Why is 225 the marker for strength in the NFL? That’s how they test their athletes. Why not 250 or 315? On that note…what are some of your pr’s with 225? Mine is 12…not sure if that’s good or bad.
Can’t answer the NFL question.
Did 5x225 the other day, not sure if I’ve ever done more than that.
[quote]slimthugger wrote:
Why is 225 the marker for strength in the NFL? That’s how they test their athletes. Why not 250 or 315?[/quote]
It’s pretty much always been 225… it’s a good marker, because it’s light enough for guys like quarterbacks and receivers to put up, but enough that it’s a good indicator of endurance and [upper body] strength for the big boys.
While I’d love to see a squat test, if someone can’t handle a load, than can single-handedly ruin someone’s career if they fuck up.
I still say a deadlifting test would be better.
Why not just test their 1 rep max and 10, 15 or 20 rep max? That way you know their strenght and endurance. If you’re a 500+ bencher repping with 225 would seem kinda pointless I think.
Edit: I’m talking squat and deadlift too, obviously.
because its the way it is.
225 is a marker in the gym anyway. come on we all remember the day we finally got up to 2 plates. so since 225 is kinda like the standard i guess the more you can bench it the better.
[quote]shoo wrote:
Why not just test their 1 rep max and 10, 15 or 20 rep max? That way you know their strenght and endurance. If you’re a 500+ bencher repping with 225 would seem kinda pointless I think.
Edit: I’m talking squat and deadlift too, obviously.[/quote]
One main reason that i can think of is that it would be time consumeing to test all of those and they have alot of guys to go through. Also as said before with higher weight there is a bigger chance of injury.
[quote]Big nation wrote:
shoo wrote:
Why not just test their 1 rep max and 10, 15 or 20 rep max? That way you know their strenght and endurance. If you’re a 500+ bencher repping with 225 would seem kinda pointless I think.
Edit: I’m talking squat and deadlift too, obviously.
One main reason that i can think of is that it would be time consumeing to test all of those and they have alot of guys to go through. Also as said before with higher weight there is a bigger chance of injury.[/quote]
I admit I know nothing of football, but you sound like the numbers are not recorded by the clubs, but everyone has to do it in the same place. If that’s the case I understand it, if it’s up to the clubs to do the testing, they’re dumbasses.
[quote]Big nation wrote:
shoo wrote:
Why not just test their 1 rep max and 10, 15 or 20 rep max? That way you know their strenght and endurance. If you’re a 500+ bencher repping with 225 would seem kinda pointless I think.
Edit: I’m talking squat and deadlift too, obviously.
One main reason that i can think of is that it would be time consumeing to test all of those and they have alot of guys to go through. Also as said before with higher weight there is a bigger chance of injury.[/quote]
Good point and to my understanding a one rep max can be determined from the amount of reps you can do with 225. anybody know how to calculate that?
[quote]slimthugger wrote:
Big nation wrote:
shoo wrote:
Why not just test their 1 rep max and 10, 15 or 20 rep max? That way you know their strenght and endurance. If you’re a 500+ bencher repping with 225 would seem kinda pointless I think.
Edit: I’m talking squat and deadlift too, obviously.
One main reason that i can think of is that it would be time consumeing to test all of those and they have alot of guys to go through. Also as said before with higher weight there is a bigger chance of injury.
Good point and to my understanding a one rep max can be determined from the amount of reps you can do with 225. anybody know how to calculate that?
[/quote]
Whoops, I managed to squeeze out my first post. 
[quote]zenomaly wrote:
slimthugger wrote:
Big nation wrote:
shoo wrote:
Why not just test their 1 rep max and 10, 15 or 20 rep max? That way you know their strenght and endurance. If you’re a 500+ bencher repping with 225 would seem kinda pointless I think.
Edit: I’m talking squat and deadlift too, obviously.
One main reason that i can think of is that it would be time consumeing to test all of those and they have alot of guys to go through. Also as said before with higher weight there is a bigger chance of injury.
Good point and to my understanding a one rep max can be determined from the amount of reps you can do with 225. anybody know how to calculate that?
awesome resource thanks…ive been to that site but never saw that.
Whoops, I managed to squeeze out my first post. :P[/quote]
Thanks
How important is it to push for reps during a football game?
So why test for that?
As mentioned already, as for why that exact figure, human beings have a fondness for numbers that are round in some way, tending strongly to employ such numbers in favor of those that are not.
For example, how many drugs come in 11 mg tablets, vs those that are 10 mg?
How many guys want to do 9 week steroid cycles, versus 8 or 10?
How often do people say they’re aiming to gain or lose 19 lb compared to how often you hear this for 20 lb?
225 in weightlifting is a round number on account of what weights are standard for plates and bars.
That calculator is not going to be anywhere near accurate unless you are doing 225 for a low to mid number of reps. You’ll usually see those calculators having a disclaimer stating how it works better the less reps you’re doing (usually no more than 10) You cant type in 225 for 22 reps and expect an accurate 1RM amount.
I have done 12 reps at 225 before but currently am doing 10 reps at a bodyweight of 200 pounds.
I think you guys are missing the point. 225 lbs=100 kg (for everybody outside the US)is the first 3 digit number.
[quote]Nian wrote:
I think you guys are missing the point. 225 lbs=100 kg (for everybody outside the US)is the first 3 digit number.[/quote]
why would that be relevant in an American sport?
My PR with 225 is 18. I may test myself on it once a year just for kicks
[quote]Nian wrote:
I think you guys are missing the point. 225 lbs=100 kg (for everybody outside the US)is the first 3 digit number.[/quote]
Actually, it’s more like 102 Kg (sry, couldn’t resist).
Interestingly, I found that calculator to be pretty accurate. I did 235 x 10 the other day and 275 x 6 yesterday. The first yields a max of 313 and the latter gives 319. My max is currently around 315. That is not bad for an estimation tool. It worked similarly for my squat max. Didn’t try it for deads.
[quote]RMorrison wrote:
Interestingly, I found that calculator to be pretty accurate. I did 235 x 10 the other day and 275 x 6 yesterday. The first yields a max of 313 and the latter gives 319. My max is currently around 315. That is not bad for an estimation tool. It worked similarly for my squat max. Didn’t try it for deads. [/quote]
Mh, keep in mind that a bodybuilder who trains exclusively with 5 or more reps will have a smaller difference between his max and his, say, 10RM than someone who does a lot of ME work but doesn’t try to actively improve his 5+RM much (smaller PL’ers etc).
And why is this in the bb forum?
Wouldn’t people in strength sports know this one better (talking about the OP’s post)?
[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
RMorrison wrote:
Interestingly, I found that calculator to be pretty accurate. I did 235 x 10 the other day and 275 x 6 yesterday. The first yields a max of 313 and the latter gives 319. My max is currently around 315. That is not bad for an estimation tool. It worked similarly for my squat max. Didn’t try it for deads.
Mh, keep in mind that a bodybuilder who trains exclusively with 5 or more reps will have a smaller difference between his max and his, say, 10RM than someone who does a lot of ME work but doesn’t try to actively improve his 5+RM much (smaller PL’ers etc).
And why is this in the bb forum?
Wouldn’t people in strength sports know this one better (talking about the OP’s post)?[/quote]
I put it here because bb’s bench as well.