Training & Part 1: Improving Military PT

Sunday:
1x5min-12kg get-up (GU)
3x1/2/3/4/5-16kg press

OAPU & Pistol practice
2 green nails

Monday:
1x5min-12kg get-up
2 green nails
4x25-16kg swing

A little research I've been doing:
"Improving Military Physical Fitness Training (PFT) Results and Reducing Troop Injury to Better Support The Mission"

Physical Fitness Training Standards
Combat readiness is rightfully the top priority for all American military service branches. In addition to mission specific training and schools, each branch has a basic Physical Fitness Training (PFT) standard by which general physical preparedness for combat is evaluated. PFT standards include a cardiovascular endurance component, an upper body strength component, and a core strength component, all of which vary according to service branch.

According to the Army Field Manual 21-20, in which the Army PFT standards are outlined in Chapter 14, the purpose of this type of testing is to “assess muscular endurance and cardiorespiratory (CR) fitness.” It is understood that the same applies to the purpose of the PFT for the remaining branches. But how does the current PFT criteria apply and carry-over to combat readiness? Furthermore, what is the physical and financial cost of the PFT, to the individual and to the military, respectively?

Military PFT is Counterintuitive to Mission Readiness
According to the Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demand (SAID) Principle, PFT components have little to no tactical application for mission specific demands and in fact can be counterintuitive and injury inducing (Bullock, 2008). Due to the nature of combat, a troop must be ready to perform at a moment’s notice (Hayes, 2004). They must be reactive, relying on past training and informed intuition (Skorodumov, 2004). Their proficiency, performance, and survival are reliant on the efficiency of individual ingrained thought and movement patterns, established through repetition (Memory and Related, 2000).

Training for and being tested on long distance running and repetitive sit-ups and push-ups inhibits tactical maneuverability by establishing inefficient and counterintuitive movement patterns, creating compensations and thereby increasing risk of injury (McIntosh, 2005). In combat situations, the troop will not have the luxury of PT gear: running shoes, shorts, and a t-shirt. He will have to maneuver in full combat dress to include long pants, long sleeves, rigid combat boots, head and eye gear, flack vest, weapons, rucksack, and any supplementary gear that can add up to 88+ additional pounds to what the troop was tested in during a PFT (Ehrlich, 2008).

Long linear endurance running (per the PFT) hardly has its place on the battle field. The likelihood of running more than a few dozen yards at a time in a combat zone is improbable. The troop should instead be prepared for high intensity, close quarter combat engagements and short-fast sprinting bouts for capture or evasion (Helmus, 2005). If endurance style running is the only practiced running pattern, the firing patterns and biomechanical development for sprinting will be underdeveloped or non-existent, resulting in injury and ultimately delaying the mission (Bushnell, 2004). Furthermore, there is little to no evidence of the cardiorespiratoy benefits of endurance running carrying over to sprinting. However, in addition to sprint training being less time consuming and less anatomically damaging, the cardiorespiratory adaptations of sprinting have significant benefit and carry over to endurance events (Gibala, Little, Essen, Wilkin, Burgomaster, Safdar, Raha, & Tarnopolsky 2006). Thus practicing and being tested on long distance running is not only damaging, but counterintuitive to the running demands of combat.

Repetitious sit-ups and push-ups have their own place in inhibiting mission ready troops. The stated purpose of timed sit-ups and push-ups is to test core and upper body strength. However, if we refer again to Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demand, in which our minds and bodies always get better at exactly what we practice, it is easy to see the lack of sit-up and push-up necessity in a combat zone (Univeristy of Pittsburgh, 2008). If the body gets better at what it practices, a troop practicing curling up from a lying position, or pushing away from level ground, will not be prepared to effectively fire his core musculature under loaded rotational movements (e.g. reacting to a threat anywhere other than directly in front of him while loaded down with combat gear), or push himself explosively away from a soft uneven surface while standing (e.g. another body in close quarter combat situations). In addition to having poor tactical carry over, repetitive sit-ups and push-ups cause significant musculoskeletal damage, compensations, and injury (Schneider, Senier, Evans, Scoville, Amoroso, 1998). Again, practicing linear endurance movements has insignificant carry-over to the multiple plane reactive, explosive demands of combat.
To be continued...

I have the rest already written, but you will have to check back next Tuesday for more. ;)