The Strength and Conditioning Practices of Strongman Competitors

Abstract

This study describes the results of a survey of the strength and conditioning practices of strongman competitors. A 65-item online survey was completed by 167 strongman competitors. The subject group included 83 local, 65 national, and 19 international strongman competitors. The survey comprised 3 main areas of enquiry: (a) exercise selection, (b) training protocols and organization, and (c) strongman event training. The back squat and conventional deadlift were reported as the most commonly used squat and deadlift (65.8 and 88.0%, respectively). Eighty percent of the subjects incorporated some form of periodization in their training. Seventy-four percent of subjects included hypertrophy training, 97% included maximal strength training, and 90% included power training in their training organization. The majority performed speed repetitions with submaximal loads in the squat and deadlift (59.9 and 61.1%, respectively). Fifty-four percent of subjects incorporated lower body plyometrics into their training, and 88% of the strongman competitors reported performing Olympic lifts as part of their strongman training. Seventy-eight percent of subjects reported that the clean was the most performed Olympic lift used in their training. Results revealed that 56 and 38% of the strongman competitors used elastic bands and chains in their training, respectively. The findings demonstrate that strongman competitors incorporate a variety of strength and conditioning practices that are focused on increasing muscular size, and the development of maximal strength and power into their conditioning preparation. The farmers walk, log press, and stones were the most commonly performed strongman exercises used in a general strongman training session by these athletes. These data provide information on the training practices required to compete in the sport of strongman.

Full text

THE STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING PRACTICES OF
STRONGMAN COMPETITORS
PAUL W. WINWOOD,
1,2
JUSTIN W.L. KEOGH,
1
AND NIGEL K. HARRIS
1
1
Sport Performance Research Institute New Zealand, School of Sport and Recreation, AUT University, Auckland; and
2
Department of Sport and Recreation, School of Applied Science, Bay of Plenty Polytechnic, Tauranga, New Zealand
ABSTRACT
Winwood, PW, Keogh, JWL, and Harris, NK. The strength and
conditioning practices of strongman competitors. J Strength
Cond Res 25(11): 3118–3128, 2011—This study describes
the results of a survey of the strength and conditioning
practices of strongman competitors. A 65-item online survey
was completed by 167 strongman competitors. The subject
group included 83 local, 65 national, and 19 international
strongman competitors. The survey comprised 3 main areas of
enquiry: (a) exercise selection, (b) training protocols and
organization, and (c) strongman event training. The back squat
and conventional deadlift were reported as the most commonly
used squat and deadlift (65.8 and 88.0%, respectively). Eighty
percent of the subjects incorporated some form of periodization
in their training. Seventy-four percent of subjects included
hypertrophy training, 97% included maximal strength training,
and 90% included power training in their training organization.
The majority performed speed repetitions with submaximal
loads in the squat and deadlift (59.9 and 61.1%, respectively).
Fifty-four percent of subjects incorporated lower body plyo-
metrics into their training, and 88% of the strongman
competitors reported performing Olympic lifts as part of their
strongman training. Seventy-eight percent of subjects reported
that the clean was the most performed Olympic lift used in their
training. Results revealed that 56 and 38% of the strongman
competitors used elastic bands and chains in their training,
respectively. The findings demonstrate that strongman com-
petitors incorporate a variety of strength and conditioning
practices that are focused on increasing muscular size, and the
development of maximal strength and power into their
conditioning preparation. The farmers walk, log press, and
stones were the most commonly performed strongman
exercises used in a general strongman training session by
these athletes. These data provide information on the training
practices required to compete in the sport of strongman.
KEY WORDS hypertrophy, maximal strength, periodization,
power, survey, training organization
INTRODUCTION
In the past decade, the sport of strongman has surged in
popularity in many countries, both as a spectator sport
and in the number of active competitors. Strongman
style training modalities may have some advantages
over traditional gym-based resistance training approaches.
For example, traditional gym-based training exercises are
generally performed with 2 feet side by side and require the
load to be moved in the vertical plane (20). Strongman events
represent functional movements in multiple planes and
challenge the whole musculoskeletal system in terms of
strength, stability, and physiological demands (25). As a
result, many strength and conditioning specialists are
beginning to incorporate strongman exercises into the
conditioning programs of their athletes (1,13). Although
the resistance training practices of strength and conditioning
coaches (6–9) and athletes (14,16,27,29,31,34,35) have been
extensively examined, no research has yet examined
common strongman training practices. Thus, strength and
conditioning coaches have little evidence base on which to
inform the inclusion of strongman training within their
programming practice.
Only 4 scientific studies appear to have been conducted on
any of the strongman events (3,19,20,25) with the emphasis
being on the metabolic and biomechanical (kinematic
determinants of performance and lower back and hip loads)
demands of these exercises. The first published study of
a strongman event examined the metabolic demands of
pushing and pulling a motor vehicle (3). The athletes
achieved peak VO
2
and heart rate (HR) values within the first
100m (65 and 96%, respectively, of treadmill maximum
values), recorded a blood lactate (BLa) concentration of 15.6
mmolL
21
, and experienced an acute decrement in vertical
jump height of 10 cm (217% of maximum) immediately after
performing each of these tasks. In a more recent study, Keogh
et al. (20) examined the change in HR and BLa across
multiple sets of tire flips. Findings from this study showed
Address correspondence to Paul Winwood, paul.winwood@boppoly.
ac.nz.
25(11)/3118–3128
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Ó2011 National Strength and Conditioning Association
3118
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

comparable HR and BLa levels to that of car push and car
pull of Berning et al. (3).
Of the biomechanical studies, the first study published
was that of McGill et al. (25). Trunk muscle activation and
lumbar spine motion, load, and stiffness were examined in
3 strongman competitors and comparisons made in the
different strongman events (tire flip, Atlas stones, log lift,
farmers walk, and yoke walk). These lifts were generally
characterized by high to very high spinal compression and
shear forces, joint torques, and activity of many of the hip and
trunk stabilizers (as assessed via electromyography [EMG]).
The other 2 biomechanical studies conducted have sought to
characterize the kinematics of 2 strongman exercises, that is,
the tire flip and heavy, sprint-style sled pull (19,20). Keogh
et al. (20) examined the temporal analysis of the tire flip. The
main finding of the study was that the duration of the second
pull was the strongest determinant of tire flip performance.
The heavy sprint–style sled pull was examined using
6 resistance trained subjects experienced in performing the
heavy sled pull (19). Video analysis showed kinematic
similarities to the acceleration phase of sprinting; however,
the sled pull had significantly smaller step lengths and step
rates, longer ground contact time, and a more horizontal
trunk in several phases of these sled pulls. The findings
suggest that the ability to generate large propulsive anterio-
posterior forces and impulses during relatively short periods
of ground contact is critical for successful heavy sled pull
performance.
The strongman studies provide some evidence of the
physiological and biomechanical characteristics of strongman
training. The studies show that the athletes need power
through midrange (20), metabolic conditioning (3) and high
core and hip abduction strength and stability, grip strength,
and high levels of overall strength (25). There is no empirical
evidence on how strongman competitors train. The purpose
of this study was to (a) describe the strength and condi-
tioning practices employed by strongman competitors and
(b) determine how well strongman competitors apply the
scientific principles of resistance training. Such an analysis
would be most useful for novice strongman competitors and
those wishing to compete in the sport of strongman. Strength
and conditioning coaches will also benefit in terms of how
to best incorporate strongman exercises into their athlete’s
resistance training programs to help maximize performance
enhancements.
METHODS
Experimental Approach to the Problem
This exploratory descriptive study was designed to provide
comprehensive descriptive information about the training
practices of strongman competitors. The research hypothesis
was that strongmen competitors follow scientifically based
strength and conditioning practices in their annual training
programs, which was assessed through a comprehensive
survey of strength and conditioning practices.
Subjects
Inclusion criteria were defined as being a local, National, and
International strongman competitor. Participants had to be
men aged 18–45 years, have at least 12 months current
experience in using common strongman exercises such as the
tire flip, farmers walk, log press, and sled drags in their
conditioning programs. They had to have competed in at least
1 strongman competition within the last year or were in
training for their first strongman competition. Only fully
completed questionnaires were used for data analysis. Thus,
the results from 167 strongman competitors from 20 countries
were used in this study. The subjects consisted of 83 local,
65 national, and 19 international competitors. Tables 1 and 2
provide a summary of the results. To protect the confiden-
tiality of the strongman competitors, no participant’s details
were associated with the survey. The participants’ mean
(6SD) age, height, and weight were 30 67 years, 183 6
7 cm, and 113 620 kg, respectively. This study was
approved by the AUT University Ethics Committee,
Auckland, New Zealand.
Research Instrument
The survey StrongmanTraining Practices was adapted from the
survey used in research with elite powerlifters (34). The
original survey was pilot tested with participants of the local
strongman and power lifting club to ensure its validity for use
with this population. As a result of the pilot testing, the
survey was slightly modified including clarifying and im-
proving the wording of a small number of questions before it
was administered to the sample. The 65-item strongman
survey was sectioned into 3 main different areas of inquiry,
including exercise selection, training protocols and organi-
zation, and strongman training. Training protocols and
organization included questions on periodization, hypertro-
phy (i.e., training directly focused on building muscle size
and mass), maximal strength training, strength and power
training (i.e., training methods that were focused on
increasing explosive strength and power), and aerobic and
anaerobic conditioning. The strongman events training
section included questions on strongman implements used
in training. Participants were asked to give their most
common or typical training values for each training phase.
Closed questions were used for all questions (questions 1–64)
except question 65 where an open-ended question was
presented. Additional demographic information including
gender, age, height, weight, weight training, and strongman
training experience, and 1RM lifts were collected from the
questionnaire (demographic and 1RM information was self-
reported from participants). Sportsurvey.co.nz was used to
launch the electronic survey on the Internet.
Data Collection
Strongmen were recruited through multimedia. The primary
method was posting the link to the survey on national and
international strongman forums (e.g., Aussie Strength forum,
Australia; Sugden Barbell forum, United Kingdom; Marunde
VOLUME 25 | NUMBER 11 | NOVEMBER 2011 | 3119
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
|
www.nsca-jscr.org
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

Muscle, USA; and North American Strongman Incorporated)
and the social networking site Facebook. Presidents of
strongman clubs in New Zealand, Australia, and America
were contacted by email and sent an electronic link to the
online survey to deliver to their club members. An
information sheet outlining the objectives and purpose of
the study was detailed on the first page of the online survey.
Statistical Analyses
All questions that were related to the application of the
scientific principles of resistance training were categorized.
Categorical and ordinal data were reported as percentages of
response. Univariate analysis was used to describe the basic
features of the data in this study. Microsoft excel was used for
data analysis.
TABLE 1. Summary of the most common strength and conditioning practices for exercise selection and training
organization among strongman competitors.
Percentage that reported using
the training practice
Exercise selection
Perform traditional resistance exercises 100
Type of squats commonly used in training
Back squats most commonly performed 65.8
Type of deadlifts commonly used in training
Conventional deadlift most commonly performed 88.0
Training organization
Periodization and planning
Use periodization in training organization 80.2
Use training log or training diary 82.6
Hypertrophy
Performed hypertrophy training 73.7
Performed hypertrophy training close to failure 63.4
Performed 10 reps for hypertrophy training 32.2
Performed 3 sets per exercise for hypertrophy training 36.0
Use rest periods 1–1:59 min for hypertrophy training 39.7
Maximal strength training
Performed maximal strength training 97.0
Performed 3 reps for maximal strength training 46.3
Performed 3 sets per exercises for maximal strength training 30.0
Use rest periods 3–4 min for maximal strength training 35.6
Power
Performed power training 90.4
Performed 3 reps for power training 33.8
Performed 5 sets for power training 31.8
Use rest periods 2–2:59 min for power training 28.5
Performed traditional resistance exercises as fast as possible 50.6
Performed squat as fast as possible (submaximal loads 0–70% 1RM) 59.9
Performed squat as fast as possible with the submaximal load of 51–60% 1RM 67.3
Performed deadlift as fast as possible (submaximal loads 0–70% 1RM) 61.1
Performed deadlift as fast as possible with the submaximal load of 51–60% 1RM 63.1
Use bands 56.3
Use chains 37.7
Use Olympic lifts 88.0
Use loads 81–90% for Olympic lifting 31.7
Performed the clean in training 77.8
Performed ballistic lifting (squat jumps and bench press throws) 20.4
Use loads 31–40% for Ballistic lifting 25.0
Performed lower body plyometric drills 53.9
Performed upper body plyometric drills 29.3
Aerobic/anaerobic conditioning
Performed aerobic/anaerobic conditioning 89.8
Performed 16–30 min 39.3
Performed sport specific conditioning 35.3
3120
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
Strongman Training Practices
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

RESULTS
Exercise Selection
One hundred and sixty-seven subjects (100%) reported
performing traditional resistance exercises such as the squat
and deadlift as part of their training. Subjects were asked to
indicate what type of squats and deadlifts they most
commonly performed in their training. Sixty-six percent of
subjects reported that the back squat was the most commonly
performed squat, and 88% reported that the conventional
deadlift was the most commonly performed deadlift used in
their training. Front squats and partial deadlifts were reported
as sometimes and quite often performed by 68 and 63% of
subjects, respectively.
Training Protocols and Organization
One hundred and thirty-four of the 167 (80.2%) subjects
included some method of periodization in their training
organization, and 138 of the 167 (82.6%) subjects used some
sort of training log or training diary.
Hypertrophy. One hundred and twenty-three of the 167
(73.7%) subjects included hypertrophy training in their
training organization. Eight-two percent of subjects per-
formed their hypertrophy training close to failure or to failure.
Eighty percent of the subjects performed 8–12 repetitions per
set for their hypertrophy training. Ten repetitions were the
most common reported training practice (32.2%) performed
for hypertrophy among strongman competitors. Eighty-five
percent of the subjects performed 3–5 sets per exercise for
their hypertrophy training. Fifty-nine percent of the subjects
used rest periods of ,2 minutes between sets for their
hypertrophy training, with between 1 and 2 minutes the most
common reported rest period (39.7%).
Strength. One hundred and sixty-two of the 167 (97.0%)
subjects included maximal strength training in their training
TABLE 2. Summary of the most common training practices for strongman training.
Percentage that reported
using the training practice
Performed with strongman implements only 50.2
Performed with strongman implements once a week 43.7
Tire flip
Performed the tire flip 82.0
Performed ,1 a week 53.3
Performed 3 sets 40.1
Performed 10 repetitions 31.4
Performed with same load as competition 50.4
Log clean and press
Performed the log clean and press 95.2
Performed once a week 61.0
Performed 5 sets 37.1
Performed 5 repetitions 30.4
Performed with same load as competition 47.5
Stones
Performed the stones 94.0
Performed once a week 48.4
Performed 3 sets 28.0
Performed 5 repetitions 29.3
Performed with same load as competition 61.5
Farmers walk
Performed the farmers walk 96.4
Performed once a week 59.6
Performed a distance of 20 m 37.9
Performed with heavier load than in competition 46.6
Truck pull
Performed the truck pull 48.5
Performed ,1 a week 69.1
Performed a distance of 30 m 39.5
Performed with same load as competition 43.0
Rest period between sets
Use rest periods .4 min 58.1
VOLUME 25 | NUMBER 11 | NOVEMBER 2011 | 3121
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
|
www.nsca-jscr.org
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

organization. Ninety-seven percent of the subjects performed
1–6 repetitions per set for their maximal strength training.
Three repetitions were the most common reported training
practice (46.3%) performed for maximal strength training.
Seventy-one percent of the subjects performed 3–5 sets per
exercise for maximal strength training. Eight-seven percent of
the subjects performed rest periods of .2 minutes between
sets for their maximal strength training, with the most
common rest period being 3–4 minutes (35.6%).
Power. One hundred and fifty-one of the 167 (90.4%) subjects
included power training in their training organization. Eight-
y-eight percent of the subjects performed 1–6 repetitions per
set for their power training. Three repetitions were the most
common reported training practice (33.8%) performed for
power among strongman competitors. Seventy percent of the
subjects performed 3–5 sets per exercise for their power
training. Five sets were the most common reported training
practice (31.8%) performed for power among strongman
competitors. Fifty-eight percent
of the subjects performed rest
periods of .2 minutes between
sets for their power training. The
most common reported rest
period between sets (28.5%)
among strongman competitors
for power training was 2–2:59
minutes.
Repetition Speed. Subjects
were asked whether they per-
formed their traditional resis-
tance exercises as fast as
possible (maximum), at speeds
less than maximum, or a mixture
of maximum and less than
maximum. The results showed
that 50.6% of strongman com-
petitors performed traditional
resistance exercises as fast as
possible (maximum), and 40.7% performed a mixture of
maximum and less than maximum.
Explosive Training Load. Subjects were asked
whether they attempted to lift submaximal loads (0–70%
1RM) as fast as possible in the squat or deadlift. Approxi-
mately 60% of strongman competitors performed speed
repetitions with submaximal loads in the squat and deadlift.
The submaximal load of 51–60% of 1RM was the most
popular training load in the squat (67.3%) and deadlift (63.1%).
Figure 1 illustrates the percentage of strongman competitors
who used submaximal loads for each of the power lifts.
Resistance Materials Used. Fifty-six percent of the
strongman competitors surveyed incorporated elastic bands
in their training, and 38% used chains. Figure 2 illustrates the
use of bands and chains in the squat, upper body press,
deadlift, and assistance exercises.
Figure 1. Analysis of submaximal loads (expressed as a %1 repetition maximum [%1RM]) used for speed
repetitions in the squat and deadlift.
Figure 2. Percentage of strongman competitors who used bands or
chains for the squat, upper body press, deadlift, or assistance exercises.
Figure 3. Percentage of strongman competitors who perform Olympic
lifting and their derivatives.
3122
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
Strongman Training Practices
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

Adjunct Power Training Methods. Eight-eight
percent of the strongman competitors reported that they
perform Olympic lifts or their derivatives (cleans, snatch, jerk,
and high pull) as part of their strongman training. Subjects
were asked to indicate what type of Olympic lifts they
performed in their training. Seventy-eight percent of subjects
reported that the clean was the most performed Olympic lift
used in theirtraining. Figure 3 illustrates the use of the various
types of Olympic lifts.
Subjects were asked what loads (as a % of their maximum)
they most typically train with for their Olympic lifting.
Thirty-two percent reported using 81–90% of 1RM as
their most common Olympic lifting training load. Figure 4
illustrates the loads used for Olympic lifting and their
derivatives.
Strongman competitors were asked if they performed
upper and lower body plyometrics as part of their training.
Twenty-nine percent reported using upper body plyometrics,
and 54% performed lower body plyometrics.
Twenty percent of the strongman competitors reported
that they perform weighted ballistic lifts (i.e., squat jump,
bench press throw) as part of their strongman training.
Subjects were also asked what loads (as a % of their
maximum) they most typically train with for their ballistic
lifting. Twenty-five percent reported using the training load of
31–40%. Figure 5 illustrates the loads used for ballistic lifting.
Aerobic and Anaerobic Conditioning. One hundred and fifty
subjects (89.8%) reported performing aerobic/anaerobic
conditioning as part of their strongman training. The time
of 16–30 minutes was the most common reported training
practice (28.5%) performed for aerobic/anaerobic training.
Thirty-five percent of subjects reported that other condition-
ing (i.e., sport specific) was the most commonly performed
aerobic/a-naerobic conditioning. High-intensity interval
training and a combination of high and low intensity cardio
were reported as sometimes and quite often performed by 55
and 53% of subjects, respectively.
Strongman Events Training
Fifty percent of the strongman competitors surveyed use
strongman implements only in a strongman events training
day, and 50% mixed gym work and strongman implements
together. Forty-four percent of strongman competitors
trained with strongman implements once a week, compared
to 24% who trained twice a week and 18% who trained ,1
a week (may only train once every 2 weeks).
The farmers walk, log press, and stones had the highest
percentage of use (96.4, 95.2, and 94.0%, respectively)
among the strongman competitors surveyed in this study.
Subjects were asked to indicate what other type of
strongman implements they used on a frequent basis in
their strongman training. Figure 6 illustrates the percentage
of strongman competitors that use the various strongman
implements in training. Other strongman exercises and
implements reported used in training by 37 competitors
included; Overhead press (Viking, sleeper press, and dumb-
bells), carries (Conan’s wheel, shield, hydrant, and frame),
pulls (harness, arm over arm, ropes, and chains), walks
(duck and yoke), lifts (safe, kettle bells, and car deadlift), holds
(crucifix), and grip exercises (block, hand, and tools).
Figure 4. Analysis of loads used for Olympic lifting and their derivatives.
Figure 5. Analysis of loads used for ballistic lifting.
Figure 6. Percentage of strongman competitors who use the strongman
implements in training.
VOLUME 25 | NUMBER 11 | NOVEMBER 2011 | 3123
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
|
www.nsca-jscr.org
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

Tire Flip. One hundred and thirty-seven of the 167 (82.0%)
subjects included the tire flip in their strongman training.
Ninety-one percent of those subjects performed the tire flip
once a week or once every 2 weeks. Less than once a week
was the most commonly reported training practice (53.3%)
performed for the tire flip among strongman competitors.
Three sets were the most common reported training practice
(40.1%) performed for tire flip training among strongman
competitors. Ninety-one percent of the subjects performed
3–10 repetitions per set for their tire flip training, with 10
repetitions per set being the most commonly (31.4%)
performed. The majority of the subjects performed the tire
flip with loads the same as (50.4%) or heavier (34.6%) than
those encountered in competition.
Log Clean and Press. One hundred and fifty-nine of the 167
(95.2%) subjects included the log clean and press in their
strongman training. Once a week was the most common
reported training practice (61.0%) performed for the log clean
and press among strongman competitors. Eight-three percent
of the subjects performed 3–6 sets for their log clean and press
training, with 5 sets being the most common reported training
practice (37.1%). Eight-four percent of the subjects performed
3–10 repetitions per set for their log clean and press training,
with 5 repetitions per set being the most common reported
training practice (30.4%). The majority of the subjects
performed the log clean and press with loads the same as
(47.5%) or heavier (39.4%) than those encountered in
a competition involving the log clean and press for repetitions.
Stones. One hundred and fifty-seven of the 167 (94.0%)
subjects included the stones in their strongman training.
Ninety-four percent of subjects performed the stones less than
once a week. Once a week was the most common reported
training practice (48.4%) performed for the stones among
strongman competitors. Ninety-one percent of the subjects
performed 1–6 sets for their stones training. Three sets were
the most common reported training practice (28.0%)
performed for stones training among strongman competitors.
Ninety-five percent of the subjects performed 1–6 repetitions
per set for their stones training. Five repetitions per set were
the most common reported training practice (29.3%)
performed for stones training among strongman competitors.
Sixty-two percent of the subjects performed the stones with
loads the same as those encountered in a competition.
Farmers Walk. One hundred and sixty-one of the 167 (96.4%)
subjects included the farmers walk in their strongman
training. Ninety-three percent of subjects performed the
farmers walk once every 2 weeks or once a week. Once
a week was the most common reported training practice
TABLE 3. Comments (N= 46).*
Higher-order themes Responses Select raw data representing responses to this question.
Request for a copy of the findings 3 ‘‘Please email me a copy.’’
Enjoyed the survey 2 ‘‘Great survey’’!
Looking forward to the results 4 ‘‘I look forward to reading the final study.’’
Expression of thanks and good luck 9 ‘‘Thank you and best of luck.’’
Contact information provided 4 A specific email address was provided.
Concerns about wording of a question 6 ‘‘Hard to answer these generic questions.’’
‘‘Reps and sets and loads vary all the time we never do the same
thing in a row, and the only constant is change.’’
Clarification about information provided
in the survey
22 ‘‘Often sets and reps vary depending on the exercise within a
hypertrophy, power and strength session—most common values
were given.’’
‘‘Most strongman-specific training load varies between lighter,
same and heavier than contest loads. Lighter usually mean longer
distance for speed (+25 m). Heavier means shorter distance
for strength and getting used to heavy loads (10–15 m).’’
‘‘For some of the events, sometimes the sets/rep will change
depending on if we are working toward a max effort in a
contest vs. a contest which has a press for reps event.’’
Miscellaneous 13 ‘‘Flexibility and movement athleticism is very important. I’d be
interested to note how others also incorporate flexibility training
into their programming as well.’’
‘‘Another good question for stone training would be: How often
do you use tacky in your stone training sessions?’’
*In some cases, the participants provided information that represented .1 concept, and their response contributed to .1 higher-
order theme.
3124
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
Strongman Training Practices
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

(59.6%) performed for the farmers walk among strongman
competitors. Eighty-nine percent of the subjects covered the
distance of 20–50 m as part of a working set for their farmers
walk training. Twenty meters was the most common reported
training practice (37.9%) performed per set for farmers walk
training among strongman competitors. The majority of the
subjects performed the farmers walk with loads the same
(42.3%) as or heavier (46.6%) than those encountered in
a competition.
Truck Pull. Eighty-one of the 167 (48.5%) subjects included the
truck pull in their strongman training. Ninety-nine percent of
subjects performed the truck pull once every 2 weeks or once
a week. Less than once a week was the most common
reported training practice (69.1%) among strongman com-
petitors who performed the truck pull. Seventy-two percent
of the subjects covered the distance of 20–30 m as part of
a working set for their truck pull training. Thirty meters was
the most common reported training practice (39.5%)
performed per set for truck pull training among strongman
competitors. Eighty-three percent of the subjects performed
the truck pull with loads the same (43.0%) as or lighter (40.0%)
than those encountered in a competition.
Subjects were asked to indicate how long their rest periods
were between sets for their strongman training. Fifty-eight
percent of subjects rested for .4 minutes between sets.
The last question of the survey was designed to provide the
strongman competitors an opportunity to provide additional
data or make specific comments regarding the survey. Forty-
six strongman competitors offered a variety of responses.
These responses are described in Table 3.
DISCUSSION
This is the first survey of the strength and conditioning
practices of strongman competitors. The number of respond-
ents (167) is higher than the number of respondents
associated with surveys of strength and conditioning practices
in football, hockey, baseball, basketball, and power lifting
(6–9,30,34). The majority of strongman competitors use
training variables (loads, sets, reps, and rest periods) that are
within the suggested guidelines for the various phases and
types of training investigated in this study, thus supporting
the hypothesis that most of the strongmen competitors in
this study follow many scientifically based strength and
conditioning practices.
The majority of subjects (80.2%) included some method of
periodization in their training organization, which is lower
than that previously reported in elite British powerlifters
(96.4%) (34) but similar to those reported by major league
baseball strength coaches (85.7%) and National basketball
strength coaches (85.0%). This finding suggests that the
majority of strongman competitors design their training to
emphasize a particular adaptation with the goal of increasing
physical performance.
Because all subjects performed traditional gym-based
resistance exercises, it shows that they understand the need
for increasing strength for successful strongman performance.
Variants of squats and deadlifts were performed, with back
and front squats, and conventional and partial deadlifts the
preferred choices of these exercises.
One hundred and twenty-three of the 167 (73.7%) subjects
included hypertrophy training in their training organization.
The majority of subjects performed 3–5 sets of 8–12
repetitions per exercise for hypertrophy training, which is
consistent with guidelines for this form of training (11).
Research has established that the force a muscle can exert is
related to its cross-section area (21). Strongman competitors
may use hypertrophy training to increase their fat-free mass,
which in turn allows for greater force production (4,18).
Ninety-seven percent of subjects included maximal
strength training in their training organization. This finding
suggests that strongman competitors believe that maximal
strength is one of the most important physiological com-
ponents to compete successfully in strongman events. The
majority of subjects performed 3–5 sets of 1–6 repetitions per
exercise with rest periods .2 minutes. These variables are
within the suggested guidelines reported for performing
maximal strength training (11). The high levels of maximal
strength training may be necessary in the sport of strongman
to enable these athletes to cope with the extremely high
spinal and hip loads (25).
The results of this study demonstrate that strongman
competitors use a variety of power training methods. The
majority of subjects attempted to lift loads in traditional
exercises (i.e., squat, bench press, and deadlift) as fast as
possible. This training practice is commonly referred to as
compensatory acceleration and may provide a superior way
of training to increase force and rate of force production
(2,36). Results from this study demonstrated that 60% of
strongman competitors incorporate submaximal loads in the
squat and deadlift in their explosive training. This is lower
than the 75.0% reported by elite powerlifters (34). The
submaximal load of 51–60% 1RM was the most common
training load in the squat (67.3%) and deadlift (63.1%) among
strongman competitors. This finding represents a slightly
lower explosive training load than the 61–70%1RM recently
reported by elite powerlifters (34). These differences may be
because of the differences between the sports type. In the
sport of strongman, the ability to move heavy loads at higher
velocities would be advantageous. This is evident in this
study with 88% of strongman competitors using Olympic
lifting exercises or their derivatives as part of their strongman
training, which is higher than the 69% reported by elite
powerlifters (34). This finding gives evidence to the
similarities between the training practices of strongman
competitors, elite powerlifters, and weightlifters. The unique
biomechanical characteristics of Olympic lifting exercises
allow for the use of heavy loads to be moved at high
velocities, thus producing higher power outputs than
VOLUME 25 | NUMBER 11 | NOVEMBER 2011 | 3125
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
|
www.nsca-jscr.org
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

traditional lifts (24). In addition, the greater skill complexity
required for the Olympic lifting exercises may be advanta-
geous by facilitating the development of a broader physical
abilities spectrum (i.e., balance, coordination, and flexibility),
which seems to be better transferred to performance (15).
The findings from this study demonstrate that strongman
competitors in common with elite powerlifters combine
compensatory acceleration with heavy and submaximal
loads to enhance force and rate of force development across
a range of velocities.
In this study, 80% of strongman competitors performed
their Olympic lifts with loads 51–90% of 1RM. Research has
found that peak power for the power clean was maximized at
70% of 1RM; however, no statistically significant differences
existed between peak power outputs at 50, 60, 80, and 90% of
1RM (17). In this study, the clean was the most commonly
performed Olympic lifting exercise performed by strongman
competitors followed by the jerk, the snatch, and the high
pull. The clean was also the most frequently performed
Olympic lifting exercise among elite powerlifters; however,
only 10% of elite powerlifters performed the jerk compared
to the 52% of strongman competitors. These differences may
be because of the specificity of the sports. Strongman
competitors may incorporate the jerk in training to have
a crossover effect to overhead events such as the axle or log
clean and press. Stone et al. (32) have suggested that the
more similar a training exercise is to actual physical
performance, the greater the probabilities of transfer. The
results of this study therefore demonstrate that strongman
competitors use a range of Olympic lifting exercises that
simulate common competition events and use training loads
for these exercises that elicit the highest power outputs.
The use of ballistic training and plyometrics has been
reported in the literature as ways of developing power and
whole-body explosiveness (33,34). The results of this study
indicated that 29% of strongman competitors perform upper
body plyometrics, and 54% perform lower body plyometrics.
This is higher than the 14.3 and 17.9%, respectively, reported
by elite powerlifters (34). The differences between the sports
may indicate sport specificity. Plyometric exercises are based
on the use of the stretch-shortening cycle. A rapid eccentric
muscle action stimulates the stretch reflex and storage of
elastic energy thus increasing the force produced during the
subsequent concentric action. For strongman competitor
training, this stretch reflex may be beneficial for events such
as the keg toss and log press where higher forces and rate of
force production would be advantageous.
In ballistic exercises, loads are accelerated through the
whole range of motion (there is no deceleration phase). This
results in greater velocity of movement, force output, and
EMG activity than the traditional exercises performed
explosively (28). The results of this study indicated that
only 20% of the strongman competitors perform ballistic lifts
(i.e., squat jump, bench press throw) as part of their
strongman training. Part of this reason may be sport
specificity. Strongman events are generally performed with
the intention to move heavy loads as quickly as possible, thus
competitors may think it more advantageous training with
heavy resistance to improve the high-force portions of the
force–velocity curve instead of the high–velocity portion. Of
those subjects, however, who performed ballistic lifting, 93%
trained with loads of 10– 60% 1RM. The training loads of 20
and 50% of 1RM have been recommended for the jump squat
and bench press, respectively, as these loads were found to
maximize peak power (5,12). The results of this study
indicate that strongman competitors who performed ballistic
exercises typically use the training loads that will elicit the
highest peak powers.
The results of this study found that 56% of strongman
competitors surveyed incorporated elastic bands in their
training, and 38% used chains. Recently, Swinton et al. (34)
found that 57.1% of powerlifters incorporated chains, and
39.3% incorporated bands (respectively) in their training. It is
likely that strongman competitors and powerlifters use
chains and bands as a means of developing strength and
power. The use of chains and bands is recommended for
multijoint exercises such as the squat that are characterized
by an ascending strength curve (26). The increased training
load during the ascent offers the potential for a greater
concentric training load than that is manageable because of
the mechanical advantage that occurs as the lifter ascends
during these exercises (10). As a result, greater muscle tension
can be achieved throughout the range of movement thereby
improving the potential for neuromuscular adaptations.
Strongman events can last from a few seconds (e.g., 1RM
log press) to several minutes (e.g., truck pull and medleys) and
involve high physiological demands both aerobically and
anaerobically (3,20). In this study, 89.8% of strongman
competitors performed aerobic/anaerobic conditioning as
part of their strongman training. Strongman competitors
incorporate low- and high-intensity aerobic/anaerobic
conditioning in their programs; however, sport-specific
conditioning is the most commonly performed (35%). Some
clarification of sport-specific conditioning was given by some
strongman competitors in the open-ended question at the
end of the survey. When training for sport-specific condi-
tioning, strongman competitors used lighter than competi-
tion loads, which allowed a high number of repetitions to be
performed for events such as the log clean and press or to
help obtain large distances for events such as the farmers
walk. The results of this study demonstrate that strongman
competitors incorporate a variety of aerobic and anaerobic
training in their strongman training to optimize performance.
The results of this study found that the majority of
strongman competitors trained with strongman implements
at least once a week. Fifty percent of the strongman
competitors use strongman implements only in a strongman
events training day, whereas the remainder combined gym
work and strongman event training in the same session. This
finding suggests that strongman use 2 different methods to
3126
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
Strongman Training Practices
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

incorporate event training in their programs. However, it is
unclear if one approach is superior to the other.
The results of this study demonstrated that strongman
competitors use a wide variety of training implements in their
training. The farmers’ walk, log press, and stones had the
highest percentage of use (96.4, 95.2, and 94.0%, respectively)
among the strongman competitors surveyed in this study.
Other implements reported as being used by the majority of
competitors were the tire flip, axle, yoke, sleds, and kegs.
Thirty-seven competitors reported using other implements
that consisted of grip strength tools, kettle bells, and
dumbbells; and carrying; lifting; dragging; and pressing
implements.
The results from this study demonstrated that the majority
of subjects rested for .4 minutes between sets for their
strongman implement training. Previous research has dem-
onstrated that the rest period between sets and exercises
affects the muscles responses to resistance exercise and
influence how much of the adenosine triphosphate phos-
phocreatine (ATP-PC) energy source is recovered (22).
In addition, the length of the rest period has a dramatic
influence on the metabolic, hormonal, and cardiovascular
responses to an acute bout of resistance exercise and the
performance of subsequent sets (23). The rest interval of
.4 minutes indicates that strongman competitors use the
long rest period to increase their ability to exhibit maximal
strength and power with heavy strongman implements. This
results indicates that strongman competitors understand the
optimal rest periods for strength and power training as
the rest interval of .4 minutes is within the suggested
guidelines reported for performing absolute strength or
power training (11).
The tire flip, log clean and press, farmers walk, and truck
pull are strongman events commonly found in strongman
competitions. In this study, 82% percent of competitors
reported using the tire flip, 95.2% included the log clean and
press, 96.4% included the farmers walk, and 48.5% included
the truck pull in their strongman training. Differences existed
in the way the subjects trained each event. The majority of
subjects trained the tire flip less than once per week with the
most common reported training practice being 3 sets of 10
repetitions with the same load as encountered in competition.
Strongman competitors may use the higher rep range for the
tire flip to help with the high physiological demands the tire
flip places on the bodies system (20). In contrast, the majority
of subjects performed the log clean and press once a week
with the same loads as encountered in competition. Five sets
of 5 repetitions was the most common reported training
practice, which has previously been reported as one of the
best methods to elicit increases in maximal strength (33).
The farmers walk and truck pull were reported as the most
common (96.4%) and least used (48.5%) strongman training
events, respectively, used by the subjects in this study. The
majority of subjects reported performing the farmers walk
once a week and the truck pull less than once per week.
Differences existed in training practices with the distances and
the loads used between these events. The most common
reported training practices for the truck pull was pulling
a truck for 30 m with loads the same as encountered in
competition, whereas subjects performed the farmers walk at
a distance of 20 m with loads heavier than encountered in
competition. This result may indicate that for the farmers
walk, subjects use the heavier loads to help improve their grip
and carrying strength. Observations of elite strongman
competitors competing in the farmers walk gives support
to the fact that grip strength and carrying strength may be
fundamental factors in successful farmers walk performance.
However, further research is needed to validate this.
Analysis of the answers to the open-ended question in the
survey revealed that strongman competitors vary their training
and periodically alter training variables (i.e., sets, reps, loads)
during different stages of their training. The type of events (i.e.,
max effort or reps event) in a competition can determine loading
strategies, and competitors determine the most efficacious
training protocols for each event. Future studies should build on
this study and examine how strongman training practices differ
at various phases of the year.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
This article serves as the first comprehensive description
of common strength and conditioning practices of strongman
competitors. Strongman competitors and strength and
conditioning coaches can use these data as a review of
strength and conditioning practices and as a possible source of
new ideas to diversify and improve their training practices.
These data should also prove useful to future investigators and
practitioners as a source for comparison. Future research
should investigate the risks and neuromuscular benefits
associated with using strongman-type implements in training.
REFERENCES
1. Baker, D. Strongman training for large groups of athletes. J Austr
Strength Cond 16: 33, 2008.
2. Behm, DG and Sale, DG. Intended rather than actual movement
velocity determines velocity-specific training response. J Appl Physiol
74: 359–368, 1993.
3. Berning, JM, Adams, KJ, Climstein, M, and Stamford, BA. Metabolic
demands of ‘‘junkyard’’ training: Pushing and pulling a motor
vehicle. J Strength Cond Res 21: 853–856, 2007.
4. Brechue, WF and Abe, T. The role of FFM accumulation and
skeletal muscle architecture in powerlifting performance. Eur J Appl
Physiol 86: 327–336, 2002.
5. Cronin, JB, McNair, PJ, and Marshall, RN. The role of maximal
strength and load on initial power production. Med Sci Sports Exerc
32: 1763–1769, 2000.
6. Duehring, MD, Feldmann, CR, and Ebben, WP. Strength and
conditioning practices of United States high school strength and
conditioning coaches. J Strength Cond Res 23: 2188–2203, 2009.
7. Ebben, WP and Blackard, DO. Strength and conditioning practices
of national football league strength and conditioning coaches.
J Strength Cond Res 15: 48–58, 2001.
VOLUME 25 | NUMBER 11 | NOVEMBER 2011 | 3127
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
|
www.nsca-jscr.org
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

8. Ebben, WP, Carroll, RM, and Simenz, CJ. Strength and conditioning
practices of national hockey league strength and conditioning
coaches. J Strength Cond Res 18: 889–897, 2004.
9. Ebben, WP, Hintz, MJ, and Simenz, CJ. Strength and conditioning
practices of major league baseball strength and conditioning
coaches. J Strength Cond Res 18: 889–897, 2005.
10. Ebben, WP and Jensen, RL. Electromyographic and kinetic analysis
of traditional, chain, and elastic band squats. J Strength Cond Res 16:
547–550, 2002.
11. Fleck, SJ and Kraemer, WJ. Designing Resistance Training Programmes
(3rd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2004.
12. Harris, NK, Cronin, JB, and Hopkins, WG. Power outputs of
a machine squat-jump across a spectrum of loads. J Strength Cond Res
21: 1260–1264, 2007.
13. Hedrick, A. Using uncommon implements in the training pro-
grammes of athletes. Strength Cond J 25: 18–22, 2003.
14. Hedrick, BN and Morse, MI. Training practices of elite wheelchair
roadracers. Adap Phys Activ Q 5: 140–153, 1988.
15. Hydock, D. The weightlifting pull in power development. Strength
Cond J 23: 32–37, 2001.
16. Katch, VL, Katch, FI, Moffat, R, and Gittleson, M. Muscular
development and lean body weight in bodybuilders and weight
lifters. Med Sci Sports Exerc 12: 340–344, 1980.
17. Kawamori, N, Crum, AJ, Blumert, PA, Kulik, JR, Childers, JT, and
Wood, JA. Influence of different relative intensities on power output
during the hang power clean: Identification of the optimal load.
J Strength Cond Res 19: 698–708, 2005.
18. Keogh, JWL, Hume, PA, Pearson, SN, and Mellow, PJ. Can absolute
and proportional anthropometric characteristics distinguish stron-
ger and weaker powerlifters. J Strength Cond Res 23: 2256–2265,
2009.
19. Keogh, JWL, Newlands, C, Blewett, S, Payne, A, and Chun-Er, L. A
kinematic analysis of a strongman event: The heavy sprint-style sled
pull. J Strength Cond Res 24: 3088–3097, 2010.
20. Keogh, JWL, Payne, AL, Anderson, BB, and Atkins, PJ. A brief
description of the biomechanics and physiology of a strongman
event: The tyre flip. J Strength Cond Res 24: 1223–1228, 2010.
21. Komi, PV. Neuromuscular performance: Factors influencing force
and speed production. Scand J Sports Sci 1: 2–15, 1979.
22. Kraemer, WJ, Gordon, SE, Fleck, SJ, Marchitelli, LJ, Mello, R,
Dziados, JE, Friedl, K, Harman, E, Maresh, C, and Fry, AC.
Endogenous anabolic hormonal and growth factor responses to
heavy resistance exercise in males and females. Int J Sports Med 12:
228–235, 1991.
23. Kraemer, WJ, Noble, BJ, Clark, MJ, and Culver, BW. Physiological
responses to heavy resistance exercise with very short rest periods.
Int J Sports Med 8: 247–252, 1987.
24. McBride,JM,Triplett-McBride,T,Davie,A,andNewton,NU.A
comparison of strength and power characteristics between power
lifters, Olympic lifters and sprinters. J Strength Cond Res 13: 58–66, 1999.
25. McGill, SM, McDermott, A, and Fenwick, CMJ. Comparison of
different strongman events: Trunk muscle activation and lumbar
spine motion, load, and stiffness. J Strength Cond Res 23: 1148–1161,
2009.
26. McMaster, T, Cronin, J, and McGuigan, M. Forms of variable
resistance training. Strength Cond J 31: 50–64, 2009.
27. Newsham-West, R, Button, C, Milburn, PD, Mundermann, A,
Sole, G, Schneiders, AG, and Sullivan, S J. Training habits and injuries
of masters’ level football players: A preliminary report. Phys Ther
Sport 10: 63–66, 2009.
28. Newton, NU, Kraemer, WJ, Ha
¨kkinen, K, Humphries, BJ, and
Murphy, AJ. Kinematics, kinetics, and muscle activation during
explosive upper body movements. J Appl Biomech 12: 31–43, 1996.
29. Reverter-Masia, J, Legaz-Arrese, A, Munguia-Izquierdo, D, Barbany,
JR, and Serrano-Ostariz, E. A profile of the resistance training
practices of elite Spanish club teams. J Strength Cond Res 23:
1537–1547, 2009.
30. Simenz, CJ, Dugan, CA, and Ebben, WP. Strength and conditioning
practices of National Basketball Association strength and condi-
tioning coaches. J Strength Cond Res 19: 495–504, 2005.
31. Stanton, R, Humphries, B, and Abt, GA. Self-reported training habits
of Australian outrigger canoe paddlers. J Strength Cond Res 16:
477–479, 2002.
32. Stone, M, Stone, M, and Sands, AW. Modes of resistance training. In:
Principles and Practice of Resistance Training. Champaign, IL: Human
Kinetics, 2007. pp. 241–257.
33. Stoppani, J. Encyclopedia of Muscle and Strength. Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics, 2006.
34. Swinton, PA, Lloyd, R, Agouris, I, and Stewart, A. Contemporary
training practices in elite British powerlifters: Survey results from an
international competition. J Strength Cond Res 23: 380–384, 2009.
35. Watanabe, KT, Cooper, RA, Vosse, AJ, Baldini, FD, and Robertson,
RN. Training practices of athletes who participated in the national
wheelchair athletic association training camps. Adap Phys Activ Q 9:
249–260, 1992.
36. Young, WB and Bilby, GE. The effect of voluntary effort to influence
speed of contraction on strength, muscular power, and hypertrophy
development. J Strength Cond Res 7: 172–178, 1993.
3128
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the
TM
Strongman Training Practices
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.