Strength Calculator
allother94
Posts: 588 Member
When this calculator says I am stronger than 60% of lifters in my demographic, are they talking about active lifters or all people that have the ability to lift weights? I’m guessing it’s anyone they typed in their stats. How accurate do you think it is?
Does anyone else use this? If so, how do your scores look?
https://strengthlevel.com/
Does anyone else use this? If so, how do your scores look?
https://strengthlevel.com/
1
Replies
-
The page you linked says where the data came from . . . .0
-
Yes. I’m guessing it’s anyone that typed in their stats without accounting for multiple entries from the same person. If multiple entries are not adjusted for, the results could be wildly skewed.
Does anyone use this? How accurate do you think this is compared to your rank vs active lifters? What about compared to the general population? What score did you get?0 -
allother94 wrote: »When this calculator says I am stronger than 60% of lifters in my demographic, are they talking about active lifters or all people that have the ability to lift weights? I’m guessing it’s anyone they typed in their stats. How accurate do you think it is?
Does anyone else use this? If so, how do your scores look?
https://strengthlevel.com/
https://strengthlevel.com/strength-standards
My strength percentage is as expected. It was fun, thank you.1 -
I’ve wondered how to interpret those percentages too. Looking around my gym, they seem about right —- if I count all the new lifters who drift in and out. If I counted only people who had been lifting for a while, then I’d say my percentages as reported by the site are too high. Make sense?0
-
I’ve wondered how to interpret those percentages too. Looking around my gym, they seem about right —- if I count all the new lifters who drift in and out. If I counted only people who had been lifting for a while, then I’d say my percentages as reported by the site are too high. Make sense?
Very much so. Where are you on percentages? I’m around 50%. Sounds like that is the correct amount vs. the constant lifters and gym drifters. If only 20% of the population even walk through weight room doors, then that would mean that I’m in the top half of the top 20%. This means that I’m in the top 10% of the general population.
Would you agree that only 20% of the general population of males aged 40-49 would use the site? Or do you think it is lower/higher?0 -
I understand. The problem is that if the same person logs their results for bench as they progress, they may log 150, 170, 190, and 210. Does the site count these logs as 4 different entries or does the last entry cancel out the others and the logs are treated as a single person?
If 4 different people, my log of 200 would suggest that I am in the top 20%. As a single person, I would be in the bottom 50%.0 -
allother94 wrote: »
I understand. The problem is that if the same person logs their results for bench as they progress, they may log 150, 170, 190, and 210. Does the site count these logs as 4 different entries or does the last entry cancel out the others and the logs are treated as a single person?
If 4 different people, my log of 200 would suggest that I am in the top 20%. As a single person, I would be in the bottom 50%.
When you update your results it is not added as another unique entry; only a chg of your data that also results in marginal chgs in the database as a whole0 -
allother94 wrote: »
I understand. The problem is that if the same person logs their results for bench as they progress, they may log 150, 170, 190, and 210. Does the site count these logs as 4 different entries or does the last entry cancel out the others and the logs are treated as a single person?
If 4 different people, my log of 200 would suggest that I am in the top 20%. As a single person, I would be in the bottom 50%.
When you update your results it is not added as another unique entry; only a chg of your data that also results in marginal chgs in the database as a whole
That would be ideal. In that case it is only saving the data from the people logging in and not freeloaders like me that just use the calculator...
What do you think about the rest of my logic to covert the number to a general population amount?0 -
allother94 wrote: »allother94 wrote: »
I understand. The problem is that if the same person logs their results for bench as they progress, they may log 150, 170, 190, and 210. Does the site count these logs as 4 different entries or does the last entry cancel out the others and the logs are treated as a single person?
If 4 different people, my log of 200 would suggest that I am in the top 20%. As a single person, I would be in the bottom 50%.
When you update your results it is not added as another unique entry; only a chg of your data that also results in marginal chgs in the database as a whole
That would be ideal. In that case it is only saving the data from the people logging in and not freeloaders like me that just use the calculator...
What do you think about the rest of my logic to covert the number to a general population amount?
I don't think there any way to know how to do that w/any accuracy. Besides, there are already "general pop" indexes available on the Net that you can compare yourself with.
There is already the possibility of self reporting error in the Strength Calculator database and trying to fiddle w/statistically w/just potentially make it more unreliable.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions