[Craig Pickering]

Craig Pickering on December 10, 2009 at 2:45 am #16379

I always used to use 1RM as a measure of how strong I was in prep for my event (100m). Generally, as my 1RM improved, I believed my performance would too. However, this year my 1RM has not improved. Instead, my 6RM for power clean, squat, and bench all have. This would indicate that I have a better level of strength endurance relative to my absolute strength. So this has got me thinking: As the 100m requires strength to be used over an average of 45 strides, would 1RM possibly be a false measure of event specific strength for the 100m? Even if you look at the portion of the race where strength is most important, i.e. the start, even then I would be taking 10 strides minimum, again leaning more towards 6 (or a higher number) RM as a potentially better measure. So, is this wishful thinking on my part, or could it be true?

I was then thinking about other events where strength is important. Events such as the throws would obviously require one lot of max effort, so 1RM could be more important here? But what about jumps? They combine the two – a need to accelerate over a set distance, say 30m, and a need for one large effort, i.e. the take off.

Id be interested to hear your thoughts.

[Eric Broadbent]

Eric Broadbent on December 10, 2009 at 5:34 am #92302

I am not sure how accurate a 6RM would be for any of those exercises..plus with your logic about 45 strides and 10 strides for accelerating then wouldn’t it make sense to do 10-45 reps of cleans/squats/bench to be training the proper way. I have always heard that you shouldn’t go above 3 reps for trying to get an accurate reading on your max also. Anything above 6 reps is going to be gearing towards muscle endurance/hypertrophy training which wouldn’t be the best means of improving your max strength.

[JeremyRichmond]

JeremyRichmond on December 10, 2009 at 10:17 am #92322

I always used to use 1RM as a measure of how strong I was in prep for my event (100m). Generally, as my 1RM improved, I believed my performance would too. However, this year my 1RM has not improved. Instead, my 6RM for power clean, squat, and bench all have. This would indicate that I have a better level of strength endurance relative to my absolute strength. So this has got me thinking: As the 100m requires strength to be used over an average of 45 strides, would 1RM possibly be a false measure of event specific strength for the 100m? Even if you look at the portion of the race where strength is most important, i.e. the start, even then I would be taking 10 strides minimum, again leaning more towards 6 (or a higher number) RM as a potentially better measure. So, is this wishful thinking on my part, or could it be true?

I was then thinking about other events where strength is important. Events such as the throws would obviously require one lot of max effort, so 1RM could be more important here? But what about jumps? They combine the two – a need to accelerate over a set distance, say 30m, and a need for one large effort, i.e. the take off.

Id be interested to hear your thoughts.

Breaking the phases of sprinting down further, I estimate 8 steps (alternating legs so 4 steps per leg) in the pushing phase, 8 steps in a more upright pushing phase with a fair amount of posterior chain pulling, 8 steps in a pulling phase, 8 steps of hamstring and glute pulling with the smallest time of force application possible, and 8+ steps of glute pulling with the smallest time of force application possible.

I think 4 RM would be better, or 4 hops/jumps etc.

[Matt Norquist]

Matt Norquist on December 10, 2009 at 2:37 pm #92329

Look out guys, this could be “bear droppings” resurrected!!

My opinion is that even though you have to apply force 45 times in a sprint race, the idea is that each one is at maximal effort.

I’ve always liked the idea of testing for 3-6RM, as I perform better on that than I do on 1RM – but it seems to defeat the purpose of doing something at maximal effort…

If you’re looking for something other than 1RM to test strength – what about speed tests where you perform a given load as many times as possible for 10-15s?? This is something I’ve always thought had merit – but not seen practiced much. Would lead toward nice progressions as well – as long form were not compromised.

Has anyone experimented with above idea? I know that some fighters do this sort of thing with various exercises, but have not seen it with powerlifts or OLs.

[Nick Newman]

Nick Newman on December 10, 2009 at 3:02 pm #92330

Matt,

I love the idea of lifting certain weight as many as you can in a given time! I have done this before and it is used in GB in some top jumps camps during their “power” phases. I have some standards somewhere, i’ll try to find them…

As for sub max weight tests – rubbish! lol

[Josh Hurlebaus]

Josh Hurlebaus on December 10, 2009 at 3:05 pm #92331

I’m a recently converted fan of bounds/skips and think measuring distance covered for either 3 or 5 reps is a good indicator.

[Matt Norquist]

Matt Norquist on December 10, 2009 at 3:07 pm #92332

I’m a recently converted fan of bounds/skips and think measuring distance covered for either 3 or 5 reps is a good indicator.

I am too. Especially bounds and speed bounds. Skips are more skill oriented, so tech plays a bigger role than power – but definitely bounds.

[Craig Pickering]

Craig Pickering on December 11, 2009 at 6:48 am #92363

I dont neccessarily think that 6RM should be the test, I was using that more of an example that perhaps 1RM wasnt the best measure for some events within athletics. I have a machine that can test peak power output for the lifts, so maybe this would be a better idea to use as a type of testing. For example how many lifts can I do at a set power output, say 2000W?

Testing for 1RM is hard too, as it depends on many things, such as fatigue and motivation levels. And your technique really has to be on point at the heavier weights.

[Patrick_Bateman]

Patrick_Bateman on December 16, 2009 at 4:58 am #92508

If you want to calculate by strides, I think a more accurate method would be calculating by power output over time. The time it takes to complete a 100m is roughly the same time it takes to complete a 2RM compound lift and a 5RM assistance/isolation exercise. It would entail a compromise between force applied and the endurance necessary to maintain it as long as is necessary

Not saying I agree with this theory, but thats how it would be applied