How much of a weight advantage to cancel out one belt rank of difference in BJJ? - Page 2

aarick161 · 10-22-2009, 01:49 AM

It's not always about weight in my opinion. Myself and another individual where I train commonly draw out with training partners our size up to two belts higher than ours, and dominate those 1 belt higher. We're not any heavier than the senior belts, nor do we deserve higher rank, we're just both very very strong for our sizes.

Now if we're talking about one belt higher, equal power to weight ratio, and equal athleticism then I'd say 40lbs or so.

shaftoe · 10-22-2009, 02:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anaconda

also, the weight matters less and less the more the two weigh.

30 lbs is the world between 120 and 150; not so much between 220 and 250.

Agree. The percentage weight difference is more likely the figure of merit. A 150lb guy is 25% heavier than a 120lb guy, but a 250lb guy is only 13.6% heavier than a guy that is 220.

TJS · 10-22-2009, 02:45 AM

I'll say 40-50 lbs...as other have mentioned it dependsa on the build..I dont have a big problem with weight...but muscle weight+strenght and some endurance gooes alot further.

brianX · 10-22-2009, 03:53 AM

Assuming that belt rank corresponds rather precisely to competition skill and eliminating white belts from the equation, I'd put the weight cost lower than what's been suggested among similar athletes (i.e. similar cardio, strength relative to weight, etc.). And I'd ballpark it at around 15% of body weight (30 pounds for a 200 pound blue = 170 purple) and declining slightly from there as belts progress. Maybe a little more. The difference in nogi would be lower than in gi, where technique is relatively more important and athleticism less. Higher in BJJ than in wrestling. Declining slightly over time as BJJ becomes a more athleticism-dependent sport and the Heliocentric mythology that size doesn't matter becomes less prominent.

Another variable is other grappling experience. A white belt with none is different from a white belt who's an All-American wrestler or who holds a brown in judo. In such cases, the weight cost would be smaller.

Belatucadros · 10-22-2009, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shaftoe

Agree. The percentage weight difference is more likely the figure of merit. A 150lb guy is 25% heavier than a 120lb guy, but a 250lb guy is only 13.6% heavier than a guy that is 220.

agree, that's a big part of it

pikeamus · 10-22-2009, 07:29 AM

So hypothetically you guys might support the proposition that a 135lb blue belt that competes evenly with a 180lb blue should be pretty close to being a purple?

Wrestleben · 10-22-2009, 08:39 AM

I am 195 lbs and honestly have the most trouble with guys 20 or so lbs less then me that are much faster then me. I'd rather have a guy 20-30 lbs heavier then lighter in most cases.

It all depends on the skill of the player though. Belts are not completely discrete. A high blue belt is a night and day difference over a fresh blue belt.

Normot · 10-22-2009, 08:55 AM

There is also the fact that some people just deal better with being outweighed than others.

Balto · 10-22-2009, 08:56 AM

These estimates are way too low. It's like 75-100 lbs for one belt, and they have to be more athletic too.

Most of you guys are probably bigger, but I'm 150 lbs so this happens all the time for me. If you're not 200 lbs or more, I usually don't even consider you to be much bigger, but even at that point I still expect to be able to do well. It's really only around the 250 lbs mark that I actually start having to make material changes.

mikehmike · 10-22-2009, 09:01 AM

From my experience and I recently have been rolling with some new guys at my gym who are 220, 260 and they are strong, muscular guys. I have had no problem, now take a blue belt or something at 220lbs (I'm 165) and that's a different story.