Featherweight Class?
Printed From: Nasgaweb
Category: Nasgaweb Forums
Forum Name: General
Forum Discription: This forum is for general discussion about Scottish Heavy Athletics.
URL: http://www.nasgaweb.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=17879
Printed Date: 3/26/26 at 3:41pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 10.11 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Featherweight Class?
Posted By: DirtyP
Subject: Featherweight Class?
Date Posted: 11/09/23 at 12:58pm
|
I've wanted to compete in the highland games for a while and have finally reached a stage in life where I have the time to. Has having a featherweight class been something that has been considered in the past? My issue is that I'm about average height (5'8"), am pretty athletic (24.5 bmi, 15% body fat, 160lbs), but when I go to compete, I'm the smallest by 25-30 pounds in the lightweight class and some of the guys are competing at over 200 pounds since they got to weigh in a couple of days early and cut to make weigh in. Even though we used the 42-pound weight for weight over bar and the weight for distance, there is a big difference between a 160-pound guy throwing it and a 185- or 195-pound guy throwing it. The heavy hammer is also an issue because the momentum it generates relative to a 160-pound guy. Think about a 200-pound guy using a 30-pound hammer instead of the 28-pound hammer or a 250-pound guy using a 35-pound hammer. Because proportionally that is what we are talking about. To me it seems like a Featherweight Class for people under 170 pounds or under 160 pounds, either still using the lightweight classes weights (where they all have issues with momentum) or using lighter weights would attract more men to the sport. There is almost no one that that is under 5'9" competing and very few people under 180 pounds. If you looked at a bell curve for men's height and weight, >90% of the competitors are going to fall on the right half of the graph. I'm going to keep competing because I enjoy it, but you won't see me on any podiums anytime soon. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1374893/English-head-shoulders-Scots-thanks-growing-wealth-south.html" rel="nofollow - English are now head and shoulders above Scots thanks to growing wealth in the south | Daily Mail Online
------------- Dirty P |
Replies:
Posted By: AlDargie
Date Posted: 11/14/23 at 6:41pm
|
Welcome This is heavy athletics and not track and field. LW and Masters throw 42 and some games will allow Masters over 60 to throw a slightly lighter weight. While height and weight can help help, good technique is more important. I have seen some "smaller" guys out throw larger guys because they had good technique, speed and were consistent in all events. At the end of the day you are really just competing against your self and trying to throw further and higher than your last games.
------------- Dyin' ain't much of a living, boy. - Outlaw Josey Wales |
Posted By: DirtyP
Date Posted: 11/15/23 at 8:24am
|
I agree that good technique is important, but two for two people with equally good technique, if one is both taller and heavier (assuming equal fitness levels), the one that is bigger is going to have the advantage. Thats the whole reason for classes. If it were just about going out there and competing against yourself, we wouldn't have any classes. There wouldn't be a masters class, lightweight class, or women's class for that matter. Everyone would go out and try beat their own record, no points would be given, and the real first place prize would be the friends we made along the way. But we are competing against each other, and most people don't want to compete when the deck is stacked against just because of their size. If it were just about technique and size didn't play a big role, you would see a lot more smaller guys competing. Little guys are equally as fit, disciplined, and interested in Scottish culture as the big guys, but they aren't showing up to compete. Part of the goal of the games is to share the culture and get more people to participate. When half the adult male population in the United States is under 180 pounds and they make up almost no competitors at the games, we are failing at that goal. We don't need to reinvent the wheel, all this would take is for event organizers to say that if they have at least 3 guys under 160, 165, or 170 pounds, then they will have a featherweight class. The featherweights use the same weights as the lightweights and even rotate with them, the class only comes into play when it comes to awarding points. Because they are using the same weights as the lightweights, their heights and distances still count just like if there was no featherweight class. I don't mean to come off as argumentative, but this seems like a commonsense solution to a problem organizer hadn't realized was a problem. I'm going to keep on my one-man crusade, but it's only going to be successful if the bigger guys who aren't affected will become allies and fight for the literal little guys.
------------- Dirty P |
Posted By: Tim
Date Posted: 11/15/23 at 11:30pm
|
Been a long time since I've posted on here. But since it has similarities to when I started, I thought I'd put in my 2 cents. Your arguments for a feather weight class are valid, sound, and reasonable. You are absolutely right about how the 6'10"/ 250 lb guys have an advantage over shorter, lighter guys. It is an issue that I recognized even before I started throwing. But.......that completely misses what the games are all about. After throwing in a few games you either get it....or don't. And to be honest, I don't even think that I can explain what it means to "get it". Way before the turn of the century when I started, I was, perhaps after eating a large pizza, maybe a buck 80. I went and watched a games at Deep Creek in Western MD. I saw very large men (e.g Bubba Hines), medium men (e.g. John Paul Wright), and small guys (e.g. Dan Jackson), all competing on the same field, throwing the same weights, competing against/with each other, cheering/supporting EVERYONE who was competing that day. I said to myself that I wanted to be part of that culture. Didn't care if I came in dead last. I had the courage to put myself out there and compete with stronger athletes than myself. It made me a better athlete (though you won't find my name in a lot of record books) and I made some great friends. Have seen many a smaller guy whip the kilt off some larger guys. And you know what? The larger guys were happy for them. Believe me, I'm not one who wanted to make a class for long haired, chicken plucking/oyster shucking guys named Tim from Delmarva just to get a cheap medal. I wanted to get a cheap medal by being the best out of a group of 30 long haired, chicken plucking/oyster shucking guys named Tim from Delmarva. Which means that I wanted to win on merit, not because a class was made to suit me. The people who put on the Games do realize physical differences and abilities, which is why there are actual differing classes. However, what you may not have taken into account is that there are very real logistical, and even more, real financial reasons for not having a ton of different classes at the games. Anyway, my suggestion is forget about the winning stuff as you are beginning your career and concentrate on improvement, and making life-long experiences for yourself. It sounds like your determination to win will help you improve in the games and will help you to start taking away cheap medals from much larger guys (and don't let anyone know it, but that is immensely satisfying. :-) ). Good luck and I hope this helps. Tim ------------- "Remember, you don't take respect, you can only give it." Myles Wetzel-Forum post 10/2/07 Rock the House |
Posted By: DirtyP
Date Posted: 11/16/23 at 11:33am
|
I agree with you, I also don't want to get a cheap medal going for a class that is so specific only 3 guys compete, I want to get a medal in a class made up of 30 people that I can be competitive with. But even with perfect technique, I doubt would get more than 700 points on any event. I would be fine getting last place if I had a chance of at least getting 800 or 900 points on any event. Guys coming in at 145 or 150 could be competitive someone weighting 169. I weighed in today at 154, and a week ago, everyone I was competing against was between 190 and 205 (they got to weigh in 2 days early and cut to get below 200 for the weigh in). Guys that are 145 or 150 or 160 can't be competitive against guys that are over 190 even with perfect technique (unless they get the big guys drunk first, but that could get really expensive). I understand the financial reasons, but I would argue that offering the possibility that there will be a featherweight class would incentivize more normal sized guys to compete and pay the entry fees, visit the vendors, and volunteer along with all their friends and family. The guys competing make up the top 50% of guys in height and/or weight. Meaning that by adding a class for featherweights organizers could potentially double the number of athletes. I wouldn't expect that to happen overnight, but long term that means bringing in more money from vendors, ticket sales, entry fees. I get logistically there will be some issues but based on the quality of the people putting on the games, I don't think there is anything they can't figure out. ------------- Dirty P |
Posted By: MacThrowfar
Date Posted: 11/16/23 at 1:09pm
|
Dirty P, I am more or less in a similar
situation. I weigh in at 190, but I compete in any event I can, no
matter what the class. I do LW, Open, B and have been thrown in with the
A's. At the end of the day its not about winning or losing. Its the
experience. I see a lot of guys who struggle that are lighter than me,
but as long as you are making progress with your throws that's all the
most care about. There are games and ADs that are strictly by the
numbers. but I have met alot of ADs who care more about the energy on
the field, the crowd engagement. We are the "entertainment" after all. But
to reiterate what Tim said. We are all cheering on each other. PRs are
PRs no matter what the weight you throw and the community you become
apart of is bigger than the classes. I trained for a good while before
my first games. Alot of the bigger guys think they can just walk on the
field and win. Use that to your advantage. I typically place in the top
half to the top 3rd over guys twice my weight. It
wasn't that long ago that there was no LW division or Womens for that
matter. If you wanted to throw you threw the 56 no matter what. Now the
womens and LW are becoming mainstays. It may happen in the future and if
it does great. But the name of the game is Heavy athletics. Don't be
come discouraged from the weight or classes. Train right and get the
technique down. and you will go far.
|
Posted By: TomLawrence
Date Posted: 11/21/23 at 6:43am
|
Late to the party, but I'll chime in. I competed in the South (SSAAA) area for over ten years. We never had a light weight division or even a C/novice division at the first several games I went to. The view from our games godfather, Kay Cummings, was that this is a big persons sport, you just need to find more ass. I started competing at age 39 and 180 pounds throwing the 56 with all the rest of the Bs, and I finished last or near last a lot. I won one B-class at a very small games once, but in general I never "won" my way out of Bs. Like other folks said, there are often ringers that come in at 6'3" and 250 in their first games and stomp everyone with minimal technique. A friend (Kevin Miller) once looked at me on the field after witnessing such and said, "You can't teach big." I eventually moved into Masters at age 45 and scored a 3rd place at my hometown gig after eating two steaks a day for six months to get to 202 pounds. Even then, I won on luck and good height events. I was never great, but I was very solidly mediocre. I had very solid technique and I threw reliably well. Am I bitter about decade plus of no-wins? Absolutely not, and the real reason is: that's not why I did it. I did it because it was fun, and I enjoyed testing my limits. In the process I met some of the finest people I have ever had the luxury to spend time and struggle with. Reference my post here: http://www.nasgaweb.com/forum/retirement-and-gratitude_topic17845.html So that is my advice. Determine WHY you are competing, then to paraphrase Teddy Roosevelt, "Do what you can with what you've got where you are." Good luck brother! Tom ------------- Aim high. Stay hungry. |
Posted By: Sammy68123
Date Posted: 11/29/23 at 3:02pm
|
Another person late to the party. Going back to the roots in Scotland, a "Highland Games" offered Heavy Athletics (the throwing events we all know and are discussing) and Light Athletics (LA). LA consisted of running events (mainly sprints) and jumping events. They are what they are: heavy events and light events. Of course, in Scotland, a Highland Games is a community festival, not an ethnic festival as it is here. In Jun 2011 before the London Olympics, I was contacted by a Runner's World journalist who wanted to know why Highland Games didn't seem to include running (he was looking to wangle a trip to UK to cover running in HG in the run-up to the Olympics). I explained that difference to him. So here in the US, it seems that Heavy Events have predominated. I agree with all the previous responders about deciding WHY you're competing. The current LW men's classes have caught on in general, but you have no control over who shows up to compete that day. Bottom line: have fun, don't get hurt (and practice honing your technique). ------------- Teresa Merrick Bellevue, NE |
Posted By: DirtyP
Date Posted: 12/20/23 at 9:54am
|
It seems like you all are saying two different things. 1. This is heavy athletics, and you are only competing with yourself, so it doesn’t matter how much bigger everyone is than you. And 2. 2. We have master’s, women’s, and lightweight classes which have brought more people into the games and made them a better experience overall. If everyone is just competing with themselves then we don’t need to have classes for older folks, women, and smaller guys. Everyone should just go out and compete against themselves and awards should be given for the biggest improvement, best technique, and most congenial. Originally there were no classes, people had to ask for them to be created. I’m sure they had to deal with very similar comments to the ones you all are making today. Why do we need a master’s class? Just compete with the young guys. Why do we need a women’s class? Let the ladies compete with everyone else. Why do we need a lightweight class? This is heavy athletics. The organizers that came before us realized that people don’t want to just throw heavy things around, people want competition. For something to be a competition, it must be competitive. Sure, 150-pound women could go up against a 300-pound man, but would anyone call that competition? That’s just people throwing heavy things around. I wouldn’t mind coming in last place in my class every time if it was competitive. But there is a large gap when you have me and the next to smallest person is 20-25% bigger than me and the biggest in the lightweight class is 30% bigger than me. If you had me, then someone 5%, then someone 10%, then someone 15% bigger, well then, I would accept that is just the way things are. But that I have consistently been the smallest person by 30 pounds shows that there is a structural problem with the classes keeping average size guys from competing in the games. I can also acknowledge that that I would have a much harder time making the argument for a featherweight class if I was in the 10th or 20th percentile in height and weight for an adult male in the US, but I’m right at 50th percentile for both height and weight. How many more people would be competing if there was a featherweight class set at 160, 165, or 170 lbs. Start paying attention at your work and at the gym, how many fit guys do you see that are under 5’9” or 5’10” and under 170 pounds. These are guys that don’t participate in the games because there is no competition for them. You all talk about this being heavy athletics, but it is also a performance for the audience. At the games you have the guys that are 190-200 lbs. completely dominating me, so every time I step up its kind of a buzzkill for the audience. They use my turns to check their phones and bless my heart. If there was a featherweight class that was more competitive it would be a better experience for the audience. I’ll say that I do see average sized guys in the audience that look like they would be interested in competing but see me as a cautionary tale. I know this is an uphill fight, but I’m not asking for anything that hasn’t already been done multiple times (creating new classes), with each new class making the games richer and more inclusive. ------------- Dirty P |
Posted By: Alaska
Date Posted: 1/14/24 at 9:37pm
|
DirtyP, I definitely have no business gatekeeping anything in the sport, so please accept my input as just adding to the conversation and not opposition to your ideas. Athletic directors already have a heck of a time finding enough judges and field space for the many classes we already have, so adding in another one will absolutely require creativity. Combining classes in groups works pretty well sometimes at some games, but group sizes should be limited to 12 for flow and for the athletes to be able to give their best at every turn. I do know that there are AD's out there that would tell you that if you can guarantee X number of competitors, they'd be willing to make a class out of them with awards/recognition at the end of the day. Beyond that, I think it's going to be tough to encourage a nationwide movement, including a national championship until there are a lot of such local competitions with plenty of interest. So, my advice is to find as many of these little fellas (and ladies) as you can and encourage their participation. Then get your volunteer hat on and help AD's make it happen. Offer your time, throw some money into the pot to make cool awards and learn to be a judge. Try the "if you build it, they will come" mentality for a while and get it going in your local area.
------------- Professional |
Posted By: Andy Crowley
Date Posted: 1/28/24 at 7:16pm
| I wouldn't be opposed to the idea. I could see it being a good feeder class into the <200 class. Get some more guys to dip their toes and maybe get hooked. A larger talent pool isn't a bad thing, but it may attract a lot of insufferable crossfitters (mostly joking...kinda'). At the same time, I'm tempted to parrot what I always heard as smaller lightweight: "Eat more, get bigger. Be taller. Maybe you should try being a jockey. What? I can't hear you from up here," but I don't want to be a hypocrit. When I started, I was 18 and about 170 and would have jumped at a featherweight class. Now, at 35, I still don't fill out the 190 class much less 200, but I've been able to stay fairly competitive and hover around the top 10 for the last decade or so. I mention this to illustrate that I'm awesome...er wait, no...rather to illustrate that if tiny people like myself dedicate themselves to the games, they can be successful. So while I don't see the <200 limit being a huge barrier for entry, I can see how a lower class could be less intimidating for people looking to try it out. It would also be cool not to be the smallest person on the field for a change. |
Posted By: Andy Crowley
Date Posted: 1/28/24 at 7:24pm
| Just had another thought. Highland games isn't for everybody, and that's okay too. Not everything has to be for everyone. If taking a whooping by a bugger, better thrower is demoralizing rather than motivating, competing probably isn't your thing. You can throw for the fun of it and to be the best thrower you can be, or don't throw at all. That's cool. You might be surprised by the progress you can make with the "be the best you" attitude. A couple years of this and you might find yourself being competitive. There, I posted two contradictory opinions back to back. Covered all my bases. |
Posted By: O'Neill
Date Posted: 3/15/24 at 9:20am
|
Years ago I threw with a guy who was 5'7" and 165 soaking wet.... he learned to counter the weights ie 56 and could throw it 23' ... He adapted and made it work. In those days there wasn't even a lightweight class. If you truly want to throw at the Highland games... You adapt to the game.... the games shouldn't have to adapt to you. ------------- "time to play the Game..! |
Posted By: DirtyP
Date Posted: 3/19/24 at 5:17am
I assume you won't be competing in the Master's class then? Are you also against there being a women's class? ------------- Dirty P |
O'Neill wrote:Posted By: O'Neill
Date Posted: 3/28/24 at 11:06am
|
I threw in the amateur A class until I was 49. That being said, there was a Masters class established. I didn't whine about it until it happened. I do throw throw in the Masters class. So I adapted to the Game. I am the Athletic Director for the North American Championships in Enumclaw, and we have a few womens classes. Womens Pro, Amateur and Master. Anything else? ------------- "time to play the Game..! |
Posted By: DirtyP
Date Posted: 3/28/24 at 6:11pm
You understand that the game is not some organism that had a
random mutation and suddenly there was a Masters class? While you might not have advocated for a Masters class,
someone did, and I it is easy to imagine the things that would have been
discussed. -the more years people compete the more likely they are to
have injuries that hinder their future performance -as people get older, they are more likely to injure
themselves and the injuries are going to take longer to heal and have a larger effect
on their lives -as people get older it’s harder to maintain strength and muscle
mass So, while you were not one of the people who advocated for a
master’s class, my guess is that by taking advantage of it rather than
continuing to compete in amateur A class you both reduced your injuries, were
able to compete longer, and that you were more competitive in the masters class
than the amateur A class. Now you can
give back and serve as an athletic director. And while I’m not old enough to compete in the masters
classes, I can certainly understand the thought process as to why they were
created and the benefit they provide to the participants and to the financial viability
and richness of the games. If your games didn’t have a Masters class or any women’s
classes, how much shorter would your games be?
Would you have as many vendors and could you charge them as much?
Would you have as many bands?
Would you have as many bagpipers? You certainly would not have as many attendees. Now think about that in reverse, instead of eliminating
those classes from your games, imagine if you added a class? If you had a class for people under 160 or under 170 pounds,
you would have more competitors. The
competitors would have family and friends come as spectators. How would more attendees affect how many
vendors you have or what you could charge vendors? Would more attendees allow you to bring in
more or more well-known bands? Would you
attract more bagpipers? There is a lot more for people to do now than there was 10,
20, or 30 years ago, most of it is cheaper and more convenient than attending a
festival hours away in the elements. The
average man in the US is more out of shape than the average US man was 10, 20,
or 30 years ago and getting more and more out of shape every year. The number of people physically able to compete
is going to continually drop, so by adding a class the games continuing to adapt
like they have in the past (with masters, lightweights, and women), and are ensuring their own viability. So, it's up to you on if you are an old man that simply doesn't want anything to change because you see change as inherently bad or if you have a young mind and are willing to at least consider the possibility that a featherweight class might have some merit. Not saying you are bad person if you choose not to establish a featherweight class for your games, but at least discuss it with someone on your board, play devil's advocate, see if you can come up with the justification for it. I am able to acknowledge that there are valid points for not having a featherweight class, but I think all those challenges can be overcome, just like they were for masters, lightweights and women. ------------- Dirty P |
Posted By: O'Neill
Date Posted: 4/16/24 at 5:44pm
|
While I'm not dismissing your post, I will say that I believe there is a point of diminishing returns. The more classes you have, yes the more people you will have. But that also means you have to increase the size of your field, pay more judges, and buy more equipment and awards to service multiple classes. Field size is always at a premium. That is one aspect that we have zero control over. So many variables in running an athletic event that escape the average eye. My advice.... get some other athletes that are featherweights, and throw in a lightweight class. Use it as a showcase to entice the athletic director to give it a shot. ------------- "time to play the Game..! |
Posted By: Jason Cherry
Date Posted: 5/26/24 at 6:30pm
|
Late to the dance but a dog in the fight. Started in 2009 I was crossfitter at a body weight 130 and throwing the 56. I asked for guidance from the forum. The answer was if you want to throw far you need to eat big and lift big..."no swimsuit models here" (Craig Smith). I drank a gallon of milk a day for two years and got stronger. At 180 I beat guys in the A class that had me by sixty pounds. Over the years I would stay around 190 and aged into the master's class. I throw masters the cast majority of the time. I prefer to hunt giants. I ran the Gaylord games for ten years. Scottish games needs another class like it needs a hole in the head. You want to throw...throw. You want to be relevant lift and practice. You want to win eat big or go home. Straight up: buckle up buttercup. No offense this is just my experience. ------------- "Example is the best precept." ~ Aesop |