S
Stiffy
Guest
Do you get paid for these Spartacus?
-
Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.
P.A., G.P.C. and CAPO differences?
Do you get paid for these Spartacus?
Kyle Aaron
Active member
Interesting, Chris, thanks for writing it up.
In conversation with me Wilks casually referred to "1,100 members," but of course "members" include coaches, supporters, etc, so we know PA doesn't have 1,100 lifters. However, it is possible for us to discover the number of active members, simply by collating all the competition results from (say) 2014 in a spreadsheet and eliminating names in common. These numbers would make your article stronger.
Secondly, I'm not sure it's fair to say the sport is "divided" between PA and the others. It's more that PA's membership has grown slightly over the past decade or so, while the other federations have grown membership out of nothing. It's like there's a pizza shop here doing sort of okay, then a burger place opens next door and people travel from across town to go there - while the pizza place does as well as it ever did. The pizza guy probably resents the burger guy, but the pizza guy in fact is not doing any worse than before, and is in fact doing a bit better.
Division implies - as all the federation heads would no doubt like to believe - that if the other federations disappeared, everyone would join theirs. This is not true, anymore than if the burger joint burned down everyone would go to the pizza joint. So in fact the different powerlifting organisations represent less division and more addition.
Since you were talking about drug testing, it would have been relevant to say that in contrast to PA having more testing than most IPF-affiliated organisations, GPC in fact officially is against drug use, but the none of the national bodies (so far as I know) actually implement this. Many times you mentioned that other federations funded testing out of membership fees, with their fees being lower than PA's - you might note their fees are on par with GPC's.
The situation with CAPO and its possible implosion amid financial opaqueness is still developing, so would be difficult to write about, though obviously relevant to a general discussion.
These points would make the article less of a hatchet-job on Wilks and PA, and more illustrating the general issues present in the sport in Australia.
spartacus
Well-known member
nothing, I write out of interest.
The academic piece on same issue was a paid job as part of a number of articles produced for a uni for money.
Kyle Aaron
Active member
What lies within ASC's powers which could change PA for the better?
vonfram88
Active member
Something stood out in your opinion piece which may not be true.
As it stands, section 62 of the PA constitution states that 'no Member has any right of inspection of any accounting or other records of the Company except as conferred by the Act or authorised by the Board or by a resolution passed at a general meeting'. This is despite the ASC stating that
In an organisation owned by members and which receives substantial public funding, both members and taxpayers have a right to know how the organisation spends its money and therefore to provide input into the effectiveness of expenditure. NSOs should therefore fully disclose administration expenses for the organisation on a gross basis before any allocation of such expenses across functional activities within the NSO. This should include full transparency on compensation and associated expenses of the top five staff members in the sport. This will enable stakeholders to understand the level of administration expenditure in the sport and the efficiency of the NSO in undertaking its operations'.
Members have no right to access detailed accounts nor internal board matters, but they can request access to normal GPFR covering a suitable reporting period. There is some discretion afforded to the board by the constitution in this regard, but you can be pretty certain they would not be providing copies of any records to non-members or known antagonists or agitators.
Unfortunately, your piece could be said by some to show your alignment with one of PA's rivals and this will attract allegations of partiality in all future work by your hand. Not everyone is a saint in this type of sport however if your adversaries choose to play the man, some of your admissions about your past deeds that appear on social media really put you in a leading-with-the-chin position.
As it stands, section 62 of the PA constitution states that 'no Member has any right of inspection of any accounting or other records of the Company except as conferred by the Act or authorised by the Board or by a resolution passed at a general meeting'. This is despite the ASC stating that
In an organisation owned by members and which receives substantial public funding, both members and taxpayers have a right to know how the organisation spends its money and therefore to provide input into the effectiveness of expenditure. NSOs should therefore fully disclose administration expenses for the organisation on a gross basis before any allocation of such expenses across functional activities within the NSO. This should include full transparency on compensation and associated expenses of the top five staff members in the sport. This will enable stakeholders to understand the level of administration expenditure in the sport and the efficiency of the NSO in undertaking its operations'.
Members have no right to access detailed accounts nor internal board matters, but they can request access to normal GPFR covering a suitable reporting period. There is some discretion afforded to the board by the constitution in this regard, but you can be pretty certain they would not be providing copies of any records to non-members or known antagonists or agitators.
Unfortunately, your piece could be said by some to show your alignment with one of PA's rivals and this will attract allegations of partiality in all future work by your hand. Not everyone is a saint in this type of sport however if your adversaries choose to play the man, some of your admissions about your past deeds that appear on social media really put you in a leading-with-the-chin position.
spartacus
Well-known member
mate, I have a solid jaw, fire away.
Remember the Senate did not want to give control of the sport to PA because of similar issues, did they?
I know heaps of stories, and I may draw on them in the future if need be.
The fact is I have long been against drugs, and am arguing why the current status quo is a joke.
I regret my past, but i am not ashamed of it. hanging around bb's had it bad and good side.
Remember the Senate did not want to give control of the sport to PA because of similar issues, did they?
I know heaps of stories, and I may draw on them in the future if need be.
The fact is I have long been against drugs, and am arguing why the current status quo is a joke.
I regret my past, but i am not ashamed of it. hanging around bb's had it bad and good side.
spartacus
Well-known member
BTW, I was close to joining PA this year, but could not be bothered having to go through the stress of whether my membership was accepted, and then to Court of Arbitration.
I know how it works, and chose GPC because a far more accommodating atmosphere where I could test my limited strength.
BTW, Wilks knows about my past, I told him in person. But that is me, no bullshit.
I know how it works, and chose GPC because a far more accommodating atmosphere where I could test my limited strength.
BTW, Wilks knows about my past, I told him in person. But that is me, no bullshit.
spartacus
Well-known member
in fact, years ago, when I was doing a few reps on 260kg deadlift in early 1990s at Balaclava Bodyworld, wilks was watching and asked if I wanted to lift in PA.
I told him the truth there and then. He may not remember that day, but also told him in late 90s when training at his gym at Melbourne Uni.
I had no interest then in competing in a suited sport, but did point people suited to powerlifting in that direction.
I later joined PA, I think around 2002, only because I was told I could not help my former mate lift at comp backstage, so paid $50 on the day.
I told him the truth there and then. He may not remember that day, but also told him in late 90s when training at his gym at Melbourne Uni.
I had no interest then in competing in a suited sport, but did point people suited to powerlifting in that direction.
I later joined PA, I think around 2002, only because I was told I could not help my former mate lift at comp backstage, so paid $50 on the day.
spartacus
Well-known member
I have a few emails sent to wilks, after he asked me to prove I was resigning from CAPO to join PA. Still have them.
It all ended when he went on tv and bagged CAPO; that is when I thought another story needed to be told given that many decent people in that fed.
I actually believe that nothing is achieved by bagging your foes, especially if the desire is to make your fed bigger.
It all ended when he went on tv and bagged CAPO; that is when I thought another story needed to be told given that many decent people in that fed.
I actually believe that nothing is achieved by bagging your foes, especially if the desire is to make your fed bigger.
Kyle Aaron
Active member
IPF has changed the list of approved gear, it'll still be good till the end of the year, but not after that.
So you may end up buying new gear every year. Given that most people do at most 3 meets a year, that's... hmm.
So you may end up buying new gear every year. Given that most people do at most 3 meets a year, that's... hmm.
vonfram88
Active member
Without taking too much of a cheap shot at ONI who really does train hard, I wonder how GPC's stated anti-drug position allows competition entry by members who have publicly advertised their drug use down to fine detail. ONI is an online identity but the videos clearly identify him. Might be worth an article or opinion pices hey Spartacus? Maybe I'll create the bones of an article myself and get my old media consultants onto it........
by by the way, any administrator of any of the Feds wants to have a crack at me, door is open and I'm waiting here in my underwear.
Last edited:
WoodyAllen
Well-known member
Unless you test your athletes, you don't have an anti-drug position.
As an example, you can post all the speed limit signs you want on a freeway, but if it's known that you never do speed checks, then you don't have an "anti-speeding" policy. If you have laws against murder or theft but never prosecute anyone, then you don't have an "anti-crime" position.
I have nothing against a non tested fed, and frankly, I suspect that there are a hell of a lot of people out there that are glad that we do have that. But ferfarksake, just accept it for what it is and get on with it.