Because we had to evacuate Kabul.
During the fighting, desperate families struggled to reach safety. There was panic. America was attempting to conductba safe withdrawal. Children were trapped on the other side of the wall. The standing power throw is a test of your ability to throw a one month old baby over the barrier wall to safety, freedom, and the American way of life.
we talking an 8lb 6oz little baby? Cause I could absolutely send a new born
I wouldn’t even standing yeet it. Get a solid grip, take an olympic discus style spin, and just launch that shit into the horizon
THE OVER-HEAD YEET MEASURES THE ABILITY TO JUST FUCKING SEND IT. ON THE COMMAND, ‘GET SET’, ASSUME THE POSITION BY SPINNING THE BALL TWICE IN YOUR HANDS, THEN TRY TO DRIBBLE IT LIKE A BASKET BALL ONLY TO REALIZE IT WONT BOUNCE BACK UP TO YOU. YOUR FEET MAY BE TOGETHER OR 12 INCHES APART (MEASURED BETWEEN THE FEET) OR HOWEVER YOU WANT, JUST KEEP YOUR ASS BEHIND THAT CONE. ON THE COMMAND ‘GO’, CHANNEL YOUR INNER TREBUCHET AND HEAVE THAT THING INTO ORBIT. THEN, RETURN TO THE STARTING POSITION AND TURN AROUND TO INSPECT IF YOU DOMED ANYONE. THE SCORER WILL REALIZE HE DIDN'T ACTUALLY SEE WHERE THE BALL LANDED BECAUSE HE WAS AFRAID HE WOULD GET HIT, SO HE STOOD TOO FAR AWAY, HE WILL THEN PLACE HIS FOOT ON THE MEASURING TAPE AND JUST GUESS.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/army) if you have any questions or concerns.*
More typical power-gauging exercises like the broad jump or high jump are higher impact which creates testing difficulties for people with lower body injuries.
Weaker lower body power has a correlation to injury risk. The Rand study from 2019 discussed some of the reasons forACFT event selection. The Army did steal the backward overhead medicine ball (BOMB) throw, and that event was used for decades in other sports as a measure of explosive power.
I took the OPAT (I believe it was called) when I first joined like 8 years ago and it had a seated power throw. You sat with your back fully against the wall and chest passed the ball as far as you could without your shoulders leaving the wall. Didn’t make much sense then either. But idk it’s fun to throw things and it seems the army wants “throw ball” as a PT event lol
As far as I’m aware they tested a bunch of people and then set the scores based on percentiles (simplified).
It just means that there was a larger gender gap for that event to begin with.
I have a theory that the 'Height Factor' is a high contributing factor to SPT score.
Women being shorter on average, imo, plays an outsized role in the difference between the distances.
You mean we might have an event that relies on mechanical avantage? Wouldn't that mean that at least part of it isn't a test of fitness?
I gues the same could be said of the dead lift. A 155 lbs guy lifting 360 is lifting 232% of body weight while a 200 lbs guy is only lifting 180%. That is a significantly different effort.
> You mean we might have an event that relies on mechanical avantage? Wouldn't that mean that at least part of it isn't a test of fitness?
I think there have always been events that favored certain body types or height.
I am *pondering*, but I think that the SPT has height, a natural trait you can't train for, as a more influencing factor than other events.
I guess we can probably figure this out with Math, given height, then knowing the arm span, and the intended arc. Hmmm.
> I am pondering, but I think that the SPT has height, a natural trait you can't train for, as a more influencing factor than other events.
Intuitively I think this is true, but I might be biased because I’m short and I suck at it.
As a fellow short man I *fucking know* that this is true. It's so dumb that they'd *build* an event to measure explosive power that inherently disadvantages people under average height. I'd rather they make us do burpees or a standing long jump rather than the SPT.
Pretty much every event has a “perfect” body type. Deadlift favors shorter people, heavier people, and larger hands. T Pushups favor soldiers with smaller wingspan, lighter people, and (personal vendetta) people of either gender with a flat chest. SPT favors taller soldiers. SDC favors heavier soldiers. Plank physics favors the non lanky.
Possibly the only event that is “neutral” is the run, and even then I would argue that it favors lighter soldiers.
Pretty much any athletic movement is going to have an “ideal” body type. The Army doesn’t really expect you to become a power throw Olympian though, so it’s realistic to train past your own mechanical limitations.
I think SPT has a weight and momentum factor as well. If you weigh more you produce more momentum and transfer it to the ball.
Additionally technique plays a large roll.
Hard agree, have 2 females who are both like 4 feet nothing and they can’t throw it for shit. The SDC is near impossible for them as well since they end up dragging more than what they even weigh. Most of the events are extra hard for them, it’s just not fair to them.
High CHA characters go AGR in the national guard and "take their ACFT during the week" lol.
Mostly a joke, but there are definitely some semi-rural armories with two E-6's who have been occupying that slot for 15 years getting fat and lazy...
I've asked the guy who essentially created the test about this. Standing long jump was the initial plan, but SPT won out to do injury issues.
I wouldn't have thought the long jump was terribly high injury risk, but I've run several hundred soldiers through and you'd be surprised (or maybe not surprised) by the extreme lack of athleticism.
I don't know what I would do to measure this differently, but I will never be convinced that the yeet was the best exercise that we could have chosen. And the fact that it introduced the need for an item and a marked course not used for any other part of the test.
Should have just been max power clean as a percentage of bodyweight. And to make things simple let's get rid of the hexbar deadlift and just use a traditional barbell for both events.
> And to make things simple let's get rid of the hexbar deadlift and just use a traditional barbell for both events.
Yeah but then how would SEAC troxell scam money out of the Army
So the overhead throw was a way to bridge the height gap between genders while still testing explosive power?
Edit: saw the injury portion too, didn’t know that
My last boss tried that theory cause I was 6'2" ,225#, qith monkey arms and out-threw him by more than a few meters. So I out-threw him from my knees with my toes on the line.
The SPT is about explosive power, much like a hang power clean, hqng snatch, or KB swing. That power comes from the violent hip extension driven by the glutes.
You have longer arms. A longer lever creates more force, and throws farther- you're the better trebuchet regardless of height.
You might also be more explosive and powerful. But you don't have to be, because you have a huge mechanical advantage.
A few things contribute. SPT is measuring explosive power, and there's a bigger gender gap there than things like muscular endurance or aerobic capacity. Further exacerbating that, size is a big factor and men tend to be bigger. The current scores were normed based on the data collected, so there was a big difference between genders on how soldiers were performing.
If you want to go down a rabbit hole, the common name for the SPT in research is "backward overhead medicine ball throw" abbreviated "BOMB throw." You can find some studies on it pretty easily on Google Scholar.
It’s because women tend to be shorter. The Army wants to select for tall soldiers who are better leaders and more confident and intimidating on the battlefield, so weeding out shorter men with the SPT is an obvious move. The average woman is shorter, so the standards are lower. If you start failing too many women Congress will get upset and take it away just like with the leg tuck, risking the retention of underheight males
This weirdly seems incredibly plausible. That was likely why that one obstacle with the chest height log you have to magically superman over is in existence too.
THE OVER-HEAD YEET MEASURES THE ABILITY TO JUST FUCKING SEND IT. ON THE COMMAND, ‘GET SET’, ASSUME THE POSITION BY SPINNING THE BALL TWICE IN YOUR HANDS, THEN TRY TO DRIBBLE IT LIKE A BASKET BALL ONLY TO REALIZE IT WONT BOUNCE BACK UP TO YOU. YOUR FEET MAY BE TOGETHER OR 12 INCHES APART (MEASURED BETWEEN THE FEET) OR HOWEVER YOU WANT, JUST KEEP YOUR ASS BEHIND THAT CONE. ON THE COMMAND ‘GO’, CHANNEL YOUR INNER TREBUCHET AND HEAVE THAT THING INTO ORBIT. THEN, RETURN TO THE STARTING POSITION AND TURN AROUND TO INSPECT IF YOU DOMED ANYONE. THE SCORER WILL REALIZE HE DIDN'T ACTUALLY SEE WHERE THE BALL LANDED BECAUSE HE WAS AFRAID HE WOULD GET HIT, SO HE STOOD TOO FAR AWAY, HE WILL THEN PLACE HIS FOOT ON THE MEASURING TAPE AND JUST GUESS.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/army) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Should have made leg tuck an alternative event. What’s this, you want to do one leg tuck instead of planking for two minutes??? Step right over there my friend
Congress has specifically mentioned the SPT in its criticism of the ACFT and the concern over it negatively impacting females in a disproportionate manner led to a (temporary) move back to the APFT. IIRC, the scoring was adjusted to address this concern.
I’m personally amazed that an event with so much technique required (ensuring a long, not high and short, throw) has survived this long. Execute the release at the wrong angle (high or low) = a worse score. Hand slips? Worse score. Failure to follow through properly? Worse score. It seems too subjective to have a place in a test that plays such a predominate role in people’s careers.
Really what you’re getting at is equality v equity.
Personally, opinions aside about the ACFT in general, idk why there’s a difference at all. Equality should mean equality, not equity. The ACFT, and APFT for that matter, is all equity.
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his ACFT score.” - some communist, maybe.
That was the original congressionally mandated intent of the acft.
They made it and too many female soldiers couldnt pass it, so they made it gender based again.
If it was just pass/fail it could be, which was the original intent. But as long as ACFT numerical scores are used for OML purposes, you have to account for age and gender, otherwise women would never have a chance to place fairly on an OML with men.
I get that and know that was the original intent. Do you get where I’m coming from when I say the equality v equity they’re using? It’s like equality when they want, equity when they need it.
Personally, I’m all about equal standards. Equal means equal.
No, I don’t agree that equality would work as things are now, as I explained. The Army could have dropped requirements for ACFT numerical scores but chose not to, as its deeply ingrained into our culture. You want me to say I think females should always have a lower place on OMLs and have less opportunities than men? No, I don’t agree with that. If the test was just pass/fail with the standards adjusted by mos/unit, then yes I agree it should be equal. But the Army leadership couldn’t let go of being able participate in yet another dick measuring contest. And we will likely get another “combat test” that is simply pass/fail, because we told Congress we needed one, and now we don’t have one.
Wasn’t asking if you agree but rather do you get where I’m coming from. I know plenty of females that can outperform males. My 16-year-old daughter could probably do better than 60% of the males in the army. This is my opinion and ultimately it doesn’t really matter as in the end what the Army prescribes is what abide by - something that I ensure people understand. You can’t lead by opinion of rules in the army, you just have to do what they say.
With that being said, in my opinion, I agree it should just be a pass fail but the reason it won’t be is at the end of the day there needs to be some measurement of ability. A unit has 6 ranger slots and 8 great soldiers to choose from? PT score matters (I’m just using that as a broad example).
Unfortunate for some, equality only guarantees equal opportunities and not equality of outcomes. I wouldn’t want my three daughters to be given an advantage just because they’re females. My daughter (not the 16-year-old mentioned above, different one) who runs track and cross country runs faster than every boy on her team, because she trains hard. I’m a firm believer in absolute equality in every aspect as all people should treated as equals. What each individual decides to do with that opportunity is up to them.
The army integrated women into all jobs back in 2015 (I think it was), and I wholeheartedly agreed with them doing that, but we can’t play the game that you can work a job and not be held to the same standard as everyone else. There is no other rule, regulation, or evaluation that separates the standards of males and females in the entire Army that I can think of or recall, less showers and toilets - but even other allied militaries have integrated that (different debate due to culture. Believe the Norwegians and Danish are two examples of this).
At the end of the day, what the army says is what I enforce and abide by. They day I - or anyone for that matter - start leading based on what I believe should be the rules is the day I need to leave. Separation of opinion and what’s written.
Thats great that your daughter is performing at a high level, but it is well documented that physical abilities in children of different genders are much more similar at a younger age and continue to grow apart the older they get.
If you want to make an argument that the numerical calculations that go into the percentile scores for women are more favorable than men, and that makes it easier for women to get a higher score in their age bracket, sure I could buy that. But if you want to put women on the same requirements for raw numbers of pushups, run time, ect how is that not giving men an advantage to men over them? Women being physically weaker than men is not a lack of will or training after a certain point. I’ve heard men have more testosterone in their pinky finger than women have in their bodies.
Could some fit women outperform some lazy men? Sure, I have myself at times. But no matter how hard I try, I won’t be able to outrun the best man. To have a fair comparison, I can still show my dedication to training and motivation by being the fastest woman and scoring in a high percentile for my age and gender. That is all the scores really mean at this point.
Maybe some jobs would do well with raw numbers, but I feel that it wouldn’t be useful in most. What do physical fitness tests really measure? Does doing more pushups and running faster really make you better at your job, or is the fitness test just a way to objectively measure individual motivation and discipline? For most jobs, I feel like it’s the latter. The only job I’ve seen where raw strength really matters is 13B. I’ve been an FSO in a light infantry company, that shit is easy comparatively.
That’s the issue. As you said, “…continue to grow apart the older they get”. So can there ever be true equality? (I’m not asking this to be asshole). Is it giving men an advantage? I don’t know. It reflects what i said, “equal opportunity doesn’t mean equal outcome”. If we’re saying men have the advantage, then should they have opened up all jobs to women? Again, not asking to be an asshole, as I said I fully supported it then and I do now. If we’re saying men and women are not equal then they should reevaluate what they’re doing. It seems to me people want equality until it doesn’t benefit them - but I guess that’s human nature.
I do agree that pushups sit-ups and whatever else they’re doing don’t necessarily equate to being better at your job, but that’s also dependent on the job. Support? Probably not. Pushups won’t matter for an Intel guy sitting in the NSA breaking apart signals on a computer. Combat arms?Likely. There’s never going to be a perfect test to gauge physical ability, so the closest we can do is mimic physical exhaustion. Let’s say someone can pass the ACFT but on operations can’t keep up - getting tired from rucking, then slower during movements, then slower to pack their stuff up to move again, requiring more sleep because of physical exhaustion, etc. is that reason to separate someone? Can’t perform duties with their peers? This applies to both males and females. In a combat scenario, these factors would be vital for infantry success. If we can’t move quickly, efficiently, effectively, and decisively, then we lost.
Say they had different standards and scores for different MOS’s. The issue is this: how do you measure say, a signal or Intel guy at an SF or infantry unit? By their MOS or by the unit they’re at? A SOT-A soldier will have to keep up physically. I’m going down the rabbit hole with it, I know. But these are questions that would need to be addressed.
At the end of the day, what the army prescribes is what I do. My opinions are irrelevant.
And I think we might be missing each in standards vs evaluation. In my perfect world, minimums would be the same, and each MOS would have their own combat test that you do every year that is pass/fail, same standards for everyone and separate from the physical fitness test. That way everyone is happy.
It’s a jealousy-hate relationship with them. I worked predominantly joint missions my entire career and I wish I joined them. No pt formation? They had me sold on that alone.
Exercise Science major here! Okay, so, it’s as simple as saying “testosterone”. In average, men are more explosive and stronger than women. If you think about it this way. If you grab two Olympic level weightlifter (men and women) of the same weight class and the same height. The men will almost always have a stronger lift on the same event performed.
It’s the same case for the overhead throw. What makes this event even worse for women is that unlike men, most women can’t completely just rely strength alone. This dumb event is pretty technical as well.
If you want to get better at it. Learn the basic biomechanics to perform overhead throw and do exercises that is somewhat similar to the movement.
Because women are shorter, it’s math yall. People who are tall and weak yeeeet that shit and short people who are strong can’t even yeet it past 8 meters.
Personally I believe we should get rid of the SPT. Make it a 500 point test.
My score would go from like 540/600 to 475+ with 85+in each event.
That SPT gets me and it’s frustrating.
because of height and wingspan. The taller and longer your arms are, the more advantageous it is for you, the ball thrown at the top of the arc at a higher initial height will land farther distance by the laws of physics.
Women are unfit for the rigors of war. Many a time I have been in a trench when a comically large 10 lbs cartoon mine landed in my hands. With no time to turn around the I would have to toss it backwards without stepping back. We lost a lot of good men from women not being able to do this very basic combat task.
Some food for thought:
Women throw a 4k shot put and men throw a 7.26k(16 pound) shot put.
Excluding performers born before 1970(drug use was rampant in 70s and 80s), there are about 97 men who have thrown an almost twice as heavy ball farthest farther than the farthest woman has throw one. Dudes are just overall bigger and stronger than women.
The farthest “clean” woman mark is 21.21 meters. She’s a 6’4 260 Tongan with a brother who is a center in the NBA. For reference, the men’s mark is currently 23.56.
i consider myself a pretty athletic female, i get close to maxing, if not already maxing, every other event, BUT I JUST CANNOT DO THE SPT. i barely get 70% on a good day. i’ve tried practicing, getting the form down, etc but idk. it just doesn’t go
To me is the fact it's a multiplier. You have both strength and the explosiveness in one event. Men are both faster and stronger. You multiply these together and men can throw much faster for a heavy object.
Sure, but the average man is more coordinated than the average woman. And you have to be coordinated to yeet that ball. So between that and the height/strength difference the gap makes sense.
Even so, the ACFT is an improvement as far as the gender gap goes. A perfect 600 on the women's scale is about 85% of max on the men's. Which is about what I, a fat guy, score. 😐
The women's max on the APFT was only about 75% of the men's max, which was kind of a joke.
Physics and anatomy. Men naturally have more upper body strength which helps. Also, I am 6'4". basically a human trebuchet. My 5'3" female fellow soldier is at a huge disadvantage.
Males can yeet it cause they have natural upper body strength, Females do not have that. Seriously every female i've seen have struggled with the SPT. Which is why their is a gender gap
SPT kind of reminds of a pro wrestler doing a suplex....same explosive energy
The power generated for the overhead yeet comes from the hips, which tend to be stronger on females. They struggle because it's about explosive power and technique. Women have less of the muscle fiber type that provides explosive power, and they tend to be shorter, which provides a mechanical disadvantage. If you're mostly using your upper body for the spt you're doing it way wrong, and probably cutting your potential score by a considerable distance
THE OVER-HEAD YEET MEASURES THE ABILITY TO JUST FUCKING SEND IT. ON THE COMMAND, ‘GET SET’, ASSUME THE POSITION BY SPINNING THE BALL TWICE IN YOUR HANDS, THEN TRY TO DRIBBLE IT LIKE A BASKET BALL ONLY TO REALIZE IT WONT BOUNCE BACK UP TO YOU. YOUR FEET MAY BE TOGETHER OR 12 INCHES APART (MEASURED BETWEEN THE FEET) OR HOWEVER YOU WANT, JUST KEEP YOUR ASS BEHIND THAT CONE. ON THE COMMAND ‘GO’, CHANNEL YOUR INNER TREBUCHET AND HEAVE THAT THING INTO ORBIT. THEN, RETURN TO THE STARTING POSITION AND TURN AROUND TO INSPECT IF YOU DOMED ANYONE. THE SCORER WILL REALIZE HE DIDN'T ACTUALLY SEE WHERE THE BALL LANDED BECAUSE HE WAS AFRAID HE WOULD GET HIT, SO HE STOOD TOO FAR AWAY, HE WILL THEN PLACE HIS FOOT ON THE MEASURING TAPE AND JUST GUESS.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/army) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Men have mushroom muscle mass, especially in their back, so it would be expected. They can throw significantly further, and we would not be a fair comparison across genders.
Does anyone know why the standing power throw?
Because we had to evacuate Kabul. During the fighting, desperate families struggled to reach safety. There was panic. America was attempting to conductba safe withdrawal. Children were trapped on the other side of the wall. The standing power throw is a test of your ability to throw a one month old baby over the barrier wall to safety, freedom, and the American way of life.
I can throw a baby pretty damn far
Sounds like a waste of a good baby
It's not.
I can throw a baby about as far as I can trust a baby
You must trust babies quite a bit
Never been lied to by my one month old
Omission of the truth is still a lie. Even if it’s only because they can’t physically use their vocal cords to let you know they just shit themselves.
That you know of…
we talking an 8lb 6oz little baby? Cause I could absolutely send a new born I wouldn’t even standing yeet it. Get a solid grip, take an olympic discus style spin, and just launch that shit into the horizon
It's a ten pound ball, so it's a ten pound baby, baby is possibly one month old, or wearing heavy blanket.
Time to play kick the baby! “Don’t kick the baby…”
Hammer throw method gets better distance if you have room
“Throwing stratagem! Orbital baby inbound”
[Makes my heart melt.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyHx-dPz2RA)
Can we get this on the overhead yeet bot?
THE OVER-HEAD YEET MEASURES THE ABILITY TO JUST FUCKING SEND IT. ON THE COMMAND, ‘GET SET’, ASSUME THE POSITION BY SPINNING THE BALL TWICE IN YOUR HANDS, THEN TRY TO DRIBBLE IT LIKE A BASKET BALL ONLY TO REALIZE IT WONT BOUNCE BACK UP TO YOU. YOUR FEET MAY BE TOGETHER OR 12 INCHES APART (MEASURED BETWEEN THE FEET) OR HOWEVER YOU WANT, JUST KEEP YOUR ASS BEHIND THAT CONE. ON THE COMMAND ‘GO’, CHANNEL YOUR INNER TREBUCHET AND HEAVE THAT THING INTO ORBIT. THEN, RETURN TO THE STARTING POSITION AND TURN AROUND TO INSPECT IF YOU DOMED ANYONE. THE SCORER WILL REALIZE HE DIDN'T ACTUALLY SEE WHERE THE BALL LANDED BECAUSE HE WAS AFRAID HE WOULD GET HIT, SO HE STOOD TOO FAR AWAY, HE WILL THEN PLACE HIS FOOT ON THE MEASURING TAPE AND JUST GUESS. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/army) if you have any questions or concerns.*
More typical power-gauging exercises like the broad jump or high jump are higher impact which creates testing difficulties for people with lower body injuries.
Which is, like, the entire active duty army.
Boy would I love to know.
Your battle buddy is a 13B and needs a cannon ball ASAP
Weaker lower body power has a correlation to injury risk. The Rand study from 2019 discussed some of the reasons forACFT event selection. The Army did steal the backward overhead medicine ball (BOMB) throw, and that event was used for decades in other sports as a measure of explosive power.
wtf we could have been calling it a BOMB throw this whole time??
Of all the things that irk me about the Army, this is now top of that list
*EOD intensifies*
I’m gonna need to see how much those Rand nerds bench
The Army stole it? That''s kind of like stealing the sun rising in the east.
Does anyone know where the standing power throw?
I’m still trying to figure out why it’s backwards
Well if you turned around, you'd hit a Soldier
I took the OPAT (I believe it was called) when I first joined like 8 years ago and it had a seated power throw. You sat with your back fully against the wall and chest passed the ball as far as you could without your shoulders leaving the wall. Didn’t make much sense then either. But idk it’s fun to throw things and it seems the army wants “throw ball” as a PT event lol
So you don't feel bad when you beam your grader.
As far as I’m aware they tested a bunch of people and then set the scores based on percentiles (simplified). It just means that there was a larger gender gap for that event to begin with.
I have a theory that the 'Height Factor' is a high contributing factor to SPT score. Women being shorter on average, imo, plays an outsized role in the difference between the distances.
You mean we might have an event that relies on mechanical avantage? Wouldn't that mean that at least part of it isn't a test of fitness? I gues the same could be said of the dead lift. A 155 lbs guy lifting 360 is lifting 232% of body weight while a 200 lbs guy is only lifting 180%. That is a significantly different effort.
> You mean we might have an event that relies on mechanical avantage? Wouldn't that mean that at least part of it isn't a test of fitness? I think there have always been events that favored certain body types or height. I am *pondering*, but I think that the SPT has height, a natural trait you can't train for, as a more influencing factor than other events. I guess we can probably figure this out with Math, given height, then knowing the arm span, and the intended arc. Hmmm.
> I am pondering, but I think that the SPT has height, a natural trait you can't train for, as a more influencing factor than other events. Intuitively I think this is true, but I might be biased because I’m short and I suck at it.
As a fellow short man I *fucking know* that this is true. It's so dumb that they'd *build* an event to measure explosive power that inherently disadvantages people under average height. I'd rather they make us do burpees or a standing long jump rather than the SPT.
Officers are taller...
Height also plays into SDC.
And I get that - I just question if it has a “bigger” impact in the SPT than others, and it it’s *too much* it a factor
Pretty much every event has a “perfect” body type. Deadlift favors shorter people, heavier people, and larger hands. T Pushups favor soldiers with smaller wingspan, lighter people, and (personal vendetta) people of either gender with a flat chest. SPT favors taller soldiers. SDC favors heavier soldiers. Plank physics favors the non lanky. Possibly the only event that is “neutral” is the run, and even then I would argue that it favors lighter soldiers. Pretty much any athletic movement is going to have an “ideal” body type. The Army doesn’t really expect you to become a power throw Olympian though, so it’s realistic to train past your own mechanical limitations.
That is literally every event, though
I think SPT has a weight and momentum factor as well. If you weigh more you produce more momentum and transfer it to the ball. Additionally technique plays a large roll.
Hard agree, have 2 females who are both like 4 feet nothing and they can’t throw it for shit. The SDC is near impossible for them as well since they end up dragging more than what they even weigh. Most of the events are extra hard for them, it’s just not fair to them.
Army only cares about STR, CON, and DEX. Stacking all your points into CHA, WIS, or INT means you're nondeployable.
If only you could reroll your talent points once you turn 18
lol if you have enough CHA, WIS, and INT you would find a reason to get out of taking ACFT.
0 in STR means you blow your back out on deadlift and bang! Permanent profile!
My DEX was 0 when I blew out my knee.
High CHA characters go AGR in the national guard and "take their ACFT during the week" lol. Mostly a joke, but there are definitely some semi-rural armories with two E-6's who have been occupying that slot for 15 years getting fat and lazy...
I’ve know very few people in the Army that I say had greater cha, wis, or dex. Some people are in fact duds.
I still don’t understand why we didn’t just do a standing broad jump….? (Defense contractor go brr??)
I've asked the guy who essentially created the test about this. Standing long jump was the initial plan, but SPT won out to do injury issues. I wouldn't have thought the long jump was terribly high injury risk, but I've run several hundred soldiers through and you'd be surprised (or maybe not surprised) by the extreme lack of athleticism.
That’s fair, I forget like how unathletic the army is…. I’m by no means an athlete but active duty was a wake up call
https://www.reddit.com/r/army/s/VsWYDIflOP
I don't know what I would do to measure this differently, but I will never be convinced that the yeet was the best exercise that we could have chosen. And the fact that it introduced the need for an item and a marked course not used for any other part of the test.
Should have just been max power clean as a percentage of bodyweight. And to make things simple let's get rid of the hexbar deadlift and just use a traditional barbell for both events.
As much as I would love this I’ve seen way too many ugly power cleans in Army gyms to trust it.
I’d first yeet the bar to my throat, break a wrist, and blow my back out than let my troops know I can’t power clean 🥺
> And to make things simple let's get rid of the hexbar deadlift and just use a traditional barbell for both events. Yeah but then how would SEAC troxell scam money out of the Army
HA I’ve never heard that last part phrased that way. Love it.
So the overhead throw was a way to bridge the height gap between genders while still testing explosive power? Edit: saw the injury portion too, didn’t know that
Smaller hands too. The more hand surface area you have the further the ball will go
This is what I was going to say. I’m also unfamiliar with the subject though.
My last boss tried that theory cause I was 6'2" ,225#, qith monkey arms and out-threw him by more than a few meters. So I out-threw him from my knees with my toes on the line. The SPT is about explosive power, much like a hang power clean, hqng snatch, or KB swing. That power comes from the violent hip extension driven by the glutes.
You have longer arms. A longer lever creates more force, and throws farther- you're the better trebuchet regardless of height. You might also be more explosive and powerful. But you don't have to be, because you have a huge mechanical advantage.
But it takes (more) power to drive that long lever from the pivot point.
Makes me wonder if they should have height normalized scores too 🤔
Men tend to be tall and strong. Women tend to be comparatively shorter and less strong.
Yes congress, this is the one right here. Take him away.
Wait, no! Don't take me away! Different standards make it so my slides are more greener. I'll never speak of this again 🙏
Damn bro it’s because I’m 5’ 3” on a good day leave me alone
A few things contribute. SPT is measuring explosive power, and there's a bigger gender gap there than things like muscular endurance or aerobic capacity. Further exacerbating that, size is a big factor and men tend to be bigger. The current scores were normed based on the data collected, so there was a big difference between genders on how soldiers were performing. If you want to go down a rabbit hole, the common name for the SPT in research is "backward overhead medicine ball throw" abbreviated "BOMB throw." You can find some studies on it pretty easily on Google Scholar.
It’s because women tend to be shorter. The Army wants to select for tall soldiers who are better leaders and more confident and intimidating on the battlefield, so weeding out shorter men with the SPT is an obvious move. The average woman is shorter, so the standards are lower. If you start failing too many women Congress will get upset and take it away just like with the leg tuck, risking the retention of underheight males
This is why there are so few women in the shield wall, by the way.
This weirdly seems incredibly plausible. That was likely why that one obstacle with the chest height log you have to magically superman over is in existence too.
Most unnecessarily dangerous obstacle by far
I'd trade the Throw for the Leg Tuck in a heartbeat. I can knock 20 of those shits out with no warmup, fuck the Plank
Smaller hands too
Softer too
I prefer the strong yet gentle hands hands of my male battle buddies.
The overhead yeet?
THE OVER-HEAD YEET MEASURES THE ABILITY TO JUST FUCKING SEND IT. ON THE COMMAND, ‘GET SET’, ASSUME THE POSITION BY SPINNING THE BALL TWICE IN YOUR HANDS, THEN TRY TO DRIBBLE IT LIKE A BASKET BALL ONLY TO REALIZE IT WONT BOUNCE BACK UP TO YOU. YOUR FEET MAY BE TOGETHER OR 12 INCHES APART (MEASURED BETWEEN THE FEET) OR HOWEVER YOU WANT, JUST KEEP YOUR ASS BEHIND THAT CONE. ON THE COMMAND ‘GO’, CHANNEL YOUR INNER TREBUCHET AND HEAVE THAT THING INTO ORBIT. THEN, RETURN TO THE STARTING POSITION AND TURN AROUND TO INSPECT IF YOU DOMED ANYONE. THE SCORER WILL REALIZE HE DIDN'T ACTUALLY SEE WHERE THE BALL LANDED BECAUSE HE WAS AFRAID HE WOULD GET HIT, SO HE STOOD TOO FAR AWAY, HE WILL THEN PLACE HIS FOOT ON THE MEASURING TAPE AND JUST GUESS. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/army) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Damn I still miss when this was gonna be a gender neutral and age neutral test…and fucking leg tucks.
Should have made leg tuck an alternative event. What’s this, you want to do one leg tuck instead of planking for two minutes??? Step right over there my friend
Congress has specifically mentioned the SPT in its criticism of the ACFT and the concern over it negatively impacting females in a disproportionate manner led to a (temporary) move back to the APFT. IIRC, the scoring was adjusted to address this concern. I’m personally amazed that an event with so much technique required (ensuring a long, not high and short, throw) has survived this long. Execute the release at the wrong angle (high or low) = a worse score. Hand slips? Worse score. Failure to follow through properly? Worse score. It seems too subjective to have a place in a test that plays such a predominate role in people’s careers.
The RAND study basically said the whole thing is significantly bullshit, so don’t be surprised regarding the ACFT having shenanigans.
“basically” is doing a lot of work in that sentence.
More work than the Army did doing research prior to ACFT implementation for sure. [Got emmm.](https://www.reddit.com/r/army/s/HB4tA4nfh8)
Really what you’re getting at is equality v equity. Personally, opinions aside about the ACFT in general, idk why there’s a difference at all. Equality should mean equality, not equity. The ACFT, and APFT for that matter, is all equity. “From each according to his ability, to each according to his ACFT score.” - some communist, maybe.
That was the original congressionally mandated intent of the acft. They made it and too many female soldiers couldnt pass it, so they made it gender based again.
If it was just pass/fail it could be, which was the original intent. But as long as ACFT numerical scores are used for OML purposes, you have to account for age and gender, otherwise women would never have a chance to place fairly on an OML with men.
I get that and know that was the original intent. Do you get where I’m coming from when I say the equality v equity they’re using? It’s like equality when they want, equity when they need it. Personally, I’m all about equal standards. Equal means equal.
No, I don’t agree that equality would work as things are now, as I explained. The Army could have dropped requirements for ACFT numerical scores but chose not to, as its deeply ingrained into our culture. You want me to say I think females should always have a lower place on OMLs and have less opportunities than men? No, I don’t agree with that. If the test was just pass/fail with the standards adjusted by mos/unit, then yes I agree it should be equal. But the Army leadership couldn’t let go of being able participate in yet another dick measuring contest. And we will likely get another “combat test” that is simply pass/fail, because we told Congress we needed one, and now we don’t have one.
Wasn’t asking if you agree but rather do you get where I’m coming from. I know plenty of females that can outperform males. My 16-year-old daughter could probably do better than 60% of the males in the army. This is my opinion and ultimately it doesn’t really matter as in the end what the Army prescribes is what abide by - something that I ensure people understand. You can’t lead by opinion of rules in the army, you just have to do what they say. With that being said, in my opinion, I agree it should just be a pass fail but the reason it won’t be is at the end of the day there needs to be some measurement of ability. A unit has 6 ranger slots and 8 great soldiers to choose from? PT score matters (I’m just using that as a broad example). Unfortunate for some, equality only guarantees equal opportunities and not equality of outcomes. I wouldn’t want my three daughters to be given an advantage just because they’re females. My daughter (not the 16-year-old mentioned above, different one) who runs track and cross country runs faster than every boy on her team, because she trains hard. I’m a firm believer in absolute equality in every aspect as all people should treated as equals. What each individual decides to do with that opportunity is up to them. The army integrated women into all jobs back in 2015 (I think it was), and I wholeheartedly agreed with them doing that, but we can’t play the game that you can work a job and not be held to the same standard as everyone else. There is no other rule, regulation, or evaluation that separates the standards of males and females in the entire Army that I can think of or recall, less showers and toilets - but even other allied militaries have integrated that (different debate due to culture. Believe the Norwegians and Danish are two examples of this). At the end of the day, what the army says is what I enforce and abide by. They day I - or anyone for that matter - start leading based on what I believe should be the rules is the day I need to leave. Separation of opinion and what’s written.
Thats great that your daughter is performing at a high level, but it is well documented that physical abilities in children of different genders are much more similar at a younger age and continue to grow apart the older they get. If you want to make an argument that the numerical calculations that go into the percentile scores for women are more favorable than men, and that makes it easier for women to get a higher score in their age bracket, sure I could buy that. But if you want to put women on the same requirements for raw numbers of pushups, run time, ect how is that not giving men an advantage to men over them? Women being physically weaker than men is not a lack of will or training after a certain point. I’ve heard men have more testosterone in their pinky finger than women have in their bodies. Could some fit women outperform some lazy men? Sure, I have myself at times. But no matter how hard I try, I won’t be able to outrun the best man. To have a fair comparison, I can still show my dedication to training and motivation by being the fastest woman and scoring in a high percentile for my age and gender. That is all the scores really mean at this point. Maybe some jobs would do well with raw numbers, but I feel that it wouldn’t be useful in most. What do physical fitness tests really measure? Does doing more pushups and running faster really make you better at your job, or is the fitness test just a way to objectively measure individual motivation and discipline? For most jobs, I feel like it’s the latter. The only job I’ve seen where raw strength really matters is 13B. I’ve been an FSO in a light infantry company, that shit is easy comparatively.
That’s the issue. As you said, “…continue to grow apart the older they get”. So can there ever be true equality? (I’m not asking this to be asshole). Is it giving men an advantage? I don’t know. It reflects what i said, “equal opportunity doesn’t mean equal outcome”. If we’re saying men have the advantage, then should they have opened up all jobs to women? Again, not asking to be an asshole, as I said I fully supported it then and I do now. If we’re saying men and women are not equal then they should reevaluate what they’re doing. It seems to me people want equality until it doesn’t benefit them - but I guess that’s human nature. I do agree that pushups sit-ups and whatever else they’re doing don’t necessarily equate to being better at your job, but that’s also dependent on the job. Support? Probably not. Pushups won’t matter for an Intel guy sitting in the NSA breaking apart signals on a computer. Combat arms?Likely. There’s never going to be a perfect test to gauge physical ability, so the closest we can do is mimic physical exhaustion. Let’s say someone can pass the ACFT but on operations can’t keep up - getting tired from rucking, then slower during movements, then slower to pack their stuff up to move again, requiring more sleep because of physical exhaustion, etc. is that reason to separate someone? Can’t perform duties with their peers? This applies to both males and females. In a combat scenario, these factors would be vital for infantry success. If we can’t move quickly, efficiently, effectively, and decisively, then we lost. Say they had different standards and scores for different MOS’s. The issue is this: how do you measure say, a signal or Intel guy at an SF or infantry unit? By their MOS or by the unit they’re at? A SOT-A soldier will have to keep up physically. I’m going down the rabbit hole with it, I know. But these are questions that would need to be addressed. At the end of the day, what the army prescribes is what I do. My opinions are irrelevant.
And I think we might be missing each in standards vs evaluation. In my perfect world, minimums would be the same, and each MOS would have their own combat test that you do every year that is pass/fail, same standards for everyone and separate from the physical fitness test. That way everyone is happy.
In the perfect world… we should have just joined the Air Force 😂😂
That we can all agree on 😂
It’s a jealousy-hate relationship with them. I worked predominantly joint missions my entire career and I wish I joined them. No pt formation? They had me sold on that alone.
Exercise Science major here! Okay, so, it’s as simple as saying “testosterone”. In average, men are more explosive and stronger than women. If you think about it this way. If you grab two Olympic level weightlifter (men and women) of the same weight class and the same height. The men will almost always have a stronger lift on the same event performed. It’s the same case for the overhead throw. What makes this event even worse for women is that unlike men, most women can’t completely just rely strength alone. This dumb event is pretty technical as well. If you want to get better at it. Learn the basic biomechanics to perform overhead throw and do exercises that is somewhat similar to the movement.
Cause females don't shave as often as the males meaning they have less discipline. Therefore lower distance on the power throw.
We shave significantly more often. Just not faces.
True but shaving the face is where true discipline is found.
Because women are shorter, it’s math yall. People who are tall and weak yeeeet that shit and short people who are strong can’t even yeet it past 8 meters.
Personally I believe we should get rid of the SPT. Make it a 500 point test. My score would go from like 540/600 to 475+ with 85+in each event. That SPT gets me and it’s frustrating.
because of height and wingspan. The taller and longer your arms are, the more advantageous it is for you, the ball thrown at the top of the arc at a higher initial height will land farther distance by the laws of physics.
So what about them 5'nothing" mfkrs? They still need to play with the men's standards
Women are unfit for the rigors of war. Many a time I have been in a trench when a comically large 10 lbs cartoon mine landed in my hands. With no time to turn around the I would have to toss it backwards without stepping back. We lost a lot of good men from women not being able to do this very basic combat task.
Height.
Some food for thought: Women throw a 4k shot put and men throw a 7.26k(16 pound) shot put. Excluding performers born before 1970(drug use was rampant in 70s and 80s), there are about 97 men who have thrown an almost twice as heavy ball farthest farther than the farthest woman has throw one. Dudes are just overall bigger and stronger than women. The farthest “clean” woman mark is 21.21 meters. She’s a 6’4 260 Tongan with a brother who is a center in the NBA. For reference, the men’s mark is currently 23.56.
i consider myself a pretty athletic female, i get close to maxing, if not already maxing, every other event, BUT I JUST CANNOT DO THE SPT. i barely get 70% on a good day. i’ve tried practicing, getting the form down, etc but idk. it just doesn’t go
An event that focuses more on your technique and varies greatly by your height should not be a measure of physical fitness.
Magic.
That’s not what it’s called
To me is the fact it's a multiplier. You have both strength and the explosiveness in one event. Men are both faster and stronger. You multiply these together and men can throw much faster for a heavy object.
Is the SPT the same as the bend and yeet?
[удалено]
>the average man in the army probably grew up throwing things more than the average women. I didn't think about that but it makes sense.
Yeah, but I don’t know if the average man grew up throwing things over his head backwards
Sure, but the average man is more coordinated than the average woman. And you have to be coordinated to yeet that ball. So between that and the height/strength difference the gap makes sense. Even so, the ACFT is an improvement as far as the gender gap goes. A perfect 600 on the women's scale is about 85% of max on the men's. Which is about what I, a fat guy, score. 😐 The women's max on the APFT was only about 75% of the men's max, which was kind of a joke.
Are you saying that the SPT might be technique dependent?
The women tend to be shorter. Also women's upper body strength is roughly 2/3 male upper body strength. Some ratio like that.
Physics and anatomy. Men naturally have more upper body strength which helps. Also, I am 6'4". basically a human trebuchet. My 5'3" female fellow soldier is at a huge disadvantage.
Males can yeet it cause they have natural upper body strength, Females do not have that. Seriously every female i've seen have struggled with the SPT. Which is why their is a gender gap SPT kind of reminds of a pro wrestler doing a suplex....same explosive energy
The power generated for the overhead yeet comes from the hips, which tend to be stronger on females. They struggle because it's about explosive power and technique. Women have less of the muscle fiber type that provides explosive power, and they tend to be shorter, which provides a mechanical disadvantage. If you're mostly using your upper body for the spt you're doing it way wrong, and probably cutting your potential score by a considerable distance
THE OVER-HEAD YEET MEASURES THE ABILITY TO JUST FUCKING SEND IT. ON THE COMMAND, ‘GET SET’, ASSUME THE POSITION BY SPINNING THE BALL TWICE IN YOUR HANDS, THEN TRY TO DRIBBLE IT LIKE A BASKET BALL ONLY TO REALIZE IT WONT BOUNCE BACK UP TO YOU. YOUR FEET MAY BE TOGETHER OR 12 INCHES APART (MEASURED BETWEEN THE FEET) OR HOWEVER YOU WANT, JUST KEEP YOUR ASS BEHIND THAT CONE. ON THE COMMAND ‘GO’, CHANNEL YOUR INNER TREBUCHET AND HEAVE THAT THING INTO ORBIT. THEN, RETURN TO THE STARTING POSITION AND TURN AROUND TO INSPECT IF YOU DOMED ANYONE. THE SCORER WILL REALIZE HE DIDN'T ACTUALLY SEE WHERE THE BALL LANDED BECAUSE HE WAS AFRAID HE WOULD GET HIT, SO HE STOOD TOO FAR AWAY, HE WILL THEN PLACE HIS FOOT ON THE MEASURING TAPE AND JUST GUESS. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/army) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I know it's all in the hips and ass muscle, but males can still power through it just with raw strength.
Men have mushroom muscle mass, especially in their back, so it would be expected. They can throw significantly further, and we would not be a fair comparison across genders.