What are the top

[Syf]

To give a simple example: who do you think is stronger? The guy that can lift 100 kg 4 times, or the guy that can lift 10 kg 100 times? The answer is obvious of course. Not to say that there is no place for doing more reps in boxing. However, you should know what you are actually trying to achieve. You do not build strength by doing 100 push ups in stead of 50. After all, the resistance stays the same....

The single max rep of the 10 kg guy would be higher than 10 kg if he can do that 100 times...

Someone who makes these kinds of statements... 50 just as strong as 100, i dont see how they can say that if they can actually hit the deck and do 100... coming from someone who has done it..I feel much stronger being able to do 100 cons than 50 cons pushups. It's a much more complete strength.

Doing 100 cons pushups involves doing over 500 pushups in reps per training session to get there. At highest level of the program that's 50+ pushups per set..and typically there are 8+ sets in any given session at high level.

You are completely missing what I am saying. You can build strength with your body weight, yes HOWEVER you are limited. If you are doing 100 push ups, you aren't gaining any strength, you are gaining muscle endurance. If you are doing high reps on body weight then you are no longer gaining strength, only muscle endurance.

Let me put it this way, if say you bench press 200lbs max but when you are working out you do 130lbs for the rest of your life, it's not going to increase your strength. If you go up to 200lbs and work on it so you can lift it over and over, your max will increase we'll say to 240lbs when you are doing it over and over. You won't get any stronger than that though unless you add more weight. This is the same principle with using body weight. Yes, you get stronger but only until you plateau at the point of your body weight. Unless you add weight, you won't be increasing strength, only endurance.

You keep going on about muscle mass. I'm not talking about muscle mass, you are. I'm talking about strength. Lifting weights doesn't have to put on a bunch of mass. I have stated this already. Using med-low weight, I meant it as being still heavier than your bodyweight. If your pushup is equivalent to say 160lbs, then you should be using 180-200lbs and doing high rep (20+). If I was talking about adding mass, like you can't seem to understand I'm NOT, then I would be saying do heavy weights and low reps. Instead of 180-200lbs I would be saying 250+ for 6-8 reps.

Just because you are lifting weights, it doesn't mean that you lose any fluidity or speed. There's a right way and a wrong way to do it and clearly you know nothing of the right way to do it. You need to open your world to other possibilities as you have an old time set of mind. I have stated several times that weights are supplementary to boxing training. That means get your **** done with boxing and then worry about lifting. So yeah, I'll be on the weights while you're on the bag but it's because I've already put in my work on the heavy bag and the end result is, I'm going to be stronger.

Still not convinced about strength being strength and muscle endurance being muscle endurance...cut and dry. Pushups yield a more natural enduring and fluid muscle appropriate for hand to hand combat. Not only most of boxing's most deadly have solidified this practice..but those of other fighting arts as well. It's time tested.

Moving on from the pushup/bench press... we have squats and horse stance. Ive been in all kinds of fighting arts from boxing and down the line. Kung fu for instance. One of my teachers was able to do horse stance for over an hour and his legs were cast iron. I never was able to go past 5 minutes (still a feat! Try it the average person breaks down in a min or so.) I'm a bigger guy than him and can probably squat more but it doesn't matter... if i had been trying to perpetuate this notion that because I can put up a bigger number than him makes my legs stronger I would've been laughed out the kwoon. The guy used to do his college homework IN horse stance back in his training days...his knees were his desk... he had p4p leg STRENGTH. I'd like someone to take a kick to the chest from him and say he wasn't strong as a freaking ox. They b like "it's just muscle endu......" then crumple in a breathless heap to the floor.

You stronger than me.....yeah maybe at picking up rocks or tossing cabers in the highland damn games.... but it's a good bet I got you on form, technique, and power....

[Facade]

The single max rep of the 10 kg guy would be higher than 10 kg if he can do that 100 times...

Someone who makes these kinds of statements... 50 just as strong as 100, i dont see how they can say that if they can actually hit the deck and do 100... coming from someone who has done it..I feel much stronger being able to do 100 cons than 50 cons pushups. It's a much more complete strength.

Doing 100 cons pushups involves doing over 500 pushups in reps per training session to get there. At highest level of the program that's 50+ pushups per set..and typically there are 8+ sets in any given session at high level.

I have trained both ways. At a certain point I could do 130-150 push ups, without breaks. Mostly due to my own ignorance I might add. I thought it would make me stronger. I have also done push ups the other way progressing from standard push ups to one arm push ups after which point I stopped. Therefore I speak from experience as well. Furthermore, quite obviously someone who can lift 10kg a 100 times is able to lift more than that weight only 1 time. However, do you also think he can lift a 100kg 1 time? Obviously, this argument can be reversed by asking if the 100kg 1 time guy can lift 10kg a 100 times. Which guy is stronger?

You will get to a more semantic discussion at this point. What is 'strength'? Does it also entail the duration someone is able to sustain a certain effort? I personally do not believe that. I also do not distinguish between regular and 'complete' strength. I believe strength refers to the amount of force one is able to apply. When you go to a 100+ reps you will train mostly endurance and there's nothing wrong with that as I believe it can have it place in boxing. I can understand one 'feels' strong after completing 50 push ups. Indeed, it is quite hard to complete 50 or more push ups. But to regard it as strength because of that feeling, doesn't seem very logical to me.

[PitbullParsons]

I can't argue with you anymore. You don't understand the difference between strength and endurance. Science vs opinion and you prefer opinion. I'm not saying not to do push ups etc., I'm talking about SUPPLEMENTING them with weights. How you don't understand that someone doing the same training you do and then lifting weight to improve strength even more would have an advantage...I don't get it. You basing that you have better form, technique, and power because I lift is a ludicrous statement.

[Syf]

I have trained both ways. At a certain point I could do 130-150 push ups, without breaks. Mostly due to my own ignorance I might add. I thought it would make me stronger. I have also done push ups the other way progressing from standard push ups to one arm push ups after which point I stopped. Therefore I speak from experience as well. Furthermore, quite obviously someone who can lift 10kg a 100 times is able to lift more than that weight only 1 time. However, do you also think he can lift a 100kg 1 time? Obviously, this argument can be reversed by asking if the 100kg 1 time guy can lift 10kg a 100 times. Which guy is stronger?

You will get to a more semantic discussion at this point. What is 'strength'? Does it also entail the duration someone is able to sustain a certain effort? I personally do not believe that. I also do not distinguish between regular and 'complete' strength. I believe strength refers to the amount of force one is able to apply. When you go to a 100+ reps you will train mostly endurance and there's nothing wrong with that as I believe it can have it place in boxing. I can understand one 'feels' strong after completing 50 push ups. Indeed, it is quite hard to complete 50 or more push ups. But to regard it as strength because of that feeling, doesn't seem very logical to me.

The semantics were started by people that wish to chop a nuanced physiological process into two categories. I am merely playing their game.

First off cong**** on 100 +. It is not merely a feeling.. A delusion, basically as you are alluding to. It is real development. Very real. One thing I found on my first run through the push-up program is I found myself speeding up to get through it quicker. You must resist that urge and keep a slow deliberate pace for optimal results.

I can't argue with you anymore. You don't understand the difference between strength and endurance. Science vs opinion and you prefer opinion. I'm not saying not to do push ups etc., I'm talking about SUPPLEMENTING them with weights. How you don't understand that someone doing the same training you do and then lifting weight to improve strength even more would have an advantage...I don't get it. You basing that you have better form, technique, and power because I lift is a ludicrous statement.

No skin off my back. And I wasn't arguing. I understand there is more nuance than black and white that's what I understand. There is strength in endurance and endurance in strength. It just depends what degree. People with less subtlety therefore categorize it as they feel the need to cut up and categorize everything. This knowledge is derived from years of hands on experience. The body adapts to what you demand of it. Simple. If you are exhausting your muscles consistently and demanding your body to do more than it currently can, It WILL adapt to do what you demand of it.

Push-ups, horse stance, pull ups, and ect demand the body to change, it's just a more gradual and natural change than weights, but as long as you keep exhausting your muscles you will develop into a more impressive physical specimen. Why? Because that's what you are demanding of your body.

I prefer the natural fluidity that facilitates more perfect form over the body overcompensating because you are telling it the wrong signal for what you want to do. Eventually, you reach a point of maintenance... Where gains are not necessary and any further gains put you into a zone where your being and physiological profile is unbalanced. This becomes a detriment to your form, and therefore, impedes your ability to enhance your technique. In short, reach a period of maintenance physically, but always strive to improve your fluidity, form, and technique.

You don't have to agree. I kick around ideas on here based upon wisdom gleaned through experience.. I am a resource. But whether people want to listen or not is on them.