T Nation

Article: "Are You Strong?"

I am okay with that. I hope to one day be exceptional.

I would say for the average person that obtains the squat and DL numbers you proposed, that they are usually around the 400 lb mark. If enhanced a bit more, as the gear seems to impact upper body more than lower.

1 Like

In truth, my thoughts are, if you are unwilling to answer the question in the topic title with “yes”, the answer is no.

Humility is dandy and all, but at one point you have to be willing to call yourself strong. If you aren’t there, get stronger until you are.


This hits me right in the feels.

1 Like

What about if everybody else says you are strong, you just happen to think you are not. It seems that many of the most proficient in many fields think they are sub par. John Bonham didn’t think he was good enough to be in Led Zeppelin (many consider him as one of the best drummers of all time). On the other side many with sub par skills think highly of themselves.

So you have the guy deadlifting 700 at a PL / strongman gym that doesn’t think he is strong, and the guy at globo gym who hits 405 and thinks he is superman.

Dunning Kruger effect (named after it’s authors / researchers) describes this effect.

Then you aren’t strong.

1 Like

In subject’s opinion. Does the subject’s opinion matter? Is there an objective standard for this (the purpose of the article)? Maybe it is all relative to our perceptions?

It’s the only one that matters, as they are the one being asked the question.

Yes, but they maybe have an incorrect perception of what average, good, great… are for strength. If they used your logic, they would say nope I am weak, when they see the title. Further reading might reveal that they are in fact strong.

That’s immaterial, as there is no objective standard of what strong is.

Okay, got it. You disagree with these types of articles as the whole proposition of creating an objective standard is absurd to you, right?

I don’t disagree with you. However, we can agree to certain things as close to objectively true. The key here is “close to”. Those things can be fun to talk about, but philosophy is also fun.

As a solipsist, I imagine this to be tricky.

As a solipsist, why would it even matter if you are strong?

Wouldn’t you by default be the strongest and weakest?

Things mattering have never really mattered to me.

1 Like

Note: All lifts are done with free weights, good form, no supportive gear other than a belt,

Damn none my lifts count then

I guess why post on forums as a solipsist? Entertainment? Must be boring and lonely?

Because Kierkegaard.

1 Like

It’s entertaining, in any event.

I know how this one plays out.

If you have a 2.45x BW squat are you close enough to Great to be great? It would be odd to say that a 487.5lbs is Great but a 485lbs squat is Good.

In which case, surely a 480lbs squat is also great and if that is great then a 475lbs needs to be great as well… All the way down to getting your ass off the couch is a great level of strength :laughing:


All you clown dicks forgot about pistol squats.


Pistols Squats at 2.3 times BW nets you a “decent” score.