If you're just a regular Joe who works out to be healthy, and attain that level of strength, then maybe your priorities will shift. I imagine the focus would shift to maintenance and longevity.
@@InvisibleHotdog It is not the ONLY predictor of longevity. Hence the point that beyond a cetain level of strength, the longevity factor from strength alone diminishes. Personally, I doubt very much indeed that the strongest men in the world have the highest longevity. I doubt that a hell of a lot. Frailty is bad. Overdoing the 1RM to the extreme may not be good for you either. So far I have seen no stats to suggest anything other than avoiding frailty is a big bonus.
Well it’s a point of diminishing returns if you can deadlift 405 and you’re not an athlete is it better to maintain a 405 deadlift or shoot for 450 and risk and injury.
Love Rip, but man I think Commodore is asking a different question than what Rip is answering. Of course someone's endurance, speed, agility, etc. will get better with better strength because more muscle recruitment is available. But, the crux of the question comes from the idea of Diminishing Returns. What would be better at the next step when we finally start feeling that "asymptote" of strength?
well, there are no diminishing returns given his strength numbers- And stronger is always better no matter what, you would't complain if your squat went from 600-700 strength is never a weakness
@@magnusbundgaard3022 Stronger isn't always better for let's say a Sprinter who can squat 600 weighing 180.Instead of spending years trying to get his squat to 700 he would be better off doing plyometrics and explosive work to help him use the strength he has better in a sprint.Eventually Elite athletes reach the point where strength training offers diminishing returns and they would be better off maintaining strength and improving another quality like speed or endurance.
@@magnusbundgaard3022 There are diminishing returns. Yes going from 600 squat to 700 is a good return but it takes a lot more effort to go from a 600 squat to 700 than it did when you started and went from 150 squat to 250. The more effort you have to put in to get the same increase is the definition of a diminishing return. Should the trainee start put some of his effort into something else? Depends on his goals. We can assume he's not a marathon runner otherwise why would he be writing rip, but there are some people who might want start putting more effort to the cardio/conditioning bucket.
@@cliffonator1111 but in his case there are no diminshing returns because his not an elite lifter, so the effort he needs to put in order to get stronger is effort spent right. getting stronger is never going to hurt your atheltic performance at all or slow you down. But i agree that at some point the effort needed to progress does not help much compared to how hard you have to train for it.. but it greatly depends on what the person is content with, and maybe the person dont need to ask rip such a question.
I know it correlates but I can't say for how long. Before I ever lifted weights I ran like a 17 second hundred. Like a couple months into lifting I ran a 15, then the other day I ran a 13. I dont train for that it was just always for fun to see if I got faster and I always did. Solely from weight training and getting my squat up
Looks like the answer is quite a bit off the mark on this one. Getting strong is the priority if you're weak, but once you have reasonable levels of strength, gaining additional strength may not longer be the best investment of your training time to improve the performance of an activity. Take a weak grappler, and get him through a basic strength progression, and you have a massively better grappler. At that point, he'll probably be quite a bit stronger than his opposition who hasn't done so. He's no longer getting overpowered by the strong guys, he can finish his submissions if he gets them, etc. All great. But at that point, the benefits of more strength begin to taper off, and improving strength further becomes a time hog with diminishing returns on the mat. If strength was all there was to elite sport, strength athletes would dominate all sports. And they don't. Not even close. Sports are dominated by strong athletes who have other characteristics and skills beside just raw strength. Take Teddy Riner, a judo legend and a 6'8", 300lb giant. Benches a respectable 500lb. There are a lot of guys out there who can beat that number by a hundred pounds, but not on the mat. On the mat they get crushed because they lack the balance, flexibility, timing, speed, technique... There is a point where acquiring other attributes gives better returns than just raw strength.
Rip missed the mark here. Yes, if you bring your deadlift from 135 to 365 you are going to improve all your attributes. But if your deadlift is already at 365 moving it to 505 will not improve your speed and endurance nearly as much, if at all. And there is a ton of research showing that doing slow, grindy lifts (which you necessarily do if you are lifting twice your body weight on the bench) will actually decrease your speed and power. It's all about specificity. For fuck's sake, even SS includes the power clean to keep your explosive strength on par with your absolute strength!
@@InvisibleHotdog It becomes about decreasing marginal return utility vs other physical development objectives. Eking out the extra 2.5lb to your 1RM when already stronger than 99% of the population has to be weighed against much better improvements to health that could be gained in other areas. You really ARE just being obtuse matey. Example? You will NOT meaningfully improve endurance running by going from advanced to elit at 1RM deadlift or bench vs taking part in some cardio. One is at the expense of the other at the margin so the question is about life balance and individual objectives. I can guarantee you that elite powerlifters give up something in other areas of health and fitness. This is not even debatable or else (if what you are saying is true) powerlifter elite athletes would be the best athletes at EVERYTHING from gymnastics to long distance running, rowing, BJJ and boxing etc etc. They are NOT.
@@fabioq6916 you're talking about endurance athletics and elite powerlifters, I'm saying that "specializing in strength" is a higher threshold than people perceive. And you're using specializations to illustrate your point, we're not having the same conversation so far
When asked about emphasizing different qualities in post-novice trainees, Rip answers by...describing the effects of a novice progression on secondary characteristics. The entire question was about rotating once the cost of achieving more strength gains goes up. The answer was super straw-manny
I think the question is a bit more interesting if he went at it from a sport specificity angle. Rip is very clear time and time again that eventually you will need to put on weight in order to get stronger. If your goal is "strength," that's no problem. But what if you are a martial artist, and you want to stay in a weight class? What if you are a skill position in football, or a dancer, or gymnast, or otherwise an athlete who can't afford to pack on more weight? My answer is I think that's a high threshold to hit, and anyone who does hit it will know a thing or two about bulking and cutting cycles, so it's a moot point. If you go from 190 with some fat to 190 and shredded to the gills, you will perform better in your sport, whatever it is.
That wasn't even sport's performance question.... "top 1% of the population". I think it'd be a good idea to work on those different qualities if you had the time and interest....especially cardio and flexibility.
What I always find astonishing incoherent: Rip is often talking about the general public as a target audience on the one hand and on the other hand he is looking for the absolut maximum in strength. The general public (even the subset of motivated strength interested people) is often interested in other sports. Insofar the question is legit, but as usual he dismisses the point for a snarky reply. And no, not every sport performance is increased in getting a heavier squat/bench/Dl. Well in theory yes, but there is a balance, especially in endurance sports, or sports that require some sort of technique. If someone could push strenght without any cost (time, muscle mass that needs oxygen, stress...) it would be true, but that is in no way possible. And yes, some sports require more flexibility than squatting or more balance than pulling weight.
The "general public" interested in other sports should do "general" physical preparedness aka strength training 'cause it'll make their sport performance and "general" life better
@@InvisibleHotdog Are you such an acolyte that you simply miss EVERY point that is critical of Rip? You are beginning to seem like some sort of cultist. At least address the man's point rather than just accusing him of heresy! His point is that (correctly) Rip ALWAYS talks about being more interested in novices and average Joes than athletes and the clue is in the name of his flagship programme. Yet, when someone asks a VERY reasonable question about balance in an overall training regime for AVERAGE JOES, he dismisses everything other than strength perfection in isolation as an objective for EVERYBODY. Look, you won't convince anyone by deliberately missing their point and being snarky. Rip isnt the worst at that but he sure does do it a LOT. Outside of his very specific field within the broader realm of health and sport, he is really no more than moderately well informed individual. Within his field (low rep high weight barbell training) he is very good indeed but JEEZ does he look like a man with a hammer seeing everything as a nail! Is SS the best thing you can do for cardio vascular health? Nope. Is it a great way to lose weight? Nope. Does it contribute to balance, flexibility and speed more than any other regime? Nope. It is useful in all those things, but not a panacea matey. Some people want to do more than bang a nail. Geddit?
That's what practice is for. The other nonsense is just made up athleanx style chicanery. You just need strength and appropriate leanness for your sport, the rest is practice and raw talent.
Without discounting the importance of strength, I must say that real life challenges are varied in nature and don't always rely upon the maximal strength. Other attributes of fitness do have importance, and can't be discarded or thrown to lower grade importance. You may hold the world records in squat and deadlift. But if you can't reach 10th floor up using stairs (when the elevator of your building is out of power or order) to pick your car keys that you forgot in a hurry and get back down, your strength and world records are useless. If you can't play football or basketball with your kids without gassing out, your world records are useless. If you can't chase that guy who picked your pocket, what good are your records.
The idea is that strength will generically improve all of these attributes by itself. If there is something specific you need to get better at, train that specifically.
Natty Fatty Powerlifting If interpreted as 1 plate ohp, 2 plates bench...that way,1233 takes like one year of training, maybe less, for a young guy. If we’re talking bout pl total then sure, 90% couldn’t reach 1200+
I always have fun listening, but this is not one if Rip’s best answers. The guy asking the question clearly has a point. But it seems to be ignored. Is strength important? Yes, obviously. Will getting your squat from 135 to 315 be a big help in almost any sport? Duh. Yes. Of course. The guy asking the question implicitly agrees with this. The point is: Unless your sport is powerlifting, is there a point of diminishing returns for increases n maximal strength? Absolutely yes. If you are doing a combat sport for instance, and have hit a 1.5x bench 2x squat and 2.5x deadlift, but have not been equally serious about your flexibility or conditioning, then further strength gains should not be a priority over those other areas. Depending on your training style, pursuing further maximal strength gains with too much priority could be a hinderance to your technical development, or your development of other attributes, both in time management and recovery management. As others have said, Rip purports emphasize strength training for “regular” people-which means non-powerlifters who have non-powerlifting goals. Yet here, he gives an un-nuanced answer that is only relevant to competitive power lifters. Seems silly. There are also sports where maximal strength, though helpful, is probably not the key attribute. Others here have mentioned BJJ as one example, where high levels of strength are certainly helpful, but perhaps not as helpful as high levels of flexibility...or as helpful as maintaining less focus on strength development with more time and energy left for technical development and reflex development. Should a BJJ practitioner still try to hit a 2.5x deadlift at some point? I think so. At least a 2x one. But should they pursue it ahead of all other attributes? No. Will they have greater returns by focusing on other less developed attributes once they hit that kind of strength. Certainly. Can they be a world dominating competitor if they never hit even a 2x deadlift? Absolutely, yes.
How about this: if you’ve made it to the 1000# club, you’re pretty strong. Not very, or really, strong. You likely can get stronger, but most people don’t get to or stay in that company.
He gets faster, his endurance increases, etc... Can we assume this is solely a result of strength training? If we assume he is *only* power lifting, then this could be the case, but I do not believe we can reasonably assume that building to a 315 squat is the most effective way to improve your ability to do anything other than squat. What to focus on when you get strong enough? The primary tenet of power lifting is that you are never "strong enough." The point is to become stronger, or more accurately, to lift as much weight as possible. No other aspect of "strength" is relevant to power lifting. As a person who has devoted his life to this pursuit, I do not believe Rip is capable of objectively assessing the value of other aspects of conditioning. He probably considers the total weight that can be moved in a single effort to be the ultimate measure of a man, even though some guy who can't lift half what he can might beat his ass like a redheaded stepchild...
@@g.ieronymidis " I do not believe we can reasonably assume that building to a 315 squat is the most effective way to improve your ability to do anything other than squat. " A 315lbs squat is a beginer number, unless you're a women. From experience, I do consider that my sprint improved, I've become faster, and I do find jumping in general and backflips a lot more easy to do since I started squating. So no, squating does a hell alot more that makes you good at squating...
Starting Strength isn't a powerlifting program and I'm sure a lot of people can beat up a guy in his 50s. Why is UA-cam recommending this to morons like you?
The question is poorly worded and sounds like a troll. If the hypothetical guy got that strong in the first place, wasn't strength the most important physical attribute to him? And now that he's strong and wants to focus on physical attribute #2, wouldn't that make that next hypothetical thing the second-most important, even to the "strong" guy?
Clearly there is no point in doing any other form of training than heavy barbells. So says Ripp. Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING imporves to the max with just barbell training. That's the logical conclusion one might draw from this video. Love Rip on strength training but boy, how narrow minded can one possibly be??? Some people want more balance and flexibility than is needed to lift a barbell. Some people want to run long distances. Some people want to look lean and lithe or not put on weight. There is a world outside heavy weight barbell lifting. Believe it or not....
The conclusion is your training should be strength, followed by conditioning. Everything else in the 2 part model of sports prep is considered practice. He's never said everyone should be powerlifters; he actually doesn't care for the sport as it is now. He believes that *first* you should be as strong as your frame allows, and then do w/e you want with your new strength. The Novice linear progression takes 3-9 months to run all the way out for most people. Then switch to w/e your passion is. You'll be a better athlete in all sports with more strength, but not necessarily more muscle, but to get as strong as fast as possible, you have to get bigger. Once the groundwork is laid, you can lean down and live a great life.
@@oliverallen5324 were his argument made like you did, few could argue. But he DOES NOT present the argument as you claim. Hence the problems. Have you noticed how many times Rip fanboys have to step in and explain what he "really meant"? Do you think that should be necessary? Doesn't that give you a clue where the problem lies? Example? He tells people NOT to run. Not to run after having built some strength for GPP, but NOT to. He says yoga, running, functional movement and other exercise regimes or whatever are a waste of time. Not exactly the open minded chappy you describe.
@@fabioq6916 Because running, yoga, and “functional training” are a waste of time. Unless they are practice for competition, you don’t need to do them.
dafunkmonster Running and yoga specifically make you faster at running and more flexible, respectively. Explain how they are a waste of time. As for "functional training", it probably is a waste of time if the intent is to gain strength and if we're talking about the same "functional training" that Rip has ranted about in the past.
i bet if a movie director wrote to him asking how he could make better movies, he'd be like 'your skill at directing would only get better if you could add another few plates to your deadlift'
Because your idea of what “athletic” looks like is actually just starvation. Having visible abs doesn’t mean you’re strong. It means you’re malnourished.
Rip seems to just use this as a springboard to blather on and on about why strength is the only thing that matters. I only watch these videos for amusement now.
Balance is good if you don't fall down!?! 😂 So if I don't fall down while I'm standing still (maybe even while squatting), I have good balance? Rip says the silliest things. I don't know whether to be amused or appalled. 🤔
As soon as he read, "strength is no longer the most important physical attribute", I knew there was a browbeating incoming.
I just started chuckling at that point.
@@lonnieporter8566 Spot on
But do you really have enough balance if you can't do a weighted single leg pistol squat on a BOSU ball?
No, you don't.
Not if you can't sip your morning coffee, and pet your dogs at the same time...
My balance has improved significantly thanks to becoming stronger.
Everyone writes a question partially to get an answer, partially to get roasted
If you're just a regular Joe who works out to be healthy, and attain that level of strength, then maybe your priorities will shift. I imagine the focus would shift to maintenance and longevity.
Yep thats me after 35.
Maintenance of what? Strength training brings longevity, it's what lets old people use their washrooms independently and stay out of nursing homes
@@InvisibleHotdog It is not the ONLY predictor of longevity. Hence the point that beyond a cetain level of strength, the longevity factor from strength alone diminishes. Personally, I doubt very much indeed that the strongest men in the world have the highest longevity. I doubt that a hell of a lot. Frailty is bad. Overdoing the 1RM to the extreme may not be good for you either. So far I have seen no stats to suggest anything other than avoiding frailty is a big bonus.
Well it’s a point of diminishing returns if you can deadlift 405 and you’re not an athlete is it better to maintain a 405 deadlift or shoot for 450 and risk and injury.
@@fabioq6916 Where did anyone claim that testing your 1RM is a good idea?
Rip's really a strength purist, rightfully so in most cases.
Love Rip, but man I think Commodore is asking a different question than what Rip is answering. Of course someone's endurance, speed, agility, etc. will get better with better strength because more muscle recruitment is available. But, the crux of the question comes from the idea of Diminishing Returns. What would be better at the next step when we finally start feeling that "asymptote" of strength?
Get stronger I guess 🤷♂️🤷♂️
well, there are no diminishing returns given his strength numbers- And stronger is always better no matter what, you would't complain if your squat went from 600-700 strength is never a weakness
@@magnusbundgaard3022 Stronger isn't always better for let's say a Sprinter who can squat 600 weighing 180.Instead of spending years trying to get his squat to 700 he would be better off doing plyometrics and explosive work to help him use the strength he has better in a sprint.Eventually Elite athletes reach the point where strength training offers diminishing returns and they would be better off maintaining strength and improving another quality like speed or endurance.
@@magnusbundgaard3022 There are diminishing returns. Yes going from 600 squat to 700 is a good return but it takes a lot more effort to go from a 600 squat to 700 than it did when you started and went from 150 squat to 250. The more effort you have to put in to get the same increase is the definition of a diminishing return. Should the trainee start put some of his effort into something else? Depends on his goals. We can assume he's not a marathon runner otherwise why would he be writing rip, but there are some people who might want start putting more effort to the cardio/conditioning bucket.
@@cliffonator1111 but in his case there are no diminshing returns because his not an elite lifter, so the effort he needs to put in order to get stronger is effort spent right. getting stronger is never going to hurt your atheltic performance at all or slow you down. But i agree that at some point the effort needed to progress does not help much compared to how hard you have to train for it.. but it greatly depends on what the person is content with, and maybe the person dont need to ask rip such a question.
I know it correlates but I can't say for how long. Before I ever lifted weights I ran like a 17 second hundred. Like a couple months into lifting I ran a 15, then the other day I ran a 13. I dont train for that it was just always for fun to see if I got faster and I always did. Solely from weight training and getting my squat up
Mark is hilarious.the sarcastic tone when he properly says,"comador decker",is fuckin epic.
lrn2spel
Wish we had gotten a ‘that’s not heavy!’
Why are you using apostrophes instead of quotes
Looks like the answer is quite a bit off the mark on this one.
Getting strong is the priority if you're weak, but once you have reasonable levels of strength, gaining additional strength may not longer be the best investment of your training time to improve the performance of an activity.
Take a weak grappler, and get him through a basic strength progression, and you have a massively better grappler. At that point, he'll probably be quite a bit stronger than his opposition who hasn't done so. He's no longer getting overpowered by the strong guys, he can finish his submissions if he gets them, etc. All great. But at that point, the benefits of more strength begin to taper off, and improving strength further becomes a time hog with diminishing returns on the mat.
If strength was all there was to elite sport, strength athletes would dominate all sports. And they don't. Not even close. Sports are dominated by strong athletes who have other characteristics and skills beside just raw strength. Take Teddy Riner, a judo legend and a 6'8", 300lb giant. Benches a respectable 500lb. There are a lot of guys out there who can beat that number by a hundred pounds, but not on the mat. On the mat they get crushed because they lack the balance, flexibility, timing, speed, technique... There is a point where acquiring other attributes gives better returns than just raw strength.
Rip missed the mark here. Yes, if you bring your deadlift from 135 to 365 you are going to improve all your attributes. But if your deadlift is already at 365 moving it to 505 will not improve your speed and endurance nearly as much, if at all. And there is a ton of research showing that doing slow, grindy lifts (which you necessarily do if you are lifting twice your body weight on the bench) will actually decrease your speed and power. It's all about specificity.
For fuck's sake, even SS includes the power clean to keep your explosive strength on par with your absolute strength!
Rip's response would be that you're underestimating the strength specialization threshold
@@InvisibleHotdog In comparison to what?
@@fabioq6916 in comparison to low expectations
@@InvisibleHotdog It becomes about decreasing marginal return utility vs other physical development objectives. Eking out the extra 2.5lb to your 1RM when already stronger than 99% of the population has to be weighed against much better improvements to health that could be gained in other areas. You really ARE just being obtuse matey. Example? You will NOT meaningfully improve endurance running by going from advanced to elit at 1RM deadlift or bench vs taking part in some cardio. One is at the expense of the other at the margin so the question is about life balance and individual objectives. I can guarantee you that elite powerlifters give up something in other areas of health and fitness. This is not even debatable or else (if what you are saying is true) powerlifter elite athletes would be the best athletes at EVERYTHING from gymnastics to long distance running, rowing, BJJ and boxing etc etc. They are NOT.
@@fabioq6916 you're talking about endurance athletics and elite powerlifters, I'm saying that "specializing in strength" is a higher threshold than people perceive. And you're using specializations to illustrate your point, we're not having the same conversation so far
When asked about emphasizing different qualities in post-novice trainees, Rip answers by...describing the effects of a novice progression on secondary characteristics. The entire question was about rotating once the cost of achieving more strength gains goes up. The answer was super straw-manny
Rip is a strength purist unfortunately
I think the question is a bit more interesting if he went at it from a sport specificity angle. Rip is very clear time and time again that eventually you will need to put on weight in order to get stronger. If your goal is "strength," that's no problem. But what if you are a martial artist, and you want to stay in a weight class? What if you are a skill position in football, or a dancer, or gymnast, or otherwise an athlete who can't afford to pack on more weight?
My answer is I think that's a high threshold to hit, and anyone who does hit it will know a thing or two about bulking and cutting cycles, so it's a moot point. If you go from 190 with some fat to 190 and shredded to the gills, you will perform better in your sport, whatever it is.
That wasn't even sport's performance question.... "top 1% of the population". I think it'd be a good idea to work on those different qualities if you had the time and interest....especially cardio and flexibility.
Commodore Matt Dekker may not be asking any more questions of Rip 🤣🤣🤣
What I always find astonishing incoherent: Rip is often talking about the general public as a target audience on the one hand and on the other hand he is looking for the absolut maximum in strength. The general public (even the subset of motivated strength interested people) is often interested in other sports. Insofar the question is legit, but as usual he dismisses the point for a snarky reply.
And no, not every sport performance is increased in getting a heavier squat/bench/Dl. Well in theory yes, but there is a balance, especially in endurance sports, or sports that require some sort of technique. If someone could push strenght without any cost (time, muscle mass that needs oxygen, stress...) it would be true, but that is in no way possible. And yes, some sports require more flexibility than squatting or more balance than pulling weight.
The "general public" interested in other sports should do "general" physical preparedness aka strength training 'cause it'll make their sport performance and "general" life better
@@InvisibleHotdog Are you such an acolyte that you simply miss EVERY point that is critical of Rip? You are beginning to seem like some sort of cultist. At least address the man's point rather than just accusing him of heresy! His point is that (correctly) Rip ALWAYS talks about being more interested in novices and average Joes than athletes and the clue is in the name of his flagship programme. Yet, when someone asks a VERY reasonable question about balance in an overall training regime for AVERAGE JOES, he dismisses everything other than strength perfection in isolation as an objective for EVERYBODY. Look, you won't convince anyone by deliberately missing their point and being snarky. Rip isnt the worst at that but he sure does do it a LOT. Outside of his very specific field within the broader realm of health and sport, he is really no more than moderately well informed individual. Within his field (low rep high weight barbell training) he is very good indeed but JEEZ does he look like a man with a hammer seeing everything as a nail! Is SS the best thing you can do for cardio vascular health? Nope. Is it a great way to lose weight? Nope. Does it contribute to balance, flexibility and speed more than any other regime? Nope. It is useful in all those things, but not a panacea matey. Some people want to do more than bang a nail. Geddit?
That's what practice is for. The other nonsense is just made up athleanx style chicanery. You just need strength and appropriate leanness for your sport, the rest is practice and raw talent.
After Rip's conclusion, Commodore Decker will be reassessing his life after he recovers.
Rip didn't understand the question, similar to many guys to the comments. That guy didn't ask what an athlete should do.
I click on these now to get my daily chuckle out of Crusty Rip.
24inch SVJ is not average, it's well above average.
@Ajgleskorv my thoughts exactly
Without discounting the importance of strength, I must say that real life challenges are varied in nature and don't always rely upon the maximal strength.
Other attributes of fitness do have importance, and can't be discarded or thrown to lower grade importance.
You may hold the world records in squat and deadlift. But if you can't reach 10th floor up using stairs (when the elevator of your building is out of power or order) to pick your car keys that you forgot in a hurry and get back down, your strength and world records are useless.
If you can't play football or basketball with your kids without gassing out, your world records are useless.
If you can't chase that guy who picked your pocket, what good are your records.
The idea is that strength will generically improve all of these attributes by itself. If there is something specific you need to get better at, train that specifically.
Yes if you weight 300 lbs but all radicalism is bad It doesn't matter if it's sports or politics or religion
Balans matters
24 inch is above average. however its average athlete numbers
What's strong enough? I get it, we all have different goals but what's strong enough? 2.5 bw deadlift? 3bw deadlift?
that’s very strong 💪🏼 mane..lifting body weight is strong 💪🏼 mane..easier to get gainz by lifting heavy but also taxing on another level..
2345, is the Standard.
With the 100 lb chinup? You must be watching coath
What's 2345?
Natty Fatty Powerlifting that’s because they train like shit or don’t eat. Any average make can reach those numbers
@@jefflee8115 2 plate ohp, 3 plate bench, 4 plate squat, 5 plate deadlift, all for a single
Natty Fatty Powerlifting If interpreted as 1 plate ohp, 2 plates bench...that way,1233 takes like one year of training, maybe less, for a young guy. If we’re talking bout pl total then sure, 90% couldn’t reach 1200+
If you are not getting stronger than you are getting weaker. Remember that.
I always have fun listening, but this is not one if Rip’s best answers. The guy asking the question clearly has a point. But it seems to be ignored.
Is strength important? Yes, obviously. Will getting your squat from 135 to 315 be a big help in almost any sport? Duh. Yes. Of course. The guy asking the question implicitly agrees with this.
The point is: Unless your sport is powerlifting, is there a point of diminishing returns for increases n maximal strength? Absolutely yes.
If you are doing a combat sport for instance, and have hit a 1.5x bench 2x squat and 2.5x deadlift, but have not been equally serious about your flexibility or conditioning, then further strength gains should not be a priority over those other areas.
Depending on your training style, pursuing further maximal strength gains with too much priority could be a hinderance to your technical development, or your development of other attributes, both in time management and recovery management.
As others have said, Rip purports emphasize strength training for “regular” people-which means non-powerlifters who have non-powerlifting goals. Yet here, he gives an un-nuanced answer that is only relevant to competitive power lifters. Seems silly.
There are also sports where maximal strength, though helpful, is probably not the key attribute. Others here have mentioned BJJ as one example, where high levels of strength are certainly helpful, but perhaps not as helpful as high levels of flexibility...or as helpful as maintaining less focus on strength development with more time and energy left for technical development and reflex development.
Should a BJJ practitioner still try to hit a 2.5x deadlift at some point? I think so. At least a 2x one. But should they pursue it ahead of all other attributes? No. Will they have greater returns by focusing on other less developed attributes once they hit that kind of strength. Certainly. Can they be a world dominating competitor if they never hit even a 2x deadlift? Absolutely, yes.
How about this: if you’ve made it to the 1000# club, you’re pretty strong. Not very, or really, strong. You likely can get stronger, but most people don’t get to or stay in that company.
Those numbers put you in top 1/10 of 1%.
"Commodore" inspired by the "Colonel" from" Boogie Nights"?
😂😂 There's a back story to this Commodore
YOUR COMADOR MAT DECKER,,,LOOOOL
“MATT!! THERE IS NO THIRD PLANET!!!!”
The funny part is the askers strenght standarts (1.5x bw bench etc..) aint really that strong😭
He gets faster, his endurance increases, etc... Can we assume this is solely a result of strength training? If we assume he is *only* power lifting, then this could be the case, but I do not believe we can reasonably assume that building to a 315 squat is the most effective way to improve your ability to do anything other than squat. What to focus on when you get strong enough? The primary tenet of power lifting is that you are never "strong enough." The point is to become stronger, or more accurately, to lift as much weight as possible. No other aspect of "strength" is relevant to power lifting. As a person who has devoted his life to this pursuit, I do not believe Rip is capable of objectively assessing the value of other aspects of conditioning. He probably considers the total weight that can be moved in a single effort to be the ultimate measure of a man, even though some guy who can't lift half what he can might beat his ass like a redheaded stepchild...
Rip is narrow minded indeed. I just watch the videos for my amusement
315 kg or 315 lbs?
@@jotr.9786 lbs
@@g.ieronymidis
" I do not believe we can reasonably assume that building to a 315 squat is the most effective way to improve your ability to do anything other than squat. "
A 315lbs squat is a beginer number, unless you're a women.
From experience, I do consider that my sprint improved, I've become faster, and I do find jumping in general and backflips a lot more easy to do since I started squating. So no, squating does a hell alot more that makes you good at squating...
Starting Strength isn't a powerlifting program and I'm sure a lot of people can beat up a guy in his 50s. Why is UA-cam recommending this to morons like you?
Deja vu
how is 2x bw squat and 2.5x bw deadlift strong?? I did that in less than 6 months of training, and I'm just average
The question is poorly worded and sounds like a troll. If the hypothetical guy got that strong in the first place, wasn't strength the most important physical attribute to him? And now that he's strong and wants to focus on physical attribute #2, wouldn't that make that next hypothetical thing the second-most important, even to the "strong" guy?
Rip has a large head.
You're not wrong because your Commodore Matt Decker... BWAHAHAHAHA!!!
Clearly there is no point in doing any other form of training than heavy barbells. So says Ripp. Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING imporves to the max with just barbell training. That's the logical conclusion one might draw from this video. Love Rip on strength training but boy, how narrow minded can one possibly be??? Some people want more balance and flexibility than is needed to lift a barbell. Some people want to run long distances. Some people want to look lean and lithe or not put on weight. There is a world outside heavy weight barbell lifting. Believe it or not....
The conclusion is your training should be strength, followed by conditioning. Everything else in the 2 part model of sports prep is considered practice. He's never said everyone should be powerlifters; he actually doesn't care for the sport as it is now. He believes that *first* you should be as strong as your frame allows, and then do w/e you want with your new strength. The Novice linear progression takes 3-9 months to run all the way out for most people. Then switch to w/e your passion is. You'll be a better athlete in all sports with more strength, but not necessarily more muscle, but to get as strong as fast as possible, you have to get bigger. Once the groundwork is laid, you can lean down and live a great life.
@@oliverallen5324 were his argument made like you did, few could argue. But he DOES NOT present the argument as you claim. Hence the problems. Have you noticed how many times Rip fanboys have to step in and explain what he "really meant"? Do you think that should be necessary? Doesn't that give you a clue where the problem lies?
Example? He tells people NOT to run. Not to run after having built some strength for GPP, but NOT to. He says yoga, running, functional movement and other exercise regimes or whatever are a waste of time. Not exactly the open minded chappy you describe.
@@fabioq6916 Because running, yoga, and “functional training” are a waste of time. Unless they are practice for competition, you don’t need to do them.
dafunkmonster
Running and yoga specifically make you faster at running and more flexible, respectively. Explain how they are a waste of time.
As for "functional training", it probably is a waste of time if the intent is to gain strength and if we're talking about the same "functional training" that Rip has ranted about in the past.
i bet if a movie director wrote to him asking how he could make better movies, he'd be like 'your skill at directing would only get better if you could add another few plates to your deadlift'
Relative strength.. ever heard of it?
not a thing.
Oliver Allen yes it is
The question and statements that guy wrote in is completely absurd.
You keep adding FAhVe PoUnDs no questions asked
If your grappling some would say flexibility over strength. Strength will take you only so far in bjj.
Only if the guys you’re grappling with are of a higher skill level. If matched, then the stronger guy wins out
@@thejdshipley strength is only about 30 percent relevant when rolling. Clearly you have never rolled before.
@@Eric-ey7rm 30% is a fuck lot my dude
The classic "your strength doesn't mean anything in a real fight" cope
@@InvisibleHotdog whose talking about a real fight dude? I'm talking about rolling.
There is no strong enough. Literally
Commodore should lose his rank and settle for Captain now.
How come nobody at starting strength looks athletic in any way?
I ask myself the same question
It’s not a physique bodybuilding program it’s a strength program
Because 'looking athletic' doesn't mean you are..
how come there are people at SS that put 4 plates over their head and pull 7 plates
Because your idea of what “athletic” looks like is actually just starvation.
Having visible abs doesn’t mean you’re strong. It means you’re malnourished.
Where in this did you answer the question posed? You made up a small man to make a point.
Rip seems to just use this as a springboard to blather on and on about why strength is the only thing that matters.
I only watch these videos for amusement now.
Commodore must have been trolling. This is like asking a priest if Jesus was akshully important.
Balance is good if you don't fall down!?! 😂
So if I don't fall down while I'm standing still (maybe even while squatting), I have good balance?
Rip says the silliest things. I don't know whether to be amused or appalled. 🤔
What are you, a tight rope walker?
😂😂😂
A 150lb kid squatting 315 isn't strong?
Not as strong as if he got his squat up to 40fyve!
No...according to RIp it's worth it if the kid is 270lbs and squats 350...that is why Rip is wrong.
Starting Strength...novice linear progression...approx 1 year of lifting.
After that...this ENTIRE premise and attitude of Rippetoe is USELESS.