Thanks John,

I agree with your description of the event. We all have to work within our
strengths and weaknesses and I believe that STREND is a valuable tool for
increasing fitness. There are minimum standards set up to make a "freak"
less able to steal the show with some speciality exercise where he can do
massive reps. Now, Takis can do a ton of dips, but has real good scores
everywhere else as well. So he is a legitimate super athlete. I do feel
some of the minimum standards at least at the World championships level
should increase, namely the minimum run time. I think it should be
dropped about 2 minutes for men and 1 minute for women, that would make
STREND athletes train harder for the cardiovascular section, reducing the
ability to perform so many reps as to almost nullify their less impressive
run time. Of course I do well in the run so this could be considered biased.

Thanks,

Matt

At 07:46 PM 2/28/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>Hey Matt,
>
>All your points are right on. Obviously, who is the "fittest" depends on
>the context of what is being measured. I know that even when I get in
>great shape for STREND, if I, heaven forbid, get into a pool and start
>swimming laps, I am in serious trouble after about 100 yards. It is not
>that I am out of shape, I am just out of shape for swimming. I think for
>STREND you have to go back to what Ed was originally trying to measure in
>designing STREND, and that was the body type that graduated towards the
>special military operations groups with which Ed served. The ability to be
>mobile (the run) and still have significant upper body strength (the 5
>lifts) in order to carry equipment, move up and down ropes, and the other
>special maneuvers that us civilian types can only dream about is an
>important part of these operations, and I think that Ed's intent was to
>design a program that would measure that ability. The real challenge was
>design an event that was workable and would a!
>ppeal to a variety of athletes. Like almost every other sport, some body
>types are better at it then others. Not very surprising.
>
>The component of STREND that I really like is that it trains you mentally
>to go and perform an exercise when you are really tired. It is not that
>hard to do a good set of dips, but to do a set of dips when your arms are
>worn out from the other exercises is a different story. Likewise to start
>the run when you are drained from the lifts is hard for everyone, those
>who are natural runners and those who are not. But the important lesson
>for everyone is that if you keep at it, your body will adjust and the run
>will get easier as you move along. I am convinced that anyone that
>consistently does a STREND workout will see remarkable improvement in
>their strength and conditioning. I was in good shape when I started, but
>I saw good improvement in my overall strength and conditioning after a
>year of consistent STREND workouts. Tom Groves, my workout buddy who is
>almost 54, saw the same improvement and, as we have noted, he will be one
>of the top competitors at Arnold's Pump and !
>Run on Sunday in Columbus. AS far as overall conditioning goes, I will
>point out that Tom G. and Tom Clark (and you would too, Matt!) will
>perform at the top of their age groups as compared to a lot of other good
>athletes. That says a lot for STREND!
>
>Have a good weekend.
>
>JC
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Matt Bogdanowicz
>Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 6:31 PM
>To: STREND@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [STREND] Re: Digest Number 271
>
>Thanks John,
>
>
>This should certainly help.
>
>It is still a decision of the individual on how much they can improve in
>each area.
>Remember if in theory you were able to do 3:00 at each station, with
>basically no rest, cardiovascular-ly you are hurting, because you get
>almost no rest before the run. Of course someone with 448 reps, would only
>need to make the minimum run time to win. What would happen I wonder if
>you decided to really improve your rep total, I bet you would have less
>time and energy to improve your 3 mile run time. The mystery of STREND
>remains how do I best improve my overall potential in the upper body
>disciplines and the run-(cardio)?
>That is why I believe someone from a running background will always have an
>advantage, they should be light to begin with and have an ability to handle
>higher reps, it is just a matter of working on overall muscular endurance.
>Here is a question: How do you come up with a formula to best determine
>who had the best rep to run ratio/or highest totals in both. Is someone
>who completes 220 reps and runs 22:00 necessarily fitter than someone
>doing 175 and running 17:30?
>STREND assumes one factor only, and that is run time divided into
>reps. Who is to say that 45 more reps is better than a 3 mile run time
>that is superior by 4:30? (Those 45 reps were worth 6 seconds a piece when
>comparing performances by the way)
> I guarantee that it probably is more impressive to have a superior run
>time and pretty high reps. But then we are back to the elusive question of
>what it means to be the "fittest"
>perspiring minds want to know!
>
>
>
>At 03:01 PM 2/28/2003 -0800, you wrote:
> >jc
> >
> >Your formula works perfectly!
> >
> >Thanks for sharing.
> >
> >
> >--- JOHN R CARMONY <jcar75@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Geeez Matt, You do have too much time on your hands!
> > >
> > > How about this for figuring the rep to run time
> > > effect:
> > >
> > > Reps=RP
> > > Run Time=RT
> > > Run Time 2=RT2
> > > Strend Score=ST (stays same for calculation)
> > > Time equivalent of one rep=T
> > >
> > > RP/RT=ST , (RP+1)/ST=RT2 , RT2-RT=T
> > >
> > > Now anybody can figure it out. I have found that
> > > after a couple of years my reps and run times have
> > > flattened out. For me, I generally do about 130
> > > reps and 18.5 minutes on the run.
> > >
> > > 130/18.5=7.027 , (130+1)/7.027=18.642 , 18.642-18.5
> > > = .142 , (.142 min = 8.52 secs)
> > >
> > > So for me, one rep = about 8.5 secs.
> > >
> > > jc
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: skate_94538
> > > Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 7:50 PM
> > > To: STREND@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: [STREND] Re: Digest Number 271
> > >
> > > Larry, 140 sounds about right; I think I will shoot
> > > for that as well,
> > > we have similar builds.
> > > Would you say that doing more reps might make one a
> > > bit more tired
> > > for the run?
> > >
> > > Comments regarding the lowering of run time or the
> > > increase in rep
> > > total:
> > > (Some one feel free to explain it to me I just can't
> > > figure it
> > > out!
> > > But I am trying. This is more of a scratch sheet of
> > > my notes, please
> > > feel free to reply back, I am sure there is more to
> > > it)
> > >
> > >
> > > Now, it was said that a rep is equal to 4 seconds on
> > > the run time. I
> > > thought about that for a while and did some
> > > calculations, only to
> > > find that is not always true, and it matters who you
> > > are comparing
> > > your total score to, and if it is just your own
> > > score you are dealing
> > > with. It is complicated but a rep can be worth
> > > different values.
> > > Let's say you can really rack up the rep total and
> > > you score:
> > > 214
> > > total, and run 21.4
> > > Your STREND factor is 10.
> > > Now, Competitor B does 175 reps, but runs 17.49 to
> > > just beat you out
> > > with a 10.0057 Now if competitor A did two more
> > > reps, (216) he
> > > would end up with 10.093. Or he could run 9 seconds
> > > faster
> > > 214/21.25= 10.0705 and that would win to, so his
> > > reps are worth 4.5
> > > seconds a piece.
> > > (turns out the more reps you do the less seconds on
> > > the run time they
> > > are worth)
> > >
> > > Athlete A scores 84 reps and runs 25 minutes
> > > = 3.36
> > >
> > > Athlete B scores 52 reps and runs 15.475+ 3.360259
> > >
> > >
> > > Athlete A has to score 33 reps (85) to beat athlete
> > > B.
> > >
> > >
> > > If Athlete B scores 52 reps and runs 18 minutes he
> > > scores- 2.8888
> > > but by running 2 min and 31.5 seconds faster he
> > > would of course win.
> > > His reduction in run time was 151.5 seconds. To
> > > score 3.360259
> > > with a run time of 18 minutes he would need to score
> > > at least another
> > > 8 repetitions.
> > > I would agree it is much easier to increase rep
> > > total. But again it
> > > depends on the total reps we are talking about. The
> > > more reps you
> > > score the less room for improvement.
> > > Each rep for Athlete B: 151.5/8 = 18.9375 seconds
> > > for his own
> > > score right?
> > >
> > > Example:
> > >
> > > A: 90 reps
> > > B: 60 reps
> > > A's run time is 30 minutes
> > > B's run time is 20 minutes
> > > Score= 3.0
> > > 10:00 in run time separate A from B
> > > and a 30 rep difference.
> > > If Athlete A could run 10:00 faster he would score:
> > > 4.5 ( or score
> > > 45 more reps) 600/45= 13.33 seconds per rep (correct
> > > me if I am wrong)
> > > And if athlete B could attain 30 more reps he would
> > > do the same. 30
> > > reps saves him 10:00 of running, how do you
> > > calculate the equivalent
> > > rep to running time ratio on that? Is it 20
> > > seconds?
> > > A: By running 600 seconds faster he scores 50%
> > > better
> > > B : By improving 50% in the rep category he equals
> > > athlete A
> > >
> > >
> > > Lets compare similar run times:
> > > A: runs 20.5
> > > B: runs 20.5
> > > C: runs 20.5
> > >
> > > REP totals:
> > > A: 240
> > > B: 300
> > > C: 180
> > > Factors:
> > > A: 11.7073
> > > B: 14.63414
> > > C: 8.7804
> > >
> > > IF A wants to beat B he/she has to perform at least
> > > 61 more reps
> > > If C wants to beat A he/she has to perform at least
> > > 61 more reps
> > > And if C wants to beat B he/she has to perform at
> > > least 121 more reps.
> > >
> > > Or A can run 4:06 Faster
> > > C can run 8:12 seconds faster (not Possible)
> > > And for C to beat A he would have to run 5:08
> > > seconds faster. (Pretty
> > > tough to do)
> > >
> > > A's reps are worth 246/61 = 4.032787 seconds
> > > C to Beat A 492/61= 8.0655 seconds
> > > And for C to beat A 308/61= 5.049181 seconds per
> > >
> > > I think it is easier just to look at your own score
> > > and make
> > > improvements there.
> > > If someone is consistently at 7 on the STREND
> > > FACTOR, I could look at
> > > a hundred different combinations to get that 7, but
> > > lets take two I
> > > guess.
> > >
> > > 190/7 = 27.14285 run time.
> > > 120/7 = 17.1428 run time.
> > >
> > > Is it easier for the first to increase his rep total
> > > or decrease his
> > > run time? I would say the run time but just the
> > > opposite for the guy
> > > running 17 minutes
> > >
> > > Now how would they go about scoring a 7.5?
> > > The first guy needs to run 1:48 faster
> > > And the second guy needs to improve by only 9 reps.
> > >
> > > The first guy would have to increase by over 13 reps
> > > if he did not
> > > want to increase his run time, again the more reps
> > > you do the less
> > > room for improvement, and I think you would be more
> > > cardiovascularly
> > > tired.
> > >
> > > So who is to say exactly what is easier?
> > > I think it depends on the individual, their rep
> > > total and overall
> > > score, their run time and who they are competing
> > > against. I
> > > don't
> > > know maybe I am wrong. It is a bit confusing can
> > > anyone come up with
> > > an Excel spread sheet or something?
> > >
> >=== message truncated ===
> >
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> >Do you Yahoo!?
> >Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
> >http://taxes.yahoo.com/
> >
> >
> >Community email addresses:
> > Post message: STREND@YahooGroups.com
> > Subscribe: STREND-subscribe@YahooGroups.com
> > Unsubscribe: STREND-unsubscribe@YahooGroups.com
> >
> >List Homepage:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STREND
> >
> >To go to the STREND Website:
> > http://www.strend.com
> >
> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>***************************************
>Matt Bogdanowicz
>Fitness Specialist
>Cisco TimeOut Fitness Center
>375 E Tasman, Bldg. 6
>Phone: 408-525-9311
>Fax: 408-525-9527
>Extension: 59311
>mbogdaan@...
>***************************************
>
>
>
>Community email addresses:
> Post message: STREND@YahooGroups.com
> Subscribe: STREND-subscribe@YahooGroups.com
> Unsubscribe: STREND-unsubscribe@YahooGroups.com
>
>List Homepage:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STREND
>
>To go to the STREND Website:
> http://www.strend.com
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>Community email addresses:
> Post message: STREND@YahooGroups.com
> Subscribe: STREND-subscribe@YahooGroups.com
> Unsubscribe: STREND-unsubscribe@YahooGroups.com
>
>List Homepage:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STREND
>
>To go to the STREND Website:
> http://www.strend.com
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


***************************************
Matt Bogdanowicz
Fitness Specialist
Cisco TimeOut Fitness Center
375 E Tasman, Bldg. 6
Phone: 408-525-9311
Fax: 408-525-9527
Extension: 59311
mbogdaan@...
***************************************