King Sports International

14 signs that the collapse of the modern world has began

2011-11-23T16:02:00.000-08:00

An excellent article has been placed on the KSI forum (http://bit.ly/sb6ILE) - '14 signs that the collapse of the modern world has began'. Consistent with our holistic approach to training, we cover all topics that affect your lifes. Not everyone wants to be exposed to this, however that is none of our business. Our business is to stay true to our principles, and this includes teaching holism in life.

As a brief insight into this article, I have provided the 14 key points presented by this author, and a link to the article:

#1 - Tornadoes, hurricanes, earthquakes and tsunamis –
#2 - The silence of the bees –
#3 - The failure of nuclear science –
#4 - The vicious pursuit of Wikileaks –
#5 - The rise of the medical police state –
#6 - The increasing frequency of food shortages and crop failures -
#7 - The runaway destruction of the world by energy companies -
#8 - The continued GMO contamination of our planet -
#9 - The tyranny and criminal crackdowns targeting real food -
#10 - The escalation of the counterfeiting of the money supply
#11 - The plummeting intelligence of the masses
#12 - The complete and utter fabrication of the mainstream news –
#13 - The ongoing pharmaceutical pollution of our world -
#14 - The radioactive contamination of the global food supply -

Of great interest and relevance directly to the physical preparation world (or more specifically the US-led fitness industry, in my opinion, were points 4 and 14.

#4 - The vicious pursuit of Wikileaks - In an age of such rampant deceit, there is no room for the truth. So those who tell the truth (Wikileaks) are viciously pursued as if they were criminals.

I have spend the last few years drawing attention to the rapid rise of deceit in the US-led fitness industry during the decade 2000-2010. My book 'Barbells & Bullshit' (http://bit.ly/vuwbM2) focuses on this, as will the book set for release during 2012 sub-titled 'lifting the veil'. I say 'If they are lying about x, what else are they lying about?'

Which links to the next points of relevance:

#11 - The plummeting intelligence of the masses - One of the most disturbing signs that we're already in the collapse is the great dumbing-down of the masses. The drooling, CNN-watching television zombies who dominate our landscape offer absolutely nothing of value to the world. They are the "mindless consumers" who get vaccinated, watch television and eat processed, pasteurized junk food. They're on psychiatric meds and believe everything the government tells them. Most of these people, of course, won't make it through the collapse.

I have been stunned by how unintellegient most act, or the absence of critical thinking. The masses of 'professionals' in the US-led fitness industry are being lied to repetitively and they struggle to see through the lies, continuing in their non-thinking role as consumers led by the interests of commerce. In fact, to create an atmostphere of acceptance, the masses are being told its okay to lie, cheat and steal.

There were a few more points made by this author in the ensuring discussion.

"Think about what's happening around you these days. These on our world. These are the End Times of the corporate oligarchy; the monopolare the signs of the last, desperate clutches of a civilization built on utterly unsustainable practices that don't value life istic for-profit corporation machine that destroyed everything in our world in exchange for a slightly higher quarterly earnings report."

This is exactly what I see the in US-led fitness industry - desparate acts by companies and individuals given power in return for their souls, acting in a non-sustainable way using practices that don't value the interests of the industry 'professionals' or the end users.

"In the quest for more money, humanity has sacrificed its food supply, its pollinators, it's oceans, forests and soils. Greed-driven humans have used other humans as medical experiments and cannon fodder."

In my yet-to-released book that will lift the veil on these practices, I ask are these the desperate acts of the end an era, where humans have become so desparate that the envioronment results in some companies and indivduals acting in unscruplous ways, more turning a blind eye to it or endorsing it, and the masses not knowing there is another, better way? Or the start of a whole new era of deciet?

Based on the timings of entering into 2012, I believe and hope that these desparate acts are the former - the last struggles of desparate humans as the era ends.

I am not the only one who sees the possibility of a existance that serves the interests of each and every one of you that may rise from this collapse.

These are the practices of a failed civilization... and one whose days are numbered. Watching it all crumble is far more interesting than watching it continue its destructive ways, of course, because those of us paying attention realize a future civilization must rise up in the place of this one after the collapse.

Some months ago I placed a Youtube clip of a prophecy by an American indigeneous man about the future. His words go something like this - I encourage you to watch the clip.

In conclusion, as I travel through America I know more of it's citizens are 'waking up'. I am not sure if the US-led fitness industry 'professionals' are this enlightened yet, however it will happen. I look forward to the day when education in that industry is based on honesty, not stolen lies.

Full article: http://bit.ly/uvWfiR

Update re KSI Coaching Program

2011-10-09T04:49:00.000-07:00

With the increased interest in our coaching program, combined with our growing awareness of how unique, special and powerful our coaching programs are, we recognize the need to simply and streamline the program, allowing all to investigate whether this is a fit for them, and progress along the path up to at least the level of longer-term committment, which is usually the major factor that seperates participants in the program.

So click on the link below to check out the current shape of the KSI Coaching Program.
http://www.kingsports.net/kingcoaches.htm.
We then encourage you to email us or post on the forum any questions you may have about where you are up to in the program and where you would like to go.

We are preparing to run a Level 1 in MA and CA, USA, in Nov 2011, and then 2012 will be a massive year. For some of you there may be just one or two components that are missing then you will be able to join us in Park City in August 2012 for what is shaping to be the most significant year in our collective lives.

In addition there is the planned 2012 World Tour (yet to be formally announced) which may present some of you with more exposure to our coaching program.

To summarize for you, the Legacy Course is now Level 1, the on-line theory course known as 'Foundations' is Level 2, and the relatively new two day practical course (introduced less than a year ago and another factor that really separates what we do from the imitators – we actually can and do coach athletes, and teach you the same) is Level 3.

Once you have achieved all three you are eligible to join us for the Level 4 – Resident Coaching Camp – a 3 day live-in coaching camp providing you with a variety of coaching experiences you are not likely to get anywhere else in the world, and the final step in the part-time end of the KSI Coaching Program.

From then on, Level 5 is a one year commitment, Level 6 longer, and Level 7 is the domain of those who seek excellence the KSI way. Essentially coaching at a level most dream of.

To summarize the KSI Coaching Program consists of the following levels:

* Level 1 - Legacy Theory Course
* Level 2 - Foundations Theory Course
* Level 3 - Art of Coaching Practical Course
* Level 4 - Resident Coaching Course
* Level 5 - Coach Intern Program
* Level 6 - Coach Mentor Program
* Level 7 - Graduate Coach Program

Essentially each level is a pre-requisite for the next level however we are flexible with the first three, provided they are completed prior to Level 4. This flexibility is necessary considering some of you completed some of these components in previous years.

If you still have questions after reading this summary, please email us at question@kingsports.net. See you at a course soon!

Ian King

Kim Clisjters talks nutritional supplements

2011-08-09T18:30:00.001-07:00

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/jon_wertheim/08/09/clijsters.interview/

WTA athletes talks nutrition

2011-08-09T18:15:00.001-07:00

The greatest live event in America this year!

2011-08-08T16:58:00.000-07:00

Caught in the web of confusion re stretching

2011-07-25T20:32:00.000-07:00

I recently received this excellent question that I believe typifies the mess most find themselves in due to the way information is brokered and thinking controlled by those seeking to be the gatekeepers:

Subject: To Ian King, About your article in T-Mag #89 (Lazy Man's Guide..) Please Help

Hello, I really need help about stretching because my mind is a mess because of stretching articles (especially in T-Nation and exrx.net), forums etc. There are PNF's, dynamic, static; before workouts, after workouts...

My story is this: Last year (2010 May), about the pain in my elbow areas, doctor said that I've tennis elbow. After a long break, I started to work out 2 weeks ago, again. Because I know that I've a problem in my elbow, I worked with light weights. But, after the second workout I felt the same pain again in my elbow area. I went to another doctor this time and he said that I've triceps tendonitis. His recommendation was to do a static stretching after the warm-up (but before weight lifting), 20 rep * 30 sec. I don't really trust Turkish medical system and its doctors but I'm sure he knows much more than I do. Even though the stretching routine he recommended is interesting, I think his diagnosis is correct.

I don't know what to do. A lot of people say "never do static-stretching before the weight-lifting, static stretching makes your muscles weaker" and this makes me think "My muscles and probably tendons are already weak and if I do static-stretching before the workout, can I become more susceptible to injuries?" Lots of other questions arise while reading articles.

What should I do? The fitness world shouldn't be this complicated for a newbie! It's just stretching! :)

Thanks Ian.
--xxx

xx – I understand your confusion – a product of the information age as I talk about in my video here: www.getbuffed.net

Before I address your email let me categorically state my opinion – any person training who does not stretch, increases the likelihood in injury with each passing day. Of course that is my opinion, however that opinion is based on more experience than most. In fact, I haven’t found too many who have trained more athletes in more sports in more countries for more years. So if you trust experience, that may mean something. If you trust science only, it won’t. If you want to do what everyone else is doing at any given time, it may not.

Let’s talk about science briefly. Lyn Jones, former Australian and US weightlifting coach, said that scientists are historians. I agree. Squatting was not ‘scientifically acceptable’ until the 1990s. Nor were amino acids and protein powders and multi-vitamins. If you were a person who wanted to conform to science you would not have used these exercises or nutrients until the 1990s. That could have been at cost to you in your training had you been at the grindstone for the prior one to two decades.

In the late 1980s, as the first person to do so, I recognized the role of the pause between the eccentric and concentric contractions in strength training. My theory was not scientifically support until the early 1990s. Did that stop thousands of athletes who I trained between these periods from using and benefiting from my hypothesis that they knew to be my three digit timing system? No. Why? Because athletes don’t wait for science to catch up. Science tends to study what athletes are doing to see if it is justifiable. Science isn’t bad. It’s just behind the front line. You need to decide if you want to wait for science of move with earlier indicators.

Now let’s discuss social conformity. You are not alone is seeking to conform. 95% of the population is estimated to share your beliefs. Then there are the trend spotters, who promote training concepts only when they feel there is enough support so they won’t be considered whacky, but not so much awareness that they can still convince the majority they are the saviour, bringing the news to the people. Stretching is the greatest example of this. I have for over 30 years verbally and in writing supported static stretching. The numbers joining me got very thin during the late 1990s and early 2000s when the crowds seeking to stone us got larger. In fact, I don’t know of any other voice who stood firm on this. Now I see the trend spotters rushing to position themselves as experts in static stretching, making and offering ‘how to video’s’ for their commercial gain. The same people who sought the safety and comfort of the dominant paradigm when it wasn’t safe to venture out with an ‘I believe static stretching is great and should be done at the start of training’ t-shirt on.

So you are not alone. You are joined by the masses, and encouraged by the trend spotters seeking to commercially exploit the latest social trends.

Now back to your story. You were sore so you sought to get stronger. You have accepted another popular dominant myth – that if you are injured it is because you are weak. Mmmm. So you sought to strength it and made it worse. No surprise there.

You should go and kiss that doctor. He is a wise man in his recommendation, albeit his strength program is a bit thin on volume.

You are right – the world shouldn’t be complicated – it’s just stretching! I’ve been saying this for decades! Well, in the 1970s and 1980s is was like this. The books were few but there was not fear or pressure to deny the role of static stretching. It was when those who had positioned themselves as experts in training and research were challenged by the rising interest in stretching during the 1990s that they had to delay the inevitable to give themselves a chance to learn more about an area they had neglected, to maybe train so they could have some to and then position themselves as an expert. Well, they have had a decade or so, and now I see they feel more comfortable about the topic, so the tide is turning – the masses are now being slowly given the green light – by the very same people who held up a red light until they could get a handle on it.

So don’t be a bunny. Do what I did. Ignore all advice and experiment in an objective, rational manner on yourself. Come to your own conclusions about training, without fear or favour. Even if these conclusions leave you alienated by society for a year or 2o.

I wrote this in my 2005 philosophy of training book that may assist: *

p. 17… Resist the temptation in program design to conform to mainstream paradigms simply for the sake of conforming, no matter how dogmatically they are presented, or how much you may be ridiculed or ostracized for trusting your intuition over conformity.

And this from my 2005 bok about stretching and dogma…

p. 39… Due to the significant absence of flexibility training in training programs to date, most athletes, coaches and other ‘experts’ have never been involved significantly in a stretching training program. Despite this, and despite the obvious physical manifestations of lacking ability to demonstrate range of movement, many form outspoken and dogmatic positions on topics including stretching

You should really listen to at least part 1 of my Barbells and Bullshit audio or DVD program (I have loaded part 1 of this series on the KSI membership site).

Thanks for communicating. You are an excellent example of the average person torn between conforming with current trends and social pressures, and doing what they intuitively suspect may be best for themselves. Will what I wrote help? Not sure – depends whether you want to be part of the 95% victims of social conformity or the 5% victors.

All the best.

Ian King

* not to be confused with the blatant paraphrasing copies like this since been published in places that I thought had more integrity:

… When designing training programs, resist the pressure to conform to any tradition or system of beliefs, no matter how dogmatically that tradition or those beliefs are presented, or how much you get "slammed" for not conforming]

The child and the injury - Pt 2

2011-07-12T05:36:00.000-07:00

The older sibling was not at our 10 year old team training. He was waiting at the car with him mother, waiting for his younger brother to finish.

The mother said to me:

"Did you know that ‘Peter’* did a grade two strain of his calf on the weekend?"

The boy’s 12 years old. It’s his second serious injury.

I just looked at the ground, bit my lip, and gently shook my head. What could I say? I hear this every day. It’s monotonous. I care about the kids and the family, however we are fighting a losing battle.
I felt like singing a few lines from the song by the band Queen:

“Another one’s gone, another one’s gone, another one bites the dust….”

The weekend newspaper in my city carried a story by a prominent sports doctor stating statistics show sports injuries are on the rise. He stated ‘We must do more’. More lip service, I thought. Like that’s going to happen. I can guarantee you – like taxes – sports injuries will continue to rise.

I had to say something. How do you break it to a mum that most of what her kids do in sport is doing more harm than good? So I said:

“I was just talking about this the other day with my coaches. We were saying how when we were kids, no one got injuries like the kids today. I played sport before school, at every school break, and after school. I didn’t get my firsts sports injury till my first year of high school, and that was a sprained ankle! I played a lot of sport, but admittedly it was play based, not like the formal training the kids do these days.”

Mum reflected on what I said. Then she asked:

“So why do you think this is?”

I responded:

“Adult training is being taken down the age groups. Every year, more adult like training is being done at an earlier age. The adult training is usually flawed. People think professional athlete training is good, so they imitate it. It rarely is optimal. It’s training that used to be done only at adult ages, so the injuries were coming out at about the same time everyone expected the athlete to retire from old age anyway. But now with the same training being imitated at the younger age groups, the flaws in training are evident well before they get to retire, sometimes even before they get to start their adult career! Surgery for sports-related injury before the young athlete reaches twenty years of age is not uncommon.”

I could see the mother taking it in so I continued.

“Playing sport the way it is being done is not necessarily good for your son. Now, your son is in one of the worst sports – soccer. Two things cause this – soccer’s traditional distain for stretching, and the high impact, high volume multi-directional movements on a hard surface.”

Mum responded:

“We are seeing that now!”

And we moved on with our day. Did I make a difference? I’m not sure. The forces of mainstream values in sport are big and strong – and off track, causing more harm than good.

If you have children - and if they are playing sport – have you thought about this? Are you wondering whether what they are doing is doing more harm long term than good? You should be.

* Not his real name

The child and the injury - Pt 1

2011-07-12T05:19:00.000-07:00

There we were, ten or so ten year old boys and myself – in the middle of the oval, in a circle – conducting the pre-training stretching routine as I do. As I have done for over thirty years. Obviously it has evolved somewhat, and this version is adapted to the age group and time frame of the training session.

An older sibling, a boy of twelve years of age, often participates in part of the training with us. He was sitting with us in the circle, but not participating.

My attention was atypically drawn from my own stretching to the status of this boy. I said:

“What are you doing? Why are you not joining in?”

A lot nicer than I would have been with a regular player in any team I work with, and especially an adult athlete.

He said:

“I can’t.”

Genuinely perplexed, I asked:

“What you do you mean ‘you can’t’?”

He said:

“I can’t. I’m not allowed to.”

Wishing to understand him more fully, I continued my questions:

“What do you mean you are not allowed?”

What he was about to say floored me. Luckily I was on the ground anyway!

“I’m can’t stretch before a game. My physiotherapist said so.”

Knowing how inflexible this athlete was, and how much I felt he need to stretch, I continued:

“Why have you been told that?”

To which he said:

“I don’t’ know. They said it was bad for me, and so I can’t do it.”

I did my best to encourage the boy to give stretching a go, but I could see his heart was not in it.

I shook my head and went back to focusing on my team’s needs.

After all, the boy had already had surgery on one knee….

Economic reflections of a coach

2011-05-23T19:14:00.000-07:00

I was tucking my son into bed recently when he “Dad, can you explain to me why you say there are big problems with the economy?” As any parent would know, this is not the best time to engage in a high level discussion, however he asked, and I did my best. That was my warm up. Now I hope I have more success explaining my thoughts to bigger people like you.

I believe the economic model we operate under in the western world is flawed, and at risk of breaking. No, I am not against capitalism – just the model of capitalism that’s being used.

In my opinion the cracks in the economy are getting wider, and we may be at serious cross-roads. No, I am not an economist. Just a coach. However as I would encourage you to do, if it affects you – and the economy does - I believe you should research it and form your own opinions, so you are prepared for whatever direction it takes.

In the following paragraphs I will tell you why I believe the economic model we rely on in western world societies is fundamentally flawed, and what I believe the future holds.

A non-sustainable model

In earlier economic models, for example in the agrarian age, I believe that if one hundred people lived in a specific area with zero population grown their lives were sustainable. In our contemporary economic model, they would not be.

We now need population growth to ‘survive’ economically. Population growth comes from immigration or births exceeding deaths. US economic commentator and forecaster Harry Dent amongst many others have done excellent work in helping us understand the correlation between population growth and economic growth.

The question I raise is this – why can’t we sustain on zero population growth? For some reason we cannot. When we experience zero or negative population growth, our economies shrink.

We rely on continuously more members in our societies to sustain the current economic model

I conclude therefore that each working adult, in our current model, is not adequately productive to sustain their and their dependant’s economic position. And therein, in my opinion lies the problem.

To read the full 7-page article, go to http://bit.ly/lPEQ0l

The Top Five Dumbest Exercises

2011-05-10T21:13:00.000-07:00

My motivation for writing this article is the continual damage to bodies and wasting of time and energy I witness on a daily basis. For the last thirty years I have worked in physical preparation to save people from damaging their bodies and wasting their time with inappropriate training methods and exercises. Perhaps naively I had expected the world to get smarter. Reluctantly I am concluding the world is getting dumber.

I am seeing a growth of literally dumb exercises. The only thing I am left to ponder is who is the dumbest – the people who promote these exercises or the people who do them? Because of my long service in this industry, I have an awareness of the origin and influences of many of these dumb movements. I have my theories as to why these exercises were promoted in the first instance in the manner they are. My theories are not always complimentary.

Read full article

Burnt at the stake

2011-05-03T04:20:00.000-07:00

One more time won’t kill me

In 1997 I labelled the 1980s as the decade of aerobic training:

You could call the eighties the decade of researching aerobic training,
--King, I., 1997, Winning and Losing

And I challenged the dominant values of that decade, only to be figuratively speaking burnt at the stake as a heretic.

In 1997 I labelled the 1990s as the decade of strength training:

…and nineties the era of popularity in researching strength.
--King, I., 1997, Winning and Losing

And I challenged the dominant values of that decade, only to be figuratively speaking burnt at the stake as a heretic.

I have labelled the 2000s as the decade of deceit:

…the 2000s ‘The Decade of Bullshit’
--King, I., 2011, The Times May be A-changing, Strengthguild.com

And am challenging the dominant values of that decade – it won’t kill me to be burnt at the stake as a heretic one more time.

Heresy in endurance training

During the late 1980s and early 1990s I reached conclusions about the flaws in application of aerobic training approach that dominated the 1980s, and I spoke out against this.

I've probably lead the anti-aerobic movement. You go back ten years ago and everything was aerobic. I was one of the first to say, listen, I've tried it and I've tried other ways and I think I can give you a better way. Now what we're seeing is an overreaction. We're seeing people saying to not do any aerobics. It's just gone too far.
--Shugart, C., 2000, Meet Ian King (interview), Fri 29 Dec 2000

During the 1980s I experienced the impact of concurrent aerobic training and strength training in both my personal sports training and in the sports training of the athletes I worked with. Ahead of any research on this topic, I knew something wasn’t right. I experienced and observed the interference that aerobic training had on the strength qualities. I questioned the ‘aerobic base’ approach.

…this excessive aerobic training is not only failing to address their weakness (lack of strength and power), but is often having a negative effect on strength and power.
-- King, I., 1997, Winning and Losing

By the early 1990s I published comments that undermined the claim made by leading local academics, who at that time were promoting the aerobic base as a science, and using newspaper clippings of athlete’s quotes as their evidence. I suggested that the aerobic base was a myth, and that in fact there was no science behind it at all.

Instead of producing the evidence of the science behind the aerobic base (of which there was none), the academics whose opinions and reputations were threatened by my comments took action to silence me. I was terminated from my position as the sub-editor of the state branch of the Australian Sports Medicine Federation journal, of which both myself and the academics I apparently threatened by speaking out were contributors and sub-editors of. They had written a letter of complaint to the editor of the publication about me, needless to say it was directed at my position on aerobic training, rather they brought out a strategy that was to be used by others in the years to come – they claimed my writings lacked adequate scientific reference.

Burnt at the stake for such heresy!

After maintaining this position professionally for over twenty years, and bearing the brunt of ridicule and violent attacks, I noted that certain others began publishing similar positions. Two things were apparent –firstly, the writings looked, well, very familiar….

Like this one:

Aerobic training has been overemphasized in training literature and practice. It is essentially in many cases an ineffective and inefficient method for performance improvement
--King, I., 1997, Winning and Losing

….quite simply aerobic training is grossly over-rated. Over rated for health, over rated for performance….
--2005, reference available on request (withheld to avoid detracting from the message of this article)

And secondly, the concepts were reaching the stage of acceptance in the market place:

Let us use the aerobic base belief as an example. There has been a traditional bias towards gaining an ‘aerobic base’ at the commencement of the general preparation phase - in all sports, all the time, with all athletes. Is this based on fact? I suggest not. I suggest it is a myth.
--King, I., 1997, Winning and Losing

I’m not exactly sure why we feel so compelled to develop an aerobic base….I don’t believe we have ever really adequately explained this need for aerobic base. I think it is simply an assumption…
--2005, reference available on request (withheld to avoid detracting from the message of this article)

Heresy in speed training

During the late 1980s and early 1990s I reached conclusions about the flaws in application of speed training approach that dominated the 1980s, and I spoke out against this.

By the late 1900s I had also begun to implement my reverse periodization model in speed and endurance training for field team sport athletes. Unbeknown to me, the late great Charlie Francis had been implementing a similar model for many years. My suggestion that you didn’t need to and shouldn’t be training speed through the use of long to short distance progression was considered again a threat and heretical. I was banished from the ovals of the field sport team I was initially implementing my trials with, forced to run a renegade program on council parks around the town.

Burnt at the stake for such heresy!

I will never forget the way one particular athlete rubbed his hands together at how he was going to put myself and my small group of speed trained athletes in our place. The pre-season fitness training was build around repetitions of 400 metres, and he knew my boys had barely run further than 40 meters for months, and to make it worse, we rarely ran flat out. It was going to be easy.

My protégés burned this athlete and the rest. When the fruits of my methods became apparent the speed coach quit, and the athlete who led the charge against my boys was forced into retirement that same season. Too slow.

After maintaining this position professionally for nearly twenty years, and (along with Charlie Francis) bearing the brunt of ridicule and violent attacks, I noted that certain others began publishing similar positions. Two things were apparent –firstly, the writings looked, well, very familiar….
Like this one:

Detection of and reaction to stimulus:…the ability to detect and react to stimulus. This is usually the first action in a chain of speed responses.
-- King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation

Reaction time: The ability to detect and react to a stimulus. This usually the first action in a series of speed responses.
--2003, reference available on request (withheld to avoid detracting from the message of this article)

Agility and co-ordination: The first few movements following the reaction to the stimulus…include sports where the distances moved and time frames involved are short…
-- King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation

Agility and co-ordination: This is the first few movements following the reaction to the stimulus… for sports where the distances moved and the time frames involved are quite short
--2003, reference available on request (withheld to avoid detracting from the message of this article)

And secondly, because most of this publishing copying occurs in the fitness industry and they don’t see much need for real sports training information (despite the marketing claims) such as speed training, this area has not yet reached mass popularity and acceptance amongst the market masses to the level where the extensive copying in publishing has occurred.

Heresy in strength training

During the late 1980s I reached conclusions about the flaws in application of strength training approach that dominated the 1980s, and I spoke out against this in the early 1990s.

Strength training of the 1980s was based largely on the belief that heavy loads in strength training were neither specific or beneficial, and therefore higher rep, faster movements dominated training. I was the first ‘strength coach’ in the Australian national league sport of Australian Rules to introduce maximal strength training. I was the first person in perhaps the world of rugby union outside of South Africa to implement maximal free weight strength training in rugby. I was the first person at least in my country in rowing, swimming, squash, and diving, and the list goes on – to promote free weight maximal strength methods in these sports.

I will never forget the day the Australian rugby coach took some of the Australian rugby union players to see the New Zealand ‘All Blacks’ ‘strength and conditioning’ coach (not that was what he was called in the late 1980s). He derided my maximal strength methods to these athletes and the coach, with comments such “When do you get this loads on the field? You don’t! They are not relevant!” And proceeded to show the boys how to do high rep sets of leg presses, leg extensions and bench presses on the Universal machine.

I challenged this over-application of specificity in a presentation in New Zealand in 1993, , the ‘home’ of specificity in strength training:

Without discarding circuit training methods completely, one can question the acclaimed specificity of circuit training to the game of rugby if done for the strength benefits - the loading in inadequate; if done for joint angle specificity - this can only be achieved by playing the game; if done for limb velocity specificity - the angular velocity of the hip in sprinting is between 500-900 degrees per second - unachievable in the gymnasium (28); if done for energy system specificity - only playing the game or performing game like drills will provide the peripheral endurance (34) specificity required.

It is important for the coach to ask "which method will create the most effective transfer to the athletes ability to play rugby?", not simply "what methods appear the most specific?
--King, I., 1993, Strength training for rugby, New Zealand Journal of Sports Medicine, v. 21(4):23-26

I was ‘burnt at the stake’ for such heresy!

Heresy in flexibility training

During the 1980s I reached conclusions about the flaws in application (or lack of) of flexibility training approach that dominated the 1980s, and I spoke out against this.

I maintained that static stretching can and should be done before training, and that static stretching should dominant the stretching program.

I find it is the most effective practical way to achieve changes or improvements in flexibility…. Generally speaking I recommend your total stretching program consist predominantly of static stretching.
-- King, I., 2002, Get Buffed! II

No-one took much notice of this in the 1980s or early 1990s, but by the late 1990s the ‘scientific’ reasons why one should not stretch, static stretch, or do static stretching before training had begun to proliferate. I spend the fifteen years between 1995 and 2010 being pillared from post to post for my position. After all, all the ‘big names’ in the US strength coach and academic circles maintain the evils everything I stood for. Not one person in the world of ‘strength and conditioning’ had the originality or courage to speak up in support.

Burnt at the stake for such heresy!

After maintaining this position professionally for over twenty years, and bearing the brunt of ridicule and violent attacks, I noted that certain others began publishing similar positions. Two things were apparent –firstly, the writings looked, well, very familiar….

Like this one:

I believe that stretching is the only physical quality that in relation to it’s training, the saying ‘more is better’ applies.
-- King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation

In my opinion - stretching is perhaps the only training activity where more is better.
--2003, reference available on request (withheld to avoid detracting from the message of this article)

And secondly, the concepts were reaching the stage of acceptance in the market place:

I do two things that are still considered relatively unique. I recommend stretching, and I recommend stretching before the workout

--King, I., 2002, Get Buffed!™ II

The key may lie in performing static stretching near the beginning of the workout,… Yes, static stretch. Yes, before the workout.
--2011, reference available on request (withheld to avoid detracting from the message of this article)

Teaching in America

During the late 1990s, courtesy of the emergence of the internet and a few years of reduced team sports requirements, I took my message to America.

In 1999 I taught my seminars in the US city of New York, which resulted in a serious back lash. I suspect it was my teaching that chin ups do not equate rows, nor do they negate the bench press, that was the cause of most of the angst. At that time, the most influential strength coach who enjoyed control of the market promoted training methods totally devoid of rows, and heavily biased towards chin ups.

I experienced personal attacks and rumour-spreading, like the time I went to a national convention and one exhibition booth person nearly fainted when he saw me – he was adamant I was in jail, and wanted to know when I was released. The old chest-nuts came out – my seminars were bad and I didn’t use enough science. My seminar hosts were threatened with ramifications if they went on with my seminars, seminar participants were personally phoned, including by certain state police calling outside their geographical jurisdiction as well as their legal jurisdiction to threaten arrest of those who got involved with me. Just because I dared suggest that horizontal pulling needed to balance horizontal pushing.

Then on to Boston, where my content was so threatening the local gate-keeper of information gathered his flock a few hours into the seminar, and made a very public showing of walking out, taking his flock with him. Not content with this, this local ‘identity’ contacted my host, and left them in no doubt about how bad my seminar was, how bad a presenter was, and what the serious ramifications would be if they dared bring me back to the area.

I believe that my position about loading being over-rated, that one should use bodyweight before loading were the main killers, along with my suggestions of balance in strength training, and my unique concept of lines of movement. At that time any compliant trend-following person was using the power and Olympic lifts with focus on maximum loading, and the concept of lines of movement and balance in strength training were totally new. And I’d suggest so in contrast to what the gate-keeper of information was doing that I had to be eliminated.

Burnt at the stake for such heresy!

My position of bodyweight before external load. It was considered so extreme in the 1990s that the publisher of the internet magazine t-mag.com felt the need to pre-warm users about the absence of external load and conventional exercises, and encourage them to let go of convention and risk the ridicule of doing something different:

Of course, the most difficult part of the workout was shrugging off years of brainwashing. Doing exercises with little or no weight was a hard pill to swallow, but once I reminded myself that I didn't care how different or weird the movements looked, I had a great workout. Remember, screw the pack mentality and give this workout a try!
--TC Louma, Editor T-mag.com, Sep 24 1999

By 2005 it was being taught in the absence of credit or reference by people who had attended my seminars where I taught this.

Or my position on balance in strength training:

To help you understand how to divide and balance out your training, Ian came up with a list of major muscle groups that reflects their function:

Horizontal pulling (row)
Horizontal pushing (bench press)
Vertical pulling (chin-up)
Vertical pushing (shoulder press)
Hip dominant (deadlifts)
Quad dominant (squats)
-- Shugart, Chris, 2001, The Ian King Cheat Sheets, Part 1 - A quick and dirty look at all the cool stuff Ian King has taught us so far, Fri, Aug 24, 2001, T-mag.com

By 2005 it was being taught in the absence of credit or reference by people who had attended my seminars where I taught this

After maintaining these positions professionally for nearly twenty years, and bearing the brunt of ridicule and violent attacks, I noted that certain others began publishing similar positions. Two things were apparent –firstly, the writings looked, well, very familiar….

Like this one:

…all things being equal, and independent of any specificity demands, the selection of exercises should show balance throughout the body.
-- King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs

...all things being equal, and independent of any specificity demands, the selection of exercises should show balance throughout the body.
--2005, reference available on request (withheld to avoid detracting from the message of this article)

I apply the following guideline to any athlete, not just young athlete - why use external loading before developing the ability to manage the load of bodyweight?
-- King, I., 1999, Get Buffed!™

My theory has always been that the only reason an athlete should lift weights is when their bodyweight no longer provides any challenge to them.
--2003, reference available on request (withheld to avoid detracting from the message of this article)

…if your bodyweight for whatever reason is too much for your leg strength, you can always do a one-legged leg press or hack squat.
-- King, I., 1999, Get Buffed!™

In fact in my experience I’d suggest that some athletes cannot even work with their bodyweight so we may need to modify certain exercises.
--2003, reference available on request (withheld to avoid detracting from the message of this article)

And secondly, the concepts were reaching the stage of acceptance in the market place:

The following article is Part I of a two-part leg training article that's very different from anything you've ever done. How so? Well, for starters, some of the exercises don't even require you to use any weight…
--Louma, TC., 1999, describing the single leg based lower body program known as ‘The Limping Program’

I occasionally flirt with the idea of not even performing conventional two-legged exercises….and simply concentrating on single leg strength….
--2005, reference available on request (withheld to avoid detracting from the message of this article)

The industry integrity heresy

Post 2010 I find myself again being labelled as a heretic. Even dishonest by some well-marketed industry commentators. Because as I have done during the past thirty years, I am calling it as I see it. Only this time it’s not training methods or paradigms about training. It’s about the standards of the physical preparation industry, specifically the US-led ‘fitness industry’.

I labelled the 1980s as the decade of aerobic training, the 1990s as the decade of strength training focus, and the 2000s as the decade of deceit.

During the decade immediately post 2000 I have observed what I describe as an unacceptable level of deceit in publishing and marketing permeate this industry. To the point where those who have positioned themselves, primarily through symbiotic relationships with information equipment distributors, now openly encourage their followers to lie, cheat and steal.

The situation has got so messed up that potentially good people coming through have unwittingly been caught up in this web of deceit. It will take years to unravel. It may take greater social and economic upheavals to bring to an end. Whatever it takes, it will be a great day when this behaviour is no longer endorsed and accepted.

Contrary to the beliefs of at least one ‘well-respected professional’, I suggest that a companies willingness to engage known individuals whose published words are not original, and who openly encourage people to lie, cheat and steal – is not, for me, an exoneration. Rather it is a sad reflection of the value system of the organizations involved, and the willingness of the masses to accept information from such organizations.

I liken it to the days prior to environmental protection from industrial waste and development. Companies would (and in some cases still do) release toxic waste products into the environment carte blanche. Did the absence of enforcement suggest this was acceptable and in the interests of the planet. No, and history has shown societies are not taking a belated stand against such behaviour. When enforcement is lax - where companies distribute their waste in an environmentally damaging way and no enforcement results – does this mean that the companies were right and acting in the good of greater society? I’d suggest not.

I propose we are in a similar period in the ‘physical preparation industry’. Where companies knowingly mislead or endorse those who mislead the masses through deceitful content, which is not in the interest of the masses. The only interests being served are the professional, personal and commercial interests of those providing the misleading content and benefiting from the subsequent sales.

For me, the absence of any regulation of this behaviour does not equate to the conclusion that the behaviour is right or in the interests of those who it is claimed they are serving. Rather, it is a sad reflection of the current state of integrity in this industry.

I might be amongst the first to have concerns. I might be amongst the first to publicly express those concerns. I might be one of the few who have walked away from consulting/writing opportunities as a personal stand against this situation. However I will not be the last. And I believe that one day, hopefully in my lifetime, we will see a shift towards an industry cultural standard where the interests of the end-user is prioritized, rather than the self-serving interests of select companies, organizations and individuals. (Who knows, it may be even sooner should the broader economy continue its tailspin)

Call me an eternal optimist if you want. That’s a lot nicer than what those who perceive I threaten their egos and income are calling me!

My message to those who perceive my stance threatens them is this – I’ve been around a while, and taken many stance. Throw as many stones as you want. You are not the first to attack, and you won’t be the last. I’m happy to go to battle for things I strongly believe in. It’s not going to change my position and direction. It never has in the past. What has changed is the way of doing and thinking. Inevitably in the direction I have called. So get ready for the change! You can choose it, or it will be forced upon you. Your call.

Conclusion

From being a paradigm shifter I experienced ridicule and attack. Many times, in many decades over many different aspects of physical preparation. Did this stop me? No. Has history proven me to be off-track? No.

I labelled the 1980s as the decade of aerobic training and during the early 1990s I sought to put the 1980s aerobic training approach back into an appropriate context.

I labelled the 1990s as the decade of strength training and during the late 1990s and early 2000s I sought to put the 1990s strength training load-based focus and other paradigms back into context.

The same people who reacted violently to my teachings now typically teach my innovations. Of course, in the absence of any referencing, as I suspect this would be too embarrassing for them to reveal the hurt I caused with my honest non-compliant teaching.

I predicted the 2000s might be the decade of flexibility training focus and acceptance – but I got this wrong.

Now post 2010 I have labelled the 2000s as the decade of bullshit, a period dominated by lies and deceit, covered over eventually be the teaching of the information gate keepers that it okay to lie, cheat and steal.

And as I have done for the past three decades, I am speaking out without fear or favour, telling you that I believe you are being seriously misled and that the only purpose this serves is the personal and commercial interests of those decades’ information gate-keepers.

I seek to encourage a return to values of honesty and truth; values that the US led fitness market in particular have discarded in the extreme during the 2000s. It seems that anyone with a burning desire to be perceived as an ‘expert’, and a lack of integrity can market successfully the perception of their greatness, and in the absence of appropriate experience. The period of 2000 to 2010 has seen a rapid descent into marketing and publishing deceit, as if the industry and perhaps society is either sensing an end to the current was we life, or intending to induce an end, by such self-destructive and non-sustainable behaviour.

I believe the lies and exploitation of the masses through marketing of training equipment under the guise of ‘new trends in training methods in physical training’ has reached serious stages, and can no longer be ignored.

And just as I did in the decades before, the fire under the stake are being lit. One particular ‘respected author’ referred in writing to my ‘dishonesty’. After all, how dare I undermine the perception of greatness that these people have created through deception? There is no way the product sales of major US equipment and distribution companies are going to be threatened by some irritant from Australia.

And how can the average person, who has believed the marketing pieces and editorially sculptured bios of these ‘experts’, be expected to have their perception of these people shattered by suggesting they are not the honest experts you have been led to believe? And what about the damage that may be caused when the average consumer in this industry concludes ‘If they are lying about x and y, what else are they lying about?’ No, this would be intolerant and must be stopped!

History has shown that the initially controversial and personally-damaging positions I have taken during the last thirty years have eventually become accepted practice, in many cases taught by the very same people who sought to destroy the message initially. Based on this, I suspect that sometime in the next few years or decades, there will be return to integrity in marketing and sales in the physical preparation industry. And it wouldn’t surprise me to see those on the bandwagon include those who currently are the ones throwing stones at my position that the market is dominated by deceitful exploitation of the trust-worthiness of the masses.

Are these personal attacks going to stop me? No. Will history prove my position to be accurate? I believe so.

So take your pick – ridicule and attack my position that lies and deceit in marketing and publication have dominated the landscape during the last ten years like most people will, because this is what the majority do. And I can guarantee you some time in the future you will accept this position, albeit probably taught to you by some trend watcher. Or step back, let go of the conditioned belief you have about the credibility of your ‘gurus’ – and give it an objective reflection.

What do you stand to gain or loose? If you like to be average, you probably want to join the masses and ridicule and attack my position. If you want to gain what I consider to be your best interests – I strongly suggest you consider rejecting the average. Typically there is a decade gap I have noted between when I teach something unique and effective that threatens the status quo, and when these same individuals who were threatened and attacked me begin teaching the very same things. You stand to gain an average of decade head start on the masses if you take the lesson now.

One of the few differences between my ‘controversial’ position in the past and this current controversial position is this – I used to take stands about training methods. Now I am taking stands against human values and behaviours. I believe what’s at stake now and its potential benefits to society are even greater. I guess I can expect the initial back lash to be even greater, as much more is at stake. It’s not just the ego of those who have staked their reputations and credibility on a training method. I am now getting between desperate people and their money.

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

--Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher (1788 - 1860)

He never did - a lesson in gratification

2011-05-01T20:19:00.000-07:00

A young personal trainer wrote to me and said something along these lines:

I am a (hopefully) up and coming strength coach ….

He never became a strength and conditioning coach. He later wrote to say something like this:

I plan on returning ... in the spring and will be trying to get in touch with the ….team. I feel that my countries poor showing in recent Olympic Games will cause the government to panic and throw money at sports. Hopefully this is where I'll capitalize. As I plan on 'jumping and hoping the net will appear' ...' I need one more piece of advice. If there was one thing that you would recommend I could do to improve my chances/abilities as a strength coach what would it be?

He didn’t get the job as a strength and conditioning coach.

He signed off a subsequent email as:

(Future strength coach to the elite)

That was not to be his future.

He wrote to say:

I look forward to …. Maybe one day coming to Australia to work for you!

He never did.

He then sends me an email that went something like this:

Please find enclosed my CV - if you get a spare minute maybe you could have a look at it and see where I need more qualifications or experience. It needs to be strengthened somehow as I've been unable to get the type of work I'm looking for.

He was right. He wasn’t. His CV said something like this:

Objective: To gain a full time professional strength and conditioning position with professional sports organization or high level training facility

He never achieved his goal.

He wrote again about his inability to get his desired work:

It is easier for you with an established record to attract new clients than it is for an "outsider" like me to break in. The reason I'm asking is to see where my weaknesses are - what is holding me back in other words as I'm failing to identify it somehow.

He couldn’t understand why he was not succeeding in getting work in his desired are of training athletes. After all, he had been trying for five years now to break into the field. I told him to be patient. After all, I had seen some would-be strength and conditioning coaches battle on for up to ten years to get the kind of work they wanted to, with athletes. I told him he needed to be patient, not driven by the need for instant gratification. I wrote:

A lesson I have learned from watching young strength and conditioning coaches such as yourself is their impatience

He rejected the advice:

I prefer to think of it as DRIVEN as opposed to impatience

I offered to help by make some referrals of athletes to which he accepted:

I would love to work with the Volleyball guys. Please set that up for me. Thanks in advance. You know where I am if you need me.

That didn’t work out.

Incidentally the volleyball team that you put me in contact with didn't return my emails. I guess I'm not important enough yet!!!

After six years of trying he began to become disillusioned:

I'd like to move out of the personal training field and train athletes exclusively but bills need to be paid.

He considered accepting a job as a head personal trainer in the gym in which he was employed:

I've been at this gym since late Sep and was this week offered the head personal trainer position -- unsure as to whether or not to accept it -- I'm just concerned as to whether or not the move to an administrative position would "hurt" my career in the longer term (i.e. the goal being to train athletes similar to yourself). Your input is as always most welcome.

Instead he opened up a personal training studio of his own.

He continued to dream about furthering himself as a trainer of athletes.

Within the next 12-18 months I intend to have become the Ian King certified strength, speed, flexibility and endurance specialist. I think the title you have in mind is co-ordinator of physical preparation - sounds good to me! Just thought I'd share that! Now that the goal is shared I HAVE to achieve it!!

He didn’t achieve this goal. Nor any of the above.

During the next few years he became a student of marketing, and began his publishing and educational services – seminar presenter and course provider.

This really gives meaning to the saying- ‘He who can’t do teaches’….And provides an excellent lesson of decisions we make between delayed and instant gratification.

One of my favorites was the publication about ‘keys to athletic success’….

The rock and the snake

2011-04-25T04:17:00.000-07:00

A few weeks ago I went into my gym and discovered a large puncture hole in the wall. I seen my share of firearm puncture holes and my first instinct was to wonder what size caliber firearm had been used to pierce the walls, and cause the inward flapping of the wall sheets. I felt under seige.

After closer examination I discovered a sizeable rock on the ground at the base of my work desk. The rock had entered immediately below my work desk, underneath my computur which housed my intellectual property. It was a shocking feeling, having such a piecing of one's special space, and so close to my computer.

I then realized the rock has been thrown from my lawn tractor during a recent grass cut. I certainly had not intended to cause the rock to become a projectile, but indirectly I had caused this penetration into my gym. I had trusted my lawn tractor and the ground too much, failing to cut with the outlet shoot facing the other way.

About a week later we discovered a brown snake lying beside the lifting platforn in the gym, meters from where the rock had pierced the walls under my work desk. The snake was dead, however this was not obvious at first as it had no apparent wounds. A closer examination of the snake revealed symmetrical depressions lines across the body. I figured out the snake had entered the gym and hidden under the lifting platform. I had then walked on the platform, killing the snake without even being aware of its presence. Effortlessly, and as part of my daily movements during training, I had snuffed out the dangerous intruder.

It felt strange knowing that I had been going about my daily training and work unaware that a snake was hiding in my presence.

The promimity of the events in time and space seems beyond a coincidence. The rock had penetrated the walls of the sacred space of my gym in the immediate proximity of my computur containing my intellectual property. Following this a poisonous snake had entered the gym, and been killed through normal daily activity. These are not your ordinary daily, run-of-the-mill experiences. And they had happened so close together.

The rock and the snake. Interesting....

State of the Union Address - April 2011

2011-04-17T22:50:00.000-07:00

The price the children pay

2011-03-29T01:06:00.000-07:00

I looked at two young boys (7 year olds) for their dad, as part of their long term preparation for sporting success. I showed dad what I saw. No, they didn't stretch. Yes, there were very active in sport and had already done a lot of training. I shared my concerns re injuries with this approach and the direction they were heading. Two weeks later I got a call from Dad - one of his boys had an inflamed Achilles and needed attention.

A few days before I was stretching a group of 9-10 year old boys involved in soccer. I had one of their older brothers (11-12 yrs) in the group for the workout. He was not participating in the stretches. I asked why. He said "I can't do stretching before games or training." I said "What are you talking about?" He said "I've been told by a physio that I am not to do any stretching before a game or training." I was shocked and saddened. The boy had already had his first knee surgery under general anaesthetic.

A week before I gave a presentation to a netball coaching group, during which I shared my belief that the absence or lack of stretching, including pre-training stretching, was a breach of our duty to athletes, and in my opinion criminally negligent. But don't worry, I assured them - you won't get sued, because it is the dominant belief that avoiding stretching is right and good.

About this time I heard of a local netball club that has informed their amateur/parent coaches that static stretching before training is banned. They are not allowed to do it. I felt sad for this sport.

Last Friday I attended an introductory coaching course for a specific sport. The young, enthusiastic and well meaning coaching director proudly talked to the group about doing a 'dynamic warm up'. He did one or two quick static stretches, but mostly the 'dynamic stretches'. He also mentioned the words 'core strength' during the workout, confirming that he is 'up to date' and 'all over' the dominant trends and buzzwords. I felt sad for this sport.

Just today a mum told me of her sons diagnosis of his ankle injury. Don't worry, she assured me, he is doing a lot of stretching. I felt encouraged about this situation. Then she continued, and demonstrated two dynamic stretches. Then my heart sank for the body....

The price the kids pay. The price the adult athletes and physically active play. For their desire to conform. For their blind belief that their best interests are being taken care of by those who promoted the trends. The trends, that is, once they identify the market acceptance is adequate but not to exposed, so they appear to be the leader of the information.

The irony is this - a trend promoter /information broker can promote the trend, then a few years later promote a new trend, even one 180 degrees turnaround from the first - and walk away with no penalty. Those who follow the trends pay the price.

In the case of stretching, one exact example where a particular information broker spent a number of years warning people off static stretching. Now that there appears to be an inkling of a groundswell of a swing back to the habit of static stretching by the masses, this trend promoter / information broker / social commentator now tells you its okay to do static stretching, and further you should do it. But of course you probably needs to buy their video they currently promote to help you cope with the reversal of position they've taken. No mention of the trail of destruction from the dogmatically held 'belief before this belief' that static stretching before training has no place. Nor the damage that will occur moving forward in those who cling to the last trend of 'you can't do static stretching before training'....

The masses pay the price - the marketeer moves on collecting revenue from what ever information sells the most and provides optimal market positioning at any given time....
If only people knew...But even if they did, they probably wouldn't believe it....

Hint - don't take flexibility advice from those who can't touch their toes....and who don't live with a commitment to stretching...but how do we tell the kids that, when they accept the authority of those who society has given authority to. Especially those who don't stretch but have conformed to the dominant and misguided belief that pre-training static stretching is bad. Here's one technique I use to discern - I listen to what a person giving advice says. If they regurgitate trend based information or buzzwords, I don't take much notice of them. Just what I do, if it helps.

This morning my 12 year old daughter complained of pain just under her knee joint, and reminded me of it after school. She does 10 or so sessions of training/games a week including school PE, none of which I control. Tonight my 9 year old son complained of back pain. He does about the same volume, of which one of those sessions I control. All I can do is seek to influence the other sessions. And that's the big battle.

I have added millions of dollars to athletes bank accounts by extending and heightening their careers through my injury prevention work. That's easy. Typically just the athlete and I, so easy to guide the process and outcome.

But this much more complex. Influencing the beliefs of the average coach - that's much harder. The faceless men in manufacutring pulling the strings from the shadows, granting those who willing to comply with their quiet requests on content - the researcher, the information broker, the publishing prac-demic. Selling their soul for the short term promise of financial or marketing promotion support.

As I trace the influences back to their sources, I wonder if the information broker publishing content for the sake of maintaining market position and cash flow has a full understanding of the responsibility they bear by disseminating what they do. Flippantly flip-flopping from idea to idea, trend to trend.

The battle to undo the damage caused by these influences is a massive fight. One that I don't expect to fully win. However it's a good fight, a worthy battle. If you have children, I believe you will know what I am saying.

I don’t know if you made this up or stole it from someone - but lets credit you anyway

2011-03-23T21:28:00.000-07:00

First they steal, meaning they publish material with no credit. Then they continue to take the credit years later - 12 years later in this case.....

This from a person who claims to 'have read everything ever written in this industry':

"This illustrates Cosgrove's short-term overreaction and long term under-reaction concept."
--Boyle, M., The Static Stretching Renaissance, strengthcoach.com

When will they stop bullshitting? This guy is ether really poorly read or wants to contiue the lie.

The standard reaction to a new idea is over-reaction in the short term, and under-reaction in the long term. The excitement burns bright until the realisation sinks in that perhaps it is not the panacea for all performance limitations.
--King, I., 1999, Understanding Plyometrics – A Guide for Athletes and Coaches

Futurists describe human response to a new idea as an over-reaction in the short term and an under-reaction in the long term. so a new idea comes up, like say the Swiss ball and everybody jumps on it, they’re having breakfast on it, they’re having dinner on it, they’re having lunch on it, they are sleeping on it and then they realise that wasn't necessary so they lose interest in. There is a happy medium.
--King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation (DVD)

I've probably lead the anti-aerobic movement. You go back ten years ago and everything was aerobic. I was one of the first to say, listen, I've tried it and I've tried other ways and I think I can give you a better way. Now what we're seeing is an overreaction. We're seeing people saying to not do any aerobics. It's just gone too far.
--King, I., 2000, in interview with Shugart, C., Fri 29 Dec 2000

It is also appropriate to remind you of the natural human and social reactions – an over-reaction in the short term and an under-reaction in the long term. When a ‘new’ thing becomes popular, many over-promote it and many over use it. After a while they become disillusioned or bored, and then under-use it.

--King, I., 2002, Heavy Metal Q & A, T-mag.com, 30 Oct

You may see a swing towards a training trend or piece of training equipment followed by a trend away. This may be the natural realization of the market that the trend or equipment was over-rated. It may be a misunderstanding of the market as to how the trend or equipment is to be used optimally. It may be a reflection of the over-reaction initially followed by an under-reaction that underpins human nature.
--King, I., 2005, The Way of the Physical Preparation Coach

When it comes to training tools or methods, it's natural for people to overreact in the short-term and under-react in the long-term. When a "new" thing becomes popular, many over-promote it and many overuse it. After a while they become disillusioned or bored, and then under-use it. Instead of going through this yo-yo response, I encourage you to objectively analysis any new trend. Ask yourself, "What application would that have for me?"
--King, 2006, over and under-reaction, t-mag.com (written in 2005)

Less than 12 months prior to this information broker crediting his buddy with this concept as above, he was a bit more accurate - he wasn't sure if he had stolen it....:

Boyle: I don’t know, I guess I give you credit for this all the time, I don’t know if you made this up or stole it from someone but you talk about this idea of over-reaction under-reaction sort of phenomenon …

His buddy choose not to clarify or address the point about the origin....:

Cosgrove: …you’re right, we are definitely seeing an over-reaction
--Boyle, M., interviewed by A. Cosgrove, 2009, State of the Industry (audio)

Another case of 'omit to mention' must mean its yours.......

So then it became:

Cosgrove is fond of saying we over-react in the short term and under-react in the long term. ...This illustrates Cosgrove's short-term overreaction and long term under-reaction concept.
--Boyle, M., 2011, The static stretching renaissonce, strengthcoach.com

I guess I shouldn't be surprised to see lies..after all, apparently it okay to lie:

Here's my premise. It's OK to tell a lie if you know that it's a lie... Once a personal trainer or performance specialist knows the truth then, they can tell a little white lie to make the sale or to get the client on board. The key to selling fitness lies (clever play on words) in knowing the truth but, also knowing when to lie.
--Boyle, M., 2006, Telling lies in America, strengthcoach.com

Or 'stealing'...:

If someone else got results faster than I did, I would copy them. I don't have a religious attachment to my ideas. I'd steal their ideas.
-- Cosgrove, A., 2009 in interview by Chris Shugart titled ‘Straight Talk about the Fitness Biz, T-mag.com, Thu, Apr 02 2009

Maybe because there are:

That there are so many fucking arseholes in this industry. And so many weirdoes.
--Cosgrove, A., 2009, in an Interview by Chris Shugart titled The Evil Scot: An Interview with Strength and Conditioning Coach, Alwyn Cosgrove, Wed, Aug 17, 2005

Going beyond the 'stealing' and 'lying' and laying claim for other peoples concepts such as 'over-reaction/under-reaction', how many times are they going to re-use my 2005 paragraphs about 'swings' in over-reaction ..."

You may see a swing towards a training trend or piece of training equipment followed by a trend away. This may be the natural realization of the market that the trend or equipment was over-rated. It may be a misunderstanding of the market as to how the trend or equipment is to be used optimally. It may be a reflection of the over-reaction initially followed by an under-reaction that underpins human nature.
-- King, I., 2005, The Way of the Physical Preparation Coach

Keep your own personal attitude pendulum in the center. In training, nutrition, and pretty much everything, we always see an overreaction to anything new in the short term and an under-reaction in the long term.
-- Cosgrove, A., 2006, 10 Things I've Learned, Feb 20, 2006, tmuscle.com

In the field of strength and conditioning the pendulum always swings. ....we over-react in the short term and under-react in the long term. A classic example is the use of, or current disdain for, static stretching.
--Boyle, M., 2010 (?),The Static Stretching Renaissance, strengthcoach.com

The moral and economic decline of a once great nation

2011-03-22T19:33:00.001-07:00

My attention was brought to a recent US blog extolling the benefits of stealing. From the outset, I say perhaps I have lost touch with the ‘new world’, because I was stunned by the content and the message.

Apparently, if you are not stealing:

• You do not have the keys to being a good strength coach or personal trainer
• You are a dumb personal trainer
• You are not participating in continuing education
• You are not a good person like Robin Hood (allegedly) was

Apparently, stealing in this context is synonymous with continuing education. Stealing in my legal contexts goes along these lines – an intent to permenantely deprive the owner.

There are apparently added benefits to ‘stealling’:

• Its cool
• All the good coaches do it

Of course, like any advertorial, there was a call to spend money in the writers directions. The reader was encouraged and invited to ‘come and steal’ from the writer and his buddies. And the investment needed, the reader was assured, was akin to buying the tools needed for burglary.

You see, ordinary ‘stealing’ may be free, but ‘good stealing’ involves parting with money. And there were two specific products/services promoted.

Now perhaps I live in a cave hidden form the world, but my understanding was that no religion or law endorsed, promoted or condoned stealing. If fact some cultures cut off your hand for doing so.

So how does the incitement to ‘steal’ help America? A once proud nation, whose national currency has halved in value in the last decade, with no signs of recovery. My understanding was what drove America in its growth periods was innovation and productivity. Writings such as these are the antithesis of this – don’t bother innovating, and don’t bother with productivity – you can get what you want the easy way.

I believe a criminologist from the school of ‘theres a correlation between poverty and criminality’. Are the recommendation and acceptance of these values a result and an indication of how much poverty abounding in this industry in America.

I suggest that the values promoted in this blog contribute to the moral and economic decline of a culture and nation. But what I am learning is those in a sinking ship don’t always think rationally. In fact, in raising similar points, one of their colleagues has labelled me as dishonest, so you are going to have to make up your own mind on this one.

So what was the motive of this promotion of the concept of stealing? Apart from another way to market goods and services, my opinion is that there is a desire to de-sensitize the market to intellectual property ‘stealing’ because this gives more latitude to those who want to publish but don’t have any original ideas.

Personally, I don’t see how the promotion of these values helps anyone, and I don’t know who it serves for America to stay morally and economically depressed or decline further.

Two misguided analogies were given –

1. Anthony Robbins
2. Robin Hood

In relation to Anthony Robbins, copying what they do and copying what they published are not one and the same. Additionally, I doubt Anthony Robbins would have been promoting the concept of stealing and that the investment in his educational material was akin to paying for the tools of burglary. And as for the Robin Hood analogy – I doubt the marketer/author was giving the proceeds of his sales to charity, so that was a real big stretch to make it fit the message.

I’ll say it again – perhaps I am too old fashioned for this world. However I stand by what I said – I don’t see how these values positively serve, and suggest they instead contribute to the moral and economic decline of a once great nation.

Be honest? I'd like to see that....

2011-03-10T18:08:00.000-08:00

I must say I was surprised to read this author promote a call for credit to the original source. Very UnAmerican, as least as the US 'fitness-industry' has been influenced during the last decade, from 2000 to 2010. A period I refer to as the 'decade of the bullshitter'.

In this recent book this author referred to another coaches plea for respect and credit to be given to his works.

From what I’ve heard, from the far end of Siberia to Iceland to California, thousands of coaches are performing with their athletes Javorek’s complex exercise, but some of them give credit to themselves. I really worked hard on developing these exercises and I like to share with everyone my ‘little secrets’. Just give credit to the creator.

My original goal with the complex exercises was to find an efficient and aggressive method of performance enhancement that saves time and makes the program more enjoyable. If you choose to use them (in some form) with your athletes, be honest and call your new complex exercises ‘Variations to Javorek’s Complex Exercises’.
--John, D., 2011, Mass Made Simple, Quoting Istvan Javorek's comments on Javorek’s web site, p. 108

This is the first time I can recall seeing a call of this nature. What I have seen a lot of is what Javorek is referring to - people who know the source, yet choose to take credit, or fail to give credit.

After all, the most common term in the US 'fitness' industry lingo of the last decade has been 'Steal'. Everyone wanted to say they 'stole' x from someone else. It was hip. A badge of honor. After all, many of these, especially those who informal education exposure was limited to the period 2000-2011, had been extolled the virtues of stealing. 'It not cheating' etc etc. In fact, they had also been extolled to lie.

It was the first time I have seen the act of stealing (in relation to intellectual property) being discouraged. Isn't that interesting.

As impressive as this is, it did raise a few questions for me.

Firstly, would Americans reach out to non-Americans with the same call? Would Americans encourage their fellow coaches to show the same respect for out-of-country intellectual property? What if those breaching the intellectual property rights of the out-of-country coaches were their mentors, people they had been taught to believe were really knowledgeable, experienced, competent coaches?

I'm not so sure that this would happen. Why? In addition to my belief that America has a history of recognizing only that which is within their own country (have observed this myopic view during my 22 years of travelling in and through North America) it would be a tough pill to swallow for any 'student'.

Another question, inter linked with the first, relates to the Javoreks plea for those using his intellectual property to be honest. Imagine that - those who seek to control and influence the masses in the US fitness industry being honest. I'd like to see that.

"No, I didn't come up with that idea."

"Nor that one."

"Or that one."

"No, not that one either."

I believe one of the reasons these information brokers fail to give credit when they know the source is that the majority of their publications would be credited. If you took out the credited content, their wouldn't be enough pages left to hold the book up. Who would buy it? What impact would this have on their reputation? After all, they have wormed for years to be in the position they are in. Why give it up for honesty? I've got certain books on my book shelf where I have color highlighted the copied and / or uncredited content - and there aren't too many pages left unmarked. The 'books' look more like a kids coloring in book than an educational text. On that thought, the kids colouring book would hvae more credibility, and probably more value for a student to study!

Honesty? Istvan would like to see that. I'd like to see that.

Do the words ‘volunteer’ and or 'amateur’ need to be antonyms of excellence?

2011-02-27T23:40:00.001-08:00

Rarely a day passes without the opportunity to watch and analyse a sports coach in action. I don’t mind at what level, what gender, what sport, or what country. I really enjoy studying the art of coaching and asking the question ‘how can it be done better?’

For me, we all have limited resources – limited energy, limited recovery ability, limited time, and limited attention span. The more efficient we teach athlete preparation, the more we have in reserve to include other aspects. Which is divergent to what I see as a growing and continuing trend – the limited focus on improving efficiency and the greater focus on adding more to the athletes schedule, in part because of ‘trends’.

In my discussions with coaches and coaching directors, one common theme appears – ‘We are amateurs and therefore you have to understand Ian’….-read – don’t expect us to pursue excellence because we are ‘just volunteers’.

To which I say – the main differences between a volunteer coach and an elite professional coach is the latter get’s paid, works with higher profiles players with more money at stake, and have bigger egos. There is nothing in my three decades plus of professional observations that leads me to believe that the professional coach is, should or needs to be a better coach. I just don’t understand why the volunteer coach and or amateur coach can’t, shouldn’t or don’t need to strive for excellence. To continually ask and answer the question – ‘How can I do this better? How can I get better results with athletes?’

From my conclusions, we have got sport upside down. The greatest window of opportunity to affect and shape an athlete is when they are young. Very young. And that window reduces with age. In most countries, however, we give the athletes to the volunteers and amateurs during this largest window of opportunity for development. And to those kids that rise to the surface, we give them more funds, allegedly better coaches, and definitely better facilities. For every kid that rises to the surface in this process, hundreds fall through the cracks, lost potential for all.

Now I don’t have a problem with the fact that most of our young athletes will be coached by volunteers and amateur coaches. What I do have a challenge with is why the assumption that if a coach is a volunteer or amateur that we should all give up and assume the pursuit of excellence is out of the question.

I don’t buy into the cultural perception that to prove you are a great coach you have to show you have worked with elite athletes. Why can’t you be the greatest coach in the land and work with kids? I believe you can, and I believe you should aim to be – because I don’t accept that the words ‘volunteer’ and or ‘amateur’ coach and the world ‘excellence’ are oxymoron’s, incompatible, or are antonyms!

Let’s talk about honesty, Lou

2011-02-23T18:27:00.000-08:00

I refer to Lou Schuler’s decision to publicly refer to my efforts to protect my intellectual property as dishonest (http://www.amazon.com/review/R1EKIUGPBU1KDE). I understand there is subjectivity in the definition of this word. I also understand his desire to protect his co-author. That aside...
...Let’s talk about honesty.

I don’t believe it is honest to use Lyle MacDonald’s words in your 2006 book ‘New Rules’ – unreferenced, uncredited, and without permission. For example:

“Imagine my surprise when I saw the original protocol repeated verbatim in New Rules of Lifting completely uncredited.”
--MacDonald, L., 2008,Warp Speed Fat Loss by Alwyn Cosgrove Contains Plagiarised Material, July 9, 2008, http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/miscellany/plagiarism-part-2.html

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it is honest to do a deal with someone for them to be primary author, and then behind the scenes plan to shift them back to secondary author without their knowledge, as occurred in the lead up to the Book of Muscle. Or as it occurred with Mike Mejia's books with you.

“Now, the big question is, how can we fix this? To credit it to "Lou Schuler, with workout programs by Ian King," is completely contrary to what we originally discussed. I hope you'll believe me when I say those original conversations seem like years ago, given how fast things move at Rodale. I have no excuses for switching tracks on this. I just got so caught up in where the book was going that I forgot where it started….

A similar situation cropped up with Home Workout Bible. I'd originally conceived it as Mike Mejia's book, but an editor got fired, the book fell months behind schedule, and I ended up having to write almost all of it. And by then, Testosterone Advantage had sold well and my name had the power to get us on bookstore shelves. But Mike's name is as prominent as mine on the cover, and he wrote the foreword, so it looks very much like his book.

I'll confess I'm panicking a bit here, because I very much screwed this up and I'm not really sure how to get back to the right place. We only have three months to write this thing, and now we have an element of bad faith to further cloud our effort, and it's entirely my fault.”
--Schuler, L., 2003, Personal communication with Ian King, Saturday, 5 October 2002

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it’s honest to have you listed as the primary author of the Book of Muscle on Amazon.com etc. since the books release in 2003. You blamed the ‘switcheroo’ on Men’s Health decisions makers – it is still MH who influences the ‘switcheroo’ at Amazons?:

Men's Health: The Book of Muscle : The World's Most Authoritative Guide to Building Your Body by Lou Schuler and Ian King (Oct 17, 2003)

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it is honest to use content from my works in your 2006 book ‘New Rules’ – yes, I know you did give some credit and referencing – but when I put my Get Buffed!™ II and Get Buffed!™III books beside your 2006 New Rules book – boy, they have a lot in common. With your editing skills you have covered the tracks well, to your credit. When you are confident with your knowledge base, I note that you do really re-work sentences. Much better job than your counter-parts did in editing a certain 2009 book about female training.

What makes me more cynical than your average avid fan is that I have collated a lot of the copying done by your co-author from the original sources, and watched the patterns unfold over the years. Too many ‘co-incidences’ for me. Take the strength programs for example. Now I know the limitations of the intellectual property laws in relation to program design, however seriously – save any denial of ‘open book publishing’ for your less discerning fans.

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it is honest to use someone’s original exercise innovations, exercise names, and loading parameters – ones taught to you personally by the originator – and then tell the audience that the only way to learn more about them is through ‘personal contact with yourself’ or by buying your book:

“Q. [from the audience] Where can I find all these exercises?

A. Only through personal contact [with me]. Firstly, write them all down, and then you have some. And second of all, it is in the ‘Martial Arts book [Secrets of Martial Arts Conditioning, A. Cosgrove, 2003], the early stage exercises are in there, but obviously…
--Cosgrove, A., 2003, Your body as a barbell – unconventional bodyweight exercises, DVD, 18 Oct 2003

My definition of honest would have been to credit all the original innovations, exercise names and loading protocols, and when asked this question, tell the person where you learnt them from, for example:

Ian King’s Killer Leg Exercises (DVD), 1999
Twelve Weeks of Pain, King, I., 1999, T-mag.com
Strength Specialization Series (video/dvd) (1998)
How to Write Strength Training Programs (book), 1998
Get Buffed! I (book), 1999
How To Teach Strength Training Exercises (book), 2000
How to Teach Strength Training Exercises (DVD), 2000
Get Buffed! II (book), 2002
Ian King’s Guide to Control Drills, 2002

And other places….

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it is honest to take advantage of someone’s generosity, following them giving you an opportunity in a guided learning experience because you lack experience in programming and training athletes, to then take the program and publish it in part or whole in the following publications, without permission, authority, and credit or referencing:

Cosgrove, A., 20??, 12 Week rugby program, strengthcoach.com
Cosgrove, A., 2003, Macrocycles

This program was provided to an existing long term KSI client, by KSI, with copyright KSI on every page. Yet the copyright symbol was removed (isn’t that a circumstance of aggravation in US copyright law?) and published in part and whole in at least the above two locations.

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it is honest to tell your readers that the program you have provided in the publication they have bought is designed with them in mind, when it wasn’t:

“I’ve designed this program around a typical client, looking to get in shape, with limited time, resources and equipment.…. This book is written with you in mind.”
-- Cosgrove, A., 2003, Macrocycles, p. 7

Unless the target audience of this book were males living in Asia aged between 18 and 28 years, playing elite sport in a government funded program preparing to play in a World Cup – then this is, for me, the absolute opposite of honesty.

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it is honest to infer you trained an athlete to an Olympic medal when your resume from 1999 makes no mention of this:

“I had a guy who took a silver medal for boxing in the Olympics in the super-heavyweight division…”
--Cosgrove, A., 2003, Your body as a barbell – unconventional bodyweight exercises, DVD, 18 Oct 2003

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it’s honest to boast in the morning that you have never had an original idea in your life, and that afternoon to refer to your original ideas:

“I don’t invent anything – I just steal. My joke is I have never had an original idea in my life.”
--Cosgrove, A., 2003, Assessment Seminar (DVD), Charles Staley Bootcamp, 3:05min in

“I remember once thinking that if you did a curl here [beside your body], a curl here [in front of your body] and a curl here [behind your body, that’s three bicep exercises… but then you do cable and dbs and a bar and you actually have nine. And if you do two angles at each position forward that takes you up to 18 exercises…...if you did each one for 3 weeks that would be a year before you would have to repeat and I haven’t even turned my hands over [pronated]…”
-- Cosgrove, A., 2003, Your body as a barbell – unconventional bodyweight exercises, DVD, 18 Oct 2003

“Biceps – three categories, it’s a very simple approach but it’s very effective. In your biceps, I want you to look at your biceps this way: Category 1 – elbow behind body; category 2 – elbow beside body; category 3 – elbow in front of body. Now with a different colour pen, write the following – supination, neutral, pronation. The message here – to fully exploit your biceps – you would need to consider those 6 options. And that gives you how many? That gives you endless options. Endless options….there is 3 ways by 3 ways…at least 9 if not more variations…...in other words if we just took a pair of DBS we have got 9 different bicep.... exercise, without considering all the cables and bars and different sorts of shape bar and the machines...”
-- King, I., 1998, Strength Specialization DVD, Part 4, 2 hr 50min

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it’s honest to claim in your bio that you are ‘recognized’ by a company, and to use a company name that doesn’t exist to create for yourself a Mike Myer’s like ‘international man’ perception:

Kingsports International Australia

There is no such company, at least that’s not our company’s name, and never was. If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it’s honest to claim to claim a ‘country’ recognizes you.

Through the years in this field Alwyn has been recognized as a specialist in Athletic Preparation by … Australia

Nor am I aware of any ‘specialist in Athletic Preparation’ certification offered by any organization in Australia. Or for that matter the US or the UK - which is also claimed.

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it’s honest to reproduce someone else’s concepts and theories, uncredited, unreferenced and without permission for reproduction. For example:

Balance : all things being equal, and independent of any specificity demands, the selection of exercises should show balance throughout the body.
--King, I., 1998, How to Write (book)

All things being equal, and independent of any specificity demands, the selection of exercises should show balance throughout the body.
-- Cosgrove, A., 2005, Fitness professional program design bible
--Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness professional program design bible (2nd Ed)
-- Cosgrove, A., 2009, Program Design Seminar handout

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it’s honest to reproduce someone’s exercise descriptions, as has occurred to over 70 exercise descriptions, appearing uncredited, unreferenced and without permission for reproduction in over 15 different publications by the same ‘author’, all published with the ‘author’ claiming copyright.
For example:

Single leg partial squat

Stand on the edge of a low block (eg. 1/3 to ½ the height of a normal bench height). Have the weak leg on the box and the strong leg off the edge of the box. Bend at the knee of the weak side, lowering down (2-3 seconds) until the sole of your feet almost brushes the floor. Keep sole parallel to ground. Pause for 1 second and return to full extension in about 1-2 seconds. At the 10th rep, pause at the bottom position for 10 seconds. You must not rest the non-supporting leg on the ground at any stage during the set. Hands on hips. Then continue reps until you get to 20. Repeat the 10 second pause. Can you go on? If yes, remember, what you start you must finish - this exercise must be done in multiples of 10, with a 10 second pause in bottom position at the completion of every 10 reps. If you get to 50 reps, look to raise the height of the block. Preferably don’t hold on to anything during the set - the challenge of balance will add to the fatigue. However you may wish to do this near a wall or squat stand just in case. You don’t need to do a warm up set - get straight into the work set. And be careful when you get off the block at the end of the set…..!
--King, I., 1999, Get Buffed!™

Single leg partial squat :

Stand on the edge of a low block (e.g. 1/3 to ½ the height of a normal bench height). Have the weak leg on the box and the strong leg off the edge of the box. Bend at the knee of the weak side, lowering down (2-3 seconds) until the sole of your feet almost brushes the floor. Keep sole parallel to ground. Pause for 1 second and return to full extension in about 1-2 seconds. At the 10th rep, pause at the bottom position for 10 seconds. You must not rest the non-supporting leg on the ground at any stage during the set. Hands on hips. Then continue reps until you get to 20. Repeat the 10-second pause. Can you go on? If yes, remember, what you start you must finish - this exercise must be done in multiples of 10, with a 10 second pause in bottom position at the completion of every 10 reps. If you get to 50 reps, look to raise the height of the block. Preferably don’t hold on to anything during the set - the challenge of balance will add to the fatigue. However you may wish to do this near a wall or squat stand just in case. You don’t need to do a warm up set - get straight into the work set.
-Cosgrove, A., 2003, Macrocycles
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, Fitness professional program design bible

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it’s honest to reproduce someone else's periodization works uncredited, unreferenced and without permission, with the ‘author’ claiming copyright. For example:

Alternating periodization: involves alternating between volume (another term used is accumulation) and intensity (again, another term seen is intensification).
--King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs

Alternating Periodization: involves alternating between volume and intensity (accumulation/intensification)
-- Cosgrove, A., 2005, Fitness professional program design bible
--Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness professional program design bible (2nd Ed)

The advantages includes that it avoids the detraining issues involved in linear progression (ie. reduces the concern of detraining metabolic or neural adaptations because of more frequent exposure to each).
--King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs

Advantages: avoids the detraining issues involved in linear progression (due to more frequent exposure of neural and metabolic effects). Generally speaking this is often the best choice for most trainees.
-- Cosgrove, A., 2005, Fitness professional program design bible
--Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness professional program design bible (2nd Ed)

The disadvantages include that it requires to trainee to be experienced in load selection as the reps drop suddenly and significantly.
--King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs

Disadvantages: requires experience in load selection as the reps change quickly and significantly.
-- Cosgrove, A., 2005, Fitness professional program design bible
--Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness professional program design bible (2nd Ed)

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it’s honest to reproduce someone else's philosophies uncredited, unreferenced and without permission, with the ‘author’ claiming copyright. For example:

Resist the temptation in program design to conform to mainstream paradigms simply for the sake of conforming, no matter how dogmatically they are presented, or how much you may be ridiculed or ostracized for trusting your intuition over conformity.
--King, I., 2005, The Way of the Physical Preparation Coach

When designing training programs, resist the pressure to conform to any tradition or system of beliefs, no matter how dogmatically that tradition or those beliefs are presented, or how much you get "slammed" for not conforming. This applies to training and life.
--Cosgrove, A., 2006, 10 Things I’ve Learnt, T-mag.com, Feb

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it’s honest to reproduce someone else’s physical qualities works uncredited, unreferenced and without permission, with the ‘author’ claiming copyright. For example:

Speed can be defined as the time taken between two points.
--King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation

Speed can be defined as the time taken between two points.
-- Cosgrove, A., 2003, Martial Arts

There are a number of sub-qualities of speed.
--King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation

Speed can in effect be broken down into several qualities
-- Cosgrove, A., 2003, Martial Arts

Detection of and reaction to stimulus: The first sub-quality of speed can be said to be the ability to detect and react to stimulus. This is usually the first action in a chain of speed responses.
--King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation

Reaction time: The ability to detect and react to a stimulus. This usually the first action in a series of speed responses.
-- Cosgrove, A., 2003, Martial Arts

Agility and co-ordination: The first few movements following the reaction to the stimulus rely on agility and coordination.
--King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation

Agility and co-ordination: This is the first few movements following the reaction to the stimulus.
-- Cosgrove, A., 2003, Martial Arts

Acceleration: The athlete’s speed component focus following the first few movements is on acceleration - provided the sporting action has the distance and time frame to cope. If the action or event is over within one to two seconds, the need to fully exploit acceleration is absent.
--King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation

Acceleration: the ability to increase speed and approach maximum speed. This is less important in short distance sports as the action is typically over in 1-2 seconds and the need to fully exploit acceleration is absent.
-- Cosgrove, A., 2003, Martial Arts

Maximum velocity: As stated above, the point at which one ceases to accelerate is ones maximum velocity.
--King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation

Maximum Speed: the point at which you cease to accelerate.
-- Cosgrove, A., 2003, Martial Arts

Speed endurance: Speed endurance is the ability to maintain high levels of speed. There are three categories of speed endurance…
--King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation

Speed endurance: the ability to maintain high levels of speed. Can be further broken into…
---- Cosgrove, A., 2003, Martial Arts

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it’s honest to reproduce someone else’s principles of training uncredited, unreferenced and without permission, with the ‘author’ claiming copyright. For example:

Progressive overload: This principle stresses two issues. Firstly the need for overload in training, and secondly the need for progression in training overload.
--King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation

Progressive overload: This stresses two issues. Firstly the need for overload in training, and secondly the need for progression in training overload.
---- Cosgrove, A., 2003, Martial Arts

General to specific: This principle stresses the benefit of progressing from general training to specific training. This principle can be applied in both long-term planning (e.g. multi-year periodization) as well as short term planning (e.g. annual periodization). General to specific can viewed as opposite ends of a continuum…
--King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation

General to specific: This principle explores the benefits of progressing from general training to more about sport specific training. This principle should be used both long term and short term when designing a conditioning program. General training to sport-specific training can be thought of as opposite ends of a continuum.
-- Cosgrove, A., 2003, Martial Arts

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

Individualization: This principle stresses that to optimize the training effect, it is necessary to take into account all the factors that the individual athlete presents. This suggests that each training program needs to be individualized. Modified to suit the individual, in each aspect of training…
--King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation

Individualization: To really maximize the training effect it is necessary to take into account every single individual difference that the athlete presents. Each training program needs to be individualized and modified to suit the individual.
---- Cosgrove, A., 2003, Martial Arts

I don’t believe it’s honest to reproduce someone else’s recovery theories uncredited, unreferenced and without permission, with the ‘author’ claiming copyright. For example:

The principle of recovery recognizes that the training effect is not simply a result of training alone, but occurs from a combination of training and the subsequent recovery from training. It is only when recovery is allowed that we see the super-compensation effect, the unique phenomenon where the bodies physical capacity is elevated in response to training…
--King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation

The principle of recovery recognizes that training alone does not produce any results. That’s right – you don’t get better by training - you get better by recovering from training…. The training effect is a combination of training and the subsequent recovery from training. It is only when recovery is allowed that we see the super-compensation effect, when the body’s physical capacity is elevated in response to training.
---- Cosgrove, A., 2003, Martial Arts

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I don’t believe it’s honest to reproduce someone else’s ‘steps to program design’ uncredited, unreferenced and without permission, with the ‘author’ claiming copyright. For example:

1. Determine goals
--King, I., 1998, How To Write (book), 35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program, p. 5-7

1. Determine Goal(s)
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Professional Fitness Coach Program Design Bible Program Design Checklist, Eighteen Steps to Programming Success

3. Determine length of program
--King, I., 1998, How To Write (book), 35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program, p. 5-7

2. Determine the time frame to achieve goals or the length of the training cycle
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Professional Fitness Coach Program Design Bible Program Design Checklist, Eighteen Steps to Programming Success

4. Select appropriate method of periodization
--King, I., 1998, How To Write (book), 35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program, p. 5-7

3. Choose a suitable periodization model
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Professional Fitness Coach Program Design Bible Program Design Checklist, Eighteen Steps to Programming Success

5. Determine appropriate rate of change of program
--King, I., 1998, How To Write (book), 35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program, p. 5-7

4. Determine rate of change of program
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Professional Fitness Coach Program Design Bible Program Design Checklist, Eighteen Steps to Programming Success

8. Determine frequency ie. number of training days per week/microcycle
--King, I., 1998, How To Write (book), 35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program, p. 5-7

6. Determine the frequency of the workouts per week (how many training sessions?)
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Professional Fitness Coach Program Design Bible Program Design Checklist, Eighteen Steps to Programming Success

9. Select which training days
--King, I., 1998, How To Write (book), 35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program, p. 5-7

7. Determine the days of the week for training sessions
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Professional Fitness Coach Program Design Bible Program Design Checklist, Eighteen Steps to Programming Success

12. Determine priorities in muscle groups
--King, I., 1998, How To Write (book), 35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program, p. 5-7

9. Determine movement patterns to be training that will address the biggest weaknesses and prioritize.--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Professional Fitness Coach Program Design Bible Program Design Checklist, Eighteen Steps to Programming Success

15. Allocate muscle groups to training days
p. 13 under this step in HTW - If you were doing a total body workout that is the same for each of the 3 or so weekly workouts, you would only use column A. If you were working with a 3 day split routine where each day was different, you would use column A, B and C….
--King, I., 1998, How To Write (book), 35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program, p. 5-7

11. Allocate corrective stretching exercises and movement patterns to each training day (can use a split routine OR a single workout).
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Professional Fitness Coach Program Design Bible, Program Design Checklist, Eighteen Steps to Programming Success

17. Determine proposed duration of program
--King, I., 1998, How To Write (book), 35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program, p. 5-7

12. Determine total training time per workout.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Professional Fitness Coach Program Design Bible, Program Design Checklist, Eighteen Steps to Programming Success

21. Calculate total set time
--King, I., 1998, How To Write (book), 35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program, p. 5-7

13. Calculate available work time (total training time – warm up time- stretching etc)
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Professional Fitness Coach Program Design Bible, Program Design Checklist, Eighteen Steps to Programming Success

22. Determine total number of sets permissible for each training session
This is calculated by dividing the proposed duration of the workout by the total time per set (which is TUT per set + rest period as calculated in Step 22 above)
--King, I., 1998, How To Write (book), 35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program, p. 5-7

14. Divide available work time by total time-under-tension + rest period for all prescribed sets (determined from periodization model). This will give you a number of allowable exercises.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Professional Fitness Coach Program Design Bible, Program Design Checklist, Eighteen Steps to Programming Success

28. Select suitable exercises for each muscle group
--King, I., 1998, How To Write (book), 35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program, p. 5-7

15. Select the exercises for each movement pattern that is most appropriate for the client and most likely to assist you in accomplishing your objective.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Professional Fitness Coach Program Design Bible, Program Design Checklist, Eighteen Steps to Programming Success

31. Determine sets, repetitions and rest periods for each exercise
--King, I., 1998, How To Write (book), 35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program, p. 5-7

5. Select appropriate set, rep, tempo and rest periods for each program within the cycle
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Professional Fitness Coach Program Design Bible, Program Design Checklist, Eighteen Steps to Programming Success

32. Select speed of movement / technique for each exercise--King, I., 1998, How To Write (book), 35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program, p. 5-7

5. Select appropriate set, rep, tempo and rest periods for each program within the cycle
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Professional Fitness Coach Program Design Bible, Program Design Checklist, Eighteen Steps to Programming Success

35. Final analysis of program, including checking total volume and duration
--King, I., 1998, How To Write (book), 35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program, p. 5-

17. Check reps, time under tension, tempo, rest periods etc. after exercise selection for any modifications.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Professional Fitness Coach Program Design Bible, Program Design Checklist, Eighteen Steps to Programming Success

In fact, put simply, I don’t believe it’s honest to knowingly reproduce other peoples works and claim that as your own copyright. If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

Nor do I believe it’s honest to lie, cheat and steal. Apparently your buddy and co-author does:

History suggests that breakaway organisations ultimately fall into the same trap that their original organisation did - take martial arts for example!” [note your quote – unreferenced -sorry!!]
---A. Cosgrove in personal communication to I King, 4 Dec 1999

I don’t invent anything – I just steal. My joke is I have never had an original idea in my life.
--Cosgrove, A., 2003, Assessment Seminar (DVD), Charles Staley Bootcamp

I steal from a lot of people.
--Cosgrove, A., 2003, Your body is a barbell (seminar on DVD)

Steal! Ok well, don’t “steal”. Just aggressively learn from everyone you can.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, Program Design Bible

From my viewpoint, physical training is an actual juggling of seven key areas. (I've completely stolen the names for these phases from several sources…)
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, 7 Keys to Athletic Success, t-mag.com, Sep 2006

A saying I stole from Ian King is…
--Cosgrove, A., 200?, Profile Alwyn Cosgrove – Martial Arts Strength Coach, cbathletics.com

Steal. Steal and modify. It's not "cheating" to use the experiences of others to better yourself.
--Cosgrove, A., 2006, Developing a Training Philosophy, T-mag.com, Wed, Nov 22, 2006

If someone else got results faster than I did, I would copy them. I don't have a religious attachment to my ideas. I'd steal their ideas.
-- Cosgrove, A., 2009, ‘Straight Talk about the Fitness Biz, T-mag.com, Thu, Apr 02 2009

If your definition of honesty is such that this is honest, I would be happy to be labelled dishonest.

I understand that you have your own definition of honest. I also understand that you work this definition in the broader cultural and industry boundaries, which appear in many ways to share you definition. But if it’s okay with you, I don’t share you definition of honesty – and if that make me the opposite, dishonest, I’m happy with that. I sleep well at night, irrespective of how long my fan list is or how many hits I get on my web site. As you have said, one of the many differences between us is that I’m a coach and you are a writer, I don’t need to garner public support and any specific perceptions from the masses to put food on my table.

If you can convince your loyal followers that you and your buddy are honest and have done no wrong and no copyright breaching has occurred - good luck to you. I’m pretty sure that when you reach the pearly gates (or what ever you define as your day of reckoning) your higher source is not going to be so gullible.

Calling me dishonest, Lou

Sure won’t make it right

But if you want

I’ll say a prayer

For your soul tonight

--Modified from John ‘Cougar’ Melloncamp’s song ‘Rain on the Scarecrow [I could have ‘omitted to reference it. Claimed copyright, and then if caught out by John, I could have said – ‘The printer forgot to include the page with the credit on it’…or ‘I thought I had the rights to it’. But to do that would not be honest. Or perhaps from your perspective, Lou, to give credit would be dishonest.]

Kids, I’m sorry

There less legacy for you now

Since some else decided

It’s okay to steal

Rain on the keyboard

Blood on the copyright

The times they may be a-changing!

2011-01-18T22:12:00.000-08:00

The Bullshit Backlash

I watched as we moved from a period of honesty in publishing in the period leading up to the start of the 21st century, to a period post 2000 AD where the bullshit in our industry grew exponentially. You didn’t need real world experience. You didn’t need measurable results in success of your trade. You just needed the desire to be perceived as ‘one of the great ones’, skill marketing and a loose moral compass.

And there were no shortage of people who fit this description that put up their hands during the decade post 2000’s, and rode this wave of content aimed to fulfil the needs of the seller, not the needs of the buyer.

Authors rode the wave. Publishers rode the wave. Equipment manufacturers and distributors rode the wave. Organizations turned a blind eye.

I become so moved by this trend that I wrote a book about it – Barbells and Bullshit, published 2010. I wanted to draw attention to what I believed was an undesirable trend. But I am only one person – what difference can I make? And for a while I thought I was the only person who was seeing this, concerned by it, and willing to take a stand against it.

Then I came upon this statement:

“I’d rather sell nothing than sell crap.”

The writer was Phil Stevens (1) and he had my attention. I thought – there are two of us!

Then I learnt more about his initiative:

This site from conception to completion is built out of a collective disdain for the useless drivel and backstabbing that is all too prevalent in the strength and fitness industry today. From that foundation Strength Guild sought out and collected a core group of the best like minded coaches, athletes, and minds in the world of strength to gather under one roof. We endeavor to fight against all that is wrong in the industry today with the over abundance of fly-by-night experts and so-called guru’s that are in it for nothing but making a dollar anyway possible. We are a group of teachers and role models who have been there done that, under the bar, in the books, and with successful clients (themselves included) for over a century combined. We are a group of “No Bullshit” strength practitioners that are here to teach the craft of strength…(2)

Then I thought – there are more than just the two of us!

Imagine that! What if there are even more people out there who feel what’s happening is not right – that there is a better way. And who are willing to make a stand, even if only in the way they invest their hard earned cash!

That’s an exciting possibility!

Naming the decades

I called the 80’s ‘The Decade of Aerobics’, the 90’s ‘The Decade of Strength’, and the 2000s ‘The Decade of Bullshit’. What will the 2010’s be know for? The revolution, the ‘Decade of the Backlash against Bullshit’?

The question is no longer will there be a backlash, or will people stand up against this trend. The question will be when we will reach the tipping point, the point at which the majority of individuals, companies and organizations choose to comply – not because they want to, but because the decisions of the masses in their individual purchasing decisions force this change.

Will the tipping point be reached during this decade? Or will this take longer? If so, how long? To answer these questions I have gone on a trip through history.

The myths surrounding the fall of the once great Roman Empire during the first 500 years AD focus on the “the gradual disintegration of the political, economic, military, and other social institutions of Rome”(3) . This has been perhaps the most famous example of social change in our recorded history.

One of the great examples in our recent history that draws me to compare to the ‘fall of Rome’ was the rise post 2000 AD of the ‘fat loss guru’. I conclude that our society is so decadent that the most pressing need of the masses is to lower body fat. One third of the world starves, yet those in the industrialized western world eat too much. And those seeking to take the profit from this misguided notion have put their hand up. Buy my book – only then will be able to turn on your after-burners. Only when you do my special combination exercise circuit (like what the US company Universal promoted in the 1970s!) will you succeed. Only when you take my special metabolism raising supplement will you achieve your goals. No talk of the simple solution – eat better, eat less, move more, and read less main stream magazines written to condition you to believe you will be inadequate until you look like a (photo-shopped) Hollywood movie start.

I recommend you all watch the movie Wall-E – the message regarding the direction of society when it comes to food, exercise and human movement capabilities – so powerful.

However Rome took up to 320 years to unravel. Are social changes likely to occur more rapidly in current times? To answer this, I look at some of the significant human changes I have witnessed in my life time.

I first noticed the ‘green’ movement in the 1970s. Some suggest it began as early as 1907 (4). I never thought I would see the values of the ostracized ‘greenies’ of the 1960s and 1970s become mainstream. In the last few years, you can see the publicly-listed companies rush to release their ‘Green Policies’. Recycling is mainstream in waste management. Composting decomposable food is hip. I have been amazed at the rapidness of these changes. They have gone from being the values of hippies to the values of mainstream.

As a child in the 1960s, I recall my father writing a letter to the then owner of one of the two largest airlines in Australia, suggesting that cigarette smoking should be banned on flights. You can imagine the answer. Anyway, if he was one of the first to raise this, then you can say this change occurred, which occurred in 1987 on Australian domestic flights – took about 20 years. The tobacco companies and their shareholders had significant power and influence, and may have been able to delay these changes for some time – but not forever.

These are two significant changes in social values that I have witnessed in my life time. I believe the changes are occurring at a fast rate. Now the 320 year period for Rome to implode covered all aspects of society – economics, government etc.

So perhaps in the broader sense, there is much work to be done, much change yet to occur. But in a micro-sense, I will be watching with personal interest how rapid the changes are in the culture of the sport and fitness industry.

In the short term I can see a division – between those who wish to cling to the ‘New Rules of the 2000’s’ – and those who wish to apply the possible ‘New Rules of the 2010s’. Those who chose to cling to last decades values will surely put up a good fight. A fight that may have begun. (5)

The resistance to change

During the 1980s and 1990s there were a few dominant values and beliefs that I decided to challenge, and with success in practical application. I then chose to share my real-world experiments and their conclusions through my seminars and published works late in the 1990s.

This information was not always well received. In one seminar, during the morning of the one of these seminars in Boston MA, an apparent local identity (who I had never heard of before) gathered his colleagues, and stormed out of the seminar. Later that person wrote an email to the seminar host threatening the ramifications for that person should they foolishly decide to host me again. Needless to say, they never did. Ironically the very content I presented in that seminar has been the backbone of this person’s publishing in the decade to follow, and in that time I didn’t see one reference to the source.

In other seminars those planning to attend were directed not to. In other cases some were rung by an out of state police officer assuring them that if they attended they would be arrested. Seminar hosts were told if they were to receive any packages in the mail from me, they would be arrested for this. Great imagination was applied, and due the gullibility of many, the registration withdrawals were many.

Not everyone’s going to be happy if more of the masses shift towards honesty and integrity. They are enjoying the current situation too much – where a low-educated, highly gullible market will believe it if you write or say it, and buy and do anything with a little marketing conditioning. Right now the truth and integrity way is sought to be crushed in the desert like the early electric cars, so we don’t threaten sales and the status quo that was established during the ‘Decade of the Bullshitter’ – in the same way electric cars in the 1970s were perceived as a threat to the sale of oil and gasoline.

The New Rules

Let’s take a look at what I call the ‘New Rules of the 2000s’ – and what I believe may be the ‘New Rules of the 2010s’. At worst, call me an optimist.

Note some of the ‘New Rules of the 2000-2010 Decade’ are not just my observations – some of them are quotes reflecting the accepted values of that period.

Lying

2000-2010
“It's OK to tell a lie if you know that it's a lie... Once a personal trainer or performance specialist knows the truth then, they can tell a little white lie to make the sale or to get the client on board. The key to selling fitness lies (clever play on words) in knowing the truth but, also knowing when to lie.” (5)

2010+
It’s not okay to tell a lie. Tell the truth. No matter if there is a sale or anything else at stake.

Cheating

2000-2010
”Steal. Steal and modify. It's not "cheating" to use the experiences of others to better yourself.” (7)

2010+
It is cheating to use other people’s works to promote and benefit from. That is not acceptable.

Stealing

2000-2010
“Steal. Steal and modify.” (8)

2010+
Stealing is not acceptable.

Experience

2000-2010
None needed – just put ‘coach’ before your name, or otherwise hide behind your keyboard

2010+
You need to have succeeded in the area and at the level you wish to teach others. Not just claim it. Really.

Names

2000-2010
Use names to create market association, create reciprocal endorsement, and cover over copying.

2010+
Use names if they are relevant to the message.

Publishing

2000-2010
Open book publishing – open someone else’s book and copy it. Put your name and the front, claim copyright and sell it as your own.

2010+
Publish only from your own experiences, original, truthful material worthy of being presented to others.

Profit

2000-2010
At any cost. No rules. No guidelines.

2010+
Only when it can be done with others interest put first and within the moral bounds of this new era.

Sales

2000-2010
Sell anything. If you think there is a demand, sell whatever is in demand. If there isn’t a demand, create it.

2010+
Sell only when and to whom it will benefit, without lies and exaggerations of the benefits of the product/service.

Not if but when

The only question is how long will the change take?

How long will it before internet and hard copy publishers cease to publish content by people who in my opinion are simply demonstrating their left brain knowledge or their creative imaginations. When we stop reading about how to get big arms by people who have never had them. Or how to get big and strong by people who have never been big and strong. Or how to get lean by people who have never been lean. Or the keys to athletic success by personal trainers who failed to find them for themselves? Or the promotion of products for the sake of a profit?

The key to change will be people power. I noted with interest the commentator in the highly recommend movie Food Inc. comment that the big corporations don’t change because they suddenly find morals – for the most part the change is consumer led. When enough people reject label deficient genetically-modified foods and demand organic foods instead, then the major companies find the motivation to join this consumer led trend towards healthier eating.

The Iron Game Woodstock

There were a few events that defined history and marked the beginning of a new era. The fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of Communism in 1989 are great examples of this. And the event known as ‘Woodstock’ is another. Here’s a description of that event:

“From August 15-18, 1969, 500000 young people from across the United States converged on Max Yasgur's 600-acre dairy farm in Bethel, New York.” (9)

Woodstock was the iconic event that heralded in people power and social change in many areas.

No-one expected these numbers to attend Woodstock. They planned for 50,000. They got 500,000!

In 21-22 June2011 – perhaps we are going to have such an event when the StrengthGuild.com annual get-together takes place. An event that triggers a longer lasting greater impact.

Conclusion

I am under no illusions that the change to our world and sport/fitness industry towards one of greater integrity will be quick or easy. Coning from a long line of previous life warriors, I am up for the fight. I hope that you will join us in this crusade.

It would be fitting to end with lyrics modified from a song considered to be the flag-ship song of the social change, by Bob Dylan.

Come gather 'round people
Wherever you train
And admit that the bullshit
Around you has grown
And accept it that soon
You'll be dumbed-down to the bone.
If your training to you
Is worth savin'
Then you better start standing up to it
Or you'll drown in the shit
For the times they are a-changin'.

Come writers and publishers
Who bullshit with your keyboard
And keep your eyes wide
The chance won't come again
And don't bother throwing stones
For the wheel's still in spin
And there's no tellin' who
That it's namin'.
For the honest ones now
Will be later to win
For the times they are a-changin'.
Come manufactures, distributors
Please heed the call
Don't stand on the platform
Don't block up the gym
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There's a battle outside ragin'.
It'll soon shake your barbell
And rattle your kettle-bell
For the times they are a-changin'.

Come internet site owners
Throughout the world
And don't criticize
That you can't understand
Your clients and customers
Are beyond your command
Your old road is
Rapidly changin'.
Please get out of the new one
If you can't lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin'.

The line it is drawn
The curse it is cast
The honest one now
Will later be fast
As the present now
Will later be past
The order is
Rapidly fadin'.
And the bullshitter now
Will later be last
For the times they are a-changin'

--Modified from the Bob Dylan classic, ‘The times they are a-changing’

References
(1) http://Philstevens.com
(2) http://strengthguild.com/blog/?page_id=2
(3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline...e_Roman_Empire
(4) http://webecoist.com/2008/08/17/a-br...reen-movement/
(5) http://bit.ly/dGOEOj
(6) Boyle, M., 2006, Telling lies in America, strengthcoach.com
(7) Cosgrove, A., 2006, Developing a Training Philosophy, T-mag.com, Wed, Nov 22, 2006
(8) Cosgrove, A., 2006, Developing a Training Philosophy, T-mag.com, Wed, Nov 22, 2006
(9) http://bit.ly/gykwPT

Readers response to Barbells & Bullshit (book)

2011-01-05T00:17:00.000-08:00

I received this feedback recently and responded. It's great to have genuine people reach out and offer their support:

Hi Ian, I've just read your Barbells &... book. I did so with a mixture of sadness and anger. While xxxx had made me aware of the plagiarism of your work that had occurred, it was quite shocking to read about the extent of it, over and over and.... I offer my moral support. On a positive note, I did find the book important in showing the social conditioning pressures we all face and the inconsistent application of the scientific method by scientists; so thanks for that. Best wishes for 2011,
--G

Thanks G - yes, now you know that xxx was not exaggerating. It has been very unpleasant to see the extent that my material, developed over the last 30+ years, from literally days and nights in the hot sun and pouring rain, in snow, earthquakes and blizzards, in many different countries, in many different environments and cultures, has been raped and pillaged,.

One of the great tragedies in my opinion in the impact on my children and their children's children, that the theft of the legacy of this material may have on them. I have a big focus on life legacy, and I feel my kids and their children's children have been stolen from as much if not more than I. They are aware of what is going on but at their tender age, it is unlikely they grasp the full long term implications.

It also provides me with many questions that I seek to answer. I am giving reflection to questions such as:

1. Is this behaviour, including the way the industry has responded to it, the start of a new era, or the extreme acts at the end of an era of social morality?

2. Is this behaviour US centric or global? Are we seeing the extension of the US corporate and cultural traits of 'if it's not oral, its not immoral?' It's only wrong if you don't get caught? Or in this case as it appears, it's only wrong if you get convicted?

Many interesting questions.

I personally never expected to see the level of 'behaviour' in anyone as that I have encountered in this 'case', so it has been a real eye opener about the breadth and width of human integrity. It has also been eye opening as to who is prepared to stand up against to this kind of behaviour and who, for various reasons from lethargy to protection of personal benefits, would prefer to turn a blind eye or pretend it didn't happen.

This has been a true life lesson, one that I intend to share in full in the years to come. I will also be preparing a 'report card' on the integrity test that has been placed in front of the individuals, businesses and organizations to whom I have laid this moral dilemma in front of. They have all been in a position to take a stand and fold. Some who I didn't really expect to take a strong stance have done so, and some who I expected would take a strong stance, have not. The report card will show each entities response. To date, the report card would not please a mother.

Appreciate your thoughts and support.

Great to hear you got value from the book in general. It was certainly a unique book with heaps of real world material! I do expect that in future generations the life lessons unfolded in my writings regarding every aspect of athletic and physical preparation will continue to serve and grown in their value to the world.
--Ian King

Out-dated methods - shame, shame, shame!

2010-11-14T23:06:00.000-08:00

Imagine if this was a respone my last post generated (just imagining of course):

"My understanding from studies concerning this issue that I have read, are simply stating that static stretching prior to physical exercise causes a decrease in force output of muscle tissue (poor performance). The studies opt for dynamic stretching prior and static stretching at the end of physical exercise. I do believe we need to read ANY study with a "critical eye", but we shouldn't be to bold as to suggest motive when we simply do not want to let go of dated methods."

Ah, studies, studies, studies. I am glad we have studies to guide us from 'outdated methods'. I am glad I didn't squat until the mid 1990s because studies didn't support it. In fact, they discouraged it. I am glad I didn't start using a multi-vitamin until after the 2002 JAMA study said it may be prudent. I am glad I didn't use protein powders or amino acids unitl the 1990s because only then were there studies supporting it.

And it's unfortunate I just can't let go of out-dated methods. You know, some people even still use the missionary sex position - and as our great-great grandparents and their grand parents before them and so on probably did the same, that's really outdated.....Shame, shame, shame!

YOU JUST CAN'T USE SOMETHNING THAT ANOTHER PERSON/S LABELS AS OUTDATEd!

And while we are being open and confessing, I must admit to using a barbell...And I believe my great uncle Vinny also trained with one, so I know I really should let go of that outdated method....

Isn't it great that most of use don't do outdated stuff! But those who do - don't they know that is not acceptable?!

Now thats ANOTHER logical reason not to static stetch - it's outdated!!!

More than that - it's another FEAR based reason - fear that you may not be 'up-to-date' with the latest 'trends' and 'science'....

After so many decades you would have thought I would have learnt to conform...and if I haven't, a response like this imaginary email may surely guide me to conformity...

..we need to ...

...we shouldn't ...

And Ian, stop being so brave as to sugest motive....how dare you. After all, there is at least one other person (I know, a few more!) that strongly believes you have no right to form an opinion outside the boundaries of the dominant beliefs....

Let's get real clear - I don't give a rat's arse what you belive in or do in training, In fact, the more f-up the methods used, the easier for otheres to succeed in competitive sport etc. My goal is simply to let those who do have some semblance of belief that they were born with a brain and intuition that it still works, and they are allowed to use it if they want...that there may be an altenrative to the dominant beliefs - as threatening as that may be to some......

Quick question if I may - do the studies show that 'out-dated' is sub-optimal? I sure hope so, because I need those words to cling on to....

Static stretching fear mongering

2010-11-09T02:18:00.000-08:00

I recently received a thesis study conducted in the US and shared with me by a coach out of austria, which i appreciated.

Here are some thoughts I shared in return.

Note the aim (or at least my aim) of static stretching is not necessarily to in the acute sense enhance or detract VJ height.

Nor is eating a large meal full of high fibre protein in the acute sense intended to enhance or detract from training ability or work capacity.

Why don't we see studies about how eating large, heavy meals followed immediately by DJ results in a decease in DJ height?

Because it is not the trend of thinking.

The only reason the relationship between stretching and jumping is hypothesized about, discussed, studied etc, is because there is an influencing drive to find rationale sounding reasons not static stretch.

Why? Because we will reduce injuries and negatively impact the pharmaceutical industry

Now there is a hypyoethesis we won't be reading about in our life time - that accurate teaching of SS results in a decrease in pharacuetical industry gross income.....

Performance Coach or Director - Why the term sucks

2010-10-26T22:05:00.000-07:00

[The following is an extract from the book 'Barbells & Bullshit' by Ian King, 2010.]

I have noted a trend over the last decade or so for physical preparation coaches involved with athletes and sporting teams to refer to themselves as ‘performance’ coaches or directors. In fact, this title appears to be the pinnacle of employment positions within sporting teams. I don’t support this and here’s why.

In my thirty year involvement in the industry to date I have watched the slow acceptance of physical preparation coaches by other coaches in sport. From my perspective the formal role of the physical preparation coach in western sport began in the 1970’s at the earliest. My point is the industry is relatively young.

As such, it’s been pretty easy for the more established coaching roles to manipulate physical preparation coaches. The most common techniques I have seen include:

1. The athletes are getting injured because of what the physical preparation coach is doing
2. The athletes are performing worse because of what the physical preparation coach is doing.

To achieve point 2, you will often hear coaches blame the team’s ‘fitness’ for poor performance. This technique is so entrenched that you will commonly hear lay people make the same statement – ‘They are not fit enough’.

Teams and athletes don’t lose simply because of their physical preparation. Physical preparation is at most 25% or one of four components of athletic success. When you add culture, equipment, and funding you now have ten components. Physical is one-tenths or 10% of this model. It’s a very long bow to suggest that controlling the physical preparation dictates the performance.

All the use of the term ‘performance coach’ does is play into the hands of those who seek to use the ‘new kid on the block’ (physical preparation) as the fall guy should one be needed in the event of individual or team failure. Controlling one-tenth of the total athlete preparation gives physical preparation coaches no more rights to claim they are ‘performance coaches’ than any of those in the coaching and support team who control / influence the other nine components in the 10-part model.

It reinforces the myth that if an individual or team fail to win, it is because they lack appropriate physical preparation.

And no, the flip side is rarely promoted – that when they win it is because of their physical preparation. The same people in the coaching team who seek to shift the blame to the physical preparation coaches in the event of a loss will step up in the event of a win to take credit. Now they seek to be titled ‘great coaches’.

This pattern of blame / credit is only outperformed in inaccuracy by the physical preparation coach who controls only one of the four sub-components of physical preparation (e.g. strength training only) – and seeks to take credit for the wins. They control 25% of 10%, or an estimated 2.5% of the generalized preparation.

The only situation I believe a physical preparation coach can even consider calling themselves a ‘performance coach’ is when they control over 50% of the total athlete preparation. Which means they would have to control technical, tactical, physical and psychological preparation (totaling 40%) – and more – to control over 50% if the total program.

Rarely achieved. I would not need more than one hand to count the number of physical preparation coaches I have encountered in three decades in this industry who meet this criteria.

This also raises the question of how many years back in each athlete’s career they had this control. Take the athlete’s age minus say 4 years of age, and then divide by 2 – have they been in control for more than half this number? If not it means they haven’t controlled the majority of the training process that led to this point.

Know anyone who would meet these criteria?

Most physical preparation coaches live in so much fear of losing their job they don’t have any intention of seeking to alter or control departments outside of their own. In fact, this scarcity mentality - where is my next job coming from? What will I do if I lose this job?- usually means they allow others in the administration, coaching and support team to interfere with the physical preparation program to the extent that I doubt they could be said to even control that.

[Learn more about this book at http://www.kingsports.net/products-ksi-book-b&bs.htm]

Feedback on my latest book - Barbells & Bullshit

2010-10-26T05:06:00.000-07:00

I recently received this feedback about my latest book:

Ian, Great book... ...keeping me up late. Very entertaining, hilarious, gut-wrenching and scary as you unfold the reality of this industry, while pairing it with guidance to a conscious way of thriving in the field of physical preparation and life. Also, you have brilliantly made the book very interactive, which I assume was done purposely, and adds to the suspense and overall enjoyment. Thank you once again!
--Ryan

To which I replied on the KSI forum as follows, content that normally stays on the members only http://www.coachking.net/ forum:

Excellent perception Ryan - there are many subtle and interwoven themes in this text which you have an awareness of, and even for my top coaches, they need all their knowledge and experience to decipher them

I appreciate your feedback, and commend you for digging into the book. many will disregard as a reading option simply because it's theme is not compliant with mainstream conditioning of 'what you need to study - e.g. references to research, or how to get bigger biceps, or apparently ever more pertinent today, how to lower body fat using the 'only' way to train 'that only I know how'

As the fitness industry grows, should it continue along its current path, I will be exposing more 'conspiracies' of the exploitation of the masses for the gain of a few - economically and egotistically.

One only needs to lift the lid on larger and older industries to see the techniques that are and will continue to expand in their use in the 'fitness industry'

Like the US economy, I feel the American-influenced fitness industry may be so 'sick' that it is beyond repair, short of greater social changes. An alternative is to create a universal sub-culture of those whose are passionate about physical preparation at any level of involvement, have the ability to think objectively and independently and reject the conditioned thinking enforced on the masses, and who do not support, endorse or wish to be part of a current, self-serving 'fitness industry'.
--Ian

The World is Flat!

2010-10-08T02:32:00.000-07:00

Popular stories have humans believing the world was flat and that Christopher Columbus, in his late 1400's explorations to the America's, travelled in spite of this belief and the risk of 'falling off the edge' of this flat earth. If this were true, Columbus showed courage and shaped the world as a result.

As a race humans have advanced in many regards, however the limiting beleifs prevail. That is, whatever is the domiantly held belief is what the majority cling to without adequate investigation of the accuracy of the belief.

These holding to domianant beliefs may provide short term feelings of security, but at what price? You would not have squatted until the 1990's when 'science' first endorsed this exercise. You would not have taken a multi-vitamin until post the year 2000, when for the first time a medical journal acknowledged that most people should consider taking a multi-vitamin. The list goes on. At what price to you? You could spend most of your life missing many valuable and beneficial activities simply because of your desire to comply with the dominant beliefs.

Which raises the question - where do the dominant beliefs come from and who controls them? Two key answers - commercial interests and information gatekeepers.

When does an exercise trend become a trend and why? For the most part when an equipment manufacturer concludes their is a market for their proposed product and moves forward.

The second player is the 'information gatekeeper'. The person or organization who upon realizing that a new habit is about to gain momentum, seek to endorse and teach the new habit (now called a trend) simply to be seen as being on the cutting edge of yet another new development.

A summary of many dominant trends over the last decade reveals a list of equipment that in my opinion was not borne out of the need for a new solution. But rather out of the realization that it could be manufactured and sold to the masses.

Most of what you do, as an end user as well as a professional in the fitness or sport industries, is a product of the influences created by equipment manufacturers and distributors, often in combination with the information gate keepers of their chose.

Do you need it? Is it the best solution for you? Is it in your best interests? These are some of the questions you have not likely asked. Rather, you have probably accepted the dominant trend and followed along.

That's your choice. I suggest you can do better. I suggest you can get better results. I suggest you deserve better. Are you ready and willing to learn how?

----------------------

New DVD released Oct 2010 -

The World if Flat!

Challenging your point of view!

In this DVD from a live seminar I dedicate approximately two hours to this and surrounding topics.

YouTube clips from that DVD:

Click here to order the DVD - http://bit.ly/9KJVmR

Enough to make your blood boyle

2010-09-22T06:18:00.000-07:00

I looked, and looked again - surely not! I couldn't believe my eyes! There on the 'net on an 'industry leading' site was three stages of a strength progam that KSI had provided a client some years prior. Being given away as a PDF download - free! How is that possible!?

For the duration of our business operations (25 years in 2011 of continual service as a company specializing in the physical preparation of the elite athlete) we have always prided ourselves on the confidentiality of our clients program. They don't get published - fullstop. There is also a little matter of protecting our proprietary information....

The program was verbatim save for a few minor details:

1. The KSI copyright that was on the document when it went to the client had been removed.
2. There was no reference to Ian King on the program.

So the publisher and readers, as there were not the client, would not have known the true origin of the program.

But what about the exercise descriptions...over 65 of them...verbatim.....except for the substitution of one word - the 'King' in the King Deadlift had been changed to 'Single-leg'. Can't figure out why? Ok, I can work that out....

Over 60 exercise descriptions and no-one figured it out...Amazing really. Considering also the web-site owner/publisher claims to have 'read everything there is to read in the field of strength and conditioning....'

If that was the case, what would be the explaination for missing all of the copied text of these 60+ uniquely worded exercises, such as:

Bulgarian squat

Some know this as a Bulgarian squat - with a difference. Face away from a normal height bench, and place your rear leg up on the bench. You can check your distance by having a relatively vertical shin throughout the movement. Place your hands on your head, and keep your chest and trunk vertical throughout.

Lower the body down by bending the knee of the lead leg until the knee of the back leg is almost on the ground.

We are going to use a speed of 515 - 5 sec lower, 1 second pause top and bottom, and 5 second lift. If you can do more than 10 reps, you can hold dumbbells in your hand. I don’t expect this to be necessary initially. Keep the knee aligned over the feet during the lower and the lift. You don’t need to do a warm up set - get straight into the work set.
--King, I., 1999, Get Buffed book

Some know this as a Bulgarian squat - with a difference. Face away from a normal height bench, and place your rear leg up on the bench. You can check your distance by having a relatively vertical shin throughout the movement. Place your hands on your head, and keep your chest and trunk vertical throughout.

Lower the body down by bending the knee of the lead leg until the knee of the back leg is almost on the ground.

We are going to use a speed of 311 - 3 sec lower, 1-second pause top and bottom, and 1 second lift. If you can do more than 10 reps, you can hold dumbbells in your hand. Keep the knee aligned over the feet during the lower and the lift. You don’t need to do a warm up set - get straight into the work set.
--from rugby programs posted on this web site

Single leg squat

...stand on 1 leg beside the squat rack or similar. Place the other leg out so that the heel stays just off the ground at all times. Bend the support knee and go down as far as you can whilst keeping your foot flat on the ground. 3 seconds down, no pause, controlled explosive up.

Initially I suspect your range will be limited but as you get better at it over time, aim to increase range as well (and maybe even more importantly) as reps. Using your bodyweight only, I expect somewhere between 5-10 reps on day one, and look to use DB’s in one hand if you exceed 15 reps. If this is the case, I have to wonder what you were doing during the earlier part of the workout?!

Use the squat rack to hold on to for balance if needed (and you probably will need to) but don’t get sucked into the temptation of using it to pull yourself up. Remember this is a leg day!
--King, I., 1999, Get Buffed book

Stand on 1 leg beside the squat rack or similar. Place the other leg out so that the heel stays just off the ground at all times. Bent the support knee and go down as far as you can whilst keeping your foot flat on the ground. 3 seconds down, no pause, controlled explosive up.

Initially I suspect your range will be limited but as you get better at it over time, aim to increase range as well (and maybe even more importantly) as reps. Using your bodyweight only, expect somewhere between 5-10 reps on day one, and look to use DB’s in one hand if you exceed 15 reps.

Use the squat rack to hold on to for balance if needed (and you probably will need to) but don’t get sucked into the temptation of using it to pull yourself up.
--from rugby programs posted on this web site

Squat

Place the bar as high as is comfortable on the neck, take a narrower than shoulder width stance, and allow only a slight external rotation of the feet. Immediately prior to commencing the descent, bend your knees slightly, suck in the lower abdomen, and squeeze your cheeks. This will ‘set’ your pelvis in a slightly posteriorly rotated position. As you lower, keep the hips in line with the spine - which means maintain this hip position. Don’t misinterpret this - you can flex forward at the hips, just don’t change the hip/spine relationship. Squat as deeply as you can without exceeding forty-five degree trunk flexion relative to vertical. Keep your knees equal distance apart during the lift. Immediately prior to the ascent, focus on squeezing the cheeks tight and hold them tight during the concentric phase. The aim here is to prevent anterior rotation of the pelvis during the initial phase of the ascent....
--King, I., 1999, Get Buffed book

Place the bar as high on your neck as comfortable. Grip the bar with your hands as close to the shoulders as comfortable, and ensure that your elbows are pointing directly downwards to the ground. Use a foot stance that is shoulder width, and have your feet either straight or slightly externally rotated. Immediately prior to commencing the descent, bend your knees slightly, suck in the lower abdomen, and squeeze your cheeks. This will ‘set’ your pelvis in a slightly posteriorly rotated position. As you lower, keep the hips in line with the spine - which means maintain this hip position. Don’t misinterpret this - you can flex forward at the hips, just don’t change the hip/spine relationship. Squat as deeply as you can without exceeding forty-five degree trunk flexion relative to vertical. Keep your knees equal distance apart during the lift. Immediately prior to the ascent, focus on squeezing the cheeks tight and hold them tight during the concentric phase. The aim here is to prevent anterior rotation of the pelvis during the initial phase of the ascent. The concentric phase should mirror the eccentric phase exactly.
--from rugby programs posted on this web site

Deadlift

• Stand in front of the bar, feet under the bar, shins a few inches away from bar.
• Take hand grip just outside shoulder width, palms down.
• Bend the knees and take position : shoulders vertically over bar, shins on bar, arms straight, hips in line with spine, back flat, head in line with spine, looking a few meters head or straight, shoulder blades retracted.
• Prior to commencement of lift contract abdominal and gluteals, extending legs until no slack in arms.
• Use leg and hip extension to take the bar from ground to where bar is just over knees.
• The trunk angle and scapula retraction is not to change during this ‘first pull’.
• From the above knee position, stand up (the second pull).
• Apply more acceleration in the second pull than the first.
• Bar to be in contact with body throughout the whole lift.
• Arms stay straight throughout the lift.
--King., I., 2000, How to Teach

Deadlift : Stand in front of the bar, feet under the bar, shins a few inches away from the bar. Take a grip just outside shoulder width, palms down. Bend the knees and take position : shoulders vertically over bar, shins on bar, arms straight, hips in line with spine, back flat, head in line with spine, shoulder blades retracted.

Prior to commencement of lift contract abdominal and gluteals, extending legs until no slack in arms. Use leg and hip extension to take the bar from ground to where bar is just over knees. The trunk angle and scapula retraction is not to change during this first pull. From eh above knee position stand up ( second pull). Apply more acceleration in the second pull than in the first. Bar to be in contact with body throughout the whole lift. Arms stay straight throughout the lift.
--from rugby programs posted on this web site

King Deadlift

This is a single leg bent knee deadlift - one of my very own creations! Stand on one leg (starting with the weak side) and bend the other leg up until the lower leg is parallel to the ground. Hands on hips or by side. The aim is to bend the knee of the supporting leg until the knee of the non-supporting leg is brushing the ground. In reality, you may have to settle for a shorter range (you’ll understand why I say this as soon as you do this workout). If this is the case - and I expect it will be - look to increase the range from workout to workout.

You are allowed to flex (bend) forward at the waist as much as you want, and doing so will increase the gluteal involvement. Keep the working knee aligned neutrally throughout the movement. Take 3 seconds to lower, 1 second pause each end and 2 seconds to lift. No warm up set needed. When you can do more than 15-20 reps FULL RANGE look to hold DB’s in the hands - ...
--King, I., 1999, Get Buffed book

This is a single leg bent knee deadlift. Stand on one leg (starting with the weak side) and bend the other leg up until the lower leg is parallel to the ground. Hands on hips or by side. The aim is to bend the knee of the supporting leg until the knee of the non-supporting leg is brushing the ground. In reality, you may have to settle for a shorter range (you’ll understand why I say this as soon as you do this workout). If this is the case - and I expect it will be - look to increase the range from workout to workout.

You are allowed to flex (bend) forward at the waist as much as you want, and doing so will increase the gluteal involvement. Keep the working knee aligned neutrally throughout the movement. No warm up set needed. When you can do more than 15-20 reps FULL RANGE look to hold DB’s in the hands.
--from rugby programs posted on this web site

Thin tummy variations:

Description - Lay on your back, knee bent, feet flat, place both hand under your belt line, with your fingers heading down into the pubic area and the thumbs placed higher up on the rectus abdominus (upper abdominal region); throughout all the following levels of difficulty, use the fingers to provide feedback that the ‘lower abdominals’ (obliques and transverse abdominus) are contracted, pulling the lower tummy thinner and creating a high level of tension under the skin; and that the upper abdominal region is hollowed, and non-contracted; and that this relationship is held. Should it at any time change or you feel that it is going to change e.g. upper tummy bulge, pelvis anteriorly rotate, terminate the range or the set. I focus more on how the muscles are ‘set’ than on the pressure of lumbar to ground or position of pelvis, although both are symptomatic of a good ‘set’ position.

Level 1 - Isometric holds (looking for above ‘set’ position) in the lying, knee bent positions.

Level 2 - As above., but lift one leg up, lower it, reset, other leg etc.

Level 3 - As above., but when you lift one leg up, extend it out as far as control (i.e. set position) allows.

Level 4 - As above., but start with both knees up, bent to 90 degrees knees and hips, cycling one leg out towards a parallel to ground position at a time as far as ‘set’ position control allows.

Level 5 - As above., but extending both legs out together.
--King., I., 2000, How to Teach

Description – lay on your back, knees bent, feet flat, place both hands under your belt line with your fingers heading down into the pubic area and the thumbs placed higher up on the upper abdominal region; throughout all the following levels of difficulty, use the fingers to provide feedback that the lower abdominals are contracted, pulling the lower tummy thinner and creating a high level of tension under the skin; and that the upper abdominal region is hollowed, and non-contracted; and that his relationship is held. Should it at any time change or you feel that it is going to change (e.g. upper tummy bulge, pelvis anteriorly rotate, terminate the range or the set. Focus more on how the muscles are ‘set’ than on the pressure of lumbar to ground or position of pelvis, although both are symptomatic of a good ‘set’ position.

Level One – isometric holds – looking for a good set position

Level Two – as Labove, but lift one leg up, lower it, rest, repeat opposite leg

Level Three – as above, but when you lift one leg up, extend it out as far as control (i.e. set position) allows

Level Four – as above, but start with both knees up, bent to 90 degrees knees and hips, cycling one leg out towards a parallel to ground position at a time as far as the ‘set’ position will allow

Level Five – as above, but extending both legs out together.
--from rugby programs posted on this web site

Toes to sky variations

Description - Lay on your back, arms out on the ground at 90 degrees to the trunk, have your legs together, 90 degrees hip flexion, so that legs are vertical.

Level 1 - Lift the pelvis as far off the ground whilst maintaining totally vertical leg position (initially this may not be very far at all, at even at best the movement is limited in its range) and hold for 5-10 seconds.

Level 2 - As above., but bend one knee to 90 degrees at knee; alternate each rep which leg is bent, which is straight.

Level 3 - As above., but bent both knees so that the knees are bent to 90 degrees.
--King., I., 2000, How to Teach

Description – lay on your back, arms out on the ground at 90 degrees to the trunk, have your legs together, 90 degrees hip flexion so that legs are vertical.

Level One – lift the pelvis as far off the ground whilst maintaining totally vertical leg position (initially this may not be very far at all, at even at best the movement is limited in its range) and hold for 5-10 seconds.

Level Two – as above, but bend one knee to 90 degrees at knee, alternate each rep which leg is bent, which is straight

Level Three – as above, but bend both knees so that the knees are bent to 90 degrees
--from rugby programs posted on this web site

These are samples of the 60+ exercise descriptions. I'm not talking about a three line generic descrition about how to do a DB press. These have a unique signature over many of them - a number of the exercises were original innovations, some were original exercise names, some were unique in their execution.

Difficult to see how a 'well-read' person could not have seen the finger print of the original source. What would be a motive if they had been recognzied and ignored? On the flip side, a poorly read person may have not picked up on the origin.

Either way, seeing this kind of behaviour, it's enought to make your blood boyle. Then I realized that for some to have empathy, they would probably need to have had an original ideas worth protecting....

Performance coach. Really?

2010-09-16T02:19:00.000-07:00

The following is an extract from Ian King's latest book 'Barbells & Bullshit' - due to be released later this month.

I have noted a trend over the last decade or so for physical preparation coaches involved with athletes and sporting teams to refer to themselves as ‘performance’ coaches or directors. In fact, this title appears to be the pinnacle of employment positions within sporting teams. I don’t support this and here’s why.

In my thirty year involvement in the industry to date I have watched the slow acceptance of physical preparation coaches by other coaches in sport. From my perspective the formal role of the physical preparation coach in western sport began in the 1970’s at the earliest. My point is the industry is relatively young.

As such, it’s been pretty easy for the more established coaching roles to manipulate physical preparation coaches. The most common techniques I have seen include:

1. The athletes are getting injured because of what the physical preparation coach is doing

2. The athletes are performing worse because of what the physical preparation coach is doing

To achieve point 2, you will often hear coaches blame the team’s ‘fitness’ for poor performance. This technique is so entrenched that you will commonly hear lay people make the same statement – ‘They are not fit enough’.

Teams and athletes don’t lose simply because of their physical preparation. Physical preparation is at most 25% or one of four components of athletic success. When you add culture, equipment, and funding you now have ten components. Physical is one-tenths or 10% of this model. It’s a very long bow to suggest that controlling the physical preparation dictates the performance.

All the use of the term ‘performance coach’ does is play into the hands of those who seek to use the ‘new kid on the block’ (physical preparation) as the fall guy should one be needed in the event of individual or team failure. Controlling one-tenth of the total athlete preparation gives physical preparation coaches no more rights to claim they are ‘performance coaches’ than any of those in the coaching and support team who control / influence the other nine components in the 10-part model.

It reinforces the myth that if an individual or team fail to win, it is because they lack appropriate physical preparation.

And no, the flip side is rarely promoted – that when they win it is because of their physical preparation. The same people in the coaching team who seek to shift the blame to the physical preparation coaches in the event of a loss will step up in the event of a win to take credit. Now they seek to be titled ‘great coaches’.

This pattern of blame / credit is only outperformed in inaccuracy by the physical preparation coach who controls only one of the four sub-components of physical preparation (e.g. strength training only) – and seeks to take credit for the wins. They control 25% of 10%, or an estimated 2.5% of the generalized preparation.

The only situation I believe a physical preparation coach can even consider calling themselves a ‘performance coach’ is when they control over 50% of the total athlete preparation. Which means they would have to control technical, tactical, physical and psychological preparation (totaling 40%) – and more – to control over 50% if the total program.

Rarely achieved. I would not need more than one hand to count the number of physical preparation coaches I have encountered in three decades in this industry who meet this criteria.

This also raises the question of how many years back in each athlete’s career they had this control. Take the athlete’s age minus say 4 years of age, and then divide by 2 – have they been in control for more than half this number? If not it means they haven’t controlled the majority of the training process that led to this point.

Know anyone who would meet these criteria?

Most physical preparation are in so much fear of losing their job they don’t have any intention of seeking to alter or control departments outside of their own. In fact, this scarcity mentality - where is my next job coming from? What will I do if I lose this job?- usually means they allow others in the administration, coaching and support team to interfere with the physical preparation program to the extent that I doubt they could be said to even control that.

Surely they can perform better than this!

2010-08-31T21:55:00.000-07:00

Many years ago I met a gentleman at a NSCA trade show who owned a major equipment distribution company in the industry, and who had a booth at the trade show. He seemed a genuine person. So recently when I learnt his company was distributing my material – just without my name on it and without any revenues coming to me – I thought - surely they can perform better than this!

After all, isn't that what a reasonable person would do? Surely they would be reasonable.

I said to my IP attorney ‘This deserves a personal approach. I am sure polite, personal and respectful communication can have these sales to cease and desist’.

So I emailed this gentleman. His response was that he didn’t remember me and that he didn’t know what I was talking about. You could expect that – after all he is a busy man. I understand that. So he referred me to one of his employees.

The employee was polite in his communication. He did remind me that they were after all just the distributors. Perhaps that was to infer they had no moral and or legal obligations? And the end result was – nothing.

And I said to myself – surely they can perform better than this!

So are we talking about difficult to see copyright breaches? Or just a few lines in breach?

Here are just a few of the offending sections. And before we go on, I want to stress – I simply included one example from a variety of different topics – in other words, just a sampling. It is unlikely you would have the attention span to review all the offending sections…..

FROM HOW TO WRITE STRENGTH TRAINING PROGRAMS (King, I., 1998)

However if this sequence shows throughout say a 12 week cycle or beyond, you risk developing muscle imbalances. To avoid this, I alternate or reverse the priorities. See this in Table 4. The key here is starting in a non-specific priority and slowly shifting towards specificity in order of priority.
--King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs (book), Exercise Selection, p. 25

If you continue to follow the exact same movement pattern split for long periods of time, you will very likely develop muscle imbalances and risk injury. To avoid this, alternate (i.e. do the exact opposite movement pattern) or reverse the priorities (i.e. the last movement pattern on the last day becomes the first movement pattern on the first day in the next phase.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 180-181; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 133

…all things being equal, and independent of any specificity demands, the selection of exercises should show balance throughout the body.
--King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs (book), Exercise Selection, p. 41

All things being equal, and independent of any specificity demands, the selection of exercises should show balance throughout the body…
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 66; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 107

Linear periodization : involves a linear progression in lowering reps and increasing load (representing the inverse relationship between volume and intensity).

… The benefits of this method include that it allows the trainee to develop load selection as a progression of reduced reps.

…The disadvantages includes that the early stages may cause a detraining in neural adaptation, and the later stages may cause a detraining in metabolic adaptations.
-- King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs (book), p. 81

Linear Periodization: involves a linear progression in lowering reps and increasing load (representing the inverse relationship between volume and intensity).

…Advantages: allows the trainee to increase loading regularly and develop load selection as a progression of reduced reps, simply and effectively.

Disadvantages: may cause a detraining effect in neural adaptation in the early stages, and a detraining effect in metabolic adaptation in the later stages.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 172; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 116

4. Priority: This is what I suggest to be the most important and powerful guide in sequencing exercise - do first whatever is the priority of that phase - even if it does ‘break all the rules’.
-- King, I., 1998, How to Write, p. 51

#8: Priority First
As a general rule – the most important qualities/movements to be trained should be trained in the freshest state. Allocate activities in a priority basis to different training days (e.g. number one and two priority need to be trained first on separate days ideally), regardless if this breaks any rules or ‘split’ that you have previously used.
--Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 13

I firmly believe that strength training program design has been historically influenced by anabolic steroids. If you accept the influence that bodybuilding, weightlifting and powerlifting have had on program design, and you understand the role drugs play in these sports, you gain a fuller appreciation of this influence.
-- King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs (book), p. 141

…the anabolic steroid issue …It would be short-sighted of me to ignore the influence of these drugs on the sport of bodybuilding. If you understand the influence of bodybuilding on general fitness, and you understand the influence of drugs on competitive bodybuilding, hopefully you can see what I am getting at.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 22; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 28

35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program
9. Plan alternating muscle group allocation in subsequent phases to receive varied benefits.
--King, I., How to Write Strength Training Programs, p. 23

Eighteen Steps to Programming Success
18. Plan movement pattern allocation in subsequent phases to achieve varied emphasis and benefits.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible, p. 180

My next and final step is to divide all the above into unilateral and bilateral, and single and double/multi-joint exercises
--King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs, p. 40

Exercises can be progressed as follows:
* Single joint to multiple joint
* Unilateral to bi-lateral.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible, p. 64; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 106

Time magnifies errors in training.
--King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs (book), p. 75

It’s important to recognize that time will magnify any and all errors in training.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible, p. 181

Variation may also give unexpected adaptations from repetitions. A trainee pursuing hypertrophy, after spending considerable time training in classic hypertrophy brackets (e.g. 8-12) may experience further significant hypertrophy when changing to a higher or lower rep bracket. Whilst this appears to contradict the above table, it shows that variety alone can accelerate gains. Note this applies in both strength (neural) and size (metabolic) training. The message is clear - irrespective of the specific goal, training in too narrow a rep bracket may not be as effective as alternating or mixing with different rep brackets. The key is not which reps to use, rather how much time to spend in each different rep bracket.
-- King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs, Repetitions, p. 101

An interesting observation is as regards variety in rep selection. While periodization of training has been well documented, if your goal is just hypertrophy – would staying in the hypertrophy rep range be the best choice? Actually – no, a trainee seems to experience the best gains when using both higher and lower reps than the “goal” rep bracket. Basically the lower reps allow heavier weight to be used, so the athlete returns stronger when he or she returns to their original rep bracket. If we go higher – the athlete experiences a longer time under tension and therefore has more endurance when he or she returns to the original rep bracket. The underlying message is obvious – variety alone can accelerate your process and regardless of your goal, the main premise to understand is that it is not merely which rep brackets to use, but also how long to stay within each rep bracket.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 50; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 90

Number of Reps: Again whilst number of reps is a critical issue, it is limited as a measure of volume unless the majority of exercises involve similar metabolic cost
-- King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs, Volume, p. 146

I think this [number of reps] is a flawed model as it makes the assumption that all reps are created equal and performed at the same speed.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 49; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 90

A repetition in strength training is one full cycle of the contraction modes involved.
-- King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs, Volume, p. 99

A repetition….can be thought of as one full cycle of the contraction modes involved.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 48; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 89

The influence of training age on number of sets: a beginner is not likely to need any more than one to two sets per exercise to gain a training effect. It could be argued that the more advanced a trainee becomes, the more sets required. I believe this is true up to a point. There is a point in time where further increases in volume (no. of sets) will not benefit, and the search for further training effects should be limited to increases in intensity.
-- King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs, Volume, p. 112

Training Age: a beginner to strength training is unlikely to need exposure to more than 1-2 sets of a given exercise….. And clearly the more advanced trainee needs greater volume, however this is only true up to a point. There is definitely a point of diminishing returns when it comes to total sets, and at this point further progress can only be made by increases in intensity.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 52; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 92-93

FROM GET BUFFED! (King, I., 1999)

Another less common criticism (one I used to get more so in the early 1990s) is that it is too complex and the movements should be ‘just done’. Yes, the system does need to be understood by the program writer (I suspect this to be the greatest challenge to these critics); and yes, it does need to be explained to the trainee. No, it doesn’t have to be executed with perfection - it is just a guideline (so don’t get out your metronome!)…
--King, I., Get Buffed (book), 1999, p. 65

It may appear over-complicated.…A common argument is ‘if I focus on maintaining a 321 speed then I can’t focus on just working hard’.…So the tempo system DOES need to be understood by the coaches and the trainee. Does it need to be executed with a metronome for absolute accuracy? No – it is just a useful guideline.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible, p. 57

The first set
The primary effect of the first work set is shock. The body, subject to the laws of homeostasis and innate protective mechanisms, rarely functions optimally during the first work set.
--King, I., Get Buffed (book), 1999, p. 53-55

…the first set of a workout tends to be a ‘shock’ to the body. The body rarely functions well during the first work set of an exercise.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 54; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 94

The second set
The second work set benefits from the first work set - in what can be described as ‘neural arousal’, or greater neuro-muscular innervation.
--King, I., Get Buffed (book), 1999, p. 53-55

The second set however tends to benefit from the first set in terms of neural innvervation – the body is ‘awake’ now.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Design Bible, p. 54; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 94

The third and subsequent work sets
In a nut-shell, if you are lifting the same load for say three sets of ten, it is unlikely it was your maximum in set one.
--King, I., Get Buffed (book), 1999, p. 53-55

…In a nutshell if you are still able to lift the same load for three sets, it is likely that you have selected loads based on the facts you are doing three sets – i.e. you didn’t use your maximum load.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 54; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 94

In my opinion, it is difficult to do more than two sets at the same reps and load if the effort is maximal.
--King, I., Get Buffed (book), 1999, p. 53-55

In general, I rarely use more than two sets of the same exercise at the same load.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 54; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 94 (NB. In this rare situation, credit was given, but does provide right to copy text verbatim without appropriate referencing methods)

Australian biomechanist Greg Wilson did some great research in the 1990s in quantifying the role of the SSC. He found that if you do a conventional bench press with an eccentric or lowering phase that was about a second, it took a full four second pause in between the eccentric and concentric to completely eliminate the stretch shortening cycle, i.e. if you lower the bar and you rest it on top of your chest for a period of less than four seconds, you're still getting an added boost from all the elastic energy.
--King, I., 1999, Get Buffed!, Chapter 12 – What speed of movement should I use?, p. 63

Research by Greg Wilson in 1991 showed that it took 4 seconds to dissipate the stretch shortening cycle in the bench press. In other words – you were still using momentum if the pause was any less than 4 seconds. All this tells us is that for pure muscle work – pausing makes it harder. For strength and speed work, we should exploit the stretch shortening cycle and have no pause.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 57; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 98

For those concerned about power (rate of force development), I don’t recommend using anything less than a fast or attempted-to-be-fast concentric contraction for some 80-90% of total training time.
--King, I., Get Buffed (book), 1999, p. 65

For anyone concerned with power or speed, anything less than an explosive (or an attempt to be explosive) is not recommended for the bulk of your training….
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible, p. 59

Single leg squat:
stand on 1 leg beside the squat rack or similar. Place the other leg out so that the heel stays just off the ground at all times. Bend the support knee and go down as far as you can whilst keeping your foot flat on the ground. 3 seconds down, no pause, controlled explosive up. Initially I suspect your range will be limited but as you get better at it over time, aim to increase range as well (and maybe even more importantly) as reps. Using your bodyweight only, I expect somewhere between 5-10 reps on day one, and look to use DB’s in one hand if you exceed 15 reps. If this is the case, I have to wonder what you were doing during the earlier part of the workout?! Use the squat rack to hold on to for balance if needed (and you probably will need to) but don’t get sucked into the temptation of using it to pull yourself up…
--King, I., Get Buffed (book), 1999, p. 203-204.

One leg squat:
Stand on 1 leg beside the squat rack or similar. Place the other leg out so that the heel stays just off the ground at all times. Bent the support knee and go down as far as you can whilst keeping your foot flat on the ground. 3 seconds down, no pause, controlled explosive up. Initially I suspect your range will be limited but as you get better at it over time, aim to increase range as well (and maybe even more importantly) as reps. Using your bodyweight only, expect somewhere between 5-10 reps on day one, and look to use DB’s in one hand if you exceed 15 reps. Use the squat rack to hold on to for balance if needed (and you probably will need to) but don’t get sucked into the temptation of using it to pull yourself up.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible, p. 83

But if you accept that sport science and sport historians have much in common, you wouldn’t be waiting for full confirmation.
-- King, I., 1999, Get Buffed! (book), Ch 22 – Injury prevention, p. 109

Sports scientists have become sports training historians as the researchers tend to study what coaches are doing anyway.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 57; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 40

There is an incredible trend in strength training to do three sets of every exercises. More specifically, three (or more) sets at the same weight on the same exercise -most commonly, 3 sets of 10! Why is this? I’ve asked myself that question many times, and the only answer I come up with is the power of tradition.

You see, these magic numbers were ‘validated’ way back in the late ‘40’s and early ‘50’s by an American army surgeon by the name of De Lorme when he presented research evidence supporting the use of three sets of ten reps. All credit to the contribution De Lorme made to the science of training, but that was fifty years ago. Yet what do you see almost every time you look at a training program? 3 x 10 (or 15 or 12 or 8, or 6 etc.) ! What do you see every time you browse (I say browse, because invariably there’s nothing that warrants reading) through a mainstream bodybuilding magazine? 3 x 10!
-- King, I., 1999, Get Buffed, p. 52

Despite the absolute limitless combinations of sets and reps that can be performed – three sets of ten remains the single most common set and rep scheme. In the late 1940’s Thomas DeLorme and his Boston team of orthopaedic surgeons were experiencing difficulties rehabilitating World War II Veterans, so they tried a radically new medical approach: Strength training.

Known as the DeLorme-Watkins protocol, the program consisted of one ste of ten reps at 50% of your ten rep max, one set at 75% and one set at 100%. That was it. That was where the industry standard came from. And here we are over sixty years later and this is still the primary set-rep scheme that most trainers are using. In sixty years have we not learned anything.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 36; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 39

Most train hard and long, and with high frequency. Unless one is supported by a incredibly higher recovery system (natural or chemically enhanced), this approach will result in over-training and non-achievement of goals.

… I have very firm beliefs on this topic. Volume and intensity are inversely related. When one is up, the other is forced down. You cannot do a high volume workout (i.e. a high number of sets) and have as high an intensity as you would have with a lower number of sets. Many kid themselves on this, but you cannot avoid reality.
--King, I., 1999, Get Buffed!, p. 33

…but you cannot train hard and long. I agree with this statement. Volume and intensity are inversely related. When one is up, the other is down. Most trainers, quite honestly, seem unaware of this simple concept, or are perhaps in denial as regards this, but it is an irrefutable fact.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 51; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 92

FROM THE FOUNDATIONS OF PHSYICAL PREPARATION (King, I., 1999/2000)

The principle of recovery recognizes that the training effect is not simply a result of training alone, but occurs from a combination of training and the subsequent recovery from training.
--King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation, Ch 2 – Principles of Training, p. 34.

The principle of recovery and regeneration recognizes that training alone does won’t produce any results. You don’t actually improve as a result of training – you improve as a result of recovering FROM training.
--Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p.43

The principle of specificity suggests that your adaptation to training will be very specific to the nature of the training you are doing. For example if you are doing a number of long, slow jogs per week, your physical capacity to do that specific activity may be enhanced. An acronym that appears to have lost popularity but is quite illustrative of this point is the SAID Principle - specific adaptations to imposed demands.
--King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation, Ch 2 – Principles of Training, p. 35

Specificity
Also known as the SAID principle, which is an acronym for ‘specific adaptation to imposed demand’. This principles suggests that the body adapts to the specific demands placed on it. For example, long slow running will enhance your ability to run long and slow, but is unlikely to enhance your ability to bench press maximal weight. Training programs need to reflect the specific goal that we are trying to achieve.
--Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p.43

Opposite and equal effect
The concept is based on the belief that to every action (in training) there is a positive and a negative outcome, and that often the negative outcome is equal or as powerful as the positive outcome.

… Lets use swimming for example. Most swimming strokes involve repetitive internal rotation of the upper arm. Consequently the internal rotators of the arm/shoulder become shorter and tighter than the external rotators….

The strong message in the equal and opposite effect concept is that every single training method will have a negative effect - and must be countered. This is why ultimately it is not a question of which is the best training method - rather a matter of using a wide range of methods…
--King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation, Ch 2 – Principles of Training, p. 30-31

Equal and Opposite Effect
…This means that in training, there is both a positive and negative outcome to any method used, and that the negative outcome is as equal as the positive one.

…..For example a bench press is a fantastic upper body strength exercise – but when overused it can cause the upper pecs, shoulder and the internal rotators of the arm/shoulder to become shorter and tighter than the external rotators…

…The underlying message of this principle is that every single training method that create a positive change, carries with it an equal negative effect, which must be addressed. As a result, you can see that there cannot be any perfect program – as every program by the nature of this principle will have a negative outcome also.
--Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p.43 (NB. In this rare situation, credit was given, but does provide right to copy text verbatim without appropriate referencing methods)

FROM HOW TO TEACH STRENGTH TRAINING EXERCISES (King, I., 2000)

Slow side raises on Ground:
Lay on your back, knee bent to about 90 degrees, and knees together. Roll the knees over together so that they are on the ground, with the shoulders and upper back still parallel to the ground. Now flex the trunk, basically up towards the roof or sky. I like to have the fingers lightly touching the front of the head, elbow out at 45 degrees from the body, and arm/elbow angle not changing during the lift. The placement of the hands will alter the level of difficulty. The further the hands are above the head, the harder the movement.
-- King, I., 2000, How to Teach Strength Training Programs, p. 62

Side raises on Ground:
Lie on your back, knees bent to about 90 degrees and knees together. Roll the knees over together so that they are on the ground with the shoulders and upper back still parallel. Now flex the trunk, basically up towards the roof or sky. I like to have the fingers lightly touching the front of the head, elbow out at 45 degrees from the body, and arm/elbow angle not changing during the lift. The placement of the hands will alter the level of difficulty. The further the hands are above the head, the harder the movement.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 161; Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible, p. 161

DB Bench Press :
• lay on your back (supine) on a bench
• dumbbells in each hand
• have the dumbbells facing palm down towards the feet
• now push the dumbbells straight up until the arms are fully extended
• have the dumbbells nearly touching in this top position
• lower down fully to the starting position
-- King, I., 2000, How to Teach Strength Training Programs, p. 144

Incline DB Press:
Lie on your back on an Incline bench, with a DB in each hand, palms facing forward towards the feet. Push the dumbbells straight up until the arms are fully extended – have the DB’s nearly touching in this top position. Lower down fully to the start position.
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible, p. 127

FROM ASK THE MASTER (King., I., 2003)

Designing a prioritization program is a real art that few have mastered.…in essence all programs have an imbalance or a prioritization. This come from the sequence of exercises within the workout and week, the allocation of volume, the relative use of intensity, the comparative selection of exercise categories and so on.
--King, I., Ask the Master (book), 2003, Program Design – Strength Training, p. 143

Programs can be prioritized by volume of movement (number of sets and reps), sequence of movement (in the workout, in the week and in the program), and loading of movement (amount of weight involved).
--Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 66; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 107

FROM THE WAY OF THE PHYSICAL PREPARATION COACH (King, I., 2005)

Less is more.
This training principle extends from the above, and reinforces that in many cases, you will get a better training effect from doing a smaller amount of training. That is, that you will get more results when you do less training.
-- King, I., 2005, The Way of the Physical Preparation Coach, Ch 2 – Training Theory, p. 5

#5: Less is more
Training hard does not necessarily equal more return. Performing more challenging exercises does not mean faster results….Select the LEAST challenging variation for the client – that’s where the best return on investment is going to be….Keep it simple. Less is more.”
--Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, 2nd Ed., p. 12

CONCLUSION

I can only conclude that the moral compass of this company defines the sale of publications containing extensive copyright breaches as acceptable.

How does this serve the greater good of the industry? I can understand it helps their bottom line. Is this a case of profit before integrity?

Surely they can perform better than this?

There is no such thing as a functional exercise

2010-08-24T23:53:00.000-07:00

There is no such thing as a functional exercise or training program.

It’s time to put some perspective on the use of the word ‘functional’, which has become somewhat of ‘catch-cry’ since the start of the 21st century. I believe it has probably gone too far now, and too many reputations on based on it, for the use of the term ‘functional’ to regain perspective. Nevertheless, here is my belief:

There is no such thing as a functional exercise. Nor is there such as thing as a functional training method.

To me, function in an outcome. The ability to perform specific function/s. The adjective interpretation.

To claim an exercise or training method is ‘functional’ is to speak from the ‘prescriptive’ perspective rather than the ‘process’ perspective. It is based on an assumption that every person using the exercise or training method has the same training goal AND responds in a predictable way.

Functional as it is popularly used is nothing more than an extension of the over-application of the term and concept ‘specificity’ – which proceeded ‘functional’ in terms of being the dominant trend term and concept – and also assumes an outcome. To claim an exercise or training method is ‘specific’ relies on an assumption that you know how any given person will respond to the exercise or training method, and that you know in advance that this adaptation will enhance their ability to perform a specific task or sport.

It would appear that any exercise that is uni-lateral, bodyweight only, and standing or sitting on an ‘unstable’ surface is instantly titled ‘functional’ – however if applied to say an elite competitive Olympic weight lifter has as much guaranteed ‘functionalism’ as power clean has to an arm wrestler.

Invariably the assumption is made that if we give a person an apparently specific movement for their training goal (e.g. sport) then the exercise is 'functional'. Let me list some of the flaws:

1. The initial aim of all non-specific (off-field) training should be to counter the damage done by the sport, not rehearse it!

2. For me, the next goal of strength training is to provide a stimulus not found when playing the sport.

3. There is an assumption that the 'apparently specific' movement will actually transfer to improved 'function'. This is a 'prescriptive' approach to training, not a process approach. I support the latter.

4. The exercise is an exercise. It is not functional nor dysfuntional. The outcome or training effect MAY be an increase in function.

5. Does this mean that exercises not considered 'specific' or 'functional' are thereby now dysfunctional?

This mis-use of the term ‘functional’ provides newcomers and students in the industry with a misguided starting point. Unless we delight in misleading others, a serious review of the use if this term is warranted.

The use of the term or concept ‘functional’ has even reached the stage of being used to identify schools of thought or belief – in the same way some refer to there being a ‘one set to failure group’, apparently there is now a ‘functional training group’.

Exercise equipment has suffered to same fate in that during the rise of ‘functional training’ many devices were labelled as bad or causing injuries. Machines are innate. If they are associated with ‘bad’ or ‘injury’ it is a function or outcome of their use, not the machine itself. They are nothing more than an innate object.

There is a time and place for everything. The exercise or training method can be used with an intent to create functional strength (strength that is optimally used by an individual in pursuit of their specific goal), however an exercise or training method is not in itself ‘functional’, nor is it by that definition ‘non-functional’.

To use the term ‘functional’ to label an exercise, training method, program, training device or training philosophy is inappropriate, inaccurate and misleading.

An exercise or training method is not 'functional'. The outcome or training effect MAY be.

NB. Listen to the interview: http://bit.ly/96H45n

What is the future of an industry that condones this type of behavior?

2010-08-18T17:33:00.000-07:00

In 1998 and 2000 I published the How to Write and How to Teach books. I then took some of the How to Write content and made it more user-friendly for the end user in Get Buffed! 1999.

Most appreciated the contribution I made through these writings. They were based on my experiences and conclusions from being in the industry for the prior 2 decades, training athletes at the elite level in over 20 different sports in over 10 different countries; and my personal training experiences from the prior 4 decades, inlcuding competing in a variety of sports.

You can imagine the shock when I found extensive portions of my original works published in a variety of publications by the same author.

It's been a learning experience as to what certain individuals are prepared to do to gain short term personal advancement. I had never expected to see this type of behavior in the physical preparation industry. I understand there are many and varied moral values in the world and that the prisons around the world are full of people who make decisions that led to their incarceration. Perhaps it was naivety, perhaps a believe and trust in the goodness within people, but for some reason I just didn't expect to witness such extensive criminal behavior in relation to intellectual property in our industry.

The learning hasn't stopped there either. There has been many lessons about what so called 'professionals' who seek to be 'industry leaders' are willing to do actively or by omission to support this behavior. Again, perhaps I was naive, in thinking that those who seek to be role models would not support these criminal acts.

I understand the readership and the followers of those who choose to flaunt copyright law may have varied value systems - until or unless it was their car being stolen or their home being broken into and items stolen. I suggest that they may at that time get a sudden case of morality and claim at least temporarily it's not right that their possessions be stolen.

Another lesson has been about how organizations - both profit and non-profit - react to these revelations. Again, perhaps naively, I assumed that any organization seeking to position themselves as pillars of the physical preparation industry would distance themselves immediately from this criminal behavior. And certainly any organization seeking to be industry regulators would enact their clearly worded Ethics guidelines and negatively reinforce this behavior.

However the values highlighted by 'Gordon Gecko' in the 1987 movie 'Wall Street' and by former US President Bill Clinton in 1998 during 'Lewinskygate' appear to be inherent in US domestic physical preparation. Values such as: If it's oral it's not immoral (I did not have sexual relations with that women). It's okay to lie if 'no-one gets hurt'. Its only wrong if you get caught. Or, according to one industry regulating organization - its only an ethics violation if a person is convicted.

Which leaves me asking some big questions - What is the future of an industry that condones this type of behavior? Who is being served by the endorsement of this deceit? How does this serve the greatest good of those who have invested unknowingly in this kind of behavior (in part because of those endorse the individuals/ and who knew better, looked the other way), and who made their investment in the hope that they will be led to a better place personally, financially and professionally? Is the global social and economic environment one that will support this supposedly-left-in-the-1980s mentality that greed is good and there are no moral limits in commercial enterprise?

This is just one example....The Bullshitter's Program Design Bible 1st Ed: http://bit.ly/9A1OFt

“It's like lip-synching to someone else's voice and accepting the applause and rewards for yourself”

--Dummer, G. M., & Douglas, M. M. (September, 2008). Plagiarism. Paper presented at Responsible Conduct of Research Workshop, Michigan State University Graduate School, East Lansing, MI.

Players turned coaches have a short memory

2010-06-27T02:57:00.000-07:00

After having watched a player I formerly trained in a team sport for many years become a coach and appear to err in the same over-training ways he would have complained about as a player under my guidance, I formed a hypothesis that many players who were trained in an optimal environment suffer short term memory loss upon making the transition to coach.

Specifically, they revert to training volumes that would have raised their shackles as a player.

I am now seeing another case of this. As a player, this coach was quoted a saying the high volume training being imposed on them was causing high incidence of injuries and depressed team performances.

Now, in his second year of coach of the same team in an Australian national league competition, the coaches season has been described as.....highest incidence of injury in the league, and a rapid fall from top of the latter to bottom half.

Sounds familiar?

Same influence in the physical preparation in both scenarios. Another case of a former player with selective memory loss now that they are a coach?

Corporate integrity and a changing US?

2010-06-18T21:28:00.000-07:00

The recent furore over the petroleum company BP oil spill impact on the US natural environment, lifes lost, and economic damage, is dominating news in the US.

And so it should.

But it raises a few questions.

Firstly, based on my reading 'Confessions of Economic Hitman' (book), energy companies (including US ones) have been devasting other countries cultures, natural habitats, lives and livelihoods for at least decades now. Is the current anger in the US because it affects directly the US? Or are Americans ready to get angry about any company / country that causes loss of live, damage to the environment, and descruction of a way of life as it occurs in any country? If the latter is correct, I would take great comfort.

Secondly, for the first time I have witnessed it, the US people appear angry about a company (BP) that may have put profit before safety and the environment. This is great. However from a distance it appears to me that the corporate culture of the US has been this for some time, in fact some may suggest they set the standard of this globally. Does this mean we are seeing a signficicant change in the value system of the people? That distain for profit before people and the environment, once a vision held only by fringe 'greenies' and other 'woodstock leftovers', is becoming mainstream in America? If it is, that's exciting.

Thirdly, is this expectation that integrity should be maintained before profit and greed, going to filter into all industries? At the moment, I am seeing US companies continuing to sell books that they have been advised directly and indirectly contain serious copyright breach issues. Or will the inital expectation for corporate integrity be limited to companies affecting our natural environment only?

Time will tell. Promising signs either way. This could be interpreted as an early indicator that the 2012 predictions/prophecy as they relate to a new era of integrity could be coming.

Keep supporting Mickaela's plan to be selected by Oprah for a TV show!

2010-06-02T18:53:00.000-07:00

KSI's shaman has thanked us all for our support of her campaign to be selected by Oprah for a reality TV show, and has asked that we continue on with this.
--------------------------

Here is a faster, direct link:
http://myown.oprah.com/audition/index.h ... promo_id=1

IMPORTANT: ?VIEWS? are more important than votes, so view the video as much as possible before voting. And to keep it up! We have a month to get all the views/votes that we possibly can. The rules state that there is no limit to how many times you can vote. So let's raise the light quotient of mainstream television and get a high-consciousness concept on the air. Namaste!

Also, there are updates to both of my sites, including new blogs, photos, and classes:

http://www.soul-work.org/

and

http://www.pathfinderfilm.com

And I've attached a word document to this email that I'd love to share with you. It was originally an 11 page article on Oprah.com about "The 10 Most Common Pitfalls on a Spiritual Process" and I found it utterly eye opening. I, personally, have tumbled into every single pothole mentioned at one point or another!-- so I really laughed out loud as I read it. I hope you enjoy it. I've condensed it into a few pages for your convenience (see attached).
I am who I am because of each of you, so thank you so much for being a beautiful part of my journey! Enjoy the summer sun!

Much Love and Light!

Mickaela

--

Mickaela Grace

Soulwork

TEN SIGNS OF PROGRESS ON YOUR SPIRITUAL PATH

By Elizabeth Lesser, O Magazine, December 9, 2009

Walking the spiritual path can be a tricky adventure. Sometimes we make progress and become more free and loving and wise; sometimes we may think our meditation or prayer or ritual is leading toward enlightenment, but really we're just treading water or even going backwards. The great Tibetan meditation teacher, Chogyam Trunpa, wrote that we are often "deceiving ourselves into thinking we are developing spiritually when instead we are strengthening our egocentricity through spiritual techniques." He called this kind of self-deception spiritual materialism. We all deal with spiritual materialism; here's a list, from my book The Seeker's Guide, of 10 common pitfalls of spiritual materialism you may encounter on your spiritual journey and the key signs that you're on the path of progress.

10 COMMON PITFALLS OF SPRITUAL MATERIALISM:

Narcissism

There's a thin line between narcissism and "following your bliss." Without some degree of sacrifice for the greater good, self-discovery eventually leads to plain old self-indulgence. Be aware of your tendency toward excessive self-centeredness even as you work to heal and love your own tender self.

Superficiality

America's new forms of spirituality and therapy are often accused of selling superficial and sunny answers to life's complexity and pain. Spirituality does not ultimately work if we use it to protect ourselves from the rough-and-tumble of real life. Any world view that suggests that thinking positively always protects you from harm, or that there is something wrong with you if you suffer or fail, or that healing isn't often complex, is offering superficial promises.

The Never-Ending Process of Self-Improvement

You can become so obsessed with your own self-improvement—your story, your victimization, your faults, your fears—that instead of becoming free, you end up caught in a tape-loop. This myopic kind of focus on the self also leads to social apathy. It just isn't true that your self-empowerment and self-healing will necessarily lead to the health and happiness of others and of society. We have to participate in the improvement of more than just ourselves.

Instant Transformation

Just as some people get seduced by the never ending process of self-examination, some are disappointed when they don't achieve inner peace after reading a book, or in a day-long workshop, or even after two years of weekly therapy. Spiritual awakening takes patience, hard work, and the grace of God.

Desire for Magic

Some of the new American spirituality throws common sense out the window and pursues a search for magic cures and miraculous people. The need to believe in all-powerful teachers, angelic visitations, UFOs, and other unexplained mysteries can obscure the ordinary magic of everyday life, proof enough of God and the miracle of life.

Grandiosity

In democratizing spirituality and bringing it to the daily life of each person, each one of us risks becoming a messianic little Pope or a humorless saint. If you find yourself becoming unbearably profound, feeling that you are somehow different from others and destined for sainthood, perhaps you are suffering from grandiosity.

Romanticizing Indigenous Cultures

There exists a kind of reverse prejudice in our politically correct times that just because something or someone is from another culture, especially an indigenous or minority culture, that it/he/she is somehow more valuable, spiritual, or wise. "Whenever teachings come to a country from abroad the problem of spiritual materialism is intensified," writes Chogyam Trungpa.

The Inner-Child Tantrum

I once heard someone say, "Some people just don't seem to realize, when they're moaning about not getting prayers answered, that no is the answer." Knowing what you want, and honestly asking for it, is a monumental achievement. But so is learning to gracefully accept God's wisdom—when "He giveth and when he taketh away."

Ripping Off the Traditions

Many modern seekers skim off the ritual trappings of a tradition with little respect for the depth behind it. This trivializes powerful and elegant systems of spiritual growth that often demand years of study. There is a difference between carefully creating a spiritual path that includes genuine practices from a variety of traditions, and flitting from flower to flower like a drunken honey bee.

The Guru Trip

Harry S. Truman lamented: "Memories are short; appetites for power and glory are insatiable. Old tyrants depart. New ones take their place. It is all very baffling and trying." Perhaps the most baffling and trying aspect of the new American spirituality is the disparity between spiritual teachings and the behavior of teachers. Men, women, Western, Eastern, fundamentalist, new-age, modern, or indigenous—none have escaped the temptation to abuse power. Things to be wary of: extravagant claims of enlightenment or healing; the minimizing of the hard work that accompanies any true spiritual or healing path; the excessive commercialism that betrays the deeper spiritual message; and the blind adherence of followers to charlatans (be they gurus, therapists, preachers, healers, or teachers). With their deceitful double standards, some gurus, therapists, and teachers have given mentorship a bad name and tarnished the image of humbling oneself to a wiser and more experienced guide.

10 SIGNS OF PROGRESS ON YOUR SPIRITUAL PATH:
Obuntubotho

When Bishop Desmond Tutu introduced Nelson Mandela at his inauguration as the new president of South Africa, he described him as being a man who had Obuntubotho. "Obuntubotho," he said, "is the essence of being human. You know when it is there and when it is absent. It speaks about humanness, gentleness, putting yourself out on behalf of others, being vulnerable. It embraces compassion and toughness. It recognizes that my humanity is bound up in ours, for we can only be human together." Obuntubotho is the first sign of progress on the spiritual path.

The Truth Works

A disciple once asked the Buddha how he would know the Truth if he found it. "You know the Truth, because the Truth works," the Buddha answered. When your life works better—when drama and chaos get tiresome, and goodness and peace are your preferred companions, then you are receiving messages from the Truth. When you are naturally happier, stronger, and more deeply engaged with people and place, you can assume you are touching on the Truth.

In Touch with Reality

A sign of progress is when you no longer fight the nature of life. Instead, you work with it. You stop pretending that life is supposed to be a certain way and accept it on its own terms. You size up the human story and get on with living.
Honesty is an Aphrodisiac

It does pay to be honest. It pays in rewarding relationships. It pays in unblocked energy. It pays in passion. To stand tall in who you are, unafraid to reveal what you want and need, kind enough to tell the truth, and brave enough to bear the consequences, is a telling sign of spiritual development.
Suffering Is Our Fear of Pain

There will always be pain in life. This is something we learn as we progress spiritually. We also learn that if we resist pain, if we fear it, then we create additional pain called suffering. Our resistance to pain stands between us and full-bodied living; it keeps us at war with our problems and from making peace with life's dual nature. When pain arises in your life and you stand to greet it with calm curiosity, you will know that you making progress on the path.
How Can I Help?

If you are spiritually happy you naturally want others to be happy. You can't help but help. Spirituality is the gift of love. Service to others is the discipline of love. If you reach out often to those in need, not because you should but because your heart leads you more and more deeply into the hearts of others, then keep on going.
Declaration of Interdependence

Are you becoming more and more aware of the interconnection of all beings, creatures, and elements? Do you hold as your own Jesus' words: "And whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers, you do to me"? Are you getting tired of the way our society celebrates the false ego's selfish and insatiable drive to acquire and use more and more? And does that make you want to be an agent of healing? A declaration of life's interdependence is a sign of spiritual progress.
Combine Love and Loneliness

When we progress on the path, we become more and more comfortable with the great paradox of belonging and being alone. We reach out to others for love and companionship, yet we know that the abiding love for which we long rests in our solitary relationship with God. We are generous in our compassion and help to those in need, but we also know that each person is responsible for his or her own healing. We are loved; we are alone. Both are blessings. Love and loneliness are both states of grace.
The Ordinary Is Extraordinary

"Just to be is a blessing. Just to live is holy," said Rabbi Abraham Heschel. When we really feel this, without forcing, without trying too hard, then we know we're on the right track. When we see the marvelous structure of the universe in the mundane and when we love the whole world by loving our mates and children and co-workers, then we are making progress. When we don't need to be anyone special, but are pleased to be simply one of God's many creatures, then we will know the joy of the extra-ordinary.
God Is Optimistic

Finally, look for these signs of progress on the spiritual path: friendliness towards change and an optimistic vision of eternity. Faith in the perfection of God's plan—even when the road is rough—can make the difference between a life of happiness and a life of bitterness. Trust in God's goodness fuels our commitment to justice and beauty; with such faith we can move mountains, just like the spiritual heroes of all times.

Reflections on a trip around the world of physical preparation

2010-05-20T20:21:00.000-07:00

I want to share briefly with you some of the things that really stood out to me during my recent around the world trip.

Firstly the difference between the sporting industry and the fitness industry. As my background is mainly in sport, I naturally have an affinity with the athlete and coach, and really enjoy the focus on a measurable and competitive outcome.

In addition to which of these two similar but distinct industry people come from, there is another variable that I have concluded determines more about what and the way an individual thinks than anything else - their exposure to what I can 'pracdemics' (those wishing to be seen as research quoting practitioners) publishing. It's amazing how no matter which country these people live in, they all happen to 'co-incidentially' thinking and acting on a common thread. I actually feel more future for those who have yet to be exposed to this publishing pracdemic 'gatekeepers' of the truth.

Another observation that has not changed - the most common strength program around the world dominates with bench pressing (horizontal push) and squat variations (quad dominant'. This appears a habit tough to lose!

My favourite moments would include:

* Having real coaches and athletes in my seminars in each location, for whom results are measured on the scoreboard, not in who agrees with the dominant trends - this was from South Australia to the North America.
* Stretching on the wet grass in near zero temperatures in a cold breeze and drizzling rain on a hilltop somewhere outside of Dublin with 20 or so gaelic footballers.
* Seeing the old houses, sheds and castles in Ireland - these houses were not build on sand!
* Talking rugby with a South African rugby coach in Austria and taking his charges through their paces.
* Shooting hoop in Innsbruck with a group of basketballers.
* Working with competitive athletes in the winter sports.
* Working one on one with a client whose live was temporarily affected by pain, and watching the face and body language changes as we peeled back the layers in a multi-disciplined fashion.
* Confirming my theories and hypotheses through my experiences and observations from a global and individual human perspective, and creating some more.
* Being in awe of the mountains during my stay and during the coach drive out of Innsbruck.
* Experiencing the accent and language of more cultures that I can count.
* Watching the sun glow through from the bottom of the clouds upwards as we flew on our approach to Brisbane above the cloud layer in the morning prior to sunrise.

And more!

I conducted about 20 seminars or training sessions in as many days, and met many great people and trust my exposure impacted them in a long-term positive way. Until next time, stay focused on your goal and ask - is this the best way I can do this?

In closing I want to thank the seminar organizers. venue hosts, and most importantly those of you who valued leaving home to attend these events. Until next time.

A lone voice in a sea of hear no evil, see no evil, do no evil

2010-04-08T19:17:00.000-07:00

I just stumbled upon this post at an internet forum:

http://tnation.tmuscle.com/free_online_forum/diet_performance_nutrition_supplements/warp_speed_fat_loss_ultimate_diet_20

07-12-2008, 05:31 AM

Bricknyce

Level 1
Join date: Nov 2002

Location: New York, USA

Posts: 2702 His Fitness Bible also seemed like a plagiarized Get Buffed! (Ian King). Unfortuntately, I spent 100 bucks on it. Anyone want it for 50?

*****

Three long pages of postings - not one single response to this post.

I am keen to find this person and say I appreciate finding another person, one of the few, in a sea of 'hear no evil, see no evil. know no evil.'

I have now identified 5 people in the world who have the integrity, honesty and courage to speak up......

The publications that I have worked hardest on in my career

2010-04-02T05:14:00.000-07:00

I written a lot of books. More than most. I know they are hard work, as any author would. However during 2009 I worked harder on a publication than I have ever worked before on any publication.

The tragic thing was that my time and energy was not being directed to sharing with the world more of my conclusions and innovations in training. Rather my energy was going towards unravelling a decade of deceit by one 'author', identifying potential copyright breaches in approx. 40 of this 'authors' publications.

In essence, not only did I work harder unravelling the lies than I have on writing any of my books to date - I also believe I worked 'harder' than the author, as repetitive use of the C+C / C+V buttons does not require much effort. Not only does it require little effort, it also require a dearth of integrity.

You are going to be able to learn more about this through various sources including but not limited to:

* the 'That Looks Familar - Exercise Descriptions ebook
* the 'That Looks Familiar Blog'
* the 'Wall'
* to be followed by the 'Floorboards'
* to be follwed by the 'Roof'
* to be followed by the 'Windows'
* the Barbells and Bullshit book (to be released this year)
* the Barbells and Bullshit seminar tour (USA, July 2010, locations tbc)
* the Secrets Series (Volumes 1, 2 and 3 have now been released - more to come)
* videos on YouTube (some up now, especially in the 'Satire' playlist, and many, many more to come!
* a book giving specific details about aspects even my closest confidants may not be aware of in relation to the matter
* media releases about the NSCA ethics committee ruling
* media releases about my personal and polite approach to certain publishers/distributors
* and of course, the transcripts of the hearing if it needs to go that far
* and what ever else come ups!

Myth - Falsehood (n.), Fiction, Illusion, Invention, Fabrication, Untruth

2010-03-31T03:44:00.000-07:00

Someone sent me a file and said 'Look at this'. So I did. It was a program, free to anyone to download who visited this particular web site. It was allegedly a program written by the 'author' for 'an international rugby team'. And I nearly fell out of my chair....

You see over the last 30 odd years I have written more programs for athletes than most could dream about. Literally thousands. One of my rules - personally, professionally and in my company - is that the programs written for a client/athlete remain confidential. Any programs I publish were generic programs written for that situation only.

So why was I completely shocked when I opened this file that a concerned person had forwarded to me? Because this 'free downloadable' program was EXACTLY the same program that my company had provided one of our clients some years ago. How the f#%k did it get to being given away? How was it that the confidentiality of my company's client was being compromised?!

This downloand was WORD PERFECT! IT WAS LAYOUT IDENTICAL! I personally did the layout so I know the origin. AND WHEN I LAYED THE ORIGINAL BESIDE THIS 'AUTHORS' PROGRAM - ALL THAT HAD BEEN DONE TO CHANGE IT WAS ....NOTHING!!! Hold it - I found ONE change - the word 'King' in relation to 'King Deadlift' had been replaced with the words 'Single Leg'.

So 50% of that clients program was included in this 'give away'. Now it all came back to me - how this breach of confidentiality and breach of KSI copyright could have happened - but I still could not believe it - who would do that? What kind of integrity deficit behaviour is this? I still shake my head to this day....

But it wasn't over....

Someone else sent me an 'ebook' by another 'author'. I opened it up and.....holy f&$k!! It's the SAME PROGRAM - AGAIN! This time it was 100% of this program - a confidential, proprietary document, now being sold by the 'author'.....

By now I didn't bother sitting on the chair - because I kept falling off it in shock...
I read....

I’ve designed this program around a typical client, looking to get in shape, with limited time, resources and equipment. ...

What a load of f%$#&)g bullshit!! What kind of person would do this?!

Not only do we have the issues of selling/giving away proprietary information the property of another person/company, and the confidentiality issues that have been breached in relation to the clients rights - we also statements grossly misleading statements like this.

The greatest effort that appeared to occur prior to the publising of this document, containing 100% of the program, was on this occasion it appeared the font had been changed....

There were a few other minor modifications - and I mean minor.

I believe that I may spend the rest of my life wondering what it takes for any person to stoop this low.

In naming this product, I ran the word 'Myth' through the
Thesaurus, and it listed the following:

Falsehood (n.)

Fiction

Illusion

Invention

Fabrication

Untruth

And I said - that's about it!

So...You may have heard of the 'Secret' DVD, released in the personal development world to much acclaim. This series will expose you to some 'other' secrets that will give you a life lesson and insight that could positively shape how you choose to further your professional development.
The 'Secrets Series' is a body of works for the consummate professional who is committed to fully appreciating the impact of published works that are based on experiences and conclusions that are not the authors, and understanding the history of conceptual development.

In the Barbells & Bullshit series Ian King teaches how we all decide, consciously or unconsciously, to reason, act and receive based only on our own experiences and conclusions, or to be a collection of the thoughts of others through intentionally or otherwise accepting their influence.

These selected works analyzed in this Series serve to ram home the extent to which people are satisfied to be and teach a collection of others peoples ideas, a dilution of the intent of the original author.
Once you fully appreciate the extent to which this occurs in your industry, it is expected that you will be shocked into being more analytical about the influences you are being exposed to, and the source of all material that is promoted in your intellectual space.

This series provides you with massive lessons in integrity (or lack of) and how you can so easily be caught up in learning second hand, diluted versions of an original message. The marketing and commercial interests of the author and publisher are pitted against the good of the buyer, a battle occurring that many consumers of informal education in this industry are blissfully ignorant of. This ignorance and blind faith in the integrity of others has potential price to pay by misleading the consumer, and by presenting a model of integrity that has dubious value for all within the industry and the broader community.

A true teacher of the art of practical application can seek only to teach what they have mastered. This approach is recommended to anyone serious at being the best they can be in the physical preparation industry.

The titles currently available in this series include:

Vol 1 - The Code to the Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible (1st Edition)
Vol 2 - The Code to the Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible (2nd Edition)

And now....

Vol 3 - The Marcocycle Myth
Subsequent volumes will be released in the immediate future.

Learn more at http://www.kingsports.net/products-ksi-manuals-secrets.htm

Order here http://www.kingsports.net/SearchResult.aspx?CategoryID=34

More than a decade behind the times

2010-03-25T01:38:00.000-07:00

10 years after I promoted unilateral leg training including the Bulgarian squats on the same web site, another article promising 'a faster, safer way to increase lower-body muscle size and strength' is published (Build Bigger Legs, One at a Time).

The Bulgarian squat, of course given a new name on this occasion, was touted for its superiority, including over the standard squat. Sounds just what Spassov was saying nearly 20 years ago!!

But then I have just given a more accurate history lesson that this 2009 version.

I can only imagine what these authors were doing in the gym during the 1990s - and I can only assume it wasn't a dominance of unilateral leg work nor was the Bulgarian squat making an appearance. More likely heavy lifting ala the way it was in strength training for sport during the 1990s. Just a hunch....But would love to see their programs. I will be analysing one such program published late 1997 - interesting.

I have more respect for the guys who were taking notes, learning and applying these developments when they came out in the 10-20 years ago than these johnny-came-latelys sharing their belated regurgitations.

The NSCA and Ethics

2010-03-19T05:47:00.000-07:00

I have been a member of the National Strength and Conditioning Association (America) since about 1982. In the years that they used to issue annual membership wall certificates, I framed mine and placed them up on the wall with pride. They went from about 1982 to about 1990. It was only when they stopped issuing these yearly wall certificates that I took them down, because as the years passed the missing years may have given the perception that I my membership was no longer current.

So I have been a member for about 28 years. It's been 21 years since I attended my first NSCA convention in America.

When the NSCA opened in Australia in 1988 I served immediately as the (honorary) State Director for Queensland, and did so until about 1986 (8 years). From 1989 to 1996 I served also as the Executive Director, running and growing this professional body. The Australian organization changed names twice during the period 1988 to 1996.

So I have had a long history with this organization, and feel I have 'paid my dues'.

Recently I did something that I never done before in my 28 year association with the NSCA. I submitted a formal complaint to the NSCA (America) Ethics Committee. After holding my silence for so long, I felt it was time to draw a line in the sand, and to find out where the professional body stands in relation to certain behaviours.

This complaint centred around the authorized release for commercial and personal gain by a former casual employee of a proprietary information - a 32 week training program and supporting material provided by KSI to a client organization in 2000. The complaint also drew attention to what I considered were dishonest and misleading claims by the 'author' in relation to the origin and purpose of the program. Another part of this complaint referred to the duties of the publishers in relation to ensuring that copyright breaching material is not published.

I don't take any pride or happiness out of taking this action - however I take feel even less positive about the behaviour that led to this action.

I believe it is time to draw a line in the sand in relation to integrity and honesty in relation to this matter, and we are all going to learn the NSCA's definition of ethics and integrity by how they rule in this case. Does it have the courage and integrity to stand by its stated ethical standards?

Why the variation on my single leg stiff-leg deadlift? I've just had an epiphany!

2010-03-08T19:08:00.000-08:00

I was in the eccentric phase of a set of my own innovated exercise, the single leg stiff leg deadlift, when it hit me! No, not the muscle pain! But the realization of a possible explanation of a question that has gnawed at me for a nearly a decade!

You see in the few years following my initial release of this exercise (first in 1998 in my Strength Specialization DVD series, then on t-mag articles, and the video 'Ian King's Killer Leg Exercises sold by t-mag, and in the Get Buffed series and in the How to Teach Series in 2000 etc.), I could not fully understand this:

Where did the 'variation' on my innovation - where you allow the non-working leg to drift up the back like a counter balance - come from? Why?

My initial conclusion and I believe there still is merit in this possibility - that it was a simple misinterpretation. Keeping in mind that many of the photo shoots done for my articles and book published by other publishers were shot in my absence. So this is a real possibility - the model misunderstood it; the photographer got it wrong, or the editor or the publisher....

But suddenly I had an additional reason!!! And of all places to come to me was while I was at the business end of a set of the very exercise!

Now when I first noticed the 'variation' it caused me to scratch my head. And to this day, nearly a decade later, I am still scratching my head. Why? Are they serious?

I have gone through all the possible reasons:

1. Firstly, as I said above there is the real chance of simple misinterpretation.

2. Secondly, some gate-keeper of the truth somewhere felt he was missing out on the kudos so felt the need to tweak the original version to get a warm feeling of being an innovator.

3. Thirdly, you get the approach 'Well if I reverse it up I can pass it off as mine'. (Like my innovation the Co-contraction partial range - where another has chosen to promote the movement in the absence of credit to its origin, reversed the title to Partial co-contraction Lunge, and reversed the movement order - more on that another day...)

But that was all the answers I had found, and the question still confounded me - not only where did it come from but why would you do it?

Here's my interpretation of what's going on when you do this 'variation'. I have never written about this before so I have kept my silence all these years.

And no, I don't have any science to 'back me up'. I'm just a simple coach. A coach who simply developed the movement in the first place, an exercise used throughout the world today, for the most part disconnected from it's origin because so many want to be 'significant (like another exercise I innovated, the King Deadlift, where I finally said 'Right, I am going to put my name on this one because all the others I have realised by have bastardized and claimed by various self-appointed gate-keepers of the truth.' I was reading a document the other day that is about 20+ pages long and it was a 100% copy of KSI propriety information - with the exception that the word 'King' was removed from this exercise description and replaced with 'the words Single leg'....more on THAT another day.

Anyway, I digress.

From my simple coach mind, using the same thought processes based on extensive practical application, I raise this points about the 'variation' where you allow the non-working leg to raise up behind the body as you lower towards the ground:

a. it takes the stretch off the target hamstring, reducing the primary benefit of doing this movement

b. It becomes an exercise of counter-balancing body parts (back leg against trunk) and therefore becomes more of a mechanical balancing act than an isolated exercise full range on the target hamstring and poster chain.

c. if you need more load, as some 'experts' claim you need as justification for the movement - go an do more load friendly exercise - like the single leg hip/thigh extension on a roman chair etc.

So I finally have another explanation, and it hit me as I was executing the movement - no better place for real world solutions to appear - THEY CAN'T TOUCH THEIR TOES.

I know what you might be asking - what do I mean? So let me explain.

If you cannot touch your toes with your legs straight, seated on the ground or standing, then you probably won't have much success in executing this movement full range with the load of your upper body, or external load in the form of DBs. Even though the original movement allowed and expected a minor knee bent, the additional range this allows relative to a fully straight leg is probably negated by the load.

So quite simply if you can't touch your toes with legs straight, you probably will look for any way to do this movement OTHER than the way I introduced it originally - with working leg knee only slightly bent, and the non-working leg kept still just off the ground, parallel to the working leg but not touching it or the ground.

Is this theory accurate? Can't say for sure yet. I am happy to test it over time. But I am excited and relieved to have added another possible explanation to a question that has been bugging me since the first person sought to 're-invent' this wheel. And I have often wondered....why haven't I seen more of those who teach my exercise as the 'expert' performing it in the ordinal form, themselves.....

The Legacy World Tour

2010-03-05T01:29:00.000-08:00

Singapore Wed 28 Apr

Dublin Fri 30 April

Dublin Sat 1 May

Innsbruck Sun 2 May

Innsbruck Mon 3 May

London Wed 5 May

Toronto Fri 7 May

Boston Sat 8 May

tbc Sun 9 May

Learn from the source the theories and methods that have influenced and shaped the world of physical preparation, from the worlds most influential innovator of in physical preparation during the last decade or more.

In the late 1990's and early 2000's Ian released many of his time-tested and proven experienced based original theories and methods in articles, books and DVDS.

For the most part they met with the usual human response - those whose values, beliefs, investments and or egos were threatened were highly critical (some even stormed out of his seminars in outrage!). Ian and his supporters received threats and vilification for his 'heretical' theories and methods.

Then as the methods become accepted these 'gate-keepers' of the truth chose to teach Ian's methods, for the most part in the absence of credit or permission.

Now more people around the world training for sport, occupation, recreation or therapy reasons would be using Ian's theories and methods of training than any other single persons in the world.

His theories and methods are literally the most copied in the world of physical preparation, albeit more times than not in the absence of recognition of the origin.

Now you have a chance to meet with and learn in person from the person who has been the most influential individual in the world of physical training during the last decades as Ian shares the lessons he has learnt during his 30 years in the industry. Ian's innovations in training have shaped the world of physical training in every aspect and country around the world. Chances are something you are doing in your physical training has been influenced by Ian King. With 30 years in the industry Ian has been possibly the most influential, the most copied innovator in the world of physical preparation. Now you can learn from the source! There is no need to learn from the diluted imitations! Go to the source! Meet Ian in person and gain direct insights into the ways and reasons for his training ideas.

Here are some of the original Ian King theory and methods that you will be exposed to in the Legacy seminar, taught from the source:

• Sayings such as
- people over-react in the short term and under-react in the long term
- time magnifies errors in training
- don’t break the rules until you know the rules
- only results matter

• Philosophies such as
- athletic success is not measured in the gym - Do the least amount needed to get the most results
- Develop the athlete then the player
- look at the bigger picture

• Concepts such as:
- prioritization through volume, sequence and load
- that which is done first in the training week and workout gets done best
- every single training method will have a negative effect - and must be countered.
- The specificity continuum

• Principles such as:
- Opposite and equal effect
- Optimal vs. capable
- Transfer vs. specificity
- Contrarian

• Flexibility training concepts, theories and methods such as:
- Static stretching is the most effective method for improving flexibility
- Static stretching before training is not recommended, contrary to the propaganda pushed earlier in this decade
- Flexibility is the most important physical quality
- Strength training exercises do not in themselves create flexibility – they are more likely to reduce flexibility

• Strength training concepts, theories and methods such as:
- Categorizing the body and exercises into planes of movement (vertical and horizontal pulling and pushing, quad and hip dominant) rather than muscle groups
- Creating family trees of exercise and how to build progressions within the family tree
- Tempo and the three digit speed timing method
- Athletes should not use external loading before they have mastered their own bodyweight and in some cases athletes are not even able to manage their own bodyweight

• Speed training concepts, theories and methods such as:
- The reverse periodization of speed method, going from power to capacity not the opposite
- Power based running sport athletes performing high volume of sprinting are not doing speed training, rather endurance training
- Strength training and speed are highly correlated provided the strength training methods do not increase the stretch-shortening cycle ability
- Stretch shortening capacity of the athlete will help determine their training needs in a sport requiring that capacity

• Endurance training concepts, theories and methods such as:
- The endurance base is a myth not a science
- Cross training is ineffective
- Endurance training needs to raise in specificity in correlation with the level of qualification of the athlete
- Developing endurance with the intent of transferring it to speed is not the sound principle that traditionalists have been promoting for decades

And ALSO learn the theories and methods he has developed over the last few years which WILL shape the world of training in the coming decade! When you learn them from the source the value will always be greater than learning a second hand diluted version.

Registration Refund Policy

Up to end of Early Registration (26 March 2010) - 75% refund
Up to end of Standard Registration (9 April 2010) - 50% refund
After 9 April 2010 - 25% refund
Register here
http://www.kingsports.net/SearchResult.aspx?CategoryID=26

Celebrating the Life and Legacy of Jim Rohn

2010-03-02T21:50:00.000-08:00

A person whom we all owe so much for his teaching passed away late last year, and I share the following extract from his company website:

Jim Rohn, our mentor and friend, passed away December 5, 2009, and was laid to rest Saturday, December 12, 2009, at Forest Lawn Memorial Park in Glendale, California.

Jim touched millions of lives over the past 46 years through his seminars, books, articles and CDs. His life’s passion and inspiration was making a difference in people’s lives.

The Celebrating the Life and Legacy of Jim Rohn event was held in Anaheim, California, on Saturday, February 6, 2010. Family, long-time friends and many special guest speakers, including Anthony Robbins, Les Brown, Brian Tracy, Chris Widener, Denis Waitley and Darren Hardy, paid tribute to Jim by sharing their thoughts and insights on some of his most powerful success principles. The event was attended by more than 1,300 people whose lives have been impacted by the wisdom of Jim Rohn.

He loved making a difference in people’s lives, that was his passion and inspiration. Yet he was also a private man who kept a small, loyal and caring inner circle. He was a tremendous friend to those who knew him.

Harold Dyke, long time close friend of Jim’s for over 55 years said it best, “As Jim is ending one life he is simultaneously being birthed into a new life. One that he has talked about over the years and anticipated with great joy in his last remaining days.”

Someone once said “when you are born you enter the world crying while everyone else is rejoicing and when you die hopefully you have lived such a life that everyone will be crying while you are rejoicing”. Jim Rohn lived such a life.

We know Mr. Rohn is looking down on us at this very moment with a smile saying I did it, I gave it my all, I went for it, now it’s your turn. Go for it. Make your life a life worth living well!
View a special tribute to Jim below produced earlier this year and debuted at the March 2009 SUCCESS Symposium. You are also encouraged to post your thoughts and remembrances of Jim on the Memorial Wall below.

Jim fondly closed his programs with the following sentiments: “I go with you in all the experience that we’ve had. But I promise you this as we leave here: I will not leave you behind. I’ll take you with me in my thoughts and in my heart.”

If you would like to learn more about Jim, his life and his works, click here.

That single leg squat exercise description looks familiar!

2010-03-01T21:04:00.000-08:00

The challenge of communicating exercise technique guide lines in writing is conveying enough and accurate information. So I have put a lot of thought and time into my exercise descriptions.

In 1999 I wrote this nice little description for the single leg squat (bolding added now):

Single leg squat

You know that I wouldn't want you to miss out on doing these delightful unilateral movements, so here we go - stand on 1 leg beside the squat rack or similar. Place the other leg out so that the heel stays just off the ground at all times. Bend the support knee and go down as far as you can whilst keeping your foot flat on the ground. 3 seconds down, no pause, controlled explosive up. Initially I suspect your range will be limited but as you get better at it over time, aim to increase range as well (and maybe even more importantly) as reps. Using your bodyweight only, I expect somewhere between 5-10 reps on day one, and look to use DB’s in one hand if you exceed 15 reps. If this is the case, I have to wonder what you were doing during the earlier part of the workout?! Use the squat rack to hold on to for balance if needed (and you probably will need to) but don’t get sucked into the temptation of using it to pull yourself up. Remember this is a leg day!

I was conducting research and I came upon the following exercise in a publication copyright claimed by another author (bolding added):

One leg squat :

Stand on 1 leg beside the squat rack or similar. Place the other leg out so that the heel stays just off the ground at all times. Bent the support knee and go down as far as you can whilst keeping your foot flat on the ground. 3 seconds down, no pause, controlled explosive up. Initially I suspect your range will be limited but as you get better at it over time, aim to increase range as well (and maybe even more importantly) as reps. Using your bodyweight only, expect somewhere between 5-10 reps on day one, and look to use DB’s in one hand if you exceed 15 reps. Use the squat rack to hold on to for balance if needed (and you probably will need to) but don’t get sucked into the temptation of using it to pull yourself up.

And I said to myself: “That looks familiar!” So I cross-referenced it and I said to myself: “Wow! No wonder that looked familiar!”

Then in a different publication I came upon this (bolding added):

Single Leg Squat:

And I said to myself: “That looks familiar!” So I cross-referenced it and I said to myself: “Wow! No wonder that looked familiar!”

Then in another publication I came upon this (bolding added):

Single Leg Squat:

And I said to myself: “That looks familiar!” So I cross-referenced it and I said to myself: “Wow! No wonder that looked familiar!”

Then in another publication I came upon this (bolding added):

One leg squat:

And I said to myself: “That looks familiar!” So I cross-referenced it and I said to myself: “Wow! No wonder that looked familiar!”

Then in ANOTHER publication I came upon this (bolding and underlining added):

Single leg squat

Start: Stand on your right leg with a bench behind you. Extend your left leg forward so that the heel stays just off the floor at all times.

Movement: Bend your right leg and lower yourself to the bench. Do not sit down. Instead skim the bench, and then drive back up to the starting position. During the movement, be sure to keep your right knee tracking over your middle toe. Initially, your range will be limited, but as you get better at it over time, aim to increase your range of motion by removing the bench and using a squat rack or other stable object to hold onto for light support until you are able to perform a single leg squat with full range of motion. Use only your bodyweight to start.

By now I knew it was going to be familiar....

I wonder how my other exercise descriptions fared?....

Build 12" Guns!

2010-03-01T15:54:00.000-08:00

You too can build 12” guns!! Excited? Okay, I agree, not very appealing. The only reason you would have been attracted to this headline is to see what’s wrong with the writer. But this is exactly what you are going to get when you take advice off people who probably have exactly that – 12” biceps.

I have read of late (more times than once) that you don’t need to do specific bicep exercises to build big biceps. Mmm. Wonder what the definition of big is? 12”?

Now before we get into it I want to make it real clear I am not glorifying big upper arms. I can take them or leave them. In fact when you look at my list of the disadvantages bulging biceps present you will appreciate this. What I am simply seeking to do is put forward a version that may help you get sucked into the bullshit, if in fact you do want to build big upper arms.

The proposal that you don’t need to do specific bicep exercises to build big upper arms can only, I conclude, come from the minds attached to bodies that have never build big upper arms.

Here are my concerns with building big biceps:

• Powerlifters are more likely to tear them in deadlifting

• Weightlifters struggle to catch the bar on their shoulders in the front squat/clean recovery position

• Athletes get distracted from effective strength training by building big upper arms

But apart from that, if you want to build big guns, go for it. If you want to take them significantly past 12”, you might want to ignore the no-bicep exercise bullshit.

You can see I’m not a big fan of bicep focused training for anyone other than bodybuilders and body beautifuls. But I am as equally not a fan of bullshit like this theory.

I found an example of this ‘no-bicep curl exercises needed’ theory in a book (1). I believe that the authors specifically set out to shape the readers value system and induce compliance to their theory with the following subjective statements:

• If they thought that doing a lot of sets of bicep curls every week would help them build their own biceps, they would be going out and doing this, just like the ‘meatheads and mooks’ do.

[You probably don’t want to think of yourself as a ‘meathead’ and/or ‘mook’ - so you may think twice about doing a bicep curl]

• Curls are mostly for newbie’s and juicers.

[You probably don’t want to feel or act like their definition of a newbie or a drug user, so you may choose to avoid doing bicep curls]

• The changes in muscle size would not be dramatic.

[A statement of fact, of dubious accuracy, but perhaps enough to discourage you from, God forbid, doing a curl]

• Unless you had a specifics reason for doing arm-isolated exercises, you should save your time and energy for other pursuits.

[Now if you needed any more discouragement, you just got it – no way are you ever going to do bicep curls again!]

Let’s take a step back. Where did these beliefs come from? Science of course. Three studies were quoted, none of which have any guarantee they relate to you. But let’s humor their ‘evidence’ for a bit longer.

The first study was conducted 13 years to the release of the book, was based on a research group of elderly m en. Unlikely to have any bearing on you, however that was enough for the writers to conclude that doing bicep curls only work for beginners.

The second study cited was conducted 14 years prior to the release of the book, and was based on competitive bodybuilders, again unlikely to have any specific bearing on you. But it was enough apparently for the authors to conclude therefore that any one beyond a beginner will see minimal if any hypertrophy from doing isolated bicep curls, because these competitive bodybuilders, during the period of this research study, didn’t.

With the third study cited, comfortingly was conducted in the same millennium, no details were provided of what they did, who they were, and there were allegedly no changes in arm size in the nine weeks of the program. It’s difficult to give any comment as to how this result may relate to you or not because inadequate details were given. Suffice to say it was allegedly research and therefore we don’t need details – we just need to believe! [Sounds a bit like sciences predecessor of social conditioning, religion…]

That’s it - on the basis of the above, you are to stop doing specific bicep curl exercises…..

Now what are the other alternatives that these writers and anyone else, yourself included, may reach a conclusion. That is, other than be basing your thoughts and actions on the apparent authority of the printed word, or on the basis of research with limited application to yourself.

Well, there is experience. You could come to your own conclusion based on your experiences. Let me share you mine. Now according to this theory, or at least this theory as presented by these ‘experts’, I should not get any results in increased upper arm girth from adding isolated bicep exercises. Why?

Because that only works for beginners and juicers, of which I am neither. And because a study conducted nearly two decades ago allegedly using experienced, competitive bodybuilders, failed so see any change in upper arm girth during the period of that particular study, that is further evidence that I would be wasting my time. After all, I too am experienced aren’t I? After all, these authors appear to have categorized themselves as experienced.

So furthering this line of thinking, what constitutes experienced? What equates with being a competitive bodybuilder? What if a person is one but not the other? Does that mean that this research applies still?
I can tell you this – I consider myself to be experience (continual strength training for approximately 30 years) but I am not, have never been and will never be a competitive bodybuilder. I know these authors have not, are not, and probably never will be competitive bodybuilders either. So it must be their experience that places them in the same category of non-response to isolated bicep curl as this study group cited above?

So how do you measure experience? Is it on number of years alone? Or is there potential for some level of qualification? Say an upper arm circumference measurement. Let me give you mine. Anything less than a 16” upper arm on an average height male is not advanced.

Anyway, as an experienced person (based on both years in training and passing this arbitrary upper arm circumference), what happens when I do isolated bicep training – they grow. Immediately.

So the value to you of the cited science is dubious, and the belief-shaping message by these authors (and others of their ilk) was not based on the writer’s personal experience, which is understandable as if you were as familiar with the upper arm circumference of the authors….

Yes, you can build big upper arms through heavy pressing and pulling, especially with the way the triceps dominate the bulk of the upper arm. But if you want to create specifically large biceps, create a peak in them, and maximize the contribution of the biceps to upper arms – you are not going to do this by avoiding specific bicep exercises. What research can I quote to give my statement credibility? None.

Or at least none that would fit the expectations of those who want to see a research article quoted, irrespective of whether it is relevant or not. Irrespective of whether it is valid or not. Irrespective of whether the researcher was even in town the day the research was allegedly conducted…

Just the observations over a few decades are used to support this conclusion.

This is just one example of how easily your conclusions and behavior can be influenced by people who seek to shape your beliefs, in the absence of personal experience.

[This is an extract from my upcoming book 'Barbells & Bullshit]

(1) Schuler, L., and Cosgrove, A., 2006, New Rules, Penguin Publishing

A great lesson from a unique athlete

2010-02-26T14:11:00.000-08:00

I just learnt the Australian silver medalist in the moguls skiing event at the to 2010 winter olympics is a self made multi millionaire. Apparently he has been for the past 7 or 8 years!

I don't know the details of his wealth nor am I interested in what the general media's opinions are. In this example, my learning comes from 'picking the fruits instead of studying the roots' as Jim Rohn taught.

From my understanding, here is a person, with all the choice in life he needs. He chooses to be an athlete, and a very successful one, requires no funding or sponsorship, does things on his own terms and compete's because he just wants too. A nice place to be for an athlete, or for anyone in life!

My question is, why don't more athletes and coaches develop at least one additional leveraged income stream on a very casual or even part time basis, during the competitive years or most productive coaching years, that continues to work even when they don't?

What impact might building a leveraged or passive income stream have on your performace as an athlete or coach?

Come the athlete's retirement or the coach wanting a break/retire from coaching, it would be nice to have leveraged or passive income there to live on and give you choice in your life. How would this make you feel? What would you do if you didn't have to work? What you're doing now? Interesting questions....

I trust you're not letting your busy-ness or ego get in the way of your truth in this life time!

Around the world my business partners attend Sugar's seminar

2010-02-26T04:35:00.000-08:00

Over the last few months I have made strong recommendations in personal email to my business partners spread around the globe to attend Brad Sugars in seminar when his was in their area.

I have been studying Brad's material for 15 years, and have strong belief his the value of this. Because I want my business partners to succeed, I bring to their attention opportunities such as the Sugars world seminar tour to expose them to great learning.

As a result my team had the opportunity to see him live in seminar in Canada, USA, Europe and Australia.

I received fantastic feedback from those who attended, to their credit. Brad's drive alone was an inspiration to them - 87 cities in 17 countries in the last year alone!

The benefits of being in our team!

Someone spiked my drink...

2010-02-26T03:18:00.000-08:00

Many years ago, after expressing my cynicism at repeated stories of athletes blaming their 'natural supplements' for failing sports drug testers, one of my newsletter readers send me a blistering email about the 'science' of how one could go positive on over the counter supplements. I remained skeptical.

I had a quite laugh when Andre Aggassi came out of the closet so to speak admitting he lied to the tennis body about his positive test for recreational drugs. For the record I have absolute respect for Andre and what he has achieved in tennis and life. I make no judgement about his fabrication or his drug use.

What I do believe his admission did was start to peel back the lid on some of the 'someone spiked my drink' stories....

Needless to say, the Women's Tennis Federation a few years ago entered into a deal with a supplement supplier that offered up a$1 million US payment for any athlete who tested positive whilst taking its supplements, after this company took its products to a World Anti-Doping Association (WADA) accredited lab to ensure its formulas met the standards required to avoid any doping offences from their consumption alone.

This is the best book in the world for strength training!

2010-02-26T03:10:00.000-08:00

A few weeks ago a young man was speaking to his naturopath about his new passion for developing his physique. The naturopath was quick to say:

'You have got to get this book - it's the best book in the world for strength training!'

And showed the Book of Muscle to his young client.

The young man went home and said to his mum, the Managing Director of a national division of a global company:

'Mum, you've got to buy me this book! The naturopath told me it's the best book in the world for strength training!'

Mum walked over to her bookshelf, pulled out a book and said:

'You mean this one?'

Not only was the son shocked at his mums book collection, she also felt she gained credibility points with her son!

Thanks Owen at Suite 206, no 33, Lexington drive, norwest business park, bellavista nsw 2153 att. We trust you enjoyed our gift of 'Ask the Master'!

I was in the best condition of my life - I don't understand it....

2010-02-25T23:23:00.000-08:00

'I was in the best condition of my life - I don't understand it.'

That was in essence what the athlete was reported in the media as saying - after his hamstring tore off from the bone.

I don't want to draw attention to the athlete or the organization, as they don't deserve anything perceived as negative aimed at them - they are simply a pretty good snapshot (in my opinion) of where the elite sporting world (and all levels down) are at in relation to the perspectives towards injury.

You see, the person responsible for injury prevention/rehabilitation added to this snapshot when he was quoted by the media as saying words to the effect:

'It was just a freak accident.'

You might get by now that I don't buy into this perspective - that in my opinion the athlete was not the best shape of his life (at least not in a global way - maybe in one specific area); and that it was not a freak accident.

Let me guess - after watching the video of the incident (no, I didn't guess on this, as this was reported in the media!) they didn't see anything significant that would explain why the injury would occur. Does that make it a freak accident? If we allow our bodies to get into an appropriate condition, and this leads to an injury during a relatively benign activity (like getting out of bed, tying your laces, picking something up off the floor - and yes, these are common actions associated with 'can't be explained' injuries) - does that mean it was a freak accident? No - it means we got so off track in our condition that a minor incident was all that it took to take us over the edge.

So we have a franchise out of pocket for the players salary for the year, a teams plans thrown into turmoil because they just lost their marque player a week or two before the season start, an athlete who is out of action for the year and who knows what long term ramifications - these are not light consequences. These are not freak circumstances. He was not in the condition of his life.

This occurred as a result of the low level of understanding of professional athletes and their service providers (and the broader community) of what it takes to cause an injury and what it takes to prevent an injury.

It's not good enough, but if people choose to participate in this perspective of injury, then they can't shift the responsibility away - they got what they deserved. There is a better way....

Giving credit

2010-02-25T23:08:00.000-08:00

I watched Brad Sugars in live seminar last week, fifteen years after first attending one of his seminars, and many in between.

For those who are not familiar with Brad, he is a Brisbane born lad currently living in the US who has contributed much to the world of business coaching. We have been among the many to benefit from his works.

Anyway, during the seminar last week he made multiple references to the late Jim Rohn, quoting Jim and immediately giving recognition to Jim as being the originator of the saying. He also recognized and expressed gratitude for Jim's contribution to his life.

Imagine that? Imagine this level of honesty and integrity in physical preparation - in giving credit for original work and recognition for contribution to those who have added value to the life’s of many.

I didn't hear Brad say how he 'stole that saying from person x', and I didn't hear Brad attempt to pass off the sayings as his own. And Brad didn't choose to ignore the influence Jim had on him.

Brad talked about Jim in the same way he did 15 years ago. He didn't bullshit then, and he didn't bullshit now.

Imagine that in physical preparation? One day....

Why don't you come and work in my yard instead?

2010-02-25T22:38:00.000-08:00

I was watching a young man in a strong man video clip on the web and as he was pushing the wheelbarrow up the hill I thought to myself - why don't you come and work in my yard instead? Help me maintain my acreage?

I am talking about the raised popularity of pushing barrow, lifting and throwing types etc.

Now don't get me wrong - I don't have a problem with this type of training. Or any type of training for that matter. But what it did make very clear to me is that the standard of living is so high that some seek the 'thrill' of these odd lifts.

In the days where more did manual labour, I am very confident that few would go home and do more manual labour!

And for that matter, those who do manual labour all day long (or have done so for at least a few months) would know how tough it is to come home from a long day in the sun to do any weight training at all.

This odd lifts or push the wheel barrow trend is not new in sport. It has been recommended and used throughout my life by coaches and athletes who wanted to get or stay in condition for their sport.

However one of the factors contributing to the continual increase in sports performance is that the off-field training has become more targeted. Manual labour can rarely compete with more specialized training.

So in essence, lifting and throwing objects is only specific to the odd lifts competitions as far as sport specific training goes. For those seeking adaptations that are not necessarily for any specific outcome - as long as they understand the lowered specificity of this, and that if they were seeking more specific outcomes there may be more specific training forms that may be more suited.

In the meantime, you can all come and maintain my yard if you want to do some manual labour!

King Sports International

14 signs that the collapse of the modern world has began

Update re KSI Coaching Program

Kim Clisjters talks nutritional supplements

WTA athletes talks nutrition

The greatest live event in America this year!

Caught in the web of confusion re stretching

The child and the injury - Pt 2

The child and the injury - Pt 1

Economic reflections of a coach

The Top Five Dumbest Exercises

Burnt at the stake

He never did - a lesson in gratification

The rock and the snake

State of the Union Address - April 2011

The price the children pay

I don’t know if you made this up or stole it from someone - but lets credit you anyway

The moral and economic decline of a once great nation

Be honest? I'd like to see that....

Do the words ‘volunteer’ and or 'amateur’ need to be antonyms of excellence?

Let’s talk about honesty, Lou

The times they may be a-changing!

More thoughts from readers response to 'Barbells & Bullshit' book....

Readers response to Barbells & Bullshit (book)

Out-dated methods - shame, shame, shame!

Static stretching fear mongering

Performance Coach or Director - Why the term sucks

Feedback on my latest book - Barbells & Bullshit

The World is Flat!

Enough to make your blood boyle

Performance coach. Really?

Surely they can perform better than this!

There is no such thing as a functional exercise

What is the future of an industry that condones this type of behavior?

Players turned coaches have a short memory

Corporate integrity and a changing US?

Keep supporting Mickaela's plan to be selected by Oprah for a TV show!

Reflections on a trip around the world of physical preparation

A lone voice in a sea of hear no evil, see no evil, do no evil

The publications that I have worked hardest on in my career

Myth - Falsehood (n.), Fiction, Illusion, Invention, Fabrication, Untruth

More than a decade behind the times

The NSCA and Ethics

Why the variation on my single leg stiff-leg deadlift? I've just had an epiphany!

The Legacy World Tour

Celebrating the Life and Legacy of Jim Rohn

That single leg squat exercise description looks familiar!

Build 12" Guns!

A great lesson from a unique athlete

Around the world my business partners attend Sugar's seminar

Someone spiked my drink...

This is the best book in the world for strength training!

I was in the best condition of my life - I don't understand it....

Giving credit

Why don't you come and work in my yard instead?