Why Does the Army Want Me Weak?

[stef]

by Ryan Long

Is a 111 pound soldier really an effective member of an infantry squad? Can that soldier carry the average soldier when wounded on the battlefield?...My strong-but-fat Soldiers were great contributors in combat, and often they were the best performers both mounted and dismounted. They were more durable and more versatile. Our problems were with the skinny-fats and the sparrows; they couldn’t keep up on dismounted patrols under load, couldn’t kick in a door, couldn’t evacuate anybody over 140 lbs, and couldn’t intimidate an insurgent.

Full Article (http://startingstrength.com/articles/army_weak_long.pdf)

Resources Page (http://startingstrength.com/index.php/site/resources)

[hatmanii]

Excellent stuff.

[MAD9692]

"increasing my back squat from 365lbs to 515lbs"

God Damn...

[OITW]

Outstanding, Major! Hoo-ah!

Please contact me on the PM.

[smitty]

Great article. I cut GOMAD down to 1/2GOMAD about a month early for fear of the Navy's "rope and choke." Starting next month, we can no longer receive a waiver for being fat but achieving an excellent or outstanding on the PRT. If you're over the body composition analysis threshold three consecutive times, you're out - no matter how many pushups and situps you can do, and no matter how fast you run the 1.5 miles.
I think that the driving force for the PRT program is not physical fitness at all, but lower health care costs.

[hbriem]

"increasing my back squat from 365lbs to 515lbs"

God Damn...

I know. For me, that's the biggie. I've been training for nearly 7 years. I was roughly at his "before" 5 years ago, give or take, 365 lbs squat, 250 lbs bench, 405 lbs deadlift (my deadlift was actually around 450 lbs 5 years ago, but whatever).

Then in 4 months!!! he adds 150 lbs to his squat, 50 lbs to his bench and 85 lbs to his deadlift?!?! Wow!

What was he doing for 4 months? He only added 8 lbs of bodyweight, BTW.

I have hardly missed a workout in those 5 years. I've pushed hard too. I've done Sheikos and Smolovs and Starr 5x5s and 5-3-1 and I've added comparatively trivial amounts to my lifts. More bodyweight though.

So I don't want to know what Major Long did to ace the army tests, which he did, but what he did to increase his powerlifts and especially his squat, so much.

[homerj742]

"increasing my back squat from 365lbs to 515lbs"

God Damn...

I was thinking the same thing.

Interesting article, overall.

[Ryan Long]

I know. For me, that's the biggie. I've been training for nearly 7 years. I was roughly at his "before" 5 years ago, give or take, 365 lbs squat, 250 lbs bench, 405 lbs deadlift (my deadlift was actually around 450 lbs 5 years ago, but whatever).

Then in 4 months!!! he adds 150 lbs to his squat, 50 lbs to his bench and 85 lbs to his deadlift?!?! Wow!

What was he doing for 4 months? He only added 8 lbs of bodyweight, BTW.

I have hardly missed a workout in those 5 years. I've pushed hard too. I've done Sheikos and Smolovs and Starr 5x5s and 5-3-1 and I've added comparatively trivial amounts to my lifts. More bodyweight though.

So I don't want to know what Major Long did to ace the army tests, which he did, but what he did to increase his powerlifts and especially his squat, so much.

Thanks. I think in part this is just what I was meant to do. Which brings up an interesting point because if I'm a natural powerlifter and not yet near my potential than it stands to reason that I'm a natural non-runner, yet I can improve my run quickly with intervals. 13 years ago I ran my fastest 2 mile time of 12:20, but weighed only 150 pounds, that minute and a half isn't worth it, nor is it useful.

My powerlifting routine was pretty simple: squat on Monday, bench on Wednesday, deadlift on Friday, 3 weeks of progression followed by a deload week, 3 cycles. I usually did 1-2 assistance exercises based on what felt was the limiting factor during that training session.

I'm trying to train now while doing intervals concurrently twice a week and I'm way overtrained and making no progress, sometimes the job has to take priority over the hobby.

[damonwells]

Great stuff Ryan. I'll miss our workouts and discussions...

[Josh Ferguson]

Thanks for this great article! I'm going to include it in my proposal to my CO for buying us some bars and bumpers.

The Navy has finally realized that you must use resistance to make people strong enough to do their jobs. They will focus on "pillar" strength, I guess that is the same thing as "core" strength.

I had similar results with my PT test; I ran my best time ever after a Starting Strength.

[w_s_oliver]

Very insightful. MAJ Long echos the sentiments that probably most of us (SS forum members) in the military have. We train for strength and size (and the athletic benefit it generously provides us), and the Army/Navy/AF/CG, etc. wants it the other way around. Our collective combat experience has only shown that the former is more appropriate.

[Patrick L.]

One of the most useful articles posted here...

Sir, you are completely correct in that it is tough to balance the APFT and the real world physical demands of being a Soldier. Your article has definitely given me a blueprint on how to do this. Thanks...

Also, can you comment on your diet during both phases of your training? While on your strength phase and then the 4 weeks leading up to the APFT?

[Ryan Long]

Patrick,

During the lifting phase I ate everything in site until 5 days before the meet. I was drinking about 1/2 GOMAD, suplementing with protein, eggs and bacon most mornings, double fisting cheeseburgers, everything. I basically tried to eat to discomfort several times each day. (5000 cal/day?) Once I got to my running phase I just dialed it back to normal eating because of the discomfort of eating so much and bouncing around when running. My weight never dropped below 180 so I was still eating a healthy amount (3500 cal/day?)


One of the most useful articles posted here...

Sir, you are completely correct in that it is tough to balance the APFT and the real world physical demands of being a Soldier. Your article has definitely given me a blueprint on how to do this. Thanks...

Also, can you comment on your diet during both phases of your training? While on your strength phase and then the 4 weeks leading up to the APFT?

[TomF]

A Colonel I know in the Canadian forces commented on how the totally ripped metcon firebreathers, however strong they also are, have often turned out to be more fragile in the field. They might simply stomp things in training, but with such a low bodyfat percentage there's no cushion. When rations or water get restricted for more than a couple of days, these guys can crumple.

He's learned to trust that strong guys with a decent but slightly fatter body composition are a lot more resilient. Even if they look less like what currently passes for Photogenic Warrior.

[Chewie_jrc]

Great article! It's awesome that you're in a position that can hopefully influence the Army's physical training views.

[SSgt Boyle]

Good article Sir.

In the Marine Corps past.. our physical fitness test (PFT) was the norm w/ training.

In 2008 USMC instituted the combat fitness test (CFT) to make marines more well rounded for combat.

We take both tests each year. The training for both are entirely different. To excel at the CFT you need to be following a sound strength program w/ sprint type cardio...ie xfit type stuff.

I still think the PFT is more of a challange...3miles just sucks to run..haha.

But w/ the addition of both Ive noticed marines becomming more strength oriented in their training...which is always a good thing.

Maybe Army can do the same thing?

[Jason B]

Great article, couldn't say it better myself. The military is stuck in the 50's with their "PT" mentality though. Running thousands of miles and doing push-ups and sit-ups in the only way to "get fit." I've fought the battles, you try to explain to a military "PT" guru the idea of a strength foundation and maximal strength increasing other fitness qualities, and that there other exercises besides push-ups and sit-ups and watch their head explode from a lack of understanding.

I'm about 35 pounds overweight according to the AF, I don't care about getting taped, I take it as a badge of honor. I love it when I weigh more than the other people taking the test yet have a smaller waist (35 inches). And I love getting my blood numbers at my physical every year where the doc tells me they are outstanding, but my commander says I'm out of shape because of the arbitrary number on the scale.

I listen to people bitch all day in the office about "having to run tonight" and it makes me sick, I tell them I don't run a lick and they don't need to either if they don't enjoy it. "But I have to stay in shape" is usually the reply, I've learned to just leave it there because it's hopeless to try to convince them of what's wrong with that statement. I run the 1.5 mile test in the same time within 5 seconds every year without running AT ALL on my own, and I max out the push-ups and sit-ups easily giving me an excellent score (abover 90 out of 100).

What PT tests really need is pull-ups. That will seperate the weak from the strong, the fat from the muscular. No body measurements needed. If you can knock out a set of 20 pull-ups without stopping you're not overweight, I don't care what the scale says.

[KAG]

Great article. The exact same could be said for peace officer academies nation wide. Everyone seems to want their cops to have 30 inch waists, 10% body fat, and run a mile in 5 minutes, but they don't seem to care that these officers are getting beaten mercilessly when they catch these violent criminals who spend years of their lives lifting in prison.

[SixtySix]

Great article. The exact same could be said for peace officer academies nation wide. Everyone seems to want their cops to have 30 inch waists, 10% body fat, and run a mile in 5 minutes, but they don't seem to care that these officers are getting beaten mercilessly when they catch these violent criminals who spend years of their lives lifting in prison.

So true. The guy in my Academy class that was the "PT Superstar" was about 6'2" and 140 lbs. He did superb on the slow road jogs and the calisthenics, but he threw up and bitched the one time I convinced the training staff to let us do a sprint and bag drill instead of a four mile jog at five mph.

It drives me crazy that PDs seem to just blindly adopt the military fitness measurements instead of thinking it out. I've been in plenty of 100 yard foot pursuits, but I've never chased someone at a slow jog for 5 miles. Why do I train like that?

[KAG]

So true. The guy in my Academy class that was the "PT Superstar" was about 6'2" and 140 lbs. He did superb on the slow road jogs and the calisthenics, but he threw up and bitched the one time I convinced the training staff to let us do a sprint and bag drill instead of a four mile jog at five mph.

It drives me crazy that PDs seem to just blindly adopt the military fitness measurements instead of thinking it out. I've been in plenty of 100 yard foot pursuits, but I've never chased someone at a slow jog for 5 miles. Why do I train like that?

I agree 100%. I know a lot of guys who are light weight fast wirey guys who blow their yearly PT away, and several of them have gotten absolutely torn up on the side of the road. On the other hand I know a lot of larger slower men who occasionally have someone run from them but rarely have anyone fight with them and don't get hurt on the occasion that they do. Who would you rather fight? 6'0" 160lbs with a 30" waist,or 5'10" 200lbs with a 36" waist and a chest and legs to match?

[vulturesrow]

Thanks for this great article! I'm going to include it in my proposal to my CO for buying us some bars and bumpers.

The Navy has finally realized that you must use resistance to make people strong enough to do their jobs. They will focus on "pillar" strength, I guess that is the same thing as "core" strength.

I had similar results with my PT test; I ran my best time ever after a Starting Strength.

Josh,

As a fellow Navy bubba, I would offer that physical preparedness in the aerobic pathway for we squids is damn close to useless. I dont want the guy who weighs 135 soaking wet to pull me out of my airplane when its on fire. I weigh 225 and Im 6'2", I want a strong guy who can move me, who can throw me over his shoulder if necessary and get the hell out of dodge. I also want that strong guy on a hose team or wearing SCBA gear moving into a dark space to fight a fire. Frankly, the Navy PRT and general attitude towards fitness is a mess and Ive hated it from the first day I set foot in the Academy, well before I discovered the joy of strength training.

And dont even get me started on the way that we measure body fat percentage. According to the Navy I have 22% bodyfat. I would bet large sums of money that there is no way I am carrying that much fat on my body.

[OITW]

vulturesrow, I'm just the 6'2" 235lb sailor to pull you out of that burning aircraft.

I'll be right there as soon as I finish dancing with colored dumbbells in my morning FEP class. Because the Navy says I'm fat.

I see that you're only 1/2" away from joining me (a smidge smaller around the neck, a tad wider around the waist, or a pissed off guy with tape determined to screw you over). Whatever you do, don't lift anything that will add more muscle to your "core" or you'll be a fat boy, too.

Fock! I hate this system.

[Jonathus]

I liked the article, the parts that I could read at least. For some reason adobe gave me errors when I open that article and the formatting is all screwed up with large paragraphs missing. I also have the latest version of Adobe Reader so I'm not sure what the issue is. Can someone recommend a different way to read the full article?

Nonetheless I'd like to comment on the article. I'm glad someone at the top has an idea about how Army Strong really isn't. I can tell you that those of us on the ground work our asses of to stay far above APFT standards to meet the demands of our job.

I am a "Skinny Bastard". I'm 6'. I joined the Army at 135 pounds. I now weigh about 155 today. I spent some time in the 82nd as an infantryman before going on to bigger and better things. Most of those guys were also skinny. I remember our Battalion CSM mandating that everyone WILL run a minimum of 3 miles a day. I don't think anyone really did all that, but we tried. I became a hell of a runner (unlike today). We also did 'buddy carries', kit runs, kit runs with boots, and many other exercises that burn a ton of calories, get you tired, but don't really build strength efficiently. As a 145-lb infantryman I was still able to carry 200lb+ teammates. But I was also something of an anomaly. I'd get much stronger and not at all bigger when I ramped up my training. As of today I'm the smallest guy in my unit and there are maybe a handful of guys my size in my battalion. I can keep up, but I'm not where I'd like to be and that's a problem of my own making. But for so many other people in the military that are not so inclined to study, they must rely on the Army's PT program, which is flat out terrible.

Now I can tell you from friends I know that Army SF candidates 'in the pipeline' (training) do a shit-ton of rucking (walking/running with a rucksack/backpack) with a 70-lb ruck, running, and ungodly amounts of calisthenics. For a while SOPC (Special Operations Preparation Course) was harder than Scuba School. That is quite a feat. But still, there was little to no weight training officially incorporated. It just isn't done. The prevailing opinion is that weighlifting produces bulky, slow soldiers. And from experience I've seen many soldiers obviously in good shape yet huge due to serious lifting fail a tape test because their bodyweight is so high and they get flagged.

After all my years of exercise and working out, you'd think I'd be able to start a program of my own and make oodles of money like so many Navy SEALs. Not so. There are so many arguments and ideas about working out that it's all subjective in the minds of many. Cross-fit, Gym Jones and Military Athlete are the big ones these days. The only thing the Army taught me is that eating a shit-ton of food and doing a lot of stuff is the best way to get strong. I'm 30 and can still eat anything I want; I'll stay thin but in order to make gains I have to hit 6000 calories a day. My metabolism is both a blessing and a curse, really.

I did the Starting Strength workout for a while on deployment here, but found that I didn't know how to properly incorporate cardio and still see strength gains. On missions I'd get exhausted walking up hills because I typically had 80-100lbs of kit depending on loadout needs. I was so busy elsewhere I slacked off on coming up with a proper workout. I'm now horribly out of shape (but I can still pass the APFT, which is a joke).

The worst thing about the Army's PT program is that there is so much ignorance that has flowed downhill for so long. In 2004 when I first enlisted, the Army was doing a new PT program that involved several varieties of warm-up calisthenics that were absolutely ridiculous. It was low-intensity to the extreme and reasoning was so many civilians entering the military were out of shape. In 30th AG (in-processing prior to Basic Training) there were many guys who couldn't do the minimum 10 pushups and 10 situps and running test (I forget the standard on that one) to go on to Basic. Guys in my basic training class, however entered Basic in good shape and left smaller and weaker. Part of that is due to the food, but another part to weaker PT standards and a whole helluva lot of running.

Go into any Army gym and you'll see dozens of machines and one squat rack, even for some of the biggest gyms. It's aggravating. Making soldiers run to lose weight (instead of lifting and controlling your diet) is the Army's easy answer.

Sir you could write an entirely new article on food and the diet the military gives ya. Bacon and eggs every morning? Sure, why not.

[milktruckcopilot]

I'm currently stuck in TRADOC hell doing a reclass. PT is Mon-Fri. With Friday generally being considered "sports day". I manage to get in to the gym to lift on Fridays. I'm at the point to where I can only perform SS twice a week (Fri-Sun).

Even when given a "free" day, I still see the vast majority of soldiers choosing to either play volleyball or go to the gym and rush to the treadmills. The ones that attempt to lift end up doing a million reps and rush from station to station. Even with the free day I feel soldiers, especially IET are influenced to run their hearts out and cardio themselves to death.

As I said, Fridays I've been able to go to the gym and lift. Today was quite unique. I arrive early to formation when I hear, "Hey Chuck Taylor, you can't wear those shoes to run in." It was the Co First Sgt. "Do you have a pair of running shoes?" "You have 10 minutes, I suggest you get moving." Needless to say I went and changed. However I believe it shows that running is the priority and first and foremost in the minds of most of the cadre, commanders ect.

Just my .02

[Josh Ferguson]

vulturesrow,

When people come in my office, they'll probably see a picture of 70's Big's hall of fame, a list on the whiteboard of who in the division can do a muscle-up, and empty red-cap milk bottles in the trash. When they ask why, I say that I want to be able to carry the biggest dude in the building out if there's an emergency. So it made me happy when I read your comment. I don't really care about BCA anymore because I know I can lean out if I go strict Paleo for a month before the PFA (I think most people can).

In my quest to develop the most effective training program for myself in preparation for a sandbox deployment, I have a been keeping a log of physical actions common in military service, just a few:

Carrying/Pushing/Pulling things
Standing up or walking for long periods of time
Sprinting or running the length of the pier or a few blocks

All of these usually involve wearing lots of gear.

Will all Mil-Spec folks here provide their input on this (especially if you have some infantry-type experience)?

Mil Rx:

Get your 5 big lifts up to respectable poundages
Practice lots of carries (farmer's, firemen's)
Walk and do lots of push-ups and pull-ups with a heavy weight vest
Pull and push something heavy
Tread water with some extra weight

[Sean5424]

Mil Rx:

Get your 5 big lifts up to respectable poundages
Practice lots of carries (farmer's, firemen's)
Walk and do lots of push-ups and pull-ups with a heavy weight vest
Pull and push something heavy
Tread water with some extra weight

Everything sounds good up to the weighted water tread. Yeah, it sucks, but in terms of operational relevance, it rates just above zero-G pirouettes. Unless you're in a MarOps unit, where tank/weight belt/brick treads are part of dive school, there are better ways to get the same strength-endurance stimulus. If I'm in a situation where I have to tread water for any period of time (i.e. bailout/crash over water), I'm going to dump as much extra weight and possible and make my pants into a flotation device.

I'd replace the treading with short, weighted sprints from a variety of starting positions, i.e. kneeling, prone, etc. Good ol' IMT.

[Josh Ferguson]

Everything sounds good up to the weighted water tread. Yeah, it sucks, but in terms of operational relevance, it rates just above zero-G pirouettes. Unless you're in a MarOps unit, where tank/weight belt/brick treads are part of dive school, there are better ways to get the same strength-endurance stimulus. If I'm in a situation where I have to tread water for any period of time (i.e. bailout/crash over water), I'm going to dump as much extra weight and possible and make my pants into a flotation device.

I'd replace the treading with short, weighted sprints from a variety of starting positions, i.e. kneeling, prone, etc. Good ol' IMT.

I'll be at riverine squadron, so every mission will start/end with a boat ride.

Funny that you mention the sprints from different positions, I just implemented these in command PT a few weeks ago.

[John2336]

After 8 years of dealing with the Marine Corps standard of fitness, I've considered getting out rather than dealing with it. I've been nearly 25 pounds over my max since I've been in. I can also smoke check almost every "skinny fat" bastard out there in the Physical Fitness Test and Combat Fitness Test, but still I have to be taped (usually by an extremely overweight/alcoholic/wife beating S3 training guy who's getting kicked out for major issues)

Service members often take extreme measures to avoid being taped. Starvation, dehydration, and laxatives are the preferred methods by those who can't pass the standard. Many have dropped dead on base while using these methods to drop weight. The skinny fat guys can get away with being 5 pounds under their max even though they barely score a 2nd class Physical Fitness Test, while guys who get a perfect score on it face the loss of their career if they're 5 pounds over.

I've been in combat- and the skinny guys fall out first. My Gunny had to be removed from a hill during a firefight after being injured, and the armored coil of trucks was 2.5 kilometers away. My gunny is 6' 4'' and 240 pounds. Between me and a very stocky Mexican buddy, we got him there. We handed the skinny guy the metal detector to clear a path for us- he was suffering from the heat and having to wear all his gear.

I hope the Marine Corps and the other branches of the military learn the error of their ways soon. I think the infusion of Crossfit "boxes" on bases across the Corps has been great, but the Muscle Mag types and the Runners world types still hold the rank. They still call the shots. Eventually the dinosaurs will retire.

[OITW]

John, stick with it. The Corps needs you, obviously. FWIW, I sent Rip a piece of an MCIA brief on Afghanistan. Somewhere around slide 48, it discusses pursuit of the enemy in that environment, and says rather bluntly, "The ability to squat 300lbs matters more than scorching your PT test." All through these comments battle-tested men have recognized the importance of big men when the shit hits the fan. You're one of them. Screw the skinnies, you're important.

[bob g]

I forwarded this thread to the O7 who lives down the street to let the big dogs hear a bit of the heart felt stories of real world needs for strength along with fitness and all of the gamesmanship going on with the tapes.

[slowjoe]

I forwarded this thread to the O7 who lives down the street to let the big dogs hear a bit of the heart felt stories of real world needs for strength along with fitness and all of the gamesmanship going on with the tapes.

I assume an 07 is some grade of senior officer?

Stands to reason that physical training is infected with silly bullshit, like the rest of modern society. Don't know how much coverage it got, but apparently NOT drinking alcohol should have a health warning attached! See http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2014332,00.html

Any test of fitness for a rifleman that doesn't involve a test with body-armor, weapon, ammo and at least water carrier is SB. Any test that can be aced is SB. Any fitness test that doesn't allow for the big fucker that carries the extra ammo and the squad support weapon is SB. And any test that doesn't include a muscleup in gear (even just to set aspiration levels) is SB.

I think any soldier that can't squat the higher of 275lbs or 1.5BW is in the wrong job. For fuck sake, when things go south, and people get hurt, getting them out of there is the mission. You can't get them out, you aren't equipped for the mission.

[bob g]

Sorry for the jargon, O7 and above are general officers. O7 is a brigadier general or rear admiral.

[250orBust]

I think any soldier that can't squat the higher of 275lbs or 1.5BW is in the wrong job.

My platoon would be reduced to 2 men. myself and another who has done starting strength.

[slowjoe]

My platoon would be reduced to 2 men. myself and another who has done starting strength.

I'm only half-joking when I say that I think I've realised why the strict limits on bodyweight are imposed.

If anyone fully grown (like you) catches a bullet, none of the little boys would be able to carry you out of harm's way. Can't have that, and the solution is so simple...

[Age_of_Aquarius]

I believe it's the assault rifle and long range weapons which intimidate insurgents, not the 111 lb soldiers using them.
I mean even women can join the military these days. I think that's a good indication that physical strength just isn't necessary anymore.

Brute physical strength and size may have been important as a roman praetorian when hand to hand combat was a way of life but with our advanced technology, it's just not necessary for an army in this day and age.

[LondonTiger]

you have to look at the bigger picture.

The better solider is one that is smart, has good technique and can operate the equipment well. So getting guys in the gym working training them for months getting their squat up 20-30kg, is a huge waste of time, When the same time can be spent training them with assualt manouvers, getting their fitness levels up so they can run a mile with all their equipment on, rather than strength which doesnt trasnlate to much in the field.

What makes a navy seal better than an army corporal?? is it strength, or is it brains, skills, training, endurance etc?

[kjharris]

I believe it's the assault rifle and long range weapons which intimidate insurgents, not the 111 lb soldiers using them.
I mean even women can join the military these days. I think that's a good indication that physical strength just isn't necessary anymore.

Brute physical strength and size may have been important as a roman praetorian when hand to hand combat was a way of life but with our advanced technology, it's just not necessary for an army in this day and age.

Are you a soldier? Anyone who tells me that you don't need strength for a 15 mile ruck march is a fucking retard. Go put on my boots and my ruck and tell me that you don't need physical strength.


you have to look at the bigger picture.

The better solider is one that is smart, has good technique and can operate the equipment well. So getting guys in the gym working training them for months getting their squat up 20-30kg, is a huge waste of time, When the same time can be spent training them with assualt manouvers, getting their fitness levels up so they can run a mile with all their equipment on, rather than strength which doesnt trasnlate to much in the field.

What makes a navy seal better than an army corporal?? is it strength, or is it brains, skills, training, endurance etc?

Getting the squat up is not improving their overall fitness? I think getting my squat up another 20-30kg would greatly increase my ability to be able to run with all of my heavy gear on, my gear is supported in part by my legs after all. Also, comparing a Navy Seal to a Corporal in the Army is apples and oranges. Is this Corporal in the Infantry? Been to Ranger school? Or is he a finance Corporal?

[Ryan Long]

LT, I'm not trying to claim that skill, intelligence, or endurance aren't essential to performance in combat, I'm arguing that being stronger will enhance all other qualities useful in combat. I'm not interested in running a mile in kit, we don't tend to run miles in kit. We sprint short distances or walk long distances, being stronger will make both easier and will make the soldier more injury resistant in general. Conventional units are not resourced to spend every day on the range or in the field training, there is plenty of time to get stronger if it is valued by the command. Stronger is better.

AoA, of course firearms are a great equalizer, that's why I encourage women to concealed carry. But physical stature is helpful in combat. I've seen the way locals react to a small soldier and a big soldier, there is a difference. Read the article before you attempt to join the adults at the big boy table, I addressed in the article why strength is necessary. What is your qualification/experience to weigh in on this matter?


I believe it's the assault rifle and long range weapons which intimidate insurgents, not the 111 lb soldiers using them.
I mean even women can join the military these days. I think that's a good indication that physical strength just isn't necessary anymore.

Brute physical strength and size may have been important as a roman praetorian when hand to hand combat was a way of life but with our advanced technology, it's just not necessary for an army in this day and age.


you have to look at the bigger picture.

The better solider is one that is smart, has good technique and can operate the equipment well. So getting guys in the gym working training them for months getting their squat up 20-30kg, is a huge waste of time, When the same time can be spent training them with assualt manouvers, getting their fitness levels up so they can run a mile with all their equipment on, rather than strength which doesnt trasnlate to much in the field.

What makes a navy seal better than an army corporal?? is it strength, or is it brains, skills, training, endurance etc?

[Rorschach]

Strength and ability are hardly mutually exclusive.

[OITW]

AoA, get the fuck off this thread and leave it to those of us who are in this, have been there and done that. Tigger, I'm only going to be slightly more polite with you.

[Mark Rippetoe]

Good advice, O.

[Tad_T]

I believe it's the assault rifle and long range weapons which intimidate insurgents, not the 111 lb soldiers using them.
I mean even women can join the military these days. I think that's a good indication that physical strength just isn't necessary anymore.

Brute physical strength and size may have been important as a roman praetorian when hand to hand combat was a way of life but with our advanced technology, it's just not necessary for an army in this day and age.


you have to look at the bigger picture.

The better solider is one that is smart, has good technique and can operate the equipment well. So getting guys in the gym working training them for months getting their squat up 20-30kg, is a huge waste of time, When the same time can be spent training them with assualt manouvers, getting their fitness levels up so they can run a mile with all their equipment on, rather than strength which doesnt trasnlate to much in the field.

What makes a navy seal better than an army corporal?? is it strength, or is it brains, skills, training, endurance etc?

You ever tried to short track a tank that hit a mine and lost the compensating idler and the #1 roadwheel?

Ever had to cut down a tree with an ax so you could use it as a de-ditching log? Hooked that de-ditchng log up with tow cables ass deep in mud in the middle of the night? Unhooked it and drug it and the cables back around the tank, still ass deep in mud in the middle of the night, and hooked it all back up so you could get another bite? Did that three times to get the tank unbogged?

Drug tow cables out into the middle of a fast moving creek in the middle of December and had to work underwater on your knees with a D-handle shovel to dig down to the tow hooks to hook up the cables so that you could get the tank unstuck before that it settled enough so that the water got into the air cleaners and ruined a $250,000 engine?

Replaced one track that was thrown to the inside and one track that was thrown to the outside on a tank that slid sideways in the dark down a muddy hill into a creek?

Retracked a tank?

Replaced a #7 torsion bar?

Stabbed a final drive into a hull?

Humped ammo boxes all day on ammo detail?

Just in case you didn't know, all of these things get done with only hand tools and/or muscle power.

Did any of the above and then mounted up, with no sleep, did a forward passage of lines, went straight into a movement to contact, and assaulted an enemy battle position?

If you haven't, you don't know what you are talking about and you should STFU.

[John2336]

I believe it's the assault rifle and long range weapons which intimidate insurgents, not the 111 lb soldiers using them.
I mean even women can join the military these days. I think that's a good indication that physical strength just isn't necessary anymore.

Brute physical strength and size may have been important as a roman praetorian when hand to hand combat was a way of life but with our advanced technology, it's just not necessary for an army in this day and age.



Let me start off with the fact that I know this has been hit upon since he joined the forum, and that I'm a noob myself.

AoA, your stupidity (especially in this case) is offensive. I'm actually embarrassed for you. This might be a good arrangement since you seem to have no shame or control over the idiotic opinions in your head. Have you ever had to dig into a rock hard waffle field while taking fire exposed in the open in 135 degree weather? Have you ever had fireman carry a 230 pound Gunnery Sergeant 2500 meters off of a hill after he was knocked out and fragged by a 15 round slew of mortars? Have you ever had to drudge through fields and hills carrying 60 pounds plus of gear, and any additional gear you may take on as weaker people fall out? How about watching your 220 pound friend wrench a jammed AK from some 130 pound Talibs hands, kick him down, and crush his fucking skull? Size DOES matter, you moron.

Weak Marines and Soldiers are a LIABILITY. When the rest get sent out to fight, the weak and unfit often get stuck back on post with the head quarters element because it's a well known fact. Our superior weaponry is generally in the hands of the Air Force and Navy. Your statement may be true for those who fight battles through a videogame- like screen, but has no bearing on those of us on the ground.

By the way, females don't get sent into combat, they sit in the rear (no matter how capable) with all the weak minded and weak bodied men. Even the Female Engagement Teams (FET) who are supposed to do searches on female Afghanis, are usually sent to the chow halls to do head counts all day. Why? Because they're a distraction and a liability. Plus, no one wants to catch gonorrhea in the field. While I'm on this tangent- I worked with a 115 pound male Marine once back when I was a fire fighter. He got kicked out for failing to meet the mininum standards, and we never went off the friggin base!

I spent May-July of this year on the front lines with some of the hardest ass motherfuckers on the face of this earth until I was wounded. That's where my opinion is coming from. Did you get your information from "reading the stars" or "consulting the wisdom of sages from lost ages?" God you're a fucking idiot.

To the rest- my bad, that idiot just got my blood pressure up. I'm going to go do some squats...

[Ryan Long]

Tad, you had me at "did you ever try to short track a tank."

[Tad_T]

Thanks, sir.

What you doing up there? Are you a Tac Officer or something?

[John2336]

Dang, the moderator actually let that post...now I'm kind of embarrassed. Boy was I pissed off.

[Mark Rippetoe]

I thought it was useful. Your comments are helping us build a case for strength in the military. The douchebag you replied to is irrelevant.

[John2336]

Well, I appreciate that. There's no question that well rounded fitness based on a solid foundation of strength is paramount in the military. That's why your SS program and Crossfit has caught on so well. There will always be the lazy asses who slip through the cracks though.

I see the douchebag hasn't replied... that's unfortunate.

[ColoWayno]

I would just like to say that even as a civilian contractor that spends his time safe behind the wire, and not being worthy to lace up the boots of Tad, John, Ryan, O, Sarg81 or any of the other military guys here, it is a good feeling to know if something did happen in my vicinity while deployed I would possibly be a more useful human being to those who were in the area trying to deal with it. I'm pretty sure they don't have a remote control robot recovery scenario to deal with IDF casualties.
Also, when you hear there's a kidnapping threat inside the wire, it's good to know you aren't the easiest target around.

[OITW]

How about watching your 220 pound friend wrench a jammed AK from some 130 pound Talibs hands, kick him down, and crush his fucking skull? Size DOES matter, you moron.

SH! John, I'd heard this story from a Seabee I know out at that camp, I'm taking your account as independent confirmation. Good work.

[Dave_Allen]

+1 to ColoWayno. I've got an unofficial pool on when the first VBIED hits here on VBC. You should SEE the number of Iraqi POVs cruising around here these days... Unfortunately, it's not just the terrorists to worry about. A buddy of mine (skinny, 6'2" 175lbs "ultra" runner) got jumped by 3 guys in ACUs at about 2am one night...he was walking to the pisser and interrupted them doing something they didn't want anyone to see. So they beat the tar out of him. Dude had no upper body strength. As you say, Wayno, always good to NOT be the soft target... 3 on one might get most anyone, but guarantee if I got my hands on one, at least one wouldn't have gotten away...

[jgraham0331]

Sir,

I'm glad I came across your article and I'm glad to see someone else shares the opinion that scoring a 300 on the APFT doesn't mean jack shit anywhere but the PT Field. I'm an 11B Squad Leader and I've had that 111 pound soldier. He scored 290 and above every APFT and was pretty much untouchable because of it, but it took two other soldiers to put his ruck sack on him when we landed at Summerall. I always score 250 or above these days, but it's simply not good enough to the chain of command. Every day all I here is how I need to run more, lose weight, and get a 300. Nevermind that I can squat and deadlift 400 pounds. The APFT is a joke and I no longer take it seriously. I just do what's necessary to get a score and move on. It's my sincere hope that you and other like minded officers will push for an APFT change in the near future.

[Eric K]

Does anyone here have an idea on how we can fix this? Anyone know a congressman? I'm a captain in the Marines and I know that I can institute PT policies for my company, but I can't fight the Machine very effectively at my level. My Marines will fail to get promoted if the scale says they're overweight. My strongest squad leader in Iraq was a fucking bulldog. Strong as hell in both a physical sense and in his performance. I put him in for an award for his phenomenal work during the deployment and it was rejected because he "didn't look good in uniform." WTF? I once had this silly notion that the military and the Marines especially were more focused on performance and effectiveness in combat. I have certainly been disabused of that notion.

I know that everyone has beat on AoA already, but after MOMG I had kinda hoped he would stop trolling. I'd like to see you assert that your long-range rifle compensates for a lack of strength when your MRAP rolls over into a canal and you have to open the up-armored door from a funny angle as the vehicle lays on its side and you have a concussion, bruised or broken arm and all your gear on. Just waiting for someone else to open the door sounds less appealing when you're also under water. Of course, one need not have any military experience to actually understand this, I just suggest you wipe the shit off your eyes after you get your head out of your ass.

[dmoore817]

Sir,

I'm sure you have read this article (http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/11/army-pt-new-way-to-meaure-fitness-110610w/) on how the Lt. Gen Hertling is finishing revamping the Army PT test. It is my sincere hope that your article has made its way to his desk. I would hate the see the Army roll out a new test that doesn't address the fundamental problems of the previous test.

[REvans]

I just finished reading the book War by Sebastian Junger. Junger mentions a few times the fact that these infantryman are carrying heavy heavy loads up and down steep unforgiving terrain. It just makes sense that to be able to maintain in that environment is to be as strong as you possibly can.

At the bottom of page 74 Junger writes: "Wars are fought with very heavy machinery that works best on top of the biggest hill in the area and used against men who are lower down. That, in a nutshell, is military tactics, and it means that an enormous amount of war-fighting simply consists of carrying heavy loads uphill."

Thoughts?

[Thyge Riisgaard]

How many 800meters intervals were done per session? 4 (=3200m ~ 2 miles)?

[Ryan Long]

4 800 meter intervals done twice weekly. I'm heading into another cardio cycle at the end of January, I'll let yo know how it goes and how/if I modify things.

[Thyge Riisgaard]

4 800 meter intervals done twice weekly. I'm heading into another cardio cycle at the end of January, I'll let yo know how it goes and how/if I modify things.

That would be nice. My rugby pre-season training starts Feb 1st.

[benjock]

Muscle Mag types and the Runners world types still hold the rank. They still call the shots. Eventually the dinosaurs will retire.


Tracking this big guy. The PT test today, I believe, is a result of cold war era brass who had no wars to realize what was relevant and what was crap. Though most are out now, their legacy holds on and the dudes who know what the deal is are stuck until common sense kicks in hyper drive.

[BikeJAG]

My conclusion from my years of service has been that Soldiers don't know what they are doing when the go to the gym, their leaders are just as clueless, and the hierarchy is focused on statistics more than Soldier health and real fitness.

Compare the Army ultra-lean ideal picutred in prints by Don Stivers strewn all over Army posts which show historic uniforms on rail thin guys, with the Marines. Marines never seem to go anywhere without top quality weights and they have significantly more upper body strength than Soldiers. There is a huge disconnect between the knowledge base of the average Marine versus the average Soldier when it comes to fitness but the young troops only get that knowledge from their leaders. So if the leaders are dimwitted and ignorant it will only perpetuate a culture of ineptitude that will keep the high injury rate and low success rate of the fitness programs.

However, the frequent question "what's the solution" is not an easy one. I think there has been a lot of brainpower given to the physical training and the Army standards for a long time now without any real improvement. I've been in since '83 and have constantly had weight issues according to the table but never had anyone complain about me being able to carry two 100 pound artillery shells at a time, or hump an M-60 with a thousand rounds of ammo or any other combat related skill. As I'm older now and an officer I don't have to do all those things but when I was in Iraq it sure as hell helped to know how to work a machine gun. The best solution is to keep educating the Soldiers and as they turn into leaders they will know more and have influence. The Army PT culture developed over a long time, since the mass BS calisthenics of WW1 & 2 to today, and it will take time to fix that.

Keep up the good work guys!

Hooah!
MAJ Bill Whitman, JA USAR
US Army Forces Command
Fort McPherson, GA

[BigShot]

I'm late to this thread, but first... fantastic article. I'm non-military but the title grabbed me and I read it. I was so impressed I sent it to a friend of mine in the US Army. She got taped many times (at about 5' and carrying far more muscle than most women her size, taping was (probably still is) a regular for her) despite routinely kicking the collective arses of just about everyone in PT. She's only a Lt though so not gonna be able to fix anything for a while yet.

Also... there's something about the no-bullshit way of calling things as they are that the forces seem to produce. I approve. This thread has made for some fantastic reading.

Good luck fixing the system, folks.

[milktruckcopilot]

Interesting article from 70'sbig:


Recently there was an article in The Seattle Times about the devastating effects on US soldiers from carrying heavy ruck loads in combat (ARTICLE). The article details individual stories of young soldiers with chronic spinal arthritis as well as how musculoskeletal injuries have significantly increased since this war began. Depending on the branch and unit, loads vary anywhere from 70 to 130 pounds. The article calls for a significant “weight loss program” to reduce the average load carried by combat soldiers.


Unfortunately it isn’t realistic to ask an infantryman to carry less weight. How else would the team carry batteries, survival gear, food, water, ammunition, and necessary explosives with them in the field? Vehicles and even pack animals are used when they can be, but there are specific circumstances and specific units who have a mission that won’t allow help with carrying loads. The warriors will have to soldier on, as they say, in order to do what they need to do.


The article referenced several underweight infantrymen.
“I had a choice. But I couldn’t leave my squad behind just before they were being deployed,” said Staff Sgt. James Knower, a wiry, 155-pound soldier from Joint Base Lewis-McChord who served in Afghanistan for a year despite injuries to his arm and rotator cuff.


…


A rail-thin staff sergeant in the same platoon, 130-pound Kenneth Rickman, patrolled with armor and gear that typically weighed between 80 and 90 pounds.
There are several things wrong with a guy carrying 70% of his bodyweight all day, every day. First is the institution that put him in that position. Why would a 130 pound man be tasked with a job in infantry — one that specifically demands that the soldier carry heavy loads long distances on a daily basis? That infantryman may also need to carry classified equipment or, god forbid, another American soldier away from a dangerous situation. Trusting someone who is underweight, and inevitably under-strong, with these tasks is a fault of the institution.


Additionally, it’s a mistake to have a “cry for help” to try and reduce loads. Modern warfare demands significant amounts of equipment ranging from communications gear to mortar rounds and tubes. Realistically the loads won’t be reduced any time soon. Warfare and methods would need to adapt, and this environment of this current war (mountainous terrain in the middle of no where) limits technological adaptation to help a platoon move materials from one place to another. The trait that can be influenced in the short-term — one that will help improve the readiness and capability of the soldier as well as limit their potential for injury — is to have a stronger soldier.


A stronger soldier not only will be able to withstand the rigor of carrying 100 pounds on his back all day (and then dropping a small portion of it to engage an enemy followed by picking it back up and moving to the destination), but it will strengthen the structures to withstand the force and strain of heavy loads. Advocates that fight for the improvement of soldier safety (regarding carrying heavy loads) shouldn’t aim to reduce the load, but to prepare the soldier to handle those loads heavier. In reality, it’s the only thing that can be currently effected — focus on the variables that can actually be controlled.


Most of these young soldiers with withering spines were ill prepared for carrying such loads. It’s not that they didn’t have the experience of carrying loads (they do it in training), but that their structures — muscles, tendons, ligaments, and bones — were ill prepared to handle the ongoing stress. It’s one thing to increase the contractile force of your muscles, but it’s another thing to increase the density and capabilities of a structures. Bones will react and adapt to the forces that are placed on them, yet slamming them with 100+ pounds of compression forces without any chance to adapt will result in deteriorating mass and structural stability. Instead, soldiers should use a combination of overall strength training with safe ruck marching loads (sources recommend capping training ruck loads at 50 pounds). Squatting and deadlifting are perfect exercises for preparing the entire spinal column to withstand higher forces, and the training ruck marches can condition that strength for prolonged postural use.


A 130 pound — even 150 pound — guy who hasn’t increased the integrity of his musculoskeletal system is ill prepared for the rigor of deployed ruck handling. What actually should happen is under weight soldiers should be put on a strength training regime to increase their body weight to at least 180 pounds with compound, realistic movements that train the musculature and structures involved in a soldier’s job: squatting, deadlifting, pressing, and rowing. It isn’t realistic to begin or maintain a program in an institution like the military. It takes years for large-scale physical fitness trends to permeate, and they don’t have the means for all personnel to get adequately strong anyway. I should point out that doing a leg press or machine row is a poor substitute for effective training. The spine and hips need to be loaded similarly to how they’ll be loaded in the actual job, and that is stabilizing a load that is not constrained to a set track.


It’s unfortunate that many soldiers have lingering effects of courageously carrying massive loads when deployed. The Seattle Times article repeatedly references the musculoskeletal issues, especially on the spine. Good chiropractors that can treat spinal issues as well as the soft tissue surrounding the spinal column should be utilized to help treat battered soldiers. Additionally, they should have effective programs that progressively increase the capabilities of the injured structures to a point where they can handle a load again. Simple, yet intelligent, progressive overload principles over time compounded with skeletal and soft tissue manipulation can help treat these lingering injuries so that the soldiers don’t have to result to pain killers and narcotics to cope (see article).


Alas, changes in the institution’s system will be long, drawn out affairs if they happen at all — it’s just the nature of a large organization responsible for the defense of the United States. Instead, active and former soldiers would do well to educate themselves on how to properly prepare, cope, and rehab with the physical punishment associated with their job. Most veterans who read this site are “in the know” of how to train their body accordingly, but they’d do well to help their friends with these simple, yet helpful lessons. Take responsibility in helping who you can when they will listen. There are thousands and thousands of people around the world that train for the sole purpose of killing Americans, especially American soldiers. We don’t need our lack of proper strength training to kill our soldiers in the field, or slowly killing their spines years after seeing combat.

[milktruckcopilot]

Looks like the Army is closer to it's new PFT.

FORT JACKSON, S.C. – Sit-ups don't make a soldier, the Army has decided. So its 30-year-old fitness requirements are getting a battlefield-inspired makeover.

Soon every soldier will have to run on a balance beam with two 30-pound canisters of ammunition, drag a sled weighted with 180 pounds of sandbags and vault over obstacles while carrying a rifle. Those were just some of the tests the Army unveiled Tuesday as it moves toward making its physical training look more like combat.

Right now soldiers have to complete sit-ups, push-ups and a two-mile run twice a year within times that vary by age and gender. Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, the general in charge of the Army's initial military training, said he has been working to change that test for years.

Hertling said the current test "does not adequately measure components of strength, endurance, or mobility," or predict how well a soldier would do under fire.

A new annual "combat readiness" test includes running 400 meters — about a quarter of a mile — with a rifle, moving through an obstacle course in full combat gear, and crawling and vaulting over obstacles while aiming a rifle. Soldiers also will have to run on a balance beam while carrying 30-pound ammo boxes and do an agility sprint around a course field of cones.

Soldiers also will have to drag sleds weighted with sandbags to test their ability to pull a fallen comrade from the battlefield. The combat test might be given before deployments as well as annually, but that has not been decided.

The Army will keep elements of its old assessment in a "physical readiness" test, which adds such things as a 60-yard shuttle run and a standing long jump to one minute of push-ups and a 1.5-mile timed run. This might be given every six months, said Frank Palkoska, head of the Army's Fitness School at Fort Jackson.

Hertling said trials of the new program are starting this month at eight bases and the plan could be adopted Army-wide after reviews later this year.

Soldiers who ran the proposed "combat readiness" portion of the test Tuesday told reporters the exercises were tough, even for combat veterans.

Wearing a battle helmet and carrying a rifle, Staff Sgt. Timothy Shoenfelt teetered as he trod the balance beam, holding ammo tins in each hand. His pace slowed a bit as he dragged the green sled behind him, then held his M-4 steady as he strode sideways through the "point-move-aim" portion of the test."My quads are on fire!" the 31-year-old from Indiana, Pa., said afterward. "It really made me breathe hard and challenged a lot of muscle groups."

Wheeled vehicle mechanic and Sgt. 1st Class Cornelius Trammell, 33, of Eufaula, Ala., said it will be important for all soldiers to go through tests, even if their jobs are behind desks. He laughed when reporters commented on his sweaty face.
"You never know when you might need it, whether you are in the infantry or if you're a mechanic," said Trammell, who's been deployed three times.

The tests will be given to all soldiers and officers, including Army Reserves and National Guard, even those recalled soldiers who are now over 60, officials said. Specific gender and age standards are still being worked out, Palkoska said.

The shift follows other Army efforts to overhaul training, improve diets and help older soldiers keep fit. Hertling said the Army is trying to better prepare soldiers for the 40 to 70 pounds of weapons and body armor many of them need to carry in Afghanistan and Iraq.

"Soldiers like to be challenged. This will definitely challenge them," Hertling said.
The Army also is hoping to reduce injuries — both in the field and from repetitive exercises.
"This is about training smarter, not just training more," Hertling said.

Staff Sgt. Danica Foster, 28, of Brooklyn, N.Y., who pumped through a shuttle run and did push-ups for the "physical readiness" section, said the new tests will require soldiers to work on their upper body strength. Female soldiers will have to work to get them done, she said."I honestly believe, though, that if I can do this, anybody can," she said with a laugh.

Besides Fort Jackson, the program will be tested at Fort Leonard Wood, Mo.; Fort Benning, Ga.; Fort Sill, Okla.; Fort Bliss, Texas; Fort Bragg, N.C.; Fort Lewis, Wash.; and at the Army's military academy at West Point.

[artwebb]

I'll not say much here, as I am not and never was in the military, though I'm the only member of my family who wasn't.
I have, however, done some paramilitary type 'training' and what I saw there exactly reflected what has been said here. Running two or three miles in twelve to fifteen minutes pales in comparison to one short sprint up a hill with an 80+ pound pack on you, and I didn't even have to wear armour. Doing 80 pushups will do far less for pushing power than strength training will for endurance, if endurance is even all that important.
I think Pavel got it right when he blamed the lack of strength training in the military on the fact that "It's harder to make someone strong than it is to just smoke them" I'll also second that as our 'operations' stretched into days, not just minutes, all the runner's world types showed the strain the worst, going to guantness as the fat boys (me, for one) hardened and toughened up and bitched less and less, and i'm sure what we did pales in comparison to the real thing
All respect for those of you who serve, and thank you for your service.