I weigh 155 and can military 85x5 without using no legs at all.
Printable View
I weigh 155 and can military 85x5 without using no legs at all.
Depends on your shoulders and tris etc. Similar question to asking if someone can bench their bw etc just keep working at it. Just for reference my highest is doing ~155-165 for reps at a bw of 215.
It's a goal you should work for, yes.
I know I can't do it, but I want to do it!
id say its a good barometer of strength. Im pretty sure the accepted #s here (all other vaiables non-existent [sp?]) are:
Bench: 1.5x bw
Dead: 2.5xbw
Squat 2x
(Mind you this is for somewhat experienced gym rats and a good starting point for PL)
I weigh 187 and rep my weight while seated and i think few people at my gym can, however, the bigger guys who are exp can do alot more than their bw for reps. So in conclusion, just keep on truckin. the weight will come, youll get it
[QUOTE=best regards]I weigh 155 and can military 85x5 without using no legs at all.[/QUOTE]
155 is a good body weight for someone without legs.
[QUOTE=irishkid]id say its a good barometer of strength. Im pretty sure the accepted #s here (all other vaiables non-existent [sp?]) are:
Bench: 1.5x bw
Dead: 2.5xbw
Squat 2x
(Mind you this is for somewhat experienced gym rats and a good starting point for PL)
I weigh 187 and rep my weight while seated and i think few people at my gym can, however, the bigger guys who are exp can do alot more than their bw for reps. So in conclusion, just keep on truckin. the weight will come, youll get it[/QUOTE]
while i think they are pretty good benchmarks for strength i have never been that keen on BW ratios for determining strength, its always so much easier for the smaller guys to achieve them.
i find something like this better
[QUOTE=Mr Beer]155 is a good body weight for someone without legs.[/QUOTE]
And the courage train with no legs at all. What an inspiration.
[QUOTE=best regards]I weigh 155 and can military 85x5 without using no legs at all.[/QUOTE]
So you are using leg drive then?
[QUOTE=Kouta]while i think they are pretty good benchmarks for strength i have never been that keen on BW ratios for determining strength, its always so much easier for the smaller guys to achieve them.[/QUOTE]
If the ratio is the same, it is an equivelant feat, that is the entire guiding principle of ratios.
[QUOTE=Kiknskreem]If the ratio is the same, it is an equivelant feat, that is the entire guiding principle of ratios.[/QUOTE]
Not really, which is more impressive, a 700 squat at 350 or a 400 squat at 200? I'd say the 700 squat hands down.
What is your objective definition of "impressive"? Because mathematically they are the same. Anyway, what I really want to do is defend the "smaller" guys. Lots of people say its "easy" or whathave you, it ain't. I'm 5'6 165 by the way. I do agree however that the 700 pound lift has a bigger "wow" factor.
[QUOTE=Kiknskreem]What is your objective definition of "impressive"? Because mathematically they are the same. Anyway, what I really want to do is defend the "smaller" guys. Lots of people say its "easy" or whathave you, it ain't. I'm 5'6 165 by the way. I do agree however that the 700 pound lift has a bigger "wow" factor.[/QUOTE]
My point is that it's harder for bigger guys to lift weight proportional to their bodyweight that smaller guys can. No question about it. Thats why there are no big guys benching 3.5X bodyweight, while some smaller guys do. So a big guy squatting double bodyweight is more impressive than a small guy squatting double bodyweight.
Now if you have 450@200 and 700@ 350, it's becomes harder to say which is more impressive.
BTW, whenever I look at lifts I always compare to bodyweight, and personally I always try to increase my strenght to weight ratio, but there's no denying that its easier for a smaller guy to lift larger percentages of bodyweight.
[QUOTE=Kiknskreem]What is your objective definition of "impressive"? Because mathematically they are the same. Anyway, what I really want to do is defend the "smaller" guys. Lots of people say its "easy" or whathave you, it ain't. I'm 5'6 165 by the way. I do agree however that the 700 pound lift has a bigger "wow" factor.[/QUOTE]
yes mathematically they are the same. But in real lifte situations they are not.
Have a look at any weightlifting records the smaller guys are always doing heavier weights as a percentage of there body weight.
Eg 50kg record is something like a 150kg clean and jerk, there are no 100kg guys doing 300kg C & J.
And that why in powerlifting they use a formula to compare weightlifters from different weight classes because straight ratios would always favour smaller lifters.
so again yes mathemitically ratios mean the lifts are the same but in the real world they are not due to ineffieciences as you get bigger BW ratios always favour smaller lifters.
I wish I could military my weight! Right now I do BTN with 95 lb.s for 3x5. I do 4x5 with 165 lb.s on bench. My weight when I'm not doing any cardio and just let myself go is 140 lb.s. Normally I weigh 135 lb.s. Is that good?
Here's a link to Kubik's sight. The timetable for the chart was when the overhead press was the favored lift. Kind of depressing :)
[url]www.brookskubik.com/how_strong.html[/url]
[QUOTE=bodyweight]Here's a link to Kubik's sight. The timetable for the chart was when the overhead press was the favored lift. Kind of depressing :)
[url]www.brookskubik.com/how_strong.html[/url][/QUOTE]
I think that chart assumes that you use the old style military press with lots of back bending. Those weights are still tough for a 165lb guy though.
i think it would be a good lift.and with no legs makes it an even better lift
I rep about 5 pounds over my bodyweight and that is sitdown military press not push and press. Im not even a powerlifter...
And yes I think people should be able to at least press there weight once.
[QUOTE=Guardian]I rep about 5 pounds over my bodyweight and that is sitdown military press not push and press. Im not even a powerlifter...
And yes I think people should be able to at least press there weight once.[/QUOTE]
the original questio was standing with no push press, but I agree that everyone should be able to do bodyweight once on the standing strict press, that's what I'm working towards.
I did 122 pounds, starting from a pause at my collar bone level, and pushing it up slowly with no leg drive. I weight 118. Still, this is not a good ratio to my bench press. I can bench press 200 for 3 anytime. ( Erm, not at any point of time but you get the meaning)
It would be nice to be able to Military my bodyweight, not quite there yet though
[QUOTE=Ahlim]I did 122 pounds, starting from a pause at my collar bone level, and pushing it up slowly with no leg drive. I weight 118. Still, this is not a good ratio to my bench press. I can bench press 200 for 3 anytime. ( Erm, not at any point of time but you get the meaning)[/QUOTE]
Very few people can military press there body weight while alot more can bench there bodyweight. If you ask me its simply how the training has evolved in that everyone focuses on bench.
[QUOTE=Guardian]Very few people can military press there body weight while alot more can bench there bodyweight. If you ask me its simply how the training has evolved in that everyone focuses on bench.[/QUOTE]
I disagree, for me military press is a lot harder even with same training. (possibley because i do it strict form and standing, true military press, which i've heard is harder than sitting how many people do it or standing w/ a jump or lean-back.)
I've been dropping weight for months, i'll bet by the time i'm ripped i'll be able to at least 1 rm my bodyweight on mil press.
[QUOTE=Kouta]
Eg 50kg record is something like a 150kg clean and jerk, there are no 100kg guys doing 300kg C & J.
[/QUOTE]
Actually Kouta theres a few 15 year olds on the team forums that can C & J 300+Kg at any body weight
I always wondered what is considered impressive for military presses. I don't see many at my gym doing them at all, so I have no way of knowing if what I'm doing is anything to brag about. I can do 135 for 5 and 160 for 1 at a BW of 145 lbs. Is that something worth mentioning when someone asks me what I can move for wieght?
I know that I feel strong doing it, deffinetly. Seeing the bar over your head with a plate on each side in the mirror makes me feel as good as when I'm squatting and benching.
A bodyweight clean and press (push press is ok) is a standard of strength imo.
[QUOTE=PaHulkster]A bodyweight clean and press (push press is ok) is a standard of strength imo.[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure what the hell it's called, but what I do is get it to my collar bond from about waist height off the squat rack, and from there I use everything to get it over my head, like back and legs. Still decent? or no?
That basically sounds a hang clean and press. A hang clean is harder than a power clean for me, so that is definitely good. Try cleaning from the floor too. It's a great exercise.
Weights overhead become different when you implement the Olympic jerk. Somebody like Pyrros Dimas who puts up 469 at 180lbs is insanely strong, but there is no way he is push pressing that weight. So I don't include the jerk for bodyweight over your head.
[QUOTE=Berserker-Power]Actually Kouta theres a few 15 year olds on the team forums that can C & J 300+Kg at any body weight[/QUOTE]
Wow, they can C & J more than the world record?
Someone should tell them to compete!