"The other day I passed a nearby junior high. The teacher was doing a fitness test. Over half the class just walked. About another quarter started jogging for half a lap, and then walked. The remainder jogged slowly except for two kids who actually ran at a decent pace."
How slowly were you passing that you had time to see all that? Were you hanging out watching young kids like some kind of a perv?
Have you met these youngsters who enlist in the Army? They are usually the dimmest, pudgiest, and laziest of the bunch. It's a sad thing that the army tricks these dummies into thinking that there in any kind of honor or pride in the military, and it is even sadder that many of these recruits will fail to hit those marks.
I'd reckon the average student who is accepted into a top-100 academic university in the US could outperform military recruits in the deadlift and two-mile. It takes dedication and work ethic to earn those acceptances, whereas joining the military just means that you aren't good enough for literally anything else.
You underestimate the lack of fitness of the general college student. Heck, I'd wager the average LRer would score lower than many of the Soldiers I see every day. You would get a 100pt score in the run and probably the plank but then what?
A young man in his prime taking 22 minutes to cover miles?
Wasn't the old standard of fitness for non runners, males in their prime, 12 minutes for 2 miles?
No.
The time needed to get the max of 100 points was around 13:00 depending on age. I think decades ago it used to be 12:00.
On the new test the time needed to get the mac of 100 points is around 13:30+ depending on age.
I want everyone here to do this test and tell me how much slower you run. It's probably going to be 30-60s slower than an open 2miBut yea, I see changes in scoring eventually coming. The minimum run time is very slow. Heck the time needed for the 2.5mi walk is arguably harder (31:00). The walk is done by those on a permanent no-running profile. We are talking about people who should be injured enough that they can't run the 10:00+ min per mile needed to pass the run....but are able to walk 12:00 min per mile.......yea ok....
The minimum passing score for women in the 2-mile run requires them to run FASTER from ages 17 to 36
17-21 23:22
22-26 23:15
27-31 23:13
32-36 23:19
Yea as I said the minimum standards are all over the place and will likely change.
All they did was take a look at the tests that have already been completed and derive passing scores from that. So obviously more 17-21 yr old females have done the test than 32-36. The bulk of those 17-21 yr old scores are coming from basic training when those Soldiers are not in great shape to begin with.
You know why they get 22 mins to run two miles? Coz it’s in part a test of mental learning ability. If you were so inexperienced with running so as to burn out within a few hundred meters, the rest still gives you enough time to recover and then quickly learn and implement the required pacing strategy, so the only way to fail the test is if you are both too unfit and too stupid for the job.
Most of the army is not involved in actual physical combat. If Rangers, SF or (especially) Delta - be assured that a high level of fitness is required for those units.
logistics wins wars. you don’t need to be in great shape to be a clerk or drive a supply truck. You should be, don’t have to be.
I was kicked off my local middle school track today to make way for a police recruit fitness test. A bunch of 20 somethings. As I had just warmed up, I stuck around to do some sprints in the parking lot. Watching the test was sad. Several of the recruits were stopping to walk during the mile run portion. I had jokingly asked the officer who told me to leave whether he thought the recruits could keep up with nearly 60yo me. He said no, and that's no joke
A young man in his prime taking 22 minutes to cover miles?
Wasn't the old standard of fitness for non runners, males in their prime, 12 minutes for 2 miles?
No.
The time needed to get the max of 100 points was around 13:00 depending on age. I think decades ago it used to be 12:00.
On the new test the time needed to get the mac of 100 points is around 13:30+ depending on age.
I want everyone here to do this test and tell me how much slower you run. It's probably going to be 30-60s slower than an open 2miBut yea, I see changes in scoring eventually coming. The minimum run time is very slow. Heck the time needed for the 2.5mi walk is arguably harder (31:00). The walk is done by those on a permanent no-running profile. We are talking about people who should be injured enough that they can't run the 10:00+ min per mile needed to pass the run....but are able to walk 12:00 min per mile.......yea ok....
Alan
Not sure why you say no as you recall, as do I, that you needed to cover 2 miles in 12 minutes (or less) to meet the fitness standard
Not sure why you say no as you recall, as do I, that you needed to cover 2 miles in 12 minutes (or less) to meet the fitness standard
I'm pretty sure the standard to MAX the CPFT (Cadet Physical Fitness Test) at West Point was 11:54 during the early 90s. I can't remember if this was also the Army standard to max or if WP had a faster requirement. The standard was never 12:00 to pass; we would not have an Army. However, 22:00 to pass is simply ridiculous and is nothing more than a very fast walk.
The time needed to get the max of 100 points was around 13:00 depending on age. I think decades ago it used to be 12:00.
On the new test the time needed to get the mac of 100 points is around 13:30+ depending on age.
I want everyone here to do this test and tell me how much slower you run. It's probably going to be 30-60s slower than an open 2miBut yea, I see changes in scoring eventually coming. The minimum run time is very slow. Heck the time needed for the 2.5mi walk is arguably harder (31:00). The walk is done by those on a permanent no-running profile. We are talking about people who should be injured enough that they can't run the 10:00+ min per mile needed to pass the run....but are able to walk 12:00 min per mile.......yea ok....
Alan
Not sure why you say no as you recall, as do I, that you needed to cover 2 miles in 12 minutes (or less) to meet the fitness standard
Yea that was 20 years go at least. In the last version of the APFT you had to run 13:00 ish. And that is to MAX the test not just pass
I would love to see the avg LRer score on the 3 Rep Deadlift, Ball Throw or Hand Release Pushup....probably equally as laughable as someone running a 20:00 2mi.
Not sure why you say no as you recall, as do I, that you needed to cover 2 miles in 12 minutes (or less) to meet the fitness standard
I'm pretty sure the standard to MAX the CPFT (Cadet Physical Fitness Test) at West Point was 11:54 during the early 90s. I can't remember if this was also the Army standard to max or if WP had a faster requirement. The standard was never 12:00 to pass; we would not have an Army. However, 22:00 to pass is simply ridiculous and is nothing more than a very fast walk.
Agree seems like an oversight just to get some sort of test standard out.
In 2011 I went through BUDS (Basic Underwater Demolition Seal Training) the best runner in the class was me who did not make it through the training pipeline. The worst runner in my class struggled with everything and made it through the training pipeline and became a Navy SEAL.
The Army is also looking at putting in place a waiver system for soldiers who perform highly on the fitness test but might not meet the current body fat standards, a change that is expected to be finalized in March.
Last year, Grinston teased the change but said it was still being worked out. At that time, he said the idea was if a soldier scored 540 on the ACFT, leaders would waive the need for a body composition test -- an assessment that is meant to ensure troops are in compliance with the height and weight standards of the Army.
That number would reflect near-perfect scores in the test's six events as the maximum is 600. The target for men, aged 17-21, is running two miles in under 15:30 and deadlifting 280 pounds for three repetitions on top of the other categories.
"What we found is that most people that score that, don't need to be taped anyway," Grinston said Tuesday.
The changes are still being formulated, with some of the uncertainty driven by two competing congressional requirements built into last year's annual defense policy bill.
I assume U.S. Army infantry like U.S.M.C. infantry need to be fit enough to climb 30 foot rope with (60 to 100) pounds of gear. How many on here can do that? Most of the D1 runners and world class distance runners on here cannot climb a 30 foot rope with 100 pounds of gear on their body. Distance running is not unimportant. Eg. Knowing what Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock did in his career and based on my observations, I assume as a young man Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock was capable of (16 to 17) minutes, 3 miles. For Army infantry, there will be far more climbing a 30 foot rope with 100 pounds of gear situations than 12 minutes 2 miles situations.
Senate has their version. House has theirs. They go to committee and figure out the middle ground.
Congress is just trying to make Army senior leaders blink since they gave them an ultimatum in the FY23 NDAA. The FY23 NDAA mandated the Army create gender neutral physical fitness standards (or something to that effect). The Army has dragged their feet on this apparently.
When the ACFT came out it was gender and age neutral. Then some in Congress got upset and said the test, which wasn't even for record yet, was unfair to women. Women had an 80% fail rate and there was a concern about the ACFT negatively affecting recruitment, promotion, and retention.
Your physical fitness test scores are a factor in promotion, especially from Specialist to Sergeant and Sergeant to Staff Sergeant. If a gender neutral test is factored into promotion the females will not be promoted as often as males.
There has been a push for gender neutral fitness standards ever s
