|
|
Post by John Milne on Jan 20, 2011 10:23:36 GMT -5
Good Al. I've told you that you can be the worlds best. You just have to dedicate yourself to it
|
|
|
|
Post by Bilal Kreidieh on Jan 20, 2011 12:35:43 GMT -5
Good Al. I've told you that you can be the worlds best. You just have to dedicate yourself to it Agreed. If you've gotten this far without even getting into the gym, holy shit!! |
|
|
|
Post by Mike Woolvett on Jan 20, 2011 19:49:01 GMT -5
I started in this sport with 15 years of weight lifting under my belt. And I agree with u Bilal, it's a great foundation to work with. But in order to be great in this sport ur training will need to evolve (as I'm sure it will). And the most important thing.... Can u and ur ego take serious ass kickings and periods of self doubt?? This is inevitable to all who trek through this path. Dispite the variables... You without a doubt are starting with advantages. I don't mind losing to people who are stronger than me, but I would hate losing to people who are just "faster" or have better technique. That would suck but I know it will happen. Such is life. You have to understand losing to enjoy winning. I don't understand this way of thinking. If you lose to a guy who has better technique than you, you are losing to a better arm wrestler. Where is the shame in that? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2011 21:18:39 GMT -5
Because aw is a STENGTH sport. Techique and speed only come into play if opponents are within 15% of eachother aw strength level. If ur getting beat by technique only... It's time to get stronger.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bilal Kreidieh on Jan 20, 2011 23:09:46 GMT -5
Because aw is a STENGTH sport. Techique and speed only come into play if opponents are within 15% of eachother aw strength level. If ur getting beat by technique only... It's time to get stronger. Again, I agree 100%. |
|
|
|
Post by Bilal Kreidieh on Jan 20, 2011 23:10:36 GMT -5
Because aw is a STENGTH sport. Techique and speed only come into play if opponents are within 15% of eachother aw strength level. If ur getting beat by technique only... It's time to get stronger. As I'm sure you're aware, when you get to higher levels and you have both been doing this forever, technique and speed and what not is almost on equal grounds. Strength and power is what will separate a winner from a loser. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2011 23:50:35 GMT -5
Agreed Bilal. At the pro level of aw a technical advantage is non exsistent.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bilal Kreidieh on Jan 21, 2011 0:15:53 GMT -5
Agreed Bilal. At the pro level of aw a technical advantage is non exsistent. Anyone can learn technique. You're going to tell me if I arm wrestle for the next 3-5 years consistently, my technique is not going to be near perfect? The only thing that would separate me from other arm wrestlers who are better than me would be their strength. Sure experience plays a role, but it's not exactly brain surgery. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2011 1:28:42 GMT -5
If u commit urself to aw, then yes in 3 years when u lose it will be to a stronger puller. What is "technique" in this sport?? It's the ability to get ur "position"(ie hook hand control, top roll hand position) upon initiation of match. And even that is a strength aspect! It's all about the strength of the moving parts ur trying to initiate with. If someone loses due to "technique" they simply do not know where to apply force. Ex: novice pullers.
Bilal u are correct, it's not brain surgery. If I get top rolled, my down cup and bk fingers need to get stronger.
I love when guys say "well I felt stronger, but I lost cuz he was faster". Speed is STRENGTH. it's all about strength. realizing how to apply it should come very fast.
The technical part of aw is bullshit and highly overrated.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Milne on Jan 21, 2011 1:51:26 GMT -5
Bilal, I will tell you that its quite possible that your technique will not be near perfect in 3 years or even 5 years for that matter. You will find that it's more difficult than you think and that you're (hopefully) always learning.
I will also contend that technique is not over rated. It's not often that Mr. Gobby and I disagree but we appear to be here.
For example - Milne vs. Penney.
There was NO question Mr. Penney was stronger than me. If we were similar in strength he wouldn't have dominated the hit and the center of the table as he did in the first two matches. I was fortunate enough that his technique failed him in that match as he went for the pin. I was able to catch him because he was opening his angles up and getting too low under the table. I had to wait for opportunities to attack him when he was in a technically inferior position.
In match three I changed my technique to a pure counter. Our strength levels were still the same but I was able to control the center of the table because I could control his rotation by changing techniques.
I hope this serves as a good example regarding technique not being over rated. Sometimes a little change in attack is all you need
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2011 2:31:38 GMT -5
That is a fair point Mr Milne. But u could also say that in match 1, ur defensive cup strength was stronger than jeffs rotator strength. In the 3 rd match, ur bk pressure and rotation was too strong for his defensive cup and his hand opened.
However i agree, technique played a big part in ur victory. But these cases are few and far between within matches amoung experienced competetive aw's. GREAT VIDEO BY THE WAY!! that was a huge win, u were a big underdog.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bilal Kreidieh on Jan 21, 2011 7:26:12 GMT -5
Bilal, I will tell you that its quite possible that your technique will not be near perfect in 3 years or even 5 years for that matter. You will find that it's more difficult than you think and that you're (hopefully) always learning. I will also contend that technique is not over rated. It's not often that Mr. Gobby and I disagree but we appear to be here. For example - Milne vs. Penney. There was NO question Mr. Penney was stronger than me. If we were similar in strength he wouldn't have dominated the hit and the center of the table as he did in the first two matches. I was fortunate enough that his technique failed him in that match as he went for the pin. I was able to catch him because he was opening his angles up and getting too low under the table. I had to wait for opportunities to attack him when he was in a technically inferior position. In match three I changed my technique to a pure counter. Our strength levels were still the same but I was able to control the center of the table because I could control his rotation by changing techniques. I hope this serves as a good example regarding technique not being over rated. Sometimes a little change in attack is all you need I do not believe technique is overrated. I believe a technical aw will dominate a non technical one, but a much stronger aw will dominate a weak but very technical aw. That's all I'm saying. End all be all, strength comes first. You're telling me Devon beat everyone because of his technique?? That his technique is superior to John?? John is known for having perfect technique. I'm saying at this level of the game, when aw's technique are near perfect, the strength aspect becomes very underrated. |
|
|
|
Post by Bilal Kreidieh on Jan 21, 2011 7:27:25 GMT -5
Bilal, I will tell you that its quite possible that your technique will not be near perfect in 3 years or even 5 years for that matter. You will find that it's more difficult than you think and that you're (hopefully) always learning. I will also contend that technique is not over rated. It's not often that Mr. Gobby and I disagree but we appear to be here. For example - Milne vs. Penney. There was NO question Mr. Penney was stronger than me. If we were similar in strength he wouldn't have dominated the hit and the center of the table as he did in the first two matches. I was fortunate enough that his technique failed him in that match as he went for the pin. I was able to catch him because he was opening his angles up and getting too low under the table. I had to wait for opportunities to attack him when he was in a technically inferior position. In match three I changed my technique to a pure counter. Our strength levels were still the same but I was able to control the center of the table because I could control his rotation by changing techniques. I hope this serves as a good example regarding technique not being over rated. Sometimes a little change in attack is all you need ...Jeff made a mistake, you capitalized on it. He may have been stronger but his strength was not properly used or allocated. |
|
|
|
Post by John Milne on Jan 21, 2011 10:11:34 GMT -5
Bilal, I will say that Devon is stronger than John. I will also say that Devon is technically far superior to John as well. In my opinion John really has no chance vs Devon over 6 rounds or even over 3.
Back to the video. Any way you look at it or break it down. Technique won that match for me. Jeff is stronger and there is no question. I applied my strength better using "technique". We all know that you need to be strong enough to apply your chosen technique so I'm not saying strength has no part, just that technique should not be over looked. There are times when the only advantage you may have is a technical one and you must capitalize on that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jeff Slater on Jan 21, 2011 10:51:58 GMT -5
Technique comes into effect at all levels of armwrestling. The more you know, the further you will get. You use your technique to out smart your opponent at the table. To get the easy win.
I have always used technique mostly because I have not always been the strongest at the table.
In short, I believe that John is right in what he is saying. Make sure you learn great technique.
|
|
