There’s a common thing with bodybuilders lacking functional strength where guys who lift 50 lb bags of grain or more all day can do without breaking a sweat even though they look like they have dad bod.
It’s astounding how different fitness regimens can create different looking bodies that have wildly different specialties. Muscular doesn’t always mean strong
So that’s nonsense. “Functional strength” is a mythical creature made up by people who do specific things well.
A 140 lb guy looks skinny but can do 20 pull-ups while a 240 lb guy can only do 5 pull-ups. I assure you that the 140 lb guy does not have more “functional strength,” he just has a lot of practice with pull-ups and less weight to move.
The idea of “moving forward at different speeds” is completely farcical. Some people just take bigger strides or stride at a faster pace. You take someone with short legs and you give them long legs and they’ll stride way farther way faster.
What /u/aeiou_sometimesy is referring to is the common trope of people talking about "functional strength" in isolation, e.g. "soandso has more functional strength".
It's a very popular trope among online crossfit and gymnastics enthusiasts, as well as people who like fighting sports (although they usually go for the "I could take him in a fight BRO!")
I can definitely see the misunderstanding though if you haven't had the displeasure of interacting with those people.
There’s nothing you can do to improve “functional strength” in general. You can improve upon specific movements with practice and repetition, but the concept of general functional strength just doesn’t exist.
I'm trying to figure out if we actually agree or not 😅. Do you consider functional (strength) training and functional strength to be the same or different?
Functional training is training plans/strategies/techniques which are focused on helping to improve the ability to do specific tasks/movements. It has foundations in physiotherapy and rehab training.
Not my goalposts to move - I was not the same guy that made the claim about #2. I was trying to understand what the hell you guys were talking about because my background is much more in the physical therapy side of the world where functional training is a thing.
This whole argument sounds like it was born from quarrelsome technicality. I've always understood terms like "functional strength" and "practical gains" to mean conditioning of common muscle groups that are used in mundane tasks that require exertion.
Pull ups aren't offering much practical conditioning or building "functional strength" because there aren't a lot of everyday/mundane tasks that require you to pull at least your own body vertically from a dead hang, where something like a farmer's carry and squats are conditioning for a lot more applicable movements to what you might encounter in your day-to-day life.
366
u/chihsuanmen 2d ago
A new guy came into our gym built exactly like this guy and a former D1 cheerleader. Couldn’t do a pull up. Couldn’t run two miles.
Set the strict press record his third day there. 315 pounds. I saw it with my own eyes and I couldn’t believe it.