Determining the Dependence between Weightlifting
Results in Different Weight Classes
|
Mochernyuk, V., Draga,V., |
Submitted for Publication
11/7/2001
|
Translated by Andrew Charniga, Jr.
|
Do not reproduce or republish in part or in
whole without the expressed consent of the author. ©
2001 |
A positive dependence between the athlete's bodyweight and
his strength indicators has long since been established.
However, the interconnection between a weightlifter's
bodyweight and his results is more complex.
An analysis of the existing systems employed to assess
equivalent results in weightlifting, revealed that they
stipulate equal proportion between the results in different
weight classes for all levels of mastery.
We endeavored to compare the results of athletes of
different bodyweight in order to determine their equivalent
results. We constructed a theoretical model in order to answer
the question as to how the results (x) change if the athlete's
bodyweight is (y). We determined the changes in absolute and
relative strength which accompanied the changes in bodyweight.
We also looked at how this in turn affected sport results, the
athlete's power (absolute and relative) and the quantity of
work he was able to execute in the competition exercises.
Competition results in weightlifting are not directly
proportional to absolute strength. Therefore, it is necessary
to determine not only the correlation between absolute
strength of athlete's of different bodyweights, but also, the
correlation between their results in specific exercises.
During the movement of the athlete's body or its links in the
execution of the weightlifting exercises different portions of
the absolute strength are expressed in the direction of the
expended effort. Therefore, it is not possible to use one
formula to compare results in the weightlifting
exercises.
The effort expended by the beginner in shifting his own
body during the execution of the classic exercises (40 - 60%
of the absolute strength) is quite different from the highly
qualified athlete (20 - 30%). In order to complete our task it
is necessary to answer the question as to how much strength
increases with the increase in weight class; relative to how
much additional effort is required for the lifter to move his
body during the execution of the weightlifting exercises.
Therefore, it necessary to determine the proportions between
the results in each concrete case.
We accept the notion that all things being equal, strength
will be proportional to the cross - sectional area of the
muscles. The parameters of the weightlifter's body change with
the rise in weight class. These changes in proportions are
important, because strength depends on the area of the cross -
sectional diameter and not upon the athlete's height.
Therefore, it necessary to reveal how body proportions are
different in the various weight classes. We analyzed the
average height and bodyweight of the weightlifters of the 1996
Olympiad. Analysis of the data revealed a high rate of growth
in the diameter of the body with the rise in weight class.
Table 1 |
Changes in Body Proportions
Relative to Increasing Weight
Class |
Weight
Class |
54 |
59 |
64 |
70 |
76 |
83 |
91 |
99 |
108 |
>108 |
Average
Height, cm |
156 |
161 |
163 |
164 |
170 |
171 |
174 |
178 |
179 |
183 |
Increase in
height, % |
1 |
1.03 |
1.05 |
1.05 |
1.09 |
1.1 |
1.12 |
1.14 |
1.15 |
1.17 |
Increase in
area, % |
1 |
1.06 |
1.13 |
1.23 |
1.29 |
1.4 |
1.51 |
1.61 |
1.74 |
1.92 | |
For example, a 108 kg class athlete is an average of only
15% taller than a 54 kg lifter; but, should be 26% taller if
the body proportions were equivalent. Therefore, one can
assume in subsequent calculations of highly - qualified
athletes (except the superheavyweights who have a significant
amount of body fat) that absolute strength corresponds to the
cross - sectional area for the various weight classes.
Utilizing Microsoft Excel we were able to construct a graphic
dependence depicting the interconnection between strength and
the highly - qualified lifter's bodyweight. Utilizing Lagand's
polynom we were able to determine the relationship between
bodyweight and strength for bodyweights in excess of 30
kg.
Figure 1. The Dependence Between Bodyweight and the
Strength of Highly - Qualified Weightlifters.
This relationship can be expressed by the formula: F =
-0.00007 m2 + 0.0224m; with a reliability of approximation R2=
0.98
So, in order to determine the equivalent results in the
competition exercises for athletes in different weight classes
we made the following calculations. We can determine the
equivalent results between a 105 kg lifter and a 56 kg lifter.
A 56 kg lifter has a biathlon result of 275 kg (112.5 + 152.5)
a sixth place at the 2000 Olympics. Now what is the equivalent
result of a 105 kg lifter? First we have to establish the
absolute strength of the first athlete. The limiting strength
factor in the clean and jerk is the absolute strength of the
legs. Therefore, we calculte the front squat results (r = 0.7
from the result in the clean and jerk) to determine the
strength o the thigh extensors. We can use 1.14 as the clean
and jerk ratio (this is the ratio of front squat to clean and
jerk of qualified athletes) and add 0.9 times the athlete's
bodyweight (this is the portion of the athlete's bodyweight
which changes position in this exercise). As a result we
obtain 224.3 kg. Then 224.3 kg is multiplied by (-0.00007 *105
squared + 0.0224 *105) (this is the formula which depicts the
ratio of the absolute strength between athletes of different
bodyweight - 105 and 56 kg in this instance) subtract 0.9 of
his bodyweight (94.5 kg) and divide by 1.14 (the front squat
to clean and jerk ratio) to obtain a result of 227.5 kg
rounded off to the nearest 2.5 kg. This will be the equivalent
result in the clean and jerk for a 105 kg lifter in comparison
with a result of 152.5 kg for a 56 kg lifter. The
corresponding results for the snatch and total will be 187.5
kg and 415 kg respectively.
Presented in the following table are the calculated
equivalent achievements for the all of the weight
classes.
Table 2 |
A Draft of Classification Norms
for Weightlifting |
Weight Class |
MSIC |
MS |
CMS |
Cl. I |
Cl/ II |
Cl. III |
Yu. I |
YU.II |
YU.III |
56 |
275 |
220 |
197.5 |
177.5 |
160 |
145 |
130 |
117.5 |
105 |
62 |
310 |
247.5 |
222.5 |
200 |
180 |
162.5 |
147.5 |
132.5 |
120 |
69 |
332.5 |
265 |
237.5 |
215 |
192.5 |
172.5 |
155 |
140 |
125 |
77 |
355 |
282.5 |
255 |
227.5 |
205 |
182.5 |
165 |
147.5 |
132.5 |
85 |
375 |
297.5 |
267.5 |
240 |
215 |
192.5 |
172.5 |
152.5 |
137.5 |
94 |
395 |
312.5 |
277.5 |
250 |
222.5 |
200 |
177.5 |
157.5 |
140 |
105 |
415 |
322.5 |
287.5 |
257.5 |
230 |
205 |
180 |
160 |
142.5 |
105+ |
430 |
332.5 |
295 |
260 |
230 |
202.5 |
|
|
| |
MSIC - Master of Sport International Class; MS - Master of
Sport; CMS - Candidate for Master of Sport; Cl. I - III -
Class one, two etc.; Yu. - Youth class
We used a total of 275 kg for the 56 kg class (sixth place
at the 2000 Olympics) as the initial point for our
calculations. The norms for MSIC (master of sport
international class) obtained by our calculations would be a
place fifth in the 62 kg class; sixth in the 69, 77 and 105 kg
classes; and seventh in the 85, 94 and 105+ classes. This
conformity between the calculated equivalent achievements and
the actual events confirms the correctness of the
methods.
Our system stands in contrast to the existing, in that the
proportions between the results of the athletes in different
weight classes are not constant. The proportions are 1.36 (for
the 105 and 56 kg classes) for the lower qualified athletes
and 1.50 for the higher qualifications. Accompanying the rise
in sport qualification there is a deviation between results of
a constant magnitude, because the qualified athlete expends
less effort in shifting his own
bodyweight.
|