idea of drug tested gyms

[strong enough?]

This line reads as if membership numbers dont matter....

When in your next post (to which is the single best post in this thread) you say they do.

This could be a reason to inflate paper numbers, as the number of lifters at meets certainly do not reflect the number quoted.

The numbers make perfect sense. Maybe the number is not fully reflected at nationals but 460 sounds like it is straight from comp results. There was a recent novice comp in Melbourne that had 73 lifters - only a fraction of which would have even qualified for nationals.

In the 1980s sports were funded on a per participant basis. There was in built incentive to inflate numbers. It became apparent that in the old days schools bench press numbers were inflated by the 1,000s to get more funding. This is where the line I've seen trotted out on the web various times over the years comes from.

In the current environment, funding is very discretionary. There is no direct relationship between member or participant numbers and funding. Eg, golf and indoor soccer have huge participation rates, but very little comparative funding.

The funding situation is so discretionary, there was a government inquiry about it several years ago that recommended the whole system be overhauled to take power away from olympic sports.

While higher participation and membership numbers do improve your chances of receiving ASC funding, it is not determinative and the level of funding is not directly correlated with those numbers.

In making funding decisions with respect to PA, it would be pretty easy for ASC to discern actual participating member numbers from general participants. It must be said that offering the schools program in the first place would be part of PA's fulfilment of its obligations for ASC accreditation - you need to have a strategic plan and put programs in place for education, junior development, training up coaches and referees etc. PA can't be criticised for having a school program.

In any event, 460 is not an official number from PA. Spartacus derived this figure from researching actual competition results.

 

[spartacus]

I know sometimes my comments appear all over the place. I am just offering my flawed opinion, like most other people who like to express an opinion.

but I have goals. promote powerlifting, and drug free sport, amongst others.

as for personal, not a factor for me. I reckon sticky and markos are amongst the most passionate and genuine supporters of sport I have come across. they are doing a great job. look at the results

if circumstances were different, I would wish people of their calibre were involved in pa.

but they are not.

I still need to express what I now believe in.

 

[spartacus]

paraphrasing asc response,

Specifically in relation to Powerlifting Australia, it no longer got funding after 2004-05 because of following, no order of importance

not a full medal sport on either of the Olympic or Commonwealth Games programs;
low participation numbers;
low profile;
and lack of consistent and satisfactory results at significant international events.

but from other evidence, which I would say highlight pa's current shortcomings, there are criteria which would complicate pa's bid. but that is a matter I am now exploring as someone interested in joining pa in the future, hoping that these factors improve to best practice.

 

[strong enough?]

paraphrasing asc response,

Specifically in relation to Powerlifting Australia, it longer got funding after 2004-05 because of following, no order of importance

not a full medal sport on either of the Olympic or Commonwealth Games programs;
low participation numbers;
low profile;
and lack of consistent and satisfactory results at significant international events.

but from other evidence, which I would say highlight pa's current shortcomings, there are criteria which would complicate pa's bid. but that is a matter I am now exploring as someone interested in joining pa in the future, hoping that these factors improve to best practice.

Interesting. That makes perfect sense and is consistent with what I thought was the situation. PA is moving on the last three of those fronts. The first one could change too, but that is solely within the IPF's control.