WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.720 Understanding what weight class could be best 00:00:02.720 --> 00:00:05.679 for an individual as well. I think that could 00:00:05.679 --> 00:00:09.419 be helped by being able to see where's your percentile 00:00:09.419 --> 00:00:11.599 ranking based on your weight class. And if you're 00:00:11.599 --> 00:00:13.800 seeing somebody's really struggling in their 00:00:13.800 --> 00:00:16.829 weight class. to be strong enough you know maybe 00:00:16.829 --> 00:00:19.629 is that one where they need to be down or maybe 00:00:19.629 --> 00:00:21.910 do do we need to look at some of the nutrition 00:00:21.910 --> 00:00:24.449 and recovery aspects or modifying the program 00:00:24.449 --> 00:00:27.510 to help them maximize the return on investment 00:00:27.510 --> 00:00:30.329 for training and maximize their muscle mass as 00:00:30.329 --> 00:00:34.689 well Hi, Zach. Hi, how are you? It's my pleasure 00:00:34.689 --> 00:00:37.130 to have you on Evidence Strong Show. If you could 00:00:37.130 --> 00:00:39.210 briefly introduce yourself. Yes, my name is Zach 00:00:39.210 --> 00:00:41.310 Gillen. I'm an assistant professor in the Department 00:00:41.310 --> 00:00:43.990 of Kinesiology at Mississippi State University. 00:00:44.450 --> 00:00:46.869 I'm in my sixth year there, and I currently direct 00:00:46.869 --> 00:00:49.270 the Resistance Exercise Performance Lab, where 00:00:49.270 --> 00:00:51.469 we study a lot of different strength and conditioning 00:00:51.469 --> 00:00:53.950 principles, both as it relates to athletes, but 00:00:53.950 --> 00:00:56.429 then just your normal everyday individual, young 00:00:56.429 --> 00:00:58.590 kids to older adults, and how we can best maximize 00:00:58.590 --> 00:01:01.229 training. I'm originally actually from Texas 00:01:01.229 --> 00:01:03.130 and did my... bachelor's and master's degree 00:01:03.130 --> 00:01:06.370 in exercise physiology at Midwestern State University. 00:01:06.810 --> 00:01:08.689 Give them a shout out. Their men's soccer team 00:01:08.689 --> 00:01:10.790 just won the national championship. I was at 00:01:10.790 --> 00:01:12.870 a youth strength and conditioning company in 00:01:12.870 --> 00:01:15.689 Frisco, Texas called DX3 Athlete for about a 00:01:15.689 --> 00:01:18.069 year. And then I went and did my PhD at the University 00:01:18.069 --> 00:01:20.730 of Nebraska. And when I graduated, was able to 00:01:20.730 --> 00:01:23.010 come down here to Starkville, Mississippi and 00:01:23.010 --> 00:01:25.329 have me and my wife have been here ever since. 00:01:25.549 --> 00:01:28.030 Awesome. So you traveled a lot, huge experience. 00:01:28.430 --> 00:01:31.579 You out of the study, we will be talking. about 00:01:31.579 --> 00:01:34.900 today and the study is percentile rankings and 00:01:34.900 --> 00:01:37.400 normalization of performance for youth international 00:01:37.400 --> 00:01:39.959 weightlifting federation world championships 00:01:39.959 --> 00:01:44.840 competitors that's a mouthful but you took a 00:01:44.840 --> 00:01:48.540 huge amount of data and tried to summarize in 00:01:48.540 --> 00:01:52.680 a usable way. So why this study? So one of the 00:01:52.680 --> 00:01:54.959 things, like I said, I've had a passion for Olympic 00:01:54.959 --> 00:01:58.120 weightlifting, coached people to use weightlifting, 00:01:58.219 --> 00:02:00.219 used it in my own training. I believe it's very 00:02:00.219 --> 00:02:03.120 important, very, very good training modality 00:02:03.120 --> 00:02:06.599 for most individuals, whether athlete or non 00:02:06.599 --> 00:02:09.240 -athlete. I can help with strength, with mobility, 00:02:09.599 --> 00:02:12.060 range of motion, joint health, everything like 00:02:12.060 --> 00:02:15.560 that. And so a lot of the, as I mentioned at 00:02:15.560 --> 00:02:17.219 the beginning, a lot of the research that we 00:02:17.219 --> 00:02:20.840 do the lab is related to how do we maximize return 00:02:20.840 --> 00:02:23.599 on investment for training. Primarily, we focus 00:02:23.599 --> 00:02:26.060 on strength and power training, whether it be 00:02:26.060 --> 00:02:29.560 your traditional lifts, plyometrics, or Olympic 00:02:29.560 --> 00:02:32.560 weightlifting. And so this study is interesting 00:02:32.560 --> 00:02:35.400 because most of the studies we do, we have our 00:02:35.400 --> 00:02:38.379 lab, participants come into the lab, and we collect 00:02:38.379 --> 00:02:40.520 data right there. What I actually did for this 00:02:40.520 --> 00:02:43.020 study is I looked up the International Weightlifting 00:02:43.020 --> 00:02:45.719 Federation database and pulled the data from 00:02:45.719 --> 00:02:48.659 there. of our different lifts or just really 00:02:48.659 --> 00:02:51.879 tests in general, vertical jump, 1 .5 mile run, 00:02:52.039 --> 00:02:54.060 you know, your squats, everything like that. 00:02:54.139 --> 00:02:56.860 You have percentile rankings to where if I'm 00:02:56.860 --> 00:02:59.259 training, I know my age category, you know, male 00:02:59.259 --> 00:03:02.509 or female, I can see where do I line up. in terms 00:03:02.509 --> 00:03:04.990 of my percentile ranking. Am I at the higher 00:03:04.990 --> 00:03:06.889 percentile, lower percentile, somewhere in the 00:03:06.889 --> 00:03:10.330 middle? But we don't have as much of that available 00:03:10.330 --> 00:03:12.729 for the snatch and the clean and jerk and the 00:03:12.729 --> 00:03:15.129 total combined. So I was interested in seeing, 00:03:15.270 --> 00:03:17.270 all right, can we pull a lot of this data and 00:03:17.270 --> 00:03:19.849 actually compile it to develop percentile rankings 00:03:19.849 --> 00:03:22.849 so that those who are training can kind of know 00:03:22.849 --> 00:03:25.129 where they're at. Coaches and athletes can use 00:03:25.129 --> 00:03:27.729 it to know, where am I at? Am I at a good strength? 00:03:27.750 --> 00:03:30.620 For my weight class, am I at a good... strength? 00:03:30.759 --> 00:03:33.719 And for my age, am I at a good strength? And 00:03:33.719 --> 00:03:36.120 so I would like for that to be, because you see 00:03:36.120 --> 00:03:39.280 Olympic weightlifting more and more used by everyone 00:03:39.280 --> 00:03:42.219 over the last probably 10, 15 years. I've seen 00:03:42.219 --> 00:03:44.919 it implemented a lot more beyond just with athletes 00:03:44.919 --> 00:03:47.280 and more people are competing in Olympic weightlifting. 00:03:47.400 --> 00:03:49.500 So I think it's good to know, okay, where am 00:03:49.500 --> 00:03:52.180 I at? Am I at a good percentile ranking? Is my 00:03:52.180 --> 00:03:54.139 snatch good? Am I clean and jerk bad or vice 00:03:54.139 --> 00:03:56.879 versa? Where could I actually improve a little 00:03:56.879 --> 00:03:58.800 bit more? And one of the other things we did 00:03:58.800 --> 00:04:00.759 with this stuff, Study two was not just look 00:04:00.759 --> 00:04:04.000 at the percentile ranking of the raw total, but 00:04:04.000 --> 00:04:07.219 looked at it, everything normalized for body 00:04:07.219 --> 00:04:09.659 mass as well, because obviously those who are 00:04:09.659 --> 00:04:11.439 heavier, you can just look at records, right? 00:04:11.520 --> 00:04:13.860 Heavier weight classes lift more because they 00:04:13.860 --> 00:04:15.740 have more muscle mass. They're able to move more 00:04:15.740 --> 00:04:17.720 weight because of that additional muscle mass. 00:04:17.920 --> 00:04:19.959 So I wanted to look at it, not just for the raw 00:04:19.959 --> 00:04:22.699 score, but also based on your body weight, what 00:04:22.699 --> 00:04:25.319 you're weighing in at. Are you at a good percentile 00:04:25.319 --> 00:04:28.319 ranking? What could you improve upon? Or even... 00:04:28.560 --> 00:04:30.639 where maybe people could figure out, is this 00:04:30.639 --> 00:04:33.519 the right weight class for me where I can be 00:04:33.519 --> 00:04:35.660 highly competitive or would I be better down 00:04:35.660 --> 00:04:37.879 a weight class, up a weight class, whatever it 00:04:37.879 --> 00:04:40.300 might be. Awesome. So you mentioned a little 00:04:40.300 --> 00:04:44.240 bit that you took the data from the IWF website. 00:04:44.360 --> 00:04:47.300 How big of an effort was it? And what kind of 00:04:47.300 --> 00:04:49.740 data did you pull out? So I ended up pulling 00:04:49.740 --> 00:04:53.250 up, for this one we did... I did the most recent 00:04:53.250 --> 00:04:56.329 few years of competition, specifically since 00:04:56.329 --> 00:04:58.329 they changed the weight class in, I believe it 00:04:58.329 --> 00:05:03.069 was 2018. So I used data from 2019, 21, 22, and 00:05:03.069 --> 00:05:05.870 2023. I had pulled this data actually before 00:05:05.870 --> 00:05:11.649 the 2024 World Championship. For this study, 00:05:11.829 --> 00:05:14.310 I specifically took World Championships. I've 00:05:14.310 --> 00:05:16.709 seen some other studies recently, some coming 00:05:16.709 --> 00:05:19.250 out looking at different competitions as well, 00:05:19.370 --> 00:05:21.519 using similar type of... methods of pulling some 00:05:21.519 --> 00:05:24.660 of those large data sets. And I ended up deciding, 00:05:24.680 --> 00:05:26.779 you know, if people were competing year to year, 00:05:26.899 --> 00:05:30.680 I just took the entire. So for 2019, I skipped 00:05:30.680 --> 00:05:33.600 over 2020 because of COVID. So didn't have a 00:05:33.600 --> 00:05:36.079 whole lot to go off of that year. But for 2019 00:05:36.079 --> 00:05:38.800 was the furthest back I went for this one. Just 00:05:38.800 --> 00:05:41.680 pulled all that data. Then I came to 2021, pulled 00:05:41.680 --> 00:05:44.720 all that data. For this, I did not look at specifically 00:05:44.720 --> 00:05:47.480 if this person competed over here. How did they 00:05:47.480 --> 00:05:50.220 do in 2021 as well? Although that is another 00:05:50.220 --> 00:05:52.420 research question I've been interested in looking 00:05:52.420 --> 00:05:55.879 at is, OK, if we get similarities of these people, 00:05:56.019 --> 00:05:58.360 these individuals at different competitions, 00:05:58.560 --> 00:06:01.699 tracking some of those changes over time for 00:06:01.699 --> 00:06:03.620 different groups of people, different weight 00:06:03.620 --> 00:06:06.339 classes, seeing if individuals are shifting in 00:06:06.339 --> 00:06:07.720 their weight class one way or the other, what 00:06:07.720 --> 00:06:09.379 that's doing to their snaps, their clean and 00:06:09.379 --> 00:06:11.519 jerk and their total. But for this one, I didn't 00:06:11.519 --> 00:06:14.009 actually. eliminate people if it was, hey, they 00:06:14.009 --> 00:06:16.350 competed here, so I'm not going to use them over 00:06:16.350 --> 00:06:19.910 in 2021 or 22. I left them in that data set just 00:06:19.910 --> 00:06:22.970 so I could get a nice large compilation of data, 00:06:23.069 --> 00:06:26.949 which for this one, you know, we had 812 records 00:06:26.949 --> 00:06:29.610 between the boys and girls as well. So some of 00:06:29.610 --> 00:06:32.129 those were repeated, some were unique to each 00:06:32.129 --> 00:06:34.769 competition. And what age bracket are we talking 00:06:34.769 --> 00:06:37.930 about? So for this one, I specifically did the 00:06:37.930 --> 00:06:41.810 youth category, so it's 13 to 17 years. of age. 00:06:41.949 --> 00:06:43.629 Because when you're trying to create these reference 00:06:43.629 --> 00:06:47.009 normative values, if I take 50 people, that's 00:06:47.009 --> 00:06:49.189 not enough to really create normative values. 00:06:49.310 --> 00:06:51.649 But when you have several hundred of them, that 00:06:51.649 --> 00:06:55.350 becomes very valuable from a statistical side 00:06:55.350 --> 00:06:57.790 of things. And I was glad that, you know, I'm 00:06:57.790 --> 00:07:00.009 very happy publicly available online because 00:07:00.009 --> 00:07:02.569 with this specifically in kids, you see youth 00:07:02.569 --> 00:07:05.560 are. using Olympic weightlifting a lot more when 00:07:05.560 --> 00:07:08.199 I've coached youth. I've taught them snatch and 00:07:08.199 --> 00:07:10.899 clean and jerk. And I think it's good, like you 00:07:10.899 --> 00:07:13.160 were saying, for them to know where am I stacking 00:07:13.160 --> 00:07:15.500 up, even if they're not, it could just be somebody 00:07:15.500 --> 00:07:17.319 they're not competing in Olympic weightlifting, 00:07:17.459 --> 00:07:19.439 but they're using it in their programming. And 00:07:19.439 --> 00:07:21.480 so wanting to see, are they actually progressing 00:07:21.480 --> 00:07:24.779 very well? How does their strength stack up against 00:07:24.779 --> 00:07:27.000 other youth who are competing at a high level? 00:07:27.100 --> 00:07:29.459 But I have a passion for promoting this type 00:07:29.459 --> 00:07:32.730 of lifting as well. in that youth age category. 00:07:32.949 --> 00:07:36.310 Let's talk about what type of analysis you decided 00:07:36.310 --> 00:07:39.050 to do. So I use a statistical program called 00:07:39.050 --> 00:07:41.750 SPSS. So creating the normative values is pretty 00:07:41.750 --> 00:07:44.810 easy in that statistical software program. I 00:07:44.810 --> 00:07:47.069 put what I want in there and it... spit it back 00:07:47.069 --> 00:07:49.449 out for me. One of the unique things we did with 00:07:49.449 --> 00:07:51.790 this one, like I said, we looked at the influence 00:07:51.790 --> 00:07:55.230 of body mass on the actual lifts, on snatch, 00:07:55.310 --> 00:07:57.470 clean and jerk and the total. So with weightlifting, 00:07:57.730 --> 00:08:00.110 we know they have the Sinclair coefficient, which 00:08:00.110 --> 00:08:02.670 is what is used to determine based on your total, 00:08:02.829 --> 00:08:05.589 how are you based on your body mass to try to 00:08:05.589 --> 00:08:08.449 normalize that out to get best overall, which 00:08:08.449 --> 00:08:11.470 seems effective, but that works for the total, 00:08:11.490 --> 00:08:13.470 not for the snatch and clean and jerk individually. 00:08:14.399 --> 00:08:17.019 So one of the methods we employed in this one 00:08:17.019 --> 00:08:19.240 and I looked at was something called allometric 00:08:19.240 --> 00:08:21.639 scaling. And allometric scaling is basically 00:08:21.639 --> 00:08:25.240 how we typically have done normalization in terms 00:08:25.240 --> 00:08:27.759 of taking my weight. dividing it by my body mass. 00:08:27.959 --> 00:08:30.839 Traditional ratio scaling normalization. Well, 00:08:30.939 --> 00:08:33.980 that ratio scaling makes the assumption that 00:08:33.980 --> 00:08:37.259 there is a linear relationship between both variables. 00:08:37.539 --> 00:08:40.980 So if I increase five kilograms of body mass, 00:08:41.100 --> 00:08:43.000 my snatch or my clean and jerk will increase 00:08:43.000 --> 00:08:46.379 X amount as well. Inherently linear relationship. 00:08:46.759 --> 00:08:49.580 So one of the things I did to check for that 00:08:49.580 --> 00:08:51.940 to see is ratio scaling actually appropriate. 00:08:52.649 --> 00:08:55.669 for this was I did what's called polynomial regression 00:08:55.669 --> 00:08:58.570 analysis to see the relationship between snatch 00:08:58.570 --> 00:09:01.090 and body weight clean and jerk body weight total 00:09:01.090 --> 00:09:04.730 combined and body weight and it's not a linear 00:09:04.730 --> 00:09:07.269 relationship you get some quadratic some cubic 00:09:07.269 --> 00:09:10.309 relationships meaning I can't just assume that 00:09:10.309 --> 00:09:14.210 if my body weight goes up x amount that my lift 00:09:14.210 --> 00:09:17.450 will go up X amount. And so, and that's actually 00:09:17.450 --> 00:09:20.090 true of a lot of things in the exercise science 00:09:20.090 --> 00:09:21.929 and the lifting field, whether it be powerlifting, 00:09:22.090 --> 00:09:24.330 Olympic weightlifting, or any other lift out 00:09:24.330 --> 00:09:27.289 there, it's not as clean cut as if you increase 00:09:27.289 --> 00:09:29.629 this many pounds of muscle mass, you'll increase 00:09:29.629 --> 00:09:32.370 this many pounds in your lift. It would be nice 00:09:32.370 --> 00:09:34.549 if that were true, but it's not quite that clean 00:09:34.549 --> 00:09:37.870 cut. And so actually one of my doctoral advisor 00:09:37.870 --> 00:09:40.690 at Nebraska, Dr. Joel Kramer, he had introduced 00:09:40.690 --> 00:09:42.870 me to allometric scaling. And one of the first 00:09:43.240 --> 00:09:45.919 papers I did during my doctorate, where instead 00:09:45.919 --> 00:09:49.419 of taking weight divided by body mass, you actually 00:09:49.419 --> 00:09:52.200 create an allometric parameter where I'll take 00:09:52.200 --> 00:09:55.759 my lift and then I can raise it to that allometric 00:09:55.759 --> 00:09:58.759 parameter. So it's kind of correcting for the 00:09:58.759 --> 00:10:01.120 fact that it's not a linear relationship between 00:10:01.120 --> 00:10:04.159 those two. And there's a lot of different scientific 00:10:04.159 --> 00:10:06.899 fields that use that, and it's become more and 00:10:06.899 --> 00:10:09.899 more common. in the exercise science and kinesiology 00:10:09.899 --> 00:10:12.700 field, just because things are not as clear cut 00:10:12.700 --> 00:10:16.779 as increase a certain number of pounds of muscle 00:10:16.779 --> 00:10:19.240 and you increase a certain number of pounds with 00:10:19.240 --> 00:10:22.500 your lifts either. That was one of the things 00:10:22.500 --> 00:10:24.779 we also want to introduce in this is give something 00:10:24.779 --> 00:10:27.539 beyond just the Sinclair coefficient, but we 00:10:27.539 --> 00:10:30.039 can give, hey, here are these, one of the tables 00:10:30.039 --> 00:10:31.860 on here, I know we had the allometric parameters 00:10:31.860 --> 00:10:34.580 where if somebody were to want to, they can simply 00:10:34.580 --> 00:10:38.379 use those to see are they in a good strength 00:10:38.379 --> 00:10:40.639 for their weight, their current body weight, 00:10:40.700 --> 00:10:43.259 and in their weight category as well. The table's 00:10:43.259 --> 00:10:46.320 actually the table eight on there, and it has 00:10:46.320 --> 00:10:48.659 an allometric parameter you'll see for boys, 00:10:48.759 --> 00:10:50.820 for girls, for the snatch, for the clean. and 00:10:50.820 --> 00:10:54.000 jerk and for the total lift I need to take the 00:10:54.000 --> 00:10:57.360 lift I did and then I just raise it to that allometric 00:10:57.360 --> 00:10:59.460 parameter so instead of you know squaring the 00:10:59.460 --> 00:11:02.200 number you just replace that with you know whatever 00:11:02.200 --> 00:11:06.480 the parameter is so for example if if I was looking 00:11:06.480 --> 00:11:09.139 at the snatch and boys the allometric parameter 00:11:09.139 --> 00:11:13.460 was 0 .5636 which means I would take their snatch 00:11:13.460 --> 00:11:17.649 and raise it to 0 .5636. And that'll give me 00:11:17.649 --> 00:11:21.110 my allometrically scaled lift. And you can do 00:11:21.110 --> 00:11:22.889 the same for the clean and jerk, for the total, 00:11:23.009 --> 00:11:26.330 for boys and for girls as well. And then you 00:11:26.330 --> 00:11:28.909 can go with the number you receive. You can go 00:11:28.909 --> 00:11:30.629 straight to the other tables you have in the 00:11:30.629 --> 00:11:34.389 paper to see where on the percentile they would 00:11:34.389 --> 00:11:37.500 be placing. with this lift. Correct. And so if 00:11:37.500 --> 00:11:41.399 you look at table six, table six, for example, 00:11:41.460 --> 00:11:44.080 has allometrically scaled total. And so I could 00:11:44.080 --> 00:11:46.820 see, okay, based on my weight category, where's 00:11:46.820 --> 00:11:49.559 my allometrically scaled number at? And so if 00:11:49.559 --> 00:11:51.659 you actually look at the, it's got the formula 00:11:51.659 --> 00:11:54.419 in, you know, on page three in this one where 00:11:54.419 --> 00:11:56.860 it's got the allometrically scaled performance 00:11:56.860 --> 00:11:59.500 measure is I take my performance measure divided 00:11:59.500 --> 00:12:02.600 by my body mass raised to that parameter. And 00:12:02.600 --> 00:12:05.100 then you'll get a number somewhere, hopefully 00:12:05.100 --> 00:12:07.440 on that table or looking somewhat similar to 00:12:07.440 --> 00:12:10.779 that table as well. All you have to do is plug 00:12:10.779 --> 00:12:14.139 into that formula listed on page three in there. 00:12:14.240 --> 00:12:17.080 Your stats, for example, stat divided by body 00:12:17.080 --> 00:12:19.279 mass raised to the allometric parameter gives 00:12:19.279 --> 00:12:21.980 you an allometrically scaled score. Because one 00:12:21.980 --> 00:12:24.639 of the things is, and theoretically similar to 00:12:24.639 --> 00:12:26.240 the Sinclair coefficient, it wouldn't be the 00:12:26.240 --> 00:12:28.720 same number every single year. That coefficient 00:12:28.720 --> 00:12:31.539 changes based on what the world record is as 00:12:31.539 --> 00:12:34.159 well. And so this would need, here in a couple 00:12:34.159 --> 00:12:35.639 of years, you probably need some more updating 00:12:35.639 --> 00:12:37.620 with this. But at the very least, it takes a 00:12:37.620 --> 00:12:41.289 snapshot right here in time. how I can use this 00:12:41.289 --> 00:12:44.149 to look beyond just that Sinclair normalization, 00:12:44.149 --> 00:12:46.590 beyond just taking my lift and dividing it by 00:12:46.590 --> 00:12:49.149 my current body mass. So hopefully it gets a 00:12:49.149 --> 00:12:51.649 little bit more of a pinpoint accuracy on how 00:12:51.649 --> 00:12:54.190 good is your strength based on your body mass. 00:12:54.509 --> 00:12:58.080 Do you think that the cuts... the lifters some 00:12:58.080 --> 00:13:02.340 lifters do between competitions like world championship 00:13:02.340 --> 00:13:05.200 where the medals and the placings are very important 00:13:05.200 --> 00:13:08.159 also before their career do you think that this 00:13:08.159 --> 00:13:12.779 would influence the scaling and the the totals 00:13:12.779 --> 00:13:18.220 maybe it possibly could so you know with And 00:13:18.220 --> 00:13:21.639 weightlifting, powerlifting, wrestling or sports 00:13:21.639 --> 00:13:25.379 that you see a lot of weight cuts in those. And 00:13:25.379 --> 00:13:28.200 I always tell people to be cautious with that 00:13:28.200 --> 00:13:32.200 because a lot of those last second cuts is really 00:13:32.200 --> 00:13:35.000 you're losing water. You're not actually you're 00:13:35.000 --> 00:13:36.879 not losing fat or anything like that because 00:13:36.879 --> 00:13:38.899 it's too small of a time frame you're trying 00:13:38.899 --> 00:13:41.080 to weight cut in. And so you can potentially 00:13:41.080 --> 00:13:43.919 put yourself in more of a dehydrated state, especially 00:13:43.919 --> 00:13:46.620 if I have to make weight in the morning, which 00:13:46.620 --> 00:13:48.759 which thankfully it's in the morning. So if you 00:13:48.759 --> 00:13:50.480 if you don't lift till later in the day, you 00:13:50.480 --> 00:13:52.639 know, don't eat breakfast or anything. Go in 00:13:52.639 --> 00:13:55.080 and then go about your normal day. But at the 00:13:55.080 --> 00:13:56.740 same time, you know, I don't want to put myself 00:13:56.740 --> 00:13:59.600 in a compromised state. If I'm dehydrated, my 00:13:59.600 --> 00:14:02.559 performance is naturally going to be down. Maybe. 00:14:02.799 --> 00:14:04.700 can still do as good as i need to but then you 00:14:04.700 --> 00:14:08.120 have to ask am i willing to risk that performance 00:14:08.120 --> 00:14:10.840 decline with being in more of a compromised state. 00:14:11.019 --> 00:14:14.200 And so hopefully, you know, studies like this, 00:14:14.299 --> 00:14:16.799 where we're, we had these normative reference 00:14:16.799 --> 00:14:19.600 values can help people in the preparation to 00:14:19.600 --> 00:14:22.279 where you don't have to go on a cut right beforehand. 00:14:22.500 --> 00:14:24.679 I usually recommend to people. And when you talk 00:14:24.679 --> 00:14:26.720 about people at world championships and Olympics, 00:14:26.840 --> 00:14:29.360 it's a little different than just normal person 00:14:29.360 --> 00:14:31.639 in the gym or even doing amateur competitions. 00:14:31.679 --> 00:14:34.580 But I usually. I would recommend find a weight 00:14:34.580 --> 00:14:37.340 class where you can perform optimally in, and 00:14:37.340 --> 00:14:39.759 hopefully you can use some of these data sets 00:14:39.759 --> 00:14:42.240 and these normative values to see, am I at a 00:14:42.240 --> 00:14:45.100 good competition strength? But also that you 00:14:45.100 --> 00:14:47.340 feel comfortable in terms of, I don't feel like 00:14:47.340 --> 00:14:49.740 I'm having to starve myself or dehydrate myself, 00:14:49.940 --> 00:14:52.539 or I don't feel like I'm having to really pack 00:14:52.539 --> 00:14:55.000 in the calories to try to be at the upper end 00:14:55.000 --> 00:14:57.460 of that weight class to maximize my muscle mass. 00:14:57.639 --> 00:15:00.820 I want people to be at a good performance weight, 00:15:00.940 --> 00:15:04.159 but also understand. you start to dip into some 00:15:04.159 --> 00:15:05.899 of the health implications to make sure you're 00:15:05.899 --> 00:15:08.799 at a good body health weight as well, because 00:15:08.799 --> 00:15:10.919 that's also going to influence the psychological 00:15:10.919 --> 00:15:15.379 component too. So I hope these types of data 00:15:15.379 --> 00:15:18.299 sets can help people in that preparation. Only 00:15:18.299 --> 00:15:20.799 time will tell with that. Okay. Are we ready 00:15:20.799 --> 00:15:23.720 to look into the results? We could compare what 00:15:23.720 --> 00:15:27.399 differences have you found for sexes and for 00:15:27.399 --> 00:15:30.840 weight classes. Some other interesting findings 00:15:30.840 --> 00:15:34.299 you would have. Yes. Yeah. So the results, heavier 00:15:34.299 --> 00:15:36.679 weight classes lifted more than the lighter weight 00:15:36.679 --> 00:15:39.529 classes. Not very surprising there. And the boys 00:15:39.529 --> 00:15:41.509 tended to be stronger than the girls. If you 00:15:41.509 --> 00:15:44.029 also look at that age category, 13 to 17, during 00:15:44.029 --> 00:15:46.210 that pubertal window, that's not, when you go 00:15:46.210 --> 00:15:48.690 to pre -pubertal kids, it's usually similar strength. 00:15:48.870 --> 00:15:50.789 There at that pubertal time, boys were stronger 00:15:50.789 --> 00:15:52.909 than girls. So those are some of the unsurprising 00:15:52.909 --> 00:15:55.450 results. But when we look at whether it be the 00:15:55.450 --> 00:15:57.809 allometrically scaled, Nash -Clean and Jerkin 00:15:57.809 --> 00:16:00.789 total, or even just the Sinclair for the total, 00:16:00.909 --> 00:16:04.769 what we found was typically boys were stronger 00:16:04.769 --> 00:16:07.190 than girls when correcting for body mass. The 00:16:07.190 --> 00:16:09.309 difference was. quite as large, but it was still 00:16:09.309 --> 00:16:11.289 there. But for both boys and girls, we found 00:16:11.289 --> 00:16:14.269 those middle weight classes were the strongest 00:16:14.269 --> 00:16:17.330 pound for pound compared to the upper and lower 00:16:17.330 --> 00:16:19.809 end weight classes. Part of it is you have more 00:16:19.809 --> 00:16:22.429 individuals in those weight classes as well than 00:16:22.429 --> 00:16:24.409 at the upper and lower ends of the spectrum. 00:16:24.470 --> 00:16:27.470 But the results really showed, like I said, boys 00:16:27.470 --> 00:16:29.529 are stronger than girls, which wasn't surprising. 00:16:29.610 --> 00:16:32.210 For the raw totals and snatch and clean and jerk, 00:16:32.289 --> 00:16:34.809 heavier lifters stronger. But when you actually 00:16:34.809 --> 00:16:37.799 correct for body mass. With allometric scaling 00:16:37.799 --> 00:16:41.379 or with Sinclair coefficient, those middle weight 00:16:41.379 --> 00:16:44.559 classes were the strongest pound for pound. Anything 00:16:44.559 --> 00:16:47.679 extra we can pull out of the data? A couple of 00:16:47.679 --> 00:16:50.039 things that people can pull out beyond just like 00:16:50.039 --> 00:16:52.759 looking at the results and, you know, interpreting 00:16:52.759 --> 00:16:55.059 those. I'd say some of the things with the results 00:16:55.059 --> 00:16:58.700 is one, coaches and athletes have some data sets, 00:16:58.799 --> 00:17:02.279 some normative values to use now, right? Whereas 00:17:02.279 --> 00:17:04.039 in Olympic weightlifting, especially in kids 00:17:04.039 --> 00:17:05.779 and kids, we don't have a whole lot of normative. 00:17:05.900 --> 00:17:09.640 values. And so those comparisons were part of 00:17:09.640 --> 00:17:12.400 it. But my initial idea behind this was we need 00:17:12.400 --> 00:17:14.579 some normative reference values, some published 00:17:14.579 --> 00:17:17.220 standards, you know, not just if somebody pulls 00:17:17.220 --> 00:17:19.619 the data and, you know, throws it up on the internet 00:17:19.619 --> 00:17:22.859 is good, but we like to also see things, scientific 00:17:22.859 --> 00:17:25.920 published standards that we have out here. Those 00:17:25.920 --> 00:17:29.799 are always good to go back to. So one, we have 00:17:29.799 --> 00:17:32.839 something to use now for the raw scores, the 00:17:32.839 --> 00:17:36.009 absolute weight lifted for Your Sinclair coefficient 00:17:36.009 --> 00:17:39.309 corrected weight lifted. And then for those allometrically 00:17:39.309 --> 00:17:42.450 scaled, so body mass corrected, weights lifted. 00:17:42.609 --> 00:17:45.329 So that'd be one of the big results I hope that 00:17:45.329 --> 00:17:48.109 has a practical aspect to it of you don't even 00:17:48.109 --> 00:17:50.450 need to know any of the math or anything behind 00:17:50.450 --> 00:17:53.190 it all. You can just pull up the table. And if 00:17:53.190 --> 00:17:55.910 I want to know, hey, how am I based on my allometrically 00:17:55.910 --> 00:17:58.569 scaled snatch? Well, I scroll up in the statistical 00:17:58.569 --> 00:18:01.210 analysis paragraph. It's got that formula. If 00:18:01.210 --> 00:18:03.369 I know their raw score, I take that. And then 00:18:03.369 --> 00:18:06.230 I take their body mass. I take raw, weight lifted, 00:18:06.390 --> 00:18:08.589 divided by body mass, raised to that allometric 00:18:08.589 --> 00:18:11.630 parameter, which is down there in the last table. 00:18:11.769 --> 00:18:14.609 Now I have my allometrically scaled score. Or 00:18:14.609 --> 00:18:16.630 if a coach doesn't care to do that, they can 00:18:16.630 --> 00:18:18.710 still look at just the raw. Here's your snatch, 00:18:18.869 --> 00:18:21.789 your clean and jerk, your total. Or the IWF website 00:18:21.789 --> 00:18:24.069 actually has a, you can calculate their Sinclair 00:18:24.069 --> 00:18:26.210 coefficient right there on the website. So if 00:18:26.210 --> 00:18:28.089 you don't even care to do the allometric scaling, 00:18:28.369 --> 00:18:30.650 hopefully there's something that a coach and 00:18:30.650 --> 00:18:32.769 an athlete can still take away from this. So 00:18:32.769 --> 00:18:36.029 let's just clarify. I didn't want to minimize 00:18:36.029 --> 00:18:38.970 the huge amount of work and the outcome that 00:18:38.970 --> 00:18:41.329 are the tables with normative values. This is 00:18:41.329 --> 00:18:43.069 the gold of the paper. There's no doubt about 00:18:43.069 --> 00:18:46.309 it. Now, the additional plus of the analysis 00:18:46.309 --> 00:18:49.750 you have done is that the coaches are not limited 00:18:49.750 --> 00:18:52.430 to only comparing the total. There may be some 00:18:52.430 --> 00:18:55.970 other elements, maybe injury, maybe a lifter 00:18:55.970 --> 00:18:58.329 comes with some deficiencies in mobility and 00:18:58.329 --> 00:19:00.569 it will take time to get them where they have 00:19:00.569 --> 00:19:04.119 to be. For example, in jerk, but for snatch and 00:19:04.119 --> 00:19:08.259 clean, they are pretty all right. Or the other 00:19:08.259 --> 00:19:10.960 combination, but they have one lift that actually 00:19:10.960 --> 00:19:14.279 the coach thinks, oh, that could be a reliable 00:19:14.279 --> 00:19:16.859 measure or valid measure of their performance, 00:19:17.079 --> 00:19:20.400 but it's not at all. So it's very hard to, well, 00:19:20.480 --> 00:19:23.680 do I guess the clean and jerk now? No, you actually 00:19:23.680 --> 00:19:27.460 provided the data. They can scale the snatch, 00:19:27.720 --> 00:19:30.140 let's say, to the body weight of the athlete 00:19:30.140 --> 00:19:32.720 converted. into a score and compare if they don't 00:19:32.720 --> 00:19:35.519 want to do it i think they are tables for for 00:19:35.519 --> 00:19:39.859 raw data too They can actually just take the 00:19:39.859 --> 00:19:43.660 snatch as it is in kilograms and see where in 00:19:43.660 --> 00:19:46.460 terms of this huge data set of elite lifters, 00:19:46.559 --> 00:19:49.619 how their lifter is comparing. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. 00:19:49.880 --> 00:19:51.900 Yeah. So like I said, if they don't care to go 00:19:51.900 --> 00:19:54.119 through any of the math behind it, you just want 00:19:54.119 --> 00:19:56.539 to know, hey, where's my snatch or my clean and 00:19:56.539 --> 00:19:58.559 jerk at? Just look at the table. If you know 00:19:58.559 --> 00:20:00.700 what their body weight is or their weight class, 00:20:00.880 --> 00:20:03.019 you can just find with the percentile ranking, 00:20:03.160 --> 00:20:05.019 go over to their weight class. You know right 00:20:05.019 --> 00:20:07.359 where you're at. Awesome. All right. So let's 00:20:07.359 --> 00:20:10.480 bring it all together. What would be the message 00:20:10.480 --> 00:20:12.640 for coaches from a study? The message for coaches 00:20:12.640 --> 00:20:16.740 is one, you know, if you need to know. If an 00:20:16.740 --> 00:20:18.980 athlete is making good progress on their strength 00:20:18.980 --> 00:20:21.500 based on their weight class, whether it be for 00:20:21.500 --> 00:20:24.299 their just raw, you know, snatch, clean and jerk 00:20:24.299 --> 00:20:26.559 or total, you can use these data. If you want 00:20:26.559 --> 00:20:29.579 to scale it to the body mass or for the total, 00:20:29.680 --> 00:20:31.680 you can use the Sinclair coefficient. You have 00:20:31.680 --> 00:20:35.579 that capability here for boys and for girls and 00:20:35.579 --> 00:20:37.779 across all the weight class categories there. 00:20:37.839 --> 00:20:40.599 And we did use all the IWF weight class categories. 00:20:40.779 --> 00:20:43.220 I know for the Olympics, they do scale it down 00:20:43.220 --> 00:20:45.490 a few weight classes. So it has. everything that 00:20:45.490 --> 00:20:47.990 would be on an international competition and 00:20:47.990 --> 00:20:51.069 most of our national competitions too that I've 00:20:51.069 --> 00:20:52.849 been a part of. One of the things as well is 00:20:52.849 --> 00:20:55.309 knowing that understanding what weight class 00:20:55.309 --> 00:20:58.650 could be best for an individual as well. I think 00:20:58.650 --> 00:21:02.150 that could be helped by being able to see where's 00:21:02.150 --> 00:21:04.430 your percentile ranking based on your weight 00:21:04.430 --> 00:21:06.369 class. And if you're seeing somebody's really 00:21:06.369 --> 00:21:09.289 struggling in their weight class to be strong 00:21:09.289 --> 00:21:11.410 enough, you know, maybe is that one where they 00:21:11.410 --> 00:21:14.230 need to be down or maybe do we need to look? 00:21:14.279 --> 00:21:16.660 Look at some of the nutrition and recovery aspects 00:21:16.660 --> 00:21:19.599 or modifying the program to help them maximize 00:21:19.599 --> 00:21:22.420 the return on investment for training and maximize 00:21:22.420 --> 00:21:25.319 their muscle mass as well. And another thing, 00:21:25.319 --> 00:21:27.920 too, it's a takeaway from this. And we've had 00:21:27.920 --> 00:21:30.480 other studies where we did it of. Even when we 00:21:30.480 --> 00:21:32.619 corrected for body mass, the boys were stronger 00:21:32.619 --> 00:21:35.099 than the girls. Usually we all think it's because 00:21:35.099 --> 00:21:38.039 of muscle, which is true. Muscle mass, it makes 00:21:38.039 --> 00:21:40.960 a big difference between boys and girls, especially 00:21:40.960 --> 00:21:44.519 like I said, in that 13 to 17 category, pubertal 00:21:44.519 --> 00:21:46.500 development starts to really differ between boys 00:21:46.500 --> 00:21:49.319 and girls. But that also speaks to some of the 00:21:49.319 --> 00:21:51.859 complexity we talked about earlier. There's a 00:21:51.859 --> 00:21:53.779 lot of other things going on in the body during 00:21:53.779 --> 00:21:56.099 growth and development that are differentiating 00:21:56.099 --> 00:21:58.559 strength between boys and girls, even when I 00:21:58.559 --> 00:22:01.180 correct for. body mass. And so, you know, those 00:22:01.180 --> 00:22:03.140 are other things that really, I guess that's 00:22:03.140 --> 00:22:05.099 the kind of take home for any researchers who 00:22:05.099 --> 00:22:06.759 are listening to this. Some of the things that 00:22:06.759 --> 00:22:08.720 I think we need to look at a little bit more, 00:22:08.839 --> 00:22:11.579 not even just body mass, but let's look at actual 00:22:11.579 --> 00:22:14.480 composition, your muscle mass, some of the neural 00:22:14.480 --> 00:22:16.980 development and neuromuscular changes. You know, 00:22:17.019 --> 00:22:19.039 I think we as researchers need to do our due 00:22:19.039 --> 00:22:22.339 diligence so that we can help coaches out there 00:22:22.339 --> 00:22:25.240 better know how can I maximize my training for 00:22:25.240 --> 00:22:27.039 my athletes. But I hope, you know, there are 00:22:27.039 --> 00:22:29.960 people out there. and coaches who at the bare 00:22:29.960 --> 00:22:32.859 minimum can use this to see, hey. Am I at a good 00:22:32.859 --> 00:22:35.039 strength for my weight class? You know, are my 00:22:35.039 --> 00:22:37.480 athletes progressing really well? Do I need to 00:22:37.480 --> 00:22:40.019 maybe take a look at this and maybe that'll spark, 00:22:40.180 --> 00:22:42.740 hey, maybe I can modify my program or even look 00:22:42.740 --> 00:22:44.480 at is this athlete in the right weight class 00:22:44.480 --> 00:22:46.839 based on their strength? And especially if they're 00:22:46.839 --> 00:22:48.880 really, really struggling in that, you know, 00:22:48.880 --> 00:22:51.339 maybe it's drop down a weight class. Maybe it's 00:22:51.339 --> 00:22:54.000 bump up a weight class. Maybe it's stay where 00:22:54.000 --> 00:22:56.180 you're at. And let's maybe look at the nutritional 00:22:56.180 --> 00:22:58.220 aspect to make sure you're getting, you know, 00:22:58.220 --> 00:23:00.960 plenty of protein and plenty of recovery. And 00:23:00.960 --> 00:23:03.829 how's your sleep? doing things like that as well. 00:23:03.910 --> 00:23:05.650 So I hope there can be some takeaway of, you 00:23:05.650 --> 00:23:06.930 know, there's a lot of different things people 00:23:06.930 --> 00:23:09.710 could gather from this. This is an elite level 00:23:09.710 --> 00:23:12.009 competitor. So I would say if you're working 00:23:12.009 --> 00:23:15.230 with very amateur level competitors, and like 00:23:15.230 --> 00:23:16.789 I said, there is actually one that came out in 00:23:16.789 --> 00:23:20.089 2024 that has adult values as well. If I'm working 00:23:20.089 --> 00:23:22.609 with amateur competitors, don't necessarily expect 00:23:22.609 --> 00:23:25.509 them to right off the bat be at the level of 00:23:25.509 --> 00:23:28.569 international worlds. championship competitors, 00:23:28.890 --> 00:23:31.269 but at least gives you a gauge to see how are 00:23:31.269 --> 00:23:33.410 they stacking up against the best of the best 00:23:33.410 --> 00:23:36.349 as well. But don't expect them to be right there 00:23:36.349 --> 00:23:38.670 if they're just starting off with Olympic weightlifting. 00:23:38.869 --> 00:23:41.289 You can use this to progress them over time or 00:23:41.289 --> 00:23:43.410 see how they're changing over time. Sometimes, 00:23:43.549 --> 00:23:46.670 especially with young lifters, the important 00:23:46.670 --> 00:23:50.230 aspect is also the rate of progression. So they 00:23:50.230 --> 00:23:54.089 may start a little bit lower, but they are progressing 00:23:54.089 --> 00:23:56.799 pretty fast and they are able to sustain. the 00:23:56.799 --> 00:23:59.099 progress. Sometimes athletes who are progressing 00:23:59.099 --> 00:24:02.759 really well as youth athletes or juniors are 00:24:02.759 --> 00:24:06.619 not necessarily able to get to the elite. lever 00:24:06.619 --> 00:24:09.099 in seniors where it's required for many reasons 00:24:09.099 --> 00:24:13.339 but i would caution coaches to not use the tables 00:24:13.339 --> 00:24:17.200 in a way that is limiting the athlete's potential 00:24:17.200 --> 00:24:20.640 so saying oh they are not meeting the percentiles 00:24:20.640 --> 00:24:24.079 of elite world championship participants so there's 00:24:24.079 --> 00:24:26.519 no point putting effort into them right you know 00:24:26.519 --> 00:24:28.819 i would say to remember you know elite level 00:24:28.819 --> 00:24:32.220 athletes in any sport you know they're percentage 00:24:32.220 --> 00:24:35.220 of a percentage of the population, right? Most 00:24:35.220 --> 00:24:38.599 people are not going to be a world's level competitors. 00:24:38.940 --> 00:24:41.680 If I'm working with somebody, are they progressing 00:24:41.680 --> 00:24:44.700 in a positive trajectory? Do they keep getting, 00:24:44.819 --> 00:24:46.440 is their technique getting better? You know, 00:24:46.440 --> 00:24:48.279 I always say, especially in kids, first, let's 00:24:48.279 --> 00:24:50.660 get the technique down and then we can worry 00:24:50.660 --> 00:24:53.519 more about adding some more weight on the barbell. 00:24:53.640 --> 00:24:55.920 Are they progressing continuously? And if they're 00:24:55.920 --> 00:24:58.460 starting to slow down their progress or, you 00:24:58.460 --> 00:25:00.319 know, a lot of people hit a plateau, that's where 00:25:00.319 --> 00:25:02.859 do I need to... to revisit the training program, 00:25:03.079 --> 00:25:05.319 tweak a few things here and there. One of the 00:25:05.319 --> 00:25:07.460 things I've really tried to focus to speaking 00:25:07.460 --> 00:25:09.599 people on is also let's not ignore the recovery 00:25:09.599 --> 00:25:12.900 aspect of it as well. Like you were mentioning 00:25:12.900 --> 00:25:15.140 earlier with people, you never know what's going 00:25:15.140 --> 00:25:17.740 on in life. If you're going through a rough stretch 00:25:17.740 --> 00:25:20.140 of life, you're not sleeping as well, your nutrition's 00:25:20.140 --> 00:25:22.359 down. that could answer why you're hitting a 00:25:22.359 --> 00:25:24.819 plateau right there. So maybe it's a keep training, 00:25:24.940 --> 00:25:27.059 but I also understand I might not see as much 00:25:27.059 --> 00:25:29.519 progress because of what's going on in your personal 00:25:29.519 --> 00:25:31.619 life as well. And those are important things 00:25:31.619 --> 00:25:33.700 and important issues that people need to deal 00:25:33.700 --> 00:25:36.039 with and be able to handle. But don't, you know, 00:25:36.039 --> 00:25:38.220 don't look at this and be disappointed while 00:25:38.220 --> 00:25:40.339 they're not at the elite level. You know, most 00:25:40.339 --> 00:25:44.180 coaches, you know, you work with. athletes who 00:25:44.180 --> 00:25:46.680 aren't getting to the Olympics or the World Championships 00:25:46.680 --> 00:25:49.759 level, that does not mean your athletes are not 00:25:49.759 --> 00:25:52.180 important, right? They're just as important as 00:25:52.180 --> 00:25:55.099 that upper echelon of athlete to coach and to 00:25:55.099 --> 00:25:58.420 properly train and design those programs or monitor 00:25:58.420 --> 00:26:02.819 their progress so that they, because just a kid 00:26:02.819 --> 00:26:05.519 seeing themselves get stronger over time, that 00:26:05.519 --> 00:26:07.700 can do a lot for their confidence and for their 00:26:07.700 --> 00:26:09.599 just health and well -being for the long term 00:26:09.599 --> 00:26:12.160 as well. So whether they're going to, you know, 00:26:12.160 --> 00:26:14.839 see these elite level numbers or not, you know, 00:26:14.839 --> 00:26:16.799 doesn't matter as much as are they progressing? 00:26:16.980 --> 00:26:19.160 Are they getting better? You know, are they seeing 00:26:19.160 --> 00:26:21.359 themselves get better as well, which is very, 00:26:21.420 --> 00:26:23.440 very important from a psychological standpoint, 00:26:23.539 --> 00:26:26.759 too. My job as a coach, yes, is to get them better 00:26:26.759 --> 00:26:28.920 for the sport. But like you said, it teaches 00:26:28.920 --> 00:26:31.920 them some life skills. It teaches them some discipline, 00:26:32.059 --> 00:26:34.099 some toughness, because, you know, we all know 00:26:34.099 --> 00:26:36.619 life will have its challenges. And if I can learn 00:26:36.619 --> 00:26:38.380 some of that discipline and toughness through 00:26:38.380 --> 00:26:41.240 how I'm training my body, it can carry over into 00:26:41.240 --> 00:26:43.589 how I'm. able to handle things in life. And, 00:26:43.589 --> 00:26:46.230 you know, it's important for kids to get that 00:26:46.230 --> 00:26:48.690 exposure as well, whether they're playing a sport 00:26:48.690 --> 00:26:50.970 or just in the gym, working out and training. 00:26:51.109 --> 00:26:54.049 It gives them some of those skills that hopefully 00:26:54.049 --> 00:26:57.089 do carry over for them. I agree 100%. I usually 00:26:57.089 --> 00:26:59.690 finish with two questions. The first one is, 00:26:59.829 --> 00:27:02.369 which one is your favorite, snatch or clean and 00:27:02.369 --> 00:27:05.430 jerk? Clean and jerk for me. I used to not like 00:27:05.430 --> 00:27:08.250 the snatch as much. Once I finally figured out 00:27:08.250 --> 00:27:10.660 the technique, I like it better, but... I'm more 00:27:10.660 --> 00:27:13.160 of a clean and jerk fan. I respect that. All 00:27:13.160 --> 00:27:15.460 right. And the last question is where people 00:27:15.460 --> 00:27:18.519 can find you if they want to be up to date with 00:27:18.519 --> 00:27:21.019 your research or maybe ask a question. Yeah. 00:27:21.119 --> 00:27:25.000 So one, you can always try to update on our Department 00:27:25.000 --> 00:27:28.160 of Kinesiology website, kinesiology .msstate 00:27:28.160 --> 00:27:31.339 .edu. Try to usually every semester update with 00:27:31.339 --> 00:27:33.759 some of the recent publications we've had. You 00:27:33.759 --> 00:27:36.380 can also find me, Zachary Gillen, on LinkedIn. 00:27:36.460 --> 00:27:39.180 That's probably where I will post the most on. 00:27:39.700 --> 00:27:41.700 I'm in the professional side of my life, whether 00:27:41.700 --> 00:27:45.299 it be new articles or students out at the conferences 00:27:45.299 --> 00:27:48.259 presenting research. Also on Instagram, I'll 00:27:48.259 --> 00:27:50.640 share some of it as well. My Instagram handle 00:27:50.640 --> 00:27:55.019 is at ZM Gillen. So ZM is in Michael and then 00:27:55.019 --> 00:27:57.779 G -I -L -L -E -N. Awesome. Thank you so much, 00:27:57.799 --> 00:28:00.500 Zach, for today. It was a pleasure. Great. Thank 00:28:00.500 --> 00:28:01.000 you so much.