[JohnF]

JohnF on August 23, 2010 at 8:22 am #16979

Hi guys.

I’m after a bit of advice.
I am keen to know if time spent in the weight room improving my maximum strength would be of any benefit to my 100m time or if I would be better to focus training elsewhere?
Is there a recommended minimum level of strength required to be able to achieve 100m sprint potential?

Is a 500lb dead lift better than a 400lb dead lift for example? Would 3 times bodyweight squats be better than 2 times body weight? Is there a point where increases in maximal strength are without benefit to the athlete?

If anybody has an opinion, I would be interested to read your minimum recommendations for the various lifts to enable an 80kg sprinter to achieve their sprint potential?

I assume the important lifts are
Squat to just below parallel
Deadlift
Power Clean
Bench Press
Military Press

Though I may be wrong and would also appreciate being put right.

Quite a disjointed question but I think you will get the gist 🙂
Many thanks for any input you can give me.

John

[Matt Norquist]

Matt Norquist on August 24, 2010 at 2:24 am #101286

There are some pretty good threads on this already: Bear Droppings – for one – https://elitetrack.com/forums/viewthread/8555/

IMHO – There is a number that is “strong enough” but it is specific to the athlete (% of BW may be higher for some and lower for others – based on their event, their limb length, etc). What I mean by that is that, for example – A 6’5″ athlete may not need to squat as big a % of BW to be effective as a 5’8″ athlete. Stronger is always better, but the question is at what point does the demands for strength gains compete with gains in speed, body composition, etc.

The goal should be to first have no lifts so weak that they inhibit performance, and once to that level – progression can be more haphazard.

As a general rule of thumb, here would be my proposed guidelines (with taller athletes getting a 10% discount and shorter athletes a 10% premium). There are benefits to getting it higher than below, but once at that level, I believe it is strong enough to not be a limiting factor in performance.

1. Parallel Squat: 2x BW
2. Power Clean: 1.5x BW
3. Bench Press: 1.5x BW
4. Military Press: 1x BW
5. Dead-lift: 2.5x BW

[Jay Turner]

Jay Turner on August 24, 2010 at 3:22 am #101287

As a general rule of thumb, here would be my proposed guidelines (with taller athletes getting a 10% discount and shorter athletes a 10% premium). There are benefits to getting it higher than below, but once at that level, I believe it is strong enough to not be a limiting factor in performance.

1. Parallel Squat: 2x BW
2. Power Clean: 1.5x BW
3. Bench Press: 1.5x BW
4. Military Press: 1x BW
5. Dead-lift: 2.5x BW

Is this the same for girls? This seems like a bit much for girls IMO.

[Matt Norquist]

Matt Norquist on August 24, 2010 at 3:26 am #101288

[quote author="Matt Norquist (WashedupDec)" date="1282596905"]As a general rule of thumb, here would be my proposed guidelines (with taller athletes getting a 10% discount and shorter athletes a 10% premium). There are benefits to getting it higher than below, but once at that level, I believe it is strong enough to not be a limiting factor in performance.

1. Parallel Squat: 2x BW
2. Power Clean: 1.5x BW
3. Bench Press: 1.5x BW
4. Military Press: 1x BW
5. Dead-lift: 2.5x BW

Is this the same for girls? This seems like a bit much for girls IMO.[/quote]

No – I would think it is dramatically different for girls. Have no frame of reference, however, to say what girls should be at.

I do know that a couple elite PVers I’ve trained with (at appr. 130#) were power cleaning 175 (1.35x) and Bench Pressing 155 (1.2x). This is an athlete who was around 5’5″ – with 12.low 100 speed, and 40′ TJ ability.

[TomMartin]

TomMartin on August 24, 2010 at 9:15 am #101298

1. Parallel Squat: 2x BW
2. Power Clean: 1.5x BW
3. Bench Press: 1.5x BW
4. Military Press: 1x BW
5. Dead-lift: 2.5x BW

Just my peronal opinion, but if done strict, the BW military press stands out to me as being the most difficult out of all of those, by a long way.

I don’t have any track athletes other than myself to refference, but I know an Olympic Lifter who at around 78kg body weight can BARELY manage an 80kg strict press, yet can jerk 165kg, ATG front squat 180kg, clean 160kg, and within a month of messing around on bench press before abandoning it, was around 135kg.

The other lifts all look easily attainable and average at best, but a BW military press for most is probably an achievement. I for example have managed parallel squat 3.5x BW, Power Clean 2x BW, over 2x BW bench, over 4x BW deadlift, but only just over 1x BW military press.

[Eric Broadbent]

Eric Broadbent on August 24, 2010 at 9:38 am #101299

haha I wouldn’t say those numbers are average at best…maybe compared to someone as beast as yourself they may seem average but if an athlete had those sort of numbers in the weight room then that would most likely be great and not the issue as far as one of the things they needed to focus on. 3.5 x’s BW squat eh? how far down are you going for these…that is a mighty big squat.

[TomMartin]

TomMartin on August 24, 2010 at 9:50 am #101300

That was 280 kg off a box set at exactly parallel, which is where I miss a lift in competition. I’ve done 290kg in single ply gear(dunno if you know anything about powerlifting equipment…) to 3 inch below parallel, which is about the depth where you will just about never get a red light. I’m significantly weaker at this depth unequipped, with a 240kg max, but training in equipment has made me significantly stronger at parallel and above, where the suit isn’t effective. And seems as parallel squats were mentioned, I thought 280kg as good a number as any to quote 🙂

Average may have been the wrong word to use, but I’m probably spoilt as I see people better those figures every day in the gym I train at. I’d have thought they would all be easily attainable for a sprinter, apart from the BW military press.

So I suppose I’m saying, yes they most likely would be great numbers for an athlete and probably more than adequate, but are they anything out of the ordinary? Or are they numbers that practically every power based athlete could surpass with some work?

[Matt Norquist]

Matt Norquist on August 24, 2010 at 12:09 pm #101309

Yeah – those standards I outlined are somewhat arbitrary, and based on personal experience as well. You’re right, the OHP is probably the toughest of those for most – but for many athletic efforts (from lifting, to throwing, etc) is – in my opinion a better strength indicator than BP.

At 200lb – my lifts are:

335 or 345×2 squat
285×2 Clean
275×2 BP
200×2 strict form Overhead press from standing – locked leg, minimum back arch. (I prefer this form vs. seated as it hits stabilizing muscles better)
495×2 Dead Lift

I do have a couple reference points that I used, however:

https://www.crossfit.com/cf-journal/WLSTANDARDS.pdf (I think this is based on research by Rippetoe and Kilgore – Starting Strength)

[Matt Norquist]

Matt Norquist on August 24, 2010 at 12:12 pm #101310

That was 280 kg off a box set at exactly parallel, which is where I miss a lift in competition. I’ve done 290kg in single ply gear(dunno if you know anything about powerlifting equipment…) to 3 inch below parallel, which is about the depth where you will just about never get a red light. I’m significantly weaker at this depth unequipped, with a 240kg max, but training in equipment has made me significantly stronger at parallel and above, where the suit isn’t effective. And seems as parallel squats were mentioned, I thought 280kg as good a number as any to quote 🙂

Average may have been the wrong word to use, but I’m probably spoilt as I see people better those figures every day in the gym I train at. I’d have thought they would all be easily attainable for a sprinter, apart from the BW military press.

So I suppose I’m saying, yes they most likely would be great numbers for an athlete and probably more than adequate, but are they anything out of the ordinary? Or are they numbers that practically every power based athlete could surpass with some work?

I agree – they are average at best. My point was – those numbers represent “strong enough” to not be limiting factors in performance. I think gains beyond that are definitely a good thing. Your numbers are huge.

My OH Press # is a little strong – relatively from a lot of summer manual labor from childhood through college (lots of lifting heavy shit over my head).

[burkhalter]

burkhalter on August 24, 2010 at 1:26 pm #101313

What track athletes are squatting 3.5x BW, cleaning 2x BW, and benching 2x BW?

A decathlete like Bryan Clay would have to squat 297kg, clean 170 kg, and bench 170 kg. I don’t see that happening, does anyone else?

As Ato Boldon says, the 400 lbs. benches and 600 lbs. squats for sprinters are myths.

[Matt Norquist]

Matt Norquist on August 24, 2010 at 1:33 pm #101314

What track athletes are squatting 3.5x BW, cleaning 2x BW, and benching 2x BW?

A decathlete like Bryan Clay would have to squat 297kg, clean 170 kg, and bench 170 kg. I don’t see that happening, does anyone else?

As Ato Boldon says, the 400 lbs. benches and 600 lbs. squats for sprinters are myths.

Bryan is not all that far off those numbers. He’s hit around 160-165kg clean and bench and 250kg parallel squat. All 3 very close to 2x/2x/3x BW. He’s also weighing closer to 80kg than 85 these days.

He’s got perfect proportions for lifting big weights, and is past “strong enough” but his best lifts put him awfully close to those numbers.

Other (taller) guys like Trey Hardee – do not do near the same # vs. body weight – but are taller, so get the “discount” I outlined.

I’d guess Walter Dix can put up some pretty big numbers.

[burkhalter]

burkhalter on August 24, 2010 at 2:00 pm #101317

[quote author="Brooke Burkhalter" date="1282636589"]What track athletes are squatting 3.5x BW, cleaning 2x BW, and benching 2x BW?

A decathlete like Bryan Clay would have to squat 297kg, clean 170 kg, and bench 170 kg. I don’t see that happening, does anyone else?

As Ato Boldon says, the 400 lbs. benches and 600 lbs. squats for sprinters are myths.

Bryan is not all that far off those numbers. He’s hit around 160-165kg clean and bench and 250kg parallel squat. All 3 very close to 2x/2x/3x BW. He’s also weighing closer to 80kg than 85 these days.

He’s got perfect proportions for lifting big weights, and is past “strong enough” but his best lifts put him awfully close to those numbers.

Other (taller) guys like Trey Hardee – do not do near the same # vs. body weight – but are taller, so get the “discount” I outlined.

I’d guess Walter Dix can put up some pretty big numbers.[/quote]

I was thinking as you say, Clay is the perfect example of someone who could be close to that. I would figure he was closest on clean and maybe bench and not real close on squat, basically as you outline.

Still Trey Hardee looks pretty strong in his videos, especially for 6’5.

“They” say Walter Dix hardly lifts weights.

Ato said he was the strongest of the HSI group at that time with a 320 bench. He and Mo both were 5’9 175-180 lbs.

What was Donovan Bailey doing, probably 140 clean at his absolute best, more likely around 130 and bench probably the same. From the videos I have seen he didn’t squat all that deep.

To me that’s all pretty strong, especially for guys who only lift 3x per week at most and to whom it is not a big priority.

[J Kilgore]

J Kilgore on August 24, 2010 at 5:52 pm #101322

I think that chasing strength numbers or saying that you have to be at least __x’s your bw in these exercises is kind of foolish. I’m not saying that you can’t work toward reaching those numbers, but when people get too caught up with numbers they forget that strength is just one part of the big picture. As long as you are getting stronger and it fits in with all other training components you’ll be fine and the numbers will take care of themselves.

[TomMartin]

TomMartin on August 24, 2010 at 8:17 pm #101323

just to be clear, I’m not in any way trying to suggest a track athlete needs to lift what I do, and to call myself a track athlete would be misrepresentetive.

I agree with Matt, the numbers he posted are most likely adequate. I bet there a plenty world class sprinters who get by on those numbers.

However, I would hate to see any sprinter who isn’t up to Matts quoted standards take the mentality that he doesn’t need to get stronger, as only the world class athletes are lifting those numbers. Those numbers (2x bw squat, 1.5 x clean etc) are so easy to work up to and maintain that you would be selling yourself short if you didn’t make the effort to do so.

[TomMartin]

TomMartin on August 24, 2010 at 8:51 pm #101324

Just a quick FYI…

I have a friend, 5ft10, 70kg, NEVER touched a weight in his life, horibly out of shape, lies in bed all day playing ps3…

I took him to the gym yesterday for his first exposure to exercise.

Within a couple hours of technical guidance, he squatted safely and technically correct, 100kg below parallel, 60kg bench and a 120kg deadlift. This highlighted to me just how strong the body is (even untrained!) if you use it correctly and efficiently. Technical improvements damn near doubled all of his lifts. His squat was a train wreck, knees buckling, zero posterior chain use, uneven hand spacing, poor depth etc etc, but it didn’t take long at all to fix all of these, and he squatted 100kg below parallel instantly.

My point is, he’d never got under a bar before, but once shown how to do the lifts correctly, how far away is he really from the numbers quoted as being adequate in this thread? I bet he could achieve them within a year, so if after years of training for a power based sport you can’t squat 2x bw etc, why not? Are you technically profcient? Are you putting in the effort, or are you just happy to settle for mediocrity?

[Eric Broadbent]

Eric Broadbent on August 24, 2010 at 10:25 pm #101327

just to be clear, I’m not in any way trying to suggest a track athlete needs to lift what I do, and to call myself a track athlete would be misrepresentetive.

I agree with Matt, the numbers he posted are most likely adequate. I bet there a plenty world class sprinters who get by on those numbers.

However, I would hate to see any sprinter who isn’t up to Matts quoted standards take the mentality that he doesn’t need to get stronger, as only the world class athletes are lifting those numbers. Those numbers (2x bw squat, 1.5 x clean etc) are so easy to work up to and maintain that you would be selling yourself short if you didn’t make the effort to do so.

I still wouldn’t say these numbers are easy to work up to. When I was in college there was a ton of guys on the team who weren’t able to hit those numbers and we had a pretty solid weight lifting program. I mean are we saying its easy for your division 1 stud to get to this or avg Joe Blow off the streets? Cleaning 1.5 x’s body weight is no joke. A lot of people on this forum may be studly in the WR or be surrounded with some animals in the WR but in the grand scheme of athletes out there, there is a large percentage that it would not be easy for them to get to this point without disregarding all other aspects of training IMO.

[comando-joe]

comando-joe on August 24, 2010 at 10:45 pm #101328

It’s hard to talk about this topic when there are so many dirty druggies out there putting up crazy numbers that are impossible for the clean athlete. My gym is full of them and some in competetive sports.

I would say as a track athlete, get as strong as you can without busting your balls for months on end just to get that extra 2kg pb.

Tom, the 1x bw strict press. I didnt think this was too hard after doing it for the last 6 weeks. From what ive seen, seems most of the average gym guys press very well. But likely all druggies.

[TomMartin]

TomMartin on August 24, 2010 at 11:28 pm #101329

[quote author="TomMartin" date="1282661294"]just to be clear, I’m not in any way trying to suggest a track athlete needs to lift what I do, and to call myself a track athlete would be misrepresentetive.

I agree with Matt, the numbers he posted are most likely adequate. I bet there a plenty world class sprinters who get by on those numbers.

However, I would hate to see any sprinter who isn’t up to Matts quoted standards take the mentality that he doesn’t need to get stronger, as only the world class athletes are lifting those numbers. Those numbers (2x bw squat, 1.5 x clean etc) are so easy to work up to and maintain that you would be selling yourself short if you didn’t make the effort to do so.

I still wouldn’t say these numbers are easy to work up to. When I was in college there was a ton of guys on the team who weren’t able to hit those numbers and we had a pretty solid weight lifting program. I mean are we saying its easy for your division 1 stud to get to this or avg Joe Blow off the streets? Cleaning 1.5 x’s body weight is no joke. A lot of people on this forum may be studly in the WR or be surrounded with some animals in the WR but in the grand scheme of athletes out there, there is a large percentage that it would not be easy for them to get to this point without disregarding all other aspects of training IMO.[/quote]

As an under developed 16 year old I could power clean 100kg at around 70kg
bodyweight which is there abouts 1.5 x. This was as a track athelete with no more than a years weightlifting experience. I was doing cleans twice a week after track sessions, it wasn’t difficult to slot in. I never was particularly fast, I’m not saying that means 1.5 X BW was sub standard, Im saying that it’s not something out of reach to all but the best! I know plenty athletes who clean similar weights, and none of them are particularly earth shattering! I also did half squats in the same sessions with decent weight, as do most, but that’s neither here nor there. I don’t see why any serious adult athlete shouldn’t be able to do that? This is ELITEtrack.com right? Not AverageJoggers.com?

Joe, I guess most average drug users are probably quite good at pressing, military or bench. Recreational gym users love these lifts, and some love steroids too! But maybe the people I’ve come across neglected their military press or didn’t put as much effort in to it as the other lifts. I just know that I see far more 2x BW squats than 1x BW military presses, and those that can do it are usually very strong in other aspects!

[burkhalter]

burkhalter on August 25, 2010 at 1:59 am #101335

[quote author="TomMartin" date="1282661294"]just to be clear, I’m not in any way trying to suggest a track athlete needs to lift what I do, and to call myself a track athlete would be misrepresentetive.

I agree with Matt, the numbers he posted are most likely adequate. I bet there a plenty world class sprinters who get by on those numbers.

However, I would hate to see any sprinter who isn’t up to Matts quoted standards take the mentality that he doesn’t need to get stronger, as only the world class athletes are lifting those numbers. Those numbers (2x bw squat, 1.5 x clean etc) are so easy to work up to and maintain that you would be selling yourself short if you didn’t make the effort to do so.

I still wouldn’t say these numbers are easy to work up to. When I was in college there was a ton of guys on the team who weren’t able to hit those numbers and we had a pretty solid weight lifting program. I mean are we saying its easy for your division 1 stud to get to this or avg Joe Blow off the streets? Cleaning 1.5 x’s body weight is no joke. A lot of people on this forum may be studly in the WR or be surrounded with some animals in the WR but in the grand scheme of athletes out there, there is a large percentage that it would not be easy for them to get to this point without disregarding all other aspects of training IMO.[/quote]

In looking at the numbers of say, the top sprinters, they are more in line with what you are talking about.

“Increases in weight numbers can also come at the expense of other strength qualities, especially the elastic qualities.” – Todd Lane

[Matt Norquist]

Matt Norquist on August 25, 2010 at 3:07 am #101337

It’s hard to talk about this topic when there are so many dirty druggies out there putting up crazy numbers that are impossible for the clean athlete. My gym is full of them and some in competetive sports.

I would say as a track athlete, get as strong as you can without busting your balls for months on end just to get that extra 2kg pb.

Tom, the 1x bw strict press. I didnt think this was too hard after doing it for the last 6 weeks. From what ive seen, seems most of the average gym guys press very well. But likely all druggies.

I don’t think that’s a fair generalization to make. Yes, steroids will make it easier to make strength gains quickly (if an athlete trains more often, with more intensity, and intelligently) but they don’t magicallly recruit new muscle fibers. I know of plenty of clean athletes who can outlift drugged athletexs.

Agreed – get as strong as you can wihtout sacrificing other training variables – that’s why its tougher for a track athlete to progress strength without giving up gains elsewhere.

[Eric Broadbent]

Eric Broadbent on August 25, 2010 at 10:23 am #101352

[quote author="Eric Broadbent" date="1282668951"][quote author="TomMartin" date="1282661294"]just to be clear, I’m not in any way trying to suggest a track athlete needs to lift what I do, and to call myself a track athlete would be misrepresentetive.

I agree with Matt, the numbers he posted are most likely adequate. I bet there a plenty world class sprinters who get by on those numbers.

However, I would hate to see any sprinter who isn’t up to Matts quoted standards take the mentality that he doesn’t need to get stronger, as only the world class athletes are lifting those numbers. Those numbers (2x bw squat, 1.5 x clean etc) are so easy to work up to and maintain that you would be selling yourself short if you didn’t make the effort to do so.

I still wouldn’t say these numbers are easy to work up to. When I was in college there was a ton of guys on the team who weren’t able to hit those numbers and we had a pretty solid weight lifting program. I mean are we saying its easy for your division 1 stud to get to this or avg Joe Blow off the streets? Cleaning 1.5 x’s body weight is no joke. A lot of people on this forum may be studly in the WR or be surrounded with some animals in the WR but in the grand scheme of athletes out there, there is a large percentage that it would not be easy for them to get to this point without disregarding all other aspects of training IMO.[/quote]

As an under developed 16 year old I could power clean 100kg at around 70kg
bodyweight which is there abouts 1.5 x. This was as a track athelete with no more than a years weightlifting experience. I was doing cleans twice a week after track sessions, it wasn’t difficult to slot in. I never was particularly fast, I’m not saying that means 1.5 X BW was sub standard, Im saying that it’s not something out of reach to all but the best! I know plenty athletes who clean similar weights, and none of them are particularly earth shattering! I also did half squats in the same sessions with decent weight, as do most, but that’s neither here nor there. I don’t see why any serious adult athlete shouldn’t be able to do that? This is ELITEtrack.com right? Not AverageJoggers.com?
[/quote]
Tom not to sound disrespectful but you keep mentioning these weightlifting numbers of yours and how you are just some avg athlete but the numbers you mentioned before are damn good. And that would explain why your numbers as a 16 yr old were as good as they were. I still don’t think you can say that it is easy just because it was easy for you. You say you’re around a lot of people that can put up these kind of numbers but who do you surround yourself with? Powerlifters who are strictly working on strength or high school and collegiate level track athletes? Yes this site is called elitetrack but not sure if you’ve noticed but there is quite a broad range of athletes on here. The only point I am trying to make is that for your average track athlete the numbers that were originally mentioned aren’t as easily attainable as you may think. I would say maybe 10 percent of the athletes on my college team could hit the numbers mentioned and that is being very generous. There are guys in our training group now that would have trouble easily hitting these numbers.

[rainy.here]

rainy.here on August 25, 2010 at 11:45 am #101357

Tom not to sound disrespectful but you keep mentioning these weightlifting numbers of yours and how you are just some avg athlete but the numbers you mentioned before are damn good. And that would explain why your numbers as a 16 yr old were as good as they were. I still don’t think you can say that it is easy just because it was easy for you.

I agree with this. Tom, you are clearly very strong and your ease of lifting big numbers does not mean they are necessary for elite sprinting (think Kim Collins), or easy to obtain. I am very good with numbers, but that doesn’t make them easy for everyone.

[TomMartin]

TomMartin on August 25, 2010 at 12:37 pm #101361

[quote author="TomMartin" date="1282672759"][quote author="Eric Broadbent" date="1282668951"][quote author="TomMartin" date="1282661294"]just to be clear, I’m not in any way trying to suggest a track athlete needs to lift what I do, and to call myself a track athlete would be misrepresentetive.

I agree with Matt, the numbers he posted are most likely adequate. I bet there a plenty world class sprinters who get by on those numbers.

However, I would hate to see any sprinter who isn’t up to Matts quoted standards take the mentality that he doesn’t need to get stronger, as only the world class athletes are lifting those numbers. Those numbers (2x bw squat, 1.5 x clean etc) are so easy to work up to and maintain that you would be selling yourself short if you didn’t make the effort to do so.

I still wouldn’t say these numbers are easy to work up to. When I was in college there was a ton of guys on the team who weren’t able to hit those numbers and we had a pretty solid weight lifting program. I mean are we saying its easy for your division 1 stud to get to this or avg Joe Blow off the streets? Cleaning 1.5 x’s body weight is no joke. A lot of people on this forum may be studly in the WR or be surrounded with some animals in the WR but in the grand scheme of athletes out there, there is a large percentage that it would not be easy for them to get to this point without disregarding all other aspects of training IMO.[/quote]

As an under developed 16 year old I could power clean 100kg at around 70kg
bodyweight which is there abouts 1.5 x. This was as a track athelete with no more than a years weightlifting experience. I was doing cleans twice a week after track sessions, it wasn’t difficult to slot in. I never was particularly fast, I’m not saying that means 1.5 X BW was sub standard, Im saying that it’s not something out of reach to all but the best! I know plenty athletes who clean similar weights, and none of them are particularly earth shattering! I also did half squats in the same sessions with decent weight, as do most, but that’s neither here nor there. I don’t see why any serious adult athlete shouldn’t be able to do that? This is ELITEtrack.com right? Not AverageJoggers.com?
[/quote]
Tom not to sound disrespectful but you keep mentioning these weightlifting numbers of yours and how you are just some avg athlete but the numbers you mentioned before are damn good. And that would explain why your numbers as a 16 yr old were as good as they were. I still don’t think you can say that it is easy just because it was easy for you. You say you’re around a lot of people that can put up these kind of numbers but who do you surround yourself with? Powerlifters who are strictly working on strength or high school and collegiate level track athletes? Yes this site is called elitetrack but not sure if you’ve noticed but there is quite a broad range of athletes on here. The only point I am trying to make is that for your average track athlete the numbers that were originally mentioned aren’t as easily attainable as you may think. I would say maybe 10 percent of the athletes on my college team could hit the numbers mentioned and that is being very generous. There are guys in our training group now that would have trouble easily hitting these numbers.[/quote]

You don’t at all sound disrespectful, it’s only a discussion. Maybe I am just spoilt because of the things I’ve seen. Recently, it’s been powerlifters, olympic lifters, strong man competitors i’ve seen, but they’ve all had to start somewhere, and made pretty quick progress to those numbers, at a wide variety of body weights.

But looking back a year or two when I used to concentrate on track, and train with other track athletes, I came across quite a lot of 1.5x BW power cleans as well, from junior athletes. This led me to the conclusion that it should be an obtainable goal for a lot of people.

The truth is, I was always a better strength athlete than a track athlete. My best 60m was 6.73, and a 10.53 100m. I consider these average numbers too. Maybe this is more reflective of my own high standards and disappointment with my own performance, than a representation of *real world* averages. But I still maintain my opinion, that Matt’s numbers he posted ARE good enough to NOT be a limiting factor in athletic performance, AND that they are in no way out of reach to any serious athlete. I would consider this level of strength a valuable tool, and worth pursuing, as the benefits of not being limited by strength probably outweigh the cost of achieving that particular level of strength.

However, if it was suggested that you carry on striving towards a 3x, 4x BW squat, I would be the first to admit that the level of commitment towards THOSE kinds of numbers, is so high that it would be detrimental to all other aspects of training. But a 2x BW squat? I can’t see why you would have to sacrifice any other aspect of your training to achieve this.

If you don’t agree, that’s fine, I’m happy to discuss a topic with somebody who feels differently than me, so please don’t feel as if you’re being disrespectful, as long as you don’t say anything offensive!

[TomMartin]

TomMartin on August 25, 2010 at 12:43 pm #101362

[quote author="Eric Broadbent" date="1282712016"]
Tom not to sound disrespectful but you keep mentioning these weightlifting numbers of yours and how you are just some avg athlete but the numbers you mentioned before are damn good. And that would explain why your numbers as a 16 yr old were as good as they were. I still don’t think you can say that it is easy just because it was easy for you.

I agree with this. Tom, you are clearly very strong and your ease of lifting big numbers does not mean they are necessary for elite sprinting (think Kim Collins), or easy to obtain. I am very good with numbers, but that doesn’t make them easy for everyone.[/quote]

My reply to this would depend on what you consider to be big numbers?

Do you consider a 150kg squat at 75kg body weight to be a big squat? I’d consider it something that with proper programming, most people could achieve within 2 years, alongside a well rounded track routine.

If you are talking about bigger weights than that, then I’ve agreed all along, it’s not necessary.

[morgan93]

morgan93 on August 25, 2010 at 4:11 pm #101368

I think the biggest key to weights training as already stated numerous times is to make sure it doesnt impact on sprinting. In that regard theres really no ‘number’ to aim for rather you should continue to gain strength in a manner which allows you to avoid feeling tired from weights the following day.

Earlier someone made a post regarding technique, this is alittle off topic but personally pilates has helped me more so than purely weights ever did as it has allowed me to actually unlock more of the strength gains from the gym. Sometimes i think people hit big numbers with their weights but in terms of actually turning that into speed they only use a very small proportion of that strength whilst sprinting.

[comando-joe]

comando-joe on August 25, 2010 at 11:18 pm #101375

[quote author="rainy.here" date="1282716935"][quote author="Eric Broadbent" date="1282712016"]
Tom not to sound disrespectful but you keep mentioning these weightlifting numbers of yours and how you are just some avg athlete but the numbers you mentioned before are damn good. And that would explain why your numbers as a 16 yr old were as good as they were. I still don’t think you can say that it is easy just because it was easy for you.

I agree with this. Tom, you are clearly very strong and your ease of lifting big numbers does not mean they are necessary for elite sprinting (think Kim Collins), or easy to obtain. I am very good with numbers, but that doesn’t make them easy for everyone.[/quote]

My reply to this would depend on what you consider to be big numbers?

Do you consider a 150kg squat at 75kg body weight to be a big squat? I’d consider it something that with proper programming, most people could achieve within 2 years, alongside a well rounded track routine.

If you are talking about bigger weights than that, then I’ve agreed all along, it’s not necessary.[/quote]

150@75kg is good enough to run very fast I would think, being atg and completely raw. I hear Darren Cambell sissy squatted 200. Ive been told by a guy who claims a 210 c+j to keep getting stronger, it will only help my performance. Truth is the last 20% strength gains i made have done nothing for me apart from the fact i can lift more dead weight and impress a bunch of morons in the gym.

Guy who 1st posted, dont take numbers too seriously. Youll have to find what strength levels work with you and keep testing on the track to see if its worth it. Lamaitre 2xBW squat?

[Matt Norquist]

Matt Norquist on September 11, 2010 at 10:53 am #101864

Decent article on the topic:Though doesn’t include OLs

https://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance/are_you_strong_find_out_right_now_with_these_strength_standards