predictions of skeletal muscle mass nor dual-energy X-ray
absorptiometry provides detailed information on the size of
speciﬁc individual muscles. Given the known importance of
muscle size as a determinant of muscular strength (9–11), pro-
nounced muscle size seems likely to be critical to extreme
human strength; however, the speci ﬁcm u s c l es i z eo f
extremely strong individuals remains unknown. Similarly, a
large moment arm (e.g., of the patella tendon at the knee joint)
could contribute to the expression of high muscular strength
(10, 12), and a large tendon may mitigate the mechanical stress
it experiences with very high muscular loads, and therefore,
these characteristics may also be expected in individuals
selected for exceptional strength.
In this paper, we present theﬁndings from a unique op-
portunity to examine the laboratory function, muscle size,
and distribution of muscle mass, as well as patellar tendon
size and moment arm, of a World’s Strongest Man and dead-
lift champion (WSM) in comparison with existing data on
untrained individuals, power athletes (100-m-track sprint-
ers), and long-term resistance-trained populations that we
have assessed previously (10, 11, 13– 15).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Participant
The WSM’s achievements included one World’sS t r o n g e s t
Man title (14 mo prior to measurement), ﬁve Britain’s
Strongest Man titles (the most recent 6 mo prior to measure-
ment), twice being World Deadlift Champion and Deadlift
W o r l dR e c o r dh o l d e r( 5 0 0k g ;a tt h et i m eo fm e a s u r e m e n t ) ,
and second place at Europe’s Strongest Man. Prior to agreeing
to participate, the purpose of the research study and the test-
ing procedures were explained to the participant along with
the risks and beneﬁts of taking part. The participant gave his
written informed consent to participate in the study that was
approved by the Loughborough University Ethical Advisory
Committee (Ethics Number R18-P090). Included in the writ-
ten consent was a statement providing permission for publi-
cation of the collected data and the likelihood that their
identity may be evident based on their achievements and
characteristics, despite anonymization.
Training History
The WSM had been continuously involved in systematic,
regular upper- and lower-body resistance training for 15 yr at
the time of testing. In the 12 mo prior to testing, the partici-
pant’s resistance training consisted of the following typical
exercises: lower body: squats, deadlifts, leg press, and knee
extension; and upper body: bench press, shoulder press,
dumbbell/barbell rows, and lat pull-down. The proportion of
the participant’s training within the following repetition
ranges over the last 12 mo was as follows: near maximum
loads [1– 5 repetition maximum (RM)]: 10%; heavy loads (6–
14 RM): 80%; and moderate loads (/C21 15 RM): 10%. The partici-
pant reported only occasional (<1/C2 /week) use of advanced
resistance training practices (i.e., complex training and ac-
commodating resistance method) but frequently ( >3/C2 /
week) executed training repetitions with the intention to
move the load as fast as possible. The WSM’sn u t r i t i o n a l
supplement consumption included protein, branched-chain
amino acids, and electrolytes.
Overview
The WSM reported for a single test session that involved
the following assessments (listed in order): axial T1 weighted
3.0-T MRI scans from T12 to the lateral malleolus [to assess
muscle size throughout the lower body (left and right sides)],
axial and sagittal T1-weighted MRI scans of both knees [to
assess patellar tendon cross-sectional area (CSA) and patellar
tendon moment arm], maximum countermovement jumps
(CMJ), and maximum isometric midthigh pulls (IMTPs). The
muscle size, patellar tendon CSA, and patellar tendon
moment arm of the WSM were compared with various popu-
lations measured within our laboratory, as indicated in