Take the average of all the answers provided.
Then divide by 2.
Take the average of all the answers provided.
Then divide by 2.
i way about 165 an i can do a 5x5 with my body weight. i maxxed out at 210 pounds. im 16 an about 5'7
I bench 205 weighing 130...but i spend an hour and a half a day in the gym, and go for a 30 min run.
good job rupp wrote:
What is considered bad, average, good, and excellent? Especially when you account for being a runner (this is a little different from being a gym rat your entire life).
I'm running about 65 miles a week right now. I weigh 155 lbs at 23 years old on a 5'10" frame. I just benched 2 x 165, 2 x 175 lbs at the end of my workout. Is this average runner strength?
I heard:
bad - anything below your weight
average - being able to bench your weight
good - weight plus 25%
excellent - double your weight
sound about right?
As a rule of thumb, a good bp is 2x your weight.
I saw on a Russian website the other night, a 12 year old girl bench-pressing 73kg.
That’s 160lbs.
1.5 times bodyweight separates the puppies from the big dogs.
My 14 year old daughter can do 135 lbs and weighs 104. She is a runner so lifting is just for cross training. It is sort of scary watching her lift.
Realistically, how much chest strength do you think a runner needs?
In my experience distance runners (on average) have a much greater need to work on their upper- and mid-back strength, rather than on chest.
Okay, should have made a more expansive comment.
You need to keep your pelvis neutral (i.e. not tipped excessively forward) to run more efficiently. If your upper- and mid-back are weak, a lot of the postural load will shift to the lower back. The lower-back muscles then become strong and tight, tending to produce excessive lordosis (arched lower back) and tilting the pelvis forward.
One of the main reasons for abdominal work is to balance the strength of the lower back--distance running, by itself, tends to strengthen/tighten LB. Similarly, upper-/mid-back work balances the strength of the chest--which, again, distance running tends to increase, often resulting in rounded shoulders, which transfer load to the lower back, etc.!
[NB: We're not talking about chest *development* but chest *strength*, at least relative to the back. Yes, I'm aware that many runners' chests are simply "the front of their backs"--the chests still tend to be (relatively) strong, however, esp. among those whose elbows never swing behind the torso during running.]
ian edwards wrote:
I maxed 160 weighing 131.
Now I bench 200 weighing 138.
once upon a time there was wrote:
Take the average of all the answers provided.
Then divide by 2.
Good God, no kidding. This should get put up there with the many threads where people talk about squatting double their bodyweight.
I used to run a lot more mileage, and now I lift while running much less than I used to. I have NEVER seen someone running more than 50 mpw who has an impressive physique or has any sort of above average lift in major exercises. And having tried to do so on high mileage, I know that it's going to come down to some damn fine genetics to do so.
Honestly, reading LR folks talk about lifting is when I realized how much talk about prs and such on this forum is BS.
For male distance runners - who cares how much they can bench?
Distance runners are for the most part, very weak compared to most athletes. Sprinters are not.
well.............. wrote:
Honestly, reading LR folks talk about lifting is when I realized how much talk about prs and such on this forum is BS.
If it makes you feel better to think so, go right ahead. If you think a 220 pound bench is "beastly" I think you just have lower standards than most.
When I was running 100+/week for a few years I weighed 150-155 lbs. and could bench about 165 lbs. At that time I could run 10 miles in 53 minutes and 4:16 in the mile on the track.
A few years after college I was running 50-60/week and going to the gym every M/W/F. I benched 200 for a single rep max at that time. I ran a 5k on the roads in 16:10.
I'm 165 - 168 lbs. now, run about 20 miles a week, and I can bench 235 lbs. But, I'm in the gym 4 days a week working muscle groups and doing strength training -- deadlifts, squats, everything heavy. I could probably run about 17:30 right now.
---
Why in the world is the bench press the main measure of "how strong someone is"?? A bench press motion is never applicable to anything.
The best I've managed is one rep of 260 at 165 weight. At the time, I was recruited for a fitness modeling shoot, and while nothing came from it, I was very jacked for a runner. I've never met any serious endurance athletes that could bench double their body weight, but if I did, I would be seriously impressed.
my best is 2x 225 at 5'10" 155 lbs. i thought i was cool, so i challenged a teammate to a lift challenge, as he was always bragging about how much he could bench. he weighed about 145 lbs. he smoked me, put up 245 to my 225. couldnt believe a kid so small could put up so much weight so easily.
When I was 17-18,I was not a runner then, weighed 190 1lbs.
I maxed out @1x 300 lbs.
3 X 290, 10 X 250
Curled 135 lbs.
Bench press flys 70 lbs each dumbell.
Now am 51, 149 lbs.
Cannot do a max BP as the home multi gym is too rickety.
Rep 20 x 100 lbs.
My 4 year old can bench 40 pounds x 2 and he's about 37 pounds, but he has no history of weight training to speak of. I've got him working traps and tris and I think soon he'll be maxing about 52 pounds.
BTW, he does this in lightweight trainers.
asdfasdfasdfas wrote:
Why in the world is the bench press the main measure of "how strong someone is"?? A bench press motion is never applicable to anything.
Have you ever pushed someone? Or pushed anything?
dammm, im 150, and 19 years old. I was always weak and skinny when i weighed 130. Now i can max out at 235, and i weigh 150!! yall weak lol