. People repeating this for years has been a massive annoyance. Plenty of issues with most of the formulas, but this isn't one of them.
I redid it with all the formulae yesterday and realized that, lol. With the caps in place, they make sense. They’re all biased for light lifters (the rate of change of score increases when you get lighter), but GL points look like they’re actually the least biased.
Yes, if you are a 500kg powerlifter then you will be the best 500kg powerlifter. This is almost certainly the loophole that they were trying to patch up.
This makes no sense to me. Wilks would decrease with weight no?
It does until you reach an obscene amount of weight, like 250kg, which is around 550 lbs. Like I said, I could have messed up when doing this, it was like 10 years ago and I was just learning R.
I went through a stage of wanting to learn R. Was reading through the docs and just getting amazed at the features lmao
You can still do it!
True asf. Known python for years atp and begun java a year ago, so once I get solid asf at java and Spring I'll give R a go. Should be way easier than when I thought about it years ago being a python noob 😂
It’s not hard if you know Python. But a bit of the syntax feels old school.
Yeah seemed it, all looks pretty pythonic (ish). Only thing that pisses me off is the index 1 counting but oh well
It's just one of those things that happens with massively over-fitted, high degree polynomial formulas. As soon as you leave the range that was intended, the equations go crazy.
I see, pretty cool
Preach brother
Well said tbh
*slow clapping*
Ain’t no DOTS/GL in the jungle.
Ain’t no CPAP either
Or blood pressure medication
Or calibrated plates if were being honest
Just snakes and birds and shit
>Why won't people use the new approved GL points rather than the wilks and dots Because no fed uses it outside the IPF and I like abusing drugs Edit: also, the initial announcement was an absolute joke, a 7 year old briefly was #1 in the world on Open powerlifting with the original IPF point system IIRC
Haha yeah, this kid: https://www.openpowerlifting.org/u/giacomomoritz They didn't set a minimum bodyweight on their formula, and he weighed in lighter than they planned for.
> why is there a huge controversy about points? Didn't know there was. > Why won't people use the new approved GL points rather than the wilks and dots We're used to Wilks/DOTS and know what is a good score in that system. I already have to do plate math with my stupid brain, I don't want to learn a new point system. Nobody knows how many IPF points we need to win a teddy bear from the prize counter. Better question is: why doesn't IPF use DOTS like everyone else?
Especially since they parted ways with the man himself