starting strength gym
Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 114

Thread: Strength and Endurance

  1. #71
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Korea Incheon
    Posts
    586

    Default

    • starting strength seminar april 2024
    • starting strength seminar jume 2024
    • starting strength seminar august 2024
    Quote Originally Posted by FatButWeak View Post
    It seems like a huge part of the problem is that very few to none of these morons have ever done a proper novice linear progression. If they had, they would know that it is entirely possible to take your squat up by 250 pounds without gaining any weight.
    x2

    Any variables is the same.Every thing is the same.Maintain conditioning compents and get your squat up to 300.It's not that hard.

    Just get stronger in off-season and gain some weight,then cut-off again as season is coming if you needed.

  2. #72
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    6,509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Berserker View Post
    Mr. Herbison, how do you feel about your recent experience?
    Ha. Well-hit, Mr. B.

  3. #73
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    1,148

    Default

    Short Story

    Coached a (I don't know how elite) competitive marathon runner. She placed 2nd in the Boston marathon. I'm under the impression this is a big deal though I could be wrong about that. She was 5/6ish 115lbs. Her squat went from 75x5x3, to a 120x3x3 in a 9 month period. She would lift 2x/week and maybe gained 5lbs. She PRd every race she did during that process and competed in the Boston later down the road, while she was strength training. She would compete every 2ish months.

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Land of Shadows...
    Posts
    4,987

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FatButWeak View Post
    It seems like a huge part of the problem is that very few to none of these morons have ever done a proper novice linear progression. If they had, they would know that it is entirely possible to take your squat up by 250 pounds without gaining any weight.
    yes, if they were "skinny fat". . . . but that not what the OP started this thread off with (elite marathoners).

    so no, if they were just skinny super lean.

    . . . I would imagine they would have to put on some muscle after a few weeks of squatting (at some in the LP process; i.e most of it).

  5. #75
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    658

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brcleeroy View Post
    When did I ascribe VO2 as the "end all be all" to performance? Also, please reread my posts as I have gone out of my way to reiterate that strength training can and does improve aerobic performance.





    You are correct that no one has said it's one or the other- strength or endurance; INCLUDING ME!

    When it comes to Endurance events (such as marathon running and cycling) well-performed analyses HAVE demonstrated that VO2 max is the best predictor of performance. I am hoping that this is simply a misspeak on your part. That is not to say that the person with the highest VO2 max always wins the race. As I have pointed out in my previous posts several times lactate threshold and economy always play a significant role. As I have also pointed out several times now strength training does have an impact on those variables and I think that we can both easily come to an agreement that endurance athletes should perform some degree of strength training.

    The other point that I was making is that Ripp's explanation in the video linked in the first post of this thread is absurd. If the example he used in that video held true I am certain that you could have dominated Lance Armstrong up the mountain stages of the Tour de France even while he was doping. What I am also certain of is that you couldn't.
    I think everyone got confused when you insisted that cardiac output was the ultimate determinant of endurance because cardiac output is a central part of the VO2Max equation. In other words you cited cardiac output's centrality in VO2Max as evidence of it's primacy as an endurance determinant. That sorta points normal people toward the idea that you think VO2Max is, actually, the "be all and end all" of endurance. Later, you point out that several well-done studies have demonstrated that VO2Max is the best predictor of performance. But I guess you'd say "predictor" and "cause" are distinct things. In which case, we're left in puzzled anticipation regarding what you meant to imply about cardiac volume.

    And you continue to either misunderstand or misapply what is being argued here. Jordan is a 725 deadlifter. He long ago eschewed any training adaptation that did not contribute to his success at the National level of powerlifting. Exactly ZERO people argue that it would be other than "questionably beneficial" for a skinny, weak endurance athlete to pursue strength acquisition beyond a productive Novice LP of a couple months' duration. The question is very definitely NOT "so I guess Jordan could beat Lance up the hill because he's stronger, right?!!?", followed by smug self-assurance that Jordan definitely would not beat Lance up the hill. The actual question for you is "what happens to a skinny, weak cyclist or runner if we take 6 weeks and double his strength?" We all get to walk through life in the meat sack we're given. Lance couldn't go back in time and become as strong as Jordan, nor could Jordan drop everything and become Lance. If you're going to be competitive in your endurance sport, does increased strength increase or decrease your chances for success hindrance going forward? Not leaping forward in time to a 700lb deadlifter's body and concluding that it's absurd to think that could make somebody a good cyclist.

    So, kind sir, if you take a skinny, weak endurance athlete and add strength training to his protocol to the exclusion of all else in order to correctly run through the straightforward process of an LP, stopping when the athlete no longer meets our definition of "Novice", will he be a better, worse, or same endurance athlete than he had been previously? Does his potential change at all? Do you accept that this is what Mr. Rippetoe is actually arguing, not that a 725 deadlift makes you a good cyclist?

    Maybe an interesting thought experiment: take a high-level endurance athlete and a high level (sub-Super HW) PL'er and switch sports. Train each for a year. Who gets closer to a "respectable" level* of performance in the opposite sport? Does the strength base or the aerobic engine more successfully "set the table" for broader capabilities?

    *Thorny to define, I realize.

  6. #76
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    53,559

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex Kennedy View Post
    Short Story

    Coached a (I don't know how elite) competitive marathon runner. She placed 2nd in the Boston marathon. I'm under the impression this is a big deal though I could be wrong about that. She was 5/6ish 115lbs. Her squat went from 75x5x3, to a 120x3x3 in a 9 month period. She would lift 2x/week and maybe gained 5lbs. She PRd every race she did during that process and competed in the Boston later down the road, while she was strength training. She would compete every 2ish months.
    This is terribly inconvenient for the trolls, Alex.

  7. #77
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Jamestown, NC
    Posts
    1,124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    This is terribly inconvenient for the trolls, Alex.
    The truth often is.

  8. #78
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    69

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Been View Post
    I think everyone got confused when you insisted that cardiac output was the ultimate determinant of endurance because cardiac output is a central part of the VO2Max equation. In other words you cited cardiac output's centrality in VO2Max as evidence of it's primacy as an endurance determinant. That sorta points normal people toward the idea that you think VO2Max is, actually, the "be all and end all" of endurance. Later, you point out that several well-done studies have demonstrated that VO2Max is the best predictor of performance. But I guess you'd say "predictor" and "cause" are distinct things. In which case, we're left in puzzled anticipation regarding what you meant to imply about cardiac volume.

    And you continue to either misunderstand or misapply what is being argued here. Jordan is a 725 deadlifter. He long ago eschewed any training adaptation that did not contribute to his success at the National level of powerlifting. Exactly ZERO people argue that it would be other than "questionably beneficial" for a skinny, weak endurance athlete to pursue strength acquisition beyond a productive Novice LP of a couple months' duration. The question is very definitely NOT "so I guess Jordan could beat Lance up the hill because he's stronger, right?!!?", followed by smug self-assurance that Jordan definitely would not beat Lance up the hill. The actual question for you is "what happens to a skinny, weak cyclist or runner if we take 6 weeks and double his strength?" We all get to walk through life in the meat sack we're given. Lance couldn't go back in time and become as strong as Jordan, nor could Jordan drop everything and become Lance. If you're going to be competitive in your endurance sport, does increased strength increase or decrease your chances for success hindrance going forward? Not leaping forward in time to a 700lb deadlifter's body and concluding that it's absurd to think that could make somebody a good cyclist.

    So, kind sir, if you take a skinny, weak endurance athlete and add strength training to his protocol to the exclusion of all else in order to correctly run through the straightforward process of an LP, stopping when the athlete no longer meets our definition of "Novice", will he be a better, worse, or same endurance athlete than he had been previously? Does his potential change at all? Do you accept that this is what Mr. Rippetoe is actually arguing, not that a 725 deadlift makes you a good cyclist?

    Maybe an interesting thought experiment: take a high-level endurance athlete and a high level (sub-Super HW) PL'er and switch sports. Train each for a year. Who gets closer to a "respectable" level* of performance in the opposite sport? Does the strength base or the aerobic engine more successfully "set the table" for broader capabilities?

    *Thorny to define, I realize.
    So you did not pay attention when I have repeatedly said:

    Strength straining is important and will improve aerobic performance

    Other factors such as lactate threshold and runny economy are also important

    Got it! You didn't fucking read. Please do so.

    Also (and perhaps this is where my previous posts weren't clear) I was primarily arguing against Ripp's absurd logic in the initial video he posted. If his explanation was true muscular strength would be the biggest determining factor regarding who would win the race. It's not. The biggest determining factor for endurance events is Cardiac Output (once again, this is far from the only variable). The engine that drives endurance performance is the heart, not muscular strength!

    BTW, your thought experiment is tremendously flawed. Both individuals would improve their capacities in the opposite sport. However the genetic make-up of both individuals would cause them to still be terrible at the opposite sport.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex Kennedy View Post
    Short Story

    Coached a (I don't know how elite) competitive marathon runner. She placed 2nd in the Boston marathon. I'm under the impression this is a big deal though I could be wrong about that. She was 5/6ish 115lbs. Her squat went from 75x5x3, to a 120x3x3 in a 9 month period. She would lift 2x/week and maybe gained 5lbs. She PRd every race she did during that process and competed in the Boston later down the road, while she was strength training. She would compete every 2ish months.
    Interesting that the improvement in her squat was far less than what is typically predicted by the linear progression model associated with SS. This would be even more interesting if anyone had ever said strength training wasn't important. Basically what we can conclude from this is that being able to squat one's body weight is how much muscular strength is required for success in elite endurance performance.

  9. #79
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    531

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex Kennedy View Post
    Short Story

    Coached a (I don't know how elite) competitive marathon runner. She placed 2nd in the Boston marathon. I'm under the impression this is a big deal though I could be wrong about that. She was 5/6ish 115lbs. Her squat went from 75x5x3, to a 120x3x3 in a 9 month period. She would lift 2x/week and maybe gained 5lbs. She PRd every race she did during that process and competed in the Boston later down the road, while she was strength training. She would compete every 2ish months.
    Second overall female in the Boston Marathon would certainly be an elite level performance.

    Did her bodyweight increase over the course of training? Getting stronger without gaining bodyweight certainly should increase performance. The tradeoff between strength and increased bodyweight is one major issue. Another is whether working on strength, all else being equal, has any negative effect on endurance or speed. I'd suspect the answer to the later question is "no".

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Elite runners and cyclists will not train.
    There are certainly exceptions. Alberto Salazar trains many elite level runners and he's using strength training (see the link in the OP). Mo Farah, an Olympic gold medalist, is a prominent counter-example (he's also coached by Salazar). He squats and deadlifts, albeit not heavy. Mo the Marathoner | Runner's World

  10. #80
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Chicagoland
    Posts
    414

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by brcleeroy View Post
    This would be even more interesting if anyone had ever said strength training wasn't important.
    Strength training isn't important. Hey, it worked!

Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •