Is it just me, or are the PRT standards a little imbalanced?

[HueyCobra8151]

Two problems though:

1. Physical Fitness Tests are (or should be IMHO) designed on the premise that combat is a physically demanding activity and service members should be at some level of physical fitness in order to perform the basic functions required in said combat situation. Physical Fitness in this regard has no sliding scale for age, sex, or any other classification that you care to look at. In this regard it is an absolute. If someone maxes a watered down PFT, but cannot fireman's carry someone out of harms way (for example), what good was it then?

2) I can't speak for the Navy, but the Marine Corps did crunch numbers and found that a grossly disproportionate amount of females maxed the flexed arm hang when compared to the number of men who maxed the pullup portion of the PFT. PFT scores are a key factor in promotions, so it is unfair for one portion of the total demographic to have that much of an advantage when it comes to promotions.

 

[raptor10]

From OPNAVINST 6110.1H

4. Policy
a. Physical fitness is a crucial element of mission
performance and must be a part of every Sailor’s life. Mission
readiness and operational effectiveness are built on the
physical fitness of the individual; therefore, all Navy
personnel shall maintain personal physical fitness by regular
exercise and proper nutrition.

b. The principal goal of the Physical Readiness Program is
to create a culture of fitness to enhance a member's ability to
complete tasks that support the command's mission. COs [sic] shall
aggressively integrate physical readiness activities into the
workweek in the same manner as applied to meeting other mission
and operational requirements.

The Navy needs no more no less...

 

[scoober78]

From OPNAVINST 6110.1H
The Navy needs no more no less...

Raptor, you and I tend to be on the same page even when we are not in agreement...but what the hell are you talking about?

Seriously though, if that is what you are getting at as to the purpose of the PRT, which I agree, is the purpose of the instruction, then the PRT program is an even bigger failure than our previous discussion would suggest. Any takers on the over/under for what percentage of the Navy exercizes only during or in immediate preparation (call it two weeks) of the semi-annual PRT? My guess is that the number is well over 50%.

 

[BackOrdered]

Any takers on the over/under for what percentage of the Navy exercizes only during or in immediate preparation (call it two weeks) of the semi-annual PRT? My guess is that the number is well over 50%.

You are taking hypothetically right? That's not alot of time.

 

[insanebikerboy]

Any takers on the over/under for what percentage of the Navy exercizes only during or in immediate preparation (call it two weeks) of the semi-annual PRT? My guess is that the number is well over 50%.

There's a reason they call it the 3 mile club.

 

[HooverPilot]

I've noticed that individual commands are starting to take the Navy Fitness culture a little more seriously (of course it has been mandated by big Navy). My command decided to have PT 3 days a week @ 1330 starting back in March. It lasts 1 hour and eats up several hundred man hours a week, but the results have been pretty impressive. Minimum failures on this PRT cycle, an increased awareness of healthy lifestyles, maybe even a moral boost - and it makes the separation of fatbody failures a lot easier. I've heard other commands on the sea wall are doing similar things.

 

[usmarinemike]

2) I can't speak for the Navy, but the Marine Corps did crunch numbers and found that a grossly disproportionate amount of females maxed the flexed arm hang when compared to the number of men who maxed the pullup portion of the PFT. PFT scores are a key factor in promotions, so it is unfair for one portion of the total demographic to have that much of an advantage when it comes to promotions.

I've been bamboozled on more than one board by that exact gross disproportion. That's what I thought this thread would be about in the beginning. I have also done the research and realize that women's muslces and lungs just physiologically do not perform in the same way as mens. However, the flexed arm hang is total BS. I believe it's unrealistic to expect most females to do 20 pullups, but com'on. 10 or 12 even.

As far as the PFT being an indicator of combat conditioning...now there's a battle I'm going to leave up to other folks.

 

[CommodoreMid]

Not a Marine, but having done the flexed arm hang I would say it is physically challenging, but if you want to max it it's simply a mental thing. If you simply tell yourself you aren't going to go down, you won't go down. If you master that mental issue, anybody can max it out.

 

[phrogpilot73]

"I suck at [insert activity here] and so therefore it must be unfair."

That's why I always thought the PFT was unfair. I suck at running, situps, and pullups.

 

[kmac]

That all changed when I started seriously running triathlon, especially Ironman distance tri's. I started looking at lactate thresholds, O2 capacity, and other aerobic and anaerobic capacities so I could get faster. What I found was that women simply don't have the same lactate threshold and O2 levels as men (that's from me reading other's research). The absolute best woman triathletes simply can't hang with the best men, because they reach a LT faster since it's lower, which means the muscle won't work for as long. For reference, Lance Armstrong has a ridiculously high LT, which is why he can go so fast for so long and have amazing power outputs.

So, I think that's why the run times are slower. Granted, there are women who can max the men's events, but as a whole, there's a reason for the difference.

Differences between men and women are obvious. But shouldn't we be looking at results instead of how difficult the path to get there was? You wouldn't pass a weak flight student because the kid is stupid, would you?
"Well he did a really good effort. His brain is a bit slower than others, and so therefore we shouldn't place him on the same standard as the faster-brained students. He did very well, considering it's him." I mean cry me a river! Who cares if womens bodies are different from mens? It's a mile and a half! If you can't make the men's standard, it's not because you've reached your O2 level or lactate thresholds. It's because you're freaking out of shape.

There are plenty of women out there that could kick my ass on the PRT. I would think that they'd be upset that because of their sex they are expected to be slower, to do less, and to perform worse.

The same argument goes for a black kid at a great school. "He's only here because of affirmative action" degrades that person's ability and true reason for being there (assuming he wasn't there because of affirmative action). When are we going to get away from the outcome-based equality and move to the opportunity-based equality?

/Rant over.

 

[CaptainRon]

On a different note related to the PRT, I just got some extra insoles for my running sneakers to give some extra padding and it has made a huge difference on the joints--much less pain.

 

[usmarinemike]

Differences between men and women are obvious. But shouldn't we be looking at results instead of how difficult the path to get there was? You wouldn't pass a weak flight student because the kid is stupid, would you?
"Well he did a really good effort. His brain is a bit slower than others, and so therefore we shouldn't place him on the same standard as the faster-brained students. He did very well, considering it's him." I mean cry me a river! Who cares if womens bodies are different from mens? It's a mile and a half! If you can't make the men's standard, it's not because you've reached your O2 level or lactate thresholds. It's because you're freaking out of shape.

There are plenty of women out there that could kick my ass on the PRT. I would think that they'd be upset that because of their sex they are expected to be slower, to do less, and to perform worse.

The same argument goes for a black kid at a great school. "He's only here because of affirmative action" degrades that person's ability and true reason for being there (assuming he wasn't there because of affirmative action). When are we going to get away from the outcome-based equality and move to the opportunity-based equality?

/Rant over.

You mean everybody at flight school doesn't get a little trophy just for playing?

Stupid liberalism.

 

[whitesoxnation]

Not a Marine, but having done the flexed arm hang I would say it is physically challenging, but if you want to max it it's simply a mental thing. If you simply tell yourself you aren't going to go down, you won't go down. If you master that mental issue, anybody can max it out.

I would think that there is a point where no matter how much will power you have, if you dont have the muscle then you arent going to make it.

 

[moguinness]

Differences between men and women are obvious. But shouldn't we be looking at results instead of how difficult the path to get there was? You wouldn't pass a weak flight student because the kid is stupid, would you?
"Well he did a really good effort. His brain is a bit slower than others, and so therefore we shouldn't place him on the same standard as the faster-brained students. He did very well, considering it's him." I mean cry me a river! Who cares if womens bodies are different from mens? It's a mile and a half! If you can't make the men's standard, it's not because you've reached your O2 level or lactate thresholds. It's because you're freaking out of shape.

There are plenty of women out there that could kick my ass on the PRT. I would think that they'd be upset that because of their sex they are expected to be slower, to do less, and to perform worse.

The same argument goes for a black kid at a great school. "He's only here because of affirmative action" degrades that person's ability and true reason for being there (assuming he wasn't there because of affirmative action). When are we going to get away from the outcome-based equality and move to the opportunity-based equality?

/Rant over.

kmac...ok we should all be expected to perform at the same standard, yes? so by that argument there should be no PRT differences for 18-year-olds and 30-year-olds. or how about 50-year-olds?

and for the record i don't think it's correct to compare muscle-power with intelligence or race...if you go down that road it turns into a false analogy.

just my two cents...

 

[Goober]

kmac...ok we should all be expected to perform at the same standard, yes? so by that argument there should be no PRT differences for 18-year-olds and 30-year-olds. or how about 50-year-olds?

I was commissioned from my ROTC unit when I was 27 and could out-PRT most of my 18 y.o. mid classmates. Myth busted.

Now, that said, a little closer to 40 now, I'll gladly take the extra time and breaks on the numbers; but if need required it, I could put the extra time into working out more than normal and pull off the same numbers. In fact, last year before a lower back injury, I posted better numbers in all categories than I ever did as a 19 y.o. airman. It's all personal desire - either you want to get better or you don't.