Military Fitness Brainstorming

SIG said:
I would be very interested in getting opinions from the users of this forum in relation to PT tests and how relevant they are to job/task specificity. I appreciate I'm a new arrival, but I've been lurking on this site for a while and have seen some great discussions!

My opinion is that most forces PT tests don't replicate the demands of the job or the fitness capacities used in their jobs and are out of date.

First, most police forces entry and annual fitness tests tend to revlove around push ups, sit ups and 1.5 mile run. Any time I've been on duty I've never had to run at a steady pace, with no change of direction, for 1.5 miles. Likewise, dealing with violent prisoners requires total body strength and power. Push ups and sit ups do not replicate the situation or the force required.

Secondly, tests like APFT require good levels of muscular endurance and aerobic power, yet a soldier will need to carry heavy loads for lengthy periods of time (strength), short sprints to cover (anaerobic) etc.

-Judging by the introduction of the RAW and Tactical Athlete Programmes, SOF and other units seems to be switching to job specific PT and PT tests.-

I have been reading through the threads in here and most if not all users partake in Crossfit, Military Athlete, Starting Strength, Wendler etc. I'd imagine you all feel these better prepare you for your indivdual jobs as opposed to just calisthenics and running!?

A high score in the APFT and other similiar tests will mean you are physically fit, but, do you think it transfers to fit for job? Obviously, a large organisation that needs new bodies on a regular basis will want simple, easy to administer PT tests. But with the advent of Crossfit etc., why not introduce functional movement screens, strength/power tests etc to new entrants?

What are your opinions on PT tests and their relevance to your job?
Click to expand...

I think a base line standard fitness test is appropriate for a snap shot of fitness across the board, I see it as more of an administrative tool (I.e. promotions, unit readiness, unit evaluation). But I think most would agree that job specific fitness is more important and normally not properly represented in the yearly fitness test.

Specifically from my experience as a grunt, soldiers need to be able to carry their weight in equipment at varying distances 8-12 miles, cross country (not just hard balling it). After they should be capable of running 1-2 miles in full battle rattle, to a weapon qual, be able to qualify, and then sprint another 500 meters to an assault house, conduct a live fire assault correctly, and than be able to proper asses and provide first aid, then evacuate a casualty by streatcher 500 meters off of the objective.

I think that would be a more accurate evaulation of fitness and weapons qual, building assault and casualty evacuation.
 
I don't think any branch claims that their PT tests replicate anything. It's just a baseline test used to asses someone's definition of "overall" physical fitness.
 
An interesting study carried out on SEALs to see the relationship between certain lab tests and tactical fitness tests.. the latter seem functional and job specific e.g. 300 yd dash, weighted pull ups. They refer to them as 'tactically relevant tasks'. It's interesting because it suggests that these lab tests compliment job specific training. I'd be interested to see a similiar study carried out using an APFT type test. I'd imagine shoulder, knee and lumbar strength would not correlate as well with push ups and sit ups. It would also be interesting to see vo2 and lactacte correlating with 2 mile run.

http://www.pitt.edu/~neurolab/publications/2013/Abstracts/K.F.Allison_ACSM2013_Final.pdf
 
SkrewzLoose said:
I don't think any branch claims that their PT tests replicate anything. It's just a baseline test used to asses someone's definition of "overall" physical fitness.
Click to expand...
Do the PT tests cover ''overall'' fitness (i.e. speed, agility, strength, anaerobic etc)? This is my point. Current PT tests are designed to assess a certain type of fitness(traditional - running and cals), with the assumption that that fitness transfers to job performance. Surely specificity should be the rule of thumb once personnel are in the job?

We've all seen guys and girls who can absolutely destroy 2 mile runs, but what are they like when climbing a 6ft wall with 60lbs of gear for example. My own experience is that when I was training for a marathon earlier this year, my best 2 mile test time was 12.15. I could run, but I could not do more than a few weighted pull ups. Which is more likely to arise in work?
 
SIG said:
Do the PT tests cover ''overall'' fitness (i.e. speed, agility, strength, anaerobic etc)? This is my point. Current PT tests are designed to assess a certain type of fitness(traditional - running and cals), with the assumption that that fitness transfers to job performance. Surely specificity should be the rule of thumb once personnel are in the job?

We've all seen guys and girls who can absolutely destroy 2 mile runs, but what are they like when climbing a 6ft wall with 60lbs of gear for example. My own experience is that when I was training for a marathon earlier this year, my best 2 mile test time was 12.15. I could run, but I could not do more than a few weighted pull ups. Which is more likely to arise in work?
Click to expand...

You want the real answer? PT tests are used as a means to numerically evaluate soldiers competing for promotion or schools. Also, it is used as a reason to get rid of under-performing soldiers.
 
goon175 said:
You want the real answer? PT tests are used as a means to numerically evaluate soldiers competing for promotion or schools. Also, it is used as a reason to get rid of under-performing soldiers.
Click to expand...
I never thought otherwise but this could still be done using job specific PT tests! Even moreso in my opinion. A guy can train and become very good at push ups and sit ups, eventually doing well in a test.

However if the test is something along the lines of what was suggested by @JAB, then he has to have his shit together physically, tactically and technically. I think the RAW assessment is a good example of PT testing that is task/job specific but still gets rid of shitbags and qualifies guys for promotions etc.
 
SIG said:
I never thought otherwise but this could still be done using job specific PT tests! Even moreso in my opinion. A guy can train and become very good at push ups and sit ups, eventually doing well in a test.

However if the test is something along the lines of what was suggested by @JAB, then he has to have his shit together physically, tactically and technically. I think the RAW assessment is a good example of PT testing that is task/job specific but still gets rid of shitbags and qualifies guys for promotions etc.
Click to expand...

Your absolutely correct, but the problem with more accurate testing is that feelings get hurt.
 
What percentage of the military do SEALs (from your post) comprise?

Not everyone in the military has to climb walls with gear on.

Do you really think the PT test is the only standard folks are held to once they report to their specific unit?

Your attempt at an argument is flawed on several levels.

I'm curious SIG , what branch are you in?
 
SkrewzLoose said:
What percentage of the military do SEALs (from your post) comprise?

Not everyone in the military has to climb walls with gear on.

Do you really think the PT test is the only standard folks are held to once they report to their specific unit?

Your attempt at an argument is flawed on several levels.

I'm curious SIG , what branch are you in?
Click to expand...
As I said in my introduction, I'm a reserve police officer. I don't claim to know anything about military operations/programmes but as a S+C coach the physical demands interest me!

In fairness, I said nothing about standards of personnel in units. I was discussing PT testing and relevance of same to the job. I'm not for a minute suggesting people who ace the APFT aren't fit for purpose; I'm merely interested in debating the relevance and application of PT tests.

Would you care to point out how my argument is flawed on several levels? This is a discussion after all!
 
I'm of the "if it aint broke, dont fix it" mentality. I like the APFT because it's easy and takes about an hour to conduct, requires no equipment short of a stopwatch, and generally indicates if a soldier is fit or not.

Like others have said, my company, for instance, has its own physical fitness requirements beyond the APFT....rucking, litter carry, buddy carry, obstacle course etc. We focus our PT on the latter.

To me, this is really a non-issue. Conduct the APFT twice a year and move on.
 
@SIG I think we have answered your specific question. The basic PT test is nothing more than an administrative tool. It doesn't successfully asses physical fitness of specific jobs. In most career fields that require high level fitness, the assessment of fitness is set by a unit standard.

Example: most LEA's require a coopers cut physical fitness teat with 70% within the individuals age group. Where that same LEA's SWAT team will normally require the same test, but with 90% score. However, once assigned to the SWAT team, the team commander will set a readiness standard ans the team leader of the team you are assigned will set a higher standard specific to your job (entry team shieldman will be doing a lot shield drills, where the sniper/observer team will most likely not train with the shield, etc).

The base line PFT stays the same, but the unit defines the fitness assessment based on the unit/position need.
 
@SIG --- In the SOF community, PT Tests are something to Max, that's it... a number to get out of the way when they're due. The real training is during Team or individual time at the gym, under a ruck, or practicing tactics, fully loaded for bear... wearing your shit and getting it done... and doing it over and over and over until it is second nature, and your gear is part of you... the only way to evaluate that right now, is to do it with a Team.

I was part of a multifaceted test a looooooooooooong time ago... ostensibly a 'rations test' (RLTW30) with many other components... the comparisons of fitness/chemistries/changes in the SF centric portion were almost deal breakers for the researchers - starting, midline and ending values were tens of percentage points above the 'regular' Combat Arms soldiers tested ... the initial and end of cycle fitness testing (complete scaled physio - Vo2, hydrostatic BMI, full blood profiles, mental/emotional baselining.... ) 4 days of tests front end and back end , with bloodwork during the field portion ... almost got the SF portion of the results thrown out - it was completely different than the results of regular Army.... far above the expectations overall...

You are asking people who have an overall fitness/functional fitness level way above norm how to test or train others to that level.... you can't explain it to 'normal' people... you get there for your Team and your buddies and the mission it's part of that life, and you laugh at PT tests as you're humping the ruck up a big friggin hill in the middle of the night with every sense at full alert... because the PT test doesn't keep you alive... everything else you've done to get into real shape keeps you alive.

MOO, YMMV
 
On the subject of the RAW assessment, I only did it once when the RAW program was just starting to be implemented. The whole RAW concept at the time was basically laughed at and ignored to be honest. I know it has evolved since then, but again I think it is for the most part business as usual. From what I understand the RAW assessment is still done, because people are told to do it from higher. So they knock it out one day and then "go do PT". Now, if you would like to see something that is more challenging and probably more job specific, check out the RPAT:

Ranger Physical Assessment Test (RPAT). The purpose of this test is to measure all components of fitness (strength, endurance, movement skills), using tactically relevant tasks.

CONDITIONS – Given a 3 mile course, RBA, MICH helmet, Skedco w/ 160-lbs load, 20-foot fast rope apparatus, 20-foot caving ladder apparatus and an 8-foot wall.

STANDARDS – Complete a 3-mile run and combat focused PT course in less than 1 hour. The event will be conducted at squad level, with the mindset that the Ranger is competing against himself. Each time the event is conducted, each Ranger should see constant improvement in his time and ability to negotiate the course.

  1. Conduct a 2-mile run wearing ACUs, boots, RBA and MICH helmet. The run will begin and end at a 20-foot fast rope.

  2. After the completion of the run, immediately climb the 20-foot fast rope and do a controlled descent.

  3. When the rope climb is complete, drag a 160-pound SKEDCO litter 50 yards, turn round and drag it

    back 50 yards to the start point.

  4. Immediately following the SKEDCO pull, climb a 20-foot caving ladder and climb all the way back

    down.

  5. At the bottom of the Caving ladder, sprint 100 yards, turn around, sprint back 100 yards and climb over

    the 8-foot wall.

  6. Conduct a 1 mile run wearing ACUs, boots, RBA and MICH helmet. The run will begin and end at the

    8-ft wall. Time stops when you cross the line at the 8-foot wall.
 
@JAB I'm aware that most SWAT teams have their own additional tests and they are usually spot on when it comes to being job oriented. I suppose it is much the same in SOF, whereby they have their own physical readiness test.

@x SF med thanks for the insight. I appreciate that you guys see it as a formality and that it bares no weight on your perfomance in the field.

I see where you are all coming from, in that most PT tests are just a box ticking exercise that do, after all, grade fitness levels. It's interesting to see that most units have their own PRT's. It makes sense, as each unit and it's individual members have their own physical needs in the job. I must admit I had forgotten that fact. Just like a cop on a bicycle needs a different type of fitness to a police diver.

Thanks for the replies, much appreciated!
 
SkrewzLoose said:
Getting back into (Beyond) 5/3/1 tomorrow. Can't wait!!
Click to expand...

I look forward to following your progress. I just started reading (Beyond) 5/3/1. The original 5/3/1 program is the best raw strength program I've used to date. Interested in the (Beyond) part of the new program.
 
I've made a couple changes. Swapped out OH press for Clean & Jerk and I'm doing front squats vice back squats.
 

Similar threads

A
Casino Night and the 75th Rangers
Replies
0
Views
80
ALSE Sarge
A
Echo1zero
Force Multiplier Fitness
Replies
0
Views
694
Echo1zero
Echo1zero
Ooh-Rah
Anyone familiar with Aphantasia?
Replies
17
Views
375
Topkick
Topkick
A
Masirah Island Baseball Bat
Replies
1
Views
115
ALSE Sarge
A
A
Retired Air Force Newbie
Replies
13
Views
279
Marauder06
Marauder06
Back
Top