Originally Posted by
adamanderson
To kinda sum up the idea of my original question with a last comment,
I honestly wasn't aware of many of the things that I've become aware of during the back n forth in this thread. I of course knew more or less what was meant by "fatigue", but had never considered the difference between Neruological and Metabolic fatigue. I also looked up the energy systems (ATP/CP, glycolytic, aerobic) in more detail. My question was intended to be sort of a general clearing up of how the body works, or more closely, how to correctly think about the "balances".
So basically, strength gain makes each rep (of whatever movement) more submaximal and thus postpones neurological fatigue. It improves anaerobic capacity, and for untrained persons it improves aerobic capacity. There's a point of diminishing returns wrt endurance because: at some point the increased energy demands from the added bodyweight supercedes the improved anaerobic (and aerobic) capacity from the added bodyweight (strength gain), as well as the neurological fatigue and the efficiency in energy transmission due to harder tendons.
Another point of diminishing returns that'd be relevant in a pullup competition or climbing, is the point at which increased strength (bodyweight) has a negative effect on the strength/gravity ratio, I guess this is relevant in endurance sports also, as the "submaximal" thing suffers as well. Philbert contributed with an interesting addition as well about body temperature, and that'd be another functional intersection to consider.
Anyway, of most importance to me from the moment of creating this post, was to understand the point(s) of diminishing returns wrt strength vs endurance. I want to have a sufficient understanding of how the body works to be able to infer stuff on my own about the "optimal balance of physiological adaptations" for a given sport. I don't expect the end results of my analyses to be perfect, as I'm not willing to get a doctorate in this stuff, I just mean a good enough understanding so that I at least know what the variables would be.
Am I in the ballpark?
... and if I am in the ballpark, I suppose that "you can't be 'too strong'", is an effective one-liner, especially given the fact that SS's target client is the novice lifter, and because with the practice and conditioning that an elite football player does he won't ever surpass those limits, and because the endurance athlete certainly won't pass them because of his extreme amount of conditioning work and probable unwillingness to strength train.