[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
Here’s a question to ask yourself: If you were wounded in battle, who would you rather have trying to carry you to safety?
A) The guy who can do 500# on the leg press machine.
B) The guy who can squat 300#.
If so, why? The answer to “why” is the definition of “functional strength.”[/quote]
I’m betting that a guy who could only squat 300 lbs would have alot of trouble carrying my fat ass to safety, it would be more like dragging slowly…lol
a friend of mine who competes in racketball tournaments does ALL of his weightlifting using machines…it doesn’t seem to negatively affect his preformance on the court. In fact, he tells me he likes using the machines because he gets injured too often with free weights that negatively affect his game…
[quote]DPH wrote:
michael2507 wrote:
I would say ‘functional strength’ is the manner in which strength can be applied outside of training.
interesting…
sounds like how most would define GPP (gerneral physical preparedness)…or exersizes that promote general athletisism…
in my mind, ‘functional strength’ should be the strength needed to perform a specific task and shouldn’t be confused with general athletisism…[/quote]
To me, GPP training is not restricted to the strength aspect, but rather a broader term, and could serve several functions like raising general work capacity, learning specific skills or even as active recovery. Nevertheless, I agree that ‘functional strength’ is influenced by the purpose it is devoted to, as I tried to express in my previous post. I guess ‘strength needed to perform a specific task’ would just be a narrower definition. Whatever, I can live with virtually any definition that doesn’t include Swiss Balls…