At the end of a coaching session where I was giving back, along with a number of other of former elite athletes in a specific sport, the coordinator introduced me to a young man who he explained was a teacher at a private school who had been entrusted with the task of introducing ‘strength and conditioning’ to his school, with the specific intent of ‘catching up to the other schools in their association as far as strength and conditioning’.
I didn’t want to say anything to the young man, to spoil his eagerness, so I kept a straight face. But inside I cringed – ‘catch up to the other schools in strength and conditioning?’ Why would you want to do that? It should more accurately described as ‘catching down’.
Let me explain.
In the 1970s not many high schools had gyms and in the ones that did have, there was no formal programming and no ‘strength and conditioning’ service provision. Firstly because there was no such thing as a ‘strength and conditioning coach’, as the term ‘strength and conditioning’ was an afterthought by a professional organization with a strength focus that belated wanted to expand their focus without changing their acronym (you can read more about that in my original writings on this subject in ‘So You Want to Become…’). And secondly because organized physical preparation (as I prefer to call it) was not even provided to the majority of western world elite adult teams at that time.
In the early 1980s in Australia the majority of 18 year and older elite athlete that I worked with (and there were thousands) were what I called clean skins. They had never done formal physical preparation. I only had to undo the imbalances that their sport had created in their body. I summarized at that time it usually took three years of solid supervised and individualized training to clean them p to the level of being injury free for the most part for the rest of their career.
Fast forward to the second decade of the 21st century and what’s changed? I inherit broken athletes from the age of 12 upwards. ACL reconstruction, stress fractures of the lower back, shoulder and hip surgery – you name it. So what’s changed?
Many in the respective sports would tell you it’s just the sport – it’s inevitable. I don’t agree, and my experience doesn’t support this. Some will say the athletes are bigger and stronger and the impacts are greater. Really? Aside from non-specific strength tests, my experiences and observations don’t support this. A more recent trendy explanation is that the athletes specialize too early. Sounds good, and it may be a contributor, but for me this also fails to explain the difference. So what is my conclusion?
In the 1970s and 1980s athletes gaining exposure to formal physical preparation as they entered elite ranks around 20 years of age typically retired at about 30 years or age. So that’s about 10 years. What if that retirement was forced more by physical preparation inducted injury than age or their sport? Now holding that thought for a moment, what if take those same flawed training concepts and applied them to a 20 year old? They would be out of the sport by about 20 years of age!
And that’s my theory. In fact I go as far as to say if a young athlete is talent identified around 8-12 yeas of age, and has the (mis)fortune of being exposed to ‘elite strength and conditioning’ – they will be injured by 16 years of age, undergone significant sports-injury related surgery by 18 years of age, and unable to play their sport by about 20 years of age as a general rule.
So in summary when I see the same flawed training methods applied to adults being applied to young athletes, I fear for their future.
So what makes me conclude that most training is flawed? During my last four decades of seeking answers and excellence in how to train, I have reached certain conclusions and theories on what it takes to create or avoid an injury.
Are my conclusions the same as the masses? No. Should this be a concern? Only if you are a conformist. If your dominant need is to be liked, and to achieve this you need to be like others, then you would be concerned by the fact that I have reached certain theories that differ from the mainstream. On the other hand if you realize that to get a different and ideally better result than the masses, you need to train differently – then you would be excited.
In my opinion the only improvements we have seen in training is in the ability to measure it, the technology of equipment, and the technology of the surgery to repaid the injuries.
Could it be possible that what the majority – and that probably means you – are doing more damage to good in their training? That is my suggestion. Is it popular? No. Is it easy to discredit? Yes. Does this what ever else is doing approach to training result in the best possible sporting out comes? No.
So if I am on track, why do most continue on this path? The answers lies there. Because most do it. And the majority are so insecure about their actions they seek comfort in the masses. Will the get away with it? Legally yes, because the interpretation will be that is what is accepted practice. Should they be able to sleep at night? I suggest not, if they have a conscience.
Why I am I so firm about this? I speak for the athlete. My heart goes out to the legally minor young athlete who has an adult guide them to life-long, career threatening, quality of life threatening injuries. There is a better way - I teach it openly and have done for decades. I believe that perhaps in the next generation, after my time on this earth, what I teach will be accepted as the final stage of truth as described by 19th century German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer – ‘accepted as being self-evident’.
But what about the one or two generations of young athletes who paid the price in their ‘strength and conditioning’ training between 1980 and whenever a better way is accepted?
So did I get excited for the young man empowered to bring his school ‘Strength and conditioning’ program up speed with other schools in their association? Not al all. I felt sad for the by-products of this intent. The young, innocent and trusting athletes. They are not, in my opinion, going to ‘catch up’. They are going to ‘do down’ in their athletic development.
Monday, February 27, 2017
Saturday, January 14, 2017
A KSI coach in every town! Wouldn’t that be nice!
I was sitting enjoying lunch today in Melbourne, Vic AUST with a friend of KSI. They shared a challenge, seeking my assistance. A New York colleague of theirs had approached them to service a client of theirs who was visiting Australian from the US for a few weeks in association with the first tennis Grand Slam event of the year, the Australian Open, played in Melbourne.
So did I have any coaches I could refer to in Melbourne was the question,, and the challenges. I didn’t. Tragically we don’t have a KSI coach in every town!
Reminded me of a situation a few months ago where a US based friend of KSI was looking for us to refer a KSI coach in Spain for their client, a person associated with the band U2. Now we were able to find a coach however they were only a L1 KSI coach. We would have preferred a higher-level KSI coach.
I put out a call on our KSI Coaches private Facebook Page, and no surprise, no response. looks like we are going to have to throw our net out wider, something we're reluctant to do - because with a coach that has a bit of this and a bit of that in their tool box (even if one of those 'bit off's is attempts to apply their interpretation of the KSI way), the training approach cannot be guaranteed, and nor can the outcomes. You can appreciate our reluctance to refer to the unknown...
So…. it’s our challenge – more KSI coaches, ideally one in every town! And the benefit belongs to the client getting a better and predictable training service, and to the coach getting the referral!
Ian King
Want to put your hand up for this? Respond in the next 48 hrs to info@kingsport.net
So did I have any coaches I could refer to in Melbourne was the question,, and the challenges. I didn’t. Tragically we don’t have a KSI coach in every town!
Reminded me of a situation a few months ago where a US based friend of KSI was looking for us to refer a KSI coach in Spain for their client, a person associated with the band U2. Now we were able to find a coach however they were only a L1 KSI coach. We would have preferred a higher-level KSI coach.
I put out a call on our KSI Coaches private Facebook Page, and no surprise, no response. looks like we are going to have to throw our net out wider, something we're reluctant to do - because with a coach that has a bit of this and a bit of that in their tool box (even if one of those 'bit off's is attempts to apply their interpretation of the KSI way), the training approach cannot be guaranteed, and nor can the outcomes. You can appreciate our reluctance to refer to the unknown...
So…. it’s our challenge – more KSI coaches, ideally one in every town! And the benefit belongs to the client getting a better and predictable training service, and to the coach getting the referral!
Ian King
Want to put your hand up for this? Respond in the next 48 hrs to info@kingsport.net
Thursday, January 12, 2017
Time, Money & Happiness for the Physical Preparation Coach
I was sitting having dinner in North America in October last year with a large group of industry professionals, all accomplished in their own right. One of them was talking about the conference he had presented at during 2016 and I asked the question ‘What was one of the key things that stood out to you about the conferences or the trends evident?’ I didn’t expect the answer.
He said ‘The number of how to make more money presentations. At one of them there were 20 presentations, and 16 of them were about how coaches and trainers can make more money.’
This got my attention, as whilst I don’t believe in the blind following or need to conform to trends, I find value in studying trends to understand human behavior and direction of thinking.
There is no other way to say this - physical preparation as a profession is a relatively low income earning profession. Statistics suggest the average western world income is about $50,000, and the stats I have been exposed to suggest that the average physical preparation coach (all disciples) earns less than $50,000. (Remember this is not gross income, this is take home pay).
So it’s no surprise that the industry has gravitated towards solving this problem. I certainly did, back in the 1990s. More on this later.
So I became more focused on this trend towards the teachings of ‘how to make more money in this industry’. I came upon enough web sites to support the trend, and enough ‘trend spotters’ who were ‘fat loss guru’s’ in the early 2000’s and have now morphed into the dominant trend of financial and business educators for the physical preparation industry.
And I came upon an excellent article from a professional organization who seek to be one of the dominant go-to bodies for professional development. An organization with its fair share of peer-reviewed editorializing. I have concluded that this article is an fair reflection of the dominant thinking of the industry. That there is a need to earn more money, that there is a growing interest, and that the solutions suggested were indicative of the current solutions offered industry wide.
I might be a bit old-fashioned but there is nothing like a written article to provide clarity and confirmation about dominant thinking, as opposed to attempting to objectively assess the message in say internet marketing. So I am thankful for the author of this article for his efforts, and stress that any comments relating to this article should not be interpreted as being critical of the person or derogatory of their work. I am truly grateful for their efforts.
But at the same time I have serious concerns for the receiver of the message.
Back in the 1980s when I took on athletes as clients the majority of them had never done any physical preparation work before – they were for the most part clean skin and easy to shape in their values and beliefs about what they needed to do in training, as well as easy to shape physically.
Now most athletes have not only had prior training experience, the majority are broken physical and in some cases mentally by the time they are in the late teens. In the spaced of 3 decades I have gone from picking up ‘clean slates’ to doing damage control. I believe that the contemporary elite athlete (my market) would be better off if had they had kept out of the physical preparation training they have done during their teens and so on. Just like the 1980s and earlier athletes.
It can take years to salvage the bodies of these athletes. If they can be salvaged. The majority of talent identified athletes who have been in ‘high performance’ training squads from their early teens will be injured and out of the sport by around the age of 20 years.
So how does this relate to you?
The athletes I refer to have been trained by physical preparation coaches whose influence has included the post 2000s period, where unsubstantiated yet highly marketed training information and influences dominated the professional development landscape. I say this from a unique perspective. I watched too many key board warriors, who have never trained with any success, never trained anyone else with any success – in fact some downright failed to attract any client base of athletes at all (don’t believe me – I can show you emails….) – reinvent themselves with skillful internet marketing sprinkled with the license to create a perception of their ‘experience’ and ‘success’ that, well, was simply not true. And people bought it.
I have one such physical coach in a professional development course with me in the mid 2000s. I had them write a program for an athlete, and then analyzed the program. I could see the influences – it was after all the ‘most’ were doing at the time’ and I asked them – ‘Why did you write this?’ I followed this up with ‘Have you ever done these exercises?’ To which the answer was ‘No I haven’t’. Once the student coach acknowledged his source, I said ‘Guess what – the ‘author’ hasn’t done these exercise either!’.
The 2000s witnessed an explosion of made up crap, aimed to give a leg up to those seeking to become ‘experts’, for personal ego and financial gain. Some who bought into this said ‘Well what’s wrong this with?’ Let me say this – if you adopt and share methods that are a product of a desperate yet creative individual lacking in integrity, how do you have to add value to the life’s of others in a meaningful and substantial way? Your influence failed to and therefore turned to bogus and oft-times plagiarized content through they usual e-book delivery method etc.
If you need any further help understand why selling things that lack value or have less value than claimed, study the sub-prime driven financial crisis in the US between 2006 and 2010. The world was left with absolute clarity that selling fraudulent overvalued mortgaged backed security that really didn’t have the claimed value will result in collapse.
From what I have seen the ‘financial education being taught currently in the sport and fitness industry has the same absence of value and integrity that the post 2000 internet-guru based information has. And the risk shifts from damaging your body, to wasting time and effort seeking ‘financial freedom’. It’s one thing to arrive in your golden ages physically broken. Its and additional burden to reach the end of your working life to realize you have been led down the garden path.
So what are the alternatives? Let me share with you a time-tested perspective, from a person who reputation has been established on under-promising and over-delivering, straight shooting, to hell with marketing, no bullshit, tell it as it is.
In the early 1990s I realized the limitations as outlined in the article I refer to (reference below). I became a student of money, time and business. Nearly a decade later, in the late 1990s, I wrote a book on the subject (Paycheck to Passive – Going from working for a living to having a life) and began teaching anyone who would listen about money. This has helped a lot of people financially. I won’t make the claim as one of our Internet gurus has – (“…we’ve been helping millions of men and women.…”). Suffice to say there are people who have publicly credited us for moving their financial education forward substantially. What I am saying is its real.
I also provided some excellent business development guidance in my book ‘So you want to become a physical preparation coach?’ (2000), again which served a lot of industry personal.
From 2000 we set out to mentor our coaches and other business partners in financial education. We did so quietly and personally, as opposed to loudly and mass-produced.
However now that financial education for physical preparation coaches in now a trend subject, with our strength experts one day, fat-loss gurus the next, and business and financial educators the next – the message stands to be lost amongst the bogus claims of rags to riches, multiple 7-figure income business etc.
Now I know there will be some who say ‘So what Ian, any information being shared is good; leave them alone’, as was the typical response to previous alerts to the bogus ‘bibles’ of training. My message is not for you.
My message is for those who firstly realize there is a problem surrounding money in their working lives, seek a solution AND have the intuitive realization that the market is full of land-mines full of bogus ‘experts’.
Now let me clarify – the article I referred to above contained excellent, fundamental concepts. I was actually impressed and happy to see these concepts being taught, such as the limitation of selling your time for money. My concerns go beyond the accuracy of the fundamental.
In relation to anyone teaching financial freedom to our industry, my questions include:
1. What level of mastery in financial freedom does the ‘teacher’ have?
2. What reproducible by others business success do they have?
3. What is the true long-term upside of the strategies they are teaching?
Lets touch upon these three briefly.
1. What level of mastery in financial freedom does the ‘teacher’ have?
For example, how long could this person walk away from their business and not experience much of a downturn of income? Do they typically spend a few months a year on holiday, travelling and enjoying their ‘financial freedom?’
2. What reproducible by others business success do they have?
Who are some of the ‘millions’ of people they have helped transform their life financially – what is the answer to these same questions to their students?
3. What is the true long-term upside of the strategies they are teaching?
Do the strategies they recommend really result in ‘financial freedom’? How many people have you met in your lives that have achieved financial freedom from these strategies? E.g. selling e-books and other information on the internet?
Lets ask this simple additional question – how many first generation, self-made multi-millionaires from physical preparation have you met in your life? (not the internet perception – the reality)
Now I appreciate that at different stages of your career you have varying levels of interest in this subject. In my ‘Money and the Physical Preparation Coach Course’ (2016) I dedicated a unit to identify and discussing the concept of ‘stages of career’, sharing the following ‘stages’:
Phase 1: Blinkered and gullible - Years: 0-10 years into their career
Phase 2: At the crossroads - Years: 5-15 years into their careers
Phase 3: Embracing or denying change - Years: 10-20 years into their career
Phase 4: Living with or without the fruits - Years: 20-40 years into their career
Phase 5: Retiring in comfort or destitution - Years: Last 10-30 years of life
I go into more detail about these phases in that course. None-the-less, I imagine that only those in Phase 2 are still reading, and have concerns on this subject.
However, rather than assume this, I have some questions for you:
1. Firstly, do you believe there is a problem, at least in your life, as it relates to your financial future?
2. How many years have you been in the industry?
3. What are the frustrations or challenges you experience?
No I know it’s tough (especially for us males and our alpha sisters), to acknowledge we have a ‘problem’. Let me share a key paragraph outlining some key ‘problems’ as identified by the article I referred to earlier (1):
References
(1) Drake, J., and NSCA Personal Training Quarterly, 2016, The training trap – building financial freedom in an appointment-based career, NSCA December Issue Member News
He said ‘The number of how to make more money presentations. At one of them there were 20 presentations, and 16 of them were about how coaches and trainers can make more money.’
This got my attention, as whilst I don’t believe in the blind following or need to conform to trends, I find value in studying trends to understand human behavior and direction of thinking.
There is no other way to say this - physical preparation as a profession is a relatively low income earning profession. Statistics suggest the average western world income is about $50,000, and the stats I have been exposed to suggest that the average physical preparation coach (all disciples) earns less than $50,000. (Remember this is not gross income, this is take home pay).
So it’s no surprise that the industry has gravitated towards solving this problem. I certainly did, back in the 1990s. More on this later.
So I became more focused on this trend towards the teachings of ‘how to make more money in this industry’. I came upon enough web sites to support the trend, and enough ‘trend spotters’ who were ‘fat loss guru’s’ in the early 2000’s and have now morphed into the dominant trend of financial and business educators for the physical preparation industry.
And I came upon an excellent article from a professional organization who seek to be one of the dominant go-to bodies for professional development. An organization with its fair share of peer-reviewed editorializing. I have concluded that this article is an fair reflection of the dominant thinking of the industry. That there is a need to earn more money, that there is a growing interest, and that the solutions suggested were indicative of the current solutions offered industry wide.
I might be a bit old-fashioned but there is nothing like a written article to provide clarity and confirmation about dominant thinking, as opposed to attempting to objectively assess the message in say internet marketing. So I am thankful for the author of this article for his efforts, and stress that any comments relating to this article should not be interpreted as being critical of the person or derogatory of their work. I am truly grateful for their efforts.
But at the same time I have serious concerns for the receiver of the message.
Back in the 1980s when I took on athletes as clients the majority of them had never done any physical preparation work before – they were for the most part clean skin and easy to shape in their values and beliefs about what they needed to do in training, as well as easy to shape physically.
Now most athletes have not only had prior training experience, the majority are broken physical and in some cases mentally by the time they are in the late teens. In the spaced of 3 decades I have gone from picking up ‘clean slates’ to doing damage control. I believe that the contemporary elite athlete (my market) would be better off if had they had kept out of the physical preparation training they have done during their teens and so on. Just like the 1980s and earlier athletes.
It can take years to salvage the bodies of these athletes. If they can be salvaged. The majority of talent identified athletes who have been in ‘high performance’ training squads from their early teens will be injured and out of the sport by around the age of 20 years.
So how does this relate to you?
The athletes I refer to have been trained by physical preparation coaches whose influence has included the post 2000s period, where unsubstantiated yet highly marketed training information and influences dominated the professional development landscape. I say this from a unique perspective. I watched too many key board warriors, who have never trained with any success, never trained anyone else with any success – in fact some downright failed to attract any client base of athletes at all (don’t believe me – I can show you emails….) – reinvent themselves with skillful internet marketing sprinkled with the license to create a perception of their ‘experience’ and ‘success’ that, well, was simply not true. And people bought it.
I have one such physical coach in a professional development course with me in the mid 2000s. I had them write a program for an athlete, and then analyzed the program. I could see the influences – it was after all the ‘most’ were doing at the time’ and I asked them – ‘Why did you write this?’ I followed this up with ‘Have you ever done these exercises?’ To which the answer was ‘No I haven’t’. Once the student coach acknowledged his source, I said ‘Guess what – the ‘author’ hasn’t done these exercise either!’.
The 2000s witnessed an explosion of made up crap, aimed to give a leg up to those seeking to become ‘experts’, for personal ego and financial gain. Some who bought into this said ‘Well what’s wrong this with?’ Let me say this – if you adopt and share methods that are a product of a desperate yet creative individual lacking in integrity, how do you have to add value to the life’s of others in a meaningful and substantial way? Your influence failed to and therefore turned to bogus and oft-times plagiarized content through they usual e-book delivery method etc.
If you need any further help understand why selling things that lack value or have less value than claimed, study the sub-prime driven financial crisis in the US between 2006 and 2010. The world was left with absolute clarity that selling fraudulent overvalued mortgaged backed security that really didn’t have the claimed value will result in collapse.
From what I have seen the ‘financial education being taught currently in the sport and fitness industry has the same absence of value and integrity that the post 2000 internet-guru based information has. And the risk shifts from damaging your body, to wasting time and effort seeking ‘financial freedom’. It’s one thing to arrive in your golden ages physically broken. Its and additional burden to reach the end of your working life to realize you have been led down the garden path.
So what are the alternatives? Let me share with you a time-tested perspective, from a person who reputation has been established on under-promising and over-delivering, straight shooting, to hell with marketing, no bullshit, tell it as it is.
In the early 1990s I realized the limitations as outlined in the article I refer to (reference below). I became a student of money, time and business. Nearly a decade later, in the late 1990s, I wrote a book on the subject (Paycheck to Passive – Going from working for a living to having a life) and began teaching anyone who would listen about money. This has helped a lot of people financially. I won’t make the claim as one of our Internet gurus has – (“…we’ve been helping millions of men and women.…”). Suffice to say there are people who have publicly credited us for moving their financial education forward substantially. What I am saying is its real.
I also provided some excellent business development guidance in my book ‘So you want to become a physical preparation coach?’ (2000), again which served a lot of industry personal.
From 2000 we set out to mentor our coaches and other business partners in financial education. We did so quietly and personally, as opposed to loudly and mass-produced.
However now that financial education for physical preparation coaches in now a trend subject, with our strength experts one day, fat-loss gurus the next, and business and financial educators the next – the message stands to be lost amongst the bogus claims of rags to riches, multiple 7-figure income business etc.
Now I know there will be some who say ‘So what Ian, any information being shared is good; leave them alone’, as was the typical response to previous alerts to the bogus ‘bibles’ of training. My message is not for you.
My message is for those who firstly realize there is a problem surrounding money in their working lives, seek a solution AND have the intuitive realization that the market is full of land-mines full of bogus ‘experts’.
Now let me clarify – the article I referred to above contained excellent, fundamental concepts. I was actually impressed and happy to see these concepts being taught, such as the limitation of selling your time for money. My concerns go beyond the accuracy of the fundamental.
In relation to anyone teaching financial freedom to our industry, my questions include:
1. What level of mastery in financial freedom does the ‘teacher’ have?
2. What reproducible by others business success do they have?
3. What is the true long-term upside of the strategies they are teaching?
Lets touch upon these three briefly.
1. What level of mastery in financial freedom does the ‘teacher’ have?
For example, how long could this person walk away from their business and not experience much of a downturn of income? Do they typically spend a few months a year on holiday, travelling and enjoying their ‘financial freedom?’
2. What reproducible by others business success do they have?
Who are some of the ‘millions’ of people they have helped transform their life financially – what is the answer to these same questions to their students?
3. What is the true long-term upside of the strategies they are teaching?
Do the strategies they recommend really result in ‘financial freedom’? How many people have you met in your lives that have achieved financial freedom from these strategies? E.g. selling e-books and other information on the internet?
Lets ask this simple additional question – how many first generation, self-made multi-millionaires from physical preparation have you met in your life? (not the internet perception – the reality)
Now I appreciate that at different stages of your career you have varying levels of interest in this subject. In my ‘Money and the Physical Preparation Coach Course’ (2016) I dedicated a unit to identify and discussing the concept of ‘stages of career’, sharing the following ‘stages’:
Phase 1: Blinkered and gullible - Years: 0-10 years into their career
Phase 2: At the crossroads - Years: 5-15 years into their careers
Phase 3: Embracing or denying change - Years: 10-20 years into their career
Phase 4: Living with or without the fruits - Years: 20-40 years into their career
Phase 5: Retiring in comfort or destitution - Years: Last 10-30 years of life
I go into more detail about these phases in that course. None-the-less, I imagine that only those in Phase 2 are still reading, and have concerns on this subject.
However, rather than assume this, I have some questions for you:
1. Firstly, do you believe there is a problem, at least in your life, as it relates to your financial future?
2. How many years have you been in the industry?
3. What are the frustrations or challenges you experience?
No I know it’s tough (especially for us males and our alpha sisters), to acknowledge we have a ‘problem’. Let me share a key paragraph outlining some key ‘problems’ as identified by the article I referred to earlier (1):
“The life of a personal trainer can be great, but trading time for money inherently limits income possibilities with only 24 hours in any given day. Furthermore, only so many of those hours are even available to work with clients. In an effort to make more money in that limited time, personal trainers are often forced to sacrifice personal priorities, service quality, and relationships. This can sometimes lead to frustration, burnout, and ultimately, career changes. The average personal training income in the United States is thought to be between $35,000 – $45,000 per year… These numbers seem great for passionate personal trainers starting out, but what about years down the road? Those who want to support a family, retire at a decent age, or create freedom in their career must take steps to rise above these industry averages.” (1)Does that help? Great, here’s what can happen. Participate in this ‘survey’ and see where it can lead. Send your responses to info@kingsports.net with ‘Ian, here is my MTH&TPPC survey response’.
References
(1) Drake, J., and NSCA Personal Training Quarterly, 2016, The training trap – building financial freedom in an appointment-based career, NSCA December Issue Member News
Sunday, October 30, 2016
Trump or Clinton?
How the 2016 USA Presidential elections will affect you – no matter where in the world you live
There are few key things that I feel many may be missing the point on about the current 2016 USA Presidential elections. Firstly there is too much focus on the messenger and not the message. Secondly there may be an assumption that is just about America, not about non-Americans living elsewhere in the world. And thirdly, a lack of forward thinking about the implications of the outcome.
Firstly - the message vs. the messenger. Granted it’s been a campaign that may have taken gutter politics to a new high (or low). And I can understand how anyone could be distracted by that. But let me bring you back on focus. It’s not about the messenger. Take Donald Trump. I see a lot of commentary on his personality, or on the allegations of his treatment of women, or on his own word selection about treatment of women, and so on. Or take Clinton, with focus on her email management or Benghazi or her husbands track record with women.
Firstly, let me be politically correct – what I am about to say is not endorsing the values or behaviours that either person has been criticises for. What I believe is however that the point is being missed. Go beyond the individuals - consider the bigger picture. This is the first time, to my knowledge, and in my lifetime, a complete political novice has been a front-runner for Presidency of the United States.
This is the message – that enough Americans are fed up with or frustrated by or disillusioned with the solutions offered in their adult lifetime by career politicians that enough of them are supporting an alternative. I suggest this is more about people power and one of the greatest shifts in political and social patterns in my lifetime that it is about Trump or Clinton.
And why? I suggest that a growing number of people in the US (and potentially other countries around the world) are concerned enough about their future that they are willing to endorse change. And that means they must be really disillusioned and questioning main-stream to-date accepted ways of governance. And that, for me is massive. There is a message in this, a ‘huge’ (no to paraphrase Donald!) message. We are possibly witnessing one on the most significant shifts in social and political thinking of the masses, based on I suggest financial realities. The system is just not working for a growing number of people.
In summary on this point, I suggest take your gaze off the personalities involved (the messengers) and look at the message – a proposal be the people, even it is only the Republicans to date in this pre-election (11 days away) moment - that there is a viable alternative that they are willing to support other than a career politician.
Now for the second point. Perhaps too many of us – myself included at times – have considered this an ‘American’ thing, that it doesn’t really matter to or affect those who are not US residents or citizens. Perhaps this is not so. What if the outcome of this election affected every country in the world and every citizen of every country in the word? And how might this occur?
In the first instance, considering the size of an impact of the US on other countries globally, it would be naïve and short-sighted to assume that there would not be a flow on affect to every other country. Now just how much impact may depend on many variables including the extent to which your country trades with the US. However there is a second potential impact. What is the same social wave of unrest, as I have called it, sweeps your country and impacts major decisions such as national elections? This is a very strong possibility, that the world may be moving into a different phase.
Thirdly lets talk about the post election impact. No, I am not talking about whether Donald jails Hilary if he is elected. Or if Hilary has retribution for Donald if she is elected; or whether Donald’s accusers will prevail; or whether the FBI will bring criminal charges against Hillary. I am talking about how our lives may or may not be impacted post election. Have you considered that?
I have, and I believe it’s something you should consider, and form your own opinions on before I share my thoughts on this with you – which I plan to do.
So there you have it. I trust I have stimulated you to give serious reflection to this moment in time, and perhaps have given you a new perspective on what may be happening – to us all, currently, in the US.
There are few key things that I feel many may be missing the point on about the current 2016 USA Presidential elections. Firstly there is too much focus on the messenger and not the message. Secondly there may be an assumption that is just about America, not about non-Americans living elsewhere in the world. And thirdly, a lack of forward thinking about the implications of the outcome.
Firstly - the message vs. the messenger. Granted it’s been a campaign that may have taken gutter politics to a new high (or low). And I can understand how anyone could be distracted by that. But let me bring you back on focus. It’s not about the messenger. Take Donald Trump. I see a lot of commentary on his personality, or on the allegations of his treatment of women, or on his own word selection about treatment of women, and so on. Or take Clinton, with focus on her email management or Benghazi or her husbands track record with women.
Firstly, let me be politically correct – what I am about to say is not endorsing the values or behaviours that either person has been criticises for. What I believe is however that the point is being missed. Go beyond the individuals - consider the bigger picture. This is the first time, to my knowledge, and in my lifetime, a complete political novice has been a front-runner for Presidency of the United States.
This is the message – that enough Americans are fed up with or frustrated by or disillusioned with the solutions offered in their adult lifetime by career politicians that enough of them are supporting an alternative. I suggest this is more about people power and one of the greatest shifts in political and social patterns in my lifetime that it is about Trump or Clinton.
And why? I suggest that a growing number of people in the US (and potentially other countries around the world) are concerned enough about their future that they are willing to endorse change. And that means they must be really disillusioned and questioning main-stream to-date accepted ways of governance. And that, for me is massive. There is a message in this, a ‘huge’ (no to paraphrase Donald!) message. We are possibly witnessing one on the most significant shifts in social and political thinking of the masses, based on I suggest financial realities. The system is just not working for a growing number of people.
In summary on this point, I suggest take your gaze off the personalities involved (the messengers) and look at the message – a proposal be the people, even it is only the Republicans to date in this pre-election (11 days away) moment - that there is a viable alternative that they are willing to support other than a career politician.
Now for the second point. Perhaps too many of us – myself included at times – have considered this an ‘American’ thing, that it doesn’t really matter to or affect those who are not US residents or citizens. Perhaps this is not so. What if the outcome of this election affected every country in the world and every citizen of every country in the word? And how might this occur?
In the first instance, considering the size of an impact of the US on other countries globally, it would be naïve and short-sighted to assume that there would not be a flow on affect to every other country. Now just how much impact may depend on many variables including the extent to which your country trades with the US. However there is a second potential impact. What is the same social wave of unrest, as I have called it, sweeps your country and impacts major decisions such as national elections? This is a very strong possibility, that the world may be moving into a different phase.
Thirdly lets talk about the post election impact. No, I am not talking about whether Donald jails Hilary if he is elected. Or if Hilary has retribution for Donald if she is elected; or whether Donald’s accusers will prevail; or whether the FBI will bring criminal charges against Hillary. I am talking about how our lives may or may not be impacted post election. Have you considered that?
I have, and I believe it’s something you should consider, and form your own opinions on before I share my thoughts on this with you – which I plan to do.
So there you have it. I trust I have stimulated you to give serious reflection to this moment in time, and perhaps have given you a new perspective on what may be happening – to us all, currently, in the US.
Sunday, June 12, 2016
Knee injuries - How can you hope to solve the problem using the stimulus that caused the problem?
As a student of sports training and competition I took up the opportunity to watch the exercise selection from the waiting room at the physical therapists. I was surprised at the amount of quad exercises used over the weeks of my observing.
Later as I lay on a table in the therapy clinic I listened to a young male client answer the question from this physical therapist.
Therapist: Okay what have we done so far?
Patient: Squats.
My mind: That’s one.
Patient: Wall squats.
My mind: That’s two
Patient: Lunges.
My mind: That’s three.
Patient: Walking lunges.
My mind: That’s four.
Patient: Step ups.
My mind: That’s five.
So far, the workout was 100% quad. I shook my head and said a prayer for the patient. Now to be fair I did see one non-quad exercise being done later. But the first five and the overwhelming majority of exercises being used in the rehab program for what I believe was an ACL surgery patient were quad exercises.
I found this ironic, because it was this very profession some 30 years ago that brought me attention to the risks of ‘quad dominance’ in muscle balance and its relationship with gait and joint integrity. And here I was, some three decades later, and they were creating that exact same condition.
I took this quad dominant concern, along with my own observations, quite seriously and spend a decade or so developing and refining before publishing a concept I called ‘Lines of Movement’ in 1998. You might not recognize the concept title I gave it but you will recognize the terminology by virtue of the prolific unreferenced and uncredited publishing by people who knew better.
In relation to the lower body, I developed the concept to ‘hip dominant’ exercises to counter the concern I learnt from my therapist colleagues about ‘quad dominance’. Now, nearly 20 years after I first published this concept, my theories about the risks of quad dominance have become greater and clearer. I rank the muscle imbalance presented by quad dominant training as one of the highest correlates with ACL ruptures and similar.
If I am track, then the question can be asked:
How can you hope to solve the problem (ACL rupture risk) using the same stimulus that contributed to the problem?
Now I understand that there are many reasons why most will disregard this message. Firstly, and most importantly, because the majority of ‘performance’, ‘injury prevention’ and ‘injury rehab’ strength training does just this – create quad dominance. And to accept this and change would take the emotional intelligence to conclude one is off track and needs to redirection one’s training programs. That’s the biggest reason the message will be ignored.
I understand this. I understand others are waiting for ‘evidence’. I say look at the changing injury landscape. This injury was extremely rare in the 1980s, and even after the surgery became available there was not an instant increase in ACL incidence – so the low incidence was not because the surgery was not available. It was just a rare injury. It is not any more. So what changed? Why are so many athletes suffering from this injury now? But this would take again a degree of commitment to excellence and a detachment from ego that few are committed to.
Evidence is, I suggest, another way of saying I will only do it when I see most others doing it, and when I am doing what most others are doing, I feel ‘right’ and ‘safe’.
What I do say is this – not withstanding the frequent medical claims I here quoted by patients all too often about how their graft will be stronger than the one their Maker gave them - 50% of all ACL patients will have repeat knee surgery, and 100% will have premature degenerative changes such as osteoarthritis. I would not wish this on anyone. If it was your child would you want this?
So while the masses wait the quarter to full century it may take for the ‘evidence’ to ‘allow’ them to take note of my conclusions, another generation or more will suffer from life changing injury and surgery such as the ACL.
It does not have to be this way for you and those in your care, however that is up to you.
Later as I lay on a table in the therapy clinic I listened to a young male client answer the question from this physical therapist.
Therapist: Okay what have we done so far?
Patient: Squats.
My mind: That’s one.
Patient: Wall squats.
My mind: That’s two
Patient: Lunges.
My mind: That’s three.
Patient: Walking lunges.
My mind: That’s four.
Patient: Step ups.
My mind: That’s five.
So far, the workout was 100% quad. I shook my head and said a prayer for the patient. Now to be fair I did see one non-quad exercise being done later. But the first five and the overwhelming majority of exercises being used in the rehab program for what I believe was an ACL surgery patient were quad exercises.
I found this ironic, because it was this very profession some 30 years ago that brought me attention to the risks of ‘quad dominance’ in muscle balance and its relationship with gait and joint integrity. And here I was, some three decades later, and they were creating that exact same condition.
I took this quad dominant concern, along with my own observations, quite seriously and spend a decade or so developing and refining before publishing a concept I called ‘Lines of Movement’ in 1998. You might not recognize the concept title I gave it but you will recognize the terminology by virtue of the prolific unreferenced and uncredited publishing by people who knew better.
In relation to the lower body, I developed the concept to ‘hip dominant’ exercises to counter the concern I learnt from my therapist colleagues about ‘quad dominance’. Now, nearly 20 years after I first published this concept, my theories about the risks of quad dominance have become greater and clearer. I rank the muscle imbalance presented by quad dominant training as one of the highest correlates with ACL ruptures and similar.
If I am track, then the question can be asked:
How can you hope to solve the problem (ACL rupture risk) using the same stimulus that contributed to the problem?
Now I understand that there are many reasons why most will disregard this message. Firstly, and most importantly, because the majority of ‘performance’, ‘injury prevention’ and ‘injury rehab’ strength training does just this – create quad dominance. And to accept this and change would take the emotional intelligence to conclude one is off track and needs to redirection one’s training programs. That’s the biggest reason the message will be ignored.
I understand this. I understand others are waiting for ‘evidence’. I say look at the changing injury landscape. This injury was extremely rare in the 1980s, and even after the surgery became available there was not an instant increase in ACL incidence – so the low incidence was not because the surgery was not available. It was just a rare injury. It is not any more. So what changed? Why are so many athletes suffering from this injury now? But this would take again a degree of commitment to excellence and a detachment from ego that few are committed to.
Evidence is, I suggest, another way of saying I will only do it when I see most others doing it, and when I am doing what most others are doing, I feel ‘right’ and ‘safe’.
What I do say is this – not withstanding the frequent medical claims I here quoted by patients all too often about how their graft will be stronger than the one their Maker gave them - 50% of all ACL patients will have repeat knee surgery, and 100% will have premature degenerative changes such as osteoarthritis. I would not wish this on anyone. If it was your child would you want this?
So while the masses wait the quarter to full century it may take for the ‘evidence’ to ‘allow’ them to take note of my conclusions, another generation or more will suffer from life changing injury and surgery such as the ACL.
It does not have to be this way for you and those in your care, however that is up to you.
Wednesday, June 1, 2016
Throwing the players under the bus – a strategy for failing as a coach
The first game of the season showed promise with the team winning the first half easily, and then holding on for the second half to win the game. By the second game this pattern of decline in dominance as the game went on became worse, and the team lost the second half.
I had fears of what was to follow, and my fears were amplified when the field announcer stated the final score and congratulated the visiting team for winning the second half. It was just the announcer looking to give a positive to the losing team, but he had inadvertently drove the nail further into the coffin of his own team.
As I feared, the coach told the team in the post-game talk that they were not fit enough. This code for something’s not working, I’ve got no idea what, but it must be your fault and the easiest blame strategy is ‘you are not fit enough’.
Predictably they trained the team harder in non-specific conditioning work as well as rugby drills during the following week. During the next game the team were the flattest they had been, with limited on-field talk. They almost lost the first half, and ended up drawing the game. This outcome was exacerbated by the fact that the opponent on this day had not won a game in the season to date. Of course, it’s unlikely that anyone took into account that they had played and lost to the competitions top teams.
So what do you do next after blaming fitness? The post-game coach’s speech focused on the lack of intensity, telling the players they needed to play and train with more intensity. I am not sure how you naturally bring more intensity when you are more tired than you needed to be, but that’s the way this scenario played out.
During the week, as you can expect, the team were trained in a way that resulted in the coach happily stating that they had brought more ‘intensity’ to training, inferring this would serve them well in the upcoming game.
In the upcoming game the team lost for the first time, failing to score a single try, and conceding nearly half a century of points.
So what do you do now that you have gone down the path of throwing the players under the bus? You start dropping players. So about 55% of the way through the season players are relegated, with the ensuing drop in personal confidence you can expect from players dropped without knowing why.
How did this work? The next game resulted in a score against that exceeded half a century. Now it was against the second strongest team in the competition, but the fact this team scored as many points as they did against a lowest rank team (a team that the losing team had easily beaten) suggested that the outcome was unnecessarily out of context to the losing teams potential.
So where do you go now? Shuffle players around, playing them out of the position you had them in for most of the season? Basically you run out of options.
Few would disagree that athletes benefit positively from people believing in them, especially their significant others. And who more significant than their coach? On the flip side, again few would disagree that negative impacts potentially result when a coach directly or indirectly tells the athlete they are lazy, don’t try hard enough, are not intense or focused enough, or are not good enough to play at that level.
The challenge with any coach who fails to interpret the cause of their outcomes is further failure. However this failure is magnified in it’s consequence in the team culture where the coach takes the path of throwing the players under the bus.
Whenever I hear a coach who by words or actions blames his players, I see a lesser future for the coach. To put it bluntly it’s a path to failure. This applies no matter what level it is occurring at, bet it the national team or a local kids team.
I have had the fortune of working with coaches who have the strength to deflect the pressure on their team. The long serving Queensland rugby union coach John Connolly was one of these. I was impressed with his choice to absorb the pressure and not throw the players under the bus. However these coaches are the overwhelmingly minority. From my experience, I have observed the majority of coaches blame the players, failing to understand that firstly what goes on is a product of their leadership, and that the act of blaming the players is in the short term the kiss of death to their team’s culture and in the long term the kiss of death to their coaching career success.
Few coaches develop their coaching abilities to the level of being able to consistently and successfully interpret the cause of their wining or losing, and I accept this. However my suggestion that even in the absence of this high level ability, coaches could benefit from avoiding the popular habit of throwing the players under the bus.
NB. The above is fictional story to illustrate the message.
I had fears of what was to follow, and my fears were amplified when the field announcer stated the final score and congratulated the visiting team for winning the second half. It was just the announcer looking to give a positive to the losing team, but he had inadvertently drove the nail further into the coffin of his own team.
As I feared, the coach told the team in the post-game talk that they were not fit enough. This code for something’s not working, I’ve got no idea what, but it must be your fault and the easiest blame strategy is ‘you are not fit enough’.
Predictably they trained the team harder in non-specific conditioning work as well as rugby drills during the following week. During the next game the team were the flattest they had been, with limited on-field talk. They almost lost the first half, and ended up drawing the game. This outcome was exacerbated by the fact that the opponent on this day had not won a game in the season to date. Of course, it’s unlikely that anyone took into account that they had played and lost to the competitions top teams.
So what do you do next after blaming fitness? The post-game coach’s speech focused on the lack of intensity, telling the players they needed to play and train with more intensity. I am not sure how you naturally bring more intensity when you are more tired than you needed to be, but that’s the way this scenario played out.
During the week, as you can expect, the team were trained in a way that resulted in the coach happily stating that they had brought more ‘intensity’ to training, inferring this would serve them well in the upcoming game.
In the upcoming game the team lost for the first time, failing to score a single try, and conceding nearly half a century of points.
So what do you do now that you have gone down the path of throwing the players under the bus? You start dropping players. So about 55% of the way through the season players are relegated, with the ensuing drop in personal confidence you can expect from players dropped without knowing why.
How did this work? The next game resulted in a score against that exceeded half a century. Now it was against the second strongest team in the competition, but the fact this team scored as many points as they did against a lowest rank team (a team that the losing team had easily beaten) suggested that the outcome was unnecessarily out of context to the losing teams potential.
So where do you go now? Shuffle players around, playing them out of the position you had them in for most of the season? Basically you run out of options.
Few would disagree that athletes benefit positively from people believing in them, especially their significant others. And who more significant than their coach? On the flip side, again few would disagree that negative impacts potentially result when a coach directly or indirectly tells the athlete they are lazy, don’t try hard enough, are not intense or focused enough, or are not good enough to play at that level.
The challenge with any coach who fails to interpret the cause of their outcomes is further failure. However this failure is magnified in it’s consequence in the team culture where the coach takes the path of throwing the players under the bus.
Whenever I hear a coach who by words or actions blames his players, I see a lesser future for the coach. To put it bluntly it’s a path to failure. This applies no matter what level it is occurring at, bet it the national team or a local kids team.
I have had the fortune of working with coaches who have the strength to deflect the pressure on their team. The long serving Queensland rugby union coach John Connolly was one of these. I was impressed with his choice to absorb the pressure and not throw the players under the bus. However these coaches are the overwhelmingly minority. From my experience, I have observed the majority of coaches blame the players, failing to understand that firstly what goes on is a product of their leadership, and that the act of blaming the players is in the short term the kiss of death to their team’s culture and in the long term the kiss of death to their coaching career success.
Few coaches develop their coaching abilities to the level of being able to consistently and successfully interpret the cause of their wining or losing, and I accept this. However my suggestion that even in the absence of this high level ability, coaches could benefit from avoiding the popular habit of throwing the players under the bus.
NB. The above is fictional story to illustrate the message.
Sunday, May 15, 2016
Stop injuring the athletes - ACL reconstructions
By Ian King
I was stretching beside the oval whilst debriefing my son following his high school rugby game and I looked. Three teenage boys from the opposition school were standing nearby, and two of them were in knee braces.
I have been saying for decades now that the rate of injuries to athletes is unacceptable and unnecessary. If fact those familiar with my writings would be appear of my zero tolerance attitude – we can prevent them all.
It has been tragic watching the advent then the rise of the ACL surgery since its introduction around about 1980. A positive sign is the discussions that are now occurring. In two different countries two separate article were published recently, one by a former elite US athlete who never fulfilled his career due to injury and the other by sports medicine advocates in Australia.
One of the many limiting factors in the effectiveness of any intervention that is stimulated by this growing awareness of injury incidence is what I call interpretation. Image ten coaches watching the same game where their team say lost the game. How many different interpretations will come from these ten coaches if they are independently arrived at? Could be ten. And how many of these coaches are high achieving in terms of their association with championships or whatever is the measure of success at their respective levels? At best one of them. And chances are that the coach with the most accurate interpretation.
Understanding why athletes get injured is no different – it is subject to interpretation. And listening to the interpretation provided by this sports medicine expert as to why the incidence of ACL ruptures in the young athlete is so high let me with little comfort that anything will change.
You see these experts cited the reduction in childhood play as the primary cause. I have heard the dominant interpretation amongst my North American colleagues – that the increased injury rate in young athletes is due to the lack of diversification in sports played in formative years and that the athletes are specializing too early.
Both lovely theories, and both have validity in the bigger picture of long term athlete development. But both, in my humble opinion, miss the target. And this is where you come in. You are going to either adopt one of the theories presented here (including my theory) of form your own. Whatever path you choose, I ask two things.
Firstly understand the seriousness of your interpretative decisions. You have the live, the quality of life and the livelihood (the US athlete only dropped 5 million dollars…..) of the athlete in your hands. I know you didn’t sign the Hippocratic Oath but for the sake of athletes all over the world I hope you would adopt this attitude:
First, do no harm.
Now based on a number of factors I am not optimistic that you will take the most effective path. Why am I so negative? Firstly that most of you will do what most do. And from my perspective, this conforming path gives you social comfort but leaves you under-performing on your potential, and the athletes will path the price. Secondly, most of you will lack the experience or competence to make optimal decisions. And thirdly few of you will be in a position to monitor the cause-effect relationship of training and injuries through multi-year controlled environments.
So if you are have not been too offended and are still reading, leaves me to the second request. I respect whatever path you take, and I accept that most of you will miss the target. But what you can do is every few years take stock, reflect, and change your mind. Get better at avoiding injuries in the athletes who trust you. Now this will require taking responsibility for your decisions rather than avoiding responsibility, which in sport is easy to do. It will also take humility and the willingness to let go of any dogma. So I understand this request is a large one, but I make it with optimism.
I want you to act before the duty of care concept from the legal perspective is your driving force. You are getting away with doing things today that are causes serious injury because ‘everyone’ is doing the same thing and ‘science’ has not yet ‘confirmed’ that what you are doing is causing the injuries. But one day, science will catch up and you will be held responsible for doing the things you take for granted now, like endless walking lunges, failing to stretch the athlete, and for developing the quad dominance that your current training programs are – just to name a few. One day these debilitating practices will be frowned upon. But you don’t have to wait till everyone has caught up. You can work these things out now and, for the sake of the athletes, make the changes and STOP INJURYING the athletes!
So what, in my humble opinion, has brought on the rise of incidence in ACL surgery? There are many factors, and in every case the hierarchy will be different, and this level of individual interpretation is nigh impossible in a world that struggles with accurate generalized interpretation. However, for the sake of starting your journey to serving the athletes better, I raise three of what I consider up the top end of contributing causes in most cases. I list them alphabetically to avoid any further message of which is more important or correlative.
I will also give examples in each case to demonstrate some of the influences in my conclusions.
1. The introduction of strength training and the inherent quad dominance in the program design.
Using the young athlete as a time line, based on my experience dealing with post high school elite athletes in Australia, there were few if any formal strength training programs in high schools in Australia prior to the early to mid-1990s. I suggest, and this is a hypothesis, that you could track the rise of ACL injuries in young athletes (12-24 years) along beside the rise of strength training programs in high schools and find a strong correlation.
Am I saying that strength training is bad for young athletes and should not be done? Not at all. What I am saying is that if strength training with the same imbalances as exist traditionally in adult or elite programs is applied to kids, they will suffer injuries early. And that is what is happening, I suggest.
I propose a second hypothesis – if you could track the rate at which strength training has been offered to younger and younger athletes in the high school programs, with the rise in incidence of ACL ruptures in younger and younger athletes, I suggest you would see a correlative pattern.
Now these same imbalances have been inherent in adult elite programs since I have been studying strength training for sport, since its inception around 1970 in the US.
During the 1980s I began forming a conceptual theory that I called ‘Lines of Movement’, to understand how inherent imbalances in traditional program design could quantified. I published this concept for the first time in 1998 Here is the fundamental message:
I identified the imbalances of the lower body musculature and found a way to teach the risk and solution in the 1980s and taught it in the 1990s. I have since advanced my theories but the historic content would serve you really well as a base point.
2. The failure to address length and tension of the connective tissue
As a student of training trends and optimal training it has been extremely interesting to say the least to watch the trends in this area of training during the last four decades. The rise of connective tissues is undeniable, and the effort to find solutions pitiful. I suggest that the only thing my colleagues are concerned about is whether they are being trend conforming, dressed up in the behavioral term ‘cutting edge’.
Let me put it this way – more and more and younger and younger athletes are being exposed to strength training, and experiencing tissue shortening and tension increases. And the best that is bring offered is dynamic ‘stretching’ and foam rolling?
Again let me be clear – I am not saying that either is bad or of no value. What I am saying is this.
Dynamic stretching is barely stretching and does not replace the role of static stretching. And as for the dominant discouragements to the masses of the post 2000 era – that pre-training static stretching will make you weak and or increases your injures – injuries could not get much higher and the dominant value is stretching is minimized, what is done is predominantly dynamic. It’s not working! It never did! All I have to offer is four decades of professional application with an intensity and desire for optimal outcomes that few can match. Who cares about my experience? I can assure, the thousands of athletes who I have given injury free high performance careers to have.
Now foam rollers – the only reason you have heard about this option was because small equipment distributors in the US realized the profit in re-selling a piece of foam and instructed their seminar speakers to project expert (and I suggest overnight expertise) opinions on the value of rolling, to the extent that it was placed in the sequence of training sessions as a mandatory must do – and the non-trendy static stretching was left out!
Now anyone who has truly been involved in athlete preparation has been having their athletes roll on tennis balls and similar forever. But not instead of stretching and not as a replacement for massage. Rolling is great, but if you fail to keep it in context you under-perform for the athlete.
3. Fatigue
There is a point in time for even the well-conditioned athlete that the incidence of injury, especially what some mistakenly assume to be ‘impact’ injuries, increase rapidly. Here’s a third proposal or hypothesis – if you could track the level of fatigue of the athlete with those that suffer ACL rupture I suggest you would find a strong correlation. Now this hypothesis is probably the hardest one to test, I appreciate that.
I have witnessed the highest incidence of ‘impact’ injuries including ACL in the sporting teams with the highest volume training. I could name example coaches whose careers I have been monitoring for years and in some cases decades to understand the correlation between training volume, fatigue and injury incidence.
This is a risk that all coaches face at all times, requiring them to monitor their training volumes. The interpretation is made more difficult by realities such as the fatigued athlete could injure early in the game and we could say it can’t have been fatigue because it happened early in the game. Remember the residual nature of fatigue.
Conclusion
There is a growing albeit belated awareness of the high incidence of injuries such as ACL injuries in athletes, and in particular the younger athlete. Whist this is nice, and supports the strong concerns I have expressed for decades, my concern is also whether it will lead to any real intervention of this trend. My concerns are based on whether the interpretation of the cause of these injuries is accurately identified and isolated.
I provide three factors that I believe are highly correlated with the risks of ACL injuries, and provide three hypoesthesia that perhaps my more learned academic colleagues may one day investigate, to aid the thinking of the masses who wait for social proof such as this:
1. That you could track the rise of ACL injuries in young athletes (12-24 years) along beside the rise of strength training programs in high schools and find a strong correlation. 2. If you could track the rate at which strength training has been offered to younger and younger athletes in the high school programs, with the rise in incidence of ACL ruptures in younger and younger athletes, I suggest you would see a correlative pattern. 3. If you could track the level of fatigue of the athlete with those that suffer ACL rupture I suggest you would find a strong correlation.
However rather than waiting for the lagging indicators of science, for the sake of the athlete I hope that at least one coach might change their mind about how they train as the result of this article. I know the power of what is offered here, I also understand the power of conformity and dogma, and the over-riding desire of the majority to be like the majority, resulting is slow change. Thousands if not millions of athletes will get injured during this slow change, as has occurred during the last few decades.
What I would like to do is this – if you are a high school coach (physical or specific sport) and what I have said has resonated with you – and if you school would like to receive a 10 part video program I created last year titled ‘The Zero Tolerance to Injuries Video Series’, provided the school is making the purchase and it will be made accessible to all in the sports department, I would live to arrange this for you at no cost. Email my office at info@kingsports.net and ask us how you can receive this.
References
1) http://mweb.cbssports.com/ncaaf/writer/jon-solomon/25584164?utm_content=buffer0f307&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
2) http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/orthopaedic-surgeons-call-for-sports-injury-prevention/7382198
3) http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/rn/podcast/2016/05/bst_20160504_0836.mp3
4) King, I., 1998, Strength Specialization Series (DVD), Disc 3, approx. 1hr 06m 00sec in.
5) King, I., 2000, How to Teach Strength Training Exercises
I was stretching beside the oval whilst debriefing my son following his high school rugby game and I looked. Three teenage boys from the opposition school were standing nearby, and two of them were in knee braces.
I have been saying for decades now that the rate of injuries to athletes is unacceptable and unnecessary. If fact those familiar with my writings would be appear of my zero tolerance attitude – we can prevent them all.
It has been tragic watching the advent then the rise of the ACL surgery since its introduction around about 1980. A positive sign is the discussions that are now occurring. In two different countries two separate article were published recently, one by a former elite US athlete who never fulfilled his career due to injury and the other by sports medicine advocates in Australia.
One of the many limiting factors in the effectiveness of any intervention that is stimulated by this growing awareness of injury incidence is what I call interpretation. Image ten coaches watching the same game where their team say lost the game. How many different interpretations will come from these ten coaches if they are independently arrived at? Could be ten. And how many of these coaches are high achieving in terms of their association with championships or whatever is the measure of success at their respective levels? At best one of them. And chances are that the coach with the most accurate interpretation.
Understanding why athletes get injured is no different – it is subject to interpretation. And listening to the interpretation provided by this sports medicine expert as to why the incidence of ACL ruptures in the young athlete is so high let me with little comfort that anything will change.
You see these experts cited the reduction in childhood play as the primary cause. I have heard the dominant interpretation amongst my North American colleagues – that the increased injury rate in young athletes is due to the lack of diversification in sports played in formative years and that the athletes are specializing too early.
Both lovely theories, and both have validity in the bigger picture of long term athlete development. But both, in my humble opinion, miss the target. And this is where you come in. You are going to either adopt one of the theories presented here (including my theory) of form your own. Whatever path you choose, I ask two things.
Firstly understand the seriousness of your interpretative decisions. You have the live, the quality of life and the livelihood (the US athlete only dropped 5 million dollars…..) of the athlete in your hands. I know you didn’t sign the Hippocratic Oath but for the sake of athletes all over the world I hope you would adopt this attitude:
Now based on a number of factors I am not optimistic that you will take the most effective path. Why am I so negative? Firstly that most of you will do what most do. And from my perspective, this conforming path gives you social comfort but leaves you under-performing on your potential, and the athletes will path the price. Secondly, most of you will lack the experience or competence to make optimal decisions. And thirdly few of you will be in a position to monitor the cause-effect relationship of training and injuries through multi-year controlled environments.
So if you are have not been too offended and are still reading, leaves me to the second request. I respect whatever path you take, and I accept that most of you will miss the target. But what you can do is every few years take stock, reflect, and change your mind. Get better at avoiding injuries in the athletes who trust you. Now this will require taking responsibility for your decisions rather than avoiding responsibility, which in sport is easy to do. It will also take humility and the willingness to let go of any dogma. So I understand this request is a large one, but I make it with optimism.
I want you to act before the duty of care concept from the legal perspective is your driving force. You are getting away with doing things today that are causes serious injury because ‘everyone’ is doing the same thing and ‘science’ has not yet ‘confirmed’ that what you are doing is causing the injuries. But one day, science will catch up and you will be held responsible for doing the things you take for granted now, like endless walking lunges, failing to stretch the athlete, and for developing the quad dominance that your current training programs are – just to name a few. One day these debilitating practices will be frowned upon. But you don’t have to wait till everyone has caught up. You can work these things out now and, for the sake of the athletes, make the changes and STOP INJURYING the athletes!
So what, in my humble opinion, has brought on the rise of incidence in ACL surgery? There are many factors, and in every case the hierarchy will be different, and this level of individual interpretation is nigh impossible in a world that struggles with accurate generalized interpretation. However, for the sake of starting your journey to serving the athletes better, I raise three of what I consider up the top end of contributing causes in most cases. I list them alphabetically to avoid any further message of which is more important or correlative.
I will also give examples in each case to demonstrate some of the influences in my conclusions.
1. The introduction of strength training and the inherent quad dominance in the program design.
Using the young athlete as a time line, based on my experience dealing with post high school elite athletes in Australia, there were few if any formal strength training programs in high schools in Australia prior to the early to mid-1990s. I suggest, and this is a hypothesis, that you could track the rise of ACL injuries in young athletes (12-24 years) along beside the rise of strength training programs in high schools and find a strong correlation.
Am I saying that strength training is bad for young athletes and should not be done? Not at all. What I am saying is that if strength training with the same imbalances as exist traditionally in adult or elite programs is applied to kids, they will suffer injuries early. And that is what is happening, I suggest.
I propose a second hypothesis – if you could track the rate at which strength training has been offered to younger and younger athletes in the high school programs, with the rise in incidence of ACL ruptures in younger and younger athletes, I suggest you would see a correlative pattern.
Now these same imbalances have been inherent in adult elite programs since I have been studying strength training for sport, since its inception around 1970 in the US.
During the 1980s I began forming a conceptual theory that I called ‘Lines of Movement’, to understand how inherent imbalances in traditional program design could quantified. I published this concept for the first time in 1998 Here is the fundamental message:
After many years I have decided that there is two family trees in lower body exercises – one where the quad dominates, and one where the hip dominates. When I say hip I mean the posterior chain muscle groups – the hip extensors; which are gluteal, hamstrings, lower back – they’re your hip extensors. And I believe this – the head of the family in the quad dominant exercises is the squat. That’s the head of the family. And there are 101 lead-up exercises to it and there’s a few on after it as well. But the core exercise for the quad dominant group is the squat. It’s the most likely used exercise in that group for the majority of people.The following is a sample list, not in any order, of the major muscle groups of the body that I published:
The hip dominant exercises – the father of the hip dominant tree is the deadlift – which when done correctly would be the most common exercise of that group. There are lead-in exercises, and there are advanced exercises from it.
So I build my family tree around the squat and I build my family tree around the deadlift. And I balance them up. In general, for every squat exercise or every quad dominant exercise I show in that week a hip dominant exercise in that week. And what do most people do in their program designs – they would do two quad dominant exercises for every hip dominant exercise. What is the most common imbalance that occurs in the lower body?
….To balance the athlete I work on a ratio of 1 to 1 of hip and quad dominant - in general. And I can assure you – most programs you’ll see are 2 to 1 – quad and hip.
That’s a concept I’m sure you’ll have never heard before because this is the first time I have spoken about it.(4)
A sample list of muscle groups, not in any order.(5) _______________________________________________The subsequent dilution of the origin of this concept has gone hand in hand with its failure to impact the athlete’s outcome to the extent it could have. I can only recommend you go to the source, to my original writings, summarized in the ‘Legacy’ book or more extensively in my ‘Legacy Course’ (Level1 KSI Coaching Program). I understand that those looking for opportunities to discredit my message may call ‘marketing!’ at this point in time, however those that know me better understand it’s not about the money, it’s about the athlete. And if that’s the best way at the moment to help the athlete, and I suggest it is – so be it.
Hip dominant (e.g. deadlift and its variations)
Quad dominant (e.g. squats and its variations)
Vertical pulling (i.e. scapula depressors e.g. chin ups)
Vertical pushing (i.e. arm abduction e.g. shoulder press)
Horizontal pulling (i.e. scapula retractors e.g. rows)
Horizontal pushing (i.e. horizontal flexion e.g. bench press)
I identified the imbalances of the lower body musculature and found a way to teach the risk and solution in the 1980s and taught it in the 1990s. I have since advanced my theories but the historic content would serve you really well as a base point.
2. The failure to address length and tension of the connective tissue
As a student of training trends and optimal training it has been extremely interesting to say the least to watch the trends in this area of training during the last four decades. The rise of connective tissues is undeniable, and the effort to find solutions pitiful. I suggest that the only thing my colleagues are concerned about is whether they are being trend conforming, dressed up in the behavioral term ‘cutting edge’.
Let me put it this way – more and more and younger and younger athletes are being exposed to strength training, and experiencing tissue shortening and tension increases. And the best that is bring offered is dynamic ‘stretching’ and foam rolling?
Again let me be clear – I am not saying that either is bad or of no value. What I am saying is this.
Dynamic stretching is barely stretching and does not replace the role of static stretching. And as for the dominant discouragements to the masses of the post 2000 era – that pre-training static stretching will make you weak and or increases your injures – injuries could not get much higher and the dominant value is stretching is minimized, what is done is predominantly dynamic. It’s not working! It never did! All I have to offer is four decades of professional application with an intensity and desire for optimal outcomes that few can match. Who cares about my experience? I can assure, the thousands of athletes who I have given injury free high performance careers to have.
Now foam rollers – the only reason you have heard about this option was because small equipment distributors in the US realized the profit in re-selling a piece of foam and instructed their seminar speakers to project expert (and I suggest overnight expertise) opinions on the value of rolling, to the extent that it was placed in the sequence of training sessions as a mandatory must do – and the non-trendy static stretching was left out!
Now anyone who has truly been involved in athlete preparation has been having their athletes roll on tennis balls and similar forever. But not instead of stretching and not as a replacement for massage. Rolling is great, but if you fail to keep it in context you under-perform for the athlete.
3. Fatigue
There is a point in time for even the well-conditioned athlete that the incidence of injury, especially what some mistakenly assume to be ‘impact’ injuries, increase rapidly. Here’s a third proposal or hypothesis – if you could track the level of fatigue of the athlete with those that suffer ACL rupture I suggest you would find a strong correlation. Now this hypothesis is probably the hardest one to test, I appreciate that.
I have witnessed the highest incidence of ‘impact’ injuries including ACL in the sporting teams with the highest volume training. I could name example coaches whose careers I have been monitoring for years and in some cases decades to understand the correlation between training volume, fatigue and injury incidence.
This is a risk that all coaches face at all times, requiring them to monitor their training volumes. The interpretation is made more difficult by realities such as the fatigued athlete could injure early in the game and we could say it can’t have been fatigue because it happened early in the game. Remember the residual nature of fatigue.
Conclusion
There is a growing albeit belated awareness of the high incidence of injuries such as ACL injuries in athletes, and in particular the younger athlete. Whist this is nice, and supports the strong concerns I have expressed for decades, my concern is also whether it will lead to any real intervention of this trend. My concerns are based on whether the interpretation of the cause of these injuries is accurately identified and isolated.
I provide three factors that I believe are highly correlated with the risks of ACL injuries, and provide three hypoesthesia that perhaps my more learned academic colleagues may one day investigate, to aid the thinking of the masses who wait for social proof such as this:
1. That you could track the rise of ACL injuries in young athletes (12-24 years) along beside the rise of strength training programs in high schools and find a strong correlation. 2. If you could track the rate at which strength training has been offered to younger and younger athletes in the high school programs, with the rise in incidence of ACL ruptures in younger and younger athletes, I suggest you would see a correlative pattern. 3. If you could track the level of fatigue of the athlete with those that suffer ACL rupture I suggest you would find a strong correlation.
However rather than waiting for the lagging indicators of science, for the sake of the athlete I hope that at least one coach might change their mind about how they train as the result of this article. I know the power of what is offered here, I also understand the power of conformity and dogma, and the over-riding desire of the majority to be like the majority, resulting is slow change. Thousands if not millions of athletes will get injured during this slow change, as has occurred during the last few decades.
What I would like to do is this – if you are a high school coach (physical or specific sport) and what I have said has resonated with you – and if you school would like to receive a 10 part video program I created last year titled ‘The Zero Tolerance to Injuries Video Series’, provided the school is making the purchase and it will be made accessible to all in the sports department, I would live to arrange this for you at no cost. Email my office at info@kingsports.net and ask us how you can receive this.
References
1) http://mweb.cbssports.com/ncaaf/writer/jon-solomon/25584164?utm_content=buffer0f307&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
2) http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/orthopaedic-surgeons-call-for-sports-injury-prevention/7382198
3) http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/rn/podcast/2016/05/bst_20160504_0836.mp3
4) King, I., 1998, Strength Specialization Series (DVD), Disc 3, approx. 1hr 06m 00sec in.
5) King, I., 2000, How to Teach Strength Training Exercises
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
