Ian King

More than a decade behind the times  

/by

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.

Ian King

The NSCA and Ethics  

/by

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I took them down, because as the years passed the missing years may have given the perception that I my membership was no longer current.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?

Ian King

Why the variation on my single leg stiff-leg deadlift? I’ve just had an epiphany!  

/by

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…..

Ian King

The Legacy World Tour  

/by

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.

Ian King

That single leg squat exercise description looks familiar!  

/by

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:
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 another publication I came upon this (bolding added):

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. 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 another publication I came upon this (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 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?….

Ian King

Build 12″ Guns!

/by

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]

Ian King

A great lesson from a unique athlete

/by

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

Ian King

Someone spiked my drink…  

/by

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.

Ian King

I was in the best condition of my life – I don’t understand it….

/by

‘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….

Ian King

Giving credit

/by

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….