Originally Posted By: Pelland
Originally Posted By: sportsfan02
Originally Posted By: Pelland
[quote=sportsfan02][quote=Pelland]I would be willing to bet that there are more (heavy) 8 year olds than 40 and 43 pounders combined.

That is a separate issue and should not be included in this discussion. Just because we do or don't have kids in one weight group doesn't mean we should create another weight group where we have no kids. I do believe that those lower weights were covered in our study completed a few years ago.


Your right....it is a separate issue and that's why I ended my post.

Apparently you haven't been reading this post. Who said anything about creating another weight group where we have no kids? I simply suggested creating a weight class where there were kids.

Originally Posted By: sportsfan02
The thread is about heavyweights or lack thereof as the title would suggest. The studies indicated the numbers in each weight class over an extended period of time. Thus why we don't have more heavier weight classes because too many were walking thru state.


Originally Posted By: Pelland
[I'm glad you finally figured that out.

Had it all along now if you could simply explain the need to bring up the lighter weights.

Last edited by sportsfan02; 03/31/09 07:56 PM.