Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

SeanRT

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Apr 28, 2008
344
1
Tulsa, Oklahoma
I'm a Personal Trainer and have been for a while.

I train personnel in the civilian sector as well as in the military sector. And one thing stands out to me when it comes to training your body for strength, endurance, etc. That is this: Getting "big" (i.e. mass, size, etc.) has its place, but not on the battlefield (and it has VERY limited applications in the civilian world as well, unless you're a body-builder).

If you're going for the "Arnold" look, that's fine. But beware; all that muscle takes a lot of maintenance and care (we're talking hours a day).

If you want to have functional strength (which is the kind of strength that you'll want in a combat situation or in most situations that you'll find yourself in, in my opinion) you need to work on explosive strength (plyometrics are great for this, if done correctly) and Anaerobic Endurance.

Okay, Okay; I know what you're thinking, "Anaerobic Endurance?! That's for women and people who practice Yoga!"
It is a truth that the words Anaerobic Endurance have been mislabeled by many to mean "womens' workout" or "something that your mother does in the gym." Most men are afraid to tell their buddies that they're NOT lifting massive amounts of weight in the gym every night. ANd why is this the case?
Because that's what society has taught us.

I did a tour in Iraq and believe me, when the chips are down and you have to haul your butt up a rope (using only your hands and legs, with no climbing equipment), or over a wall, or you have to run 4-5 miles with a 40-50 pound ruck, Anaerobic Endurance is the type of stregth that you'll want.

An example of training for Anaerobic Endurance is as follows:
EX: Instead of bench-pressing 200 pounds 8-10 times for 3 sets, drop your bench weight to 165-175 pounds and bench-press it 12-15 times for 4-5 sets. This will get your chest, shoulders, and triceps used to lifting NEARLY the same weight but for more sets and more reps/set.

Okay, so what does this do for you in a practical setting? The answer: everything (or nearly everything). You will burn more fatty tissue, which will lead to greater weight loss. You will see gains in muscle-tone. If your training is balanced and done correctly, you will also even see increases in muscle size; lean muscle, Anaerobic Endurance muscle.

If you're interested in gaining this fitness level take a look at P90X, Cross-Fit, or go talk to a personal trainer at your gym. Heck, talk to your muscle-bound buddy (everyone knows "that guy") for tips and help.

Happy Muscles!

-Mr300
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

Not exactly on topic, but closely related.

It's better to know how to fight that how strong you are.

Case in point. There was this guy who trains at the gym i used to work out at. He is fairly famous and has won a lot of bodybuilding contests. He's huge. He warms up with 150 pound dumbells for dumbell shoulder press. I saw him bench over 600 lbs and he has 23 inch arms. He weighs 315 off season and competes at a ripped 280.

A former navy seal/martial artist got in a fight with this guy and pounded the snot out of him. Broke his ankle, his wrist and the whole side of his face was black and blue.

After witnessing this, I gave martial arts some serious thought and decided strength was important, but not that important.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

I've seen a 120-pound-soaking-wet-2nd-LT bring a 200+ pound man (nearly) to tears during MACR-LVL 1 training. This wasn't because the LT was on crack, either. The LT was a Cross-Fit trainer and had years of experience in Anaerobic Endurance training.

He completely tired the guy out and then tore through him like a hot knife through butter.

Anaerobic Endurance is what you need during long bouts of combat, whether it be stand-up or ground-and-pound.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

I was witness to this while playing football. When I tried out for Jacksonville there was a defensive lineman there who was benching 415 for reps. Big and strong. Now he couldn't do shit on the field because he had no technique and that strength couldn't help him in "real world" applications.

However big, strong guys that also have anaerobic endurance will smoke check everyone.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mike</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> However big, strong guys that also have anaerobic endurance will smoke check everyone. </div></div>

The only problem with this is that it takes guys a LONG F***ING TIME and a lot of very hard work to get to this size and be in this shape. As you stated this guy was a football player. Some of the only people who can pull this off are those who are literally paid to workout (i.e. military, sports players, gymnasts, etc.).
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

Thanks for the info, I hate plyometrics simply because I have no endurance, but I know that's what I need.
I gonna have to try reducing the weight and get in more reps before my muscles give out..haha
thanks,
Sean
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Musicman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I hate plyometrics simply because I have no endurance, but I know that's what I need.</div></div>

No Problem, man.

And believe me, I understand. I hate 'em, too! HA HA!
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

Its often a huge missconception that big muscle bound guys are slow and lack agility and in alot of cases it is true but their are some big guys that will supprise the hell out of you.

I was alwas a big kid chubby most of my life but always very active , in martial arts of some sort or another from 6-7yrs old , and played football from 3rd grade up into a couple semi pro teams even at 315lbs and 20%BF i could run a couple miles non stop.

I still train some martial arts , yoga and do limited "arobic" activity but I'm a competitive body builder and constantly get tested by ALOT smaller guys that are under the impression that cause im big I must be slow or that body builders are weak and uncordinated , its always a learning experiance.

On the same note here where i live we have a SWCC boat unit stationd here and these "kids" are often looked down on as small or week but all of them are suprisingly strong for their size and a few of them were/are SEAL's and you don't get that their from being a weak pussy. World ranked MMA fighter Rich Clementi is a friend of mine and to look at him in person his not to impressive , not big by any means , not to lean unless he is preping for a fight , and alot of people that don't know him look at him like a 33yr old tatted up punk but he can inflect a tremendous amount of damage in a very short time , I've rolled with him a few time and even being 100lb heavier and twice as strong even somwhat trained to grappel i've nver beat him , I'm sure if it were an all out fight i could probably pound him out but damn and he isn't the problem , its the 20-30 "kids" that train with him and spar with him day in and day out , most of these guy are nothing to look at but they can throw down some serious ass beating when needed

I guess basicaly what i'm saying is never underestimate your opponent cause you never know who the hell your dealing with
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

The gist of this whole thread is functional strength vs being "HUGE." I want to say that there's nothing wrong with being huge.

I don't want people to think that huge guys are dumb and slow.
I know an old ex Marine Force Recon guy who is muscle packed on muscle which is under a thick layer of fat. He's nearly as big around (in girth) as he is tall. But that guy can sprint like no other, moves with the agility of a cat, and rock climbs with NO ROPES! Honestly, it's one of the most incredible things that I've ever seen.

The whole point of this is to build functional strength; if your idea of functional strength is to be 300 pounds of lean muscle, that's fine. Go for it. But for the vast majority of people functional strength is being that 150 pound guy who can kick any ass in the nearest bar.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

Being huge has nothing to do with your "fighting" skills. Big or small, if you have been training to fight, you will probably be able to fight better than someone who has not. And for all you 150 pound "fuctional" guys, you will get your ass kicked by some 300 pound guy who has trained to fight. If skill and training is the same, the bigger and stronger the better. Why do you think they have weight classes for wrestling, MMA, boxing?
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mr300</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mike</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> However big, strong guys that also have anaerobic endurance will smoke check everyone. </div></div>

The only problem with this is that it takes guys a LONG F***ING TIME and a lot of very hard work to get to this size and be in this shape. As you stated this guy was a football player. Some of the only people who can pull this off are those who are literally paid to workout (i.e. military, sports players, gymnasts, etc.).</div></div>

Indeed and fortunately I fell into this category playing football, rugby, and in a very physically demanding role in the military.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: himaster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not exactly on topic, but closely related.

It's better to know how to fight that how strong you are.

Case in point. There was this guy who trains at the gym i used to work out at. He is fairly famous and has won a lot of bodybuilding contests. He's huge. He warms up with 150 pound dumbells for dumbell shoulder press. I saw him bench over 600 lbs and he has 23 inch arms. He weighs 315 off season and competes at a ripped 280.

A former navy seal/martial artist got in a fight with this guy and pounded the snot out of him. Broke his ankle, his wrist and the whole side of his face was black and blue.

After witnessing this, I gave martial arts some serious thought and decided strength was important, but not that important. </div></div>


This is a great thread and topic. I used to train BJJ and MMA in the mid to late 90's long before it was popular. At the time, BJJ and submission grappling tournaments like NAGA didn't have a huge level of participation. Sometimes, because of a small turnout, there would only be 3 weight classes. I've had to compete against much larger and more muscular guys, but typically they would gas pretty quickly and lose. I can't say that their functional strength was lacking because some of these guys were so strong it was frightening, but to have freakish strength and endurance is pretty rare. It seems that adding large amounts of muscle mass to gain power and the added weight that comes with it, is relatively inefficient for strength/endurance activities. Having said that, everyone is different. I have come across really big guys who have great cardio, and really scrawny guys who are super strong. It probably just depends how they got there.

I had a tenant who was a champion bodybuilder, multiple Mr. (enter state name here... he had the trophies to prove it) He was about 6' and walked around at about 320 when not doing a show, he would cut to around 250-60 for competition. We were watching an old UFC at my house and he asked if a guy my size (5' 10 - 190) could do anything against a guy his size. Well, I got out the mats and showed him how easy it was to take him down and sub him. But again, this is a guy who was out of breath from just moving his furniture into his apartment and has no fighting skills whatsoever. He also admitted that he got his size from massive amounts of steroids, he would also use them to cut before a competition. However, I have gone up against guys who a pretty big, not bodybuilders but who know what they are doing on a mat and they killed me. As a general rule, if a guy is 20 + pounds heavier and knows something you might want to think twice about fighting them.

So functional strength vs big just boils down to what your "function" is. If you are participating in an activity that requires you to have endurance, strength, and agility, then the power lifter or body builder routine is probably not for you. if you are trying to be a body builder, then the plyos and cardio are probably not for you. I talk to the guys at my gym who do compete at national lifting events, they wear their funny lifting suits for squats and bench. They can't come close to doing the reps I can, but I can't come even remotely close to lifting the amount of weight they do... it hurts my joints just watching them.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

31508d1263371626-deadlifts-vs-squats-squats_vs_deadlifts.jpg


HIIT on non lifting days.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

Id much rather have functional strength over just being huge. Ive been a smaller guy pretty much my entire life. Im pretty wirey looking 5'11 150 almost all of my high school I was around 135 and competed in state powerlifting tournaments in the 135 weight class. I always wanted to get to the 200lb mark. So I started lifting really heavy, eating alot, supplements etc etc. I could never get over 165 but man I was ripped out and super strong. A few years later I started doing mma, bjj, muay thai, and training for that type of physical workouts. Very different method of training, mma in general is alot about timing and muscle memory. Sure strength is nice when your trying to stuff a take down, or pressing someone in the cage or trying to muscle out of a triangle or some sort of joint lock. But Ive rolled with several guys that should easily handle me, and in the street if someone had to take a bet I would be on the loosing end of the bet all the time. In BJJ its about what 'a' move does to set up 'b' move if 'a' fails, and 'c' move is setup by 'b' move if 'a' and 'b' fail etc etc. Its a fast pace chess match.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ouch!!</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Id much rather have functional strength over just being huge. Ive been a smaller guy pretty much my entire life. Im pretty wirey looking 5'11 150 almost all of my high school I was around 135 and competed in state powerlifting tournaments in the 135 weight class. I always wanted to get to the 200lb mark. So I started lifting really heavy, eating alot, supplements etc etc. I could never get over 165 but man I was ripped out and super strong. A few years later I started doing mma, bjj, muay thai, and training for that type of physical workouts. Very different method of training, mma in general is alot about timing and muscle memory. Sure strength is nice when your trying to stuff a take down, or pressing someone in the cage or trying to muscle out of a triangle or some sort of joint lock. But Ive rolled with several guys that should easily handle me, and in the street if someone had to take a bet I would be on the loosing end of the bet all the time. In BJJ its about what 'a' move does to set up 'b' move if 'a' fails, and 'c' move is setup by 'b' move if 'a' and 'b' fail etc etc. Its a fast pace chess match. </div></div>


"Without Knowledge, Skill cannot be focused. Without Skill, Strength cannot be brought to bear and without Strength, Knowledge may not be applied." - Alexander the Great's Chief Physician
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

P90X is no joke, I always had that "get big" mind set, and once i finally started gaining good weight after college, went from 150lbs to 200lbs (over the course of a few years) I started P90X and realized how much my cardio took a hurt from gaining the muscle and reducing my cardio. Now I dropped down to 180 and feel much better.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: gyr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BJJ is brasilian jiu jitsu? </div></div>

That is correct
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KansasMag</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your weight doesn't have much to do with your cardio. You could have felt the same at 200 if your training was proper </div></div>

Yeah, cardio and strength are two completely seperate energy pathways. Someone with more mass to manage will have to work all that much harder to compete via the oxygen pathway, but they'll have more power to work with. A happy medium should be the ideal, and that can only be found through working both abilities.

marathoner_sprinter2.png
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

I've trained all my life to gain more functional strength chin UPS are the ultimate uper body workout if you want more punching power but it needs to be backed up by cardiovascular workouts I like circuit training my self give slow medium and fast muscle twitch fibres all a workout and you will see some awesome results
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mike</div><div class="ubbcode-body">.
However big, strong guys that also have anaerobic endurance will smoke check everyone. </div></div>
This is very True.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Musicman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks for the info, I hate plyometrics simply because I have no endurance, but I know that's what I need.
I gonna have to try reducing the weight and get in more reps before my muscles give out..haha
thanks,
Sean </div></div>
not sure about your training methods but i use plyo's as a means for quick bursts, not endurance, don't get me wrong you can do a plyo workout for endurance, but your training fast twitch muscle fibers for totally different means. I do ladders, skip drills, box jumps, vertimax etc... focus on each set as an explosion, so when you hit the hole, or need that short quick burst its there to use, not to get through a set then hurry into the next drill to get a endurance workout, if you want endurance running/biking/incline treadmill is the way to go.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

Thanks Skinney, I'll take quick burst and endurance please..haha
I'll have to hit the bike and break out the treadmill.
We do a mix of P90X and Insanity, so I guess I need to schedule a time for some biking in there somewhere.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

ya, i wish we could take the quick burst and endurance, i like to see guys like you try hard at what they do, keep on keepin on, i haven't looked into the p90x stuff, i'm still too much of a steel eater, but from what i hear you should be gettin plenty of endurance with your mix!!!
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Musicman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks for the info, I hate plyometrics simply because I have no endurance, but I know that's what I need.
I gonna have to try reducing the weight and get in more reps before my muscles give out..haha
thanks,
Sean </div></div>

That's not the type of plyometrics he meant. Plyometrics are exercises that trigger the myotatic reflex. They load the muscle more than you could with a concentric exercise. This type of plyometric is an advanced exercise, and is very fatiguing on the nervous system.

To add to Mr300's post:

There are 7 main types of strength:

1. Starting Strength

2. Acceleration-Strength

3. Rate of Force Development (RFD)

4. Explosive Strength (Maximum RFD)

5. Maximum Strength

6. Strength-Endurance

7. Deceleration Strength

Depending on your goals, there are very specific ways of training these. The base of all strength is absolute strength, which you train when working trying to increase your maximum lifts. Once a strong foundation of absolute strength has been trained, you can then train the other forms of strength.

Additionally, it is possible to train both energy systems exclusively (aerobic and anaerobic, so you can run 5 miles aerobically, but not give up any of your fast twitch fibers that provide the absolute and explosive strength).
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

If you train to run 5 miles, it will hurt your absolute and explosive strength. That is why powerlifters, spinters, (olympic) weightlifters, high jumpers, and long jumpers never do any distance work. You can get better at both aerobic and anaerobic work, but it is a compromise. Getting really good at one hurts the other.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

Not so much on work out info as it is "useless facts" but I always thought how funny it was while at the same time being ahead of the curve that old school football players such as Bruce Smith use to do ballet in the off season. Picturing him in the shoes and tutu is hilarious but then again I was never a quarterback! I'm sure they never laughed.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mbgame80</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not so much on work out info as it is "useless facts" but I always thought how funny it was while at the same time being ahead of the curve that old school football players such as Bruce Smith use to do ballet in the off season. Picturing him in the shoes and tutu is hilarious but then again I was never a quarterback! I'm sure they never laughed. </div></div>

Exactly so. Thanks for the previous posts all. No one individual has all the answers when it comes to functional strength. What works for one person may not work as well for someone else. There is no "cookie-cutter" formula to build your functional level of strength. Yes, P90X and "that-other-workout-which-shall-not-be-named" will work for people with a beginning or intermediate level of conditioning and strength. Just be careful; your body is different from mine and from the other 6 billion people that comprise this planet earth.

In the end, it almost always comes down to this: training smart.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

Strength and Conditioning training is like this: as your strength and conditioning level increases, the window for training gets smaller. Up to a certain point, almost anything will increase your ability. As your ability increases, your training needs to get very specific. Most people will not get to this point, and if/when they do, the see it as a plateau that they can't get past.

Additionally, you CAN train your aerobic capacity if you stay below your anaerobic threshold and stay below that heart rate. That's the ideal way to minimize the impact on your fast twitch fibers. Running to meet a target heart rate is different than running 5 miles and trying to get fast at it.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

There are 3 muscle fiber types, and 3 ATP (energy) sources.

We'll start with the ATP sources:
ATP- PC System (Phosphagen system) - ATP on hand, followed by broken down creatine that converts ADP to ATP. Lasts about 10 seconds.
Anaerobic glycolysis (lactic acid) - Glycolitic System. Converts glycogen to glucose, which is broken down anaerobically for energy. Produces lactic acid. May last 10 seconds to 2 minutes, depending on the intensity of the exercise (heavy lifting for reps, about 40 seconds).
Aerobic - there are 3 stages: Glycolysis, The Krebs Cycle, and Oxidative Phosphorylation. This process is much more efficient, produces more ATP, and is much slower.

3 muscle fiber types:
Type I - slow twitch fibers. Lowest contraction speed. Energy source: Aerobic. They have a high aerobic capacity.
Type IIa - fast twitch fibers. moderate contraction speed. Energy source: Anaerobic and Aerobic. Can be used aerobically when trained to do so (good for bike road racers).
Type IIb - fast twitch fibers. highest contraction speed. Only used under extreme loads. Easily converted to Type IIa fibers, whether you want them to or not.

If you limit your training to under your aerobic capacity, you will minimize the transformation of type IIb fibers to type IIa fibers. Training up against and past the anerobic threshold converts fibers.

When I do aerobic exercise, ideally I only train the aerobic capacity of my Type I fibers, and don't hurt my anaerobic capacity of my Type IIa fibers.

Type IIb fibers are the most difficult to train (this is where the "window if training" gets very small). I'm hoping I can keep what I have!

If you've got questions, let me know. I'll be happy to explain how different training affects each system.

If I mis-typed, I'll come back and edit this later.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

Anaerobic threshhold can be tested on a treadmill, slowly increasing your heartrate, and drawing blood to test the lactate threshold. You can usually find someone who will do the test for $100 or so.

It's useful for endurance athletes. They're the main users of the test.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

Not currently.

I was an assistant strength and conditioning coach at the University of Houston for a couple years after I finished playing football there. My mentor is a big Mel Siff, Supertraining guy. The pro-day/combine workouts were very technical and calculated. It's amazing what the right workouts can do on elite college athletes in 10 weeks. We averageda a decreased 40 time drop of .2, increased vertical of 4", increased 225 lb bench rep of 5 reps.

I got into oil and gas when I realized there wasn't any money in strength coaching (though there is in personal training!). I've done some one on one training with some athletes in Houston, but I haven't devoted much time to it.

What clientele do you have?
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

Militaryathlete is who I trust my fitness to. I think Rob Shaul has functional fitness about as close to figured out as anyone Ive meet. I just wish he would include more running since the military is never going to move away from it.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Archangel3285</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Militaryathlete is who I trust my fitness to. I think Rob Shaul has functional fitness about as close to figured out as anyone Ive meet. I just wish he would include more running since the military is never going to move away from it. </div></div>

I've read about Mr. Shaul's training methods and he seems to be very knowledgeable.

Look, if you want to run more, just include some extra sprinting into your workout.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: uhcoog1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not currently.

I was an assistant strength and conditioning coach at the University of Houston for a couple years after I finished playing football there. </div></div>

When were you at Houston? I was heavily recruited there back in the late 80s.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: uhcoog1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mike-

Where did you end up playing? You missed Ware, Klingler, etc. Glory days.

2003-2006. </div></div>

Cal.

I was actually favoring Houston and took a recruiting trip there. I wasn't overly fond of the campus back then but the thought of playing football in Texas was enticing. What kept me away was there were rumors that the NCAA was going to come down on Coach Pardee and UH and I didn't want a part of it. Good thing too because the hammer dropped.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

Yeah, very good thing you went where you did.

It's amazing how the NCAA can set programs back the way they did. SMU is by far the worst. Houston got hurt by not getting in the Big 12- I'm sure Texas and A&M made the conference switch when they did in order to leave a few of us out. Oh well.
 
Re: Functional Strength VS Getting BIG

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: uhcoog1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yeah, very good thing you went where you did.

It's amazing how the NCAA can set programs back the way they did. SMU is by far the worst. Houston got hurt by not getting in the Big 12- I'm sure Texas and A&M made the conference switch when they did in order to leave a few of us out. Oh well.

</div></div>

Ironically SMU was beating my door down as well and I thought to myself I would quit football before going there. I am still amazed to this day that, not only has SMU not recovered, but they are completely floundering. It's really sad that such a storied program has never come out of the toilet.