If a heavy weightlifter or strongman competitor threw the shot put with zero experience, how would they do?

You don't throw the shot put; you put the shot.

1) You don't "throw the shot put"--you put the shot.

2) I have actually seen multiple people like those you've posited attempt to put the shot. Almost all required enough instruction to be putting and not throwing the implement; beyond that, most with "zero experience" were initially below ten meters, though a few reached over twelve. I have not personally seen any such person reach fifteen.

If you forcefully move something in your grasp forward and let go, and it flies through the air, that's a throw. I don't care what they were calling it in the 19th century.

That goes for British people too - cricket "bowlers" are throwing the ball. Bowling is when you roll a ball.

They do poorly in the shot but can be quite successful in the weight throw.

some years ago a Russian shot putter called Aleksandr Baryshnikov invented a brand new shot putt technique called the rotational technique. it is still in use today by a small number of putters and I actually saw a woman doing it last night at the IAAF indoor tour meet in Düsseldorf. that one fact alone should tell you that technique is important. if the athletes are experimenting with new ideas it means either: a) technique is important or b) technique is even more important than that.

on the other hand, when there is no experimentation going on it means either: a) everyone agrees this is the best way to do it (high jump) or b) the rules have stamped on novel ideas (rotational javelin technique is spectacularly dangerous).

cheers.

lease wrote:

1) You don't "throw the shot put"--you put the shot.

2) I have actually seen multiple people like those you've posited attempt to put the shot. Almost all required enough instruction to be putting and not throwing the implement; beyond that, most with "zero experience" were initially below ten meters, though a few reached over twelve. I have not personally seen any such person reach fifteen.

I feel like some strongman competitors might be able to approach 14 meters or so. As a 190 pound beginning decathlete after college, I was over 10m my first day of learning the stand throw. I have to imagine some of those 300 pound strongman competitors could do close to twice as well as me (15 meters is twice as good as 10m in terms of power output).

Note I said "some," I am definitely not suggesting all. Im also suggesting they could do that their first day with somebody teaching them. I agree that if you just stick a 16 lb shot in their hand and say "farthest competitor to land it in that direction from within this circle wins" you would see a lot of 6 to 10 meter throws and big dudes grabbing their elbows in agony.

No training? Well enough to score in a HS meet, maybe a conference meet.

Alan

Suppose the Mountain was given a shot put and watched a 10 minute youtube video. You really think he would only throw far enough to be a decent high schooler?

I would guess that with one day of instruction the Mountain could throw at least 50 feet with a 16lb. Eddie Hall probably the same but maybe more. With one week they are 60+. One year they are world beaters.

you really think this wrote:

Suppose the Mountain was given a shot put and watched a 10 minute youtube video. You really think he would only throw far enough to be a decent high schooler?

I would guess that with one day of instruction the Mountain could throw at least 50 feet with a 16lb. Eddie Hall probably the same but maybe more. With one week they are 60+. One year they are world beaters.

Basically what this dude did.

I'm a big strong guy who can throw a lot of weight around in the weight room. My son is a college throws coach and convinced me to throw the shot and discus at an all-comers meet. I sucked at shot. It just didn't click. A kid who weighed 100 lbs less than me threw farther. Weirdly, I wasn't terrible in the discus, which you'd think would take more technique.

The strongman guys do lots of things that should translate to the shot, so I'd think they'd be good with a little work. But keep in mind that these guys who are over 400 lbs owe about 100 lbs of that and a lot of strength to unregulated use of steroids. Not to say track guys don't dope, but they can't go all out on the doping like the strongman guys.

Knowing very little about the shot put, I also suspect that they would suck pretty badly with no specific training. Even something as straightforward as a deadlift requires a lot of skill and technique... the shot put much more so.

I’d rather watch a strong man throw Alexi Pappas off the Golden Gate Bridge.

I know a guy who could put the shot over them mountains.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BqlHlvfCEAAYR2g.png

It is pretty much just like asking whether an NFL wide receiver or RB ran the 100m or 200m with zero experience. They would do really well and few could definitely be world class with some dedication (Tyreek Hill was 20.14/9.98). But in general, they would not be at all competitive with the pros just showing and throwing cold. And while technique may not take a tremendous amount of time to master on a world class level, there are piles of sprinters who can run low 10.XX who never make it out of B meets. Only 121 sprinters have run under 10 sec but over a thousand have run between 10 and 10.25. So, yeah. If you take athletes who do similar training and have similar talents, they can cross over to T&F and do much better than most everyone else. But they will not just show up and blow everyone out of the water. It takes a whole lot more to be a top T&F athlete.

Bad Wigins wrote:

If you forcefully move something in your grasp forward and let go, and it flies through the air, that's a throw. I don't care what they were calling it in the 19th century.

That goes for British people too - cricket "bowlers" are throwing the ball. Bowling is when you roll a ball.

Putting the shot is a motion distinct from throwing it. The propelling motion is judged, and if a putting motion is not maintained the attempt is declared a foul. (And it could be painful, as someone observed above.)

But I don't want to get into a silly semantic argument, so if you want to call it "throwing," be my guest. Just please don't call it "throwing the shot put." The round object is a *shot* and not a *shot put*.

[It actually used to be "putting the stone"--a 14lb object. But stones were fairly precise weights used in commerce, and getting them dinged up in athletics competition was not popular. One thing the Brits had plenty of were iron shots for their naval cannon, but 14lb shots were not a standard size. So they went with the standard shot that was closest to 14lb, and that was 16lb. Hence nowadays we put the (16lb) shot and not the stone.]

As for cricket: Bowling is a specifically defined (and judged) motion and very distinct from ordinary throwing. *Throwing* the ball to a batsman...well, that wouldn't be cricket.

Aside from putting technique those guys would have trouble just staying in the circle. You need a lot more balance putting the shot just to avoid fouling.

Some guys would do great, 16m+ easy on the first day. Some would suck, maxxing at 14m. I have done 14+, and I have met some of those guys, and they would all be at least as good as me after 1 day.

Kevin Toth. 74+ feet, 6th best ever. Strongman competitor. Failed drug test........

"Technique gives you inches conditioning gives you feet"

I forgot which coach said it but this is the correct answer. If you could squat, deadlift, bench press over 400 pounds and are over 6 feet you're going to put the shot far. Whether its 60 or 64 depends on technique.