Ian King

Awesome Abs – And 10 reasons why it won’t happen!

/by

The abdominals are one of the most emotionally driven muscle groups in physique enhancement. Perhaps not as high up on the value list as say arms for males or currently the gluts for women, but they have been a mainstay for a long time.

There are a few questions about this, including is the focus producing the full potential of the abdominals? If it was, because of their relatively high standing in the emotional stakes, then the outcomes should mean there are very few shortcoming existing.

I suggest that is not the case. However, I respect that my ‘take’ on abs may be different than yours, and definitely different to the mainstream interpretation.

Here’s ten reasons why I have little confidence that what you are doing with your abdominal training will meet my definition of ‘Awesome Abs’:

  1. Your ab picture is small (Purpose)
  2. Your values are upside down (Visual)
  3. Your ab work is not contributing to the battle (Injury prevention)
  4. Your transfer to sport and or life is not effective (Transfer)
  5. You didn’t take the class (Prioritization)
  6. You do abs last (Sequence)
  7. You do too few ab exercises (Volume)
  8. Your ab view is too narrow (Lines of movement)
  9. You’re too scared to be / do differently (Conformity)
  10. You’re sucked into the conspiracy (Commerce)

 

  1. Your ab picture is small (Purpose)

I’ve said above that abdominals are a highly emotional muscle group in physical enhancement training. However, that is predominantly for one purpose only – aesthetics. The visual appeal of ‘ripped/shredded’ abs, affectionally referred to as a ‘six pack’. And no longer the exclusive domain of males.

That’s cute. But it’s a small picture.  If you consider my alternative picture on what the abs offer, you are focusing on 33% or 1/3rd of the ab offering and leaving the remaining 2/3rds on the table.

Here’s my ‘bigger picture’ of the abs, one that I have been sharing for over quarter of a century:

There are a number of reasons why you may or should be doing abdominal exercises and they include:

  • Abdominal training and visual impact
  • Abdominal training and transfer to sport and or life
  • Abdominal training and injury prevention [1] [2] [3] [4]

Perhaps now you can see why I suggest that if not you, the majority have a very small picture view on their abdominal training influences.

  1. Your values are upside down (Visual)

To continue with this discussion, even if you were to suggest that your training embraced this bigger picture, I would challenge you on your values. Which of these purposes do you hold in the highest regard and which do you place at the bottom of your focus?

I suggest that an objective analysis of your abdominal training values, as demonstrated by your exercise choices, may be different to mine.

One of us is upside down…

As you will learn in this book there are a number of purposes or benefits from doing what I refer to abdominal training including visual, transfer to life and or sport (function) and injury prevention.  As you may have picked up on by now, I actually have a reverse perspective on the relative value of these three purposes or benefits – injury prevention, transfer and visual.[5]

Make no mistake – your values will drive your program design, and in turn the training results you get.

  1. Your ab work is not contributing to the battle (Injury prevention)

When I’m talking about the injury prevention role of abdominals, one of those key tasks is to contribute to a force couple with the abdominals to posteriorly rotate the pelvis (stand the pelvis up). [6]

I’m going to ask her to suck her stomach thin and to squeeze her cheeks. Why do I want to do that?  Well, I want to, they’re the two force couples and we’ll change the shape of her pelvis…She’s got a lack of awareness posturally. She hasn’t got a lot of support. And I’ve only just looked at one half of the force couple. [7]

What are the force couples for posterior rotation of the pelvis? …Glutes and abs…Versus what? Quads and hip flexors, generally speaking…[8]

I call this ‘the battle’: [9]

What is it, the force couple? Hip flexors, quads, pulling the pelvis forward, glutes not strong enough to hold it back, abdominals not contributing to hold it back. The hip flexors and quads are winning the battle. [10]

And the challenge for you, the way I suspect you are doing abdominal training, you are losing the battle:

Why is it pulling forward? What’s winning the battle? … The hip flexors and quads are winning the battle. [11]

This pattern results in the hip flexors winning the battle against the abs and glutes, consequently pulling the top of the pelvis forward and resulting in a pinching of the nerves feeding the lower body. Why? Because the quads/hip flexors get a better training effect. [12]

  1. Your transfer to sport and or life is not effective (Transfer)

The third purpose for abdominal training I identify is transfer.  And yes, everyone talks about – but if I was to literally interpret what the world is doing, I am going to assume that the so called ‘plank’ is the exercise that has been crowned as being the exercise with the greatest transfer. Now I don’t, because I do not believe that is the reason this exercise is arguably the most commonly used abdominal exercise in the world these days, taking over from the pre-2000’s garden variety ‘sit-up’. Call me cynical, but I suspect that the plank is chosen because it’s perceived as easy to teach and creates a painful muscle fatiguing outcome in the clients who have been conditioned to believe that muscle fatigue means a satisfactory training effect is occurring.

But if I did literally interpret the omnipresent ‘plank’, humans must live and play sport with rigor mortis….

  1. You didn’t take the class (Prioritization)

Since the 1990s, I’ve been providing a concise ‘prioritization of strength training’ lesson.

Prioritization of muscle group

i. By sequence:

a. Within the workout.

b. Within the training week.

ii. By volume.

iii. By load:

a. Load potential.

b. Percentage of maximum load. [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19]

I may be off point here, but if you are doing what everyone else is doing with your abdominal training, I am going to conclude you didn’t take the class – Prioritization in Strength Training 101!  Because they are simply not congruent!

  1. You do abs last (Sequence)

If most or all the time you do abs last in your strength workout, you are being compliant. Compliant with what most do.

The continuing dominant paradigm is that abdominals should be done last.  What if they are the weakest body part?  That doesn’t seem to matter!  What if they are the number one training focus for performance?  Again, it doesn’t seem to matter – they are placed last.  Why?  The repetitive answer I get to this is ‘because they cause fatigue of stabilizers and it would be dangerous to do things like squats after doing abdominals’.  Where is the evidence?  Is this evidence from empirical observations or ‘scientific’ research?  Again, that doesn’t seem to matter.  NOBODY does abdominals first!  What a load of trash!  The excuses support the paradigm, nothing more.  I train abdominals first when they are the priority for whatever reason and only put them to the end of the workout when I don’t want to totally avoid any possibility of total body fatigue prior to a maximal strength workout.  That is, I wouldn’t want the total body fatigue draining the neuromuscular system, reducing the potential for load.  But nothing to do with injury potential! [20]

But not compliant with what I concluded in the 1980s and shared repetitively in print from the 1990s onwards. [21]

Some key things I do (and perhaps a little different to what you may be used to!) is I spend a substantial amount of program time doing abdomen at the START OF THE WORKOUT.  Yes, that’s right, before any other exercises.  I know what you are going to say – how many times have I heard it?  Your granddaddy told your daddy and he told you – doing abs first will cause fatigue in the support muscles, which is evil blah blah.  Before you reel out the rhetoric give it a go.  Absolutely bash your abdominals and then squat – then come to your own conclusions.  It’s okay to have a different opinion to the rest of the well-trained monkeys! [22]

So, if you are doing what everyone else is doing – doing abs last most or all of the time – you are not going to achieve what I believe is the potential of your abdominals.

  1. You do too few ab exercises (Volume)

Most do one or two sets of abdominal exercises per workout and believe that’s sufficient. That might be in point some of the time, or for those who say only doing a total of one or two sets of lower or upper body per workout. And that’s rare.

Most do two to six (2-6) exercises and four to twelve (4-12) sets per muscle group. But not on the abs.

Bill Pearl’s  classic Keys to the Inner Universe lists and graphically illustrates over 100 ab and trunk exercises! Despite all this info, there seems to be a gap in the knowledge and the actual practice. I still see exercise programs that select only one abdominal exercise, usually a trunk flexion movement. Would you use only one exercise to train your legs or your chest? [23]

How do you explain that?

The only way you can is on the basis you believe the abs don’t deserve equality in volume to other muscle groups.

And that’s another reason you are not going to experience ‘Awesome Abs’, not at least by my definition.

  1. Your ab view is too narrow (Lines of movement)

Prior to the release of the Lines of Movement concept in the 1990s, the world viewed ‘legs’ as just that – legs.  All leg exercises were grouped together. Don’t believe me? You obviously weren’t doing leg exercises pre-2000 if you don’t!  In his classic book ‘classic Keys to the Inner Universe’[24] the legs were just that. A category that included squat and squat variations, along with deadlifting and deadlift variations.

This is not a criticism of Bill’s work. He was just reflecting the thinking of the time.  And so was everyone else. Up until at least, the late 1990s when I began to speak more openly about ‘Family Trees’ and ‘Lines of Movement’ in strength training.

That’s a concept I’m sure you’ll have never heard before because this is the first time I have spoken about it. [25]

The challenge with a broad grouping list is that it’s easy to miss appropriate balancing where there is the need to recognize the differences in specific muscle group actions within the muscle group.

Which is why I separated ‘Hip dominant’ from ‘Quad dominant’.

After many years I have decided that there are two family trees in lower body exercises – one where the quad dominates, and one where the hip dominates. [26]

And you are probably making this mistake by assuming and treating the ‘abdominals’ (or worse still, the ‘core’) as one. They are not.

I divide the abdominal muscle groups or functions down into six (6).  The technical correctness of my divisions I will leave to those with the time and motivation to debate to do so.  This is a simple and effective approach to ensuring exposure to all abdominal and some of the other trunk stabilizers…[27]

I provided the ‘Abdominal Lines of Movement’ over a quarter of a century ago, yet most chose not to ‘take that class!’. If you are choosing to ignore some or most of these abdominal ‘Lines of Movement’ – and most are – you’d better have a very good reason for it – other than ignorance…

  1. You’re too scared to be / do differently (Conformity)

As I mentioned above, you are most likely doing abdominals the way everyone else is. And that’s fine. It’s just not optimal.

I resonate with the American existential psychologist and author Rollo May’s treatise on conformity:

The opposite of courage isn’t cowardice; it’s conformity.[28]

It may be harsh, but I am willing to challenge you – one of the main reasons you are doing what you are doing in relation to your abdominal training is that you would prefer to conform. And that’s a choice.

You could break the mold. But it would mean being different, and I understand not too many of you are ready to be different.  Conformity is much more comfortable… Most humans chose to live a life less courageous, more ordinary. So, you are ‘normal’ by choosing the same.[29]

It’s just a choice worth reflecting on.

Including once you have considered my thoughts about the drivers of the trends you are conforming to.

  1. You’re sucked into the conspiracy (Commerce)

When I first started writing about a possible ‘conspiracy’ in training back in the late 1990s, I didn’t feel totally comfortable because back then anyone talking conspiracy was considered somewhat of a ‘nutter’, at risk of not being taken seriously. Fast forward to the 2020s, and everyone has a conspiracy theory they want to share. So, rest assured, this talk is not a new post-Covid trend compliant behaviour. I’ve been singing from this song-sheet for a bit longer than that…[30]

So, your approach to abdominal training is compliant with the majority, or the dominant trend.  For those interested in unpacking this, how is a trend shaped?  I have for a number of decades shared my beliefs on what are the influences that shape trends in strength training. [31]

Trends I suggest are commercially driven. So, they are not there because they are optimal, they are not dominating because they are in the best interests of the end user – they dominate because people with adequate financial resources have driven the paradigm for their commercial benefit. [32]

For me the number one driver of behavior in our industry are those with vested interests.  The product/equipment manufacturers and distributors are great examples of this…

In the early years of my coaching career, I was where many of you are probably now, believing that to study and learn from ‘trends in training’ was wise.  It didn’t take me long to revise my perspective substantially since then. Throughout the 1990s I warned of the dangers of following trends. In my 2002 second edition of my 1997 book Winning and Losing I dedicated an entire chapter to this topic, titled ‘Don’t Get Sucked in by the Trends!’ [33]

To cut to the point – the risk abdominal training trends face is that too many can be done without equipment. And this is a problem…

Did you know the next craze to come out in this industry is this? It takes 15 minutes a day, six days a week, and involves no equipment. It’s going to be the next really big fad. There’ll be no equipment, and it will take up a time. What are my chances? None whatsoever. Because of why? There’s no equipment. Can’t sell it. No one’s going to make any money off it. And it doesn’t meet the needs of instant gratification. There are two criteria. The only stuff that you get exposed to in this country is stuff that people can make money off, and it’s convenient. And your entire professional thinking is based on those two things. You are completely bound on the variables of because someone decided they could commercialize it and make a profit margin from the sale of goods, that it met your perception of instant gratification. Neither of those two things are fundamentally sound. [34]

Just like another training method that has for the last few decades been successfully suppressed – stretching. Because it too – God forbid – is not equipment dependant…yet!

Who’s promoting you to flexibility? No one because they can’t make any money out of it. What’s the other thing? It’s one of the few physical qualities where perhaps more is better. How are you going to sell that? I want you to stretch for 20 hours a week. Not too many people want to join me. 

I’ll go and stretch for two hours. Who’s going to come with me? It doesn’t meet the social trend. Because you are marketing driven to be this, and the quickness, the marketing stimuli is so short and fast now that no one produces articles. They produce short things and they’ll be this and they’ll be this. And instead of every month, they go every week and it’s every day and it’s five times a day. And that’s the speed of marketing. The world isn’t stretch deficient because stretching isn’t effective. It’s just not marketable from the American marketing perspective. [35]

I know the world has fallen off the map when it comes to appropriate application of stretching.  I fear also that abdominal training may be slipping as well – for the same reason. Exercises that do not rely on equipment threaten the take up of equipment sales for those exercises that are reliant on equipment. Your training habits are up against well-funded opposition. You need to decide whose interests you are going to serve.

Conclusion

So, there you have it. You have the opportunity for ‘Awesome Abs’, but odds are, at least from my perspective, you probably won’t achieve them.   That may be harsh, but from travelling the world helping athletes and others with their training during the last half a century, that’s the conclusion I’ve reached.

But there is hope.

Provided you are ready and willing to take a bigger picture view of your abdominals, and to step outside the comfort and confines of the average person’s choices. To ‘think for yourself’. [36]

To help you do this, I have a created a book to help – and yes, the book is titled ‘Awesome Abs!’

When the abdominal student is ready, the ‘Awesome Abs!’ book can appear. That’s up to you. And of course, your view of the abdominals purpose and whether you feel you have fulfilled the potential of your abdominals.

 

References

[1] King, I., 2001, Thinking Man’s Guide to Ab Training, Testosterone, Issue No. 4, April 2001, p. 42-49. (Article)

[2] King, I., 2002, Awesome Abs – Stage 1, t-mag.com, 12 April 2002. (Article)

[3] King, I., 2002, Get Buffed! II: Get MORE Buffed! Ch. 9 – The abdominal exercises. (Book)

[4] King, I., 2026, Awesome Abs – Ch. 3- Why do abdominal training, Get Buffed Specialization Series (Book)

[5] King, I., 2026, Awesome Abs – Introduction, Get Buffed Specialization Series (Book)

[6] King, I., 2025, Legacy – Ian King’s Training Innovations – Volume 1 – Parts 1 & 2 : Injury Prevention and Performance Enhancement – Theory #94 – The pelvis force couple (Book, 2nd Ed.)

[7] King, I., 2016, A coach’s guide to preventing, identifying, managing, and rehabilitating lower back injuries, SWIS Presentation, Canada

[8] King, I., 2018, Does powerlifting transfer to sport? SWIS Convention Canada, 28 Oct 2018

[9] King, I., 2025, Legacy – Ian King’s Training Innovations – Volume 1 – Parts 1 & 2 : Injury Prevention and Performance Enhancement – Theory #95 – Who’s winning the battle? (Book, 2nd Ed.)

[10] King, I., 2010, Barbells & Bullshit, Los Angeles, 2 Oct 2010 (Seminar)

[11] King, I., 2010, Barbells & Bullshit, Los Angeles, 2 Oct 2010 (Seminar)

[12] King, I., 2001, Pelvis has left the building – How pelvic alignment and proper exercise program design can keep the injury goblins at bay, t-mag.com, 28 Dec 2001

[13] King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs, Prioritizing muscle groups (Book)

[14] King, I., 2011, KSI Coach Education Program, L1 Legacy, Unit 10 – Balance (Course)

[15] King, I., 2013, Legacy – Ian King’s Training Innovations, Ch. 28- Prioritization (Book)

[16] King, I., 2015, Strength training and injury prevention, Presentation at the 2015 Society of Weight Training Specialists (SWIS) Symposium, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 13-14 November 2015 (Presentation; Video)

[17] King, I., 2018, Ian King’s Guide to Strength Training, Vol. 3 – How to transfer strength training, Chapter 6

Avoiding creating new imbalances (Book)

[18] King, I., 2026, Legacy – Ian King’s Training Innovations – Volume 2 – Parts 3 & 4: Flexibility & Strength, Theory #255 – Reimagining strength training prioritization, (Book, 2nd Ed.)

[19] King, I., 2026, Get Buffed! V – Get Optimally Buffed, Chapter 7 Program design for Neuromuscular Optimization (Book)

[20] King, I., 2002, Get Buffed! II (Book), Sequence of Abdominal Training within the Workout, p. 130

[21] King, I., 2025, Legacy – Ian King’s Training Innovations – Volume 1 – Parts 1 & 2 : Injury Prevention and Performance Enhancement – Theory #99 – Abs first (Book, 2nd Ed.)

[22] King, I., 2003, Ask the Master (Book), p. 15

[23] King, I., 2001, Thinking Man’s Guide to Ab Training, Testosterone, Issue No. 4, April 2001, p. 42-49. (Article)

[24] Pearl, B., 1979, Keys to the Inner Universe, 1st Ed., Physical Fitness Architects, Pasadena, California

[25] King, I., 1998, Strength Specialization Series (DVD)

[26] King, I., 1998, Strength Specialization Series (DVD)

[27] King, I., 2002, Get Buffed! II: Get MORE Buffed! Ch. 9 – The abdominal exercises. (Book)

[28] May, R., 1953, Man’s Search for Himself (Book)

[29] King, I., 2022, Off the Record #122 – We work together every week, 6 April 2022 (Article)

[30] King, I., 2025, Legacy – Ian King’s Training Innovations – Volume 1 – Parts 1 & 2 : Injury Prevention and Performance Enhancement – Theory #27 – It’s a conspiracy (Book, 2nd Ed.)

[31] King, I., 2025, Legacy – Ian King’s Training Innovations – Volume 1 – Parts 1 & 2 : Injury Prevention and Performance Enhancement – Theory #122 – Training trends are commercially driven (Book, 2nd Ed.)

[32] King, I., 1997, Winning and Losing (book), Chapter 7 – Training Theories, p. 41-42

[33] King, I., 2018, KSI Coaching Program, L0 – Orientation, Unit 2 – What are the influences on the way I train my clients?

[34] King, I., 2010, It won’t sell, 8 Oct 2010, YouTube

[35] King, I., 2010, It won’t sell, 8 Oct 2010, YouTube

[36] King, I., 2025, Legacy – Ian King’s Training Innovations – Volume 1 – Parts 1 & 2 : Injury Prevention and Performance Enhancement – Theory #124 – Over-react in the short-term and under-react in the long-term (Book, 2nd Ed.)

Ian King

A thought for physical coaches – The lifetime value of our decisions

/by

In my holistic research recently I was exposed to information that I have wondered about. One of the individuals I have determined to be worthy of learning from shared information recently that I picked up on. I knew who their influences were, and I often wondered what the asset position is of the person I learn from. I learnt some answers to that today. Not the exact answer, but enough to get insights.

This information typically only becomes accessible when you get close enough to the mentor, and if you dedicate enough time to studying what they share – in print (books, emails, newsletter) and in videos and seminars.  I have done a lot of study of this person – years of it – to stumble upon this simple nugget.

As the person who commenced the first physical coach mentoring program, the value in mentoring matters to me, as it does to anyone when they choose a mentor.

Moments such as when I learnt this nugget of information from the mentor I speak about in this article require a moment when the person drops their privacy guard and shares a bit more openly. I know that moment. When I am talking to my higher-level coaches, I am more open with them but even then, need to review everything I am inclined to share before it comes out of my mouth.

There are a lot of reasons for this.

Firstly, there is simply privacy. We all want to determine who learns what about our person affairs. I am very conscious of this personally, and professionally, as our high-level coaches can confirm.

Secondly there is interpretation. In some situations, with some people, information shared with intent to help does not always work out that way. The way information can be interpreted can at times be more damaging than good, including with the best interpretations of both parties. Let alone when one of the parties has less than good intent.

The third consideration is readiness.  I am a strong believer that a student needs to qualify they are ready for that information, because if they are not, it will not server optimally.

Finally, there is confidentiality. When a person shares something with someone, even with the ‘right person’ at the ‘right time’, if that person then shares that information with another person who the original person has no say as to what is shared to whom, then all bets are off. It’s a shit show and all the efforts of the original person to ensure their information serves optimally is shattered

I know. It’s as simple as seeing as a person blasting out my innovations during their 10-year incubation period.[1] Ones that I have not even chosen to make public or talked about much.

So, after all this, I will share with you the information. But you will note that I am not giving names or details or specific context.

The person who I trust to learn off publicly thanks the person who exposed him first to the line of thinking, some 35 years ago – for how much money that person’s advice had made him. And it was a bigger number than I was expecting. And I know that my mentor is humble and discreet and not a bullshitter. Basically, he is disqualified from being an IG influencer!

And so, I know his asset position is even more than that…Wow!

And I know the lifetime value of this mentor’s mentor choice.

This is one of the many things that intrigue me.

So many focus on the perception others have of them.

Like – what if I changed my professional description from ‘personal trainer to physical preparation coach?’ Or what if I changed my title back from ‘physical preparation coach to personal trainer?’  Will I get more interest in me, my services?

Or how many people do I have following me on IG, or what multisyllabic words can I say or to get more? Or whether I should get hair implants and a fake tan? What car should I buy, drive and post about?

The other thing that I guess more perplexes me is how do I get across to our lower and even middle level coaches what we focus on and achieve in the higher levels?

After all, our ‘profession’ is so low bar – low income, low behaviour, low expectations – that there is very little awareness or expectation of more.

And then there is our ‘lane’. We are expected to stay within sets and reps.

Yet we do so much more.

KSI and my lifetime value to our high-level coaches – at least those who stay the course and change enough to graduate is getting clearer now, after a quarter of a century.

And it does have a dollar value. It might not be the same number as the one I learnt today about my mentor. But it is a number that if we shared it openly would at best get dismissed, at worst be subject to financial regulator complaints.

Ah, the challenges of life.

And then there are the challenges for those who remain the crab bucket of our average in our ‘profession’. Not for me thanks. And not for our gradates. It’s not easy getting out of that crab bucket but it’s worth the challenge. I know, it’s only for those with a strong desire and believe, willing to face and overcome adversity. But then living homeless is also filled with adversity – as I know personally – so we all pick our poison.

 

References

[1] King, I., 2025, Legacy – Ian King’s training innovations, Vol 3 – Injury prevention & performance enhancement, Theory #13 – A decade of testing

Ian King

Jimmy you might be asking the wrong person!

/by

I recently received a marketing email from Jimmy on behalf of a Chinese equipment company. It contained training values around a subject if have some familiarity with – the concept of control and stability and selective recruitment as it relates to strength training. Marketing my idea back to me a quarter of century later and wrapping it in the all-important marketing word ‘sciences’ …-well, Jimmy you might be asking the wrong person!

I began publishing an alternative model for the periodization of strength in the 1990s. This model included the sub-quality of control and stability, which prior to that did not exist in the strength vernacular, with all due respect to those who published on this topic before this.

I presented my unique model of strength periodization from the early 1990s onwards. [1] [2]  [3] The followings show the contrast between the classical or mainstream accepted model and my innovative model of strength periodization – which included a never included sub-quality – Control and stability. [4]

Here’s an example of this:

An alternative model for the periodization of strength. [5] [6]

Control/ stability/ recruitment enhancement

Hypertrophy/General strength

Maximum strength

 Explosive Power Maintenance of specific strength qualities

So – control, stability and recruitment…

Fast forward a quarter of a century later and I receive this marketing email from some China based manufacturing company:

Hi there, We’ve long admired how KSI grounds athlete development in science — especially your emphasis on ‘Control & Stability’ and ‘Muscle Activation’ as foundational, not just outcomes.

That’s why we designed three pieces specifically to support those principles *in practice*:
• Yoga rollers — for deep neuromuscular activation during stability drills
• Stability balls — with consistent rebound & surface grip to challenge control without compromise
• Non-slip base kettlebells — so asymmetrical loading stays focused on muscle recruitment, not floor friction

All use odor-free, eco-friendly materials (TPE/EVA/rubber-coated) — because safety and feel matter when teaching.

Which of these aligns most with your current teaching focus? Happy to share specs or samples if helpful.

Best regards,-Jimmy, Senior Marketing Specialist [7]

Now perhaps I can’t expect young Jimmy from Nantong, Jiangsu Province, China to be a student of the modern history of physical preparation. And I shouldn’t be too surprised how marketers lean on the magic word ‘science’ to validate what they are selling. After all, many ‘professionals’ in our industry do the same.

The challenge I have is that as the person who introduced the idea, I have some degree of familiarly with its origin. And if you refer to science as an academically approved study published in a peer-reviewed journal – no Jimmy, it was not based on science. If you definition of science is a coaches ideas doing their best to be objective, then maybe it was science. But I know my academic colleagues would not agree,

The Sports Science section in the May issue of Sportsmed News is characterized by poor attention to detail and again, a lack of science.  Had the author (lan King) invested sufficient time in collecting his ideas… There continues to be a paucity of sports science reaching the readers of Sportsmed News and the content in future issues must be improved; reliance on “theories based on tradition” (Sportsmed News May 1996,p7) is not science – it is handed-down information based on the guess-work and hit-and-miss efforts of others. Sports Science is evolving at a phenomenal pace and your readers deserve better. [8]

After all, if I have a dollar for every time I have been accused of lacking in ‘science’, then I would be sitting on beach with my feet up.[9] [10] Now if ‘science’ has provided validation since, I am not sure what it is in comparison to. My goal was simply to share with the world the conclusions I had reached during the 1980s about something that I felt was missing in the sub-qualities and periodization of strength.

Jimmy if you have a moment, and if you have the desire to learn some modern history, and if accuracy matters in your marketing – check out a summary of the origin of these terms and concept in the context of strength in Theory #381 – Period if strength and a new sub-quality! in Volume 3 of the 2nd Edition Legacy book trilogy. Or take me off your marketing list as it’s tough to read this BS….And while you are at it, because I know you are driven to excellence, can you reference your studies re. the ‘science’….As a lifelong student I am keen to learn!

As to your question –

Which of these [items of equipment] aligns most with your current teaching focus? Happy to share specs or samples if helpful.

Can I suggest you check out my thoughts about the relationship between equipment manufacturing and marketing”

I’m not here to make money for an equipment distributor. I’ve walked away from significant offers because I don’t like their ethics. What I tell you is free of commercial, cultural bias, and obviously that’s not popular. It’s not allowed to be popular. For starters, I’m telling you, you don’t need equipment. [11]

And the influence on training trends.

No. Can you tell me a piece of equipment that surpassed a barbell or dumbbell? Now, most people would answer that question. They would paraphrase the marketing that they’ve been told. I know the answers. Fortunately, you’ve been silent long enough for me to keep talking. But I’m telling you, there hasn’t been. Between your body weight, a barbell and a dumbbell, you don’t have a bloody good reason for something else. A really good reason. [11]

Jimmy if you are interested check out the following:

  • #207 – The way you train is driven by commerce [13]
  • #208 – The equipment manufacturers conspiracy [14]
  • Chapter 1 – in the soon to be released Get Buffed! V book….[15]

I know, it’s probably AI anyway…And Jimmy might not actually be Jimmy… None-the-less, Jimmy, you might be asking the wrong person….

 

References

[1] King, I., 1993, Multi-year Periodization of Strength, A presentation at the Resistance Training Seminar for the Australian Coaching Council High Performance Course, Australian Institute of Sport, Canberra, 11-12 October.

[2] King, I., 1995, Periodization, ASCA Seminar Series, Brisbane 11 April 1995. p. 9.

[3] King, I., 1995, Periodization, ASCA Seminar Series, Brisbane 11 April 1995, p. 10.

[4] King, I., 2013, Legacy- Ian King’s training innovations (book) 1st Edition book

[5] King, I., 1999, Foundations of physical preparation (Course)

[6] King, I., 2000, Foundations of physical preparation (book), Table 20,  p. 75

[7] Nantong Modern Sporting Industrial Co., Ltd.  Nantong Modern Sporting Industrial Co., Ltd.  Nantong, Jiangsu Province, China

[8] Jenkins, D., 1996, Letters to the Editor, Sportsmed News, August 1996, authored by two academics at the local university

[9] King, I., 2025, Legacy – Ian King’s Training Innovations – Volume 1 – Parts 1 & 2 : Injury Prevention and Performance Enhancement, Theory #16 – Sticks and stones,  King Sports International (Book, 2nd Ed.)

[10] King, I., 2011, Burnt at the stake, 3 May 2011 (Article)

[11] King, I., 2011, How to Write Seminar Series – Pt 1 – How do I ensure balance in my strength training to prevent injuries? Nerang Gold Coast Qld Aust., Sun 15th May 2011 (Seminar/Video)

[12] King, I., 2011, How to Write Seminar Series – Pt 1 – How do I ensure balance in my strength training to prevent injuries? Nerang Gold Coast Qld Aust., Sun 15th May 2011 (Seminar/Video)

[13] King, I., 2026, Legacy – Ian King’s Training Innovations – Volume 2 – Parts 3 & 4: Flexibility & Strength, King Sports International (Book, 2nd Ed.)

[14] King, I., 2026, Legacy – Ian King’s Training Innovations – Volume 2 – Parts 3 & 4: Flexibility & Strength, King Sports International (Book, 2nd Ed.)

[15] King, I., 2026, Get Buffed! 5 – awaiting publication

 

Ian King

The Wallabies Kiwi experiment

/by

In 2008 the Australian Rugby Union (ARU) employed a non-Australian to coach the national men’s team for the first time, making Australia possibly the first Tier 1 rugby nation in the professional era to do so.  This coach was Robbie Deans from New Zealand.   It was a move some called brave, but either way it raised eyebrows. Since then, the ARU has seen fit to engage two more foreign coaches, also from New Zealand. To date, our southern hemisphere rivals New Zealand and South Africa have not followed in this path.

Since 2008, New Zealand coaches have held Australian men’s national coaching positions for a combined eleven (11 years) of the last eighteen (18) years, or 61% of the years. Suffice to say they have been the dominant influence on the direction of the men’s national rugby team over the last two decades.

There is more than sufficient data to review the ARU’s decision to look overseas, and in particular to New Zealand, for coaching guidance.  Keep in mind that this decision has broader impacts than the scoreboard. It also reflects values around coach development and impacts opportunities for domestic coaches.

A statistical analysis of the Wallabies Kiwi coaches

The following is a statistical analysis of the Australian men’s national team coaches that hail from New Zealand.  The analysis focuses on

Robert Deans [1]

Robert Deans coached the Australian national men’s team during the period 2008 to 2013, or six (6) seasons. His win loss record with the Wallabies was 58.7%, making him the most successful of the three New Zealand coaches to coach Australia. [2] He also holds the record for the most tests coached by an Australin men’s national coach at 75 tests.

Against his former nation the All Blacks, Deans was 3 games out of 18 (17%).[3]

During his six-year tenure as the Wallabies national coach, Deans did not win a Bledisloe Cup during (0%), won one Rugby Championship (17%), and placed third in the only World Cup he presided over (0%).When Deans was appointed as the men’s national coach in December 2007, Australia’s international rugby ranking was 5th, and in the month of his resignation (July 2013) it was 3rd. [4]

Dave Rennie [5]

Dave Rennie coached the Australian national men’s team during the period 2020 to 2022, or three (3) seasons. His win loss record with the Wallabies was 36.4%, making him the least successful of the three New Zealand coaches to coach Australia. [6]

Against his former nation the All Blacks, Rennie was 1 game out of 7 (14%).[7]

During his three-year tenure as the Wallabies national coach, Rennie did not win a Bledisloe Cup during (0%), or Rugby Championship (0%), and did not preside over a World Cup (-%).When Rennie was appointed as the men’s national coach in November 2019 Australia’s international rugby ranking was 5th, and in the month of he left the role (January 2023) it was 6th. [8]

Joe Schmidt [9]

Joe Schmidt coached the Australian national men’s team during the period 2024 to 2025, or two (2) seasons. His win loss record with the Wallabies was 39.3%, making him the second least successful of the three New Zealand coaches to coach Australia.[10]

Against his former nation the All Blacks, Rennie was 0 game out of 4 (0%).[11]

During his two-year tenure as the Wallabies national coach, Schmidt did not win a Bledisloe Cup during (0%), or a Rugby Championship (0%), and did not preside over a World Cup (-%).

When Schmidt was appointed as the men’s national coach in January 2024 Australia’s international rugby ranking was 9th, and in the month of he left the role (mid 2026) it was 8th. [12]

Table 1 – Summary of success of the Australian Rugby’s New Zealand Coaches.

Coach

Win-Loss Record [13]

 Cup Results [14]

World Rugby Rank

# Yrs

 P W L D % Bled [15] RC RWC Start Finish Change

Dean

 6 75 44 29 2 58.7% 17% 1 0 5th 3rd

+2
Rennie

3

 33 12 18 3 36.4% 14% 0 n/a 5th 6th

-1
Schmidt

2

 28 11 17 0 39.3% 0% 0 n/a 9th 8th

+1
AVERAGE

3.7

 45 22 21 2 44.8% 10%

A statistical analysis of the Wallabies Australian coaches

The following table summarizes the win-loss record of the Wallabies Australian coaches during the ‘professional era’.[16]

Table 2 – A summary of the win-loss record of the Wallabies Australian coaches during the ‘professional era’. [17]

Years Wallaby Coach W-L %age
1997-2001 Rod Macqueen 79%
2001-2005 Eddie Jones 58%
2006-2007 John Connolly 64%
2013-2014 Ewen McKenzie 59%
2014-2019 Michael Cheika 50%
2023-2023 Eddie Jones 22%
Averages 55.3%

The average of the six (6) Australian coaches of the Wallabies during this period was 55.3%

A comparison between the Wallabies New Zealand and Australian Coaches

The following table compares the win-loss record of the Wallabies Australian coaches during the ‘professional era with the win-loss record of the Wallabies New Zealand coaches during the same era.

Table 3 – Comparison of the Wallabies Australian coaches during the ‘professional era with the win-loss record of the Wallabies New Zealand coaches during the ‘professional era’.

Origin of Coaches

 W-L %age

Wallabies New Zealand coaches

44.8%
Wallabies Australian coaches

55.3%

The verdict is in

With the completion of three coaching contracts in review, we have the results to form an comparative analysis of the decision by the Australian Rugby Union to select foreign coaches, and exclusively New Zealand coaches.

The New Zealand coaches average win-loss record is 44.6%, 11% lower than the 55.3% average for the Australian coaches.

A bigger picture look

To understand the role of the dominant New Zealand coaching influence in Australian national men’s coaching during the last twenty years, we can wider the lens and take a bigger picture look at the on-field results of the Wallabies since the game went ‘professional’ in 1996, thirty (30) years ago.

The following table and graph combine all Wallaby coaches’ performances during the professional era to date.

Table 4 – The combined chronological results of all Wallabies coaches during the ‘professional era’.

Years

Wallaby Coach

 W-L %age

1997-2001

Rod Macqueen

79%

2001-2005

 Eddie Jones

58%

2006-2007

 John Connolly

64%

2008-2013

 Robbie Deans

59%

2013-2014

 Ewen McKenzie

59%

2014-2019

 Michael Cheika

50%

2020-2023

 Dave Rennie 36%
2023-2023 Eddie Jones

22%
2024-2025 Joe Schmidt

39%

The data in this table is expressed in the graph below.

Figure 1 – The combined chronological results of all Wallabies coaches during the ‘professional era’.

 

It is reasonable to suggest there is a linear decline in win-loss records over the last thirty years, and origin of the coach does not appear to the cause of that trajectory.

Conclusion

The aim of this article is to compare the results achieved by foreign coaches hired by the Australian Rugby Union to the results achieved by domestic coaches.   The data suggests that the New Zealand coaches results are lower than the Australian coaches results, specifically in the win-loss record.

It is also important to note that the aim of this statistical analysis was to review the decision by the Australian Rugby Union to select foreign coaches, and exclusively New Zealand coaches. It is not to judge the coaching ability of the coaches involved, rather to look at the results during their time in Australia, in the Australian social, political and physical environment.

 

These coaches have all experienced greater success before arriving in Australia, and also afterward, for those coaches who have continued to coach.

The point was raised earlier that there may be broader implications for Australian rugby than the on-field results.  For example, the lost opportunities and lack of focus on domestic coaches and coaching development, to name one.

Since turning ‘professional’, Australian rugby during the last thirty years has slipped from number two (2nd) in international rankings to as low as tenth (10th), currently sitting in 8th. [18]

It is reasonable to conclude or suggest that the Australian Rugby Union has turned to arguably the greatest rugby nation in the world, New Zealand, for coaches in the hope to reverse this decline. It’s also reasonable to conclude is has not worked.

Some might say that the graph turning up recently is a positive sign. Getting excited about raising from 22% to 29% win-loss is questionable.

The question remains – if it’s not the coaches, what is the cause of this downward trajectory?

 

References

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robbie_Deans

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_national_rugby_union_team_coaches

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bledisloe_Cup

[4] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Data:Men%27s_World_Rugby_rankings.tab

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Rennie

[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_national_rugby_union_team_coaches

[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bledisloe_Cup

[8] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Data:Men%27s_World_Rugby_rankings.tab

[9] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Schmidt_(rugby_union) 

[10] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Schmidt_(rugby_union)

[11] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bledisloe_Cup

[12] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Data:Men%27s_World_Rugby_rankings.tab

[13] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_national_rugby_union_team_coaches

[14] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rugby_Championship

[15] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bledisloe_Cup

[16] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_national_rugby_union_team_coaches

[17] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_national_rugby_union_team_coaches

[18] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Data:Men%27s_World_Rugby_rankings.tab

 

Ian King

Reflections of a Dad

/by

When I receive course submissions such as the one below, in response to a unit in the KSI Child to Champion Course, its rewarding to know the lessons shaped over 45 years of coaching and shared in this educational tool for parents and coaches of the young athlete is worth the effort.

This is what this dad shared with me…

Unit 2 – The purpose of sport

I totally agree with Ian’s approach and message here. If you think about the big picture, how many kids are going pro? Or Division 1? Very few. But that shouldn’t be the goal. If your kid plays a sport growing up, and comes away with it healthier, feeling good about themselves, made a bunch of friends, memories, learned lessons that carry over to life etc, but never play in college or beyond, then in my mind it was a total success.

Absolutely. At 49 years old, I’m amazed by the impact of the lessons I learned from the best (and worst) coaches in my life. In terms of ‘positive’, I had an amazing sensei when I was 7, and the best hockey coach I ever had was when I was 11. I got so spoiled I thought all my coaches would be like that (they weren’t) But what I took away from just those two men was amazing, and shaped so much of who and what I am today. It was a huge thrill that I was able to take my older son to that same sensei when he was 8.

When I find a youth sports coach in any sport that makes the kids’ self-esteem a priority, I work to maximize the amount of time my kids spend with them. The opposite can be tougher (minimizing time spent about bad coaches), but it’s still something I do.

I don’t think I’ve seen many coaches that are malicious, and actually set out to humiliate kids, etc (though I’m sure there are some malformed people out there) but I do see a great many coaches that pay lip service to ‘having fun, creating a fun environment’, etc, but when push comes to shove, parents are yelling, heat of the game, they revert back to ‘just win baby’ mentality. I will admit that while I’ve never bought into the youth coaching ‘win at all costs’ thing, I have caved to parental pressure and changed my approach for the worse. Especially when I was young.

I’m going to talk to both of my sons today about their mindset. How they approach each practice, game, training session, etc, and focus on how they see themselves, what they’re capable of, etc. Prioritizing their self-esteem, that growth mindset, that it’s not all about the scoreboard, etc.

I think this section should be required reading for youth coaches, gym teachers, anyone working with kids in a sport/training environment.-John, USA

This has got it all – relating to the message through personal experiences that have seen the highs and lows of youth sport, living through it again with his kids, and being inspired to act in the now to shape a better outcome for the next generation.

And that response was just to one of the early units, in a course with over 60 units.

Thanks dad John for sharing those well considered reflections!

Learn more about how we are helping parents and coaches of the young athlete here.

Ian King

34 year ago…

/by

A few weeks ago another athlete reached out for a phone chat. They wanted to say thank you for you contribution to their sporting career. The last time we met and sport was 34 years ago.

He also spoke proudly of the reports and other printed information I had prepared and given him back in the day, and kindly offered to send them to me so I could obtain a copy. After all, computers had just arrived in 1992 – they are very simple, more like glorified type-setting devices – but emails had not, an internet as we know know it and cell phones were even further away.

I am always touched by athletes who care enough to express gratitude, and I told them that. I also took the time to catch up on their life, and there were some lessons for me.

  1. Show gratitude – forever

I know it sounds basic however I do my best to do this, and I appreciate athletes who also do this. I am humbled by the actions of some of the athletes, who work hard to find me over a quarter of a century later, as I realize they may have exceeded their teacher in this regard.

  1. I need to be better

I learnt during this chat that he had a serious, life impacting injury later in the seasons that I had prepared him for. Although he was in an Australian Institute of Sport squad, there were higher levels of squads above that, and he did not receive the level of service that these higher level squads were given. I did not recall his injury, and had no involvement in his rehab – which was tough for me to learn.

With all due respect to my sports medicine colleagues of that era, I typically took a responsible to assist towards an optimal outcome of an injury athlete.  I was under the pump so to speak with the higher-level squads (and other sports) in that era, but I should have done more for him

  1. Theories leave a paper trail

In the paperwork this athlete shared with me I took note of certain items that showed my long commitment to certain beliefs, including and listed alphabetically:

Clean skins

I have used the words ‘clean skins’ to describe the athletes I ‘inherited’ in the 1980s and 1990s who had never done physical preparation before.

When I first started professionally training athletes in the early 1980s, I got what I now call clean skins. These were athletes that were great at their sport (typically at the top of their sport provincially, nationally, and internationally) yet has never done what I call dryland or physical preparation. Others now instinctively default to the less-than-optimal term ‘strength & conditioning’…That’s right – never ever done anything more than non-specific fitness training run by their coach. So, what I got to learn from and observe were bodies where the only collateral damage to their bodies was what playing their sport had done. I am talking about Olympians, and captains of national teams included.  Yes, their bodies had collateral damage, but it was directly correlated with their position in their sport. [1]

Here’s a statement in this 1992 communication that confirmed that this reality:

If you commence training some muscles for the first time e.g. shoulder joint muscles, you will need to learn to stretch these joints specifically.[2]

Predict into and plan for the future

A mindset I teach athletes and coaches is what it takes to be great, to be the champion today, dose not stand still. To maintain dominance in sport, we need to anticipate and plan for what the sport may be like moving forwards.

You can see this in my 1992 report to the athlete:

Plan for the [their sport]  of the future – it will be faster, more skillful, the players bigger, stronger, faster……. [3]

Recognizing the sub-qualities of strength

In the 1980s and early 1990s the greatest challenge in strength training for sport in Austarlia was to overcome the negative attitudes athletes had towards strength training. Yes, I know, that’s hard to imagine. Note the references to this:

It is important to note that the term strength i s used t o describe all types o f strength – maximal strength, speed-strength (including explosive power) and strength endurance…. Whilst different players play different styles o f [their sport] and different positions have varied strength requirements, don’t make the mistake that has been made by many players in the past, largely from poor advice given – get strong! Strength is not a dirty word – just make sure that you are developing the correct type of strength in the correct muscle groups.

Now that the world, including Australian athletes, have over-reacted, post 2000 in particular I have felt compelled to take the opposite approach – counselling against the over-reliance on strength and strength training. And that has happened in the span of just a decade or so.

Don’t assume, as an athlete, that strength training holds your salvation! Strength training only holds your salvation if lack of the specific strength qualities needed in your sport is truly your number one limiting factor to enhanced performance. And in my opinion, it rarely is. Technique, tactics and selected psychological traits rate higher in my opinion as the limiting factor in most athletes, rather than strength.

So when you strength train, do it in context – balance it relative to your limiting factors i.e. what stands between you and the next step of greatness.  Prioritize the most importance or weakest link, that which will have the greatest impact now on your performance.  And when you do strength train – do it well.  Do what you need to perform, not look good relative to the model of the bodybuilding physique[4]

Relationship between strength and endurance

In the 1980s and early 1990s developing an ‘aerobic base’ in the off-season was the dominant paradigm.

There has been a traditional bias towards gaining an ‘aerobic base’ at the commencement of the general preparation phase – in all sports, all the time, with all athletes.  Is this based on fact?  I suggest not.  I suggest it is a myth.  Yes, there will be times when this method is applicable, and there will be times when it won’t be. 

My breaking of this ‘aerobic base’ rule has attracted a lot of flak, as would any paradigm shifter.  I was wrong. It can’t be done.  This is the way we have always done it.  It has to be done this way. [5]

I wrote my report in 1992 for this athlete and their squad in this environment.

The relationship between strength and endurance is becoming more clearly

understood. During periods of priority strength training, endurance training needs to be minimized and well controlled. Failure to achieve a balance between the two will have a greater negative effect on strength than endurance. [6]

A point of significance worth noting was that one of my ‘co-consultants’ in this athletes squad was one of the very consultant who retaliated against my stance against the sanctity of the aerobic base.  When I say I have been stoned and burnt at the stake metaphorically:

I have fallen on my sword and been burnt on the stake a lot of times in the last 30 years. Not because I want to be right, but if I feel the dogma isn’t serving the athlete or the people, why go on with it? [7]

I say it because it is real, and one of those moments was because I took a stance against the aerobic base myth, partly based on my personal and professional conclusions, and partly because the ‘interference’ conclusions raised in research.

The Sports Science section in the May issue of Sportsmed News is

characterized by poor attention to detail and again, a lack of science.  Had the author (lan King) invested sufficient time in collecting his ideas… There continues to be a paucity of sports science reaching the readers of Sportsmed News and the content in future issues must be improved; reliance on “theories based on tradition” (Sportsmed News May 1996,p7) is not science – it is handed-down information based on the guess-work and hit-and-miss efforts of others. Sports Science is evolving at a phenomenal pace and your readers deserve better. [8]

Yet, in the very same sports squad that this athlete was part of, my strength training programs were paired with an ‘endurance’ program based on this very ‘aerobic base’. Not only is it difficult to produce optimal results with conflicting guidance, irrespective of all other physical quality training including strength, how does an athlete actually ‘convert’ their long distance and interval training to ‘speed’ during the pre-season, in a way that results in dominating in speed during the season proper?

Well done xxxx – concentrate on your speed over the shorter distances in the next few months – Off season report for this athlete[9]

No-one can suggest this quote or the endurance programs provided were me demonstrating a ‘poor research’ approach. It is factual. And the athletes and team in this sport who were able to fully follow my more encompassing athlete preparation guidance won a number of significant championships during the 1990s…but of course, that is not ‘research’, my apologies, just poor ‘empirical’ information.

Experiences like this led me to share the below:

I became known as a person who was not that scientific. But guess what? The athlete standing on the podium didn’t give a …. rat’s ass that I wasn’t very academic or that I’d forgotten how to pronounce an anatomical term. They really didn’t care. So, I don’t mind being considered as unacademic, because my role, my niche, my gift, is to help the elite athlete become successful beyond their own expectations. There’s no correlation with my academic qualifications. [10]

When an athlete is on the podium, you think they care whether what they did was in the latest scientific journal. There is no correlation between science and what happens to performing sport at the elite level. [11]

There is no correlation between the podium and science – in other words, that a Gold medalist is not likely to be backed by more science than a Silver medalist, and who in turn is not likely to be backed by more science than a Bronze medalist.  Well, at least, not the ones I help put on the podium. [12]

I understand I am expected to be apologetic for the heretical stance I have and continue to take – putting the athlete before the professional reputation of academics who recommend training based on the very thing they virtual-signaled me for – lack of research.

But I don’t think I will. And I don’t believe the athletes who have stood on the podium, or the teams that have won Championships are losing too much sleep about that.

Relationship between strength and flexibility

There has been one constant in my professional career – the value I have placed on flexibility this has led to very clear and effective theories about the role and application of flexibility training. That the post 1995 training world has stepped further away from these theories that I developed in the 1980s has not changed that position.

Flexibility and strength training have also suffered misinterpretation. If you increase your volume of training by adding strength training, you will need to increase your stretching… The factor that will influence your flexibility the most – either negatively or positively – is whether you are doing enough flexibility training of the correct type. [13]

Relationship between strength and skill

One of the key reasons strength training was rejected in Australia by sports coaches, athletes and academics until about the mid 1990s (this phenomenon existed in other countries such as the US, they simply moved through them at an earlier year) was the fear of being ‘muscle bound’.

This a valid conclusion I suggest, at least in the way strength training was conduced in the 1960s and 1970s:

Between 1960 and 1970 many leading sports coaches in the western world gave strength training a go and found it was causing their athletes to become muscle bound (stiff) and resulted in increased injuries. So, they stopped, concluding that strength training was bad for sport.

They were right with the way they were doing it- it was not optimal. It took another 2-3 decades for the sporting world to learn that there are many different variables in strength training that when manipulated in varying combinations created diverse results. And some of these were better than others for any given athlete at any given time. [14]

However, I felt I was providing the 1980s and 1990s athletes with a more optimal form o strength training, I needed to encourage them to overcome the negative recent history of the impact of strength training on skill.

Another traditional attitude in [their sport] is that strength will decrease skill. Strength training has the potential to enhance many skills, and the finer skills which it has minimal impact o n it certainly doesn’t have a negative impact on. If you wish to retain or improve skill – you need t o train that exact movement! [15]

Post 2000 the overreaction to strength training, at the expense of other athletic components, let me to counsel in reverse:

Many athletes get a warm feeling from the muscle mass and strength increases from strength training. In part because of the social rewards placed on ‘getting buffed’, and in part because it gives them a feeling of being a warrior. There is no correlation between muscle mass and or non-specific (gym) strength that trumps optimal technical and tactical development. More likely, you will see a decline in technique if your dryland adaptations contest skill execution. [16]

Relationship between strength and speed

During the 1989 and early 1990s, strength training was not used by athletes in Australia to develop speed. In fact, very few athletes – including elite athletes – were given any speed training. What was done was more endurance, interval training. Hard to believe?

In 1999, an athlete who I had cared for since our first meeting after he graduated high school, was at a World Cup. He approached the coach responsible for their physical training, and asked if he could have a supervised speed session. In response, based on what the athlete shared with me, this national team physical coach said words to the effect:

‘You don’t need to do speed training, You get your speed from the gym. But if you feel you need to, run up and down that grassed area, and I will watch you from the roof top (of the local licensed premises)…’

This ‘interesting’ phenomenon where even speed-strength sport athletes were denied either strength or speed training or both was what I was countering when I wrote this in my 1992 report:

From a historical perspective it has been believed that forwards need to be stronger than backs. When one considers the relationship between strength and speed, one may recognize the need for greater strength. [17]

Strength tests do not measure your ability to play your game

In the 1980s I became concerned that the advent of strength testing in Australia was being used to inappropriately select athletes for teams or squads. For example, in 1989 I was in a national team selection discussion where the head coach was using my testing results to justify his desired selection. I did all I could to negate this direction.

It is also important to note that strength testing does not measure your ability to play [their sport] – but rather, measures qualities that contribute to success i n [their spor]. Whilst different players play different styles of [their sport] and different positions have varied strength requirements… [18]

Think for yourself

My consistent message to athletes and coaches is think for yourself.

But at this stage, it’s still considered a little bit naughty for a person to form their own opinion, or for a person like myself to teach you to form your own opinion, but it’s a little bit naughty. By now you’ve realized that that’s what I do, and I believe it is the most effective way to act as a professional as well as live your life. And I also believe that if you’re intuitively smart, that your conclusions will be confirmed by inverted comma science at a later date, as a number of mine have. So, I didn’t read a book and say, that’s the belief I want to have. I didn’t go to a seminar and heard a speaker and was so influenced by it that I thought, well, that’s the belief I want to have [19]

At the end of the day, all I really ask you to do is think and ask yourself the question, what’s best for them now? What’s best now? What’s best now? What’s best now? Never assume, never apply a stereotypical or generic concept. Always question it. And even if you don’t have the answer now, guess what? The fact that you’ve raised the question will give you a chance of having the answer in one day. If you never ask the question, you will never get the answer. [20]

You can see this was there in 1992:

Don’t blindly follow the leader’ in your training – think about what you are doing. [21]

Title

I signed that 1992 document off with…

lan King, Consultant – Physical Preparation of the Athlete [22]

I have written about the options and history of a job descriptions as far back in the 1990s, through to more recent times.

I am not supportive of  the  term strength and conditioning…I believe the term ‘physical preparation’ is a better term.  Athletic preparation another.[23]

Is there a better term than ‘strength and conditioning’?   Yes, I believe that the words ‘physical preparation’ is a more appropriate term. [24]

In the 1980s, I  forged a career in Australia that did not exist. The role did not exist, and there was no job title. What would I call myself?  I looked around the world for guidance and found two dominant influences – the United States National Strength & Conditioning Association (NSCA) and an Eastern European perspective on athlete training by Tudor Bompa, whose 1983 book ‘The Theory and Methodology of Training’ was one of the most influential books I was exposed to in that decade.

The answers and conclusions I reached from my search for a professional job title continue to shape the world in various ways.   With a growing number using the term ‘physical preparation coach’, it’s timely to share the origin and intent of this term. In this article, I achieve this through consideration of cultural influences, sports history, and my personal experiences. [25]

Learn more about the history of this title or role description in this article series. [26] [27]

Conclusion

I want to say thank you to the athlete who triggered this article. Thank you for trusting me 34 years ago. Thank you for reaching out, for your gratitude. I know we could have done more for you back in the day. However ,it is never too late – I will be reaching out to you for an in-person consultation to make amends and meet my commitment to the athlete – for life.

 

References

[1] King, I., 2023, I miss the clean skins, Leondo #14, 14 Sep 2023

[2] King, I., 1992, AIS [their sport] Off-season Training Program – Strength Training and Strength Testing Report, 22 Dec 2022

[3] King, I., 1992, AIS [their sport] Off-season Training Program – Strength Training and Strength Testing Report, 22 Dec 2022

[4] King, I., 2004, Get Buffed! III, Introduction

[5] King, I., 1997, Winning & Losing, p. 19-20

[6] King, I., 1992, AIS [their sport] Off-season Training Program – Strength Training and Strength Testing Report, 22 Dec 2022

[7] Casey, Sean, 2011, Interview with the expert – Ian King – Part 1 of 2, Casey Performance, March 02, 2011

[8] xxx, x., 1996, Letters to the Editor, Sportsmed News, xxxx1996 (full reference withheld in respect)

[9] Provided by the fitness consultant

[10] King, I., 2010, Barbells and Bullshit – Challenging your thinking, Pt 1of 10 – How to think and learn

[11] King, I., 2011, Child to Champion, Cape Cod MA USA, 4 November 2011 (Seminar/Video)

[12] King, I., 2020, In theory this should, Off the Record #124, 21 Oct 2020

[13] King, I., 1992, AIS [their sport] Off-season Training Program – Strength Training and Strength Testing Report, 22 Dec 2022

[14] King, I., 2020, Stereo-typing training, Off the Record #115, 8 Sep 2020

[15] King, I., 1992, AIS [their sport] Off-season Training Program – Strength Training and Strength Testing Report, 22 Dec 2022

[16] King, I., 2023, Supercross Super injured, Blog, 23 May 2023 https://kingsports.net/supercross-super-injured/

[17] King, I., 1992, AIS [their sport] Off-season Training Program – Strength Training and Strength Testing Report, 22 Dec 2022

[18] King, I., 1992, AIS [their sport] Off-season Training Program – Strength Training and Strength Testing Report, 22 Dec 2022

[19] King, I., 2012, KSI Coaching Program Level 2 Foundations, Unit 4 – Theory of flexibility development, (Video) 17 May 2012

[20] King, I., 2013,  Lines of movement, Presentation at Tufts University,  Boston, MA, USA, 12 March 2013

[21] King, I., 1992, AIS [their sport] Off-season Training Program – Strength Training and Strength Testing Report, 22 Dec 2022

[22] King, I., 1992, AIS [their sport] Off-season Training Program – Strength Training and Strength Testing Report, 22 Dec 2022

[23] King, I., 1997, Winning and Losing, Ch. 16 – The strength & conditioning coach, p. 87

[24] King, I., 1999, So you want to become (Book), p. 16-17

[25] King, I., 2025, What’s in a name? Pt 1 – Origin and intent of the term physical preparation coach, (Blog), 16 May 2025

[26] King, I., 2025, What’s in a name? Pt 1 – Origin and intent of the term physical preparation coach, (Blog), 16 May 2025

[27] King, I., 2025, What’s in a name? Pt 2 – Considering the bigger picture of physical preparation, (Blog), 30 May 2025

 

 

Ian King

I wonder if these coaches care

/by

I was in the equivalent of a Home Depot in Australia about a year ago. A chain of stores by the name Bunnings. I sought the assistance of one of the workers in the store. I noted his height and could not help myself – I asked him if he had used it in sport.

About an hour later we wrapped the conversation. I learnt a lot. I learnt he was a talent-identified athlete, selected in national junior squads, played overseas including the US – until his injuries forced very premature retirement. I was struck by one particular statement. He said during his short career he found himself asking the question:

I wonder if these coaches care whether I can bend over and pick up my kids when I get older… and now I can’t.

As anyone familiar with my work knows that statement is very close to home – you can this in Theory #11 and #117 in Legacy 2nd Ed Vol 1

And that’s because I want a long career in sport. I want you to LeBron James for 21 years. And that’s five Olympic cycles, 20 years. That’s at the top. That’s what I want. And then I still want you to be able to play with your kids 20 years later. That’s the difference. [1]

And now he was having kids and had concerns for them in sport….And, he struggles to bend over and pick them up…

I excitedly told him about all my learnings in this area and that I could give him access to some videos…

Then I felt the guilt. I had not done enough. I needed to be able to give him something more concise. This has burnt me for the last year, and now I am making amends.

I have worked to create and make available an educational program that I hope can help the parents and coaches of the young athletes that have a nagging feeling that is must be a better way – and are looking for guidance to find that way.

Do you have children or coach children in sport? If so, you may find value in this latest offering. If not, I understand. After all, according to Ben Sasse, former US Senator of the great state of Nebraska (2015-2023)… and (who is tragically battling late stage cancer)

One of the unexpected by-products of the digital age is Americans are “having less sex and making fewer babies.” [2]

Fortunately, my life’s work is not focused on what popular or trending. After all, I was focused on strength training in the 1980s when most athletes and coaches were led to believe it would make you muscle bound and injured.

In fact, history has shown that typically the topics I focus on lead a renaissance of interest…

What I took too long to say was I understand and apologize if I have taken up your time on a subject of no interest to you – the athlete preparation of the young athlete, 0-18 years of age.

I spent my first two professional decades, between 1980 and 1999, with an almost exclusive focus on the adult athlete.  Once we began to build a family, I realized the gap in my competency, and this was a failing to serve my children.  I had been moved by the saying:

The cobbler’s children have no shoes.[3]

I had seen it in too many other professionals’ lives and didn’t want to make that mistake. After all, what athlete deserved  more attention than my own children.

So, I set out as a serious student of the athlete preparation of the young athlete. I did have the benefit of my prior 20 years.

Firstly, I was exposed to the work Dr. Tudor Bompa, a Romanian who immigrated to Canada, and published what I still believe is the best book ever on the theory of athlete development, in his 1983 Theory and Methodology of Training. I read his books, attended his presentations, met personally for discussions, and even shared the stage in a speaking engagement. My appreciation of his contribution runs through all my published works.

I also was fortunate enough also to have spent 10 of those early years working and collaborating with a former Hungarian who emigrated to Canada by the name of Dr. István Balyi. When we first met in 1989 in Canada, I had not heard of him. By the turn of the century his reputation as a world leader in long-term athlete preparation was taking shape. By 2010, the acronym LTAD had become an industry buzzword, one of those must quote line where nothing changes, just your ability to say the words.

After two decades of adult coaching and one additional decade focused on research and application of training the young athlete, I began sharing what I had learnt in 2010 onwards.  As I explain in Theory #13  of my recent book Legacy 2nd Ed Vol 1 – – A decade of testing:

… the concepts that I typically developed over a decade and then shared with the world …. [4]

I do normally refine my concepts for about five to ten years before talking about them. So, I don’t rush them to the market. [5]

The pattern I have established is test and refine a training concept or innovation for about a decade before sharing it as a recommended way.[6]

From 2010 onwards I conducted a series of presentations in various countries, teaching parents, coaches of the young athlete, and the young athletes themselves, what I had leant. [7]  [8]  [9]  [10]  [11]  [12]  Whilst still continuing to apply and research in this area.

Now in 2026, over a quarter of a century after I set out on this journey, I believe I have earned the right to share what I have learnt.

For those who are genuinely interested in improving their ability to serve the young athlete – as a parent and or coach – I welcome you to share this journey as we formulate an online course like no other to serve this specific niche.

Why? Because as I explain in Theory #18 of Legacy 2nd Ed Vol 1….

I owe it to the athlete

To bring you into this…

We owe it to the athlete

This raises the question – where is the world going? If I was to predict the future based on the current plots on the graph – I would say we are heading into an undesirable direction.  I have seen nothing to date to suggest otherwise. 

This is bad news for some, good news for others. Those who stand to lose include the athletes and their families who are hurt by the lost opportunities of their sons and daughters, brothers and sisters.

Those who stand to gain include the injury treatment and rehabilitation sector (doctors, surgeons and physical therapists in particular).

Another party who will gain are those who master the KSI way. It’s getting increasingly easier to provide a superior alternative to the average. However, at what cost to the athlete?  This is a self-serving benefit from which I take no joy.[13] 

We do today what others will do tomorrow. Why? Because we innovate ruthlessly in pursuit of the answer to the question ‘What is the best way to train?….[14]

In creating this educational program, I am making amends to the athlete I spoke about above, who never got be play adult sport. And to all the other young athletes, parent and coaches who believe there is a better way but not sure what that is.  And I am reaching out to all current and future young athletes, their parents and their coaches.

The Child to Champion Course was built for you.

 

References

[1] King, I., 2025, Building a body that lasts, Kent UK, Wed 8 Oct 2025 (Seminar)

[2] https://abcnews.com/Politics/book-excerpt-ben-sasses-hate-heal/story?id=58506498

[3] This saying is explained by Google AI as a mid-16th century proverb indicating that a person with a specific skill or expertise often neglects to apply that skill for their own family or personal benefit. It highlights the irony where a professional is too busy serving others to take care of their own needs.

[4] King, I., 2013, Report #1: Keys to success in coaching athletes, King Sports International

[5] King, I., 2016, A coach’s guide to preventing, identifying, managing, and rehabilitating lower back injuries, SWIS Presentation, Canada

[6] King, I., 2025, What’s in a name? Pt 1 – The origin and intent of the term physical preparation coach, (Blog  www.kingsports.net), 16 May 2025

[7] King, I., 2011, Child to Champion, Brisbane, AUS, 14 March 2011 (Seminar/Video)

[8] King, I., 2011, Child to Champion, Brisbane, AUS, 14 March 2011 (Seminar/Video)

[9] King, I., 2014, Child to Champion, Barrie, Ontario, CAN,10 April 2014, (Seminar/Video)

[10] King, I., 2014, Child to Champion, Cape Cod MA USA,13 April 2014, (Seminar/Video)

[11] King, I., 2014, Child to Champion, Cape Cod MA USA, 21 November 2014 (Seminar/Video)

[12] King, I., 2017, Child to Champion Seminar, Cape Cod MA, USA Thu 9 Nov 2017 (Seminar/Video)

[13] King, I., 2011, KSI Coaching Program L1 Legacy Course, Ch. 34- Concerns for the world of physical preparation

[14] King, I., 2023, The Between Sets Newsletter The KSI Newsletter No 222 Dec 202-3Jan 2024

Ian King

The “ABC” of program design

/by

In 1980 I set out on my professional journey to find answers to the question ‘What is the best way to train?’  How to design training programs was integral to finding these answers, as the decisions made in program design shape the training outcomes.

One of the components of training design is the decision as to what days to perform certain training on.  I refer to this program design step as the allocation of training, specifically exercises and or muscle groups to training days.

This refers to all forms of training, not just strength training. However, in relation to strength training it was apparent there were three dominant approaches – the method that referred to a sequential number of the training day within the week e.g. Training Day 1, Training Day 2 etc.; the method that referred to the day of the week that certain training was to be performed on e.g. Mon, Wed, Friday; and the method that referred to the muscle groups to be trained in the workout on that day e.g. Leg day; chest, shoulders and triceps day; and back and bicep day.

These three approaches to allocation of training were evident over decades, and therefore, I suggest they earned the title as ‘traditional’ approaches.  They were also evident in a broad range of strength training disciplines and across cultures, therefore earning the title of ‘dominant’ approaches.

I considered these traditional dominant approaches and soon found significant limitations with them, based perhaps on the fact that the bodies that I was testing and refining my training solutions on were athletes in diverse sports as opposed to general population or athletes limited to one sport, and the fact that I moved away from an exclusive muscle group approach to include my Lines of Movement concept. In summary, I found these traditional approaches for the allocation of training to be limiting, presumptive and restrictive in nature.  So, I did what has become a half-century habit – I innovated. This is discussed in full later in this article.

The aim of this article is to review the influences and adoption of these three traditional, dominant approaches to allocation of training, and to outline the alternative I developed to overcome the limitations of these traditional approaches.

The dominant approaches to the allocation of training

From my professional entry point in 1980, I identified three dominant approaches to the allocation of training.  They were as follows.

Allocation of training to a sequential number of training days within the week

The allocation of training to a sequential number of training days within the week resulted in the workout being named as a number, e.g. Workout 1, Workout 2, etc.

Workout 1 Workout 2 Workout 3
Exercise 1 Exercise 1 Exercise 1
Exercise 2 Exercise 2 Exercise 2
Exercise 3 Exercise 3 Exercise 3
Exercise 4 Exercise 4 Exercise 4
Etc. Etc. Etc.

 [1]

Allocation of training to the day of the week

The allocation of training to the day of the week resulted in the name of the day being used to identify that workout.  For example, a three-day-a-week strength program would be depicted as below, and it was either ‘Monday’s workout’, or ‘Wednesday’s workout’, or ‘Friday’s workout’.

Monday Wednesday Friday
Exercise 1 Exercise 1 Exercise 1
Exercise 2 Exercise 2 Exercise 2
Exercise 3 Exercise 3 Exercise 3
Exercise 4 Exercise 4 Exercise 4
Etc. Etc. Etc.

[2]

Allocation of muscle groups to workouts

The allocation of muscle groups to the workout approach resulted in the name of the muscle groups being used to title that workout.  For example, a three-day-a-week strength program would be depicted as below, e.g. the ‘chest/shoulders/triceps’ workout might be done on say Monday, the ‘Legs’ workout may be done on Wednesday, and the ‘Back & Biceps’ workout might be done on Friday. Realistically, the frequency of training may be higher; however, this was kept simple for illustrative purposes.

Chest/Shoulders/Triceps Legs Back & Biceps
Exercise 1 Exercise 1 Exercise 1
Exercise 2 Exercise 2 Exercise 2
Exercise 3 Exercise 3 Exercise 3
Exercise 4 Exercise 4 Exercise 4
Etc. Etc. Etc.

 [3]

The traditional influence on these dominant approaches to the allocation of training

From my professional entry point in 1980, I began collating training reference material as part of my search for the answer to the question, ‘What is the best way to train?’ This reference material indicated that there was a strong enough history to describe these three dominant approaches to allocation of training as traditional.

As I began to develop, test, and refine an alternative approach from the early 1980s onwards, the reliance of these dominant approaches to the allocation of training continued for another two decades.  Therefore, these three methods dominated program design for a minimum of thirty years (1970-2000).

It was not until after I published my 1998 book ‘How to Write Strength Training Programs’ that the alternative approach that I had developed gained traction, as evidenced in program design-related publications.

The global acceptance of these dominant approaches to allocation of training

The use of these two dominant approaches to the allocation of training has not been restricted to one country. They have appeared in literature in many different countries.

The strength training genre adoption and preferences to these traditional dominant approaches to the allocation of training

A number of different strength training genres contribute to strength training as a whole. These include but are not limited to, weightlifting. powerlifting and bodybuilding.  There are also sports such as track and field that have led the way in the use of strength training for sport. There are also professional genres, such as the American concept of ‘strength and conditioning coach’ (originally referred to as ‘strength coaches’),that have made a significant contribution to strength training as it is now known. All of these genres had adopted these traditional dominant approaches to allocation of training.

There does appear to be a historic preference amongst each strength training genre for one or the other of these two traditional dominant approaches to allocation of training.

For example, weightlifting may have a historic preference for the allocation of training to a sequential number of training days within the week approach.

  [4]

Powerlifting may have a historic preference for the allocation of training to the day of the week approach.

[5]

Bodybuilding may have a historic preference for the allocation of muscle groups to the training days approach.

 [6]

The ‘strength & conditioning’ genre has a historic preference for the allocation of training to the day of the week approach.

 

 [7]

And in some cases, referenced the muscle group to training days ala bodybuilding.

 

 [8]

The limitations of these traditional dominant approaches to the allocation of training

Each of these dominant traditional approaches to allocation of training presented specific limitations, especially in the application of program design to the bodies on which I was testing and refining my training solutions on.  My niche since 1980 has been the physical and athletic preparation of elite athletes in diverse sports and countries, as opposed to a one-sport focus, or domestic-based athletes, or lower-level athletes or the general population.

The limitations of each traditional dominant approach to the allocation of training

In addressing the limitations of each of these three approaches to allocation of training,  I will reverse the order to work from most restrictive to least.

The most presumptive and restrictive is what I will refer to as the bodybuilding approach, which groups muscle groups together in a broad-brush method and allocates them to training days, e.g. the ‘back’. Before my Lines of Movement concept being published, and in some situations, I am sure this continues to today, the ‘back’ refers to both horizontal and vertical pulling muscle groups. I found this approach inadequate and replaced it in the 1980s with my Lines of Movement approach to allocation of training days.

The second most restrictive approach, although not to the extent of the above, is what I will refer to as the powerlifting approach, which nominates a day of the week. This suits domestic-based, stable competition; however is more clunky for the internationally competing athletes, who competition is not a regular one day of the week, on a predictable cycle e.g. every weekend for some weeks, e.g. American football is played domestically, and in many leagues up u on the same day each week, or a primary day of the week.  This approach is not suitable for many sports.

Thirdly, what I will refer to as the weightlifting approach, simply adds a number to the more workouts in a week planned. This is a more flexible approach.

It is interesting to note the historic influence adopted by more recent influences, such as the US National Strength and Conditioning, which in its relatively short history, appears to have favored what I refer to as the powerlifting approach to allocation of training day, with a lesser inclusion of bodybuilding.

Below is an example from what I believe is the origins of the NSCA – a powerlifting strength coach with a major focus on servicing American football players – in the case of this program shared by the late legendary Bill Starr, the author of the iconic book ‘The Strongest Shall Survive’.

  [9]

An alternative approach to the allocation of training

In the early 1980s, I was following the powerlifting approach. Here is an example of this from a program I wrote in 1983.

 [10]

However, during the 1980s, I adopted a new approach of allotting training days by sequential letters of the alphabet.  Here is an example from 1990.

 [11]

You will see this practice of muscle group allocation to the sequential letter of the alphabet in all my published works from about the mid-1980s onwards. Here is an example from my 1998 book, How to Write Strength Training Programs. [12]

Allocation of muscle groups to training days in strength training refers to the decision of which muscle groups to place on which training days.  Once the number of training days and which training days have been selected, this is somewhat like filling in the spaces. 

The steps involved in allocating muscle groups to training days include:

  1. Determine all the muscle groups to be trained: Simply brainstorm and list all the muscle groups you wish to train. The following is a sample list, not in any order:

Figure 1 – A sample list of muscle groups, not in any order.

_______________________________________________

vertical pulling (i.e. scapula depressors e.g. chin ups)

biceps

abdominals

vertical pushing (i.e. arm abduction e.g. shoulder press)

hip dominant (e.g. dead lift and its variations)

horizontal pulling (i.e. scapula retractors e.g. rows)

quad dominant (e.g. squats and its variations)

triceps

lower back

calves

horizontal pushing (i.e. horizontal flexion e.g. bench press)

forearm extension/flexion

________________________________________________

  1. Determine how many days of training per week or microcycle: Now decide how many training days per week or microcycle.  For the purposes of the example we are using, I have chosen four (4).
  1. Determine which days will be training days within that week or microcycle: Now determine which days you will train on – the following table builds on the example we are developing.

Table 1 – Number of training sessions and which days in the week.

 

SUN MON TUE WED THUR FRI SAT
  A B   C D  

 [13]

The popularization of my alternative approach to the allocation of training

The following are examples of the application of this method for the allocation of training.  These tables are from my 1998 book How to Write Strength Training Programs. [14]

[15]

Despite about a decade and a half of use and publishing about this method, from the mid-1980s to 2000, it was not until my work was published in the US online bodybuilding magazine known at that time as t-mag.com that it gained popularity, and this approach became more common. When you consider that significant training methods such as the West German sport scientist Dietmar Schmidtbleicher’s alternating accumulation and intensification did not get much notice from its earlier publishing in the early 1980s until it was published by a different author on t-mag.com, it should not be a surprise. The fact that it takes a bodybuilding magazine to gain traction is not lost on me, however.

 

References

[1] Qld Amateur Weightlifting Association, Preliminary Certificate Course

[2] Kazmier, B., 1981, The Bench Press

[3] Fleck, S.J., and Kraemer, W.J., 1987, Designing resistance training programs, Human Kinetics

[4] The United States Weightlifting Federation Coaching Manual, Vol. 3 – Training Program Design

[5] National Coaching Accreditation Scheme, Australian Powerlifting Federation, Interim Level 1 Powerflifting Manual, 1 Jan 1994

[6] Keller, L., 2000, The Men’s Health Hard Body Plan, Rodale Publishing

[7] Baechle, T.R. (Editor), 1990, Essentials of strength training and conditioning, National Strength and Conditioning Association of America

[8] Baechle, T.R. (Editor) et al, 1994, Essentials of strength training and conditioning, National Strength and Conditioning Association of America

[9] Starr, B., 1979, The strongest shall survive

[10] King, I., 1983, Bodybuilding programmes (Booklet), unpublished

[11] King, I., 1990, Program written for an athlete

[12] King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs, Chapter 3 – Allocation of muscle groups

to training days

[13] King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs, Chapter 3 – Allocation of muscle groups

to training days

[1] King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs, Chapter 10 – Frequency of training

[2] King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs, Chapter 10 – Frequency of training

 

© 2025 Ian King & King Sports International. All rights reserved.

Ian King

Celebrating the life and contribution of Istvan Balyi

/by

This article is about Istvan Balyi, who positioned himself as one of world’s leading experts on periodization and integration of training in sport. It is intended to celebrate his life and contribution, including from my personal and professional, first hand and over quarter of a century of association perspective.

I’ve been to memorials where individuals speak about the dearly departed yet manage to talk more about themselves. I’m conscious to avoid this yet acknowledge that I choose only to speak about Istvan through my personal observations and interactions with him.

Istvan’s journey to Canada from Hungary

Istvan was born in Hungary on 23 July 1942 in Debrecen, Hungary. He attended the Hungarian University of Sports Science and completed his undergraduate degree there. In 1974 he was in Montreal Canada with the Hungarian Olympic team’s advanced mission when he chose to walk out of the hotel and seek asylum. [1]

His Canadian work life started out working  teaching physical education at the University of Montreal, then onto the University of Ottawa and later the National Coaching Institute at the University of Victoria. [2]

My introduction to Istvan

I was introduced to Istvan by Charles Poliquin in about 1989 when I stayed with the Canadian Alpine Ski team for a summer camp. Poliquin had been one of his students at Ottawa. For the next ten years I worked closely with Istvan in his role as Sport Science Director for the Canadian Alpine Ski team.

The Sports Science Director for the Canadian Alpine Ski team in the early 1990s was Istvan Balyi.  Istvan is the most effective sports scientist I have ever worked with.  He represented his native country of Hungary in the 1964 Olympics (swimming) and therefore had a feel for the athlete and the training process.  He completed his undergraduate degree in sports science in Hungary, where he rubbed shoulders with a number of internationally recognized Hungarian sports training experts.  He completed his PhD in Canada, a country proud of its sporting achievements.  He provides a unique service, having a feel for both science and practice. [3]

He also arranged visits and guest lectures for me at various locations throughout Canada through the Canadian Association of Coaching and the National Coaching Institute at the University of Victoria.  Through Istvan I met and spent time with many leading proponents of athlete preparation in Canada. You will note in the 1997 quote below that the first four names are Canadian – such was the influence on me during my time in Canadian sport.

I had so many incredible learning opportunities to meet and question others during my travels.  My trips to North America over the years have resulted in meeting, dining with, and talking shop with so many people that I have lost track.  Istvan Balyi, Tudor Bompa, David Docherty, Boyd Epley, Steve Fleck, Vern Gambetta, Ken Kontor, Bill Kraemer, Dietmar Schmidbleicher, Mike Stone, Al Vermeil, Harvey Wenger, to name a few.   There are many more – I share a few to get the message across.  No better way to learn! [4]

In return, I introduced Istvan to the Australian Coaching Association, which had heavily modelled what the Canadian Association of Coaching had done, and to the NSCA of Australia (now the Australian Strength Coaching Association). I invited Istvan to speak at some of the national conferences I organized for the NSCA of Australia in the early 1990s.

I still have on my wall today a plaque that Istvan had made for me and presented to me during a seminar he gave in Australia, for my contribution to the Canadian Alpine Ski Team. A true gentleman.

Istvans’ transition from committed to recognized

One of the things that stood out to me about Istvan was his focus on training literature and specifically periodization.  There would not be a day that goes by in camps in Canada where he would not knock on my door in our accommodation and say, ‘Ian, have you read this article?’ And give me a copy.

There would not be a week or month that goes by in Australia that I would not get a fax from Istvan. In addition to administrative emails about our shared responsibility with the Canadian Alpine Ski Team, there would be more ‘Have you seen this article?’ and a copy attached.

New South Wales (an Australian province) rugby trots out the line each year (at the start of the season!) about how fit they are!   History shows no results for their 11-odd year involvement in the Super 6, 10 and 12 competitions!  In fact, they usually fade halfway through the competitive season – badly.  Which is no surprise, for even the research collated by my colleague Istvan Balyi shows that elite athletes exposed to more than eight to ten weeks of high intensity energy system training will ‘fry’! [5]

He was my gold standard in being hungry for and appreciative of anyone who left bread crumbs in writing about athlete preparation.

In addition, our training discussion in person during my multiple visits per year over a decade was something a sports coach nerd can only dream of. Istvan was very appreciative and respectful of my own interest in his favourite subject, periodization and integration of training. He included one of my long-term athlete development tables in his Kinetics books (to his credit one of the only times a publisher has reached out to me in writing to seek approval to use my works). I would expect nothing less from a person with integrity, as was the case with Istvan.

When I met Istvan I was not aware of him outside of the ski team, and then over the next few years, his reputation in Canada grew. He worked very hard to connect with and contribute to as many sports as he could, in what was in that era arguably the finest sports coach education system in the western world.

By the late 1990s, his reputation had grown internationally. He was getting hired by nations inlead up to home Olympics e.g. Australia 2000, UK 2012, and shared his message with more sports in more countries.

“By the end of his life, he had consulted with more than 50 sports organizations in more than 20 countries. He authored papers, wrote textbooks and was recognized with an honorary doctorate from his alma mater in Budapest in 2022.” [6] [7]

Despite his newfound fame, he didn’t change – he remained humble, hard-working and put the athlete first.

One of my endearing messages of his impact was when I was working with coaches and athletes in the a US state Olympic organizational group around 2010, when they told me all about this expert called Istvan Balyi and their newfound discovery of long-term athlete development. I bit my tongue, as that has been accessible for over 20 years. It did get even more interesting, however, when they told me they had brought in another expert to teach them all about this new thing called bodyweight exercises…The Canadian Alpine Ski Team could have shared that with them from experiencing my program design 20 years earlier….I know, I expect too much…

Working with Istvan

It was a dream to work with him. No ego, no sensitivities, no politics, no BS, total commitment, life focused and athletes first.  Now I have worked with a lot of PhD holders, and there are a few I could say that about. Now I know many of those others have said less than polite things about me, so it goes both ways, I guess. Istvan and the professors I met through Istvan restored my faith in sports scientists with the letter Dr in front of their names, after my experiences with the same at my alma mater in the late 1980s and early 2000s in Australia.  The Canadians were respectful, collaborative and committed to service through adequate humility to know we don’t have all the answers.

There appears competition in Australia as to who should control the training process, the sport scientist or the strength and conditioning coach. The strength and conditioning coach can benefit from sport science input, but I believe the laboratory bound sport scientist is too far removed from the training process to effectively control the training.

One sport scientist who appeared to have come to this conclusion was David Docherty PhD, head of the sport science department at the University of Victoria, British Columbia.  David had a strong interest in all theoretical and practical aspects of strength and conditioning and had been responsible for this aspect of the Canadian National Rugby Team training for many years.  During one of our chats in his office in the early 1990’s he said to me words to the effect “You know Ian sport is after people like yourself, not like me.”  I believe that David had realized that there was a new wave of physical preparation experts coming in, which would make it difficult if not impossible for him to be both an academic in sport science and the strength and conditioning coach.

This is not to suggest that sport scientists have nothing to offer in the practical environment.   I recall doing an Olympic lifting training session with American bio mechanist John Garhammer, during which he gave me some valuable tips on my lifting technique.  John is well known for his biomechanical analysis of the power clean, amongst other things.  Other sport scientists have proved their abilities in practical application in athletic preparation – take Istvan Balyi (PhD) of Canada for example – one of the best working colleagues I have had to pleasure to be involved with.[8]

Once I had earned my respect, Istvan gave me full rein in taking over areas of training that traditionally he had controlled.

My role was greater than the services they had been previously provided  – I programmed and taught speed, strength, endurance, flexibility, lifestyle, recovery, and some nutritional issues.  It was the first time in about a decade that the then Sport Science director, Istvan Balyi, had relinquished the periodization and integration roles.  He provided a broad skeleton of dates, and I filled in the specifics.  This was a big step for Istvan, and he was not to be disappointed.  With his blessing I applied my methods of reverse periodization of the energy systems.  [9]

I believe this was because he had previously hired individuals with an exclusive focus on strength training.

Despite being an internationally recognized expert in periodization, Istvan slowly relinquished the role of periodization of the skier’s programs to me.  He had previously utilized the traditional approach to periodization, applying the aerobic base theory.  Somehow, I had obtained his trust, and he watched as I implemented radical new ways of training in the general preparation phase.  He didn’t necessarily agree but was open-minded.  This despite it being in contrast to his long-serving methods.  He was keen to watch the impact on the aerobic measures and skiing performance. 

In the year leading up to the 1994 Winter Olympics, I implemented an alternative method with all the male skiers.  The result.  No negative alteration of aerobic fitness, and the best skiing results in a decade.  Istvan was impressed.  I was relieved and very happy, not that I doubted the methods – just that, like any sport, so many variables exist. [10]

I learnt a lot from Istvan, not the least his Eastern European approach to training. I speak about this a lot in my writings.[11]  This influence on my coaching cannot be understated.

Istvan was, as I have made clear, my kind of colleague and teammate. He was totally focused on the athletes. There was limited idle chit chat; it was always focused. He was collaborative and respectful, and received that in return. It was not about him, his ego, his future employment, how much fame and fortune he could scrape out of sport. The opposite of Istvan sums up most coaches and support staff I have worked with over the last 45 years – and there have been many. So, I was blessed with this quarter-century association.

I noted with comments about Istvan the person, such as below:

“In addition to sport, they shared a common love of books and music. They eventually married and had a son, Nick. Despite being emotionally remote, Istvan worked hard to provide for Ann and Nick.” [12]

No such complaint from me. However, I have learnt that some seek more from others than coaching guidance.  A committed, highly focused, serving others kind of sports consultant may have some limitations outside of sport. And I speak for all of us who fit this description. They have been my most valued colleagues. I apologize to Anne and Nick for taking up their time.

Conclusion

Istvan passed away on 3 December 2024 in Sooke, B.C., of liver failure; aged 82.

I have seen many tributes to his life published, which is appropriate. Having spent collaborative time with Istvan during the period he shaped his long-term athlete development model, and knowing that our discussions contributed to that, I believe I speak with his approval when I clarify one point.

Some tributes, in my opinion, mistakenly attribute Istvan with creating long-term athlete development, being the ‘architect’. That may be true from their perspective. However, in respect of all those who published on the subject before Istvan, and who Istvan drew inspiration, I believe some clarification is needed. I believe Istvan would have said the same thing.

. I was with him, watched him, read his references enough to know that he respectfully collated the work of those who came before him, and distilled that into a working model to suit the culture and systems of modern Western world training. He championed the concept.

What Istvan unequivocally did was bring to the Western world’s attention what the ‘others’ (Eastern bloc) countries have known and been doing for a long time. He had the drive, the persona, the commitment to sport to make it his life’s mission.

For that, he deserves to be acknowledged. That was his life message. I can only hope that ‘LTAD’ is more than a passing trend, that more coaches take the time to study, internalize and implement it. It’s more than a catch phrase, more than a theory. It was designed to make life better for all future athletes.

I conclude with statements I made in 1997, 28 years ago:

… Istvan is the most effective sports scientist I have ever worked with. …take Istvan Balyi (PhD) of Canada, for example – one of the best working colleagues I have had to pleasure to be involved with.[13]

 

References

[1] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/article-sport-scientist-istvan-balyi-changed-canadian-coaching-and-ate-hot/

[2] King, I., 1997, Winning and Losing

[1] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/article-sport-scientist-istvan-balyi-changed-canadian-coaching-and-ate-hot/

[2] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/article-sport-scientist-istvan-balyi-changed-canadian-coaching-and-ate-hot/

[3] King, I., 1997, Winning and Losing, Ch 7 – Training Theories

[4] King, I., 1997, Winning and Losing, Ch 19 – Professional development

[5] King, I., 1997, Winning and Losing, Ch 27 – The high volume road show rumbles along

[6] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/article-sport-scientist-istvan-balyi-changed-canadian-coaching-and-ate-hot/

[7] It was great to see his alma mater acknowledge him. That’s not something we can all expect. Shows great values on their part.

[8] King, I., 1997, Winning and Losing, Ch 18 – Other support staff

[9] King, I., 1997, Winning and Losing, Ch 23 – Watching Rome crumble

[10] King, I., 1997, Winning and Losing, Ch 7 – Training Theories

[11] It’s tragic to see those who copy my work using the same words as if they too were there– I spent time and collaboration with Eastern Europeans – it was time and labor intense, took up a large part of my life, but so worthwhile. It’s heartbreaking to see this trivialized by the strokes of a keyboard.

[12] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/article-sport-scientist-istvan-balyi-changed-canadian-coaching-and-ate-hot/

[13] King, I., 1997, Winning and Losing

 

© 2025 Ian King & King Sports International. All rights reserved.

Ian King

An athlete called to say thanks

/by

Reflections on gratitude.

A few days ago, an athlete called me to say thank you. Unsolicited.  Not for the winning, which we did. But for the lessons shared.  You might ask ‘So what. There’s nothing special about a thank you.’ So, I will share this – the period of time the athlete was referring to occurred 30 years ago.

It is no coincidence that just a few weeks prior in a webinar with a global audience, I spoke about this:

And that’s just a little example of gratitude that it’s a lifelong gratitude from an athlete when you help them create a legacy and fulfil their potential.[1]

I say no coincidence because this expression of gratitude over this time frame is not an uncommon experience for me.

Those who spend a few days with me know it’s unlikely much time passes when a real athlete who I really helped win expresses their unsolicited gratitude. [2]

However, it still stands out.  For me, it speaks to the character of the athlete. I take as much pride in the person I have helped them become as in the sporting legacy.

I have encouraged this trait in writing:

Show gratitude. The human emotion of gratitude is one I value and teach in all aspects of living; however, in the context of the student, I strongly encourage you to use it. Whether the teaching is short or long, what you wanted to hear or not, express your gratitude. This rewards the teacher and encourages them to continue teaching – be it to you or subsequent students.[3]

The premium I place on culture is reflected by its presence in KSI’s 19 points of culture:

Gratitude … I am a truly grateful person. I say thank-you and show appreciation often and in many ways, so that all around me know how much I appreciate everything and everyone I have in my life. I celebrate my wins and the wins of my team and clients. I consistently catch myself and other people doing things right … [4]

Personal character traits, including gratitude, figure high in our athlete development message:

I don’t have an expectation for them, it’s their path in sport, but as far as behaviour and attitude, that’s not really negotiable. To do their best and be positive, show gratitude and be courteous, respectful. [5]

And it’s not just the athletes. As coach education is the almost-as-long-serving concurrent aspect or our combined service, we also receive similar in this genre – unsolicited, multi-decade later gratitude.

Ian,  your teaching has been something I have been using since we met over 20 years ago. One of the best decisions I made in my life.  It has helped me tremendously professionally  & personally. Just wanted to say thanks.—Miguel [6]

You might see others reach similar conclusions:

I think the same thing happens with relationships. Business, personal, family relationships, etc. They start off young and that’s when you can build almost a “relationship myelin” around them. You do that by being honest with people, by showing gratitude, by not overusing the connection, by treating it just right so it develops into something that can last a lifetime. If someone does something for you, show you are grateful.[7]

People often ask, ‘Who was your favorite athlete?’ To which I respectfully decline to answer, deflecting by saying something along the lines of ‘A parent should not have a favorite child’. Then I go on to say I can, however, tell you about those who make their mark by their character trait of consistent and long-term gratitude.

Such as the athlete whom I helped to a Silver Medal in the 1992 Auckland Commonwealth Games, who would send me an annual thank you card for years following…

Or the contact sport athlete who became the most capped in the world in his sport and reached out to me by phone annually for the year following…

Or the athlete who, 30 years later, gave me reason to share this.

 

References

[1] King, I., 2025, Optimal athletic performance, Kent, UK, Sat 11 Oct 2025 (Seminar/Video)

[2] King, I., 2019, How did you develop your approach to flexibility, Off the Record #50, 31 July 2019

[3] King, I., 2005, The way of the physical preparation coach, Ch 21 – Become a student

[4] King, I., 2009, KSI 18 Points of Culture

[5] King, I., 2014, Coaching Mastery, Cape Cod, 13-14 April 2014, USA (Seminar)

[6] King, I., 2025, Personal communication, Email received 25 March 2025

[7] Altucher, J., 2014, 10 Things I learnt when interviewing Tony Robbins about money, The Stanberry Digest,18 Nov 2014