Major Strongman Strategy and Tactics - Episode VI: How to Manage an Event That Does Not Suit You

In a Strongman competition, there is almost never a perfect athlete profile. You may be excellent at deadlift but vulnerable to speed. You may dominate stones but lose points in a pressing event. You may have extraordinary grip strength and still be limited by an implement that prevents you from expressing your strength. Sometimes an event simply does not suit you.

The problem is not having a weak event. The problem begins when the athlete tries to turn an unfavorable event into one he must win. At that point, strategy can break down. A weak event should be treated as a problem of loss and resource management, not as an insult to the athlete's identity.

1. The first perspective shift: you do not have to win every event

In a multi-event Strongman competition, the real objective is the overall standings, not a collection of individual event victories. Each event result contributes to competitive position, and the final outcome is produced by the accumulation of those results. One of the most important tactical ideas in Strongman follows directly from this: an event you do not win can still be an event you manage extremely well.

If you finish seventh in an event while the athletes directly behind you finish ninth and tenth, your result may be strategically excellent. Conversely, if you spend everything trying to move from seventh to sixth and then lose two positions in the next event because of fatigue, you won an event and lost the contest. Strategy has to look beyond the isolated result.

2. Define what makes an event unfavorable

An unfavorable event is not necessarily an event in which you are absolutely weak. It may be unfavorable relative to the athletes in that contest. You can perform well and still lose many points because other competitors have a better profile. The issue is the match between athlete, implement, standard, duration, distance, load and scoring distribution.

There are at least four types of unfavorable events. The first is an absolute limitation, where your capacity is simply low. The second is a relative limitation, where you are decent but others are exceptional. The third is a technically unfavorable event, where the implement or standard limits the transfer of your strength. The fourth is an event that appears at the wrong point in the contest, when its recovery cost is greater than it would have been in another context.

3. The goal is not to win the event, but to limit the loss

When you enter an unfavorable event, change the question. Do not ask only, How do I win? Ask, What is the best result I can obtain without paying a disproportionate price? This sounds defensive, but it can be one of the most aggressive strategic decisions in a contest because it protects points and resources for events in which you have an advantage.

Loss limitation should be defined before the event. It may mean staying in the top half, maintaining contact with a direct opponent, securing a valid result, avoiding a costly miss or preserving a specific points gap. A realistic numerical objective is more useful than the vague instruction to do as much as possible.

4. Do not turn a weak event into an ego test

One of the most common errors is an emotional response. The athlete knows the event does not suit him and tries to prove the opposite. He increases the load, forces the pace, skips a safe attempt or continues after technique begins to deteriorate. In competitive terms, this is an investment of resources for identity rather than for the standings.

A weak event does not mean you are a weak athlete. It means that, in that context, the relationship between event demands and your profile is unfavorable. Accepting this before the start allows colder decisions. You do not need to defeat the event. You need to leave it with as many points as possible and as much capacity as possible.

5. Build a minimum result, target result and attack point

For an unfavorable event, three levels are useful. The minimum result is what you need to avoid a major loss. The target result is the realistic performance that protects your position or gains points against direct opponents. The attack point is the additional performance you pursue only if the contest situation justifies the risk.

This model prevents you from entering the event with one rigid target. If you perform below expectations, you still have a plan. If you perform above expectations, you can attack. If the opponents change, you can modify the objective. Strategy becomes adaptable rather than dictated by the event itself.

6. Use the warm-up to update the plan, not just to warm up

Competition day provides information that did not exist when the plan was written weeks earlier. How does the body feel? How does the implement move? What is the surface like? What is the judging standard? How long are the gaps between attempts? How does the grip respond? How quickly does technique degrade? These observations can change the objective.

Strongman-specific research shows that athletes use RPE, perceived movement speed and percentage of 1RM to monitor intensity on competition day. In an unfavorable event, this monitoring becomes even more important because the difference between a controlled attempt and a forced one can consume resources needed later. Winwood and colleagues reported, in a sample of 132 Strongman athletes, a typical warm-up duration of about 16 minutes and a perceived optimal rest period of about 8.5 minutes before an event. citeturn0search0

7. Choose the technique that reduces your disadvantage

When you cannot change physiology, you can change efficiency. In an unfavorable event, technique should be viewed as a way to reduce the cost of each unit of performance. A better body position, shorter trajectory, more consistent setup, controlled rhythm or grip adjustment can turn a very poor event into a manageable one.

This does not mean experimenting for the first time in competition. Technical strategies should be tested in training. Competition day is for applying a validated solution, not inventing one. Strongman preparation research indicates that athletes commonly practice their competition-day preparation strategies in training, supporting the value of familiarity in reducing uncertainty. citeturn0search0

8. Adapt the pace to both the event and your profile

In an unfavorable event, the temptation is to start too hard to compensate for the disadvantage. Often that reaction makes the problem worse. Pacing research shows that distributing effort across an exercise task can substantially affect performance, and that pace regulation depends on event duration, available energy and the anticipated work remaining. In longer events, a more controlled distribution of effort may be preferable to an excessively aggressive opening. citeturn0search1

In Strongman, this principle has to be translated to the event. In farmer's walks, yoke walks, sandbag carries or medleys, an extremely aggressive start can produce a disproportionate drop later. In loading events, brief pauses can protect breathing and grip. In repetition events, the pace should reflect what you can sustain, not what you can produce for a single repetition. The event that does not suit you should be approached with economy, not panic.

9. Do not chase the wrong opponent

In a weak event, the standings can create a trap. You see a very strong athlete ahead and try to follow him even though he is not your relevant opponent. At the same time, there may be a competitor immediately behind whom you can control through an intelligent performance.

Divide opponents into three groups: those you cannot control in this event, those you can keep close to and those you need to beat. If the first group is too strong, do not waste energy trying to imitate them. Focus on differences that matter for the overall standings.

10. Protect the next event

This is one of the most important rules of an unfavorable event: the event does not end when the clock stops. The body immediately enters the next stage of the contest. If the current event is not a strength, there is little reason to spend an enormous amount of resources for a small change in placing, especially if the next event is one where you have an advantage.

Strongman tapering research found that athletes perceive deadlift, yoke walk and stone work among the events that can require longer recovery. This reinforces the need to judge an event's cost in relation to what comes next. citeturn0search2

11. Use the weak event to protect your strengths

A good competition is a sequence of exchanges. Sometimes you give up a little in one event so you can gain a lot in another. If you know a major strength event is coming, you do not need to enter the weak event believing you must immediately recover every lost point.

Imagine a contest where the unfavorable event can cost you two points, while the next event can realistically give you four or five. The optimal strategy is not to eliminate those two lost points at any cost. It is to prevent minus two from becoming minus four through an unnecessary attack, then arrive at the next event with enough resources to exploit your advantage.

12. When is an attack justified even in a weak event?

The fact that an event does not suit you does not mean you should be passive. Attack becomes justified when the points gap matters, direct opponents are accessible, the probability of success is reasonable and the cost to the next event is acceptable.

For example, you are fourth and third place is two points ahead. In the unfavorable event, an additional performance could recover those two points, and the next event provides enough recovery time. Attack may make sense. But if the same attempt could drop you several positions in a miss and the next event starts immediately, the decision changes.

13. When you must accept the loss

Sometimes the best decision is to accept that you will lose points. No strategy can eliminate every disadvantage. An athlete who tries to repair every weakness in real time may pay twice: through the points lost and through the resources consumed trying to recover them.

Acceptance is not resignation. It is loss containment. You decide: this is where I will lose, but I will not allow that loss to spread into the rest of the contest. In an accumulative sport, the ability to contain a bad event can be as valuable as winning one.

14. The weak event can become a test of tactical maturity

A young or highly emotional competitor may feel the need to prove something in every event. A mature athlete understands that a competition is a multi-variable equation. Sometimes the smartest performance is the one that looks less spectacular but produces a better final result.

This becomes especially important in close multi-event competitions. The smaller the differences between athletes, the greater the value of management decisions can become. You do not have to be the best in every context. You have to be good enough in unfavorable contexts and excellent in favorable ones.

15. Practical model: Minimize, Stabilize, Protect, Exploit

For an event that does not suit you, use four stages. Minimize: avoid unnecessary loss. Stabilize: secure a controlled result. Protect: preserve resources for what follows. Exploit: if the situation becomes favorable, use the opportunity to gain points.

This does not mean being conservative all the time. It means the order of decisions matters. First protect the minimum result, then evaluate the context. If you already have what you need, there is no reason to increase risk simply because you can. If the objective is not met, attack becomes a calculated option.

16. The Failure Point of an unfavorable event

The Failure Point is not necessarily the moment when you miss a repetition or fail to complete the course. In an unfavorable event, the tactical Failure Point can appear much earlier: when the cost of a marginal improvement exceeds its competitive value.

If one extra point requires enough energy to damage the next event, you may already have crossed the Failure Point. If an attempt has a low probability of success and a miss leaves you without a result, you may have crossed it. If you are chasing an opponent who can no longer be reached, you have crossed it. Good strategy means recognizing this point before you pay for it.

17. What the plan should look like before the start

Before the event, answer several questions: what is the minimum acceptable result? Who are the relevant opponents? How many points can I realistically gain? What is the maximum risk I accept? How much can this event cost me in the next one? What signal tells me to change the plan?

When these answers exist, the event is no longer a mystery. It becomes a scenario with branches. Plan A can be the safe result. Plan B can be a moderate attack. Plan C can be aggressive resource conservation when the standings allow it. The more unfavorable the event, the more valuable this structure becomes.

Conclusion: you do not win every event, but you can win the way you manage them

An event that does not suit you does not have to become a black hole in the competition. It should become a defined problem: how much can I lose, how much can I gain, what risk is worth taking and what must I protect afterward?

In Strongman, the difference between a strong athlete and an efficient competitor often appears exactly here. The strong athlete tries to defeat every event. The efficient competitor knows when to fight for every point and when to leave a few points on the table so he can gain much more in the rest of the contest. An unfavorable event does not have to be won. It has to be managed.

Selected references

1. Winwood PW, Pritchard HJ, Wilson D, Dudson M, Keogh JWL. The Competition-Day Preparation Strategies of Strongman Athletes. J Strength Cond Res. 2019;33(9):2308-2320. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003267.
2. Winwood PW, Keogh JWL, Harris NK. The Strength and Conditioning Practices of Strongman Competitors. J Strength Cond Res. 2012;26(9):2464-2478. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31823f8f86.
3. Winwood PW, Keogh JWL, Harris NK. Tapering Practices of Strongman Athletes. J Strength Cond Res. 2018;32(5):1181-1196. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001933.
4. Abbiss CR, Laursen PB. Describing and Understanding Pacing Strategies during Athletic Competition. Sports Med. 2008;38(3):239-252. DOI: 10.2165/00007256-200838030-00004.
5. Hettinga FJ, Edwards AM, Hanley B. The Science Behind Competition and Winning in Athletics: Using World-Level Competition Data to Explore Pacing and Tactics. Front Sports Act Living. 2019;1:11. DOI: 10.3389/fspor.2019.00011.