Ive been working out for id say around 2 years trying to get bigger. I started off at 6’ 130lbs and now im up to being 6’1" 168-170. I bench around 160 now and dumbell curl 35’s and 40’s. Around how much should i weigh/be liften in order to be considered somewhat strong?
sorry if this is kind of a bad question.
It’s all relative to your size, but after 2 years you should be lifting more than that.
Have a look here:
Would taking Cytogainer and BCAA’s help in building strength and mass?
I can’t comment on the cytogainer as I have no experience with it, but BCAAs will definitely help.
Ultimately, it’s 3 things that will get you bigger and stronger:
If your are not growing, one of those is not up to scratch.
Bottom line, you need to eat a lot of proper food, lift heavy and sleep 8-9 hours a night.
I am.
-S
what does your program look like?
[quote]rsg wrote:
It’s all relative to your size, but after 2 years you should be lifting more than that.
Have a look here:
[/quote]
Those standards are definitely low. All my lifts are between the advanced and elite standards. I haven’t ever trained for strength, just fat loss and an advanced lifter is supposed to have multi year experience. I wouldn’t use those standards as comparisons.
Standards like that don’t take into account body shape, bone structure, levers and so on. Short limbed big boned people generally do better in most strength movements than long boned slim people, before any kind of muscle development comes into play.
Many know of a barrel chested untrained man that can lift bigger than hard training folks just by virtue of their heavy bones, excellent connective tissue and natural ‘default’ muscle size.
The OP is quite tall and sounds slim, likely to be young and probably should have deadlifts, done carefully, in the exercise mix.
The chart at exrx is interesting though, i bookmarked it - thanks rsg.
[quote]ItWasntMe wrote:
Those standards are definitely low. All my lifts are between the advanced and elite standards. I haven’t ever trained for strength, just fat loss and an advanced lifter is supposed to have multi year experience. I wouldn’t use those standards as comparisons.[/quote]
They’re pretty accurate for me, though. I’m right in the intermediate zone (I’m 148 pounds with 2 years of training and my PRs are around the same as the corresponding intermediate standards).
It would help if you posted your BW, training experience and PRs as well so that you can prove your point.
Although I have to say that I believe more in the T-Nation strength standards article.
Problem one is you have gained 35-40 pounds in two years. 6’1" 170 isn’t even filled out yet.
Eat.
You’ll know when you are big and somewhat strong when the gym stops to watch you lift heavy.
[quote]undeadlift wrote:
Although I have to say that I believe more in the T-Nation strength standards article.[/quote]
Can you post a link to that one? I’m curious.
[quote]Arms Afire wrote:
Problem one is you have gained 35-40 pounds in two years. 6’1" 170 isn’t even filled out yet.
Eat.
You’ll know when you are big and somewhat strong when the gym stops to watch you lift heavy.[/quote]
What weight is considered being filled out for someone like me who is 6"1?
You’ll start looking “big” at around 220ish.
[quote]Brant_Drake wrote:
http://www.T-Nation.com/readArticle.do?id=1563264
Read it.[/quote]
Good article. I definitely recommend it.
Don’t worry about your hight. A lot coaches compare “what you lift VS how much you weight”, not how tall or short you are VS how much you lift. Thats why you hear coaches saying a 2X bodyweight deadlift is Good, and a 3X Bodyweight deadlift is VERY Good. This is also the reason why in Powerlifting, Olympic lifting, and any fighting sport you have “Weight Classes” not “Height classes”.
You should set up some intermediate goals of strength. Check the numbers on the article above.
Also for a biginner/intermediate Dan John also recommends a Bodyweight Overhead Squat, a 15 Reps Bodyweight BackSquat, and your Front Squat to match your Bench.
[quote]gswork wrote:
Standards like that don’t take into account body shape, bone structure, levers and so on. Short limbed big boned people generally do better in most strength movements than long boned slim people, before any kind of muscle development comes into play.
Many know of a barrel chested untrained man that can lift bigger than hard training folks just by virtue of their heavy bones, excellent connective tissue and natural ‘default’ muscle size.
The OP is quite tall and sounds slim, likely to be young and probably should have deadlifts, done carefully, in the exercise mix.
The chart at exrx is interesting though, i bookmarked it - thanks rsg.[/quote]
I gotta say man… I don’t really “buy” into the whole short limbed Vs long limbed. Not that it doesn’t have merit, its just that it can easily be used as an Excuse to NOT lift heavy.
[quote]rsg wrote:
undeadlift wrote:
Although I have to say that I believe more in the T-Nation strength standards article.
Can you post a link to that one? I’m curious.[/quote]
Brant already posted it, but here you go: http://www.T-Nation.com/readArticle.do?id=1563264
[quote]NeoSpartan wrote:
I gotta say man… I don’t really “buy” into the whole short limbed Vs long limbed. Not that it doesn’t have merit, its just that it can easily be used as an Excuse to NOT lift heavy.[/quote]
Bullseye. Mechanical disadvantage from longer limbs shouldn’t discourage tall people from lifting heavy.
[quote]NeoSpartan wrote:
I gotta say man… I don’t really “buy” into the whole short limbed Vs long limbed. Not that it doesn’t have merit, its just that it can easily be used as an Excuse to NOT lift heavy.[/quote]
Some do use that as an excuse for not lifting more but dude it IS a science of leverage. Think about it.
[quote]NeoSpartan wrote:
I gotta say man… I don’t really “buy” into the whole short limbed Vs long limbed. Not that it doesn’t have merit, its just that it can easily be used as an Excuse to NOT lift heavy.[/quote]
Simple mechanics really. Even mechanically identical people of different heights require different levels of strength for the same lift. say a press, the taller guy needs to push the weight against gravity over a longer distance to get his arms straight, thus making the lift, and that takes more force.
Having said all that you’ve made an excellent point that it shouldn’t deter the ‘long and slim’ folks from endeavouring to lift heavy, for them. Even if in the long run they can’t match their mechanically advantaged buddies they’ll still be lifting serious weights. Most people end up with lifts they can do particularly well at, that give them a special kick.
[quote]jck524 wrote:
Arms Afire wrote:
Problem one is you have gained 35-40 pounds in two years. 6’1" 170 isn’t even filled out yet.
Eat.
You’ll know when you are big and somewhat strong when the gym stops to watch you lift heavy.
What weight is considered being filled out for someone like me who is 6"1?[/quote]
How old are you. 35-40 pounds in 2 years isn’t actually too bad if a large portion of that was muscle. It isn’t a record, but it’s respectable. I wouldn’t get too sidetracked by comparing yourself to others. keep learning and training. You’re doing fine overall and will only improve as you go along if you keep at it and don’t get discouraged. Those numbers aren’t going to turn any heads at this point, but you will get much stronger if you continue to advance in understanding how your body responds to different training methods. I do go along with the make sure you’re eating enough thing. Better to overdo it for now. You’ll know if you’re gaining too much fat.