The Future of Weight Classes (modified from "All weight classes...")

**Iphaltuus** · Posted On: 6/08/2008 4:38pm

http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=71283 - Previous relating article.

Okay, so after a bit of research, I have determined that the structure of ones skeletal frame does in fact have to do with the strength one can exert, I just haven't found any conclusive evidence to fully support whether it enables more ability or handicaps you lol.

When first considering the athletic ability of one person compared to another, I researched physical strength to determine just what I was dealing with. And though not necessarily related to the transformation of modern weight classes, I did find it interesting that certain types of muscle fibers determined whether you were more of an explosive strong person or a durable iron man type. Kind of makes me dwell on stand-up versus ground fighting etc.

(source page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_strength )

In any case, it specifically states that shorter limbs are able to lift more weight. However, after researching more into the skeletal frame, I found that there are slight differences between the male and female skeleton. Most notably, the male skeleton tends to have slightly thicker and longer arms and legs.

(source page: http://www.enchantedlearning.com/sub...printout.shtml)

So I cross referenced the world records of male versus female weight lifting. It turns out that only one weight division (69kg,151 lb.) between the two matched entirely. Here were the results-

Male Snatch Record
165 kg (363 lb.) Georgi Markov

Female Snatch Record
123kg (270.6 lb.) Oxana Slivenko

Male Clear & Jerk Record
197 kg (433.4lb) Zhang Guozheng

Female Clear & Jerk Record/Name
157 kg (345 lb.) Zarema Kasaeva

Male Total Weight Record
357 kg (785.4 lb.) Galabin Boevsk

Female Total Weight Record/Name
276 kg (607.2 lb.) Oxana Slivenko

(source page: http://www.iwf.net/events/wr/record_cur.php)

I realize that there could be a substantial difference between the male and female genetics, where males typically produce a much higher level of type I muscle fibers, so I decided to cross reference the world records of a sport that relied heavily on muscle endurance; Marathon running. In particular the Berlin Marathon, which is 42 kilometers long for both female and male participants.

The record holders were

Sex Name Event Time

Male
Haile Gebrselassie
Berlin Marathon
2 hours 4 min 26 sec

Female
Mizuki Noguchi
Berlin Marathon
2 hours 19 min 12 sec

Female
Gete Wami
Berlin Marathon
2 hours 21 min 34 sec

(Source page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Marathon)
(Source page: http://www.real-berlin-marathon.com/...8/index.en.php )

Now, I couldn’t find out the height or weight of Mizuki Noguchi so I settled for Gete Wami. The results were-

Name Height Weight

Gebrselassie Haile
1.65 m (5 feet 5 inches)
56 kg (123.458 lb.)

(source page : http://www.iaaf.org/athletes/biograp...774/index.html )

Gete Wami
1.54 m ( 5 feet ½ inch)
45 kg (99.208 lb.)

(source page : http://www.iaaf.org/athletes/biograp...845/index.html )

So I imagine that the types of muscle fibers inherited in a person are a result of pure genetic inheritance, not to be influenced by gender primarily. Even so, I imagine that the difference in production of muscle fiber types would most likely not produce results of similarly weighted individuals to such a degree of difference.

I began to ponder the situation, it didn’t seem to make much sense, here were pages that supported both the fact that shorter limbs can lift more weight and that longer limbs could to. Then it hit me, perhaps the truth is that shorter limbs when compared to ones entire body could lift more weight, because they had less resistance at the end, caused by the lesser length of the limb. On the other hand, longer limbs had more leverage when applied properly. Thus I began to look at skeletons of animals that had similar DNA to humans, yet skeletons that were more or less exaggerated in areas. My prime suspect, the gorilla.

Not only can a gorilla lift, push, pull and press more weight than a human, it could also rip a humans limbs from the sockets and break them directly in half without having to manipulate them into certain holds. I know that you might think it’s because of the muscle difference, but the fact is that a common female gorilla stands at about 4 feet 7 inches tall and weighs around 220 lbs. Even then I imagine that this female ape could dispose of a human male of similar weight with ease.

(source page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorilla )

Furthermore, I believe that it isn’t entirely the mass of the gorilla’s muscle that makes such a large difference in strength and performance so much as the size and length of the bones. The leverage of their arms has to be considerably higher than ours.

(source page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:GorillaSkeleton.jpg )
vs.
(source page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Skeleton_diagram.svg )

THESIS

It is my opinion that in the end, muscle mass and or type are not the determining factors of a struggle between two combatants. It is a combination of skeletal mass, length and overall size used for leverage that gives the considerable advantage.

**Iphaltuus** · Posted On: 6/08/2008 5:11pm

Oh and the topic is about finding methods of measuring fighters that the fighters cannot control, yet can classify each competitor into a fair class.

**Kentucky Fried Chokin** · Posted On: 6/08/2008 5:23pm

So in your analysis, muscle mass doesn't matter?

**Iphaltuus** · Posted On: 6/08/2008 5:36pm

No, I feel that it's over emphasized and that it plays a supporting role to bone structure and is not the determining factor in a maneuver.

**mike321** · Posted On: 6/08/2008 6:17pm

Ok, you seem intent on taking up this challenge. Can you lay out a system for assigning fighting classes in a straightforward manner? Meaning, keep it simple, and make it comprehensible without phd level research.

**ysc87** · Posted On: 6/08/2008 6:18pm

Originally Posted by Iphaltuus

No, I feel that it's over emphasized and that it plays a supporting role to bone structure and is not the determining factor in a maneuver.

Well, muscle definitely creates a larger tolerance for error in just about any technique, not to mention the fact that it makes arm punches stronger, which makes striking on the ground much easier, and less risky. (As terrible as that sounds technically. :/)

And in the end, I would prefer matching fighters based on weight rather than just similar body types, because it often results in more fights with different styles, while still allowing for fights between similar fighters as well.

And what I mean by that is- it's much more likely that two people with similar body types will have similar fighting styles, often because a type of fighting style favors (and creates) a certain type of body.

Using weight classes makes MMA fights and other combat sport competitions potentially more exciting, IMHO. And keeps it simple, non-time consuming (for the organization, not the fighter) and inexpensive. :)

**Iphaltuus** · Posted On: 6/08/2008 6:46pm

I agree, different body types shaped in some form by styles do create interesting match ups. However, no matter what style you train in, I doubt it will make much difference in the mass and density of your bones (with a slight margin for shin conditioning and the like).

I feel that, given a particular combatants own skeletal analysis, fighters would actually look and seem even more diverse than they are now.

Let's take two extremes, a medium tall very stocky fighter and a very tall light build fighter. Now, I imagine that the stocky fighter would have a thicker, heavier skeletal frame needed to adequately support his own body weight in a workable fashion. But, given the entire mass of the tall fighter, let's say that his bones are just as heavy overall, and therefore would technically support the same amount of weight on his own body as the stocky man.

In that spectrum, the advantage might definitely go to the tall fighter in the stand up (debatable I know) fight, but perhaps the equalizer would be when the match hits the ground (debatable as well I know).

However, given that the bone structures of the two should technically support the same amount of muscle with equal performance ability (the only difference being in shape) the amount of power derived from their maneuvers would be the same yet only in different areas. While the taller fighter has a stronger cross and straight, the shorter fighter has more powerful hooks and uppercuts.

Of course it would require considerable research to determine the precise statistics needed to allow a thorough analysis of all possible movement in a given mma match, but **** I got time haha.

**Iphaltuus** · Posted On: 6/08/2008 6:52pm

As far as the weight classes would go, given that muscle mass can never be completely ignored in such a sport, I would imagine that it might remain close to what the standards are today.

One angle would suggest that the weight classes remain unchanged and are good as they are now.

Another would be the extreme, suggesting that each weight class has a prerequisite that is met by either the bone density and size and or total bone weight of the fighter in question.

Even further, perhaps a mixture of the two could be involved. Where as you must meet the requirements set by bone density, size and or total weight, and are only allowed to be within a certain total body weight range.