all posts post new thread

Barbell 1xMP/1xFSQ/2xDL strength standard

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)

Sean M

Level 7 Valued Member
Dan John answered a question on his podcast recently with a strength standard:
  • 1x bodyweight overhead press
  • 1x bodyweight front squat (the “caller” was asking about 2x bodyweight back squat)
  • 2x bodyweight deadlift
Then try to maintain that as long as possible.

I thought this was interesting and worth discussing.
 
It just shows that arbitrary "standards" are not vey useful in general.
For me, 2xBW deadlift or 1BW front squat are anything but a big challenge. I can do both any day. In a row.
But a bodyweight press... I have been on this quest for years... Getting close, but not there yet...
 
I like it, personally. (For men, anyway. That BW press is too far a reach for most women... I'd go with .75 BW on the press and 1.75 BW on the deadlift. We can squat the same.) But generally, those are good markers, and the OH press doesn't get nearly enough attention from most people. It's a great strength builder that transfers to many things. When you press weight overhead, your entire skeleton is supporting the weight. Not many other exercises can claim that.

I know there are always plenty of people against the idea of strength standards on these type of threads, but personally I think they are a useful communication tool to let people know early on in their strength journey what is generally attainable if they stay the course on building strength. Once you have it, you know why it was worth the effort. And like Pavel says in Q&D pg 11, "You can be anything you want... But you must be strong first."
 
I suppose the question is always, standard for what? To not worry about getting strong and instead go focus on specialized pursuits? To feel good about yourself? To join our secret society of power and rule the world?

I'd agree the OHP is a tough one - maybe that's Dan's way of saying that most of us ought to keep striving to improve our OHP for a long part of our training lives. Jon Engum said that's the secret to happiness, after all.

I'd also agree the FSQT seems light - maybe that comes back to the idea that not everybody needs to squat heavy.

For any of these types of standards, it would be most interesting to see how many people can actually do them, maybe sorted by training ages. Take a random couch potato off the street... a novice trainee... a guy who's been around the iron for 10 years, what the odds that any of them hit them all. I'm 2 for 3 here... I'm probably at a 0.75 BW OHP at best...
 
I like the idea of .75 for the press, which I’ve see elsewhere as a worthy standard along with BW clean and FSQ, 2x DL. BW seems like a tall orde to put overhead strictly.
 
Good discussion.

I agree that 1x bodyweight strict press is a lofty goal. But I also agree with @Anna C that the press is an underrated lift for strength development. I understand why it was removed from the Olympics, but I also think we “lost something” when we stopped contesting that lift.

I would contend that the average person would derive more benefit (and face it, satisfaction) from pursuing a heavy strict press than the bench press. I think this is what Dan John is getting at - lately he’s going back to the mindset of lifters before the drugs era of the 60s. Olympic lifts and the press were the go-to lifts in those days.
 
Strength standards are so subjective. I don't want to get into the psychology aspect of it, but you shouldn't beat yourself up if you don't measure up to certain standards. The good thing about strength standards is they show us what's achievable and can be used as goals to keep getting stronger.

We can slice and dice Dan's and other peoples numbers, but if you can hit Dan's numbers, you're still stronger than most.

One interesting site is strengthlevel.com
Supposedly the standards on there were taken from their users, so take it with a grain of salt. But, they do have data for many other exercises including the EZ BAR CURL! How awesome is that? Summer will be here before we know it, and the on standard that's gonna matter is how you are rockin that sleaveless shirt.
 
I have a 2.5x bodyweight deadlift, and almost 1x bw press.
But my squat is too low for this standard. About 1.75x bw.

I think that 2x bodyweight deadlift is just decent, but 2x bodyweight squat is extraordinary.
 
I like thinking about strength standards. I think it’s a good discussion, trying to determine how much is “enough.” Where is that point of diminishing returns? Where more isn’t better, it’s just more?

Of course, individual needs and circumstances determine much here, but I still think it’s a good topic. If Strength is not your primary goal, but a means to an end, how much is enough? As DJ quips, More is the enemy of Enough.

I cobbled together this from various discussions geared towards an endurance athlete:

DL 2x
SQ 1.5x
FSQ BW
BP BW
MP .8x
PU 10 at BW

More than this probably won’t bring greater performance, and might detract from other activities via the time it takes. Going for more probably means the goals have changed.
 
I once was in condition of roughly 2xBW squat, 1,5xBW benchpress and 2,2xBW deadlift. But at the time I didn't really train deadlift anymore. I guess this fits into the individual differences bracket.

Thus 2,5x deadlift seems very tough. But no. I was just weak in deadlift, e.g. 205kg should be very reachable if you're 80+kg.

So it's +1 for the 2x 1,5x 2,5x level from me.

A respectable 2,5x 2x 3x would get me to around 70th place in world ranking. And btw 2xBW squat is not extraordinary.

The strength level that I once had is my training goal though, but. My goal is to do it with a 4 hrs marathon during the same calendar year.
 
I cobbled together this from various discussions geared towards an endurance athlete:

DL 2x
SQ 1.5x
FSQ BW
BP BW
MP .8x
PU 10 at BW

More than this probably won’t bring greater performance, and might detract from other activities via the time it takes. Going for more probably means the goals have changed.
Thinking about this more, goals are really important. I found this spring that I could finally benefit from intervals on the bike because I got stronger. So reaching some strength level will maximize interval training for speed, but more wont be better.

What is that level? I don’t know, but I know coaches have had traditional strength standards before incorporating plyometrics.

I like @Timo Keskitalo’s idea of reaching a standard in divergent disciplines.
 
Personally, I like 100/150/200/250kg for MP/BP/SQ/DL. About 220/330/440/550 in pounds. I don't like bodyweight multipliers - maybe because I'm heavy. But this is just based on personal experience, so can't go into the multipliers in any case.

I could also just go with a 200kg zercher squat and a 100 behind the neck push press if I wanted to be more simple.
 
Personally, I like 100/150/200/250kg for MP/BP/SQ/DL. About 220/330/440/550 in pounds. I don't like bodyweight multipliers - maybe because I'm heavy. But this is just based on personal experience, so can't go into the multipliers in any case.

That's in line with the 200/300/400/500 for a 200# man, if you are a heavier guy. I aspire to hit those some day, though I'm not primarily a barbell practitioner. But in my mind, those aren't a "standard" per se - if you can hit those numbers, you are pretty dang strong.
 
I like %BW because I’m lighter. A 220lb MP is huge for a 160lb dude.

Sure. But I wasn't thinking in multipliers, I was thinking what I've seen, for myself, as not that hard to accomplish and had me feel a difference with. I could take multipliers from them for other people and they likely wouldn't make sense for them. Like their multipliers wouldn't make sense for me.

I get that standards are great for sports coaches. After a certain bench press, a T&F athlete can worry less about the bench and do some other exercise. And this standard is different if you throw the javelin or put the shot. However, I would argue that the strength standard is actually a matter of opportunity cost. If we take the shot put athlete as an example, if the bench press comes naturally, I see it make sense to go past the standard. It would likely still be useful, but less so, but because he's so apt with it, the law of diminishing returns hits later on.

So those numbers are round and about what I could hit with a relatively tolerable opportunity cost and what I felt had an effect. A sweet spot for me. Not for any sport.
 
Good discussion.

I agree that 1x bodyweight strict press is a lofty goal. But I also agree with @Anna C that the press is an underrated lift for strength development. I understand why it was removed from the Olympics, but I also think we “lost something” when we stopped contesting that lift.

I would contend that the average person would derive more benefit (and face it, satisfaction) from pursuing a heavy strict press than the bench press. I think this is what Dan John is getting at - lately he’s going back to the mindset of lifters before the drugs era of the 60s. Olympic lifts and the press were the go-to lifts in those days.

I totally agree here.

I love the fact how guys like John, Pavel or Rip are bringing back the old school overhead pressing standards which were forgotten by the industry since powerlifting chose benching.

But I also agree that having the same BW standard for a (front) squat and overhead press is somehow imbalanced when you look at what a human body can lift in lower/upper body areas. Lifting objects over shoulder girdle is restricted for a reason in daily jobs like construction in health and safety guidance.

I also love the fact of strength standards to shoot for. Everyone needs to decide by themselves where is the line of safety or common sense. But what made the S&S so ingenious as compared to PM ETK is actually defining the clear goals which give yourself a measuring stick. Same goes for x BW goals for BB and KB. Some call it gym goals, for me it just makes lifting a more complete sport for each one individually.

I do recall an article on SF which mentioned specific BW goals for BB. Failed to find it so far, will give it a try again later.
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom