405 squat below parallel with no wraps or belt, 450 parallel w/wraps&belt

Educate yourself, thank me later - http://strengtheory.com/the-belt-bible/
The question is not "should I use a belt". The question is spurred by an erroneous assumption that simply wearing gear automatically makes you stronger, so again, the question remains. If putting on your squat suit automatically adds power to your lifts, then why are lifters that hold world records in raw lifts not holding the geared as well? As stated earlier in the thread, putting stuff on means you'll get at least 50 more lbs.

You think sumo is cheating, too?
 
Belt use is highly individual and completely depends on your current training program/goals.

Period.
 
The question is not "should I use a belt". The question is spurred by an erroneous assumption that simply wearing gear automatically makes you stronger, so again, the question remains. If putting on your squat suit automatically adds power to your lifts, then why are lifters that hold world records in raw lifts not holding the geared as well? As stated earlier in the thread, putting stuff on means you'll get at least 50 more lbs.

You think sumo is cheating, too?

This is bad logic from top to bottom.
 
"Use it for the bulk of your training", but I can post other "educated" write ups saying only use them for your heaviest attempts.

Not being an asshole here, but could you post some of them then? I would be interested.

Oh.. but to be a little bit of an asshole, why did you put 'educated' in scare quotes? Are you saying Greg Nuckols isn't educated? I mean, on the formal side he only has a Bachelors Degree in Sports Science, but that still counts as being formally educated and you only have to read some of his stuff to see how much time and effort he puts in reading and understanding all the relevant studies.
 
The question is spurred by an erroneous assumption that simply wearing gear automatically makes you stronger,

I'm sure as hell I didn't say that. I think no one did but maybe I didn't read carefully other comments (or someone who I've blocked did). Wearing a belt doesn't instantly make you stronger, but it will make you stronger over time.

Oh.. but to be a little bit of an asshole, why did you put 'educated' in scare quotes? Are you saying Greg Nuckols isn't educated? I mean, on the formal side he only has a Bachelors Degree in Sports Science, but that still counts as being formally educated and you only have to read some of his stuff to see how much time and effort he puts in reading and understanding all the relevant studies.

Isn't he a doctor by now?

"Use it for the bulk of your training", but I can post other "educated" write ups saying only use them for your heaviest attempts.

I'd like to read them, because that article is the best I've seen regarding belt use both in depth and argumentation. So it'd be interesting to see the other point of view.
 
Putting on a bench shirt or knee wraps or a squat suit doesn't make one stronger. No. But it provides a mechanical advantage, immediately and without question. And with practice, guys can maximize that mechanical advantage and move way more weight. There's a reason why all the geared records are higher than the raw ones, and it's not that the athletes are necessarily stronger.

Of course, there are some guys who do lift both in gear and raw. Joe Mazza comes to mind. He at one time held records in both raw and geared bench press at 165-170 or so. IIRC he benched 485 raw and 705 with a shirt.

Yes, the shirt gave him 220 pounds.

The thing to understand in powerlifting is that there's protective equipment (like a belt, wrist wraps, knee sleeves, shoes) and there's assistive equipment, as previously mentioned. The protective stuff doesn't by design add pounds to your lifts. It makes them safer.

Assistive gear, by design, adds pounds to your lift via mechanical advantage. Or, like wrist straps for deadlifting, allows you to complete a lift you otherwise couldn't.

Why can't a person be expected to instantly get hundreds of more pounds the second they put on a bench shirt? Because it takes a little time to get used to the equipment.

I was a pole vaulter in high school. If I handed a high jumper the pole and told him he could instantly go over a bar ten feet higher than he's ever gone over before, I'd be lying. But the mechanical advantage of that pole does allow it, once he practices for a while.

Just as you can't compare a pole vault with a high jump apples to apples, you can't compare a geared lift to a raw lift without mentioning the equipment.

But don't get confused. Both a high jumper and a pole vaulter wear shoes to protect their feet and grip the track. That's universal equipment, like a belt in both raw and geared lifting, meant for safely. Taking away a belt may cost pounds due to lost stability and intrabdominal pressure, but a belt isn't considered assistive.

Hope this clears things up a bit.
 
I'm sure as hell I didn't say that. I think no one did but maybe I didn't read carefully other comments (or someone who I've blocked did). Wearing a belt doesn't instantly make you stronger, but it will make you stronger over time.



Isn't he a doctor by now?



I'd like to read them, because that article is the best I've seen regarding belt use both in depth and argumentation. So it'd be interesting to see the other point of view.
They may have changed the comment. I haven't looked back for it, but someone said something along the lines of "If wraps and a belt only add 50lbs to your squat then something is wrong". I agree with what you and @Cmart are saying. Which is why I stated it should be considered a classification of lift when you're doing an equipped lift instead of "oh this is easier and I'll disregard it because they're wearing assitive equipment".

If suiting up meant you gain a certain amount, then the strongest raw lifters would also be the strongest equipped lifters because who doesn't want both records? It's a very different skillset.
 
...If suiting up meant you gain a certain amount, then the strongest raw lifters would also be the strongest equipped lifters because who doesn't want both records? It's a very different skillset.

"Suiting up" does mean exactly that -- that you will gain a certain amount.

And, as I just said (and named an example) there are lifters who do both raw and suited. And of course the strongest raw guys are also the strongest geared. The gear adds. If you have more strength to start with, adding to it gives the highest total.
 
"Suiting up" does mean exactly that -- that you will gain a certain amount.

And, as I just said (and named an example) there are lifters who do both raw and suited. And of course the strongest raw guys are also the strongest geared. The gear adds. If you have more strength to start with, adding to it gives the highest total.

Not necessarily.

Some guys are simply better at using the gear and get more out of it.
 
Not necessarily.

Some guys are simply better at using the gear and get more out of it.
Let's not muddy the issue too much. Typically it's the stronger people making the bigger lifts, equipped or not. Many times it's the same people, like the example I stated.

Any equipped lifter, if you ask them, will be able to give you his raw lift number and his equipped lift number. The equipped one will vary due to the ply they use. But it will be a certain amount. One could easily extrapolate how much gear adds by collection of that information.

It will vary some from lifter to lifter but there's an overall average, a percentage, that you'd find that the gear adds.
 
I think Jim or Cmart are both right in a sense, however I've seen and know many lifters that suck in gear and the numbers they put up in gear don't do justice compared to their raw strength.

One of my local rivals when I use to compete would blow me out of the water raw, but with gear I had potential to beat him. I also wasn't that great in equipment either, but he was just horrible in it, hence why I believe a few years later he just started competing raw when it got more popular. I also seen many multi-ply guys that get high squats passed that are average raw, especially in the squat and sometimes the bench. I can give real life examples of every scenario in and out the gear so it just varies by the person and how they train. After I stopped competing I lost over 5# (I'm a small guy) and my raw squat was at it's best a year later since I stopped focusing on gear based squat training.
 
I don't follow geared lifting at all, but I'd be surprised if you can say gear adds X to your lift or even a certain % to your lift. I've seen people try to say a belt adds X or a certain %, but I think it can vary greatly.
 
Let's not muddy the issue too much.

It's not. Aside from being as strong as possible, being able to squeeze every pound out of your gear is also a huge factor and another skill on its own.

Gear brands, knee wrap type (stiff or springy), how you wrap your knees, suit/shirt styles and alterations, ability to afford new gear, how much you train in the gear, being able to use it properly on meet day (hitting depth in the squat, touching your chest in a shirt).
 
It's not. Aside from being as strong as possible, being able to squeeze every pound out of your gear is also a huge factor and another skill on its own.

Gear brands, knee wrap type (stiff or springy), how you wrap your knees, suit/shirt styles and alterations, ability to afford new gear, how much you train in the gear, being able to use it properly on meet day (hitting depth in the squat, touching your chest in a shirt).

Take every lifter who's used gear, track their raw numbers vs. their equipped numbers, and get the average. You'll arrive at a ballpark of what a person can expect to get out of that gear. Of course peoples' mileage will vary.

Joe Mazza, a record holder for a time in both raw and shirted, got just over 45% increase with the shirt. That's a massive increase. But he's a guy who held both records, which I noted in answer to the earlier post about it being separate lifters in raw and geared. Often it is, sometimes it isn't. Even geared lifters have raw numbers, though.

Barbend.com did an article with a very simple nutshell explanation of raw and equipped: https://barbend.com/explain-like-im-five-what-exactly-is-raw-and-equipped-powerlifting/

From the article: "It’s estimated (this varies a bit) that equipped lifting allows the athlete to lift approximately 115% of their max, with proficient Equipped lifters lifting far beyond that percentage."

That's low, in my estimation. But if you did a big, huge study, you'd get a more reliable average. Yes, with variation, but an average. And you could use that to predict geared performance to an extent. That's the point I'm making.

This is typical of internet discussions about things in general -- a point is made like "Baseball players can hit a ball farther with an aluminum bat than a wooden one." and then you get guys who think they're clever when they come up with a counterexample. The axiom still holds, there really isn't an argument to be made, but you gotta always have the guy that says person X hit it farther than person Y and X used a wooden bat and Y used an aluminum one so there! So yes, some people get more out of gear, some get less. The average is _____, something like 20% or whatever, and that's what you can expect out of gear.
 
Disagree with him all you want but Cmart is the best new addition to the main I've seen in some time.

He's not coming at you with flagrant bullshit
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,987
Messages
55,528,925
Members
174,815
Latest member
Alex Baker
Back
Top