"Balance" of physiological adaptations

[Yngvi]

To be direct; why is that? What if the fighter's strength is mediocre for his weight class and he's already barely making weight (perhaps he's very tall for the weight class)? Shouldn't he move up a division? To be clear, when you say 'limits', you are referring to the point at which strength/bodyweight starts decreasing?

Maybe he should. I don't know. The judgement is beyond my experience and realm of knowledge. I do not have the experience or coaching ability in MMA to make that determination, so if I were theoretically training an MMA fighter, I would leave the weight class decision to the fighter and his MMA coaches.

In this case, I was defining limit as the point at which a further incremental increase in strength would cause the athlete to become an incrementally less effective fighter. (The right hand side of the bell curve for a graph of strength vs fighting performance)

I mean, a 6' guy at 250lbs who's ridiculously strong might come across a 6'7" boxing specialist, who is weaker, yes, but who might have 6" of reach on him per arm, who might have excellent endurance and who is explosive enough to knock anyone out in any round (look at Wilder: 6'7", 209lbs walking into the ring, the most devastating KO puncher in heavyweight boxing. NOT saying he should stay that light) ... I get the math, for sure, but it seems simplistic in that e.g. there are guys who are very unexplosive, skinny-fat, and who will still throw at ca 50%, but maintain such a pace and punch volume that they manage to 'drown' their opponents in the later rounds (Nick Diaz). Also, yes strength matters, it always matters. Force x lever length = grappling moves. The skills are designed to maximize those (as many force vectors pointing in the same direction as possible i.e. different muscles producing force and gravitational force on bodyweight as well + correct grip placement) variables, and is such an astronomical part of grappling that to reason that a weaker fighter can't afford to expend less than 90% of force production potential on a grip, is incorrect... again, I do get the math and, mathematically, it's undeniable, but I think that the variables are so numerous that more careful analysis is required.

I think those guys have a naturally higher aerobic capacity, endurance train better, have higher hematocrit, have a more efficient vascular system or a combination of those factors that puts them above their competitors. I believe they would be even more effective when stronger.

Surely there are many instances against a stronger fighter when grappling becomes a 90% - 100% effort proposition? Again, not enough sport specific knowledge on my end.

So my question regarding your statement about weight classes, like, of course we can find out which weight class is theoretically optimal, I'm simply thinking that the amount of variables is so copious that it becomes kinda hard.

That is where it is necessary to have the input of an experienced, sport-specific coach. A good sport coach should be able to handle most of those variables intuitively and explain the variables. If one of their assumptions on the variables involves an aspect of strength training they don't understand, you can override the input on that variable.

To be petty, Butterbean wasn't known as the '4 Round King' for no reason. Obviously not saying that fat and or strong = can't go the distance, I'm just reminiscing, he was fun to watch.

Haven't seen another like him. Many short fights, but I can't recall seeing him lose because he got gassed (fell down a couple of times and couldn't get up, but that is a different issue). It sounds like his physical exam results come back near perfect despite carrying so much weight for much of his life. He is a freak athlete.

[Philbert]

After Yngv's detailed explanation I have one thing to add: for extreme endurance performance (such as the marathon) temperature management becomes important. Athletes with high surface to volume ratios (short and lightly built) have an advantage in this as they cool well. Even if accompanied by a proportional increase in aerobic capacity, a larger athlete will need to divert more blood flow to the skin and sweat glands to maintain temperature, making him less efficient.

[Fatfacts25]

It seems like everyone here has a doctorate in physiology. 🤓 I would posit that weightlifting can benefit all sports. It’s only a matter of how much of the weightlifting do you need. That’s about all I can say about that. My smarts have left the building.

[Mark Rippetoe]

An important contribution, Fat.

[adamanderson]

I think those guys have a naturally higher aerobic capacity, endurance train better, have higher hematocrit, have a more efficient vascular system or a combination of those factors that puts them above their competitors. I believe they would be even more effective when stronger.

Agreed on all points. I especially don't want to seem like I disagree with the last one.

Yngvi,

Maybe you intentionally left out the details due to not being an MMA expert, but I'll ask anyway to make sure, because you're not one to parrot words i.e. you truly know your shit:

The limit where strength increase means fight performance decrease, what were you thinking that the incrementally deteriorating factors/capacities/abilities would be that would negatively affect fight performance? Endurance? Less practice time?

That's what popped up in my mind. With regards to endurance, I was thinking of a few ways in which it could suffer, like heavier body=higher energy demands not compensated by the anaerobic capacity improvements, and less recovery time from endurance training. I guess some quickness could be lost as well (at some point) because of the high bodyweight... I get that the point of diminishing returns likely wouldn't be the same for all of these factors and that 'fight performance' would have to take them all into consideration.

[Yngvi]

You are correct; I intentionally said "fight performance", because I do not understand all of the factors well enough. I could imagine overlooking several aspects of MMA performance or misinterpreting their level of importance. I don't even want to speculate which ones I have missed, because I am sure I would sound like a fool.

[Mark Rippetoe]

Agreed on all points. I especially don't want to seem like I disagree with the last one.

Yngvi,

Maybe you intentionally left out the details due to not being an MMA expert, but I'll ask anyway to make sure, because you're not one to parrot words i.e. you truly know your shit:

The limit where strength increase means fight performance decrease, what were you thinking that the incrementally deteriorating factors/capacities/abilities would be that would negatively affect fight performance? Endurance? Less practice time?

That's what popped up in my mind. With regards to endurance, I was thinking of a few ways in which it could suffer, like heavier body=higher energy demands not compensated by the anaerobic capacity improvements, and less recovery time from endurance training. I guess some quickness could be lost as well (at some point) because of the high bodyweight... I get that the point of diminishing returns likely wouldn't be the same for all of these factors and that 'fight performance' would have to take them all into consideration.

Methinks Adam is under the impression -- as many people seem to be -- that all fighting is MMA/MMA is a fight.

[Yngvi]

Methinks Adam is under the impression -- as many people seem to be -- that all fighting is MMA/MMA is a fight.

And if he does, the considerations for "physiological balance" should be reassessed for actual fighting.

[adamanderson]

Methinks Adam is under the impression -- as many people seem to be -- that all fighting is MMA/MMA is a fight.

Just practice combat sports and you'll be good. If you find it a good investment of time, practice eye pokes. The thing is though, that if you know how to fight in a cage, you'll know how to fight on the street, that's the truth, and whatever fat old bespectacled street karate senseis claim about the ineffectiveness of sport fighting on the streets, is wrong.

Sure, street fights tend to not go 25min, especially when one of the participants is a trained combat sports athlete.

[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.