WOB Rules

THIS IS NOT A SPIN VS STAND TOPIC 

Nor will I hijack another thread for this.  I have seen two incredible throwers who both hold WOB record throwing 42# weight in action in this event. (one in 190 division and one in the masters division). Their throwing talents far exceed what mine will ever be.   

BUT I BELIEVE SOMETHING NEEDS TO CHANGE

The WOB weight is almost always attached to the handle by at most one link so that standing throwers can throw without hitting the ground. 

I do not know if Throwers Choice was used in Warrensburg, MO and I do not know if the implement was at the full 18 inches or not.  However, the same implement was used in 2005 to set a Master's World Record in WOB at Kirskville, MO game. 

Throwers choice is where the AD provides several certified weights and the thrower gets to choose which one they would like to throw:  D, Triangle or Ring handles -- box, spherical, or conical shaped weights, ....  A very nice way of letting throwers throw what they feel comfortable with. This is not the problem.

The problem is using throwers choice to skirt around the need to shorten the weight in WOB event.  This is a dubious way of setting a world record.  I will agree the Letter of the Law has not been violated.   However, the spirit of the law is laying on the ground withering in agony because she has been badly violated.  

Perhaps the reason that there is not a special length rule (just the usual 18" max length) for the implement in WOB is because:  

#1. the writers of the rules never imagined that someone would spin and throw the weight over bar; and

 

#2. The writers of the rules if they knew about the spin never imagined "throwers choice" being used in such a vile manner. 

 

The below pictures do far better in demonstrating what I am saying.

 

 

World Record Weight Used in Kirksville, MO -- Note the nice long chain!   (Picture taken at 2005 Kircksville Games by Kevin Veit http://www.midwestsportsphotos.com/ -- Cropped down to fit here)

The below weight is the 42# Weight used in Ancient Athletics' Events.  Issaic Burchett used this weight to set the then 190# World Record at 17' 6.5" which I believe was broken later in 2005.  (Picture taken at this years Shamrock Games by Kevin Veit http://www.midwestsportsphotos.com/  Cropped down to fit here)

No Chain - Weight attached to handle

I think AD's and other rule writers need to review the WOB rules and either limit the overall length to 14" (I have heard talk that this was once a rule but have not found any evidence of this) or state that the WOB weight must be attached to the handle by no more than one length. 

I AM NOT CALLING FOR ANYBODYS RECORD TO BE RESCINDED -- The throws are still amazing, but they are not comparable to other WOB records and violate the spirit of the throwing rules.  

Mark McVey
Athletic Director and 2006 Games President
Celtic Highland Games of the Quad Cities

Edited by McSanta

I agree Adam, spot on! That's the way I was taught that you can practice with anything, but you have to use what the AD leaves for you. If you dont like it it's like I tell my kids, "Take what ya get and dont throw a fit"  Everybody else I hang with has gone by this for years and I think it just makes more work for the AD's to have throwers choice.

 Though it is great when folks want to help out with bringing weights if something isnt availible, but that needs to be weigh'd and checked out to be legit before the games can us what ever the weight is.

We have all had to deal with repairs, but unless is screws up the weight of the impliment used, we all have spare parts to every thing on the field. C rings, chains, bolts, screws, D handles, and extra hammer handles.

Well, unless you were at Tulsa this last year and a certain class of men BROKE the 56# WOB where it was not fixable. Who would have thought that anchore that holds the handle would snap off at the weight! (yikes!)
My posting this will probably make some folks un-happy with me, but I just happen to agree with AGM and in the spirit of folks having an oppinion in this sport, this just happens to be mine so no hate mail.

Have a groovey week ya'll!
Keep us straight McSanta!
Cherie- Rudy 

 

"Don't like that particular type of weight? Too damn bad. Throw it anyway."

YEAH!!!

~Jason

I think this is just like other issues that seem to come up every year on here! Is there anything in the rules that would make the weights none legit? The ones that the Queen posted don’t seem to rule out the weight in question!! If we have rules lets use them, not what we or anyone “Thinks” was the intent of the rule when it was written!

Whether we want to admit it or not, I “Think” this is still all about Stand vs Spin. The wt. in question favors the spin!

This goes to show that we need one governing body and one set of rules to live by.

 

Terry Lawson

McSanta wrote: Just because throwing rules does not prohibit something does not make it acceptable or right.

GEE WHIZ! Then what are rules for?  In my mind, If its not against the rules, its O.K., if its not O.K., make a rule against it! 

I see two options; sit around and complain about it until all the different associations in this country make it against the rules or, get these associations to sit down and form a federation so that there's some sort of continuity going on.

Maybe this Spinning/Standing, ThrowersChoice/ThrowWhat'sThere debate will be enough to kick start a little action.  I've been waiting since the mid-80's.  Could the time be right?

GEE WHIZ! Then what are rules for? In my mind, If its not against the rules, its O.K., if its not O.K., make a rule against it!

The rules don't cover everything - there will always be people coming up with new ideas that weren't anticipated. And unfortunately, there isn't anybody around to make a new rule when those new ideas show up on the field.

This sport is not going to have a national governing body any time soon. But we should put together a national rules committee to look at issues like these and make revisions to the rules where necessary.

Edited by agm_

I have a question and then what I think the real issue is:

First the Question:  Let's have a vote on what a "regulation length" for the WOB should be.  If several organizations have 18" max, then let's debate what it should be.  I'll start the debate and say, 16" (bacause several weights made today would have trouble getting under this length i.e. Merl Lawless' weights, which are top notch).  What were the length's of the weights used by spinners recently, Sean Betz in St. Louis in '04, Harrison's record (was that Michigan?), Kip's old record that I broke?  Does anyone have any data on the implements used, I'm not only curious how long they were, but the style and shape used. 

Second, the real issue is this:  A national, or international set of standards would solve this, but if you do that, here is what will happen, people will divide and start their own groups with their own rules and we'll end up like powerlifting.  It is already happening, the RMSA tried to create a stronger set of rules and standards and as we speak a midwest group of AD's that have been a part of the RMSA are creating their own organization with their own rules (one of which is to limit the WOB implement to 14"....which is problematic since most implements already exceed this length and could not be shortened) and are breaking off from the RMSA.  Sean Betz once told me that the reason he loved the games was the challenge of adapting to what you were given at any given games.  I think that would be lost if we went overboard on national rules.  Maybe a solution is to note the implement used for any particular record.  

And the following is just me getting defensive, which I realize that is not the issue, but I can't help myself.  Over the years I have heard of guys taking full advantage of the rules.  I was honest about what I did and now I seem to be the example.  So read on if you like or just stick to the above.

A funny side note to this is that I was a die hard standing thrower until I started getting my butt kicked by spinners who couldn't beat me standing.  It was adapt or die.  Then, as I found I could spin pretty good (and I still say that the best standing thrower will be the best spinning thrower if he or she would take the time to learn the technique) I began to look for any advantage I could have within the rules.  And don't tell me that guys don't do this or it's unsportmanlike.  I have been told other spinning records had longer implements involved, I was not there, but I have been told by reliable sources.  Albeit, admittedly, not as long as the implement I used.   If you want to talk to me directly about the information I am aware of, please PM me and I'll tell you what I know.  Let's just say I'm not the only one to take this advantage, I'm just the guy that made a big deal about it because I felt it NEEDED to be debated.

Also, when I submitted my throw to Bill Scruggs, I insisted he put "spin" next to it because I did not feel that my throw was comparable to what Don Stewart did standing.  I told him exactly how I did it and told him that if he felt it were not legit, then don't post it.  The fact is, I followed the rules.  I also told him that I felt we should have seperate records for standing and spinning, just my opinion and I still have that opinion. We also need to do that now because later there won't be reliable records of who did what. 

Finally, here are my bests.  I've cleared 17ft standing in official competition (KC Games 2005) and 19ft spinning with a Bobby Dodd in official competition (and 20ft in practice in front of witnesses) and I won the WOB Championships at Pleasanton with a Bobby Dodd.  I can throw a "regular" weight.  It is my hope to break that record with a "shorter" implement this year.  Merl Lawless' weights are around 16", my Ironmind WOB weight is 15.5", my Bobby Dodd weights are 15".   

And one last "finally":  The weight I did use was made by Al Myers.  It is a solid lead implement that has a super light chain and handle.  To me, that is the real secret of why it's a flyer.  That is a seperate debate, but one that is an issue.  Do we get down to regulating the composition and design of the weights?  Do we get down to the type of rock used for the Braemar Stone?  Or do we just say, the games are the games and records should be taken with a grain of salt.  I honestly get the impression that Sean Betz could care less that he broke the WOB record, he is more interested in winning.  He never practices the WOB and I'm sure if he did (like I did) he'd go way higher.  It was  choice I made to focus on that one event for the summer and go after that record.  Soon, it won't matter because it will be broken again and again. 

Oh my god...that weight was used to set a "record" ? quit fu(king up the sport!

Throwers choice? AD' choice?...you have to be kidding me....here is a legal weight throw the thing....STANDING!  The weight should be a weight with one ring that you hold on to.  If its a crappy weight that doesnt fly,,,oh well....The guy who set a record with that weight ,,,does  not have a record of any kind!  I am going to throw the hammer this year but I am going to use a hammer with a 9 ' long handle.

 

It doesnt say in the rules that I cant tackle someone while they throw so this year if someone is beating me Im going to sack them as they hit a power position....Keith Tice is spinning in his grave looking down on what this sport is becoming.

Before what follows, I totally understand where McSanta is going with the Thrower's Choice.  My .02 is that if there are multiple weights available, one should be selected and used throughout the class' competition.

If not, you would have throwers bringing their "favorite" weights to competitions.

Can you imagine if you had throwers flying to games, bringing a full selection of weights that they liked to throw.  I can see it now in the newspaper headlines, "Airplane Passenger Killed When 56# Weight Falls From Overhead Compartment".

 

OK --- Carlos, for President.  Here's my input for the Rules!!!

Rules for Scottish Heavy Athletics:

1. Throwing is fun.
2. Throwing should be fun.
3. If it's not fun, then why do it.
4. Diversity, differences, fields, slants, slopes, hills, valleys, knock off bars, fixed bars, space between standards, spinning, standing, Braemar, Open, one spin, two spins, (Gasp) three spins, PVC, 3/4" PVC, 1/2" PVC, Rattan, tape, tacky, chalk, gloves, winged trigs, Cross Bars, various sizes - shapes - weights of stones, Cabers (like trees grow the same), Shapes of handles, "O" rings, "D" rings, Triangle rings, chains, larger, smaller, more weight in handle, more at bottom of implement, shoes, cleats, logger boots, tanels, blades, tennis shoes, football cleats, soccer shoes, neoprene, braces, Icy Hot, Ben Gay, supplements, energy drinks, libations, size of athletes, classes of athletes, size of fields, make up of standards, differing organizations, Clubs, etc., etc., etc. . .
5. Too much structure = Track and Field.
6. Refer to Rule #1!!!!!

That said, our differences make us unique.

Half the fun of these games is going to a new place and meeting new guys and gals, throwing the weights that are there at their field, chatting, eating, drinking, in short, having fun.

Remember, an AD is putting on the game, sometimes as his/her expense.  And, if not at their expense, I promise you some of their personal funds have slipped into the fray!!!

The A.D. is doing the best they can with the weights, budget, etc., that they have.  Follow their rules, Relax and Enjoy!!!

I see this as two distinct issues, both of which could be addressed by a rules clarification or change.

1). The Throwers Choice Issue: I am echoing several previous posts when I say Everyone in a given class should use the same implement (stone, weight, hammer,or caber).  If the AD and the Judge wish, the throwers input may be asked before an event starts to decide which implement to use.  For Example: you have three stones that are legal for use in an open stone event, the weights are relatively close (16.5lb, 16.75lb, 17lb)  but each is shaped differently.

2). WOB Implement specifications: These should be specific in regards to handle attachment, shape, and overall length.  For Example: The weight shall be made of metal in one of the following shapes (Spherical, Box, Cylinder, Bullet).  The handle can be Round, Triangle, or "D" shaped, and shall be attached directly to the weight or attached with a single link (no more than 2" in length). The implement shall not measure more than 16" in overall length, measured from top of the handle to the bottom of the weight.

I also would fully support you Carlos, in developing a national set of rules.  I do believe this is realistic and long overdue. 

I echo Carlos' call, it is time to for National Rules Committee 

This should not be a one man effort because of issues relating to big and little games, male and female throwers, regional issues, ...  may get missed. In addition, if you get regional people involved, then they have their say in the development of the rules. This leads into each person buying into the rules and the ability to credibility sell the rules to those in their region that did not attend.  I again recommend that people in each region get involved.  I will help were and when I can but their are better candidates in the Midwest than I.

Some may question whether a group of ADs can get together and accomplish anything.  I know they can because a group of AD's from big games as well as small did get together in the off season last year. They did discuss the rules and other topics (some mentioned in my previous post).  Not all who were invited made it, but I think they support the goal. 

The goal was not to create an organization, the goal was to stop crying about the rules and other problems and do something about it -- well at least on a regional basis.  There was no need to announce this because we are not trying to convert people or hurt other organizations -- We just agreed to follow a given set of rules at our own games and perhaps provide others with the set of rules. The hope was that this effort would standardize  throwing rules in the middle of the country. We further agreed to cooperate with each other and other games in our area.

The point I am trying to make is if you get a group together, you will get a free flowing exchange of information and ideas as we did in the last off season.  Not just on rules but on other issues that ADs struggle with.  I believe this will improve the Highland Games  not just for those who came, but overall.

Since AD's are the ones who spend there time and sometimes money to keep the games going, they generally have a vested interest in what is good for the games in general. This is why when ADs get together something will get done. 

I wish I was more eloquent and could say what I mean in two sentences.

Mark "McSanta" McVey

Edited by McSanta

I thought thrower's choice meant having several different legal weight and length implements and the throwers can choose out of the selection- meaning you could be using 3 different WOB implements at the same time?  I've read stories about Donnie Dinnie where all the athletes brought their own "special" hammers to throw- that's pretty "historic"....and just as many stories where everyone hates the "historic" weights at a game and they get told "BUT THAT"S WHAT WE"VE ALWAYS THROWN".Hell if I know what to do.........At my games , we'll all use one implement- so length is a non-issue as standers like my vertically challenged buddy Ed can't possibly throw a weight like that thing Al made..............but I would love to give that thing a whirl - even if my best tosses so far were w. a handle attached directly to the weight style- so it may not even help.Like Thom and Jeff said = FUN FIRST. If all you guys get together and at least decide on what a WOB  implement should look like - I'll play along.

Valenti was  classic. 

While you are at this national committee, get rid of the stuupud sheaf toss.  Stuupud event.

<What were the length's of the weights used by spinners recently, Sean Betz in St. Louis in '04, Harrison's record (was that Michigan?), Kip's old record that I broke?  Does anyone have any data on the implements used, I'm not only curious how long they were, but the style and shape used.>

Thom,

Hope your training is going well.

If I recollect.......it was an Old Celt (block) with a clevis between the eyebolt and the handle.  I have no idea what the length was.  My Old Celt 42 measures 14.5" set up as described.  G-man had a picture of the actual toss, I believe.

Don Stewarts 20' standing is still the king.

kip miller

 

Kip Miller wrote: Don Stewarts 20' standing is still the king.

Very few people know just how amazing that accomplishment was.  I wasn't there, but have the records from the 2001 Quechee games in front of me.  After disposing of the competition (which took all of 2 throws), Don took exactly one shot at 20', made it, and in his inimitable fashion, walked away.

What height COULD he have made?  Inquiring minds want to know...

-Wayne