MTI’s Strength Standards for Tactical Athletes: How Do You Measure Up?

Above: Junior officers at USMC Base Hawaii take the MTI Relative Strength Assessment.

By Rob Shaul, Founder

In the tactical environment, strength is essential. It supports load carriage, sprinting under load, buddy drags, casualty evacuations, and equipment handling.

However, just as important to mission performance is work capacity and endurance (run/ruck). Everything is a trade off and spending too much time and effort training one fitness attribute has a cost.

Chassing too much strength can come at the expense of work capacity and endurance. Work capacity and endurance matter just as much in mission performance. In some cases, more (military selections). 

At MTI, we’ve spent nearly two decades working with tactical athletes across military, law enforcement, and fire/rescue. We’ve tested, trained, and observed how strength contributes to operational performance — and where the limits start to show. From this work came a question we needed to answer clearly:

What is “strong enough”?

A Relative Strength Standard, Not a Maximal One

We’re not interested in absolute strength numbers. Tactical athletes aren’t powerlifters, and chasing powerlifting standards is misdirection. More often than not, it leads to trade-offs in other key areas: movement speed, chassis integrity, stamina, and resilience under fatigue. For some athletes, chasing strength can lead to excess hypertrophy – muscle mass – which makes them slow. 

Instead, we focus on relative strength — or strength per bodyweight.

This matters operationally. Tactical athletes carry themselves, not a barbell. Strength-to-weight ratio influences how quickly they can move, how long they can stay effective, and how well they perform under load.

As well, a relative strength standard automatically “scales” to the individual athlete and creates a single measure which allows direct comparison between athletes of different heights and sizes. 

Years ago I developed the MTI Relative Strength Assessment.

The assessment is straightforward, takes about an hour to complete, and offers a balanced snapshot of full-body strength:

• Front Squat (1RM) – Lower body pressing strength
• Bench Press (1RM) – Upper body press strength
• Hinge Lift (1RM) – MTI’s version of the deadlift – Lower body pulling strength
• Strict Pull-Ups – max reps, capped at 20 for scoring – upper body pull strength

Each lift addresses a fundamental movement pattern. The scoring model adds total load lifted (plus a scaled pull-up contribution), then divides by bodyweight.

I chose these exercises because they are technically straightforward for experienced athletes, require minimal equipment, and allow us to measure what matters—without technical complexity getting in the way. Olympic lifts demand a high degree of skill, and poor technique can skew results in ways that don’t reflect actual strength.

One common question is why we use the front squat rather than the more familiar back squat to assess lower body pressing strength.

There are two main reasons.

First, the front squat provides a more direct assessment of anterior chain (quad-dominant) strength. In contrast, the hinge lift (MTI’s version of the deadlift) clearly targets the posterior chain—glutes and hamstrings. By separating these patterns, I get a clearer picture of potential strength imbalances between front and back.

This is based on observation and personal judgment, but I believe the back squat, like the trap bar deadlift, is a more blended movement. It distributes load across both anterior and posterior chains. That’s largely because, in both movements, the bar sits close to the body’s centerline. In contrast, both the front squat and conventional deadlift place the load forward of the centerline, increasing emphasis on one side of the chain. The front squat leans forward into the quads; the deadlift pulls backward into the posterior.

Second, over time I’ve seen a consistent pattern: athletes with balanced upper and lower body strength typically have similar 1RMs in the front squat and bench press. For example, a 225-pound front squat 1RM often lines up with a 225-pound bench press. This 1:1 ratio isn’t universal, but when it’s way off, it reveals useful information.

It’s common to see gym-focused athletes come in with a bench press 1RM that far exceeds their front squat—a sign of underdeveloped lower-body strength. On the other end, endurance athletes often show the reverse—strong legs, underpowered upper bodies.

There is a tradeoff, though. The front squat requires adequate wrist, finger, and shoulder mobility to maintain a proper front rack position. Some athletes don’t have this flexibility and have to use the older, bodybuilding-style crossed-arm variation.

Even so, I’ve found the front squat to be the best lower-body pressing test for what we’re trying to assess: real-world, mission-driven strength, in balance.

The MTI Relative Strength Assessment:

After a warm up, the athlete hops on a scale to get current bodyweight, then completes the following efforts: 

• 1RM Front Squat

• 1RM Bench Press

• 1RM Hinge or Deadlift

• Max Rep Strict Pull Ups

Scoring begins by adding up the 1RM loads for the front squat, bench press and hinge lift. 

Pull up scoring is more complicated. First, the max number of pull ups an athlete can score is 20 reps. Second, multiply the number of max rep pull ups by 10% of the athlete’s bodyweight to get his/her pull up score.

Finally, add the pull up score to the 1RM loads for the front squat, bench press and hinge/dead lift, then divide by bodyweight. 

Example Scoring for a 201 pound athlete: 

1RM Front Squat = 275 lb

1RM Bench = 275 lb

1RM Hinge Lift = 435 lb

Pull-Ups = 20 reps (cap) × 10% of bodyweight (201 lb) = 402

Total Load = 1,387

Bodyweight = 201 lb

Score = 1,387 / 201 = 6.9

This score would be categorized as “Excellent” on MTI’s scale:

Relative Strength Score Category

6.5+ Excellent

5.75-6.4 Good

< 5.74 Poor

Our expectation is that professional tactical athletes score “Good” or better. That’s not a performance ceiling — but it’s a reasonable baseline for those who need to do their jobs under physical stress.

It’s worth noting: these standards aren’t high by powerlifting or Olympic lifting measures. They weren’t intended to be. They’re modest, on purpose. They’re built to reflect the full spectrum of what’s required in tactical environments — not just peak strength, but usable strength, in context.

While we use the combined score of the assessed exercises, below are the absolute standards most male athletes need to score excellent on our scale: 

Lift          Raw Standard

Front Squat          1.5x Bodyweight

Bench Press          1.5x Bodyweight

Hinge or Dead Lift        2x Bodyweight

Max Rep Pull Ups         15+

Importantly, there are two ways to increase relative strength: (1) Get Stronger, or; (2) lose weight. In terms of bodyweight, I’ve also developed MTI’s Ideal Bodyweights based on height. This will give you some idea on where you should be in terms of bodyweight.

Most athletes heavier than these ideal bodyweights are packing round excess body fat, but select few, can be packing around excess muscle mass. Both negatively impact movement and speed over ground in terms of running, rucking and overall endurance. 

Being stronger than “Good” isn’t a problem — unless it starts affecting other critical attributes.

We’ve seen it happen. Athletes chase numbers in the gym, and over time their endurance drops, work capacity fades, and recovery time stretches. A strength bias creeps in. It’s simply more sexy in an agro work environment to push more weight on the bench or squat, than run a faster 1.5 mile. However, the weightroom isn’t the mission, Performance in real-world tasks which demand speed and endurance begins to flatten or regress. The engine becomes too heavy for the frame.

In this way, the MTI strength assessment is both a benchmark and a governor. It points to areas that may need development — and in some cases, where dialing back may be the right move.

Overall, my experience has been that athletes who score “good” on the relative strength assessment can also have high levels of work capacity and endurance.

What the Test Reveals

More than just a number, the assessment offers insight into training balance:

• A big gap between front squat and bench? Possible lower body lag.

• High numbers but low score? Excess bodyweight is likely hurting performance.

• Strong bench press but poor pull-ups? Too much pressing and not enough upper body pulling. 

• Good strength, but endurance suffering? Programming may need rebalancing.

The test isn’t just a judgment — it’s a tool for refining training direction.

What If You Fall Short?

It may mean strength work should take priority. Or it could expose a lack of balance in current programming. Either way, we’ve built the MTI Relative Strength Training Plan to help correct these gaps. It’s five weeks of focused training aimed at improving all four metrics, while preserving the work capacity and movement speed tactical athletes need.

What if you’re scoring 7+? It could be you’re spending too much time in the weightroom and not enough running or rucking. We have assessments for both tactical work capacity and military endurance. Take them and see if you’re lacking. 

Questions?

Email me directly, rob@mtntactical.com