PDA

View Full Version : what should a healthy person be able to lift?


B Walker
June 16th 04, 03:21 PM
I remember somewhere hearing that you should be able to bench press your
bodyweight.

Are there any similar guidelines for squat, shoulder press, lat pull
down? Perhaps a website or other resource?

I've been lifting since December, and I think I'm ready to start working
on some more specific goals (other than doing the exercises consistently
and working hard ;-).

My main goal is just to get in better general shape, I have no desire to
PL, and don't really compete in any sports (except shooting sports,
don't need specific muscles for that ;-).

Oh, I'm 35 if that matters..

Perhaps I'm asking the wrong question and there aren't any 'guidelines'
as such?

tia.

--
DoD# 2223, OFCC #3122
Meum scapha volitare plenum anguillae

Neil Gendzwill
June 16th 04, 04:15 PM
B Walker wrote:
> I remember somewhere hearing that you should be able to bench press your
> bodyweight.
>
> Are there any similar guidelines for squat, shoulder press, lat pull
> down? Perhaps a website or other resource?

Try: http://home.comcast.net/~joandbryce/hwgdami.htm

Neil

Neil Gendzwill
June 16th 04, 04:15 PM
B Walker wrote:
> I remember somewhere hearing that you should be able to bench press your
> bodyweight.
>
> Are there any similar guidelines for squat, shoulder press, lat pull
> down? Perhaps a website or other resource?

Try: http://home.comcast.net/~joandbryce/hwgdami.htm

Neil

B Walker
June 16th 04, 04:29 PM
Neil Gendzwill wrote:
> B Walker wrote:
>
>> I remember somewhere hearing that you should be able to bench press
>> your bodyweight.
>>
>> Are there any similar guidelines for squat, shoulder press, lat pull
>> down? Perhaps a website or other resource?
>
>
> Try: http://home.comcast.net/~joandbryce/hwgdami.htm

Thanks, that looks like what I was looking for.. should help with some
reasonable goals.


--
DoD# 2223, OFCC #3122
Meum scapha volitare plenum anguillae

B Walker
June 16th 04, 04:29 PM
Neil Gendzwill wrote:
> B Walker wrote:
>
>> I remember somewhere hearing that you should be able to bench press
>> your bodyweight.
>>
>> Are there any similar guidelines for squat, shoulder press, lat pull
>> down? Perhaps a website or other resource?
>
>
> Try: http://home.comcast.net/~joandbryce/hwgdami.htm

Thanks, that looks like what I was looking for.. should help with some
reasonable goals.


--
DoD# 2223, OFCC #3122
Meum scapha volitare plenum anguillae

Przypadek
June 16th 04, 05:00 PM
"Neil Gendzwill" > wrote in message
...
> B Walker wrote:
> > I remember somewhere hearing that you should be able to bench press your
> > bodyweight.
> >
> > Are there any similar guidelines for squat, shoulder press, lat pull
> > down? Perhaps a website or other resource?
>
> Try: http://home.comcast.net/~joandbryce/hwgdami.htm
>

Could this guide also apply to women or would it need some adjustments?

Przypadek
June 16th 04, 05:00 PM
"Neil Gendzwill" > wrote in message
...
> B Walker wrote:
> > I remember somewhere hearing that you should be able to bench press your
> > bodyweight.
> >
> > Are there any similar guidelines for squat, shoulder press, lat pull
> > down? Perhaps a website or other resource?
>
> Try: http://home.comcast.net/~joandbryce/hwgdami.htm
>

Could this guide also apply to women or would it need some adjustments?

Neil Gendzwill
June 16th 04, 05:24 PM
Przypadek wrote:

> Could this guide also apply to women or would it need some adjustments?

I suspect it would need some adjustments. For example, not many women
can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6 would probably be
a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just guessing). Keith mentioned
a while back that the world-class wrestler he trains can do 3. Maybe
there's some women highly adapted for rock climbing or gymnastics that
could do a bunch...


Neil

Neil Gendzwill
June 16th 04, 05:24 PM
Przypadek wrote:

> Could this guide also apply to women or would it need some adjustments?

I suspect it would need some adjustments. For example, not many women
can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6 would probably be
a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just guessing). Keith mentioned
a while back that the world-class wrestler he trains can do 3. Maybe
there's some women highly adapted for rock climbing or gymnastics that
could do a bunch...


Neil

DRS
June 16th 04, 05:31 PM
"Neil Gendzwill" > wrote in message

> Przypadek wrote:
>> Could this guide also apply to women or would it need some
>> adjustments?
>
> I suspect it would need some adjustments. For example, not many women
> can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6 would probably
> be a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just guessing). Keith
> mentioned a while back that the world-class wrestler he trains can do
> 3. Maybe there's some women highly adapted for rock climbing or
> gymnastics that could do a bunch...

Pullups seem to be something of a special case, whereby the weight and size
of the person matters greatly with larger (even though strong) people often
having difficulty while smaller and lighter people have less. I'm not that
big and I often do 4 to 6 pullups between squat sets simply as a way of
loosening up. Keith's world-class wrestler might be able to twist me into a
pretzel yet would clearly struggle to match me for pullups.

--

"I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as
equals."
Winston Churchill

DRS
June 16th 04, 05:31 PM
"Neil Gendzwill" > wrote in message

> Przypadek wrote:
>> Could this guide also apply to women or would it need some
>> adjustments?
>
> I suspect it would need some adjustments. For example, not many women
> can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6 would probably
> be a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just guessing). Keith
> mentioned a while back that the world-class wrestler he trains can do
> 3. Maybe there's some women highly adapted for rock climbing or
> gymnastics that could do a bunch...

Pullups seem to be something of a special case, whereby the weight and size
of the person matters greatly with larger (even though strong) people often
having difficulty while smaller and lighter people have less. I'm not that
big and I often do 4 to 6 pullups between squat sets simply as a way of
loosening up. Keith's world-class wrestler might be able to twist me into a
pretzel yet would clearly struggle to match me for pullups.

--

"I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as
equals."
Winston Churchill

Will
June 16th 04, 06:04 PM
In article >,
Ignoramus23926 > wrote:

> In article >, Neil Gendzwill wrote:
> > Przypadek wrote:
> >
> >> Could this guide also apply to women or would it need some adjustments?
> >
> > I suspect it would need some adjustments. For example, not many women
> > can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6 would probably be
> > a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just guessing). Keith mentioned
> > a while back that the world-class wrestler he trains can do 3. Maybe
> > there's some women highly adapted for rock climbing or gymnastics that
> > could do a bunch...
>
> One woman who is currently posting to alt.support.diet claims that she
> can do 5 pullups. She appears to be a mentally well balanced person,
> and is unlikely to be lying. She is very slim. I won't mention her
> name for privacy reasons.
>
> i

I've spotted a ~110 lb woman at my gym doing sets of 8-12 pullups with
10 lbs or so of added weight. She usually gets 7-9 on her own and I
help a tiny bit with the rest.

Will
June 16th 04, 06:04 PM
In article >,
Ignoramus23926 > wrote:

> In article >, Neil Gendzwill wrote:
> > Przypadek wrote:
> >
> >> Could this guide also apply to women or would it need some adjustments?
> >
> > I suspect it would need some adjustments. For example, not many women
> > can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6 would probably be
> > a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just guessing). Keith mentioned
> > a while back that the world-class wrestler he trains can do 3. Maybe
> > there's some women highly adapted for rock climbing or gymnastics that
> > could do a bunch...
>
> One woman who is currently posting to alt.support.diet claims that she
> can do 5 pullups. She appears to be a mentally well balanced person,
> and is unlikely to be lying. She is very slim. I won't mention her
> name for privacy reasons.
>
> i

I've spotted a ~110 lb woman at my gym doing sets of 8-12 pullups with
10 lbs or so of added weight. She usually gets 7-9 on her own and I
help a tiny bit with the rest.

Keith Hobman
June 16th 04, 06:08 PM
In article >, Ignoramus23926
> wrote:

> In article >, Neil Gendzwill wrote:
> > Przypadek wrote:
> >
> >> Could this guide also apply to women or would it need some adjustments?
> >
> > I suspect it would need some adjustments. For example, not many women
> > can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6 would probably be
> > a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just guessing). Keith mentioned
> > a while back that the world-class wrestler he trains can do 3. Maybe
> > there's some women highly adapted for rock climbing or gymnastics that
> > could do a bunch...
>
> One woman who is currently posting to alt.support.diet claims that she
> can do 5 pullups. She appears to be a mentally well balanced person,
> and is unlikely to be lying. She is very slim. I won't mention her
> name for privacy reasons.

Viola can do over 10 in a test, but we limit her to sets of three as Neil
says. However, these are done explosively with the concentric portion only
and also with unbalanced hand positions - almost like one-handed pull-ups
with some assistance from the other hand. This type of pull-up is more
specific to wrestling IMO.

So the idea is not to grunt out a pull-up, but to explosively pull
yourself over a height. Another thing we do is go to a climbing wall and
navigate the three section horizontally, up and down no more than 6 feet.

--
Dawn's cold kiss calls me
Forth I creep, blindly stumbling
Joy: Morning workouts.
Hugh Beyer's 'Haiku On Returning To Weights'

Keith Hobman
June 16th 04, 06:08 PM
In article >, Ignoramus23926
> wrote:

> In article >, Neil Gendzwill wrote:
> > Przypadek wrote:
> >
> >> Could this guide also apply to women or would it need some adjustments?
> >
> > I suspect it would need some adjustments. For example, not many women
> > can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6 would probably be
> > a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just guessing). Keith mentioned
> > a while back that the world-class wrestler he trains can do 3. Maybe
> > there's some women highly adapted for rock climbing or gymnastics that
> > could do a bunch...
>
> One woman who is currently posting to alt.support.diet claims that she
> can do 5 pullups. She appears to be a mentally well balanced person,
> and is unlikely to be lying. She is very slim. I won't mention her
> name for privacy reasons.

Viola can do over 10 in a test, but we limit her to sets of three as Neil
says. However, these are done explosively with the concentric portion only
and also with unbalanced hand positions - almost like one-handed pull-ups
with some assistance from the other hand. This type of pull-up is more
specific to wrestling IMO.

So the idea is not to grunt out a pull-up, but to explosively pull
yourself over a height. Another thing we do is go to a climbing wall and
navigate the three section horizontally, up and down no more than 6 feet.

--
Dawn's cold kiss calls me
Forth I creep, blindly stumbling
Joy: Morning workouts.
Hugh Beyer's 'Haiku On Returning To Weights'

Nikolai Michaleski
June 16th 04, 06:08 PM
B Walker wrote:

> I remember somewhere hearing that you should be able to bench press your
> bodyweight.
>
> Are there any similar guidelines for squat, shoulder press, lat pull
> down? Perhaps a website or other resource?
>
> I've been lifting since December, and I think I'm ready to start working
> on some more specific goals (other than doing the exercises consistently
> and working hard ;-).
>
> My main goal is just to get in better general shape, I have no desire to
> PL, and don't really compete in any sports (except shooting sports,
> don't need specific muscles for that ;-).
>
> Oh, I'm 35 if that matters..
>
> Perhaps I'm asking the wrong question and there aren't any 'guidelines'
> as such?

>
>
> tia.
>
> --
> DoD# 2223, OFCC #3122
> Meum scapha volitare plenum anguillae

I think "fit" must be defined before this question can be seriously asked.
What is fit? It's a pretty vague term up for a lot of interpretation. Some
consider fit to be a predominantly muscular state while most would consider
it a cardiovascular state. Maybe it's somewhere in between.

N

Nikolai Michaleski
June 16th 04, 06:08 PM
B Walker wrote:

> I remember somewhere hearing that you should be able to bench press your
> bodyweight.
>
> Are there any similar guidelines for squat, shoulder press, lat pull
> down? Perhaps a website or other resource?
>
> I've been lifting since December, and I think I'm ready to start working
> on some more specific goals (other than doing the exercises consistently
> and working hard ;-).
>
> My main goal is just to get in better general shape, I have no desire to
> PL, and don't really compete in any sports (except shooting sports,
> don't need specific muscles for that ;-).
>
> Oh, I'm 35 if that matters..
>
> Perhaps I'm asking the wrong question and there aren't any 'guidelines'
> as such?

>
>
> tia.
>
> --
> DoD# 2223, OFCC #3122
> Meum scapha volitare plenum anguillae

I think "fit" must be defined before this question can be seriously asked.
What is fit? It's a pretty vague term up for a lot of interpretation. Some
consider fit to be a predominantly muscular state while most would consider
it a cardiovascular state. Maybe it's somewhere in between.

N

Em
June 16th 04, 06:26 PM
Will wrote:

> In article >,
> Ignoramus23926 > wrote:
>
>
>>In article >, Neil Gendzwill wrote:
>>
>>>Przypadek wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Could this guide also apply to women or would it need some adjustments?
>>>
>>>I suspect it would need some adjustments. For example, not many women
>>>can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6 would probably be
>>>a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just guessing). Keith mentioned
>>>a while back that the world-class wrestler he trains can do 3. Maybe
>>>there's some women highly adapted for rock climbing or gymnastics that
>>>could do a bunch...
>>
>>One woman who is currently posting to alt.support.diet claims that she
>>can do 5 pullups. She appears to be a mentally well balanced person,
>>and is unlikely to be lying. She is very slim. I won't mention her
>>name for privacy reasons.
>>
>>i
>
>
> I've spotted a ~110 lb woman at my gym doing sets of 8-12 pullups with
> 10 lbs or so of added weight. She usually gets 7-9 on her own and I
> help a tiny bit with the rest.

I can do 6 pullups but then I am the 0.1% of the women at my gym that
squat.

My goal is a bodyweight squat but the problem is my bodyweight keeps
going up as I put on muscle.

Em
June 16th 04, 06:26 PM
Will wrote:

> In article >,
> Ignoramus23926 > wrote:
>
>
>>In article >, Neil Gendzwill wrote:
>>
>>>Przypadek wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Could this guide also apply to women or would it need some adjustments?
>>>
>>>I suspect it would need some adjustments. For example, not many women
>>>can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6 would probably be
>>>a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just guessing). Keith mentioned
>>>a while back that the world-class wrestler he trains can do 3. Maybe
>>>there's some women highly adapted for rock climbing or gymnastics that
>>>could do a bunch...
>>
>>One woman who is currently posting to alt.support.diet claims that she
>>can do 5 pullups. She appears to be a mentally well balanced person,
>>and is unlikely to be lying. She is very slim. I won't mention her
>>name for privacy reasons.
>>
>>i
>
>
> I've spotted a ~110 lb woman at my gym doing sets of 8-12 pullups with
> 10 lbs or so of added weight. She usually gets 7-9 on her own and I
> help a tiny bit with the rest.

I can do 6 pullups but then I am the 0.1% of the women at my gym that
squat.

My goal is a bodyweight squat but the problem is my bodyweight keeps
going up as I put on muscle.

Neil Gendzwill
June 16th 04, 06:26 PM
Keith Hobman wrote:

> Viola can do over 10 in a test, but we limit her to sets of three as Neil
> says.

Sounds like me - I can pull over 10, but I'll typically do sets of 3 and
try to be as explosive and get as high as I can. I superset them with
bodyweight dips (X5). But then, I'm a moderately fit middle-aged man
and she's a young world-class wrestler. So is my guesstimate of 6
pullups being a 99th percentile thing for women far wrong?

Neil

Neil Gendzwill
June 16th 04, 06:26 PM
Keith Hobman wrote:

> Viola can do over 10 in a test, but we limit her to sets of three as Neil
> says.

Sounds like me - I can pull over 10, but I'll typically do sets of 3 and
try to be as explosive and get as high as I can. I superset them with
bodyweight dips (X5). But then, I'm a moderately fit middle-aged man
and she's a young world-class wrestler. So is my guesstimate of 6
pullups being a 99th percentile thing for women far wrong?

Neil

Neil Gendzwill
June 16th 04, 06:39 PM
Em wrote:

> I can do 6 pullups but then I am the 0.1% of the women at my gym that
> squat.

And of the overall female population, some relatively small percentage
gets to the gym at all. You're probably stronger/fitter than 95% or
better. Just spit-ballin' here.

It would be really interesting to see all those targets expressed as
percentiles. I don't think they're even across the board. For most
guys who aren't horribly overweight, 6 pullups is pretty doable. But a
6 minute mile - that's a much harder target.

Neil

Neil Gendzwill
June 16th 04, 06:39 PM
Em wrote:

> I can do 6 pullups but then I am the 0.1% of the women at my gym that
> squat.

And of the overall female population, some relatively small percentage
gets to the gym at all. You're probably stronger/fitter than 95% or
better. Just spit-ballin' here.

It would be really interesting to see all those targets expressed as
percentiles. I don't think they're even across the board. For most
guys who aren't horribly overweight, 6 pullups is pretty doable. But a
6 minute mile - that's a much harder target.

Neil

BobMac
June 16th 04, 06:47 PM
B Walker wrote:
> Neil Gendzwill wrote:
>
>> Try: http://home.comcast.net/~joandbryce/hwgdami.htm
>
>
> Thanks, that looks like what I was looking for.. should help with some
> reasonable goals.
>
>
I particularly like the note: "Use this a guide and help, not as a
diabolical tool to beat yourself up over."

rm

BobMac
June 16th 04, 06:47 PM
B Walker wrote:
> Neil Gendzwill wrote:
>
>> Try: http://home.comcast.net/~joandbryce/hwgdami.htm
>
>
> Thanks, that looks like what I was looking for.. should help with some
> reasonable goals.
>
>
I particularly like the note: "Use this a guide and help, not as a
diabolical tool to beat yourself up over."

rm

ray miller
June 16th 04, 07:22 PM
>> Try: http://home.comcast.net/~joandbryce/hwgdami.htm
>
>Thanks, that looks like what I was looking for.. should help with some
>reasonable goals.

I've seen that site before - pretty useful.
I've set a goal of
bench press - 1*bw
deadlift - 1.5*bw
by christmas.

I have two advantages. First my BW is coming down, so it's getting
easier, and 2nd I'm a relative newbie so I'm still gaining if a little
slower than I was. so far I'm at 80% and 130% respectively.
I'm not unhappy about reaching the deadlift goal, but the bench goal
is going to be tricky.
Any suggestions on how to get there? Other than eat, lift, rest,
repeat :)

Ray

ray miller
June 16th 04, 07:22 PM
>> Try: http://home.comcast.net/~joandbryce/hwgdami.htm
>
>Thanks, that looks like what I was looking for.. should help with some
>reasonable goals.

I've seen that site before - pretty useful.
I've set a goal of
bench press - 1*bw
deadlift - 1.5*bw
by christmas.

I have two advantages. First my BW is coming down, so it's getting
easier, and 2nd I'm a relative newbie so I'm still gaining if a little
slower than I was. so far I'm at 80% and 130% respectively.
I'm not unhappy about reaching the deadlift goal, but the bench goal
is going to be tricky.
Any suggestions on how to get there? Other than eat, lift, rest,
repeat :)

Ray

Przypadek
June 16th 04, 07:49 PM
"Em" > wrote in message
. com...
> Will wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > Ignoramus23926 > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>In article >, Neil Gendzwill wrote:
> >>
> >>>Przypadek wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Could this guide also apply to women or would it need some
adjustments?
> >>>
> >>>I suspect it would need some adjustments. For example, not many women
> >>>can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6 would probably be
> >>>a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just guessing). Keith
mentioned
> >>>a while back that the world-class wrestler he trains can do 3. Maybe
> >>>there's some women highly adapted for rock climbing or gymnastics that
> >>>could do a bunch...
> >>
> >>One woman who is currently posting to alt.support.diet claims that she
> >>can do 5 pullups. She appears to be a mentally well balanced person,
> >>and is unlikely to be lying. She is very slim. I won't mention her
> >>name for privacy reasons.
> >>
> >>i
> >
> >
> > I've spotted a ~110 lb woman at my gym doing sets of 8-12 pullups with
> > 10 lbs or so of added weight. She usually gets 7-9 on her own and I
> > help a tiny bit with the rest.
>
> I can do 6 pullups but then I am the 0.1% of the women at my gym that
> squat.

Six sound great about the pull ups! I've only managed two, working on
improving that tho! Cool to hear about women doing so many.

> My goal is a bodyweight squat but the problem is my bodyweight keeps
> going up as I put on muscle.

Squats i'm much stronger at, my best 1RM so far has been 1.3 my bodyweight.
My lower body just seems to develop faster.

Przypadek
June 16th 04, 07:49 PM
"Em" > wrote in message
. com...
> Will wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > Ignoramus23926 > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>In article >, Neil Gendzwill wrote:
> >>
> >>>Przypadek wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Could this guide also apply to women or would it need some
adjustments?
> >>>
> >>>I suspect it would need some adjustments. For example, not many women
> >>>can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6 would probably be
> >>>a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just guessing). Keith
mentioned
> >>>a while back that the world-class wrestler he trains can do 3. Maybe
> >>>there's some women highly adapted for rock climbing or gymnastics that
> >>>could do a bunch...
> >>
> >>One woman who is currently posting to alt.support.diet claims that she
> >>can do 5 pullups. She appears to be a mentally well balanced person,
> >>and is unlikely to be lying. She is very slim. I won't mention her
> >>name for privacy reasons.
> >>
> >>i
> >
> >
> > I've spotted a ~110 lb woman at my gym doing sets of 8-12 pullups with
> > 10 lbs or so of added weight. She usually gets 7-9 on her own and I
> > help a tiny bit with the rest.
>
> I can do 6 pullups but then I am the 0.1% of the women at my gym that
> squat.

Six sound great about the pull ups! I've only managed two, working on
improving that tho! Cool to hear about women doing so many.

> My goal is a bodyweight squat but the problem is my bodyweight keeps
> going up as I put on muscle.

Squats i'm much stronger at, my best 1RM so far has been 1.3 my bodyweight.
My lower body just seems to develop faster.

Keith Hobman
June 16th 04, 07:53 PM
In article >, Neil Gendzwill
> wrote:

> Keith Hobman wrote:
>
> > Viola can do over 10 in a test, but we limit her to sets of three as Neil
> > says.
>
> Sounds like me - I can pull over 10, but I'll typically do sets of 3 and
> try to be as explosive and get as high as I can. I superset them with
> bodyweight dips (X5). But then, I'm a moderately fit middle-aged man
> and she's a young world-class wrestler. So is my guesstimate of 6
> pullups being a 99th percentile thing for women far wrong?

I sure don't know too many who can do that many. Mebbe 2-3 in the
wrestling club - and they really tend to be outliers genetically. So I
wouldn't argue with that number.

--
Dawn's cold kiss calls me
Forth I creep, blindly stumbling
Joy: Morning workouts.
Hugh Beyer's 'Haiku On Returning To Weights'

Keith Hobman
June 16th 04, 07:53 PM
In article >, Neil Gendzwill
> wrote:

> Keith Hobman wrote:
>
> > Viola can do over 10 in a test, but we limit her to sets of three as Neil
> > says.
>
> Sounds like me - I can pull over 10, but I'll typically do sets of 3 and
> try to be as explosive and get as high as I can. I superset them with
> bodyweight dips (X5). But then, I'm a moderately fit middle-aged man
> and she's a young world-class wrestler. So is my guesstimate of 6
> pullups being a 99th percentile thing for women far wrong?

I sure don't know too many who can do that many. Mebbe 2-3 in the
wrestling club - and they really tend to be outliers genetically. So I
wouldn't argue with that number.

--
Dawn's cold kiss calls me
Forth I creep, blindly stumbling
Joy: Morning workouts.
Hugh Beyer's 'Haiku On Returning To Weights'

Em
June 16th 04, 08:08 PM
Przypadek wrote:

> "Em" > wrote in message
> . com...
>
>>
>>I can do 6 pullups but then I am the 0.1% of the women at my gym that
>>squat.
>
>
> Six sound great about the pull ups! I've only managed two, working on
> improving that tho! Cool to hear about women doing so many.
>
>
>>My goal is a bodyweight squat but the problem is my bodyweight keeps
>>going up as I put on muscle.
>
>
> Squats i'm much stronger at, my best 1RM so far has been 1.3 my bodyweight.
> My lower body just seems to develop faster.
>

Wow...I am impressed. I had my ACL replaced 9 months ago so I am very
slowly working my squat weight up. 100 pounds is my short term goal.

I did find that I could add 10 pounds to my max (I am up to 85lbs...woo
hoo!) just by switching from wearing running shoes to flat bottom
sneakers.

Em
June 16th 04, 08:08 PM
Przypadek wrote:

> "Em" > wrote in message
> . com...
>
>>
>>I can do 6 pullups but then I am the 0.1% of the women at my gym that
>>squat.
>
>
> Six sound great about the pull ups! I've only managed two, working on
> improving that tho! Cool to hear about women doing so many.
>
>
>>My goal is a bodyweight squat but the problem is my bodyweight keeps
>>going up as I put on muscle.
>
>
> Squats i'm much stronger at, my best 1RM so far has been 1.3 my bodyweight.
> My lower body just seems to develop faster.
>

Wow...I am impressed. I had my ACL replaced 9 months ago so I am very
slowly working my squat weight up. 100 pounds is my short term goal.

I did find that I could add 10 pounds to my max (I am up to 85lbs...woo
hoo!) just by switching from wearing running shoes to flat bottom
sneakers.

A Ross
June 16th 04, 08:21 PM
In article >, Neil
Gendzwill > wrote:


> not many women
> can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6
> would probably be
> a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just guessing).
>
> Neil
>

<delurk>

Wow. I'm good. I do pullups on back day--usually two
sets of five, but I've done more when showing off...no
kipping.

Amy

</delurk>

A Ross
June 16th 04, 08:21 PM
In article >, Neil
Gendzwill > wrote:


> not many women
> can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6
> would probably be
> a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just guessing).
>
> Neil
>

<delurk>

Wow. I'm good. I do pullups on back day--usually two
sets of five, but I've done more when showing off...no
kipping.

Amy

</delurk>

A Ross
June 16th 04, 08:21 PM
In article >, Ignoramus23926
> wrote:

> In article >, Neil
> Gendzwill wrote:
> > Przypadek wrote:
> >
> >> Could this guide also apply to women or would it need
> >> some adjustments?
> >
> > I suspect it would need some adjustments. For
> > example, not many women
> > can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6
> > would probably be
> > a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just
> > guessing). Keith mentioned
> > a while back that the world-class wrestler he trains
> > can do 3. Maybe
> > there's some women highly adapted for rock climbing or
> > gymnastics that
> > could do a bunch...
>
> One woman who is currently posting to alt.support.diet
> claims that she
> can do 5 pullups. She appears to be a mentally well
> balanced person,
> and is unlikely to be lying. She is very slim. I won't
> mention her
> name for privacy reasons.
>
> i

Thanks, i.

Amy

A Ross
June 16th 04, 08:21 PM
In article >, Ignoramus23926
> wrote:

> In article >, Neil
> Gendzwill wrote:
> > Przypadek wrote:
> >
> >> Could this guide also apply to women or would it need
> >> some adjustments?
> >
> > I suspect it would need some adjustments. For
> > example, not many women
> > can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6
> > would probably be
> > a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just
> > guessing). Keith mentioned
> > a while back that the world-class wrestler he trains
> > can do 3. Maybe
> > there's some women highly adapted for rock climbing or
> > gymnastics that
> > could do a bunch...
>
> One woman who is currently posting to alt.support.diet
> claims that she
> can do 5 pullups. She appears to be a mentally well
> balanced person,
> and is unlikely to be lying. She is very slim. I won't
> mention her
> name for privacy reasons.
>
> i

Thanks, i.

Amy

Przypadek
June 16th 04, 08:38 PM
"Em" > wrote in message
. com...
> Przypadek wrote:
>
> > "Em" > wrote in message
> > . com...
> >
> >>
> >>I can do 6 pullups but then I am the 0.1% of the women at my gym that
> >>squat.
> >
> >
> > Six sound great about the pull ups! I've only managed two, working on
> > improving that tho! Cool to hear about women doing so many.
> >
> >
> >>My goal is a bodyweight squat but the problem is my bodyweight keeps
> >>going up as I put on muscle.
> >
> >
> > Squats i'm much stronger at, my best 1RM so far has been 1.3 my
bodyweight.
> > My lower body just seems to develop faster.
> >
>
> Wow...I am impressed. I had my ACL replaced 9 months ago so I am very
> slowly working my squat weight up. 100 pounds is my short term goal.

Thanks. It does make me quite happy to be able to squat around my body
weight. I think it's mostly my quads and calves that are freashly strong.
Lately, I've been trying to concentrate on my hamstrings and glutes. (Well,
and my back too... want to do more pull-ups!)

Slowly working up the weight sounds like the wise thing to do. I've got
problems with my lower back and that's my strategy with deadlifts. I suspect
I could 1RM my weight, but feel a bit safer just working up to it. I hate to
lose work out time, by pushing myself to hard and ending up with some injury
that requires rest and ice. ugh.

>
> I did find that I could add 10 pounds to my max (I am up to 85lbs...woo
> hoo!) just by switching from wearing running shoes to flat bottom
> sneakers.

interesting. thanks. i'll have to give that a try!

Przypadek
June 16th 04, 08:38 PM
"Em" > wrote in message
. com...
> Przypadek wrote:
>
> > "Em" > wrote in message
> > . com...
> >
> >>
> >>I can do 6 pullups but then I am the 0.1% of the women at my gym that
> >>squat.
> >
> >
> > Six sound great about the pull ups! I've only managed two, working on
> > improving that tho! Cool to hear about women doing so many.
> >
> >
> >>My goal is a bodyweight squat but the problem is my bodyweight keeps
> >>going up as I put on muscle.
> >
> >
> > Squats i'm much stronger at, my best 1RM so far has been 1.3 my
bodyweight.
> > My lower body just seems to develop faster.
> >
>
> Wow...I am impressed. I had my ACL replaced 9 months ago so I am very
> slowly working my squat weight up. 100 pounds is my short term goal.

Thanks. It does make me quite happy to be able to squat around my body
weight. I think it's mostly my quads and calves that are freashly strong.
Lately, I've been trying to concentrate on my hamstrings and glutes. (Well,
and my back too... want to do more pull-ups!)

Slowly working up the weight sounds like the wise thing to do. I've got
problems with my lower back and that's my strategy with deadlifts. I suspect
I could 1RM my weight, but feel a bit safer just working up to it. I hate to
lose work out time, by pushing myself to hard and ending up with some injury
that requires rest and ice. ugh.

>
> I did find that I could add 10 pounds to my max (I am up to 85lbs...woo
> hoo!) just by switching from wearing running shoes to flat bottom
> sneakers.

interesting. thanks. i'll have to give that a try!

Przypadek
June 16th 04, 08:45 PM
"A Ross" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Neil
> Gendzwill > wrote:
>
>
> > not many women
> > can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6
> > would probably be
> > a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just guessing).
> >
> > Neil
> >
>
> <delurk>
>
> Wow. I'm good. I do pullups on back day--usually two
> sets of five, but I've done more when showing off...no
> kipping.
>
> Amy
>
> </delurk>

That rocks! Certainly something to show off. :)

Przypadek
June 16th 04, 08:45 PM
"A Ross" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Neil
> Gendzwill > wrote:
>
>
> > not many women
> > can do much for pullups. The "fit guy" standard of 6
> > would probably be
> > a 99.9th percentile standard for women (just guessing).
> >
> > Neil
> >
>
> <delurk>
>
> Wow. I'm good. I do pullups on back day--usually two
> sets of five, but I've done more when showing off...no
> kipping.
>
> Amy
>
> </delurk>

That rocks! Certainly something to show off. :)

B Walker
June 16th 04, 08:56 PM
Przypadek wrote:
> "Em" > wrote in message
> . com...
>
>>Przypadek wrote:
>>
<snip>

>>Wow...I am impressed. I had my ACL replaced 9 months ago so I am very
>>slowly working my squat weight up. 100 pounds is my short term goal.
>
>
> Thanks. It does make me quite happy to be able to squat around my body
> weight. I think it's mostly my quads and calves that are freashly strong.
> Lately, I've been trying to concentrate on my hamstrings and glutes. (Well,
> and my back too... want to do more pull-ups!)

Is that full squat or just below parallel? I started squatting just
below parallel and right off I could 1RM about 80% bodyweight, but as
soon as I started full depth squatting (hams to calves).. yikes.. I'm a
whimp!

B Walker
June 16th 04, 08:56 PM
Przypadek wrote:
> "Em" > wrote in message
> . com...
>
>>Przypadek wrote:
>>
<snip>

>>Wow...I am impressed. I had my ACL replaced 9 months ago so I am very
>>slowly working my squat weight up. 100 pounds is my short term goal.
>
>
> Thanks. It does make me quite happy to be able to squat around my body
> weight. I think it's mostly my quads and calves that are freashly strong.
> Lately, I've been trying to concentrate on my hamstrings and glutes. (Well,
> and my back too... want to do more pull-ups!)

Is that full squat or just below parallel? I started squatting just
below parallel and right off I could 1RM about 80% bodyweight, but as
soon as I started full depth squatting (hams to calves).. yikes.. I'm a
whimp!

Przypadek
June 16th 04, 09:27 PM
"B Walker" > wrote in message
...
> Przypadek wrote:
> > "Em" > wrote in message
> > . com...
> >
> >>Przypadek wrote:
> >>
> <snip>
>
> >>Wow...I am impressed. I had my ACL replaced 9 months ago so I am very
> >>slowly working my squat weight up. 100 pounds is my short term goal.
> >
> >
> > Thanks. It does make me quite happy to be able to squat around my body
> > weight. I think it's mostly my quads and calves that are freashly
strong.
> > Lately, I've been trying to concentrate on my hamstrings and glutes.
(Well,
> > and my back too... want to do more pull-ups!)
>
> Is that full squat or just below parallel? I started squatting just
> below parallel and right off I could 1RM about 80% bodyweight, but as
> soon as I started full depth squatting (hams to calves).. yikes.. I'm a
> whimp!

nah, you're not a whimp. only if you believe it anyway. ;)

no, not a full squat, unfortunately. just below parallel i'd say. and it
just was a very good day. :) my usual squat weights hover around my body
weight depending on what i'm doing. And I can't say i've ever tried a 1RM
full squat tho. Getting out of that low point is the killer for me. Trying
to get some practice with more comfortable weights. And to strech my hams
and glutes every day, that really seems to help.

Przypadek
June 16th 04, 09:27 PM
"B Walker" > wrote in message
...
> Przypadek wrote:
> > "Em" > wrote in message
> > . com...
> >
> >>Przypadek wrote:
> >>
> <snip>
>
> >>Wow...I am impressed. I had my ACL replaced 9 months ago so I am very
> >>slowly working my squat weight up. 100 pounds is my short term goal.
> >
> >
> > Thanks. It does make me quite happy to be able to squat around my body
> > weight. I think it's mostly my quads and calves that are freashly
strong.
> > Lately, I've been trying to concentrate on my hamstrings and glutes.
(Well,
> > and my back too... want to do more pull-ups!)
>
> Is that full squat or just below parallel? I started squatting just
> below parallel and right off I could 1RM about 80% bodyweight, but as
> soon as I started full depth squatting (hams to calves).. yikes.. I'm a
> whimp!

nah, you're not a whimp. only if you believe it anyway. ;)

no, not a full squat, unfortunately. just below parallel i'd say. and it
just was a very good day. :) my usual squat weights hover around my body
weight depending on what i'm doing. And I can't say i've ever tried a 1RM
full squat tho. Getting out of that low point is the killer for me. Trying
to get some practice with more comfortable weights. And to strech my hams
and glutes every day, that really seems to help.

B Walker
June 16th 04, 09:44 PM
Przypadek wrote:
> "B Walker" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Przypadek wrote:
>>
>>>"Em" > wrote in message
. com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Przypadek wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>><snip>
>>
>>>>Wow...I am impressed. I had my ACL replaced 9 months ago so I am very
>>>>slowly working my squat weight up. 100 pounds is my short term goal.
>>>
>>>
>>>Thanks. It does make me quite happy to be able to squat around my body
>>>weight. I think it's mostly my quads and calves that are freashly
>>
> strong.
>
>>>Lately, I've been trying to concentrate on my hamstrings and glutes.
>>
> (Well,
>
>>>and my back too... want to do more pull-ups!)
>>
>>Is that full squat or just below parallel? I started squatting just
>>below parallel and right off I could 1RM about 80% bodyweight, but as
>>soon as I started full depth squatting (hams to calves).. yikes.. I'm a
>>whimp!
>
>
> nah, you're not a whimp. only if you believe it anyway. ;)
>
> no, not a full squat, unfortunately. just below parallel i'd say. and it
> just was a very good day. :) my usual squat weights hover around my body
> weight depending on what i'm doing. And I can't say i've ever tried a 1RM
> full squat tho. Getting out of that low point is the killer for me. Trying
> to get some practice with more comfortable weights. And to strech my hams
> and glutes every day, that really seems to help.

Whew ;-).. I went from 2x12 of about 50% bodyweight (when I started)..
right back to a 45# bar only when I started full squats ;-)... There's
an eye-opener.


--
DoD# 2223, OFCC #3122
Meum scapha volitare plenum anguillae

B Walker
June 16th 04, 09:44 PM
Przypadek wrote:
> "B Walker" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Przypadek wrote:
>>
>>>"Em" > wrote in message
. com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Przypadek wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>><snip>
>>
>>>>Wow...I am impressed. I had my ACL replaced 9 months ago so I am very
>>>>slowly working my squat weight up. 100 pounds is my short term goal.
>>>
>>>
>>>Thanks. It does make me quite happy to be able to squat around my body
>>>weight. I think it's mostly my quads and calves that are freashly
>>
> strong.
>
>>>Lately, I've been trying to concentrate on my hamstrings and glutes.
>>
> (Well,
>
>>>and my back too... want to do more pull-ups!)
>>
>>Is that full squat or just below parallel? I started squatting just
>>below parallel and right off I could 1RM about 80% bodyweight, but as
>>soon as I started full depth squatting (hams to calves).. yikes.. I'm a
>>whimp!
>
>
> nah, you're not a whimp. only if you believe it anyway. ;)
>
> no, not a full squat, unfortunately. just below parallel i'd say. and it
> just was a very good day. :) my usual squat weights hover around my body
> weight depending on what i'm doing. And I can't say i've ever tried a 1RM
> full squat tho. Getting out of that low point is the killer for me. Trying
> to get some practice with more comfortable weights. And to strech my hams
> and glutes every day, that really seems to help.

Whew ;-).. I went from 2x12 of about 50% bodyweight (when I started)..
right back to a 45# bar only when I started full squats ;-)... There's
an eye-opener.


--
DoD# 2223, OFCC #3122
Meum scapha volitare plenum anguillae

Neil Gendzwill
June 16th 04, 10:17 PM
Keith Hobman wrote:

> I sure don't know too many who can do that many. Mebbe 2-3 in the
> wrestling club - and they really tend to be outliers genetically. So I
> wouldn't argue with that number.

I don't know if there are any numbers available. There are some numbers
for fitness testing at exrx.net. I was bored today so I made some
little tables (use fixed width fonts to see). 99+ means the last number
before the percentile calculator rolled over to 100, basically the best
surveyed.

For pushups, doing as many as you can (females from the knees
unfortunately):

% of pop:50 75 90 95 99+
------------------------
M 25 yo: 39 49 58 63 78
M 40 yo: 27 37 46 51 66
F 25 yo: 28 46 63 72 99
F 40 yo: 15 29 42 50 71

For situps, doing as many as you can in 60 sec, ankles braced:

% of pop:50 75 90 95 99+
------------------------
M 25 yo: 39 44 49 51 59
M 40 yo: 29 34 39 51 49
F 25 yo: 35 40 45 47 52
F 40 yo: 24 29 34 36 44

I was also curious about that mile run, so I pulled out the WAVA
numbers. WAVA is a method of predicting performance with age for track
and field events. I used the calculator at
http://www.personal.rdg.ac.uk/~snsgrubb/athletics/wavalookup.html, there
are lots of others around.

As the percentages get higher, they get really close to the best times.
A 75th percentile person WAVA is way beyond the 75th percentile of the
general population IMNSHO. The 99th percentile numbers are only a couple
seconds off of world records. Maybe some of the running geeks out there
know how this translates to the general population.

% of pop: 50 75 90 95 99
---------------------------------
M 25 yo: 7:28 4:59 4:10 3:56 3:46
M 40 yo: 7:52 5:15 4:22 4:09 3:59
F 25 yo: 8:18 5:32 4:37 4:22 4:12
F 40 yo: 8:50 5:53 4:54 4:39 4:27


Neil

Neil Gendzwill
June 16th 04, 10:17 PM
Keith Hobman wrote:

> I sure don't know too many who can do that many. Mebbe 2-3 in the
> wrestling club - and they really tend to be outliers genetically. So I
> wouldn't argue with that number.

I don't know if there are any numbers available. There are some numbers
for fitness testing at exrx.net. I was bored today so I made some
little tables (use fixed width fonts to see). 99+ means the last number
before the percentile calculator rolled over to 100, basically the best
surveyed.

For pushups, doing as many as you can (females from the knees
unfortunately):

% of pop:50 75 90 95 99+
------------------------
M 25 yo: 39 49 58 63 78
M 40 yo: 27 37 46 51 66
F 25 yo: 28 46 63 72 99
F 40 yo: 15 29 42 50 71

For situps, doing as many as you can in 60 sec, ankles braced:

% of pop:50 75 90 95 99+
------------------------
M 25 yo: 39 44 49 51 59
M 40 yo: 29 34 39 51 49
F 25 yo: 35 40 45 47 52
F 40 yo: 24 29 34 36 44

I was also curious about that mile run, so I pulled out the WAVA
numbers. WAVA is a method of predicting performance with age for track
and field events. I used the calculator at
http://www.personal.rdg.ac.uk/~snsgrubb/athletics/wavalookup.html, there
are lots of others around.

As the percentages get higher, they get really close to the best times.
A 75th percentile person WAVA is way beyond the 75th percentile of the
general population IMNSHO. The 99th percentile numbers are only a couple
seconds off of world records. Maybe some of the running geeks out there
know how this translates to the general population.

% of pop: 50 75 90 95 99
---------------------------------
M 25 yo: 7:28 4:59 4:10 3:56 3:46
M 40 yo: 7:52 5:15 4:22 4:09 3:59
F 25 yo: 8:18 5:32 4:37 4:22 4:12
F 40 yo: 8:50 5:53 4:54 4:39 4:27


Neil

Keith Hobman
June 16th 04, 10:54 PM
In article >, Neil Gendzwill
> wrote:

> Keith Hobman wrote:
>
> > I sure don't know too many who can do that many. Mebbe 2-3 in the
> > wrestling club - and they really tend to be outliers genetically. So I
> > wouldn't argue with that number.
>
> I don't know if there are any numbers available. There are some numbers
> for fitness testing at exrx.net. I was bored today so I made some
> little tables (use fixed width fonts to see). 99+ means the last number
> before the percentile calculator rolled over to 100, basically the best
> surveyed.
>
> For pushups, doing as many as you can (females from the knees
> unfortunately):
>
> % of pop:50 75 90 95 99+
> ------------------------
> M 25 yo: 39 49 58 63 78
> M 40 yo: 27 37 46 51 66
> F 25 yo: 28 46 63 72 99
> F 40 yo: 15 29 42 50 71
>
> For situps, doing as many as you can in 60 sec, ankles braced:
>
> % of pop:50 75 90 95 99+
> ------------------------
> M 25 yo: 39 44 49 51 59
> M 40 yo: 29 34 39 51 49
> F 25 yo: 35 40 45 47 52
> F 40 yo: 24 29 34 36 44

We did a bunch of these tests for a Kinesiology lab I was doing. I
basically fudged on all of them - I'd find out the 99th percentile number
and then shoot for that and quit when I made it. Except for the grip test,
where the grip device only went up to 140 kgs or something like that,
which I could bury.

For most of the resistance or bodyweight exercises it wasn't really tough
to get that high. But there is no way I could even come close to those
running numbers.

--
Dawn's cold kiss calls me
Forth I creep, blindly stumbling
Joy: Morning workouts.
Hugh Beyer's 'Haiku On Returning To Weights'

Keith Hobman
June 16th 04, 10:54 PM
In article >, Neil Gendzwill
> wrote:

> Keith Hobman wrote:
>
> > I sure don't know too many who can do that many. Mebbe 2-3 in the
> > wrestling club - and they really tend to be outliers genetically. So I
> > wouldn't argue with that number.
>
> I don't know if there are any numbers available. There are some numbers
> for fitness testing at exrx.net. I was bored today so I made some
> little tables (use fixed width fonts to see). 99+ means the last number
> before the percentile calculator rolled over to 100, basically the best
> surveyed.
>
> For pushups, doing as many as you can (females from the knees
> unfortunately):
>
> % of pop:50 75 90 95 99+
> ------------------------
> M 25 yo: 39 49 58 63 78
> M 40 yo: 27 37 46 51 66
> F 25 yo: 28 46 63 72 99
> F 40 yo: 15 29 42 50 71
>
> For situps, doing as many as you can in 60 sec, ankles braced:
>
> % of pop:50 75 90 95 99+
> ------------------------
> M 25 yo: 39 44 49 51 59
> M 40 yo: 29 34 39 51 49
> F 25 yo: 35 40 45 47 52
> F 40 yo: 24 29 34 36 44

We did a bunch of these tests for a Kinesiology lab I was doing. I
basically fudged on all of them - I'd find out the 99th percentile number
and then shoot for that and quit when I made it. Except for the grip test,
where the grip device only went up to 140 kgs or something like that,
which I could bury.

For most of the resistance or bodyweight exercises it wasn't really tough
to get that high. But there is no way I could even come close to those
running numbers.

--
Dawn's cold kiss calls me
Forth I creep, blindly stumbling
Joy: Morning workouts.
Hugh Beyer's 'Haiku On Returning To Weights'

Neil Gendzwill
June 16th 04, 11:15 PM
Keith Hobman wrote:

> We did a bunch of these tests for a Kinesiology lab I was doing. I
> basically fudged on all of them - I'd find out the 99th percentile number
> and then shoot for that and quit when I made it. Except for the grip test,
> where the grip device only went up to 140 kgs or something like that,
> which I could bury.
>
> For most of the resistance or bodyweight exercises it wasn't really tough
> to get that high. But there is no way I could even come close to those
> running numbers.

I'm about 90th percentile for my age on the situp/pushup thing, but
those running numbers are way out of my league. I'm pretty sure I could
break 7 minutes for a mile as I can keep up a 6:40 pace for over 3
minutes (that's what I use right now for intervals) but beyond that...
World record time is 3:43.13, WAVA 99% is 3:46. Ambitious much?

Neil

Neil Gendzwill
June 16th 04, 11:15 PM
Keith Hobman wrote:

> We did a bunch of these tests for a Kinesiology lab I was doing. I
> basically fudged on all of them - I'd find out the 99th percentile number
> and then shoot for that and quit when I made it. Except for the grip test,
> where the grip device only went up to 140 kgs or something like that,
> which I could bury.
>
> For most of the resistance or bodyweight exercises it wasn't really tough
> to get that high. But there is no way I could even come close to those
> running numbers.

I'm about 90th percentile for my age on the situp/pushup thing, but
those running numbers are way out of my league. I'm pretty sure I could
break 7 minutes for a mile as I can keep up a 6:40 pace for over 3
minutes (that's what I use right now for intervals) but beyond that...
World record time is 3:43.13, WAVA 99% is 3:46. Ambitious much?

Neil

Keith Hobman
June 16th 04, 11:27 PM
In article >, Neil Gendzwill
> wrote:

> Keith Hobman wrote:
>
> > We did a bunch of these tests for a Kinesiology lab I was doing. I
> > basically fudged on all of them - I'd find out the 99th percentile number
> > and then shoot for that and quit when I made it. Except for the grip test,
> > where the grip device only went up to 140 kgs or something like that,
> > which I could bury.
> >
> > For most of the resistance or bodyweight exercises it wasn't really tough
> > to get that high. But there is no way I could even come close to those
> > running numbers.
>
> I'm about 90th percentile for my age on the situp/pushup thing, but
> those running numbers are way out of my league. I'm pretty sure I could
> break 7 minutes for a mile as I can keep up a 6:40 pace for over 3
> minutes (that's what I use right now for intervals) but beyond that...
> World record time is 3:43.13, WAVA 99% is 3:46. Ambitious much?

I wonder if they are referring to genetic potential.

Way more than 1/1,000 women have the potential to do 6 or more pull-ups.
But the reality is probably close to that.

--
Dawn's cold kiss calls me
Forth I creep, blindly stumbling
Joy: Morning workouts.
Hugh Beyer's 'Haiku On Returning To Weights'

Keith Hobman
June 16th 04, 11:27 PM
In article >, Neil Gendzwill
> wrote:

> Keith Hobman wrote:
>
> > We did a bunch of these tests for a Kinesiology lab I was doing. I
> > basically fudged on all of them - I'd find out the 99th percentile number
> > and then shoot for that and quit when I made it. Except for the grip test,
> > where the grip device only went up to 140 kgs or something like that,
> > which I could bury.
> >
> > For most of the resistance or bodyweight exercises it wasn't really tough
> > to get that high. But there is no way I could even come close to those
> > running numbers.
>
> I'm about 90th percentile for my age on the situp/pushup thing, but
> those running numbers are way out of my league. I'm pretty sure I could
> break 7 minutes for a mile as I can keep up a 6:40 pace for over 3
> minutes (that's what I use right now for intervals) but beyond that...
> World record time is 3:43.13, WAVA 99% is 3:46. Ambitious much?

I wonder if they are referring to genetic potential.

Way more than 1/1,000 women have the potential to do 6 or more pull-ups.
But the reality is probably close to that.

--
Dawn's cold kiss calls me
Forth I creep, blindly stumbling
Joy: Morning workouts.
Hugh Beyer's 'Haiku On Returning To Weights'

Em
June 16th 04, 11:49 PM
B Walker wrote:

> Przypadek wrote:
>
>> "Em" > wrote in message
>> . com...
>>
>>> Przypadek wrote:
>>>
> <snip>
>
>>> Wow...I am impressed. I had my ACL replaced 9 months ago so I am very
>>> slowly working my squat weight up. 100 pounds is my short term goal.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks. It does make me quite happy to be able to squat around my body
>> weight. I think it's mostly my quads and calves that are freashly strong.
>> Lately, I've been trying to concentrate on my hamstrings and glutes.
>> (Well,
>> and my back too... want to do more pull-ups!)
>
>
> Is that full squat or just below parallel? I started squatting just
> below parallel and right off I could 1RM about 80% bodyweight, but as
> soon as I started full depth squatting (hams to calves).. yikes.. I'm a
> whimp!
>

Mine is a full squat. If I don't go through the full range of motion my
knee gets all wonky.

I just about fell over the other day when one of the personal trainers
complimented me on my "great low squat". The other trainers either
avoid me or try to convince me to only squat to parallel.

Em
June 16th 04, 11:49 PM
B Walker wrote:

> Przypadek wrote:
>
>> "Em" > wrote in message
>> . com...
>>
>>> Przypadek wrote:
>>>
> <snip>
>
>>> Wow...I am impressed. I had my ACL replaced 9 months ago so I am very
>>> slowly working my squat weight up. 100 pounds is my short term goal.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks. It does make me quite happy to be able to squat around my body
>> weight. I think it's mostly my quads and calves that are freashly strong.
>> Lately, I've been trying to concentrate on my hamstrings and glutes.
>> (Well,
>> and my back too... want to do more pull-ups!)
>
>
> Is that full squat or just below parallel? I started squatting just
> below parallel and right off I could 1RM about 80% bodyweight, but as
> soon as I started full depth squatting (hams to calves).. yikes.. I'm a
> whimp!
>

Mine is a full squat. If I don't go through the full range of motion my
knee gets all wonky.

I just about fell over the other day when one of the personal trainers
complimented me on my "great low squat". The other trainers either
avoid me or try to convince me to only squat to parallel.

Mistress Krista
June 17th 04, 12:07 PM
"Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
...
> Way more than 1/1,000 women have the potential to do 6 or more pull-ups.


I would think so too. I think it's also a matter of directed training. I've
never met a woman who couldn't do at least one pullup after training
specifically for it. The heaviest woman I've seen do a pullup was in the
neighbourhood of 190 lbs.

The most I've ever done is 9. Normally I use sets of 5. But now, it seems,
I have a project to work on.


Krista

--
http://www.stumptuous.com/weights.html
http://www.trans-health.com
mistresskrista at stumptuous dot com

Mistress Krista
June 17th 04, 12:07 PM
"Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
...
> Way more than 1/1,000 women have the potential to do 6 or more pull-ups.


I would think so too. I think it's also a matter of directed training. I've
never met a woman who couldn't do at least one pullup after training
specifically for it. The heaviest woman I've seen do a pullup was in the
neighbourhood of 190 lbs.

The most I've ever done is 9. Normally I use sets of 5. But now, it seems,
I have a project to work on.


Krista

--
http://www.stumptuous.com/weights.html
http://www.trans-health.com
mistresskrista at stumptuous dot com

A Ross
June 17th 04, 12:28 PM
In article >, Ignoramus23926
> wrote:


> >> One woman who is currently posting to
> >> alt.support.diet
> >> claims that she
> >> can do 5 pullups. She appears to be a mentally well
> >> balanced person,
> >> and is unlikely to be lying. She is very slim. I
> >> won't
> >> mention her
> >> name for privacy reasons.
> >>
> >> i
> >
> > Thanks, i.
> >
> > Amy
>
> did not know you were posting here...
>
> i

I'm not.

A Ross
June 17th 04, 12:28 PM
In article >, Ignoramus23926
> wrote:


> >> One woman who is currently posting to
> >> alt.support.diet
> >> claims that she
> >> can do 5 pullups. She appears to be a mentally well
> >> balanced person,
> >> and is unlikely to be lying. She is very slim. I
> >> won't
> >> mention her
> >> name for privacy reasons.
> >>
> >> i
> >
> > Thanks, i.
> >
> > Amy
>
> did not know you were posting here...
>
> i

I'm not.

the black rose
June 17th 04, 05:46 PM
Neil Gendzwill wrote:
> For situps, doing as many as you can in 60 sec, ankles braced:
>
> % of pop:50 75 90 95 99+
> ------------------------
> F 40 yo: 24 29 34 36 44

Ow. And I was so pleased with myself yesterday when I finally managed a
set of 8 proper crunches. 24 in 60 secs, no way.

*sigh*

I'll get there. Just gotta work at it.

--
the black rose, wench with a wrench
proud to be owned by a yorkie
http://community.webshots.com/user/blackrosequilts

the black rose
June 17th 04, 05:46 PM
Neil Gendzwill wrote:
> For situps, doing as many as you can in 60 sec, ankles braced:
>
> % of pop:50 75 90 95 99+
> ------------------------
> F 40 yo: 24 29 34 36 44

Ow. And I was so pleased with myself yesterday when I finally managed a
set of 8 proper crunches. 24 in 60 secs, no way.

*sigh*

I'll get there. Just gotta work at it.

--
the black rose, wench with a wrench
proud to be owned by a yorkie
http://community.webshots.com/user/blackrosequilts

Rob Beattie
June 23rd 04, 07:03 PM
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 16:15:55 -0600, Neil Gendzwill
> wrote:

>Keith Hobman wrote:
>
>> We did a bunch of these tests for a Kinesiology lab I was doing. I
>> basically fudged on all of them - I'd find out the 99th percentile number
>> and then shoot for that and quit when I made it. Except for the grip test,
>> where the grip device only went up to 140 kgs or something like that,
>> which I could bury.
>>
>> For most of the resistance or bodyweight exercises it wasn't really tough
>> to get that high. But there is no way I could even come close to those
>> running numbers.
>
>I'm about 90th percentile for my age on the situp/pushup thing, but
>those running numbers are way out of my league. I'm pretty sure I could
>break 7 minutes for a mile as I can keep up a 6:40 pace for over 3
>minutes (that's what I use right now for intervals) but beyond that...
>World record time is 3:43.13, WAVA 99% is 3:46. Ambitious much?
>
>Neil

There has only been 3 people who have ever run 3:46 or under in the
entire recorded history of the human race. So the actual percentile
would probably be something like 99.99999999999999............

Even a sub 4 minute is very rare and can only be done by athletes who
train full time. For 99.0% I would say maybe 4:30 - 4:45.

Rob Beattie
June 23rd 04, 07:03 PM
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 16:15:55 -0600, Neil Gendzwill
> wrote:

>Keith Hobman wrote:
>
>> We did a bunch of these tests for a Kinesiology lab I was doing. I
>> basically fudged on all of them - I'd find out the 99th percentile number
>> and then shoot for that and quit when I made it. Except for the grip test,
>> where the grip device only went up to 140 kgs or something like that,
>> which I could bury.
>>
>> For most of the resistance or bodyweight exercises it wasn't really tough
>> to get that high. But there is no way I could even come close to those
>> running numbers.
>
>I'm about 90th percentile for my age on the situp/pushup thing, but
>those running numbers are way out of my league. I'm pretty sure I could
>break 7 minutes for a mile as I can keep up a 6:40 pace for over 3
>minutes (that's what I use right now for intervals) but beyond that...
>World record time is 3:43.13, WAVA 99% is 3:46. Ambitious much?
>
>Neil

There has only been 3 people who have ever run 3:46 or under in the
entire recorded history of the human race. So the actual percentile
would probably be something like 99.99999999999999............

Even a sub 4 minute is very rare and can only be done by athletes who
train full time. For 99.0% I would say maybe 4:30 - 4:45.