They grow up fast in ROTC...

Your right, all around athletes will probably do well with the new APFT.

You've got to love the Gymnasts and the Water Polo players, they just kill the current APFT. My son is the Tennis player, still not sure how that translates to the high APFT, average has always been around 330 plus, although he does take full advantage of the Rec on a daily basis, and has a killer overhand shot.

Both collegiate athletes are female, very impressive, I bet you keep the boys on their toes.

I don't know if this is just a recent development but it seems that a lot of programs do not have a large number of current collegiate athletes among the ranks. It appears odd that ROTC pushes the student-athlete-leader model extremely hard, yet there are not many D1 (or even D2/3/NAIA) athletes within the program. My program currently has none (over 100 cadets from 3 schools) and in past years we maybe had one in track and a practice squad football player. I wonder if its time commitment or ROTC just simply doesn't appeal to many college bound athletes.

Jcleepe- My batt is the same way, our monthly intramurals remind me of the awkward PE moment in high school when you toss a perfect pass to a wide open receiver and they drop it....every time. Very very few athletes. We also have ROTC teams that compete in school wide intramurals and its usually the same 2-3 guys who carry every team. Everyone else is well...ummm..ya.

I am also excited to see the new APFT!
 
Last edited:
I don't know if this is just a recent development but it seems that a lot of programs do not have a large number of current collegiate athletes among the ranks. It seems odd that ROTC pushes the student-athlete-leader model extremely hard, yet there are not many D1 (or even D2/3/NAIA) athletes within the program. My program currently has none (over 100 cadets from 3 schools) and in past years we maybe had one in track and a practice squad football player. I wonder if its time commitment or ROTC just simply doesn't appeal to many college bound athletes.

I am also excited to see the new APFT!

I expect its a case of D1 athletes having no need of ROTC.
 
I expect its a case of D1 athletes having no need of ROTC.

Well nowadays D1 schools often do not give full rides away for athletes. My buddy plays D1 baseball and got a 1/4 scholarship and another plays D1 football as a walk on with nothing. ROTC is perhaps the surest way to get a full ride nowadays, unless you are a top pitcher or quarterback prospect odds are you might not get that 100% scholarship.
 
I'm still waiting to see how many sprained and broken anlkes they will have if they do the "Run on a 4" beam while carring a full Ammo box in each hand" .
I think that is not for the APFT, which will then be called the APRT (Army Physical Readiness Test), but rather the Army Combat Readiness Test (ACRT), which will be given to active duty personnel.
 
I don't know if this is just a recent development but it seems that a lot of programs do not have a large number of current collegiate athletes among the ranks. It appears odd that ROTC pushes the student-athlete-leader model extremely hard, yet there are not many D1 (or even D2/3/NAIA) athletes within the program. My program currently has none (over 100 cadets from 3 schools) and in past years we maybe had one in track and a practice squad football player. I wonder if its time commitment or ROTC just simply doesn't appeal to many college bound athletes.

Jcleepe- My batt is the same way, our monthly intramurals remind me of the awkward PE moment in high school when you toss a perfect pass to a wide open receiver and they drop it....every time. Very very few athletes. We also have ROTC teams that compete in school wide intramurals and its usually the same 2-3 guys who carry every team. Everyone else is well...ummm..ya.

I am also excited to see the new APFT!

I would imagine that many of the prospective D1 athletes that have an interest in the military are snatched up by the Academies. There were at least 3 athletes from my son's high school last year that received letters from various academies expressing interest in recruiting them. One of them accepted (Track), the others had no interest in the military.
 
I think that is not for the APFT, which will then be called the APRT (Army Physical Readiness Test), but rather the Army Combat Readiness Test (ACRT), which will be given to active duty personnel.

ACRT, thanks, I couldn't remember the acronym, knew it started with an A though.

Still, it will be interesting to see how the ankles hold up. They set up a couple beams at my son's school just to test it out, Son said most of the guys kept falling off and that was without carrying the Ammo boxes, the female cadets did the best, better balance I guess.
 
ACRT, thanks, I couldn't remember the acronym, knew it started with an A though.

Still, it will be interesting to see how the ankles hold up. They set up a couple beams at my son's school just to test it out, Son said most of the guys kept falling off and that was without carrying the Ammo boxes, the female cadets did the best, better balance I guess.


Learning to walk in high heels finally has a good pay off:biggrin:
 
Agreed to the first point.

To the embarrassment issue, there is a time element involved. There is no BEAST in ROTC. Different program philosophy, different resources, different training. The ROTC program is designed to have a college student prove they have what it takes to be an officer over a 2.75 year period, up through LDAC. They don't have to prove their fitness first semester, then have two more years to prove Scholarship, Leadership and Military bearing. They have 2.75 years to show all four elements of Officership. Lots drop out and can't hack it. For a student to hit 225 in 1st semester is not exemplary, but at the same time it is not an embarrassment because it is the first lap of a six lap race! Then 245 second semester (2nd lap), then 260 3rd semester, then 275 4th semester, etc. puts them on track to hit 300 by the end of 6th semester and LDAC. BTW, why is 225 more embarrassing for a female than 225 would be for a male?

It's a progression. Not everyone enjoys physical training, or is fighting fit, right out of a no-sport summer after High School. That's why civilian college ROTC gives a new Contracted cadet a semester to hit 60/60/60 (or they are dropped), then expect 100/100/100 after 2.75 years of supervised training.

As to the third point, about an officer dropping out of a run due to poor fitness, I agree ... but that doesn't relate to a cadet that is four years of training away from being in that situation.

"A no-sport summer after high school" is also known as "the summer you prepare for your ROTC scholarship PT test."

Why is a 225 more embarrassing for a woman? Because (despite the apologist gender griping this will no doubt generate) the women's scale is easy. Failing a run on the women's scale in the 17-21 age group means that the cadet ran slower than a 9:30 mile. The Army standard for a unit run is a 9-minute pace, so as to allow a unit to move swiftly but stay together. At Airborne School, the standard is a 4-mile run at a 9-minute/mile pace. The bottom line is that if you can't pass the run on the female scale, you're woefully shy of even being able to keep up with the soldiers you hope to lead. And when the time does come for that unit run, no commander wants his unit to just move at the minimum pace. Most will run around an 8-minute pace. The other morning, our BC led all the officers in a 45-minute Crossfit workout followed by a 3-mile run at a 7-minute pace. That's reality.

You may think that doesn't apply to a cadet, or that a PT score doesn't matter at the outset or along the way until it's time to be an officer, but the fact is that cadets are expected to be leaders. They are expected to do things like attend Airborne School, take part in CTLT, and other events in which they will be held to the standard of an officer and will not be allowed to lean on such excuses as "it's a six-lap race" and "ROTC doesn't have a Beast."

Why is it more important for a woman? Because she'll be expected to lead men. A 300 on the women's scale is 224 on the men's scale. That 300 is fine and dandy on PT test day. Every other morning, though, she needs to be able to lead from the front at PT. If she wants the respect of the males under her charge, she will earn it starting there.

Some other posters also hit on it: the Army is shrinking. Some cadets, even those on scholarship, will be let go. Don't be surprised if PT scores are a huge driver.

It's good that your daughter is headed in the right direction.
 
Back
Top