Ian King

Let’s talk about honesty, Lou  

/by

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And other places….

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Kingsports International Australia

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Single leg partial squat

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

Single leg partial squat :

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

History suggests that breakaway organisations ultimately fall into the same trap that their original organisation did – take martial arts for example!” 1
—A. Cosgrove in personal communication to I King, 4 Dec 1999

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Calling me dishonest, Lou
Sure won’t make it right
But if you want
I’ll say a prayer
For your soul tonight

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

Kids, I’m sorry
There less legacy for you now
Since some else decided
It’s okay to steal
Rain on the keyboard
Blood on the copyright
Ian King

The times they may be a-changing!  

/by

The Bullshit Backlash

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

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

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

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

Then I came upon this statement:

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

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

Then I learnt more about his initiative:

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

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

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

That’s an exciting possibility!

Naming the decades

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The resistance to change

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

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

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

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

The New Rules

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

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

Lying

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

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

Cheating

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

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

Stealing

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

2010+
Stealing is not acceptable.

Experience

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

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

Names

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

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

Publishing

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

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

Profit

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

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

Sales

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

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

Not if but when

The only question is how long will the change take?

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

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

The Iron Game Woodstock

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

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

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

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

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

Conclusion

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ian King

Readers response to Barbells & Bullshit (book)  

/by

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Many interesting questions.

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

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

Appreciate your thoughts and support.

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

Ian King

Out-dated methods – shame, shame, shame!  

/by

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

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

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

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

YOU JUST CAN’T USE SOMETHING THAT ANOTHER PERSON/S LABELS AS OUTDATED!

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

Isn’t it great that most of us don’t do outdated stuff! But those who do – don’t they know that is not acceptable?!

Now that’s ANOTHER logical reason not to static stretch – it’s outdated!!!

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

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

..we need to …

…we shouldn’t …

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

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

Quick question if I may – do the studies show that ‘outdated’ is sub-optimal? I sure hope so, because I need those words to cling on to….

Ian King

Static stretching fear mongering

/by

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

Here are some thoughts I shared in return.

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

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

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

Because it is not the trend of thinking.

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

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

Now there is a hypothesis we won’t be reading about in our life-time – that accurate teaching of SS results in a decrease in pharmaceutical industry gross income…

Ian King

Performance Coach or Director – Why the term sucks  

/by

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Know anyone who would meet these criteria?

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

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

Ian King

Feedback on my latest book – Barbells & Bullshit  

/by

I recently received this feedback about my latest book:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ian King

The World is Flat!  

/by

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

———————-

New DVD released Oct 2010 –

The World if Flat!
Challenging your point of view!

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

YouTube clips from that DVD:

Click here to order the DVD – http://bit.ly/9KJVmR
Ian King

Enough to make your blood boyle

/by

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

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

The program was verbatim save for a few minor details:

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

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

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

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

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

Bulgarian squat

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

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

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

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

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

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

Single leg squat

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

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

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

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

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

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

Squat

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

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

Deadlift

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

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

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

King Deadlift

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

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

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

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

Thin tummy variations:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Toes to sky variations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ian King

Performance coach. Really?  

/by

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Know anyone who would meet these criteria?

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