Re: America's Fall From OL Glory

[Guest guest]

I would tend to think that the biggest reason that OL is not a big

medal winner for the US is because of the second reason posted - that

it's not well-known to most people.

I know that when I was in high school, our PE classes were mostly

filled with basketball, volleyball and other sports like that. Even

at neighboring schools where they had weightlifting classes taught,

the exercises were typical stuff most people do anyway (the

powerlifts and others). They never taught the kids the Olympic lifts

or the variations of.

I remember reading in Milo magazine that the weightlifters in the

dominant lifting countries are popular sports stars, much like

basketball or football players here are. So I'm sure that younger

generations growing up look to these athletes much like so many kids

here wanted to " be like Mike. "

Besides, look at the coverage OL got during the Sydney games. The

only lifting I saw was a little 5-minute blurb and I only caught that

by accident. But how many swimming and gymnastics events did you

see? Probably more than enough, right? I don't mean do put down

these sports - I'm only using them as an example. The day NBC or the

other major networks put OL on in prime-time is the day you might

generate a little more interest in the sport.

This is just my opinion.

Nate Mosher

Carmel, NY

[Guest guest]

<<I was just sitting at work contemplating why the US

has not produced Olympic medals (for men at least)

in OL for the past two decades.>>

<<2) OL is not well known in the US - on second

thoughts, it's not known at all. The best athletes

the US has to offer are playing football,

basketball, baseball, and yes, track and field.>>

Malcomb

I believe the snippet from above represents the single

most important factor in the decline of the US'

Olympic lifting fortunes. Where is the money?

Of those who do pursue the Iron Game, there is further

siphoning into Powerlifting and Bodybuilding.

But even in the 'heyday' of US Olympic lifting, public

recognition and exposure was very limited. It was

mainly thru the efforts of Bob Hoffman of the York

Barbell Company that the sport got what little

publicity it had. Most of the world-class caliber

lifters were sponsored by York.

Bill Keyes

San Ramon, CA.

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

I too agree with Nate's observation. During the past two Olympics the only

way to catch Olympic Lifting was in a quick blurb or to watch during odd

hours. Even then you were lucky to see more than a half hour.

Unfortunately Olympic Lifting is just not very mainstream in America. This

same thing was true of Soccer throughout my childhood years.

Rarely did I as an American youth play soccer in PE class. If we did play

soccer, it was changed to a game they called speedball that was more

reminiscent of Soccer combined with Basketball and Football. In all

seriousness, growing up in Pennsylvania school systems throughout the

1980's you really only played soccer if you could not start on the Football

team. This of course was not always the case, but Football was king.

I notice a huge swing toward Soccer occurring in Pennsylvania now. I know

my friends son plays Soccer year round and Football really is not a

concern. I think the big change occurred when Soccer began being aired

more on TV and the message that Soccer aficionados are pushing that Soccer

is much safer seems to of been a big winner with parents.

Although in some schools I have heard of Powerlifting teams I have never

heard of Olympic Lifting Teams. This is ashamed and I for one would love

to see Olympic Lifting more here in America.

Buffington

Mechanicsburg, PA

>Message: 25

> Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 10:36:01 -0000

> From: ndmosher@...

>Subject: RE: America's Fall from OL Glory

>

>I would tend to think that the biggest reason that OL is not a big

>medal winner for the US is because of the second reason posted - that

>it's not well-known to most people.

>

>I know that when I was in high school, our PE classes were mostly

>filled with basketball, volleyball and other sports like that. Even

>at neighboring schools where they had weightlifting classes taught,

>the exercises were typical stuff most people do anyway (the

>powerlifts and others). They never taught the kids the Olympic lifts

>or the variations of.

>

>I remember reading in Milo magazine that the weightlifters in the

>dominant lifting countries are popular sports stars, much like

>basketball or football players here are. So I'm sure that younger

>generations growing up look to these athletes much like so many kids

>here wanted to " be like Mike. "

>

>Besides, look at the coverage OL got during the Sydney games. The

>only lifting I saw was a little 5-minute blurb and I only caught that

>by accident. But how many swimming and gymnastics events did you

>see? Probably more than enough, right? I don't mean do put down

>these sports - I'm only using them as an example. The day NBC or the

>other major networks put OL on in prime-time is the day you might

>generate a little more interest in the sport.

>

>This is just my opinion.

>

>Nate Mosher

>Carmel, NY

[Guest guest]

,

I would suggest that another reason for our lack of quality OL

athletes is the extremely small pool of qualified coaches. Most of

the Olympic lifting is limited to a few regional locations. Imagine

what a difference it would make if a tenth of the subscribers to this

list would seek qualification as club coaches, or above, from the USA

Weightlifting. Associated with the lack of qualified coaches is a

lack of facilities. I learned to lift in the YMCA in Phoenix Arizona,

but most of the Y's no longer have lifting platforms and OL

competition bars. It is a rarity to fine lifting space and bumper

plates in the commercial gyms.

In a recent conversation with Judy Glenney, one of the major figures

behind the growth of womens OL both nationally and internationally,

she mentioned the lack of support for the grass roots development of

Olympic Lifting in this country from our own national organization.

Judy was the first woman to serve as an international competition

judge, including the Olympics. She has now shifted her efforts to

grass roots development of lifting in the Portland, Oregon -

Vancouver, Washinton area.

There are enough younger atheletes that would find OL exciting and

challenging, if a few of us would expose them to it and provide them

the coaching and facilities to pursue it.

Ken Largent,

La Grande, Oregon

[Guest guest]

<<I was just sitting at work contemplating why the US

has not produced Olympic medals (for men at least)

in OL for the past two decades.........

2) OL is not well known in the US - on second

thoughts, it's not known at all. The best athletes

the US has to offer are playing football,

basketball, baseball, and yes, track and field.>>

Malcomb >>

> I believe the snippet from above represents the single

> most important factor in the decline of the US'

> Olympic lifting fortunes. Where is the money?

OLing also seems like kind of waste of talent for a gifted athlete. The

aforementioned team sports are more social, engaging, lucrative, complex,

challenging... more FUN than OLing.

Kurland,

Chicago USA

[Guest guest]

Kurland:

<OLing also seems like kind of waste of talent for a gifted athlete.

The aforementioned team sports are more social, engaging, lucrative,

complex, challenging... more FUN than OLing. >

I don't see track events as more engaging, complex, or challenging, and

those activities aren't considered a waste of talent for a gifted athlete.

Eli Rosenberg

Champaign, IL

[Guest guest]

wrote,

><<I was just sitting at work contemplating why the US

>has not produced Olympic medals (for men at least)

>in OL for the past two decades.........

>

>2) OL is not well known in the US - on second

>thoughts, it's not known at all. The best athletes

>the US has to offer are playing football,

>basketball, baseball, and yes, track and field.>>

> Malcomb >>

>

>> I believe the snippet from above represents the single

>> most important factor in the decline of the US'

>> Olympic lifting fortunes. Where is the money?

>

>OLing also seems like kind of waste of talent for a gifted athlete. The

>aforementioned team sports are more social, engaging, lucrative, complex,

>challenging... more FUN than OLing.

In your opinion. Other people may disagree. Obviously though, a large

number of Americans appear to support this suggestion.

Hobman

Saskatoon, Canada

'Grip it and rip it!'

[Guest guest]

>OLing also seems like kind of waste of talent for a gifted athlete. The

>aforementioned team sports are more social, engaging, lucrative, complex,

>challenging... more FUN than OLing.

I agree with (I also like your little quote), I feel like there's nothing

better than relying on yourself and only yourself to accomplish something. I

played many team sports, but none of them could offer me nearly as much as

Olympic lifting. Sure their social and engaging at times, but their is still

that element of relying on someone else to come through. Of course it's more

lucrative, but not everything is about money. OL has given me a chance to train

and compete while pursuing two degrees. Team sports are not as fantastic as you

claim them to be. OL gives you a chance to compete against yourself, to

challenge your mind to convince your body to do something is was not designed to

do. You also claim that team sports are more complex that OL, are you kidding?

Take a linebacker in football, sure he must train hard and learn the stragedy of

reading the offense and getting around offensive guards, but it's not even

ballpark to the complexities to a proper snatch. Developing excellent snatch

technique can take 12-18 months of constant training. And are you forgetting

that some of the most talented athletes, though some people would disagree

having no idea about weightlifting, are OL'ers. Name me a more pure athlete

than Serge Reding, a man who practically performed gymnastic moves with hundreds

of kilos over his head. Perhaps you should step on a platform and try the

Olympic lifts yourself before making such a statement. Just my humble opinion.

Malcomb

University of Colorado - Boulder

Office: (303) 735-6363

Mobile: (720) 261-8353

jesse.malcomb@...

[Guest guest]

Kurland:

<OLing also seems like kind of waste of talent for a gifted athlete.

The aforementioned team sports are more social, engaging, lucrative,

complex, challenging... more FUN than OLing. >

Eli wrote:

> I don't see track events as more engaging, complex, or challenging,

and

> those activities aren't considered a waste of talent for a gifted

athlete.

>

> Eli Rosenberg

> Champaign, IL

Matt writes:

I agree with Eli. I don't believe that OL is any less challenging or

fun than other individual sports. When it comes to the decision on

which sport to choose, I believe certain talented athletes are more

inclined to a choose team sport over an indivdiual sport (e.g.

weightlifting) for reasons related to personality, exposure to sports

and social conditioning.

Further I think it is a matter of which sports our society as a whole

supports and the resulting lack of funds that are delivered to the

sports that are less supported. You can see the same problem in

several amateur sports, not just weightlifting (e.g certain winter

sports such as luge, skeleton, biathlon etc...).

What a sport like weightlifting needs are the individuals who are

willing to volunteer their time to continue to develop athletes and

expose youngsters to this wonderful sport. With hard work and

committment on behalf of administrators, senior athletes and coaches I

think the sport of weightlifting will see growth in popularity.

I believe efforts should be directed towards grass roots development,

and also towards recruitng athletes in power sports (such as American

Football, throwing sports etc.) who have failed to reach the highest

level but who still have the talent to be good weightlifters. Where I

work I often see athletes who don't make it in their primary sport but

who could turn out to be decent weighlifters.

In Canada the sport of speed skating has taken this approach by

recruiting ice hockey players who are good skaters but who were unable

to make the step to the elite Junior or professional level of hockey.

This method may also be useful for weightlifting.

Matt Jordan

University of Calgary

[Guest guest]

From: " Kurland " <skurland@...>

>

> OLing also seems like kind of waste of talent for a gifted athlete.

The aforementioned team sports are more social, engaging, lucrative,

complex,challenging... more FUN than OLing.

B.S. Why must someone denigrate one sport in relation to others? All

sports have their own challenges and difficulties that cannot be

compared to each other. Just because I don't like figure skating

doesn't mean I think it's easy to do. I respect the level of

dedication these athletes put in every day, just I do for all athletes.

Perhaps the only similarity between sports is that the greatest

challenge is enduring the long hours of training and making the

sacrifices required to be a champion.

As for weightlifting not being a social and fun activity, I work at an

inner-city community project coaching weightlifters. Our fitness area

has a one hour period where kids come in and exercise. Today I started

teaching two youths the lifts. By the end of the hour I had 8 more

(without having to recruit or sell the sport) mobbing me because they

wanted to learn as well.

Loren Chiu

Graduate Assistant

Exercise Biochemistry Laboratory

Human Performance Laboratories

The University of Memphis

[Guest guest]

> >OLing also seems like kind of waste of talent for a gifted athlete. The

> >aforementioned team sports are more social, engaging, lucrative, complex,

> >challenging... more FUN than OLing.

>

> In your opinion. Other people may disagree. Obviously though, a large

> number of Americans appear to support this suggestion.

>

> Hobman

> Saskatoon, Canada

I guess others could disagree with the fun, engaging, and waste remarks. I

don't think anyone could disagree with the lucrative, complex, social, or

challenging ones, though you are of course perfectly welcome to take your

shot. I predict 'challenging' will be the first quibble, not because it's

untrue, but because the measures for it are less obvious. Comparing the

salaries of top OLers to top basketball/football/hockey/baseball players is

too obvious for anyone to pick 'lucrative' as their death ground of choice,

I think.

Kurland, Chicago

" Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of

authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made

to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are

men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They

promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters. "

- Webster

[Guest guest]

Kurland:

<<OLing also seems like kind of waste of talent for a gifted athlete.

The aforementioned team sports are more social, engaging, lucrative,

complex, challenging... more FUN than OLing.>>

Malcomb:

<I agree with (I also like your little quote), I feel like there's

nothing better than relying on yourself and only yourself to accomplish

something. I played many team sports, but none of them could offer me

nearly as much as Olympic lifting. Sure their social and engaging at times,

but their is still that element of relying on someone else to come through.

Of course it's more lucrative, but not everything is about money. OL has

given me a chance to train and compete while pursuing two degrees. Team

sports are not as fantastic as you claim them to be. OL gives you a chance

to compete against yourself, to challenge your mind to convince your body to

do something is was not designed to do. You also claim that team sports are

more complex that OL, are you kidding? Take a linebacker in football, sure

he must train hard and learn the stragedy of reading the offense and getting

around offensive guards, but it's not even ballpark to the complexities to a

proper snatch. !>

Well, okay; if you prefer solo sports to team sports, I won't argue; too

subjective. You conceded social, engaging, and lucrative, right?

As for 'OL gives you the chance to compete against yourself', so does any

sport that has a training/conditioning component....

Team sports are more complex than OL. Not only are there considerations

aside from conditioning, unlike OL, but the conditioning itself is often

more comprehensive, since it includes stamina and agility components OL

lacks. Strategy, tactics, and teamwork are big chunks of sport that OL

simply lacks.

As for your contention that snatch technique is more complex than tactics,

strategy, and game theory....

[There's a lot of talking at cross purposes here - we should really be referring

to

motor complexities, not strategic differences. If we bring in all of those

factors, then individual

sports such as boxing, wrestling, martial arts, tennis and table tennis

certainly

would have to be recognised as equally or more complex technically, tactically,

stragically

and mentally. This, however, simply leads us further astray. If someone really

insists, then

we should stay within the scope of comparing the motor skills and complexities

of OL with the

skills required in specific team sports.

The snatch undoubtedly is technically far more complex and difficult to master

than most

skills in football, but it hardly compares with the technical complexities of

many movements

in gymnastics, for example. Now, this discussion will simply veer massively off

target if we

continue in this vein, with each person promoting his/her favourite sport, so

let us just

appreciate that each sport requires different attributes and all are similar in

that they all

require great dedication, plenty of training and strength of will to reach the

top. And it does

not matter if one sport requires more technical skill than another - we have a

wide variety

of sports available to suit anyone with greater or lesser capabilities in

different areas. Mel Siff]

<Developing excellent snatch technique can take 12-18 months of constant

training. And are you forgetting that some of the most talented athletes,

though some people would disagree having no idea about weightlifting, are

OL'ers. Name me a more pure athlete than Serge Reding, a man who

practically performed gymnastic moves with hundreds of kilos over his head.

Perhaps you should step on a platform and try the Olympic lifts yourself

before making such a statement. Just my humble opinion.>

Developing skill at any given position in any of the listed team sports

takes a lot longer than 18 months.

As for your point about talented OLers, that was, in fact, my contention;

that an athlete a lot less talented than Reding can make a lot more money

and have a lot more fun in team sports than in OLing. OLing is very

unrewarding compared with team sports - thank you for providing additional

evidence for that assertion. If you want to look at equally talented

athletes, look at Gretzky and Jordan - MUCH richer and more famous than

Reding.

[it would be preferable to state that OL appears to you as being very

unrewarding,

not that it is quantifiably unrewarding. OL, to many people, is enormously

enjoyable.

Some folk might state that OL is far more rewarding than many team sports

because

most pro team sportsmen have to undergo multiple surgical operations, many have

job security for more than very few years and most have to give up playing well

before their 40s.

One major difference between OL and football, basketball and hockey is that

OLifters

always socialise and party with their opponents after events and many become

lifelong

friends, but in those pro sports, the players really struggle to cope

psychologically

with one's most powerful opponents. It is very sad not to socialise with one's

" enemy "

after the competition, but very edifying and happy for lifters who regard this

post-event

bonding as one of the best rewards of sport. If you have ever competed in

weightlifting and

powerlifting, you will know exactly what I mean.

Olympic and power lifters both can contest their sports well into their senior

years,

continuing to strengthen and enrich their lives, without needing the regular

services of

surgeons, PTs, chiropractors etc. I don't know one footballer or basketballer

who is still

competing at the highest level in their fifties, but there are a few

powerlifters like Louie

who are. There are many OLifters who are competing at good national

level well into

their 40s and who are much stronger than most team athletes at the same age.

They are

supremely happy with their sport which can be enjoyed in Masters events into

one's very senior

years. Many medical professionals are even happier than those team athletes

whom they are

constantly having to repair so that they can play and stay happy for a few

years!

By the way, although it can help, material wealth is not necessarily the

greatest reward

that one can have in life. By the way, at his peak, lifters like eyev,

were at least as

well known internationally as Jordan and Gretzky, but none of them was known to

as many

people as soccer heroes such as the great Pele, a bodybuilding hero by the name

of Arnie,

a tiny gymnast by the name of Nadia Comaneci and tennis players such as Borg,

Lendl,

Navratilova and McEnroe. Anyway, there are some non sportsmen like Bill Gates

who could

buy every top team player in the world with the small change in his pockets.

The lesson?

To each his/her own. Thank goodness for our diversities of profession,

happiness and reward!

Mel Siff]

Kurland,

Chicago USA

[Guest guest]

to :

<<OLing also seems like kind of waste of talent for a gifted athlete.

The aforementioned team sports are more social, engaging, lucrative,

complex, challenging... more FUN than OLing.

Team sports are more complex than OL. Not only are there considerations

aside from conditioning, unlike OL, but the conditioning itself is often

more comprehensive, since it includes stamina and agility components OL

lacks. Strategy, tactics, and teamwork are big chunks of sport that OL

simply lacks.

As for your contention that snatch technique is more complex than tactics,

strategy, and game theory.... >>

Mel Siff:

<There's a lot of talking at cross purposes here - we should really be

referring to motor complexities, not strategic differences. If we bring in all

of

those factors, then individual sports such as boxing, wrestling, martial arts,

tennis and table tennis

certainly would have to be recognised as equally or more complex technically,

tactically, stragically and mentally. This, however, simply leads us further

astray. If someone

really insists, then we should stay within the scope of comparing the motor

skills and

complexities of OL with the skills required in specific team sports.>

:

I disagree, Dr. Siff. My point was that all of those factors are relevant

to the aforementioned team sports, but not to OL, making the team sports

certainly more complex and arguably more interesting and challenging. If

you only compare motor skills, OL holds up pretty well, but there's more to

sport than that.

Mel Siff:

<The snatch undoubtedly is technically far more complex and difficult to

master than most skills in football, but it hardly compares with the technical

complexities

of many movements in gymnastics, for example. Now, this discussion will simply

veer

massively off target if we continue in this vein, with each person promoting

his/her favourite

sport, so let us just appreciate that each sport requires different attributes

and all are

similar in that they all require great dedication, plenty of training and

strength of will to reach

the top. And it does not matter if one sport requires more technical skill than

another - we

have a wide variety of sports available to suit anyone with greater or lesser

capabilities in

different areas. >

This is false, in fact I haven't mentioned my favorite sports once. The

'target' is, why has American OLing declined? I'd say this conversation is

very well aimed.

wrote:

<<Developing excellent snatch technique can take 12-18 months of constant

training. And are you forgetting that some of the most talented athletes,

though some people would disagree having no idea about weightlifting, are

OL'ers. Name me a more pure athlete than Serge Reding, a man who

practically performed gymnastic moves with hundreds of kilos over his

head.

Perhaps you should step on a platform and try the Olympic lifts yourself

before making such a statement. Just my humble opinion.>>

wrote:

<Developing skill at any given position in any of the listed team sports

takes a lot longer than 18 months.

As for your point about talented OLers, that was, in fact, my contention;

that an athlete a lot less talented than Reding can make a lot more money

and have a lot more fun in team sports than in OLing. OLing is very

unrewarding compared with team sports - thank you for providing additional

evidence for that assertion. If you want to look at equally talented

athletes, look at Gretzky and Jordan - MUCH richer and more famous than Reding.>

Mel Siff:

<It would be preferable to state that OL appears to you as being very

unrewarding, not that it is quantifiably unrewarding. OL, to many people, is

enormously enjoyable. Some folk might state that OL is far more rewarding than

many team sports

because most pro team sportsmen have to undergo multiple surgical operations,

many

have job security for more than very few years and most have to give up playing

well before their 40s....>

To the extent that reward is quantifiable: money, fame, competition... OLing

is relatively unrewarding. Team players get to compete FAR more often than

OLers, to cite yet another example of quantifiable and proven lack of reward

in OLing.

Mel Siff:

One major difference between OL and football, basketball and hockey is

that OLifters always socialise and party with their opponents after events and

many

become lifelong friends, but in those pro sports, the players really struggle to

cope

psychologically with one's most powerful opponents. It is very sad not to

socialise with

one's " enemy " after the competition, but very edifying and happy for lifters who

regard

this post-event bonding as one of the best rewards of sport. If you have ever

competed in

weightlifting and powerlifting, you will know exactly what I mean.>

I'm not sure socializing and partying with one's opponents 2 or 3 times a

year is preferable to playing 160+ times a year (baseball) and socializing

and partying with one's teammates. I'm not sure why the " enemy " , as you put

it, would have any special value as a social companion - surely you aren't

suggesting that team sportsmen are LESS extroverted and social than OLers?!

[You know the saying about " love thy enemies " ? That teaches you a lot more and

can

often reward you infinitely more than loving your friends. Mel Siff ]

Mel Siff:

< Olympic and power lifters both can contest their sports well into their

senior years, continuing to strengthen and enrich their lives, without needing

the

regular services of surgeons, PTs, chiropractors etc. I don't know one

footballer or

basketballer who is still competing at the highest level in their fifties, but

there are a few

powerlifters like Louie who are. There are many OLifters who are

competing at good

national level well into their 40s and who are much stronger than most team

athletes at the same

age. They are supremely happy with their sport which can be enjoyed in Masters

events

into one's very senior years. Many medical professionals are even happier than

those team

athletes whom they are constantly having to repair so that they can play and

stay happy for a few

years! >

THERE'S a quantifiable advantage to OLing, though I'll point out that the

team players get to compete in their relatively brief careers at least an

order of magnitude more often than OLers in their relatively long ones.

Mel Siff:

<By the way, although it can help, material wealth is not necessarily the

greatest reward that one can have in life. By the way, at his peak, lifters

like

eyev, were at least as well known internationally as Jordan and Gretzky, but

none of them was

known to as many people as soccer heroes such as the great Pele, a bodybuilding

hero by the

name of Arnie, a tiny gymnast by the name of Nadia Comaneci and tennis players

such as

Borg, Lendl, Navratilova and McEnroe. Anyway, there are some non sportsmen like

Bill

Gates who could buy every top team player in the world with the small change in

his

pockets. The lesson? To each his/her own. Thank goodness for our diversities

of profession,

happiness and reward!>

No one cited money as the greatest reward one can have in life, though

discounting it completely merely because OLers suffer in comparison

monetarily so egregiously with pro team members seems unfair.

If the point you're making by citing Pele, Arnie, Nadia, Borg, Lendl,

Navratilova, and McEnroe is that many sports are more rewarding than OLing,

I agree.

If the point you're making by citing Gates is that many non-sporting

pursuits are more rewarding than OLing, I agree.

[Mel Siff: My point was that many people may not think that sport is of much

use at all

and that other things in life are even more rewarding. Do read my 'Critical

Thinking' posts again - you are trying to use several illicit tricks of

argumentation

to make a point and there are so many non sequiturs and detours in your above

post

that any further discussion in this vein is likely to end up being unproductive

and

uninformative. At this stage I cannot see that any new information is going to

be

forthcoming on this highly subjective issue and very soon, everyone is going to

simply accept that we " agree to differ " . Let's rather move on to a more

objective

aspect of team and individual sports, such as the physical and mental skill

training

required in specific situations.

To iterate what several of us have asked you - have you ever competed in

Olympic lifting? How many weightlifters do you know well? Can you not simply

accept that every sport has its strong and weak points and that all sports are

equally

rewarding to the individuals who play and love them. Whether you believe it or

not

you will find some people who find many team sports boring, unnecessarily

violent

and very unrewarding, while others who will find individual sports like OL very

rewarding according to another set of standards. There are even some of us who

find team and individual sports equally rewarding and have played them for many

years

side by side. Whether OL is or is not rewarding is entirely a matter of opinion

and any

further comparisons of this ilk are odious and unverifiable outside the realms

of

monies made by the athletes. ]

Kurland,

Chicago USA

[Guest guest]

> <OLing also seems like kind of waste of talent for a gifted athlete.

>

> The aforementioned team sports are more social, engaging, lucrative,

> complex, challenging... more FUN than OLing. >

>

> Eli wrote:

> > I don't see track events as more engaging, complex, or challenging,

> and

> > those activities aren't considered a waste of talent for a gifted

> athlete.

> >

> > Eli Rosenberg

> > Champaign, IL

>

> Matt writes:

>

> I agree with Eli. I don't believe that OL is any less challenging or

> fun than other individual sports. When it comes to the decision on

> which sport to choose, I believe certain talented athletes are more

> inclined to a choose team sport over an indivdiual sport (e.g.

> weightlifting) for reasons related to personality, exposure to sports

> and social conditioning.

I think athletes make decisions as rationally as any other set of people,

and that to assume that the cream of the athletic crop choosing team sports

over OLing is whimsical is elitist, irrational, and unfair.

>

> Further I think it is a matter of which sports our society as a whole

> supports and the resulting lack of funds that are delivered to the

> sports that are less supported. You can see the same problem in

> several amateur sports, not just weightlifting (e.g certain winter

> sports such as luge, skeleton, biathlon etc...)

Agreed, though the word 'supported' is suspect. 'Lucrative' would be more

accurate - football has the money to attract high talent because it's a

wildly popular spectator sport, not from fiat.

>

> What a sport like weightlifting needs are the individuals who are

> willing to volunteer their time to continue to develop athletes and

> expose youngsters to this wonderful sport. With hard work and

> committment on behalf of administrators, senior athletes and coaches I

> think the sport of weightlifting will see growth in popularity.

I disagree that the problem is with a lack of coaching. A strong

grass-roots movement such as you're describing is an EFFECT of popularity,

not a cause.

>

> I believe efforts should be directed towards grass roots development,

> and also towards recruitng athletes in power sports (such as American

> Football, throwing sports etc.) who have failed to reach the highest

> level but who still have the talent to be good weightlifters. Where I

> work I often see athletes who don't make it in their primary sport but

> who could turn out to be decent weighlifters.

Not the best, though; not until someone like Refrigerator can make

more money OLing than playing football.

>

> In Canada the sport of speed skating has taken this approach by

> recruiting ice hockey players who are good skaters but who were unable

> to make the step to the elite Junior or professional level of hockey.

> This method may also be useful for weightlifting.

>

> Matt Jordan

> University of Calgary

Kurland, Chicago

" Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of

authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made

to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are

men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They

promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters. "

- Webster

[Guest guest]

Kurlandwrote,

<<OLing also seems like kind of waste of talent for a gifted athlete. The

aforementioned team sports are more social, engaging, lucrative, complex,

challenging... more FUN than OLing.>>

Hobman:

<In your opinion. Other people may disagree. Obviously though, a large

number of Americans appear to support this suggestion.>

>I guess others could disagree with the fun, engaging, and waste remarks. I

>don't think anyone could disagree with the lucrative, complex, social, or

>challenging ones, though you are of course perfectly welcome to take your

>shot. I predict 'challenging' will be the first quibble, not because it's

>untrue, but because the measures for it are less obvious. Comparing the

>salaries of top OLers to top basketball/football/hockey/baseball players is

>too obvious for anyone to pick 'lucrative' as their death ground of choice,

>I think.

No, I would argue all your points.

First, not everyone defines happiness by money. Lucrative sport? There was

an article I read recently that said in terms of happiness being married to

the right spouse is worth $100,000. I think being around the right people

is also worth something, and I find powerlifting gives me that.

Social? I get lots of social interaction both at meets, in the gym and

through various forums like this one. I suspect my social life based on my

sport is in better shape than some high paid, prima donna superstars I hear

about.

Complex and challenging? I think we are playing with definitions here. You

don't think an 800 lb squat or 500 lb clean and jerk is challenging? Of

course you do; you just have defined what you see as challenging a little

different.

The bottom line is this. I have competed in hockey, baseball, rugby,

curling and karate at a fairly high level, although not high enough to reap

huge $ in salary. I enjoy those sports, but I also enjoy PL. To me saying

one is better than the other is kind of silly. I love sports. I enjoy a

wide variety of sports and can sit and watch people compete at almost any

level in any game and enjoy myself. They are different, but I don't feel

compelled to rate them.

When I went to the Supertraining camp I arrived at the Siff's a few hours

early. Not knowing them as I now do, I killed the two hours by heading to a

park in Littleton and watching a youth soccer game. I'm not a huge fan of

soccer, but watching the sheer joy those kinds experienced was fun. I

remember thinking to myself as I sat in the park, " This is great! " And it

was.

The same kind of feeling I get watching the tapes of Reding and eyev

setting the press record on back to back attempts. That was great, too.

Hobman

Saskatoon, Canada

'Grip it and rip it!'

[Guest guest]

I agree with Mel. I started this post to suggest reasons and maybe some

solutions to the lack of OL'ers in the US. My intention was not to get into a

" my sport is better than yours " argument. If I did, my apologies. I love team

sports also and continue to compete in them, although my concentration is now in

Olympic lifting. I just hope more people could be exposed to OL and see what it

can offer. Like I said before, I'm just going to train my hardest, and take

some opportunities to teach others (including my brother who keeps asking me

about it , and likely coach when I get older. I just wish the USWA would try

a raise a little more awareness (and money), and TV coverage wouldn't hurt.

Regards,

Malcomb

University of Colorado - Boulder

Office: (303) 735-6363

Mobile: (720) 261-8353

jesse.malcomb@...

[Guest guest]

>===== Original Message From " Kurland " <skurland@...>

>OLing also seems like kind of waste of talent for a gifted athlete.

Too bad you feel that way.

I train athletes of all sizes, shapes and gender. It is true many of my

athletes who perform OLifts can't shoot a hoop or drill a soccer ball or throw

a spiral.

When I find one who is well-versed in the OLifts AND can do one of the above,

it almost always means (s) he will be college or professional athletic

material.

>The team sports are more social, engaging, lucrative,

>complex, challenging... more FUN than OLing.>>

Apples and oranges. I would prefer to watch, say, a college football game than

OL competition. However, I would prefer to watch the grass grow that see golf

on TV.

Is it truly more challenging to run a buttonhook, catch and be tackled

immediately than to snatch your bodyweight? For some, maybe, for others, no.

One last comment. I don't believe you understand the power and athleticism

required of the OLifts. Stick around, search the archives and read. You will.

Cid Summers

burg TN

[Guest guest]

>From: " Kurland " <skurland@...>

>OLing also seems like kind of waste of talent for a gifted athlete.

>The aforementioned team sports are more social, engaging, lucrative,

>complex,challenging... more FUN than OLing.

Loren " chews " :

>B.S. Why must someone denigrate one sport in relation to others?

Only to support there philosophy or personal preferences.

>As for weightlifting not being a social and fun activity, I work at an

>inner-city community project coaching weightlifters. Our fitness area

>has a one hour period where kids come in and exercise. Today I started

>teaching two youths the lifts. By the end of the hour I had 8 more

>(without having to recruit or sell the sport) mobbing me because they

>wanted to learn as well.

Must have been a slow day! )

I am always amazed at the enthusiasm of youth, especially those that cannot

afford or do not have the skills for traditional sports, to OL and PL.

Shana Raberts

Leesburg, Florida

_________________________________________________________________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

[Guest guest]

Matt wrote:

> > I agree with Eli. I don't believe that OL is any less challenging

or

> > fun than other individual sports. When it comes to the decision

on

> > which sport to choose, I believe certain talented athletes are

more

> > inclined to a choose team sport over an indivdiual sport (e.g.

> > weightlifting) for reasons related to personality, exposure to

sports

> > and social conditioning.

writes:

> I think athletes make decisions as rationally as any other set of

people,

> and that to assume that the cream of the athletic crop choosing team

sports

> over OLing is whimsical is elitist, irrational, and unfair.

Matt writes:

I am not sure what your point is and whether you are disagreeing with

me. Either way maybe I should reinforce what I am saying. I firmly

believe that participation is dependent on popularity. If you

consider the huge popularity of soccer in Europe you find that they

have an extremely high level of participation. Also look at speed

skating in the Netherlands. Here you have a small country who loves a

sport that is relatively unpopular in the world but nevertheless they

have a large degree of particpation and also success on an

international level. Societal factors will most certainly affect the

decisions we make. Furthermore the participation level in a sport is

reflected in its popularity. Show me an unpopular sport with high

participation. As for issues of personality I think some indivdiuals

have a temperment for individual sports and others are best suited for

team sports.

writes:

> Agreed, though the word 'supported' is suspect. 'Lucrative' would

be more

> accurate - football has the money to attract high talent because

it's a

> wildly popular spectator sport, not from fiat.

Matt writes:

I think the word " supported " is an ideal term especially when

considering amateur sports such as weightlifting. Amateur sports are

very much dependent on funding from the government and other agencies

and this can be seen as " support " . I realize the case is different

for professional teams. This argument may be better held in the arena

of amateur sport as it is nearly impossible to compare amateur sport

with professional sport.

Matt wrote:

> > What a sport like weightlifting needs are the individuals who are

> > willing to volunteer their time to continue to develop athletes

and

> > expose youngsters to this wonderful sport. With hard work and

> > committment on behalf of administrators, senior athletes and

coaches I

> > think the sport of weightlifting will see growth in popularity.

writes:

> I disagree that the problem is with a lack of coaching. A strong

> grass-roots movement such as you're describing is an EFFECT of

popularity,

> not a cause.

Matt writes:

I am not criticizing coaches or the lack of quality coaches. If you

notice my choice or words I am including senior athletes and

administrators. It is important for all of these indivduals to be

pro-active in organizing competitions, seminars, demonstrations and to

develop relationships with media to further promote the sport of

weighlifting. This IS grass-roots development. It is unlikely that

anyone else will do this for us.

Matt wrote:

> > I believe efforts should be directed towards grass roots

development,

> > and also towards recruitng athletes in power sports (such as

American

> > Football, throwing sports etc.) who have failed to reach the

highest

> > level but who still have the talent to be good weightlifters.

Where I

> > work I often see athletes who don't make it in their primary sport

but

> > who could turn out to be decent weighlifters.

writes:

> Not the best, though; not until someone like Refrigerator can

make

> more money OLing than playing football.

Matt writes:

Let's consider a potential example. Take a college level running back

who is very explosive but who does not have the agility or the finesse

to make it in the NFL. This would be a perfect candidate to recruit

for weightlifting. I think when you are in the developmental phase of

growth for a sport it is a huge mistake to not actively recruit new

athletes whether they have the potential to reach the highest level or

not.

Matt Jordan

Calgary, Alberta

[Guest guest]

Mel Siff:

<You know the saying about " love thy enemies " ? That teaches you a lot

more and can often reward you infinitely more than loving your friends. >

No. What is it?

[it appears in different words in the scriptures of several major religions

including

Christian, Buddhism and Judaism. Next time you stay in an hotel, you can check

through

a Gideon's Bible at your bedside and you might find a few words on this topic

there. Mel Siff]

> [Mel Siff: My point was that many people may not think that sport is of

much use at all

> and that other things in life are even more rewarding. Do read my

'Critical

> Thinking' posts again - you are trying to use several illicit tricks of

argumentation

> to make a point and there are so many non sequiturs and detours in your

above post

> that any further discussion in this vein is likely to end up being

unproductive and

> uninformative. At this stage I cannot see that any new information is

going to be

> forthcoming on this highly subjective issue and very soon, everyone is

going to

> simply accept that we " agree to differ " . Let's rather move on to a more

objective

> aspect of team and individual sports, such as the physical and mental

skill training

> required in specific situations.

I'd've said you were the Trickster, Dr. Siff. I've been making an honest

argument to answer the question, " Why has American OLing declined, " and

you've been consistently ducking it. As for illicit tricks, I cited a

hypothesis: that OLing is relatively unrewarding for very gifted athletes

compared to a certain set of team sports. Then I defended that assertion by

citing money, fame, competition, complexity....

While personal preferences are subjective, economics are not.

[Money is a convenient, but entirely artificial descriptor of the Wealth of

Nations and individuals, devised by the very subjective agendas of the

manipulators

of the money market internationally. Mel Siff ]

Mel Siff:

< " Let's rather move on to a more objective aspect of team and individual

sports, such as the physical and mental skill training required in specific

situations. " Speaking of illicit tricks, that is an EXCELLENT example of a

false dilemma - you should add it to your critical thinking post. Well

done. >

[You very clearly moved way off the original topic raised by on reasons

for the demise of OL in the USA and embarked upon some spurious comparisons

of OL with some other sports.

If you have an alternate hypothesis that explains the decline more

elegantly, then please cite it.

[Mel Siff: All others have succinctly addressed the major issues. As someone

who was

involved overseas for many years in the administration and politics of

weightlifting and

many other sports, I fully appreciate what others have stated thusfar. OL can

certainly

take notes from the marketing of other similar smaller sports like powerlifting

and strong man events

which often attract a lot of attention. I am not so interested in reasons for

OL decline,

but am more interested in what can be done to promote the sport, whatever the

reasons

may be for its current state.

When I was Chairman of all university weightlifting in S Africa, I combined our

events to

include weightlifting, powerlifting and bodybuilding and this tended to attract

many more to OL.

I also organised regular displays at schools, universities, agricultural shows,

churches and ran

continuing education courses showing how variations of OL can augment most

sports. I also quite

regularly appeared on TV talk shows which allowed me to publicise the strengths

and

minimise the myths about OL. Another lecturing colleague and I often held small

contests and tryouts

in our well equipped university lifting club (at least 15 a year), but, since I

have moved to the USA,

I lament to see that little is done to really go out to the public to market the

sport. There have been some

wonderful opportunities for USAWL to appear on TV with excellent competitors

like Tara Nott and Shane

Hamman to explain what OL is, what the science is behind it and so on, but the

most that we see

is an occasional glimpse of a few lifts at the Olympics. I would happily go on

TV here with some

top lifters to sell the art, science and joys of OL in the USA, just as I

started this Supertraining list

in an attempt to shake up much of the complacency that we have in applied

strength and fitness science.]

> To iterate what several of us have asked you - have you ever competed in

> Olympic lifting? How many weightlifters do you know well? Can you not

simply

> accept that every sport has its strong and weak points and that all sports

are equally

> rewarding to the individuals who play and love them. Whether you believe

it or not

> you will find some people who find many team sports boring, unnecessarily

violent

> and very unrewarding, while others who will find individual sports like OL

very

> rewarding according to another set of standards. There are even some of

us who

> find team and individual sports equally rewarding and have played them for

many years

> side by side. Whether OL is or is not rewarding is entirely a matter of

opinion and any

> further comparisons of this ilk are odious and unverifiable outside the

realms of

> monies made by the athletes. ]

No. None. No. So? No, it isn't entirely a matter of opinion - some

rewards are objective and quantifiable, and some are not. To the extent

that the rewards are quantifiable OLing suffers terribly in comparison to

certain other sports. Your statement that all sports are equally rewarding

to the individuals who play and love them is absurd; it is neither a zero-

nor an inifinite- sum game; someone can love and deeply enjoy and personally

develop from, say, playing basketball in the NBA as much as an OLer loves

his sport, and in addition make millions.

As for your questions about my experience in OLing, I'm amused that you

complain about illicit rhetorical tricks in one paragraph and set up ad

hominem arguments in the next one.

[No tricks here at all - just a genuine attempt to make you recognise your own

prejudices and possibly understand why some people find OL very rewarding. I

often

have found that I displayed some unfair prejudices against various sports until

I actually

tried to play them. For example, as someone from one of the top rugby playing

countries

of the world, I used to think that American football was an idiotic sport for

people who sit

out most of the time, who cannot handle tough tackles without layers of

protective clothing

and rarely run the length of the field. Since I have come to work with and meet

some top NFL

players, I now really appreciate the greatness and special attributes of this

exciting game.

I can hardly wait for the football season to begin so that I can join my wife

shouting at the TV

screen or sometimes accepting tickets from our Bronco friends to sit right

behind them at

home games in Denver! You might find, too, that a little more openness to OL

would add

another enjoyable sport and some variety to your list!

Anyway, you are clearly sidestepping, so that we can assume that you have never

tried competitive

OL or PL. It's quite OK - sneak into the gym when nobody is watching and try it

out - you are

even welcome to come over to my gym and I promise not to tell anyone if you

smile while you

are lifting Mel Siff]

Kurland,

Chicago USA

[Guest guest]

> First, not everyone defines happiness by money. Lucrative sport? There was

> an article I read recently that said in terms of happiness being married

to

> the right spouse is worth $100,000. I think being around the right people

> is also worth something, and I find powerlifting gives me that.

I think conflating money with happiness will backfire on you, . If you

could've played in the NHL, would you have preferred it to powerlifting?

Why?

> Social? I get lots of social interaction both at meets, in the gym and

> through various forums like this one. I suspect my social life based on

my

> sport is in better shape than some high paid, prima donna superstars I

hear

> about.

Except for the meets, the aforementioned superstars can have all those

social outlets too, if they wish. Of course, they get games and practices

instead of 3-4 meets a year....

>

> Complex and challenging? I think we are playing with definitions here. You

> don't think an 800 lb squat or 500 lb clean and jerk is challenging? Of

> course you do; you just have defined what you see as challenging a little

> different.

Well, not complex. As for challenging... an 800# squat would squash me like

a dumb juicy bug, that's maybe a little TOO challenging... a 500# C & J would

look a lot like a guy trying to pick up a barbell and utterly failing.

But those exact same challenges are available in the weight room to the team

sport athletes, and additionally they get to work on a dozen (way

conservative number) other things. Figuring out your weakness in the bench

is one thing, figuring out your weakness in your GAME is a whole other order

of magnitude of complexity.

>

> The bottom line is this. I have competed in hockey, baseball, rugby,

> curling and karate at a fairly high level, although not high enough to

reap

> huge $ in salary. I enjoy those sports, but I also enjoy PL. To me saying

> one is better than the other is kind of silly. I love sports. I enjoy a

> wide variety of sports and can sit and watch people compete at almost any

> level in any game and enjoy myself. They are different, but I don't feel

> compelled to rate them.

If you could've played in the NHL, or major league baseball, would you have

found that more rewarding than powerlifting? Why?

Not that I mean to compel you. If you don't want to rate them, never mind.

But my point stands: that if a gifted athlete has a choice between playing

with his friends for millions or lifting in meets a few times a year, a

rational one will pick the more rewarding sport.

>

> When I went to the Supertraining camp I arrived at the Siff's a few hours

> early. Not knowing them as I now do, I killed the two hours by heading to

a

> park in Littleton and watching a youth soccer game. I'm not a huge fan of

> soccer, but watching the sheer joy those kinds experienced was fun. I

> remember thinking to myself as I sat in the park, " This is great! " And it

> was.

Of course it is! Team sports are a ton of fun for MANY people, especially

star talent....

>

> The same kind of feeling I get watching the tapes of Reding and eyev

> setting the press record on back to back attempts. That was great, too.

I believe you. I think your response is unusual, though.

>

> Hobman

> Saskatoon, Canada

>

> 'Grip it and rip it!'

Kurland, Chicago

[Guest guest]

> Mel Siff:

>

> <You know the saying about " love thy enemies " ? That teaches you a lot

> more and can often reward you infinitely more than loving your friends. >

>

> No. What is it?

>

> [it appears in different words in the scriptures of several major

religions including

> Christian, Buddhism and Judaism. Next time you stay in an hotel, you can

check through

> a Gideon's Bible at your bedside and you might find a few words on this

topic there. Mel Siff]

That is not an answer, Dr. Siff.

This is a link to an online Revised Standard Bible search function:

http://etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/rsv2www?specfile=/lv6/workspace/rsv/rsv-pub

..o2w

I didn't find your quote. If you know it, please state it. If you don't

know, please give me enough context (like, which book of the bible is it

in?) for me to find it. As for your contention that one saying appears in

Christianity, Judaism, AND Buddhism, I don't believe it. Cite your source -

more specifically than " the bible " , if you please.

BTW, in English the formation would be " Love thine enemies, " I think. Gotta

watch the elision.

And, " infinitely rewarding " is darn unlikely.

>

> > [Mel Siff: My point was that many people may not think that sport is of

> much use at all

> > and that other things in life are even more rewarding. Do read my

> 'Critical

> > Thinking' posts again - you are trying to use several illicit tricks of

> argumentation

> > to make a point and there are so many non sequiturs and detours in your

> above post

> > that any further discussion in this vein is likely to end up being

> unproductive and

> > uninformative. At this stage I cannot see that any new information is

> going to be

> > forthcoming on this highly subjective issue and very soon, everyone is

> going to

> > simply accept that we " agree to differ " . Let's rather move on to a more

> objective

> > aspect of team and individual sports, such as the physical and mental

> skill training

> > required in specific situations.

>

> I'd've said you were the Trickster, Dr. Siff. I've been making an honest

> argument to answer the question, " Why has American OLing declined, " and

> you've been consistently ducking it. As for illicit tricks, I cited a

> hypothesis: that OLing is relatively unrewarding for very gifted athletes

> compared to a certain set of team sports. Then I defended that assertion

by

> citing money, fame, competition, complexity....

>

> While personal preferences are subjective, economics are not.

>

> [Money is a convenient, but entirely artificial descriptor of the Wealth

of

> Nations and individuals, devised by the very subjective agendas of the

manipulators

> of the money market internationally. Mel Siff ]

What is your point?

>

> Mel Siff:

> [You very clearly moved way off the original topic raised by on

reasons

> for the demise of OL in the USA and embarked upon some spurious

comparisons

> of OL with some other sports.

>

I suggested an alternative hypothesis for the decline of American OLing;

definitely not off topic. The (non-spurious, thank you very much)

comparisons with the team sports cited were to make clear the

deficiencies of OLing.

>

> If you have an alternate hypothesis that explains the decline more

> elegantly, then please cite it.

>

> [Mel Siff: All others have succinctly addressed the major issues. As

someone who was

> involved overseas for many years in the administration and politics of

weightlifting and

> many other sports, I fully appreciate what others have stated thusfar. OL

can certainly

> take notes from the marketing of other similar smaller sports like

powerlifting and strong man events

> which often attract a lot of attention. I am not so interested in reasons

for OL decline,

> but am more interested in what can be done to promote the sport, whatever

the reasons

> may be for its current state.

Oh. Well, let's change the subject, then.

>

> When I was Chairman of all university weightlifting in S Africa, I

combined our events to

> include weightlifting, powerlifting and bodybuilding and this tended to

attract many more to OL.

> I also organised regular displays at schools, universities, agricultural

shows, churches and ran

> continuing education courses showing how variations of OL can augment most

sports. I also quite

> regularly appeared on TV talk shows which allowed me to publicise the

strengths and

> minimise the myths about OL. Another lecturing colleague and I often held

small contests and tryouts

> in our well equipped university lifting club (at least 15 a year), but,

since I have moved to the USA,

> I lament to see that little is done to really go out to the public to

market the sport. There have been some

> wonderful opportunities for USAWL to appear on TV with excellent

competitors like Tara Nott and Shane

> Hamman to explain what OL is, what the science is behind it and so on, but

the most that we see

> is an occasional glimpse of a few lifts at the Olympics. I would happily

go on TV here with some

> top lifters to sell the art, science and joys of OL in the USA, just as I

started this Supertraining list

> in an attempt to shake up much of the complacency that we have in applied

strength and fitness science.]

Is there some reason your SA tactics aren't applied in the US?

>

> > To iterate what several of us have asked you - have you ever competed in

> > Olympic lifting? How many weightlifters do you know well? Can you not

> simply

> > accept that every sport has its strong and weak points and that all

sports

> are equally

> > rewarding to the individuals who play and love them. Whether you

believe

> it or not

> > you will find some people who find many team sports boring,

unnecessarily

> violent

> > and very unrewarding, while others who will find individual sports like

OL

> very

> > rewarding according to another set of standards. There are even some of

> us who

> > find team and individual sports equally rewarding and have played them

for

> many years

> > side by side. Whether OL is or is not rewarding is entirely a matter of

> opinion and any

> > further comparisons of this ilk are odious and unverifiable outside the

> realms of

> > monies made by the athletes. ]

>

> No. None. No. So? No, it isn't entirely a matter of opinion - some

> rewards are objective and quantifiable, and some are not. To the extent

> that the rewards are quantifiable OLing suffers terribly in comparison to

> certain other sports. Your statement that all sports are equally

rewarding

> to the individuals who play and love them is absurd; it is neither a zero-

> nor an inifinite- sum game; someone can love and deeply enjoy and

personally

> develop from, say, playing basketball in the NBA as much as an OLer loves

> his sport, and in addition make millions.

>

> As for your questions about my experience in OLing, I'm amused that you

> complain about illicit rhetorical tricks in one paragraph and set up ad

> hominem arguments in the next one.

>

> [No tricks here at all - just a genuine attempt to make you recognise your

own

> prejudices and possibly understand why some people find OL very rewarding.

I often

> have found that I displayed some unfair prejudices against various sports

until I actually

> tried to play them. For example, as someone from one of the top rugby

playing countries

> of the world, I used to think that American football was an idiotic sport

for people who sit

> out most of the time, who cannot handle tough tackles without layers of

protective clothing

> and rarely run the length of the field. Since I have come to work with

and meet some top NFL

> players, I now really appreciate the greatness and special attributes of

this exciting game.

> I can hardly wait for the football season to begin so that I can join my

wife shouting at the TV

> screen or sometimes accepting tickets from our Bronco friends to sit right

behind them at

> home games in Denver! You might find, too, that a little more openness to

OL would add

> another enjoyable sport and some variety to your list!

A better - certainly a more ethical - approach to disabusing me of my

prejudices would be to address them, instead of questioning my experience.

I don't question that OL is very rewarding for some people. My point, for

the severalth (?) time, is that it is a less rewarding pursuit for an elite

athlete for four basic reasons: money, fame, competition, and complexity.

Answer honestly: do NBA starters - heck, NBA players - make more money than

top OLers? Are major league baseball players more famous - IN THIS COUNTRY -

than top OLers? Do NHL players compete more often than top OLers? Is the

conditioning of a top OLer more or less complex than the combined

conditioning, skills practice, and team practice (i.e. tactics, strategy) of

a <pick a team sport> player?

>

> Anyway, you are clearly sidestepping, so that we can assume that you have

never tried competitive

> OL or PL. It's quite OK - sneak into the gym when nobody is watching and

try it out - you are

> even welcome to come over to my gym and I promise not to tell anyone if

you smile while you

> are lifting Mel Siff]

Clearly sidestepping?! Dr. Siff, those first words in my second-to-last

paragraph above are answers to your questions. No, I've never OLed. No, I

don't know any OLers. Et cetera.

>

Kurland, Chicago USA

[Guest guest]

Kurland <skurland@...> replied to Dr Siff:

<I didn't find your quote. If you know it, please state it. If you don't

know, please give me enough context (like, which book of the bible is it

in?) for me to find it. As for your contention that one saying appears in

Christianity, Judaism, AND Buddhism, I don't believe it. Cite your

source - more specifically than " the bible " , if you please. >

Perhaps Dr Siff would allow me to interject here.

The saying appears in Christianity in the New Testament in the Book of

. More specifically, 5:44 which reads as follows:

" But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do

good to them that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you, and

persecute you "

A concise explaination of this saying, in the context of Christianity, can

be found at the following website:

http://www.grace-for-today.com/1669.htm

A variant of the aforementioned saying in Buddhism can be found at the

following website:

http://www.esscr.org/g103_Buddhism.shtml

It basically explains that, according to Buddhist thought, anger and hatred

cloud the mind and prevent one from reaching the state of nirvana. The

above website and Buddhism's " Eight fold path " can explain this concept in much

greater detail than I can. I would go into a more in-depth explaination but

it is extremely easy to click on a link and the physical exersion is so

minimal that it shouldn't even cut into your recovery time,

A variant of this saying can be found in Judaism. Some sayings from the Old

Testament and Judaism begotten from:

http://www.service-net.org/ws/theme142.cfm are as follows:

The Day of Atonement atones for sins against God, not for sins against

man, unless the injured person has been appeased.

7. Judaism. Mishnah, Yoma 8.9

You shall not take vengeance or bear any grudge against the sons of your own

people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the Lord.

9. Judaism and Christianity. Leviticus 19.18

Who takes vengeance or bears a grudge acts like one who, having cut one hand

while handling a knife, avenges himself by stabbing the other hand.

10.Judaism. Jerusalem Talmud, Nedarim 9.4

I hope these above quotes have helped to quell your skepticism, Mr Kurland.

Oh and you'll find that Dr Siff was actually more than correct; variants of

the saying " Love Thy Neighbor " and " Love Thy Enemy " can be found in quite a

few of the world's religions and philosophies. If you need any further help

let me know and I promise I shall do my best to explain these concepts to

you.

Take Care,

Frost

Taunton,MA

USA

[Guest guest]

The reasons that OL fell out of favor from the public eye in America has to

do with several factors. Most of these factors have been addressed in

previous post,s but a quick reiteration can't hurt.

Money: There is a lack of monetary funding for Olympic Weightlifting in the

US

Public Interest: There is a severe lack of mainstream public interest in OL

Complexity in technique: Olympic Lifting does not APPEAR to have much in

the way of a learning curve

Solo game: it is a solo game and as such often lacks the solid team-based

camaraderie which is one of the trademarks of popular team based sports such

as football etc.

A prejudice in this country against pure strength

I will try to show how several of these factors have contributed to the

fall of weight lifting in the US Keep in mind that it is a danger to assume

that any one of these factors is solely responsible. I'll start with money.

Money: It is obvious that there is a lack of money in OL as compared with team

sports such as football, basketball, hockey etc. This may be and indeed

probably is a factor for many talented young weightlifters who decide to

steer their talents toward other sports venues. But to be fair, it is

obvious that top OL don't do it for monetary reasons alone, they do it for

the love of the game, just as most athletes who compete in other sports do

it first and foremost because of the level of enjoyment they get from

competing.

Public Interest: There has been very little in the way of public interest

with OL. Part of the joy of competing no doubt has something to do with ego

for many athletes. Part of what drives them to compete is undoubtedly the

attention they receive from winning. I'm not saying that all athletes are

egotists, but to be realistic, public attention has a good deal to do with

why athletes decide to compete and give it their all. Again, I am not

demeaning them in the slightest, I am just pointing out human nature. But

again, this does not stop those who truly love OL from competing and loving

every minute of it. It is my belief that those who are attracted to

individual sports are perhaps more internally motivated than those attracted

to team sports, but again this is pure speculation on my part.

Complexity of technique: Oh, OL is complex all right, but it doesn't appear to

be complex at all to the mainstream public who are ignorant of just how

technically advanced the fastest movements in all of sports are. It's just

not exciting to watch a guy lift a barbell overhead from the floor as

compared to a few dozen big, burly guys running across a field and tackling

each other. Sports such as football and basketball involve more players,

therefore there is more visual stimulation involved and the movements

themselves look far more complex than OL, which is debatable.

Complexity of technique is perhaps the weakest argument, because the most

popular sports in

the US certainly aren't the most complex. Gymnastics and variants thereof

involve far more technical skill than OL or football, basketball etc.. Of

course, THE most popular spectator sport in the US that of Pro Wrestling

involves a massive degree of skill, rivaling that of even professional

gymnasts in some respects. Of course, the average beer belly sitting in

front of his TV at home has no respect for the rigors of the " sport " and

often thinks to himself " ah that stuff's all fake, I could do it in my

sleep " .. all the while never realizing that Pro Wrestlers are some of THE

most conditioned athletes on the planet.

Individual game: OL is individual and, as such, there is " less at stake " in

the eye of the public. Less visual stimulation etc. Individual sports have

received far less attention in the US for precisely these reasons. There is

less camaraderie on average because OL is primarily individual rather than

team based. This is hard to explain, as I don't want to make it sound like

there is no camaraderie but it stands to reason that there is less than when

one is playing all season with the same team mates etc. This may be an

important reason why OL is less popular, since many young athletes go into

sports for a sense of team play, interaction, and team based problem

solving.

Prejudice against Strength. If I had a dollar for every time I've heard " oh

big deal, he or she is just strong. So what? " I'd be a rich man. Well.. I'd

be able to buy myself a nice steak dinner at least. In our country, strength

for its own sake is largely looked down upon. It perhaps comes from the old

stereotype that all strong people are stupid. This prejudice came to be in

my opinion because strength & power are intimidating. So few people possess

it that naturally there is extreme jealousy of those who do. I can name

hundreds of people who are good college football players, but I can't name

many who can lift 300-500 lbs over their heads in one explosive movement. Top

OL generally have skills which could easily carry over to other sports as

well. They aren't " just strong " . Many are incredibly fast. Unnaturally fast

considering that many of them are not sprinters but some have incredibly

good run times. Because of this prejudice, there has been dwindling media

coverage, hence less money and public appeal towards OL

Keep in mind that many of the points that I just covered are only possible

factors as to why OL is rather unpopular in the US at this time as compared

with other sports. Perhaps the biggest reasons why OL is unpopular are lack

of public interest and media coverage. Not many people even know about OL

so how can it get popular? Again these are just my opinions and much of

what I stated is mere speculation on my part.

Kind Regards,

Frost

Taunton,MA

USA

[Guest guest]

This has been an extremely interesting thread about what I personally find to

be a very enjoyable spectator sport (when I can manage to see it). However

one thing that has only been touched upon briefly is that OL is a contest

between one person and the iron, rather than a bunch of people against another

bunch of people. When one stops to consider it, OL is very refined (no fist

fights, etc.) which may make it boring to the masses. The Romans knew what

they were about with " bread and circuses " and if one considers the violence

that goes on over and above many games themselves, or even in the games, it's

easy to see that much of what we consider " sport " is actually a form of

entertainment. The human audience, made up of violent-natured animals that

haven't evolved in hundreds of thousands of years, love to watch a bloody

altercation. If they didn't, they wouldn't be in their seats plying

themselves with food and drink while the spectacle unfolded before their eyes.

In this day and age, our unevolved selves have little opportunity for

nature-made danger and adventure, other than possibly walking down dark city

streets, which isn't exactly what most are looking for. Many are thankful to

live in relative peace, yet many others seek out thrills. The roller coaster

post was an excellent example. To me sky diving, bungee jumping and extreme

sports, are just three more examples. Whenever I see a bunch of young men

(who obviously have more circulating testosterone than they know how to deal

with) looking for a rumble, I often think they ought to be gathered up and

shipped out to some location where there's a war on so they can engage in

battle.

As far as the monetary angle, youngsters very soon learn that money equates to

power, at least in the Western world. Consider those who are wealthy who

commit crimes but due to their fame and/or ability to hire good lawyers,

manage to evade the harsh punishment an average individual would receive. And

how about those who can afford to buy political office? Who was the first

civilian to go into space and why was he able to get there?

Who in the US are considered modern heroes? Unfortunately many are sports

stars. I say " unfortunately " because many are lousy role models. Be that as

it may, immature, impressionable youngsters look upon sports greats or

entertainment personalities as people to emulate. They don't realize that

these people's fame often puts them in a prison of a different kind, a very

unenviable position, if you ask me.

Since many youngsters do not have proper adult guidance (and even with it),

they do not learn to think the situation over in a critical manner (another

great thread). All they see is the glitz, the fame, the money, the beautiful

women, the fancy cars, etc. They are not being taught that whatever you do,

you must do for yourself. If it gives you pleasure to play football, which

also happens to be a popular sport, so be it, but you need to understand what

lies beneath. It's not all a bed of roses.

As far as bringing OL more into the mainstream, I might suggest to Mel that

you contact a national TV program such as Good Morning, America. Shows such

as this are always looking for something new and different. When Montel

was on, he used to invite bodybuilders on his show on occasion

because he was interested in the subject. The GMA audience, I feel, would be

more impressed with OLers because of the technique that is required.

Rosemary Wedderburn-Vernon

Venice, CA