How important is strength during selection?

Strength has mattered in selection-type environments long before modern gyms. Xenophon’s Ten Thousand didn’t fail because they lacked a bench press, but because exhaustion, load, terrain, and cohesion punished the weak links. In WWII, accounts from commando and airborne training repeatedly emphasize loaded movement and repeated lifting/carrying under fatigue—practical strength.

If you look at doctrine and historical training narratives (e.g., British commando training memoirs, U.S. Ranger training histories), the consistent theme is not “max strength,” but “usable strength” that holds up when sleep-deprived and wet. The events that select people—log PT, litter carries, wall climbs, casualty drags—are all strength-endurance problems.

So yes, strength matters, but mostly as a buffer: it reduces the cost of every task and buys resilience. I’d aim for competence in basic patterns (hinge, squat, press, pull, carry) and then make it repeatable under load. Absolute strength is rarely the only gate; durability and repeated output are the historical killers.

Strength matters more once you add kit, and kit is where people misjudge things. A “light” day can still be 30–50 lb on you depending on ruck, water, plates, helmet, and what your cadre considers standard. The stronger you are, the less that load wrecks your posture and the less you compensate with sloppy mechanics.

Practical recommendation: train with the stuff you’ll actually use (ruck that fits, boots that don’t destroy your feet, socks that manage heat, and a belt/strap setup that doesn’t shift). Bad fit can make a strong guy miserable and a moderate-strength guy quit.

For strength, I’d prioritize: pull-ups (strict), loaded carries (farmer/sandbag), hinge (deadlift or trap bar), and overhead stability (pressing isn’t just vanity—think lifting equipment, obstacles, and shouldering odd objects). If your gear is dialed and your movement is clean, you need less “gym strong” than you think.

From my experience, strength is important, but it’s not the scoreboard—performance under fatigue is. Selection-style events don’t care what you can do fresh. They care what you can do after a long movement, little sleep, and then being told to pick up something awkward with a team.

The guys who struggled weren’t always the smallest; it was the ones who couldn’t repeat efforts: sprint to work, lift/carry, recover fast, do it again. If you’re “just strong enough,” you can still do well if you’re disciplined, don’t panic, and manage your pace.

What I’d call “enough” is: good pull-ups, solid push-ups, a hinge that doesn’t break down, and the ability to carry odd weight without your lower back turning into the weak link. Train smart, progress gradually, and if you’re getting recurring pain, get a qualified coach/PT to look at your mechanics early rather than trying to tough it out.

People who say “strength doesn’t matter” are repeating internet coping. Of course it matters. Every ounce of kit, every litter carry, every time you have to lift someone else’s problem—strength is the tax.

But here’s the part folks don’t want to admit: chasing huge numbers can be a trap if it ruins your endurance or gets you hurt. Selection doesn’t hand out trophies for a 1RM. It punishes weak movement and fragile bodies.

So yes—get stronger. Just stop pretending you’re training for a meet. Get strong in the basics and make it transferable: carries, sandbags, sleds, pull-ups, hill work. If you can’t move awkward load repeatedly, your “cardio engine” is irrelevant because you’ll be smoked in team events.

Strength is still a factor today, but it’s interesting how missions are shifting. More ISR, more small teams supported by drones and sensors, more remote targeting—yet the selection and early training still heavily favor classic load carriage and physical robustness.

Why? Because the human still has to move, carry batteries, carry comms gear, carry water, and keep functioning when tech fails. A quadcopter doesn’t reduce the weight on your back unless your unit changes the whole load plan.

In practical terms: aim for strength that supports long-duration movement and repeated lifts. If you’re moderately strong but highly durable, you’ll likely handle the “analog” problems better—battery swaps, hauling cases, moving with antenna masts, etc. The future is high-tech, but the entry gate is still very physical.

Think of it like vehicle design: horsepower alone isn’t the answer—torque curve, cooling, and reliability matter. Selection rewards “torque” you can use all day, not a peak number once.

In mechanized units we learned quickly that moving ammo, track blocks, tow bars, and tools is awkward, not elegant. That’s selection in a nutshell: odd objects, bad handholds, uneven ground, hurry up.

So train strength that matches that: trap bar deadlift or conventional hinge for overall posterior chain, heavy carries, step-ups with load, and bracing. If your trunk can’t transmit force, your legs and lungs don’t matter. And don’t skip mobility and recovery—broken parts don’t pass selection.

From a maritime perspective, strength isn’t just “lifting,” it’s maintaining capability in constrained, unstable environments: ladders, lines, small boats, wet decks, awkward loads. Many selection pipelines feed into roles where you’ll handle equipment in dynamic conditions.

That said, the deciding factor is usually work capacity plus composure. On ships we value the person who can keep performing safely at 0200 in bad weather. That maps well to selection: do the job when tired, stay calm, don’t get sloppy.

If you’re training, build a base of strength so tasks feel submaximal, then bias toward stamina with load. And get instruction on technique—poor lifting mechanics with fatigue is a fast track to injury.

In aviation training we talk about “capacity vs demand.” You want your physical capacity high enough that the demand of the day doesn’t spike your stress and decision-making. Selection is similar: when you’re physically on the edge, mental errors multiply.

You don’t need to be massive, but you do need strength that makes obstacles and carries routine. Especially pulling and grip—rope climbs, walls, monkey bars, dragging things, holding awkward items.

I’d focus on pull-ups/chins, rows, farmer carries, and some overhead work for shoulder integrity. Then keep your running/rucking consistent. The best candidates I’ve met in other pipelines were rarely the strongest; they were the ones who never looked surprised by the workload.

Strength is important during selection, but usually as a support pillar for the big four: endurance, load carriage, durability, and teamwork. If you’re below a baseline, you’ll struggle with carries and obstacles; if you’re above it, returns diminish compared to improving ruck/run economy and recovery.

A practical way to frame “enough”: can you consistently hit strong bodyweight basics (solid strict pull-ups, push-ups with good form), can you hinge/squat with good technique, and can you carry awkward weight without form collapse? If yes, you’re probably in the workable zone and can focus on stamina and repeatability.

If you can, find a reputable coach who has worked with tactical athletes. The goal is progress without injury—selection prep is often lost to overuse issues, not lack of heart.

Across SEAL/SAS-style and other SOF selections, the pattern is consistent: you’re judged on being useful under load, not on gym bragging rights. Most pipelines include long movements, water/obstacle confidence (depending on unit), and team events with heavy awkward objects.

The guys who do well tend to be “strong enough” plus extremely hard to break: good joints, good tendons, strong midline, strong grip, strong upper back. That’s what carries over to logs, boats, litters, and rucks.

If you’re not a big guy, don’t panic. Smaller candidates can do great if they’re conditioned, technically solid, and mentally steady. Just don’t neglect strength entirely—odd-object work (sandbags), carries, and pull-ups are the closest to selection reality you can safely train.

In the field, “strength” often shows up as the ability to do boring physical tasks for hours: moving water, cutting and hauling, digging, building a hide, carrying a casualty, or just keeping your kit organized and dry when you’re smoked.

I’d prioritize functional strength that protects you: strong posterior chain and core bracing for rucking, strong shoulders for climbing and lifting, and grip endurance. Those reduce mistakes when you’re tired—like dropping gear, stumbling, or tearing up your hands.

Also, don’t ignore the unsexy parts: foot care, pacing, hydration planning, and navigation basics. Being strong won’t save you if you’re constantly fighting blisters or making bad route decisions under fatigue.

Selection standards are partly about operational reality and partly about risk management and signaling. Institutions want people who can reliably perform across uncertain environments, carry heavy comms and support gear, and still make good decisions. Strength is a proxy for robustness, but not the only one.

Modern missions can be tech-heavy and politically constrained, which actually raises the need for discipline under stress. A physically overwhelmed operator is more likely to make a bad call, mishandle equipment, or create a diplomatic incident.

So: strength matters insofar as it supports resilience and reduces cognitive overload. But it’s not a standalone predictor of who will pass. The best prep is balanced—strength, endurance, recovery, and the ability to be a solid teammate.

Engineers learn quickly that “moving stuff” is most of military life. Sandbags, barriers, tools, bridging components—awkward, repetitive, and time-sensitive. Selection simulates that with team tasks because it reveals who can keep producing without drama.

The strength that matters most is load-handling efficiency: picking, carrying, setting down, and doing it again without wrecking your back or shoulders. That’s technique plus strength-endurance.

If you’re building a plan, keep the big lifts for foundational strength, but add lots of carries, step-ups, and controlled lifts from the ground (sandbag to shoulder, bag over a barrier). Start conservative and build volume slowly—overuse injuries can derail you faster than lack of effort.

I’m in a similar spot (not huge, better at running than lifting), and this thread is exactly what I needed. When people say “strength doesn’t matter,” it always sounded off, because even rucking feels like strength after a while.

For the people who’ve done it: is grip usually the first thing to fail on carries and obstacles? And do you recommend trap bar deadlifts over regular deadlifts for someone trying not to get hurt?

Also, how do you balance getting stronger without your running getting worse? I feel like my legs are dead for days after heavy lower-body lifting.

In selection, strength is like having a larger “resource pool” in a wargame. If your baseline strength is low, every task costs more stamina and recovery, so your decision-making and team contribution degrade faster over time.

But optimization matters: putting too many points into max strength can reduce your endurance “budget” and increase injury risk. The winning build is balanced—enough strength so carries and obstacles are submaximal, then lots of conditioning that mimics repeated efforts.

If I were modeling it: prioritize reducing the probability of catastrophic failure (injury, cramps, inability to carry, inability to climb). That argues for solid technique, steady progressive loading, and field-realistic work like hills, stairs, and loaded carries.

Even with exoskeleton research and powered load-assist concepts, selection today still assumes the human is the primary platform. Fielded systems are limited by power, maintenance, noise, and reliability, and they often add complexity rather than remove it.

So strength remains important because you’re the fallback when systems fail or when you can’t deploy them. Also, operating advanced tech still requires physical tolerance: carrying batteries, moving cases, setting up sensors, and hauling comms gear.

If you want future-proof preparation: build general strength, tendon durability, and strong movement patterns. Tech might change the tools, but it won’t change the fact that selection is trying to find people who can keep working when everything is heavy, awkward, and stressful.