Great video man! And we all need to realise Kjell's incredible execution of the last few years. And when he gets that full 790-800 kg comp, and he will, he must be in the conversation of best lifter of all time. Period.
Thank you! Yes absolutely, hell 800 is still a total only 4 lifters have ever hit as a 74/75 (one of them being Kjell). Hitting that at 66 is nuts, and if it weren't for Kjell I don't think we'd even be talking about 800 at 66 until years down the line.
Great analysis! Did the same at my powerlifitng gym. We have board with weight classes. I cut down to 148 and blew the current numbers out of the water.
i thought of this aswell. I dont think its true though. I think he thought we would be able to challenge austin after arnold. But after worlds he and his coach realized they could make hthis move.
I feel like a lot of people will try to follow the same strategy as kjell, to cut down a class, but the heavier you are, the more difficult it gets, because the difference in weight between classes gets bigger as the classes go up.
noo one else can do this now. if you look at world records per weight class and the amount of toital kjell lost its impossible for everyone else to do it.
It's definitely something that will be on more people's radars now. While it is hard to see anyone doing it quite as successfully as Kjell at the moment, you never know...
You can call it a genius move but end of the day, Kjell is a 74 and he couldn't compete with Perkins. It's a bit odd in a sport which focuses on big lifts that there's so much praise for Kjell. Of course it's a very good 66 record, but Perkins still comes out better on coefficients and is still a stronger lifter. That's what matters. Nice for Sheffield, but that's a one time move.
While he didn't beat Perk he was definitely competing with him and pushed him at worlds. Also idk about claiming Perk is stronger based on coefficients, they're all arbitrary and change all the time (wilks, dots, gl points etc.). I'd argue the % over the WR (i.e. how much stronger you are than anyone in history in that weight class) is a better way of comparing across weight classes than a random formula someone cooked up back in the day
@@PresserPowerlifting Yes, he pushed Perkins more than necessary at Worlds, albeit in hindsight it wouldn't have mattered because Perkins had a subpar day. I'm no fan of coefficients either but they're the best we have. Whilst ranking changes, it doesn't across weight classes (more so some coefficients favour lighter/heavier or mid, etc more) and it's clear that Perkins is a phenom and one of or the best. Think about it like this: There's not many 59kg men who lift, and so I think it's pretty easy to appreciate there's far less competition in that class than say 83/93kg. Therefore, the quality of WR is not the same in each. Coefficient is a way for us to rank these things. Take an extreme example to prove a point: There's now a 45kg weight class for men ... is the person breaking the record 1% every year (only competitor) really better than a Perkins or a John Haack who don't break it 1% a year?
Yes at the end of the day no method of comparing across weight classes is going to be perfect or completely objective. Obviously for your example the 45kg lifter wouldn't be more impressive than Perk. However let's keep it to the 8 real IPF weight classes (59 - 120+), that's the range where we are going to continue seeing the best in the world challenge each other and push the numbers up consistently. While I agree at the moment some weight classes are not as developed/strong as others relatively, that's something that will even out as the sport grows and the talent pool across all classes grows with it. Eventually each weight class will have a similar number of outlier/generational lifters and then the WR% scoring criteria will work even better. Even today though, who's to say Kjell's 770 isn't relatively stronger than Perk's 843? Like maybe that's just the way strength scales in that bodyweight range? The historical numbers of previous top 66s and 74s kinda supports that... I'm not necessarily saying that 770 @ 66 > 843 @ 74 (I don't think there is an answer here, you could argue either way), I'm just saying I don't buy that Perk's 843 is clearly better just because some vague formula said so.
@PresserPowerlifting Personally for me it's easy. Kjell has been an 83 and 74 for all of his long career except recent months. Perkins has lifted more than he ever has. To me, that suggests Perkins is the better lifter.
@Artheam ...except for this performance he was a 66 not 74 or 83. You can't just consider Kjell a lifelong 74 cos that's where he competed most of his career haha. If this was another lifter who was a lifelong 66 hitting 770 would that somehow make it more impressive?
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
Great video man! And we all need to realise Kjell's incredible execution of the last few years. And when he gets that full 790-800 kg comp, and he will, he must be in the conversation of best lifter of all time. Period.
Thank you! Yes absolutely, hell 800 is still a total only 4 lifters have ever hit as a 74/75 (one of them being Kjell). Hitting that at 66 is nuts, and if it weren't for Kjell I don't think we'd even be talking about 800 at 66 until years down the line.
This really was on some batman plotting to defeat the justice league type shit
Kjell playing chess ♟️
I just discovered your channel yesterday and I’m really enjoying the videos. Keep it up!
Really appreciate it!
Finally someone with correct info and PL history. Great video!
Haha thanks man, plenty more coming
😂damn..he didn't even let perk get a podium place at Sheffield.
If you had said a year ago that Perk wouldn't even podium you'd have been called crazy!
Great analysis! Audio better than before!
Good to hear, thanks!
Great analysis!
Did the same at my powerlifitng gym. We have board with weight classes. I cut down to 148 and blew the current numbers out of the water.
I think we're gonna be seeing a lot more of that now after everyone has seen what Kjell has done...
Crazy good analysis
Thanks bro!
@@PresserPowerlifting I hope it's ok but I put a link to your vid in a thread on r/powerlifting for other folks to check out
Oh cool, appreciate the support!
i kinda wish kjell went full super villain purely for the drama bc this plan was insane
Haha yep, he sure did cost Perk a lot of money...
Great video.
Thanks!
i thought of this aswell. I dont think its true though. I think he thought we would be able to challenge austin after arnold. But after worlds he and his coach realized they could make hthis move.
Hard to say exactly when they thought of cutting to 66, but from what I've heard its something he's been considering for a while
I feel like a lot of people will try to follow the same strategy as kjell, to cut down a class, but the heavier you are, the more difficult it gets, because the difference in weight between classes gets bigger as the classes go up.
noo one else can do this now. if you look at world records per weight class and the amount of toital kjell lost its impossible for everyone else to do it.
It's definitely something that will be on more people's radars now. While it is hard to see anyone doing it quite as successfully as Kjell at the moment, you never know...
Did you turn down your audio or are you just a quiet guy bc this video sounds quieter than last.
Nah I changed my whole audio setup to try improve it and in the process it got a lot quieter for some reason lol. Working on it...
Cray ♟️
You can call it a genius move but end of the day, Kjell is a 74 and he couldn't compete with Perkins.
It's a bit odd in a sport which focuses on big lifts that there's so much praise for Kjell. Of course it's a very good 66 record, but Perkins still comes out better on coefficients and is still a stronger lifter. That's what matters. Nice for Sheffield, but that's a one time move.
While he didn't beat Perk he was definitely competing with him and pushed him at worlds. Also idk about claiming Perk is stronger based on coefficients, they're all arbitrary and change all the time (wilks, dots, gl points etc.). I'd argue the % over the WR (i.e. how much stronger you are than anyone in history in that weight class) is a better way of comparing across weight classes than a random formula someone cooked up back in the day
@@PresserPowerlifting Yes, he pushed Perkins more than necessary at Worlds, albeit in hindsight it wouldn't have mattered because Perkins had a subpar day.
I'm no fan of coefficients either but they're the best we have. Whilst ranking changes, it doesn't across weight classes (more so some coefficients favour lighter/heavier or mid, etc more) and it's clear that Perkins is a phenom and one of or the best.
Think about it like this: There's not many 59kg men who lift, and so I think it's pretty easy to appreciate there's far less competition in that class than say 83/93kg. Therefore, the quality of WR is not the same in each. Coefficient is a way for us to rank these things. Take an extreme example to prove a point: There's now a 45kg weight class for men ... is the person breaking the record 1% every year (only competitor) really better than a Perkins or a John Haack who don't break it 1% a year?
Yes at the end of the day no method of comparing across weight classes is going to be perfect or completely objective. Obviously for your example the 45kg lifter wouldn't be more impressive than Perk.
However let's keep it to the 8 real IPF weight classes (59 - 120+), that's the range where we are going to continue seeing the best in the world challenge each other and push the numbers up consistently. While I agree at the moment some weight classes are not as developed/strong as others relatively, that's something that will even out as the sport grows and the talent pool across all classes grows with it. Eventually each weight class will have a similar number of outlier/generational lifters and then the WR% scoring criteria will work even better.
Even today though, who's to say Kjell's 770 isn't relatively stronger than Perk's 843? Like maybe that's just the way strength scales in that bodyweight range? The historical numbers of previous top 66s and 74s kinda supports that...
I'm not necessarily saying that 770 @ 66 > 843 @ 74 (I don't think there is an answer here, you could argue either way), I'm just saying I don't buy that Perk's 843 is clearly better just because some vague formula said so.
@PresserPowerlifting Personally for me it's easy. Kjell has been an 83 and 74 for all of his long career except recent months. Perkins has lifted more than he ever has. To me, that suggests Perkins is the better lifter.
@Artheam ...except for this performance he was a 66 not 74 or 83. You can't just consider Kjell a lifelong 74 cos that's where he competed most of his career haha. If this was another lifter who was a lifelong 66 hitting 770 would that somehow make it more impressive?
Could see 105,120 being open to this sort of cut next year.
Both are relatively low and 120+ is far out of reach with Jesus really
Bro the video is nice ..but you gotta do something about the audio
Copy, I'm working on it