Author Topic: Why is the IFBB contest called the 202lbs and under? (Read 2035 times)

BIG ACH · « **on:** August 17, 2009, 12:15:48 PM »

Why is it under 202 lbs class and not under 200 lbs?

I never understood that, what is the reasoning for those 2 lbs?

Chick · « **Reply #1 on:** August 17, 2009, 12:19:25 PM »

Good question...

Originally it was 210, which then was reduced to 202. My suggestion was 205 which I thought was the perfect number t allow for a 7 lb. gain for anyone in the amateurs coming from the top of the Lt Heavy class.

emn1964 · « **Reply #2 on:** August 17, 2009, 12:22:36 PM »

Quote from: Chick on August 17, 2009, 12:19:25 PM

Good question...

Originally it was 210, which then was reduced to 202. My suggestion was 205 which I thought was the perfect number t allow for a 7 lb. gain for anyone in the amateurs coming from the top of the Lt Heavy class.

why a weight class and not a height class like the olden days?

Chick · « **Reply #3 on:** August 17, 2009, 12:25:53 PM »

Quote from: emn1964 on August 17, 2009, 12:22:36 PM

why a weight class and not a height class like the olden days?

We use weight classes in the NPC, only makes sense to keep it the same in the pro's...that said, height classes never made sense to me at all.

TRIX · « **Reply #4 on:** August 17, 2009, 12:31:43 PM »

200 would of been better 91 kgs

BIG ACH · « **Reply #5 on:** August 17, 2009, 12:33:17 PM »

Hey Chick, thanks for the answer, I never thought about taking into consideration the weight classes from the amateur ranks - good point. 205 or 210 makes more sense, 202 is just such a random number

I've competed at shows where height classes were used and I've done shows where weight classes were used.

Being a tall guy, I found that I had an advantage when I was competing in height classes, but it proved to be a great disadvantage for shorter individuals. I guess weight classes is the lesser of the two evils.

I've seen some countries in Europe do classes divided by a weight/height ratio - which then you had classes with very similar looking physiques.

#1 Klaus fan · « **Reply #6 on:** August 17, 2009, 03:55:25 PM »

Quote from: BIG ACH on August 17, 2009, 12:33:17 PM

I've seen some countries in Europe do classes divided by a weight/height ratio - which then you had classes with very similar looking physiques.

Known as classic bodybuilding? They count how much you can weight by taking of a number from your height. The number is little smaller for taller classes. For example it could go like 180cm - 96 = would be 84 kg max weight. I think this is a good system.

About the original question: I think 200 pounds is as random number as 202.

Milos_Sarcev · « **Reply #7 on:** August 17, 2009, 08:46:29 PM »

Quote from: Chick on August 17, 2009, 12:19:25 PM

Good question...

Originally it was 210, which then was reduced to 202. My suggestion was 205 which I thought was the perfect number t allow for a 7 lb. gain for anyone in the amateurs coming from the top of the Lt Heavy class.

Typical Bobby "answer"...

Bobby - why is under 202 and not 200?

Originally it was this, my suggestion (like anyone needs your suggestion genius) was that (BTW - anything I suggest is "perfect"...like 7 pounds and 2.3 ounces is absolutely the best amount of weight insignificant amateurs /that I could care less for/ should gain to be significantly ignored by me when they get their pro cards...)...

Oh boy...Bobby the puppet signs for the Muppet (show)...

G o a t b o y · « **Reply #8 on:** August 17, 2009, 08:57:10 PM »

Quote from: Chick on August 17, 2009, 12:25:53 PM

We use weight classes in the NPC, only makes sense to keep it the same in the pro's...that said, height classes never made sense to me at all.

In bodybuilding, height classes make much more sense than weight classes. A 198-lb guy @ 5'5" is going to look a lot different that a 198-lb guy @ 6'5". One is hyper-developed, and the other is underdeveloped. Yet in a weight-class system, they compete against each other.

240 is Back · « **Reply #9 on:** August 17, 2009, 09:39:57 PM »

Quote from: G o a t b o y on August 17, 2009, 08:57:10 PM

In bodybuilding, height classes make much more sense than weight classes. A 198-lb guy @ 5'5" is going to look a lot different that a 198-lb guy @ 6'5". One is hyper-developed, and the other is underdeveloped. Yet in a weight-class system, they compete against each other.

I thought all bodybuidlers were under 5 foot 5?

Chick · « **Reply #10 on:** August 18, 2009, 05:21:45 AM »

Quote from: G o a t b o y on August 17, 2009, 08:57:10 PM

In bodybuilding, height classes make much more sense than weight classes. A 198-lb guy @ 5'5" is going to look a lot different that a 198-lb guy @ 6'5". One is hyper-developed, and the other is underdeveloped. Yet in a weight-class system, they compete against each other.

Spoken like someone who doesn't anything about BB...

Chick · « **Reply #11 on:** August 18, 2009, 05:34:35 AM »

Quote from: divcom on August 18, 2009, 05:30:54 AM

oh man....i was so wishing chick muppet would have replied so u two could have a multi-page insider industry s##t tossing contest.

Nothing really to respond to....just Milos and his usual nonsense...whatever is out there, he disagrees, but offers NOTHING in response.

divcom · « **Reply #12 on:** August 18, 2009, 09:00:02 AM »

Quote from: Chick on August 18, 2009, 05:34:35 AM

Nothing really to respond to....just Milos and his usual nonsense...whatever is out there, he disagrees, but offers NOTHING in response.

u are no fun...chick.

emn1964 · « **Reply #13 on:** August 18, 2009, 09:03:40 AM »

Quote from: G o a t b o y on August 17, 2009, 08:57:10 PM

In bodybuilding, height classes make much more sense than weight classes. A 198-lb guy @ 5'5" is going to look a lot different that a 198-lb guy @ 6'5". One is hyper-developed, and the other is underdeveloped. Yet in a weight-class system, they compete against each other.

that was my thought GB...perhaps Lee Thomspon would have a different opinion?

toolarge4u · « **Reply #14 on:** August 18, 2009, 09:57:14 AM »

Quote from: Chick on August 18, 2009, 05:34:35 AM

Nothing really to respond to....just Milos and his usual nonsense...whatever is out there, he disagrees, but offers NOTHING in response.

uh chick... ya he does dont play that game. You got a much better retort for this. Dont lay down. Come on big fella, have some coffee or meth and come back at him in chick fashion.

wavelength · « **Reply #15 on:** August 18, 2009, 10:19:54 AM »

I also don't understand the weight classes. Why should a short guy be forced to compete with the tall guys just because he manages to gain more muscle than the other short guys?

Chick · « **Reply #16 on:** August 18, 2009, 10:29:37 AM »

Quote from: wavelength on August 18, 2009, 10:19:54 AM

I also don't understand the weight classes. Why should a short guy be forced to compete with the tall guys just because he manages to gain more muscle than the other short guys?

Weight classes are designed to keep those with a relative amount of muscle/ size/ etc, competing on equal ground....

emn1964 · « **Reply #17 on:** August 18, 2009, 10:35:39 AM »

Quote from: Chick on August 18, 2009, 10:29:37 AM

Weight classes are designed to keep those with a relative amount of muscle/ size/ etc, competing on equal ground....

--Chic: so take for example two competitors...both 202 pounds. one is 5'3 and the other is 5'10". both have same condition, symetry and proportions. who is the better bodybuilder

Chick · « **Reply #18 on:** August 18, 2009, 10:40:12 AM »

Quote from: emn1964 on August 18, 2009, 10:35:39 AM

--Chic: so take for example two competitors...both 202 pounds. one is 5'3 and the other is 5'10". both have same condition, symetry and proportions. who is the better bodybuilder

Most likely the 5'3 guy....5'10/ 200 at the pro level aint going to get job done

Ron · « **Reply #19 on:** August 18, 2009, 10:49:16 AM »

The first contest was the 210lbs and under, in which Silvio came in at 207 pounds and dominate the field. So my guess is that Silvio, which was a top 6 IFBB bodybuilder competitor, could win both shows (the regular and the 210 pounds) with no problem.

Hence, two good changes were made. One, make the weight less (202lbs is good) and two, have the competitors CHOOSE which show they want to be in.

Of course, someone like David Henry at the IFBB Tampa Pro could easily have won both shows, so it does deny us the chance to see David Henry being compared against Dennis James, and so on.

In talking to a lot of the smaller weight competitors, they are happy with the contest, because without it, many of them would never have a chance against the bigger guys.

But one can also argue that Lee Labrada competed at under 200 pounds, and looked great against the big guys.

ManBearPig... · « **Reply #20 on:** August 18, 2009, 10:51:42 AM »

you're definitely over 202, Ron.

timfogarty · « **Reply #21 on:** August 18, 2009, 10:54:58 AM »

Quote from: Ron on August 18, 2009, 10:49:16 AM

In talking to a lot of the smaller weight competitors, they are happy with the contest, because without it, many of them would never have a chance against the bigger guys.

its good for the sport because it takes mass over everything out of the equation. contestants then can concentrate on symmetry and proportionality.

Quote

But one can also argue that Lee Labrada competed at under 200 pounds, and looked great against the big guys.

When Lee was competing, the big guys were more likely in the 220-240 range.

njflex · « **Reply #22 on:** August 18, 2009, 11:06:58 AM »

Quote from: timfogarty on August 18, 2009, 10:54:58 AM

its good for the sport because it takes mass over everything out of the equation. contestants then can concentrate on symmetry and proportionality.

When Lee was competing, the big guys were more likely in the 220-240 range.

EXCEPT HANEY,YATES.

timfogarty · « **Reply #23 on:** August 18, 2009, 11:27:54 AM »

Quote from: njflex on August 18, 2009, 11:06:58 AM

EXCEPT HANEY,YATES.

Haney was about 240, Yates was mostly after Labrada

emn1964 · « **Reply #24 on:** August 18, 2009, 11:29:22 AM »

Quote from: Chick on August 18, 2009, 10:40:12 AM

Most likely the 5'3 guy....5'10/ 200 at the pro level aint going to get job done

so, same amount of muscle on both guys, but short guy is better. see, that's why weight clsases makes no sense.