How fit are you?

[brikis98]

I recently ran across the Athletic Skill Levels page from Crossfit Seattle which defines four "levels" of athletic ability, from "healthy beginner" to "elite athlete". Each level contains benchmarks you should pass, such as being able to lift a certain weight, run 400m in a certain time, and so on. There are PDF's on the right side of the page with details about each level, as well as the cumulative poster of all skill levels. Obviously, the definition of these skill levels is far from perfect. For example, even though it's Crossfit, the lack of anything even remotely representing "long distance" is a bit suspect. Moreover, some of the skills seem much harder than others: 45 consecutive thrusters @ 0.5 bodyweight is only intermediate?? However, they do acknowledge their own weaknesses:

Finally, the Athletic Skill Levels are intended to be a gauge and a guide, not a standardized test you are obliged to "pass." Do not beat yourself up for not being "elite." Use the Levels to evaluate your strengths and weaknesses and to make smart choices about your training time. This guide is not a definitive guide to CrossFit, an exercise prescription, nor a complete guide to developing the skills. The skills are intended to be broadly representative of general fitness.

So, keeping that in mind, I think this can be a fun tool to see where you're at.

 

[Deeko]

I would actually have to try a lot of those to get an accurate classification, but on the weight room maxes, I'm over elite in every category where I knew the number.

 

[brikis98]

Following the list on the poster of all skill levels, here's roughly where I'm at (some of these are approximations, since I rarely do max efforts):

Squats: 80 free squats (beginner/intermediate)
Squat: 1.9 x bodyweight (elite)
Push-ups: 70 free, not sure how many on rings (intermediate/advanced)
Bench press: 1.56 x bodyweight (elite)
Rope climb: never tried
OH squat: 0.95 x bodyweight (advanced)
KB snatch: never tried
400m run: 1:05 (elite)
Deadlift: 2.25 x bodyweight (advanced/elite)
Military press: 1 x bodyweight (elite)
Handstand push-up: 10 (advanced)
Clean: 1.35 x bodyweight (advanced/elite)
Hanging knees to elbows: 15 (intermediate)
Thrusters: never tried max reps
800m run: 2:50 (advanced)
500m row: never tried
Vertical jump: haven't measured
Dips: 15 on rings (intermediate/advanced)
Dip: 1 with 0.75 x bodyweight (advanced)
Pull-ups: 30+ (intermediate/advanced)
Pull-up: 1 with 0.65 x bodyweight (intermediate/advanced)
Muscle-up: 8 (advanced)
L-sit: 30 seconds (intermediate)
Row: never tried
Snatch: 0.78 x bodyweight (intermediate/advanced)
Helen: 11:04, never tried Chelsea (intermediate/advanced)
1 mile run: 6:00 (advanced)

 

[HN]

i really need to keep working deadlifts. if i could get that up to advanced numbers, i could hit 5x bw on CFT

 

[brikis98]

Originally posted by: HN
i really need to keep working deadlifts. if i could get that up to advanced numbers, i could hit 5x bw on CFT

I haven't done a CFT in a looong time. I think after a few more weeks of my strength/power CF hybrid (CFSPB?), I'll give it a shot. I should be pretty close to a 1000lb CFT, or 5.4 x bodyweight.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

I've seen this chart a lot and I don't think things are skewed equally for each movement. For example, 2x bodyweight on squat is elite? I don't quite consider that elite. Nor do I consider a 60+ second 400m anywhere close to elite. I don't know... I think a better chart could be made. I mean, it's not bad to use as a comparison amongst athletes as an overall gauge, but I think it's a pretty meh way to quantify your performance.

 

[InflatableBuddha]

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged
I've seen this chart a lot and I don't think things are skewed equally for each movement. For example, 2x bodyweight on squat is elite? I don't quite consider that elite. Nor do I consider a 60+ second 400m anywhere close to elite. I don't know... I think a better chart could be made. I mean, it's not bad to use as a comparison amongst athletes as an overall gauge, but I think it's a pretty meh way to quantify your performance.

My guess is that this is designed for more well-rounded athletes such as decathletes. You're right that a 60 second quarter and 2x body weight squat is not very elite, but someone with the strength and speed to do all of those exercises at the elite level would not be nearly as fast as someone who specializes in a 400m sprint or one mile.

 

[HN]

the only one if find rather odd is the one for level III core, OHS 1 rep bw.
the jump to level IV for that one is 15 reps bw.
that's a rather large gap between the two levels compared to the other categories.

 

[StageLeft]

I'm all over the map. I'd say for most I'm intermediate with a couple advanced. Within the past four years I've had an elite bench and almost elite 400 m, but these days (been slacking too much) I'm not sure anything is advanced, and I probably have one or two in the level one (terrible core!).

Compared to the average joe, though, I think if a person sat comfortably in the advanced they'd easily be 99th percentile for physical fitness among adults. I'd say I was 99th a couple of years ago and still couldn't have done most of the advanced.

 

[SWScorch]

given that I am a scrawny distance runner, I score very high marks on the running events (60 second 400m and sub-5:00 mile) and pretty decent on the body weight stuff too, but anything involving lifting weight I am sore lacking!!!!!

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged
I've seen this chart a lot and I don't think things are skewed equally for each movement. For example, 2x bodyweight on squat is elite? I don't quite consider that elite. Nor do I consider a 60+ second 400m anywhere close to elite. I don't know... I think a better chart could be made. I mean, it's not bad to use as a comparison amongst athletes as an overall gauge, but I think it's a pretty meh way to quantify your performance.

My guess is that this is designed for more well-rounded athletes such as decathletes. You're right that a 60 second quarter and 2x body weight squat is not very elite, but someone with the strength and speed to do all of those exercises at the elite level would not be nearly as fast as someone who specializes in a 400m sprint or one mile.

You'd be surprised. The most well-rounded athletes I know of are olympic sprinters who can withstand grueling high intensity, low intensity, weightlifting oriented, and other exercises. But yeah, clearly they're not going to be racing the 200m and the 5k even though their time for the 5k would still be ridiculously low.

 

[GenHoth]

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged

Your new avatar keeps confusing me!

 

[BeauJangles]

From that chart, I fall between level II and III, leaning more towards III.

A lot of the exercises they use as a standard aren't things I've done. For instance, I've never actually taken 10 minutes and tried to do 200 24 kg kb swings.

Also, 30 rounds of Chelsea in 30 min is nuts.

 

[GenHoth]

Also: I have some work to do, gotta catch up with you guys!

 

[brikis98]

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged
I've seen this chart a lot and I don't think things are skewed equally for each movement. For example, 2x bodyweight on squat is elite? I don't quite consider that elite. Nor do I consider a 60+ second 400m anywhere close to elite. I don't know... I think a better chart could be made. I mean, it's not bad to use as a comparison amongst athletes as an overall gauge, but I think it's a pretty meh way to quantify your performance.

As I said in the first post, it's far from perfect. However, I think it should be clear that "elite" on this chart is not "elite" in the typical way we mean it. A 1:04 400m doesn't make you an elite sprinter and a 2 x bodyweight squat does not make you an elite powerlifter. However, getting times that are actually "elite" in any activity typically requires you to become a "specialist", which means your other abilities will often suffer. For example, an elite powerlifter may squat much more than twice his bodyweight, but he probably can't run a 5 minute mile. On the other hand, an elite runner may do a 400m in under 1:04, but he probably can't do a front lever for 15 seconds. An elite gymnast could easily handle the 15 seconds of front lever, but probably couldn't run 800m in 2:20. And so on and so forth.

These numbers are "elite" for a generalist: someone who is pretty good at just about everything. A 5 minute mile may not be "elite" amongst competitive runners, but any person that can run a 5 minute mile, deadlift 2.5xbw, do 50 consecutive ring dips, hold an l-sit for 1.5 minutes, snatch 1.25xbw and row 500m in 1:25 is unquestionably elite as far as GPP. Therefore, this chart is useful as a general guide and helps you see where your strengths and weaknesses are.

 

[brikis98]

Originally posted by: HN
the only one if find rather odd is the one for level III core, OHS 1 rep bw.
the jump to level IV for that one is 15 reps bw.
that's a rather large gap between the two levels compared to the other categories.

Yea, I definitely agree. For exaple, the difference between 1 rep and 15 reps of bodyweight OH squat is MUCH bigger than the difference between a 1.25 x bw bench press and a 1.5 x bw bench press. Having said that, I still think that the most ridiculous requirement is 45 reps of thrusters at 0.5xbw just to be "intermediate". For me, that would be 45 consecutive reps at 92.5lbs. For comparison, the entire Fran workout contains 45 thrusters at 95lbs and there is no way in hell I could do all of those consecutively.

 

[brikis98]

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged
I've seen this chart a lot and I don't think things are skewed equally for each movement. For example, 2x bodyweight on squat is elite? I don't quite consider that elite. Nor do I consider a 60+ second 400m anywhere close to elite. I don't know... I think a better chart could be made. I mean, it's not bad to use as a comparison amongst athletes as an overall gauge, but I think it's a pretty meh way to quantify your performance.

My guess is that this is designed for more well-rounded athletes such as decathletes. You're right that a 60 second quarter and 2x body weight squat is not very elite, but someone with the strength and speed to do all of those exercises at the elite level would not be nearly as fast as someone who specializes in a 400m sprint or one mile.

You'd be surprised. The most well-rounded athletes I know of are olympic sprinters who can withstand grueling high intensity, low intensity, weightlifting oriented, and other exercises. But yeah, clearly they're not going to be racing the 200m and the 5k even though their time for the 5k would still be ridiculously low.

Heh, I'd expect olympic athletes of almost any kind, especially track & field, to do pretty damn well at a whole lot of things. They are, after all, elite athletes. However, even many of them, as "specialists" would probably still struggle in some areas. For example, I could see the gymnastics elements being tough for sprinters as they are not likely to include them in their training: pistols, handstand push-ups, front lever, ring dips, muscle-ups, and l-sits.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Originally posted by: brikis98

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged
I've seen this chart a lot and I don't think things are skewed equally for each movement. For example, 2x bodyweight on squat is elite? I don't quite consider that elite. Nor do I consider a 60+ second 400m anywhere close to elite. I don't know... I think a better chart could be made. I mean, it's not bad to use as a comparison amongst athletes as an overall gauge, but I think it's a pretty meh way to quantify your performance.

My guess is that this is designed for more well-rounded athletes such as decathletes. You're right that a 60 second quarter and 2x body weight squat is not very elite, but someone with the strength and speed to do all of those exercises at the elite level would not be nearly as fast as someone who specializes in a 400m sprint or one mile.

You'd be surprised. The most well-rounded athletes I know of are olympic sprinters who can withstand grueling high intensity, low intensity, weightlifting oriented, and other exercises. But yeah, clearly they're not going to be racing the 200m and the 5k even though their time for the 5k would still be ridiculously low.

Heh, I'd expect olympic athletes of almost any kind, especially track & field, to do pretty damn well at a whole lot of things. They are, after all, elite athletes. However, even many of them, as "specialists" would probably still struggle in some areas. For example, I could see the gymnastics elements being tough for sprinters as they are not likely to include them in their training: pistols, handstand push-ups, front lever, ring dips, muscle-ups, and l-sits.

I think you'd be entirely surprised there. I took to gymnastic movements pretty naturally after having been a sprinter for a while. I've also seen some of the most explosive muscle ups and best L-pullups from sprinters. To be perfectly honest, I feel they are some of the most versatile athletes. I've seen a sprinter run a 4:30 mile, run a 48 400m, run a 17 min 5k, do insane muscle ups, flips, etc. Clearly I may be biased and I think gymnasts are also very excellent athletes, but I don't quite feel they are quite as well-rounded.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Originally posted by: brikis98
As I said in the first post, it's far from perfect. However, I think it should be clear that "elite" on this chart is not "elite" in the typical way we mean it. A 1:04 400m doesn't make you an elite sprinter and a 2 x bodyweight squat does not make you an elite powerlifter. However, getting times that are actually "elite" in any activity typically requires you to become a "specialist", which means your other abilities will often suffer. For example, an elite powerlifter may squat much more than twice his bodyweight, but he probably can't run a 5 minute mile. On the other hand, an elite runner may do a 400m in under 1:04, but he probably can't do a front lever for 15 seconds. An elite gymnast could easily handle the 15 seconds of front lever, but probably couldn't run 800m in 2:20. And so on and so forth.

These numbers are "elite" for a generalist: someone who is pretty good at just about everything. A 5 minute mile may not be "elite" amongst competitive runners, but any person that can run a 5 minute mile, deadlift 2.5xbw, do 50 consecutive ring dips, hold an l-sit for 1.5 minutes, snatch 1.25xbw and row 500m in 1:25 is unquestionably elite as far as GPP. Therefore, this chart is useful as a general guide and helps you see where your strengths and weaknesses are.

Perhaps I'm just a hardass in what I expect from myself. I understand these numbers are respectable, but I just don't feel that the terms are quite indicative of the skill level. *shrugs*

 

[brikis98]

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged
I think you'd be entirely surprised there. I took to gymnastic movements pretty naturally after having been a sprinter for a while. I've also seen some of the most explosive muscle ups and best L-pullups from sprinters. To be perfectly honest, I feel they are some of the most versatile athletes. I've seen a sprinter run a 4:30 mile, run a 48 400m, run a 17 min 5k, do insane muscle ups, flips, etc. Clearly I may be biased and I think gymnasts are also very excellent athletes, but I don't quite feel they are quite as well-rounded.

I'm not arguing that sprinters tend to be great athletes, and as I said before, I have little doubt that olympic caliber athletes, being elite by definition, would do quite well at a lot of these tasks. However, most olympic athletes are still specialists, which means that they usually are insanely good at some proportion of the tasks but will have weaknesses elsewhere. For example, I'd expect sprinters to dominate any sort of running/rowing event, do well at explosive lifts, and probably at the slow lifts as well. However, I'm highly skeptical that even an elite sprinter would be capable of a 1:30 l-sit, a 1xbw pull-up, 15 OH squats @ bodyweight or a 15 second front lever hold unless he did CF/GPP style training (which would be odd for a specialist).

 

[EvilYoda]

My CF box just adopted this this week...it's going to be interesting seeing where I fall in the rankings. Most of my stuff is between level II and III.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Squat: 2x+ bodyweight
KB snatch: 1 pood x 25 consecutive (Not ME)
400m run: Probably around 55 sec atm
Deadlift: 2.29 x bodyweight (last I maxed)
Military press: ~1 x bodyweight
Handstand push-up: 10
Thrusters: 95x11
800m run: Probably around 2:30 atm
500m row: 1:40ish
Vertical jump: haven't measured either
Dips: 30 consecutive (Not ME)
Pull-ups: 20 (Not ME)
Pull-up: 5 x Bodyweight + 50 pounds
Muscle-up: 15
L-sit: Haven't tried
Row: Haven't tried
Snatch: No access to oly plates
1 mile run: Probably pretty slow now. Maybe high 5's.

I figured that since I bombed this thread, I should at least post my stats. I stole your template, brikis. Hope ya don't mind. I haven't actually lifted heavy all that much lately, which I would like to remedy. I was supposed to lift today, but needed to get some rest and to go shopping. Hopefully Thursday I can get some DLs + some cardio in.

 

[SWScorch]

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged

I think you'd be entirely surprised there. I took to gymnastic movements pretty naturally after having been a sprinter for a while. I've also seen some of the most explosive muscle ups and best L-pullups from sprinters. To be perfectly honest, I feel they are some of the most versatile athletes. I've seen a sprinter run a 4:30 mile, run a 48 400m, run a 17 min 5k, do insane muscle ups, flips, etc. Clearly I may be biased and I think gymnasts are also very excellent athletes, but I don't quite feel they are quite as well-rounded.

I'm not trying to be contrary here, but in all my years of running, I have never ever seen a sprinter (meaning someone who specializes in 100m-400m) who has been able to run fast for more than half a mile. I do know some guys who are hella fast and thus also just so happen to be good sprinters, but nobody I know who specializes in sprints has ever been able to run faster than a 20-minute 5K. Mid-distance guys might have the speed and range (look at Alan Webb, who has ran everything from the 800m to the 10K at or near American record pace), but there is no way Usain Bolt or Tyson Gay could run a 5K at anywhere near a competitive level. They don't have the aerobic capacity.

 

[Koing]

Originally posted by: SWScorch

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged

I think you'd be entirely surprised there. I took to gymnastic movements pretty naturally after having been a sprinter for a while. I've also seen some of the most explosive muscle ups and best L-pullups from sprinters. To be perfectly honest, I feel they are some of the most versatile athletes. I've seen a sprinter run a 4:30 mile, run a 48 400m, run a 17 min 5k, do insane muscle ups, flips, etc. Clearly I may be biased and I think gymnasts are also very excellent athletes, but I don't quite feel they are quite as well-rounded.

I'm not trying to be contrary here, but in all my years of running, I have never ever seen a sprinter (meaning someone who specializes in 100m-400m) who has been able to run fast for more than half a mile. I do know some guys who are hella fast and thus also just so happen to be good sprinters, but nobody I know who specializes in sprints has ever been able to run faster than a 20-minute 5K. Mid-distance guys might have the speed and range (look at Alan Webb, who has ran everything from the 800m to the 10K at or near American record pace), but there is no way Usain Bolt or Tyson Gay could run a 5K at anywhere near a competitive level. They don't have the aerobic capacity.

Indeed mate.

Sprinter doesn't do a 17min 5k! I've seen some sprinters run a solid mile but they weren't 'pure' sprinters as in 100-200m. 400m is a sprint but the difference between a 11.8 and 10.5 100m sprinter is worlds apart.

Squats: f0ck knows. I don't do reps.
Squat: 2x bw back squat
Push-ups: 75 with some training, 55 when not doing push ups
Bench press: 115kg @ 88kg
Rope climb: Im' a beast at this. I eat on rope. We had 2 ropes at the Gymnastics club and I would monster them
OH squat: 116kg Snatch
KB snatch: Don't doi t
400m run: 62seconds, I was ruined...
Deadlift: 170kg @ 84kg
Military press: 77kg @ 85kg
Handstand push-up: Don't do any
Clean: 145kg @ 86kg bw
Hanging knees to elbows: Never tested but at least 20 I'd imagine
Thrusters: 55 in a minute, never maxed out
800m run: It would almost certainly be terrible, at least 2:50-3mins?!
500m row: 1:32 baby
Vertical jump: 84cm
Dips: 40 dips
Dip: 7x with 27.5kg x 4sets
Pull-ups: 17 all the way down and up
Pull-up: 1x 45kg @ 85kg
Muscle-up: 4 on a static bar, failure on rings
L-sit: 60seconds on the ground
Row: Don't row distance
Snatch: 116kg @ 83.5kg bw : 1.40x bw
Helen: 11:04, never tried Chelsea (intermediate/advanced)
1 mile run: 9mins, it was savagely pathetic I was ruined then had hurdle training afterwards! Dam those winter training!

Originally posted by: brikis98

Originally posted by: SociallyChallenged
1:30 l-sit, a 1xbw pull-up, 15 OH squats @ bodyweight or a 15 second front lever hold unless he did CF/GPP style training (which would be odd for a specialist).

A 90second L sit from the floor isn't out of the question imo for an elite sprinter.
Pull ups is actually a good indicator of a persons ability to sprint. The faster you can move your arms the faster you can sprint.
15 OH squat isn't out of the question either
15secs front level is probably not so but I'd say doable
The one that stands out as wrong ist eh 17min for a 5k! A sprinter would probably not be able to do that but they are overall beasts.

Gymnasts have sick muscular endurance but they can't sprint properly. You ever seen a gymnast sprint? Relatively slow legs but very explosive and a GRANITE like back that is just ridiculous.

I want to see someone post up 30 strict pull ups! You do realise a pull up is when your palms face away from you? Your chin has to go over the bar and you have to go to full bottom where your arms lock out properly. Bent arms don't count.

At the gladiator auditions all the tests were about speed, agility and power. Nothing included raw strength. The middle distance guys didn't hack it, the rugby guys were slow (a high level Rugby guy would have done far better), the personal trainers didn't do well, the martial arts guy were generally bad, a few of the supposedly 11second sprinters were crap also (maybe 11second in their youth and minus 15kgs). Obviously if your good in your choosen sport you would do well but a middle distance/ long distance/ endurance athlete isn't going to be near a person that does pure speed, agility and power. And conversely that guy will fare a lot worse on eudurance stuff!

A lot of people's pull ups didn't count as the refs were strict on not kipping, going all the way down and up. I rarely see anyone do a strict pull up in any gym. It's all to bent arms.

Anyone that rattles out 20 pull ups is a beast!

Koing

 

[brikis98]

Originally posted by: Koing
A 90second L sit from the floor isn't out of the question imo for an elite sprinter.

I'd like to see it.

Originally posted by: Koing
Pull ups is actually a good indicator of a persons ability to sprint. The faster you can move your arms the faster you can sprint.

Moving your arms fast is not the same as doing a pull-up with double your bodyweight.

Originally posted by: Koing
15 OH squat isn't out of the question either

I have never, ever seen someone be good at the OH squat without plenty of practice devoted to it. Your sport is o-lifting, so maybe you take it for granted, but the average person and even elite sprinters are just not likely to have the shoulder or core stability for 15 consecutive bodyweight OH squats.

Originally posted by: Koing
I want to see someone post up 30 strict pull ups! You do realise a pull up is when your palms face away from you? Your chin has to go over the bar and you have to go to full bottom where your arms lock out properly. Bent arms don't count.

It's worth mentioning that since these standards come from a Crossfit site, the "standard" pull-up is the kipping pull-up. Certainly the arms have to be straight at the bottom and the chin has to clear the bar, but kipping is generally allowed and encouraged. However, it's also worth noting that the elite level explicitly lists 40 dead hang pull-ups. Can't say I know too many people who could pull that off.