Equation For Calculating Relative Strength

[quote]Jumanji wrote:
insult big strong guys…praise big strong guys…insult big strong guys…praise big strong guys…insult, insult, insult…
[/quote]

dude get off your high horse and get a sence of humor…

you could have ignored the posts you didn’t like and given a critique of the equation presented…

but no…you just bitched and moaned…

which makes you no better than any of the rest of us…

personally I thought the critiques of the formula were amusing…

and to be honest…these kinds of formulas are usually presented by guys that are weak but are trying to make themselves feel better because they really don’t want to put the time in to get strong…

Not at all disenchanted with the S&C world, it is exactly what it claims to be: get strong, get in shape.

I like that it accurately sets expectations… but rarely does it address the gap between S&C and on field performance… that GAP for 99% of the athletes is vast.

Also, not on a high horse, just sick of those who are strong belittling guys who are ‘weak’.

I don’t sit here and call powerlifters fat (which most are), or uncoordinated (which from an overall athletics perspective most are), or really quite amusing when they jump (enough said), instead I view their posts as coming from the perspective of someone with amazing strengths in one arena, but also having stunning limitations in another area.

When I want advice on getting strong I go to the experts: Tate, Simmons, Wendler, etc.

But, if Big Dave was here asking about different ways to analyze movement patterns, I wouldn’t call him a lumbering jar necked oaf because he doesn’t move like Harrison Houston… not even close. He wants to get better, or become a better teacher.

But mocking is what is being done here on this thread.

And for those doing the mocking: from a performance coach’s perspective, many powerlifters have the dynamic mobility and agility of someone who needs to be removed from practice for fear of instantaneous injury. But if you were to inquire about an agility progression and how progress could be measured accurately, I wouldn’t ignore the question and call you a mongloid Ogre that is barely bipedal… would I? Nope, I hardly find it necessary.

That is the equivalent of calling someone who is ‘weak’ a pencil necked geek…

So you miss the point completely, and that probably is because I wasn’t succinct enough and through in many shortcoming I have noticed over time. I will try to keep it succinct:

When in doubt, educate. That is what T-Mag is all about, IMO. I can make fun of strength guys, and they can make fun of me… all we have to do is relate to each other in the arena we dominate… mine being speed and explosiveness in the team sport arena, theirs being strength.

I am a pencil necked geek who is good, no, very good at many sports… probably too multi-laterally developed for my own good. If you’d like to test your sport prowess, please meet me at any soccer field, or basketball court (or even football since it is the most strength dominant of all popular sports) and we can see who looks foolish. I remind you that at 34, totally out of shape for my own standards, I still run a sub 4.3 on the Pro agiltiy and can hang from the rim with ease…plus I have the experience of a cagy veteran who has coached three sports in college. So hit me, block my shot, whatever…if you can…

Then afterwards, we can go lift weights… (now a sport in itself), and you can crush me… I have no doubt that I am very weak by all strength athletes’ standards…

But not with a lack of power on the ballistics and of the force curve… just on the strenght side… and thank goodness for it.

To the guys who were posting here on topic: namely relative BW strength… If you are not Benching 1.5-2 times your weight, and squatting twice your weight, you don’t need to be discussing overtraining, or fancy nutrition, or anything else…

You are weak… for a girl.

No reason to analyze anything because getting to those markers is quite easy… if you aren’t there, then something is drastically wrong with what you are doing…

Period. No discussion necessary, just shut it.

Any program hitting the basics hard will bring up your deficits as long as you are eating hard, sleeping hard and lifting hard.

You don’t need Poliquin or any fancy supplements, you need to quite being a dorks… (even though both help, they aren’t necessary in the early stages)

If you are taking those steps, then I commend you, and will help in any way I can.

If not, then you need to go to Self magazine online, or Better Homes and Gardens, or HGTV, or whatever, and pursue those pursuits…

From that perspective, I do agree with the Strength guys here… totally.

One final question: what is more amusing to watch, a pencil necked geek who at 170 pounds only benches 215, or a powerlifter trying to play soccer?

Both IMO, but I would help either get better.

Hope this clears the air…

J

[quote]DPH wrote:
Jumanji wrote:
insult big strong guys…praise big strong guys…insult big strong guys…praise big strong guys…insult, insult, insult…

dude get off your high horse and get a sence of humor…

you could have ignored the posts you didn’t like and given a critique of the equation presented…

but no…you just bitched and moaned…

which makes you no better than any of the rest of us…

personally I thought the critiques of the formula were amusing…

and to be honest…these kinds of formulas are usually presented by guys that are weak but are trying to make themselves feel better because they really don’t want to put the time in to get strong…[/quote]

Sense of humor? Belittling guys who took the time to contribute isn’t funny… is it? Does it make you feel good that you can make fun of other people? Sad really…

I could have ignored, but didn’t… instead I chose to participate… it is called living. Yes, I am the guy who speaks up when he doesn’t agree…

Didn’t bitch, didn’t moan, just shared a differing perspective.

Better? Never tried to be… it is you who does the judging… and takes joy in deriding…

I didn’t realize relative BW strength is used by guys who want to make themselves feel better, blah, blah, blah… I will defer to your ability to read other’s minds and motivations from here forward… did this happen by way of a supplement, or have you always had this talent?

I just know that I use them to test strength deficits, taking into account lever length, etc. This allows me to decide whether a block would better be served trying to increase Hyper-Strength-or make power production more efficient…

Did you use the word ‘dude’?

Funny thing is DPH, I look for your insights on most posts when I am trolling…

You must have missed the whole point I was trying to make.

A friend of mine at UF once told me after I had gotten into a scuffle: since you are so explosive, you have a certain obligation; that is to not display it when the time is innapropriate for society.

DPH… so do you.

I would expect those like you to explain to posters of this site that unless the figure they are coming up with in terms of relative BW strength starts with a 2.+ , then they are wasting their time… not mock them.

Now people who misuse squat racks should be mocked, and beaten… but that is another story altogether.

J

I guess it is only funny when the newbies are made fun of, huh? Not everyone started lifting when they were 10 like you and I, DPH… you know that. Fulfill your role here… educate. The weights you move inspire… wield that power appropriately. I learn from each of your posts.

[quote]Viking69 wrote:
This reminds me of oone other formula…[/quote]

Honestly this was the first thing I thought of.

This is dumb.

I use the add and watch formula, I keep adding plates and watch people mouths drop open when they realize this little sawed off fucker is strong!

Bullpup

[quote]kroby wrote:
This is dumb.[/quote]

Uh oh. Jumanji is going to log back in and type out at least 5 paragraphs about how you just think it is dumb because you want to put down the weaker guys for being weaker than you and blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah Benchpress blah blah blah blah blah blah weak blah blah blah vagina blah blah blah blah blah blah feelings hurt.

[quote]Jumanji wrote:
Quite a bit.
[/quote]

So I guess you take a multifactoral approach to analasys of performance?

One or many of the factors being derived from the sport that the athlete performs in?

Cause thats what it sounds like.

Aside from a beef with the big guys that dis the little guys, and a lot of jabs thrown in while you aren’t throwing jabs, Do you have a formula that you use to determine a relationship between size, weight, and work on the bench press?

Cause I don’t. I just think it would be a cool little thing to kick around. Kind of like measuring your bodyfat or b.m.i. Just another tool to measure change.

[quote]DLboy wrote:
I have been trying to develop an equation to calculate an individuals relative strength. So far I have only factored in height and weight, and the reason is because someone that is 5’5 200 obviously has more overall muscle mass than someone at 6’5 200.

(Bodyweight + height in CM) / 1 rep max

[/quote]
Because of the non-linear relationship btwn height, weight, and strength it would look more like an exponential–i.e the curve will flatten out at a certain point. The equation you posted would continue indefinitely. Also, adding height and weight together does not make sense because the units are completely different.

so we would expect something like:

S = A*exp[R/W];

where A is some constant of proportionality, R is the “linear density” (mass/height) and W is max force lifted. As you can see it is a 3D graph because we have to consider both the “linear density” and strength as varying parameters. However, I am loath to believe that height plays that big a role. I think maybe we’d see height influences as some sort of second order effect. For instances height will either help or hinder certain lifts and therefore cannot be accounted for exactly the same for differing lifts–ie squatting and deadlifting would be calculated differently if height is taken into account.

I too have been struggling with this equation the problem is I don’t have enough data to model a solution. I have used data from powerlifting sites to help but there really isn’t enough information posted.

[quote]Jumanji wrote:
Not at all disenchanted with the S&C world, it is exactly what it claims to be: get strong, get in shape.

I like that it accurately sets expectations… but rarely does it address the gap between S&C and on field performance… that GAP for 99% of the athletes is vast.

Also, not on a high horse, just sick of those who are strong belittling guys who are ‘weak’.

I don’t sit here and call powerlifters fat (which most are), or uncoordinated (which from an overall athletics perspective most are), or really quite amusing when they jump (enough said), instead I view their posts as coming from the perspective of someone with amazing strengths in one arena, but also having stunning limitations in another area.

When I want advice on getting strong I go to the experts: Tate, Simmons, Wendler, etc.

But, if Big Dave was here asking about different ways to analyze movement patterns, I wouldn’t call him a lumbering jar necked oaf because he doesn’t move like Harrison Houston… not even close. He wants to get better, or become a better teacher.

But mocking is what is being done here on this thread.

And for those doing the mocking: from a performance coach’s perspective, many powerlifters have the dynamic mobility and agility of someone who needs to be removed from practice for fear of instantaneous injury. But if you were to inquire about an agility progression and how progress could be measured accurately, I wouldn’t ignore the question and call you a mongloid Ogre that is barely bipedal… would I? Nope, I hardly find it necessary.

That is the equivalent of calling someone who is ‘weak’ a pencil necked geek…

So you miss the point completely, and that probably is because I wasn’t succinct enough and through in many shortcoming I have noticed over time. I will try to keep it succinct:

When in doubt, educate. That is what T-Mag is all about, IMO. I can make fun of strength guys, and they can make fun of me… all we have to do is relate to each other in the arena we dominate… mine being speed and explosiveness in the team sport arena, theirs being strength.

I am a pencil necked geek who is good, no, very good at many sports… probably too multi-laterally developed for my own good. If you’d like to test your sport prowess, please meet me at any soccer field, or basketball court (or even football since it is the most strength dominant of all popular sports) and we can see who looks foolish. I remind you that at 34, totally out of shape for my own standards, I still run a sub 4.3 on the Pro agiltiy and can hang from the rim with ease…plus I have the experience of a cagy veteran who has coached three sports in college. So hit me, block my shot, whatever…if you can…

Then afterwards, we can go lift weights… (now a sport in itself), and you can crush me… I have no doubt that I am very weak by all strength athletes’ standards…

But not with a lack of power on the ballistics and of the force curve… just on the strenght side… and thank goodness for it.

To the guys who were posting here on topic: namely relative BW strength… If you are not Benching 1.5-2 times your weight, and squatting twice your weight, you don’t need to be discussing overtraining, or fancy nutrition, or anything else…

You are weak… for a girl.

No reason to analyze anything because getting to those markers is quite easy… if you aren’t there, then something is drastically wrong with what you are doing…

Period. No discussion necessary, just shut it.

Any program hitting the basics hard will bring up your deficits as long as you are eating hard, sleeping hard and lifting hard.

You don’t need Poliquin or any fancy supplements, you need to quite being a dorks… (even though both help, they aren’t necessary in the early stages)

If you are taking those steps, then I commend you, and will help in any way I can.

If not, then you need to go to Self magazine online, or Better Homes and Gardens, or HGTV, or whatever, and pursue those pursuits…

From that perspective, I do agree with the Strength guys here… totally.

One final question: what is more amusing to watch, a pencil necked geek who at 170 pounds only benches 215, or a powerlifter trying to play soccer?

Both IMO, but I would help either get better.

Hope this clears the air…

J

[/quote]

I don’t quite understand what prompted your tirade?

Whereas I don’t necessarily disagree with some of the generalizations you make, I don’t understand their purpose either. I think that the S&C profession is spot on, it is the “personal training” profession that is off. Unfortunately the common mark is the personal trainer, not a strength and conditioning coach.

The other item that makes me curious is you seem to disregard strength athletics as a form of athletic sport at all. Why is this?

I’m just rather curious to the motivations of your posts moreso than anything else. Given that I was a decent soccer player, rugby player and track athlete, that now is old and broken so I just do some strength athletics for fun, I may have had a similar initial experience as you but I chose to keep training for strength goals once my careers in the other sports came to an end. So that is likely why I don’t quite see the motivation for your rant.

Regards,

Sensless

PS I’d be happy to meet you on a soccer pitch, bball court, or any other location to enjoy a non-lifting/strength sport. They are fun to me. I can’t play 'em for crap anymore because of numerous injuries that makes my agility lacking, but I won’t mind if you blame it on my focus on strength athletics.

[quote]Jumanji wrote:
Sense of humor? Belittling guys who took the time to contribute isn’t funny… is it? Does it make you feel good that you can make fun of other people? Sad really…
[/quote]

guys flip each other shit all the time…it’s very common…you’re taking these jabs way too seriously…perhaps you could try some relaxation therapy…

but you didn’t participate…you didn’t give a critique of the formula at all…you just gripped about some guys flipping dlboy some shit…

mmmm…no…

you bitched and moaned…

your post had a hollier-than-thou judging tone to it…did you take joy in writing it?

actually, relative BW is used by posters here all the time in an attempt to show others how superior they are…then they usually add in how they go around kicking the shit out of guys twice their size on a regular basis…

hey…you’re making fun of me here… does it make you feel good? or are you really sad too?

it’s good that you use tests to evaluate your athletes…but do you really think dlboys equation is any good? you still haven’t addressed the pros or cons of such a formula…

yes…I like to use colloquial language so I don’t sound like a snooty knob when posting here…

well…I’m not sure that I have alot of insight to offer…I like to keep things simple and practical…probably not very scientific…

it wouldn’t be the first time…as much as I would like to think otherwise, I’m probably not that intelligent of a person…

I have an obligation to not be explosive? you mean my temper? yeah, I can be a complete dick alot of the times…

not all athletes need to obtain a 2x or more bodyweight squat or deadlift… endurance athletes for instance…

so it IS ok to flip some people shit for dumb things then (by the way, I do and say plenty of dumb things and people flip me shit for it too)…

of course this is going to have a gray area…we’re not always going to agree what the limits should be…sometimes I think people go too far and sometimes I don’t think they go far enough…

I don’t make fun of newbies very ofter…when I do I feel they deserve it…you may think otherwise…

[quote]
Not everyone started lifting when they were 10 like you and I, DPH… you know that. Fulfill your role here… educate. The weights you move inspire… wield that power appropriately. I learn from each of your posts.[/quote]

I have a role here to educate? it would be a bit pompous of me to think that I have much to offer…I give my feeble suggestions when I feel like it…

I seriously doubt that anyone here thinks of me as a role model…I know I don’t…

the weights I move inspire? to be honest, I’m a below average powerlifter …even my best lifts, where all the stars were in alignment and all that shit, are ok at best…the really strong guys lift WAY more than I do…

maybe you should pay more attention to what Josh Bryant has to say…he’s a good role model that generally always sees the best in people…plus he’s a HELL of alot stronger than I am…

funny how you all can read a lengthy rant and not realize that the entire point is that mocking gets us nowhere… which is why i kept driving the point over, and over, and over, ad nauseum… so you’d realize that it really is simple to mock, but not constructive…

as in the vein of the DC article rant…hmmm…

there, is that direct and simple enough for you…?

i tried to write in crayon font, but none was offered…

remedial communication…

And, you are right, the S&C world in colleges is top notch and cutting edge. It is a shame that this is the case, because it will really put a dent on JoeD and MartinR’s businesses… get a clue. And yes, personal trainers are not performance people, they are composition change trainers at best… this is merely the first step towards performance though… and most screw up the easiest part.

[quote]Jumanji wrote:
It is a shame that this is the case, because it will really put a dent on JoeD and MartinR’s businesses… get a clue.[/quote]

I have no clue. Perhaps you can just fill me in. I like to be edumacated.

I haven’t done any mocking of other people, I just ignore that stuff because I don’t really care about it. Perhaps you could try doing the same.

Regards,

Sensless

Sensless~

Firstoff, I won’t argue with your screen name, no matter how you spell it…

Secondly, if you ask 95% of the college coaches out there if they would like an extra 25k to recruit, or to give to the weightroom, they choose the recruiting every time…

I was a former college coach in multiple sports… I speak from experience.

Why is this? Because Bobby Bowden knows to his core that he has a far better chance of FINDING a Deion Sanders than the CSCS guy has of MAKING a guy who a step slower run faster… which is why Bobby recruits LB’s and DB’s instead of recruiting D-lineman (for the most part)… he knows that in the current state of S&C we are able to add muscle and strength, but rarely do we make huge gains in on-field performance. (For another example refer to Adam Archuletta and the huge ordeal made about his gains…)

This is where ‘niche’ guys come in like Joe and Martin, etc… because they have studied far beyond the CSCS test to truly understand performance training: Movement analysis, deeper understanding of the rate-force and time-force curves, tendon stiffness, etc.

So laugh it up, make phunny little spellings of words like educated, whatever you want… unfortunately you aren’t arguing with me… you are arguing with the reality of what exists today… that in almost all programs, there is a gap between the weightroom, and the performance on field… this gap will continue to shrink as knowledge is shared as opposed to mocking…

Enjoy fighting reality.

Also, give Martin a call and tell him he will need to inform Bill Parisi that their business is in danger… ha!

I am pretty sure that Joe D isn’t worried about a bunch of guys who take a test that if you aren’t a total blockehead can be passed with a weekend of studying… errr skimming of chapters to get their take on training. It is all I did, but that is due to the simple nature of how everything is approached for the test, not any amazing level of intellect on my part…trust me!!!

The real issue is that the majority of the guys entering the profession find the test challenging… that is where the problem lies, IMO. Call me silly that I hope for a day when brighter minds enter the arena… minds that question and analyze… I am just not sure that you can get to the Superbowl of Training with a bunch of guys who intellectually run a 5.3 forty and have a VJ of 17"… maybe, maybe not.

And no, I don’t think I will stand around as people mock and deride. You worry about you… that should be enough to keep you busy for a while.

[quote]Jumanji wrote:
funny how you all can read a lengthy rant and not realize that the entire point is that mocking gets us nowhere[/quote]

Where does sanctimonious preaching get us?

[quote]Jumanji wrote:
Sensless~

Firstoff, I won’t argue with your screen name, no matter how you spell it…

Secondly, if you ask 95% of the college coaches out there if they would like an extra 25k to recruit, or to give to the weightroom, they choose the recruiting every time…

I was a former college coach in multiple sports… I speak from experience.

Why is this? Because Bobby Bowden knows to his core that he has a far better chance of FINDING a Deion Sanders than the CSCS guy has of MAKING a guy who a step slower run faster… which is why Bobby recruits LB’s and DB’s instead of recruiting D-lineman (for the most part)… he knows that in the current state of S&C we are able to add muscle and strength, but rarely do we make huge gains in on-field performance. (For another example refer to Adam Archuletta and the huge ordeal made about his gains…)

This is where ‘niche’ guys come in like Joe and Martin, etc… because they have studied far beyond the CSCS test to truly understand performance training: Movement analysis, deeper understanding of the rate-force and time-force curves, tendon stiffness, etc.

So laugh it up, make phunny little spellings of words like educated, whatever you want… unfortunately you aren’t arguing with me… you are arguing with the reality of what exists today… that in almost all programs, there is a gap between the weightroom, and the performance on field… this gap will continue to shrink as knowledge is shared as opposed to mocking…

Enjoy fighting reality.

Also, give Martin a call and tell him he will need to inform Bill Parisi that their business is in danger… ha!

I am pretty sure that Joe D isn’t worried about a bunch of guys who take a test that if you aren’t a total blockehead can be passed with a weekend of studying… errr skimming of chapters to get their take on training. It is all I did, but that is due to the simple nature of how everything is approached for the test, not any amazing level of intellect on my part…trust me!!!

The real issue is that the majority of the guys entering the profession find the test challenging… that is where the problem lies, IMO. Call me silly that I hope for a day when brighter minds enter the arena… minds that question and analyze… I am just not sure that you can get to the Superbowl of Training with a bunch of guys who intellectually run a 5.3 forty and have a VJ of 17"… maybe, maybe not.

And no, I don’t think I will stand around as people mock and deride. You worry about you… that should be enough to keep you busy for a while.[/quote]

I’m not arguing or debating anything with you, that appears to be a misinterpretation made by you. I simply asked for clarification of your motivation for the posts you have made and about the s&c coaching. I even stated previously that I don’t really disagree with much of what you have said.

I have a meaningless personal training certification, I took some silly course to get it while I was off school for a semester many moons ago. I only took it because I was trying to self-educate so my own training could be improved. After taking the course and getting the certification, I realized what a waste of time it was. The only real benefit seems to be that it has made it easier to spot someone that actually knows something versus someone that is an “internet trainer”.

I happen to train at a place that has quality S&C coaches that focus on making athletes. Improve movement, reduce tendon pains and stiffness, run faster, jump higher, etc. I.E. they are using the training room to improve on-field performance (whatever that field of play is, be it the lifting platform, football field, rubgy pitch, pool, etc.). Feel free to check it out, NX Level Athletics. The head trainer’s name is Brad Arnett.

I haven’t done any mocking or deriding either, so I’m just going to assume the commentary about that is directed at others and not me.

Regards,

Sensless

PS Nicknames don’t have to be spelled correctly.

Sens~

Agreed with you, glad we have found some common ground…

So you know, they should be working on increasing tendon stiffness…

There have been many studies that have shown that tendon stiffness in the lower extremities actually increases reactive ability. This stiffness is a neural factor as opposed to a strength issue… this is where S&C will finally make the breakthrough in the future years… something track coaches like myself have known for years…

The stiffness derives from the neural firing of the supporting muscle structure… in an isometric fashion. This is all basexd on a rate factor after a baseline level of strength is reached.

Take yourself for example. From the icon I assume your calves are amazingly strong, but continuing to lift will not help improve reactive ability. What is needed is a progressive sequencing of power absorbing exercises, then progressing to power coupling in a fully plyometric display. This is where the Russians came from with plyometrics in the true sense of the word: first absorb (depth landings will decrease GTR firing, etc and will teach absorption with maximal RATE), then depth jumps which take this new power and rate absorption gains, and couples them through the utitilization of the SSC… and there we have it.

But it all has to be progressive… like anything else, plyos, true plyos are merely a tool which must be integrated into a progressive training system…

Another note is obvious to most in that the longer your tendon is, the more potential you have to realize reactive prowess…(high claves). I don’t have them, so I have had to become more powerful muscularly to make up for this structural deficit… this is why I take a deeper gather when I jump, run powerfully, but with less efficiency due to using more muscle, etc…

I know you are not allowed to post a site, so I will google it… thanks for the link. Always love to learn.

Oh, and I am assuming the guys at the site you directed me to offer a far different training experience than kids get in college… which was my whole point… but, I would classify them as performance coaches, not S&C guys… sorry if the distinction was unclear.

~Often even more sensless

Sens~

Yep, the site is great, and they provide a vastly different training experience… glad you have been exposed to something like this…

J