Dan John game-changer strength standards

Stick to training related posts.

Moderators: Dux, seeahill

JohnDoe
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 281
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:35 pm

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by JohnDoe » Wed Sep 23, 2015 6:38 pm

Seems like we've got a bit of a Montessori versus Common Core debate going on here.

Here they are for rowing as a % of bodyweight:

Male Squat
High School: 100%
Under 23: 130%
Club: 140%
National: 170%
Olympic: 190%

Male Deadlift
High School: 100%
Under 23: 130%
Club: 140%
National: 170%
Olympic: 190%

Male Bench Pull
High School: 70%
Under 23: 90%
Club: 105%
National: 120%
Olympic: 130%

Female Squat
High School: 80%
Under 23: 100%
Club: 125%
National: 140%
Olympic: 160%

Female Deadlift
High School: 80%
Under 23: 100%
Club: 125%
National: 140%
Olympic: 160%

Female Bench Pull
High School: 60%
Under 23: 80%
Club: 95%
National: 110%
Olympic: 120%

Blaidd Drwg
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 19089
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:39 pm

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by Blaidd Drwg » Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:38 pm

JohnDoe wrote:Seems like we've got a bit of a Montessori versus Common Core debate going on here.

That's a good insight.

Unlike the T-Rubes, you'd think people here would question applying screening tools for populations to the development of an individual. Teaching to the test yields predictable results.

This is the fundamental disconnect. Initiated maybe by the OP who reasonable asks...."how do y'all stack up?

A fine exercise on it's own but then quickly down the rabbit hole and we see why these articles are so much a distraction from developing individuals. This is how I and people in my position end up spending inordinate amounts of time explaining to some "text-neck" afflicted teen why these "standards" are not relevant when they can't execute the basic movements of their sport, fit properly on their equipment or manipulate loads that are frankly minuscule in comparison to their capabilities.

If any of you are trying out for a HS boys soccer team, I encourage to be aware of the screening and selection process. If you want to get better at what you want to get better at....well, I'd avoid Common Core/T-Nation and Navel gazing FMS instructors like the plague.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill

Chris McClinch
Sarge
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 10:22 am

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by Chris McClinch » Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:49 pm

I think, too, that there's an issue of terminology. "Strong enough that strength is not your problem" connotes something very different from "game changer."

I think a huge part of the value of these standards is the reminder for athletes, coaches, wannabes, and would-bes that strength is only a piece of the puzzle, and even in the sports where it's a pretty big piece of the puzzle there comes a point of diminishing returns. I'd like to see the discussion tied to the fact that managing an athlete means managing trade-offs, that practicing the basic movements of the sport is paramount, and that everything we do in the gym is essentially GPP; we all grok that, but the T-Rubes don't.

Blaidd Drwg
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 19089
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:39 pm

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by Blaidd Drwg » Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:52 pm

Chris McClinch wrote:I think, too, that there's an issue of terminology. "Strong enough that strength is not your problem"
Absolutely. In fact that's been a bit of a theme around here....something that may be lost on Helicopter Posters interested only in reputation management.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill

User avatar
Danny John
Gunny
Posts: 642
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 2:51 am

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by Danny John » Wed Sep 23, 2015 10:48 pm

"I think, too, that there's an issue of terminology. "Strong enough that strength is not your problem" connotes something very different from "game changer.""
That is a point I tried to make earlier, but you are right. The key to the standards really isn't so much that you destroy one or two, just that you can basically do them all. That is something I picked up from Ethan Reeves...it gives you a real insight into the gaps...maybe it is injuries, or mobility "here" or whatever...good stuff.

Like you said...a piece of the puzzle. That is a very smart way to look at it. The problem...at the team sport level...is the coach with the biggest paycheck is looking to point fingers.

User avatar
syaigh
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 5685
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 3:29 am
Location: Surrounded by short irrational people

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by syaigh » Thu Sep 24, 2015 12:37 am

I had the pleasure of training a former professional football player for weightlifting and he competed at Nationals. I've also trained a good number of former division 1 college athletes. I've also trained Special Forces as well as Marines and regular Army. I've also trained a number of kids from age 7 up for powerlifting, weightlifting, and track and field.

Elite athletes were born that way and many coaches select for that talent. They are born strong and skilled and don't require a whole lot of intervention. My experience with top athletes tells me that they lift a lot because they were born fucking strong and as soon as they learn good technique, they have elite level strength.

Most kids who come to me because their parents want them to have a leg up in their sport of choice are suffering from poor coordination and posture. In their cases, I look at strength as a necessary intervention to prevent injury and the usual happy result is better coordination and body control. Even better, injury prevention.

If you are interested in developing athletes, you have to look at their weaknesses and get them better. The increases are modest, but the benefits are great. Mostly just because they can maintain their posture better while developing their game skills, which, is extremely important for balance, control, and injury prevention.

When I see "standards", I see a selection process. And its frustrating to see coaches patting themselves on the back for what is simply the result of good genetics. Genetically talented people tend to be really strong and really good at sports.

For the record, most high school boys, who aren't freaks, clean about 180-220, squat no more than 250-300, might pull 300-350, and bench around 180-250. At least the ones in this area.

So, as for "game changing" strength, its usually something they were born with. For the rest of us, its about getting as strong as we can without interfering with our skill development.

Ie, its all good. Develop your strength, your endurance, and your skills. Leave one out and your progress will suffer. its that simple.

For the record, I am participating in this conversation as a discussion of the premise of the original topic. If I wrote for Tnation, I'd just have lots of pictures of boobs cause . . . well . . the audience.

**EDited to add, in my experience, strength IS a game changer, a huge game changer, but in my experience, its the biggest game changer for the kids who would normally get cut from the team. Getting stronger improves their coordination, endurance, body control, etc and makes them contenders. Unfortunately, once we get to middle school, I don't see a lot of athlete development, just selection, and in my experience, but strength training can make the selection pool a whole lot bigger.
Last edited by syaigh on Thu Sep 24, 2015 9:05 am, edited 3 times in total.
Miss Piggy wrote:Never eat more than you can lift.

User avatar
Bobby
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 5549
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 7:41 pm

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by Bobby » Thu Sep 24, 2015 1:37 am

Wel Syaigh,you can never go wrong with pics of boobs if the audience is a male one.....wonder when my boss will understand this?
You`ll toughen up.Unless you have a serious medical condition commonly refered to as
"being a pussy".

Boris
Top
Posts: 1517
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 1:54 am

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by Boris » Thu Sep 24, 2015 1:41 am

Danny John wrote:"I think, too, that there's an issue of terminology. "Strong enough that strength is not your problem" connotes something very different from "game changer.""
That is a point I tried to make earlier, but you are right. The key to the standards really isn't so much that you destroy one or two, just that you can basically do them all. That is something I picked up from Ethan Reeves...it gives you a real insight into the gaps...maybe it is injuries, or mobility "here" or whatever...good stuff.
Yes, very good stuff. It should go without saying that "being able to do them all" means being able to do them all in good form and without wrecking yourself...

*edit: not saying that to anyone, just adding it to the mix in case someone clueless is reading.

TerryB
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 9697
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 1:17 pm

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by TerryB » Thu Sep 24, 2015 6:33 pm

syaigh wrote: So, as for "game changing" strength, its usually something they were born with. For the rest of us, its about getting as strong as we can without interfering with our skill development.
What if strength is the skill we're developing?

MIND = BLOWN
"Know that! & Know it deep you fucking loser!"

Image

ccrow
Gunny
Posts: 823
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 5:19 pm

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by ccrow » Thu Sep 24, 2015 7:02 pm

Boris wrote:When I was a competitive swimmer, there were 3 D1 All-American distance swimmers on my team. Two of them could do 15+ pull-ups any day of the week. One couldn't do a single pull-up and eschewed any and all weight room work... The two who were strong continued to make the gainz - I don't think that's a coincidence.

So, what's the lesson there?
The lesson I'd see there is don't throw out the baby with the bathwater, there is more than one road to Rome. One guy managed to be a D1 All American, elite, as a weakling. Would he have been better if he was stronger? Well sure maybe, then again, maybe he'd have tightened up his shoulders or just wasted a lot of time in the weight room not doing what made him a D1 All American. The Marine Corps is has lots of guys that can do 20 chins but not too many that can swim like he did. Point being, he found a way, the standard may or may identify a way to more improvement.

I think standards are always important but they have to change over time or you're just not paying attention. Standards set up for groups, populations, etc. have a use, and everyone has to start with a somewhat arbitrary standard, but ultimately if you're not a beginner you should be setting your own standards, learning what things will move your game forward.
But when I stand in front of the mirror and really look, I wonder: What the fuck happened here? Jesus Christ. What a beating!

Blaidd Drwg
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 19089
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:39 pm

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by Blaidd Drwg » Thu Sep 24, 2015 7:28 pm

TerryB wrote:
syaigh wrote: So, as for "game changing" strength, its usually something they were born with. For the rest of us, its about getting as strong as we can without interfering with our skill development.
What if strength is the skill we're developing?

MIND = BLOWN
If strength is the skill...there is only one standard....where your numbers sit relative to the strongest human to ever walk the planet bar none. It's the Z-Quotient.

Image
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill

User avatar
stanley_white
Gunny
Posts: 511
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 11:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by stanley_white » Thu Sep 24, 2015 11:45 pm

For additional reference here is a previous thread.

viewtopic.php?t=223875

-Stan

Boris
Top
Posts: 1517
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 1:54 am

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by Boris » Fri Sep 25, 2015 1:42 pm

ccrow wrote:
Boris wrote:When I was a competitive swimmer, there were 3 D1 All-American distance swimmers on my team. Two of them could do 15+ pull-ups any day of the week. One couldn't do a single pull-up and eschewed any and all weight room work... The two who were strong continued to make the gainz - I don't think that's a coincidence.

So, what's the lesson there?
The lesson I'd see there is don't throw out the baby with the bathwater, there is more than one road to Rome. One guy managed to be a D1 All American, elite, as a weakling. Would he have been better if he was stronger? Well sure maybe, then again, maybe he'd have tightened up his shoulders or just wasted a lot of time in the weight room not doing what made him a D1 All American. The Marine Corps is has lots of guys that can do 20 chins but not too many that can swim like he did. Point being, he found a way, the standard may or may identify a way to more improvement.
Could he have improved doing nothing but what he was doing, only better? The answer to that is always "Sure, I suppose". Could he have improved with even a tiny bit of strength? The answer, imho, is absolutely.

edit: Just to make it crystal clear, I think any strength coach in any field that sacrifices sport specific skill for strength development is an idiot. I think we're all in agreement there. If your strength training inhibits your ability to streamline effortlessly in the water off of your starts or turns, then you're doing it wrong...

Blaidd Drwg
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 19089
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:39 pm

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by Blaidd Drwg » Fri Sep 25, 2015 7:17 pm

Boris wrote:If your strength training inhibits your ability to streamline effortlessly in the water off of your starts or turns, then you're doing it wrong...
Cross-threading this fucker... I think this is the strong argument for segmented or block training. I am suspect of any strengtht and conditioning training that doesn't temporarily inhibit your capability in your sport movement. Too many people abandon the effective ancillary work (LSD for strength athletes, resistance training for endurance athletes....) because they perceive their performance in their sport movement to be talking a hit. Of course it's taking a hit. You're changing the pieces on the board. My cyclists love to come in and tell me how the last squat session effected their wattage for the week...I care none percent about that. i want to know how it effects their wattage once we're in the pre-season putting in miles or at the opening race.

Accepting that you're going to get a little worse before you get better. That simple conundrum has been at least 80% of the challenge of all training I have ever done, in any sport... Expecting yourself to be at 99% of your capability year round is massive limitation on progress.

Conversely, knowing when you've done enough is really important and has nothing to with hitting some matrix of numbers, it has to do with having made the amount of progress you can in the amount of time you had. You built capital in the weight room or on the road, then you shift focus and spend that capital.

Of course...if you don't have a sport and just like to measure yourself against random fitness standards...well that's a fine preoccupation....but then so is Golf.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill

Boris
Top
Posts: 1517
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 1:54 am

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by Boris » Fri Sep 25, 2015 8:33 pm

Blaidd Drwg wrote:
Boris wrote:If your strength training inhibits your ability to streamline effortlessly in the water off of your starts or turns, then you're doing it wrong...
Cross-threading this fucker... I think this is the strong argument for segmented or block training. I am suspect of any strengtht and conditioning training that doesn't temporarily inhibit your capability in your sport movement. Too many people abandon the effective ancillary work (LSD for strength athletes, resistance training for endurance athletes....) because they perceive their performance in their sport movement to be talking a hit. Of course it's taking a hit. You're changing the pieces on the board. My cyclists love to come in and tell me how the last squat session effected their wattage for the week...I care none percent about that. i want to know how it effects their wattage once we're in the pre-season putting in miles or at the opening race.

Accepting that you're going to get a little worse before you get better. That simple conundrum has been at least 80% of the challenge of all training I have ever done, in any sport... Expecting yourself to be at 99% of your capability year round is massive limitation on progress.

Conversely, knowing when you've done enough is really important and has nothing to with hitting some matrix of numbers, it has to do with having made the amount of progress you can in the amount of time you had. You built capital in the weight room or on the road, then you shift focus and spend that capital.
Yes, you're right, of course. There's a "not enough to matter" <----> "so much it wrecks you for good" continuum there.

User avatar
Shafpocalypse Now
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 21109
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 11:26 pm

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by Shafpocalypse Now » Fri Sep 25, 2015 9:47 pm

Sequencing woes...it's nice to have an easy metric, wattage, lap times, bench press, that can tel, you what's going on. Sequencing for field athletes is a bit tougher. Overall I think full programming for rugby is really fucking hard, especially for a flanker or 8 who needs strength and arguably the best conditioning on the pitch.

Blaidd Drwg
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 19089
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:39 pm

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by Blaidd Drwg » Fri Sep 25, 2015 10:10 pm

Shafpocalypse Now wrote:Sequencing woes...it's nice to have an easy metric, wattage, lap times, bench press, that can tel, you what's going on. Sequencing for field athletes is a bit tougher. Overall I think full programming for rugby is really fucking hard, especially for a flanker or 8 who needs strength and arguably the best conditioning on the pitch.
That tells me that it's all the more important to delve into the right sequence for that individual based on their abilities...not a population scaled yardstick.

You look at Marshawn Lynch's combine numbers and his height and weight and you think.. slighlty chubby undersized moderately quick catching RB...then you look at him play and realize he plays 20 pounds heavier, faster and at least twice as strong as his numbers.

He needs a well thought out plan of Halo, legal weed and being fed the ball and skittles all day Sunday.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill

User avatar
Herv100
Sgt. Major
Posts: 3696
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:12 am

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by Herv100 » Fri Sep 25, 2015 11:35 pm

To those who complain about strength and conditioning routines leaving you not 100% fresh and DOMS free for every skill/sports training session(you see this a lot with martial arts/BJJ guys), I say: "Welcome to sports, pal"
Image

User avatar
Koko, Beware
Gunny
Posts: 752
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 3:29 pm
Location: Pilgrim Country

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by Koko, Beware » Sat Sep 26, 2015 12:14 am

Blaidd Drwg wrote:
Shafpocalypse Now wrote:Sequencing woes...it's nice to have an easy metric, wattage, lap times, bench press, that can tel, you what's going on. Sequencing for field athletes is a bit tougher. Overall I think full programming for rugby is really fucking hard, especially for a flanker or 8 who needs strength and arguably the best conditioning on the pitch.
That tells me that it's all the more important to delve into the right sequence for that individual based on their abilities...not a population scaled yardstick.

You look at Marshawn Lynch's combine numbers and his height and weight and you think.. slighlty chubby undersized moderately quick catching RB...then you look at him play and realize he plays 20 pounds heavier, faster and at least twice as strong as his numbers.

He needs a well thought out plan of Halo, legal weed and being fed the ball and skittles all day Sunday.
What he also needs, as we know, is to have had one more carry on his stat sheet for the 2014-15 NFL season.
In the mill, getting down.
-Kotto

User avatar
johno
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 7817
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 6:36 pm

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by johno » Sat Sep 26, 2015 3:17 am

Blaidd Drwg wrote: You look at Marshawn Lynch's combine numbers and his height and weight and you think.. slighlty chubby undersized moderately quick catching RB...then you look at him play and realize he plays 20 pounds heavier, faster and at least twice as strong as his numbers.
A guy who played a couple spots behind Marshawn did a ride-along with my crew a few months ago. When asked about Marshawn's squat numbers, he just about laughed. Said it was nothing to do with how strong Marshawn was, it was about how he ran.
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

W.B. Yeats

Blaidd Drwg
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 19089
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:39 pm

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by Blaidd Drwg » Sat Sep 26, 2015 5:06 am

johno wrote:
Blaidd Drwg wrote: You look at Marshawn Lynch's combine numbers and his height and weight and you think.. slighlty chubby undersized moderately quick catching RB...then you look at him play and realize he plays 20 pounds heavier, faster and at least twice as strong as his numbers.
A guy who played a couple spots behind Marshawn did a ride-along with my crew a few months ago. When asked about Marshawn's squat numbers, he just about laughed. Said it was nothing to do with how strong Marshawn was, it was about how he ran.
I bet it's the standard college weight room, high as fuck and 405 for reps...

That said.... The few legit athletes (d1 football and wrestling) guys we've had in the gym, the universally suck with the barbell stuff but really take to the strongman implements. Crazy weird angle strength. really common.
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." JS Mill

User avatar
Shafpocalypse Now
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 21109
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 11:26 pm

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by Shafpocalypse Now » Sat Sep 26, 2015 2:02 pm

"they universally suck with the barbell stuff but really take to the strongman implements. Crazy weird angle strength. really common."

I've seen this too.

User avatar
powerlifter54
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 7941
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 5:46 pm
Location: TX

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by powerlifter54 » Sun Sep 27, 2015 11:27 pm

Shafpocalypse Now wrote:"they universally suck with the barbell stuff but really take to the strongman implements. Crazy weird angle strength. really common."

I've seen this too.

Easier and a better ROI to make a fast athlete strong than a strong athlete fast.
"Start slowly, then ease off". Tortuga Golden Striders Running Club, Pensacola 1984.

"But even snake wrestling beats life in the cube, for me at least. In measured doses."-Lex

User avatar
WildGorillaMan
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 9951
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:01 pm

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by WildGorillaMan » Mon Sep 28, 2015 12:54 am

powerlifter54 wrote:
Shafpocalypse Now wrote:"they universally suck with the barbell stuff but really take to the strongman implements. Crazy weird angle strength. really common."

I've seen this too.

Easier and a better ROI to make a fast athlete strong than a strong athlete fast.
Part of the problem is that making athletes fast who are not fast often involves a time machine and in-vitro fertilization.
Image
You'll Hurt Your Back

basically I'm Raoul Duke trying to fit into a Philip K. Dick movie remake.

User avatar
powerlifter54
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 7941
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 5:46 pm
Location: TX

Re: Dan John game-changer strength standards

Post by powerlifter54 » Mon Sep 28, 2015 3:04 pm

WGM,

When people ask if i have a training recipe for my quads or my calves, which are genetically freaky, i always answer

"dad over mom"

takes some a while to get it.
"Start slowly, then ease off". Tortuga Golden Striders Running Club, Pensacola 1984.

"But even snake wrestling beats life in the cube, for me at least. In measured doses."-Lex

Post Reply