Virtualmeet.net

All discussion related to the Powerlifting meet on December 5-7th, 2008 is welcome here. Sign up for the meet here (http://virtualmeet.net/community/forum/meet-talk/263/0/).

If we have a group of 6 people doing the Dec. 5-7 PL meet. Should we run it like a meet (with increasing weight)or would it be better to video each person's lifts and then do the next person?

TNT

Good question. You could do it either way, but personally I would run it like a meet. From a time perspective, you would either need a lot of time or have all the lifters hurry through their nine attempts were you to do it one lifter at a time. The maximum duration of a three-lift meet is 2.5 hours which should allow 6 lifters to comfortably go through the meet. The time is individual, i.e. it starts on the first attempt on the squat, so the meet could in fact be close to three hours from the time the first lifter starts to the time the last lifter finishes if needed.

I would also think that running it as a meet would rev-up the intensity and atmosphere as everyone is in it together, but at the end of the day your lifters may of course find the lifter by lifter option more compelling.

Starting to look good already... good to see Anthony back in one piece. And thanks Matt for offering to judge, much appreciated. :)

Fourteen lifters have signed up so far. 25 hours left to sign up if anyone else is still thinking about it.

Looks like this meet is going to rock. :)

Lifters: I will send out further information at the end of this week with all the details you need.

I'll bet Canada wins the team title.

TNT

The meet registration deadline has now passed and we are two weeks out from the meet. And there's many reasons to be really excited about this one.

On top of my list is the strong showing of women thanks to the UOIT Varsity Rowing Team (http://www.uoitridgebacks.com/varsity/w-rowing/rosters.htm) and Anna Cappelli out of Catalyst Gym (http://www.catalystgym.com/). We've had a total of 6 women compete in our last ten meets; now we have 6 women in ONE meet. Now that's something.

Secondly, you lifters represent a happy mix of people with different approaches to the sport. Some of you lift weights to support other sports, some of you are all-eaters (crossfit) who do this and so much more and some of you are dedicated powerlifters. In this meet, we will be seeing lifters both doing this for the fun of it and lifters who really mean business in shattering previous PRs with some impressive weight on the bar. That's the way it should be and it makes me honored to see that you all feel equally welcome here.  :)

Thirdly, the Bulgarians have entered as a force to be reckoned with in these meets and are paving the way for a stronger presence of Europeans. We've had lifters from 10 countries in our meets before, but the trend has still been dominantly North American. My dream is that we will see people from the whole world rub shoulders in these meets and seeing you guys here makes me happy. :)

Also, this meet continues to show the growing interest for teams to sign-up. Next year we will start arranging team competitions too. This will add an exciting new dimension to the meets and will hopefully give real-world teams one more reason to shift into higher gear.

So thanks everyone!


 ;D 10 Canadians, 5 Bulgarians and 4 Americans. Were we to have team titles the statistics would indeed favor the Canadians, but never say never...

The judge line-up is now complete with Ryan Rigdon (http://virtualmeet.net/rigdon/) stepping in as the final judge. He brings plenty of judging experience with him, so you are all in good hands.

Thanks Ryan. :)

Update: lifters will receive the meet information tomorrow. Apologizes for the delay, I got stuck trying to finish the new t-shirt so that they would be available in time for this meet.

All lifters should now have received information on how to submit their clips etc. via e-mail. This is the first time I've done this as an automated process, so lifters should take extra care to verify that the upload account is actually working well before the meet. I tested a few and everything does seem to be in order. The automation also solves the problem with these mails landing in the spam box on Gmail accounts.

One week to go... hopefully everyone's meet prep has been going well. :)

MEET WEEKEND! The Bulgarians kick it off today, go for it guys! :)

We're jacked to be part of it tomorrow!  We've been warned that there may be a bunch of spectators, so I'll try to include them in some camera shots.  I'm especially happy for Anna and her husband, Ed; watch out for her crazy DL!

The meet went pretty well. Except for the newspaper that we forgot. And one of the guys getting injured and skipping the meet. And two of the guys not registering for it.

Best of luck to everybody that is yet to lift.

And remember: if your knees ain't bending, then you're just pretending.

PS http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2004458&id=1593126869

To expand on Tsvetan's post a bit, the guys forgot the newspaper but had one of the lifters deliver it in the middle of the first squat round. The newspaper was subsequently shown after one lift for each lifter. A mistake was done in this regard for Alexander Tomov, but because all clothing, lifting conditions and everything elses matches the other clips I will accept his lifts. Also, the clips for the lifters who did not register were not submitted so no problem there either.

Sorry to hear that Nikolay injured himself before the meet. Hopefully it wasn't serious.

So: four lifters have submitted their lifts so far.


Indeed! Just remember the newspaper folks, please. The rules are pretty clear on the consequences of forgetting that (disqualification). Can't recommend using the meet checklist (http://virtualmeet.net/meets/rules/) enough, follow that and you should be golden.

Two more meet days ahead! I'll keep you updated here as usual on how things are progressing. :)

Plenty of uploading going on at the moment, only a few lifters now who have yet to upload. Can't wait to dig into the judging. :)

Hopefully everyone hit some good PR's, or atleast attempted :)

Just finished up loading all the files for the meet. Hit PR's on squat and bench (finally) but no such luck with my deadlift. Cannot seem to get my squat and deadlift to respond at the same time from a cycle. Overall pretty happy with the performance.
Now take a week to deload and begin traing for my first single ply meet in February.
Good luck to everyone and hope all hit the numbers they are looking for.

We had a great time.  Anna Cappelli broke a few gym records (pending judging,) and another female lifter who was just 'along for the ride' really did some damage also.  A couple of guys were caught off guard deadlifting after the heavy squats; they should have taken the rest we were offering.  A great time, thanks again Kris, and please count on me for judging in the future!  Below: Phil and Ed hamming it up a bit between deadlifts.

One lifter from the Sunday group has yet to upload. The 24h upload time limit has not yet passed, but tomorrow I will move the meet for judging.

Thanks everybody! Based on the feedback here on the forum and privately, this was a very energetic meet that worked well for you. Can't wait to roll out the results. :) As usual, the judges will have one week to finish judging after the meet has been submitted for judging.

Update: this meet produced 115 attempts for a total of 1.3 gigabytes of raw video. The clips have been moved for judging, but some manual interventions still need to be done, mostly in relation to video to Flash encoding, before the meet judging can begin. This should be finished tomorrow. So: moving forward.  :)

COMPLAINT! There is an official complaint being lodged from the Canadian entry from the UOIT Varsity Rowing team that took part in the Dec. 5-7 PL meet.

It seems one of our lifters blew the crotch out of her shorts during the warm-ups. Luckily, one of our lifters is a 4th year nursing student experienced and trained in ER proceedures. In true Canadian fashion,
(Red Green would be proud) our nurse in training did an quick repair with DUCT TAPE. The only colour available was BLACK.

Now, according to CSA, UL and ISO industrial standards, DUCT TAPE, because of its strength, is considered SUPPORTIVE GEAR. Under the current rules of Virtual Meet, supportive gear is NOT allowed but neither is NUDITY on the platform. Soooooooooo, I think we need an official ruling from the jury on this one, cause I ain't gonna touch it with a ten foot pole.

Now on to the complaint. The women rowers at UOIT pride themselves in their vast collection of brightly coloured SPANDEX shorts. Some of them actually have a 3rd degree black belt in shopping and have traveled the world in search of the ultimate pair of Spandex shorts. They have pink and black zebra stripes, flowers, polka-dots, stripes, and one even has a pair of glow in the dark Spandex shorts, so in case of a hydro-electric power failure, the judges might not be able to see the bar, but they will be able to check out her form. And I might add, her form is very nice, with or without lights.

In the past,  Canada has been known as a peace-loving nation and not prone to civil up-risings or rebellions, but I think this Spandex issue just might push some of our female rowers over the edge. Watch for a possible revolt.

As you can tell, a good time was had by all. We're still giggling.

Everyone is looking forward to the OL meet in February.

Thanks.

Thomas Thekan

<deleted>

I am sorry but any lifter usig supportive gear must be disqualified.
  :D

By the way - I had the intention of filming "The VIrtualmeet bloopers" but due to camera filure it will have to wait. I promise to make a short movie about it sometime soon.

You want bloopers?  Watch the 3rd attempt of one of our lifters.  Spotter was definitely not alert.   He was fine, though.

Damn. If I had been paying more attention I could have don one hell ov a comedy on my third bench attempt. Something like...when the bar got stuck, I could have just stood up and snatched it.

Anyways. Waiting for the results now.

In response to the official complaint lodged by the Canadian rowers, I must first of all congratulate the whole team for overcoming what must have been a near over-human urge to wear spandex... no matter what! Spandex dependency is well-known among athletes competing in such varied sports as javelin and bungee jumping, but for obvious reasons, some of them ecological in origin, Virtualmeet.net takes a harsh stance on such materials used for vanity and/or the pursuit of squatting excellence. Ingrid Piat's candid report of the event that lead to the potential breach of rules weighs in your favor despite the potentially incriminating evidence presented therein. However, in my role as meet director, I must raise serious questions on the actual supportive role presented by a puny strip of duct tape (an inferior non-silvery brand at that). Given this, I cannot fault the team's response to the malfunctioning of the squatting garment beyond the principal level. Case closed.

The jury is still out on Tsvetan's exclusive report. It may be too candid for public review and will be subjected to close scrutiny by the Virtualmeet.net staff. However, the role of the report shall be considered in the light of recent events that shall remain unmentioned.



 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Ok, the meet is now with the judges. As usual, we aim to complete the judging within 7 days, i.e. by the end of December 18th.

The three judges face 9 rounds each with a total of 151 lifts, so there is a total of 27 rounds to be judged and 453 judge calls to be given. You can follow the judging progress in the box above this forum.

Those who are interested in learning how the judging interface works can consult this forum post (http://virtualmeet.net/community/forum/technical-questions/245/0/). Any and all questions are also welcome as usual. :)

are you talking about my squat? cause I watched the 3rd attempt a couple of times and all I could think of is Blooper Reel. lol.

No, definitely not.  Haven't seen yours yet.

The judging is now 2/3 done. Looks like we are set for a meet release by the end of the week. It's busy times now around Christmas, so I may not be able to release the very same day judging finishes. But you shall definitively have the results out this week folks. So hold the jingle bells.  ;)

I guess you people in Finland must be busy rounding up all the reindeer and getting them trained and ready for the big event on Dec. 24. That's why the judging is taking so long.

TNT

All Finn, Swedish, Norsk and etc. "northern men" get drafted in the Army of Santas Sanctuary(ASS).  ;D

Here's how it works: when you turn 18, you get drafted and undergo2 years of Santa and/or Elf training depending on their height(if h>=180cm,then consc:=santa,else consc:=elf). In the Santa's Unbelivebale Center of Kupioo(SUCK) they learn how to grow a beard, how to grow a belly, how to give orders to the elves, and generally - whatever you learn in officer school. The Elf Academies of Tundrisg, Manehole and Espoo train men how to become shorter, have more pointy ears, assemble toys and package gifts. In case of an elf shortage, the Emperor of The Northern Countries - Primal Santa - declares war state and women are also drafted. Women are only drafted to Elf School, but since they are quite tall(sometimes more than 3 meters!) they usually have to cut their legs at the knees. Mind the previouse sentance! Women cut their legs themselves, because serving the ASS is a privilege, and all those who fail to enter(due to asthma, flat feet or having a BMI lower than 35 for SUCK) are deprived of all their christmas gifts for the rest of their lives, and usually commit suicide in no more than 2 christmases.

What did I drink last night? ???

Judging has been completed on schedule. We are set for a weekend release of the meet results. As usual, I will send out an e-mail when the results are out. Thanks to Matt (http://virtualmeet.net/abbrevi8tor/) and Ryan (http://virtualmeet.net/rigdon/) for your bit!

Thomas and Tsvetan: some of the details in your accounts are slightly off, but you have no idea how right you are... ;D

Whatever you drank last night......can you send me a couple of bottles to sample?
I would like to get the sole distribution rights for Canada. That stuff sounds like just the thing to gets us through our long winters and our Federal elections, at the same time maintaining a sense of humour.

TNT

Water here is like 50% alchochocholochol...Sorry 'bout that: just drank a glass.

I can excange Bulgarian rakia(a strong alchochocholic beaverage...sorry - dran another cup of tap water...) for moose meat(a strong anabolic compound) any time!

(http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj48/bozthe1/RakiaConnectingPeople.jpg)

P.S. one of these days(or years) I'll go to Canada to check out Charles Poliquin and do an anabolic cycle of moose meat and lard.

PPS. Did you know that Canada is the new Mexico? With the new low-carb trend, Mexico's steroid fame is declining. People from the USA used to go to Mexico, take a few shots of tequila, take a few shots of test, eat a burrito and a dish of mexican rice and go back to their homes. Now...They go to Canada, eat moose and polar bear and get the same anabolic advantage, without the extra fat and drug test danger. On the drug test you just state "I went to canada, and they must have slipped something in my food...like moose in my hot-dog!" The jury states "Inadvertent use" and you are free to enter any competition and win.

The meet results have been released. This meet truly had its up and downs.

On the downside, 9 out of the 17 lifters bombed out of the meet. Many of the submitted clips were not shot in a way that would have allowed the judges to give a fair call (or a call at all in cases where large parts of the lifter was out of picture). I keep reminding lifters to use the checklist (http://virtualmeet.net/meets/rules/) and to especially read the section of the rules related to how to video the lifts. It's not hard, but it does require a bit of thought and a test video clip or two (especially on the squat to make sure that the depth is not blocked by the rack). See the rules (http://virtualmeet.net/meets/rules/) for the details, but basically:


On the positive side, many of the lifters who bombed out still got in a lift or two for the rankings (http://virtualmeet.net/rankings/). For example, Anthony Bevilacqua (http://virtualmeet.net/flex87/) annihilated the squat record (with his opener at that!) and Anna Cappelli (http://virtualmeet.net/veggieburger/) posted a huge deadlift  that put her in second slot on the women's rankings. Personally, I was also very impressed by the strength and form of the UOIT Varsity Rowing team. If you lift like that, you must row like machines. :o Brian Long (http://virtualmeet.net/blong/) also keeps coming back stronger and stronger; he also posted the biggest total of the day. The Bulgarians also seemed to have a ball with an attitude! Good job everyone!! For the details, see the meet results (http://virtualmeet.net/meets/200812pl/).

The passed lifts are of course only the tip of an iceberg. If those who had a bad camera day get their angles together for the next one, we will see some more lids blowing off.  ;D

Almost forgot: very cool T-shirt Anthony!  :) :)

Hi guys,

Thanks evetyone for the meet, judging, etc ... :)
I'm just looking at the results, I have a question regarding rulings given by each judge for a given lift. On some lifts I can see something looking like this:

1:good 2:failed(insufficient_pause) 3: nojudge

What does "nojudge" stands for?

Thanks,
Alex

Folks; thanks to the judges.  I apologize to my lifters; the camera work was done in an attempt to help the judges with joint angles, and I missed the section about keeping the camera steady.  Completely my fault.  I'm kicking myself!

No judge is the call used when the judge is of the opinion that (s)he can't give a fair ruling based on the video (i.e. for the clause in the rules that says it is at the judges discretion to turn down a lift when the video details are too lacking to allow for an accurate and fair ruling). Obviously, judging based on a single video angle has its limitations and the judges should do their best to judge a lift even if it doesn't comply with the recommendations given in the rules. But if the lighting is so bad that you can't tell what's what, you can't see essential body parts, there is something obstructing the hip joint on the squat or such, it is obvious that calling a lift like that white or red is just a wild guess.

Thinking that a lift is probably good doesn't cut it if people are to take us seriously (being official or unofficial has nothing to do with this kind of credibility), so I'm all for being strict in terms of what we accept. That said, it would probably be a good idea to post some photo or video examples of what's good and what's not to help both the lifters and the judges keep a consistent line although I do think that the rules are quite clear on this point. I actually shot plenty of video footage for this purpose, but editing it will take plenty of time.


Chris, I appreciate the effort, it was a good thought. :) Indeed most of the time, the depth is what people are looking at in the squat (and the most usual case for why a lift is red lighted next to failing a lift), but we've also had cases of bar rolls, stepping etc. So we need to see the full monty. Otherwise it would be unfair to all those who've had their lifts called for such things that we cannot reasonable call because we can't see them.

But there's always more meets and your lifters sure got some strong stuff... :)

As a quick addendum, I should also add that if there is a clear fault in a video that otherwise is lacking (for example, no pause on a bench attempt on a video that only shows the upper body), a judge can call the fault instead of passing no judge. Either way is correct as a bad lift is always a bad lift even if you can't see all of it. Not sure if we should favor either way, both have their merits.

Also, a blank light should be shown for no judge calls as they do not take a stance on whether the lift actually was good or not.

Any thoughts or ideas on this is more than welcome. :)

Thanks Kris; we'll be back again.  I appreciate the need for consistency.  In fact, the following weekend, I participated in a meet (sanctioned) where, because of time considerations, none of the 198s got to take their third squat attempts!  Unbelievable.  Anyway, thanks again for all your work, and I'll get better by next time.

One more thing regarding the nojudge call: I noticed some fairly odd nojudge calls for lifts which couldn't get much better from a video standpoint (like Alexander's deadlifts). I ran a query on the database and noticed that we have 24 nojudge calls from judge 1 (Matt), 18 from judge 2 (me) and 72 from judge 3 (Ryan). I called lifts I would have passed as nojudge with a fault if it was very clear, so the numbers for Matt and me stack up quite closely. With this large a discrepancy, I think there may be some misunderstanding or possibly technical glitch with the video streaming going on here.

Having thought about this for a bit, I think I should add a checkbox to the judging interface that the judges can use if there are technical issues (like the video not showing or jamming). Up until now, I've always verified that each video is working before passing the meet to the judges, but since this is run with Flash and JavaScript there may be browser specific and/or version issues that we need to know about if they happen. Then, if lifts like this are present, I would fix them and the judges could go back to judge them separately. As the meets grow and we work harder on getting the meets out faster, I won't be able to review all clips before releasing them anyway so we need a mechanism like this.

In the same vain, there could also be a checkbox and comment field that can be used if the judge thinks there may be something fishy with the lift (fake plates, wrong uploaded clip...). Stuff like this should be resolved by the meet director in direct contact with the lifter (eg. by me until such a time that other's step into this role too).

Again, as of yet, I don't know if the nojudge calls are due to technical issues or something else, but anomalies such as these are very valuable in making our service more robust and predictable. :)

Ok, looking at the specifics, I noticed that all of the judge 3 calls went to the same eight lifters who had ALL their attempts called with this. Looking closer at the lifts, I can see a case for passing this call for many of them if we consider the videotaping recommendation that "the camera should be placed so that the lifter fills up most of the screen without violating rule 5." (rule 5 being "The lifter AND the barbell must be fully visible for the whole duration of the lift (unracking to racking)"). Obviously, many of the lifts fail rule 5, others are shot at quite far away (the Bulgarian crew's squats). Personally, I find the video quality quite good on the far away ones, but it would indeed be much better to get a bit closer (but not too close...).

But enough speculation, Ryan or I will get back with the lowdown. In the end, this is why powerlifting has three judges. Each of us is human and our interpretation of the same lift will vary. Ryan also has extensive real world judging experience and is an elite lifter, but obviously this call does not exist as such outside virtual powerlifting so this has little to do with judging skills and more with praxis. Having a discussion about this will benefit us all in helping make the interpretation of the judging criteria clearer. It may seem clear on paper, but once faced with a tricky video clip there is no objective way of saying where the border between an acceptable clip and an unacceptable clip goes.

I was able to watch all clips.

For the most part if I couldn't see the feet, or the barbell was not in full view, or the lifter was not in full view, I put it down as a no-judge.

Everyone did an outstanding job though, regardless of the outcome.

How much diagonally(to the side) should the camera be situated? I aimed for 45 degrees, but the leg press wa sort of getting in the way. How much should we aim for the side to avoid the squat rack getting in the way?

Points taken. Will work more on the lifting AND videotaping.

To gauge depth, we need to see the top point of the thigh at the hip joint and the knee. To clear the uprights of the rack, mid-point between 45 degrees and a straight side-shot seems to work well (for example, see my own ugly squat (http://virtualmeet.net/kris/)).

It is more important that there is nothing obstructing the leg and that the camera stays steady than the precise angle. In many cases, we can still get a good view of the depth by looking at the inside of the leg further away from the camera in cases where the closer leg is obstructed. The best way to determine what a good angle is is simply to video tape a few of the warm-up lifts to see if there is a clear view of the leg or not.

I also think that the height of the camera is generally more important than the precise angle used; with the camera at knee height gauging depth is a breeze, but assessing depth from higher angles is very hard.

In my opinion, your submissions where quite good. I would use a more acute angle (more to the side of the lifter) if possible, but I didn't find it hard to assess depth from your clips. The one thing that would be welcome would be to get the camera a bit closer to make the lifter fill up the space more.

The video taping guidelines are not meant to be precise formulas or grounds for automatic disqualification if not followed (we have no red light cause that states "camera is not positioned at 42 degrees"...). They are guidelines, but at the same time we recognize that there will be leg presses, cramped spaces, bystanders, bad lights and what may require creative solutions. With a bit of testing, a working angle can usually be found. But the point is, that you do need to do this kind of quick angle testing to make sure it works. It's not a coincidence that this step is mentioned twice on the meet checklist (http://virtualmeet.net/meets/rules/).  ;D

Congrats to the competitors. Another strong showing by Brian. I am awed by the squat form of the rowing team. These were like from an instruction video for proper squatting technique.
Too bad that there were so many athletes who did not get all their attempts, but even more reason for them to come back stronger.

Tom Thekan taught us to lift and he is an awesome coach. We get in trouble if we don't do it properly. :)

Now this kind of nonsense has to stop. Comments like that are NOT a ticket to an easy workout in the future. Contrary to popoular belief, flattery will get you no where. Now, bribery, on the other hand, goes along way.

Wait till the OL comp in February. LOTS of rowers AND softball players are looking forward to that one.

These meets provide a great motivating factor for an athlete's training. Whoever thought of this concept (virtual meet) is a genius (flattery). Your bribe is coming later.

TNT

Turns out the calls were well-founded. Ryan gave the Bulgarian and the Catalyst teams nojudges across the board because of a clear lack of newspaper.

The Catalyst team did not show the newspaper as per the rules in the same video clip as an attempt; rather they sent in separate newspaper clips for each lifter. In my mind, the decision as to whether to accept or decline submissions from a lifter rests with the meet director (i.e. me) so I didn't even think of telling the judges about me accepting their submissions even though somewhat lacking. But this policy has not been documented anywhere and the rules clearly say that "failure to produce the day's paper shall result in disqualification from the meet". Not having any way of knowing about the separate newspaper clips, Ryan did the logical thing by giving nojude calls for the whole group. Furthermore, it was probably a mistake by me not going strictly by the book.

Now, as mentioned earlier (http://virtualmeet.net/community/forum/meet-talk/264/msg1697/#msg1697), the Bulgarians got their newspaper in late and it was only shown after the second or third attempt for some lifters. The rules state that "In the event that the newspaper is forgotten on the first attempt or the recording equipment fails, it is also acceptable to show it on the first possible subsequent attempt", so there was no problem with this per se. If I didn't misunderstand, Ryan deemed that the papers were too fuzzy to be able to discern a date. I totally agree, but on the other hand, the rules do not say anything about the date having to be legible. This won't work with the lower resolutions (eg. mobile phone clips), so the idea has been to just get a capture of the main news and front page to allow the paper to be compared to that day's paper at any later date. Many lifters do take extra steps to zoom in on the date which is very much appreciated, but not required. So in this case, there was a bit of a misunderstanding on how to interpret the newspaper rule.

As this case shows, the judging process still needs a bit of work so that it is clear how the lack of newspaper situations should be handled and by whom. For the next meet, the following changes will be made:

1) A checkbox with the text "Newspaper shown in clip" will be added next to the video for each attempt on the judging interface. Since the judges can't know in advance whether a videoclip is shown in later attempts, they will be instructed to pass their calls without regard to the whether the newspaper is there or not.

2) At the end of the meet, it will be verified that for each lifter there is at least one clip that has been flagged as containing a newspaper by at least two of the judges. If this is not the case, the lifter will be disqualified. This also means that the only accepted way of submitting a newspaper will be as part of an actual attempt, separate clips etc. will be ignored.

3) Nojudge calls will be flagged as a blank light instead of a red light.

I want to commend Ryan for taking a strict approach. I for my part apologize for the lack of information which led to this judging inconsistency, but I hope that the new measures will resolve this issue for future meets. We live and we learn. :)


\o/ Welcome!


Looking forward to that. However, as you can see from the above, we take judging very seriously so don't expect too much. Still, doesn't hurt (me) to try.  ;D

Rules are rules to be enforced. Each time something pops up - we can make the rules better.

WEe got the newspapper late. Then there was a problem with the camera - if it focused on the newspapper, everything in the distance got blurry. We(I?) decided to go for a blurry newspapper on the vids, and a snapshot with clear quality showing that this newspapper was indeed from the date stated. Snapshots were uploaded together with vids, and I even think that there was something written in the comments field of the lifterinfo.txt.

The more lifts we take part in - the better we get in the sport. IPF get used to their gear, we get used to our gear too.


Thanks for the strict judging. I will always enforce strict rules whenever I can, and would expect firplay and good atmosphere from all.

P.S. we're working on a duct tape squatting suit and bench shirt. Also bandages for kneewraps  ;D

I would appreciate comments on our form. Some of the guys are worried about the pauses in the bench press.

I guess that couting "twentyone"(twentyone-twentytwo for the fastouthed) would be enough.

Sorry for the slow turn-around, Christmas and the server migration has kept me rather busy of late. :)


You guys certainly went out of your way to deal with the challenges that popped up, much appreciated. The problem is that the scripts that prepare the judging interface only knows of attempts and any information sent separately won't make it to the judges or the spectators unless I hand edit it into the clips. In the past, when the meets were significantly smaller, I used to do just that while also doing my best to correct levels etc. to make even dark videos judgeable and so on. But with the larger meets running above 200 video clips each and having two small kids worthy of plenty of attention, I've given up on the manual reviewing and editing. In the end, this is probably a good thing as the only way to keep the meets scalable to a large number of lifters is to automate everything besides the submission of the meet details, the video uploads and the actual judging. This makes it the sole responsibility of the lifters to make sure the clips are adequate for judging.

At the same time, like I wrote below, we must be quite clear about what the minimum requirements for the clips are. While seeing the date is nice, requiring a clear shot of it as part of an attempt would put some serious limitations on the technical equipment. Virtualmeet.net is about allowing lifters to compete most anywhere and to that end we must do our best to keep the requirements realistic. In my book, and this needs to be spelled out in the rules too, a clear view of the newspaper with at least the major headline readable has to be good enough. In the case of suspicion of fraud, the newspaper is verifiable by checking the newspaper for the lift day.

In the end, our concept revolves around trusting the lifters, not around trying to make the rules as waterproof and, consequently, draconian as possible. There's a million and one ways to cheat, but, as the past two years have shown, this kind of honor system breads a very positive atmosphere that I think actually makes cheating rather pointless and unlikely. Simply, people of that bent won't find much substance here. If anything, the lifters actually tend to go beyond the requirements where possible by doing things like counting the plates out loud with a close zoom, uploading video of the weigh-in and pictures of the newspaper etc. etc. One thought in this regard would be to allow lifters to upload any extra meet material they'd like whether more stringent proof of the date, meet bloopers, commentaries or whatever. These could then become available in an extra section for the meet results organized by participant. What do you think?


Very well put.


Good luck to you.  ;D


Your pauses were very borderline, but in my book a fraction too short. Honestly, I would not have complained about some of them getting passed, but I go by the mantra that our calls should be strict enough so that lifters can be reasonable sure that the same lift would pass in any federation. In that regard, I would welcome comments on your pauses from experienced IPF lifters.

A good pause does not have to be long at all, but the bar needs to very clearly stop AND stay put for just a fraction before pressed back up. On some attempts, like Ivan's 110kg, the pause was long enough, but the bar did not come to a complete stop. I think Brian's benches in this meet are a good example of pauses which are just at the mark; a quick but definitive stop, then launch. When I've prepped for meets with my training partner, our mantra has always been a quick one-two count which makes for a pause which is beyond dispute. In the same vain, we used to check the depth of our squats from the side for every single lift in training and if the partner thought they were high by even a fraction we would pay a fine of 50 cents. Come meet time, we had no doubt that we would receive only white lights for depth.

While there are times when it may be worth trying to hit the bare minimum pause to get a big lift, I think there is a lot to be said for going for a convincing pause in same spirit as hitting convincing depth on the squat (http://www.usapowerlifting.com/newsletter/06/novice/novice.html). Convincing form will make sure that you get whites no matter whose doing the judging (provided you are strong enough for the attempt of course). That it looks mighty impressive does not hurt either.  ;D

Just my .02 cents. This is a very useful discussion.  :)