Strength Standards

[CommanderFun]

You guys will enjoy your training a lot more when you stop being consumed about where you "should" be and just keep getting that weight up however you can (except by half repping and such, obviously). Everyone's different. Some of us are natural born athletes, some of us seem to be the farthest fucking thing possible from that without being crippled. Just keep improving.

[Oso Rojo]

Except they're a hundred pounds lighter.

Is the math wrong?

[AndrewLewis]

Is the math wrong?

Under no circumstances is someone who can lift 310lb stronger than a person who can lift 410lbs. Age, sex, height, etc have nothing to do with it. The 410lb lifter is still stronger.

[Oso Rojo]

Under no circumstances is someone who can lift 310lb stronger than a person who can lift 410lbs. Age, sex, height, etc have nothing to do with it. The 400lb squatter is still stronger.

Now I'm really confused. Your statement is a confirmation of the definition of mass. How did we get to confusion of 310 lbs and 400lbs. This whole topic has gotten strange.

[Mark Rippetoe]

Is the math wrong?

410 - 310 = 100.

[Mark Le Comte]

Its quite simple, using numbers in the thread.

In terms of expectation:
a 20 year old "should" be able to deadlift 405x5 in a year
a 60 year old "should" be able to deadlift 310x5 in a year
some will be more some will be less

In terms of outcome, lifting heavier is stronger (by definition). Applying scaling factors and the like is only useful for arbitrary competitions etc, but has no impact on how strong you actually are in real life.

In general, young adults start stronger and get stronger faster than those that are older. You still want to be as strong as possible (at least run out novice linear progression) even if it takes longer to progress.

[AndrewLewis]

Now I'm really confused. Your statement is a confirmation of the definition of mass. How did we get to confusion of 310 lbs and 400lbs. This whole topic has gotten strange.

Sorry, I meant to say "410lb" in the second part. I edited the comment. See if that clears it up.

[Oso Rojo]

410 - 310 = 100.

Your doing different math. I'm calculating Logan1's comment;
"The McCulloch coefficient for someone who is 60 is 1.34. Although there are other estimates, I think a reasonable adjustment for strength standards would be 75% of that of an open lifter."

So it's 300 * (100/75) = 400. It appears you are calculating the net difference between the two lifts.

[AndrewLewis]

Your doing different math. I'm calculating Logan1's comment;
"The McCulloch coefficient for someone who is 60 is 1.34. Although there are other estimates, I think a reasonable adjustment for strength standards would be 75% of that of an open lifter."

So it's 300 * (100/75) = 400. It appears you are calculating the net difference between the two lifts.

I understand what you did there, but that's not the point.

Our point is that 300lb is still 100lb less than 400lb no matter what anyone says.

[Chiaki Nitya]

Had a dude at the gym try to start an argument with me by claiming that a 165er pulling 500 was stronger than a 198er pulling 550. He knows how I feel about bodyweight coefficients, so I didn't take the bait. I just said that in terms of bodyweight ratios, an ant is 100x stronger than a gorilla, but I'd still rather be the silverback.