I’m not quite to the 300/400/500 lb level, but after looking at the following site, I decided that my physique goals would be met with a strength goal of 400/500/600. This is very much in line with what the OP said above.
Are there freaks of nature that can do 400/500/600 and not look like they can, or vice versa? sure, but that’s not the point here. Most of us here aren’t freaks of nature. (though i suppose you won’t really know if you are until you’ve trained properly for quite a while)
Strength benchmarks are great and work better for some than others. I personally am getting much better results by focusing on getting stronger in the squat, dl, and bp. For someone like myself who has the attention span of a mayfly in heat, using strength as a goal keeps me focused and on track.
Who the hell decides how strong someone has to be before they can see some specific physique improvements?
There is this bizarre idea that you have to be ‘x’ strong to have a ‘y’ physique, where ‘z=42’ and ‘n’ is a number between 1 and 10.
As Zap said, how do we know how tall the subject is, or any number of other genetic factors; such as their initial untrained strength.[/quote]
Elite strength athletes capable of doing 2.5x bodyweight bench and 3x bodyweight squats are obviously exceptions. These guys are at the top end of the genetics bell curve for strength. Some rare individuals build overly large muscles compared to their strength level and these too are exceptions. Men 5’ tall and men 7’ tall would be in a class their own as well.
Point is most of us are not exceptions but fall somewhere near the middle of the bell curve for all the factors you describe. Most of us will have similar levels of muscular development at similar levels of strength. Guidelines are just tools that may or may not work for you. That doesn’t discredit that they work for most.
I like the simplicity of the original post. It makes the goal for beginners/intermediates very clear. It sets these goals up in a solid way and I would think (hope) would help do away with the common pitfall so many beginners have - being to wrapped up in the details.
[quote]SWR-1240 wrote:
Anyone claiming they can get anything more than the first set of “Benchmarks” have any videos?
I always like watching some good performance videos.[/quote]
I have recently started using video for form feedback, but no big lifts yet. When I do some max attempts, I’ll shoot you a p.m., maybe get some outside input.
[quote]Heliotrope wrote:
SkyzykS wrote:
I could go along with that. I’ve set and broken a few benchmarks this year, and those are pretty close, except the squat. One was a 3wheeler on the bench, next was the 4 plates on the dead lift, and my next phase for this year will focus on the squat. I’d like to get it past 405 by the end of the year. That will require a 30-40 lb. increase. At that point I will consider myself prety strong for a lightweight(165).
As it stands though, I realy don’t look like much.
Your numbers suggest that you are on the high end of average or above average in relative strength genetics. Your strength goals will have to be fairly ambitious if you want to reach a high level of muscular development.
Good news is if you are interested in strength sports like powerlifting you might actually have the genetic potential to do well.[/quote]
Thanks.
That was accomplished using some relatively standard techniques(Waterbury 10x3 and some conjugate periodization). I will be implementing the use of bands and chains shortly, revamping the set/reps and loading a bit, and just some general tweaking.
[quote]Roland Fisher wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
I think you are a little bit high with some of your numbers. I doubt 165 pound fitness models are not putting up those kinds of numbers.
So fitness models all weigh 165? Are they all 5’5" too?
Roland[/quote]
Most of the Mens Health cover models seem to fall into the 165# category but there are some bigger guys.
I admit it, I used to have a subscription. I am so ashamed.
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
SWR-1240 wrote:
Anyone claiming they can get anything more than the first set of “Benchmarks” have any videos?
I always like watching some good performance videos.
I have recently started using video for form feedback, but no big lifts yet. When I do some max attempts, I’ll shoot you a p.m., maybe get some outside input.
[/quote]
Cool. I always thought there weren’t enough videos posted here on a regular basis.
Even if they’re not huge lifts, if they’re just PR’s I think more people should post them, even if it looks like they’re just tooting their own horn.
At least it’s proof, and better than just saying that you can do it (not you SkyzykS, but “you” in general meaning many others who act like it’s easy to deadlift over 500 or bench over 400).
As for the original post, I would say that the first set of benchmarks are either a bit high, or a bit too inclusive. I don’t think that many people are able to get those numbers.
The others I would agree with in a general sense. Not to mention that different people have different leverages so those who are great at benching might not be so great at deads, even though they worked them equally as hard, and vice versa.
[quote]Jimfound wrote:
I like the simplicity of the original post. It makes the goal for beginners/intermediates very clear. It sets these goals up in a solid way and I would think (hope) would help do away with the common pitfall so many beginners have - being to wrapped up in the details.[/quote]
That was definitely what I was shooting for. As basic as it is far too many people waste time on advanced principles when they simply aren’t ready for it. Having easy clear benchmarks helps to avoid this.
[quote]caneman wrote:
Yeah, those numbers seem pretty good. As an example, I believe Arnold had 500+/500+/710. Pretty awesome to see those 3 numbers next to each other.
[/quote]
Arnold never, ever squatted over 500. He’s stated on a number of occasions that the best he ever got on the squat was 400 for 8 reps.
As for the original post, I would say that the first set of benchmarks are either a bit high, or a bit too inclusive. I don’t think that many people are able to get those numbers.
The others I would agree with in a general sense. Not to mention that different people have different leverages so those who are great at benching might not be so great at deads, even though they worked them equally as hard, and vice versa.[/quote]
The intermediate benchmark is a little high perhaps but even among regular lifters impressive physiques are rare. It is not about what is easily and commonly achieved its about what most are wanting to achieve.
255 bench 340 squat 425 deadlift is a 15% variance and any guideline assumes some variance towards either side. We could use that as a start point but I think a lot of lifters would be disappointed with their physique if they started dieting and specializing at those levels. Any lower than these numbers and most would certainly have less than impressive physiques.
As far as leverages go it is the same case as any genetic curve that might skew these guidelines. Making adjustments and customizations for individual variance should be obvious when necessary.
Using a benchmark that clearly doesn’t work for an indidvidual as an excuse for lacking progress should also be obvious.
[quote]harris447 wrote:
caneman wrote:
Yeah, those numbers seem pretty good. As an example, I believe Arnold had 500+/500+/710. Pretty awesome to see those 3 numbers next to each other.
Arnold never, ever squatted over 500. He’s stated on a number of occasions that the best he ever got on the squat was 400 for 8 reps. [/quote]
400(likely 405) x 8 is estimated at 497 max. Who knows what his max was exactly but it was near 500 and there are pictures of him deadlifting over 700.
I might add that by todays standards his legs would be considered by many as disproportionately small in comparison to his upper body.
Can anyone translate those figures into 5x5. I have no idea how much I can bench, squat, or deadlift. I really don’t care. I lift a little more weight each week, and that’s enough.
Still, I do like the idea of goals and would like some ideas on what good numbers for a 5x5 would be.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Sigh, I’ve been doing this for too long now to call myself a beginner… that sucks.[/quote]
As far as workout knowledge, general strength, health, and fitness you are probably very advanced compared to average people.
These aren’t benchmarks for average people.These numbers are geared towards building an impressive physique that stands out even among lifters. The kind of physique most on this site are after.
Intermediate development is quite an achievment and one that many would be completely satisfied as an end goal once dieting and bodypart specialization puts on the finishing touches.
The advanced level is rare but not so much that intermediate isn’t the right term.
[quote]shamethedebil wrote:
Can anyone translate those figures into 5x5. I have no idea how much I can bench, squat, or deadlift. I really don’t care. I lift a little more weight each week, and that’s enough.
Still, I do like the idea of goals and would like some ideas on what good numbers for a 5x5 would be.[/quote]
slimjim wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
I think you are a little bit high with some of your numbers. I doubt 165 pound fitness models are not putting up those kinds of numbers.
And boxers and 80% of professional running backs are not putting up 400/500/600
These numbers are not guidelines for fitness models and strength athletes.Boxers, sprinters, and running backs etc. look the way they do from superior genetics and hypertrophy from sport specific training. This discussion of guidelines is aimed at trainees that are relying almost completly on average genetics and weights/bodybuilding for hypertrophy and physique improvement.
Everyone has a differnet idea about what a male fitness model or a top running back should look like. My examples are subjective opinions only. Just tools to explain the point that strength benchmarks have real and basic correlation to physique goals. If you have better examples by all means lets add them to the discussion.
[/quote]
I have to admit that I didn’t come close to the beginner #s. I see those as worthy benchmarks though, and better than what I had set earlier.
As for physique and lifts, I guess powerlifts could get you pretty close if not right on with the addition of other lifting schemes to round it all out. My physique goal is to look like shrek but with powerlifter legs. With my body hair, being a big ugly ogre looking fuck would be my greatest achievement with my physique! Hahahaha
Great post, i decided a month ago to set new strength goals for my 3 core lifts of squat, deads, bench for the next 6 months.
I agree that genetics and the “person” do change the numbers and standards posted, but this was just shown as a basic idea. Personally i can deadlift 545x3 right now, squat 545x5, but only bench 335 x 3.
Also, about vids, and great idea, i was planning to post vids here at the end of my 6 months (feb 07)to show my lifts in dead, squat, and bench. I think more people should post them, its good to see the name on the forums in a vid lifting.