Topic: Competing injured versus team responsibilites

[Mike Wittmer]

Prior to the Worlds, but well after selection, one of the lifters likely to score points has a performance affecting injury and is much less likely to earn points.

This is an unreasonable assumption. One could suffer an injury and recover in time to have a fantastic performance. And, the fitness test Mike says the BOD is considering could easily force a slightly injured lifter to go heavier than they should and make them worse.

That is not unreasonable at all, in fact, that exact scenario  happened in 2006.  The lifter did not recover and had a below mediocre performance and scored no points, while an in shape lifter capable of scoring points stayed home.

[Mike Wittmer]

That is not unreasonable at all, in fact, that exact scenario  happened in 2006.  The lifter did not recover and had a below mediocre performance and scored no points, while an in shape lifter capable of scoring points stayed home.

My words, not yours as indicated above.

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

There was no guarantee the other lifter would have scored points and no guarantees on the matter in the future. You can't predict future performance or we could simulate weightlifting meets on a computer. Any attempt to do so will be subjective and will inevitably screw lifters based on opinion and arbitrary and counterproductive bureaucracy. You can't measure injuries or heart. Its just the wrong approach.

[Mike Wittmer]

There was no guarantee the other lifter would have scored points and no guarantees on the matter in the future. You can't predict future performance or we could simulate weightlifting meets on a computer. Any attempt to do so will be subjective and will inevitably screw lifters based on opinion and arbitrary and counterproductive bureaucracy. You can't measure injuries or heart. Its just the wrong approach.

Of course there is no guarantee.  The other lifter could bomb with the heavier weights.  In this case however, the lifter stated he was not recovered from the injury, and not close to 100%.

What if he lost a leg?  What if he had a heart attack two weeks out?  Would you screw the lifter and not let him lift.  You can measure injuries and the heart.

I'll try again:

"So, how do the "centralized controlling bureaucrats regulate" this so as to insure that the "common interest" is achieved?"

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

Of course there is no guarantee.

Exactly. This is why teams should be picked via objective criteria, ideally a straight up Golden Standard % which even avoids political manipulation of the qualifying totals.

What if he lost a leg?  What if he had a heart attack two weeks out?"

Its up to them. Its their spot. I do not believe an elite weightlifter would ever choose such an action, but if they did I would not condemn it but probably praise their heart.

You can measure injuries and the heart.

How can you do so objectively? The ideas you put forward so far do not.

So, how do the "centralized controlling bureaucrats regulate" this so as to insure that the "common interest" is achieved?

I don't accept that there is such a thing as the common interest since it is completely unknowable. The best thing for the group is the same as what is best for the individual- an objective qualifying system that removes bureaucratic and political influence from the process. You are going in the opposite direction, for all the same reasons as America is going away from freedom and toward fascism and socialism [altruism]- distrust of individuals seeking rational self-interest in favor of trusting centralized, political and bureaucratic superiority of decision making [elites]. I hope you all change your mind before you go down this nasty road. What happened at the 1991 Pan Ams was a great example of the bankruptcy of this type selection system, but maybe some posters from the former communist block could also describe some of the injustices that take place under these political team selection processes.

[Mike Wittmer]

You can measure injuries and the heart.

"How can you do so objectively? The ideas you put forward so far do not."

That is not true.  Stroke volume, end systolic volume, ejection fraction, heart rate, etc., can all be measured objectively.  By your reasoning, you would admire the lifter attempting to lift with one leg.
You might not be so happy if the team points lost cost us that additional Olympic slot, and it would have been yours.

But, that's OK.  I admire your debating skills, and for the most part, your logic.  I think our goals are different, I'm seeking input that would be useful.  I get the feeling you're just enjoying the argument.

Mike

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

That is not true.  Stroke volume, end systolic volume, ejection fraction, heart rate, etc., can all be measured objectively.

I am speaking of weightlifting, where the only objective way to determine superiority and thus select teams is via competition.

By your reasoning, you would admire the lifter attempting to lift with one leg.

Absolutely, I would admire a one-legged weightlifter. The strength of will for such an undertaking would be extraordinary.

You might not be so happy if the team points lost cost us that additional Olympic slot, and it would have been yours.

Probably not, just as the "poor" are not often happy with the "evil rich businessman's" choices in how to spend their money. This is irrelevant. Once the slot has been earned according to objective procedures, it is the athlete's slot, their choice. Its a matter of perspective. Either you believe in collectivism, the supremacy of the group, or you believe in individualism, the supremacy of rational self-interest. Freedom Vs Control. Incentive Vs Coercion.

I think our goals are different, I'm seeking input that would be useful.  I get the feeling you're just enjoying the argument.

My passion is for the ideologies at issue, yes. But, it is the outcome of them I am motivated to stop (screwing lifters). This line of collectivist thinking *will* lead to unjust and subjective political and bureaucratic overruling of what happens in the qualifying events and will inevitably fail to produce as good a overall performance over the long term. The precedent of elitist bureaucratic control is poison which can only damage the body (USAW). Collectivism doesn't work. Altruism can bring only guilt and resentment. It does not motivate. No one dedicates their lives to lifting to sacrifice for the USAW or some other lifters. But they can be forced or guilt tripped in to it if they do not understand that selfishness, rational self interest, is a Great Virtue.

[Jim Moser]

All,
I think you have one small challenge with this debate. If you have an apple tree, you can beat it, shake it, reward it and throw money at it. Know matter what you do to it, it will never produce oranges.  Think about it!