Originally Posted by
JamesNoBrakes
In my army experience there were very few muscle-bound types that I'd call "fit". They had "huge" guns, but couldn't run a 2 mile to save their a$$.
A 40" waist is huge for someone that's in shape. Even the huge muscle bound in-shape guys that are 6' or higher are rarely more than 36.
Just to be sure, this is the guy we are talking about right? Definitely not the "largest" picture I found. Seems to be quite the variance with his weight in the pictures I saw.
You are missing the point. The standard is the same for everyone. Someone who is 5'4" can have a 38" waist. Do you realize what that person would look like? As you mentioned, a 36" waist would be marginally passing. Also, a lot of jeans/clothing that say "32" really aren't 32". So even though someone can wear a size 34 or 36 (as I do depending on brand), I tape out very near the limit. And don't get me started as to why females can have more forgiving standards than men. I mean, we all do the same job right?
The USAF always has had a way of screwing up PT tests. Back in the early 90s when I started, they used a bicycle ergometry test to validate the oxygen use level of each member under the conclusion that the more efficient your body used O2, the better fit you were. Well, not really. And they knew then that the program had big flaws. Just like now, the top brass looked the other way. They used that program until Congress mandated a change. Congress mandates a strength test, not a cardio test so the USAF had to get rid of the bike tests.