Ian King

You don’t want to be the best you can be  

/by

You want to be just like everyone else

I am sure if a survey was taken of physical preparation coaches the majority would say there goal was to be the best they can be. From my perspective, I suggest that is not the dominant focus. I suggest that the desire to be like everyone else is far greater than the desire to be the best one can be. And I suggest that the price paid for this default is lost opportunities for both the professional and the client.

During the 1970s very few people participated in the exercise know as the squat, or double knee bend. The belief was squats were bad for your knees. Did the majority come to that conclusion based on their personal experiences, or did they simply accept the dominant beliefs and habits?

During the 1980s the majority of mixed energy sports athletes participated in a higher volume aerobic training block in their General Preparatory Phase. The belief was that it was neither safe or optimal to expose the athlete to other training modalities without first gaining a level of aerobic fitness. Did the majority come to that conclusion based on their personal experiences, or did they simply accept the dominant beliefs and habits?

During the 1990s the majority of physical preparation coaches included Swiss ball exercise in their program design. The belief was that performing an exercise, any – actually vertically all – exercises. This was based on the dogma that the additional balance challenges produced a superior training effect, and that this was definitely going to transfer to all sport and life activities. Did the majority come to that conclusion based on their personal experiences, or did they simply accept the dominant beliefs and habits?

During the 2000s the majority of physical preparation coaches selected almost exclusively from the so-called ‘functional exercises’ (although I am not really sure what that is) in their program design. To do any exercise sitting on a bench or lying down was heretical. This was based on the belief that standing and multi-planar movements were superior in their training effect for all people at all times, and would definitely provide a superior transfer to sport and life. Did the majority come to that conclusion based on their personal experiences, or did they simply accept the dominant beliefs and habits?

During the 2010s the majority of sports coaches and physical preparation coaches refuse to use static stretching, replacing what little stretching time is dedicated to stretching with ‘dynamic’ stretches. This is based on the belief that static stretching makes you weak and leads to injury and dynamic stretching is safer, more functional and effective. Did the majority come to that conclusion based on their personal experiences, or did they simply accept the dominant beliefs and habits?

The one question I asked throughout the above is – Did the majority come to that conclusion based on their personal experiences, or did they simply accept the dominant beliefs and habits? I suggest they did not come to these conclusions based on any form of personal experience. I also suggest that they didn’t even think. They just accepted and did.

So what would I need to see to believe that a physical preparation coach was making an attempt to be the best they can be? The most important criteria I am looking for is evidence of thinking. That the key questions have been asked, including but not limited to;

• What is the best way to train?
• What can I do to fulfill my potential as a coach?
• What can I do to fulfill the potential of my client/athlete?

Now call me simplistic, but I am skeptical as to whether the majority has applied this approach. Here are a few considerations.

Let’s take squats for examples. Prior to about 1990, when a slew of ‘research’ was published extolling the benefits of stretching, did the did the majority of physical preparation coaches have collective personal experiences that squatting was bad and then collectively and coincidentally post 1990 have personal experiences to the contrary?

Let’s take the Swiss ball for example. Prior to about 1990 few knew the word Swiss ball and exercises upon it. Up until this time did the did the majority of physical preparation coaches have collective personal experiences that Swiss balls and exercises on Swiss balls were useless and then collectively and coincidentally post 1990 have personal experiences to the contrary?

Let’s take stretching for example. Prior to about 1995 it was okay to statically stretch, and commonly done. Post 1995 it wasn’t. Now did the majority of physical preparation coaches have collective experiences prior to 1995 that static stretching was the most effective way to stretch, and then post 1995 all reach personal conclusions to the contrary? I suggest not. Now I respect that for many of you my proposition is flawed as I place a premium on thinking, at a time in the world and in our industry where the dominant belief that what you think is irrelevant – just read the research and see if ‘research supports it’. This is essentially not only the antithesis of thinking, I also suggest that this don’t think just believe in the research mentality is actually contrary to the intent of the origin of science.

For me objectivity is the key.

Scientific objectivity is a characteristic of scientific claims, methods and results. It expresses the idea that the claims, methods and results of science are not, or should not be influenced by particular perspectives, value commitments, community bias or personal interests, to name a few relevant factors.

And even though science claims this I don’t believe it is always the case.

Science in theory is intended to provide objective analysis. I believe this way has been lost in many cases, where the research conclusions are influenced by the researcher, who in turn may be influenced by the provider of the funding.

For all the lip service we pay to science, everyone knows that it is commerce that runs the show. As the Spanish proverb goes, ‘He who gives the bread lays down the law’. Science today typically serves the large corporate interests that fund it. In a world conceived by the financial and corporate leadership who effectively rule it, the purpose of the human being is to contribute to the economy as an increasingly efficient unit of production and as an increasingly efficient unit of consumption. The financial and corporate elite establish effective social policy, and commercially funded science gives them the technological wherewithal to execute it. –Laurence G. Boldt, 1999

I believe you can be more objective than certain modern ‘scientific’ conclusions:

Now I admit it’s not easy being an objective thinker. Throughout history thinkers have been subject to a variety of suppressions and restrictions by authorities.

Take Roger Bacon (c. 1219/20 – c. 1292) for example, the 13th Century English philosopher. He is sometimes credited (mainly since the 19th century) as one of the earliest European advocates of the modern scientific method inspired by Aristotle

• After 1260, Bacon’s activities were restricted by a statute prohibiting the friars of his order from publishing books or pamphlets without prior approval. • The Condemnations of 1277 banned the teaching of certain philosophical doctrines, including deterministic astrology. Some time within the next two years, Bacon was apparently imprisoned or placed under house arrest. –https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Bacon

Here are some of the thinking that Bacon and others were ‘not allowed to engage in’ at various times in the 13th Century:

The banned propositions included:

• “That there is numerically one and the same intellect for all humans”.
• “That the soul separated [from the body] by death cannot suffer from bodily fire”.
• “That God cannot grant immortality and incorruption to a mortal and corruptible thing”.
• “That God does not know singulars” (i.e., individual objects or creatures).
• “That God does not know things other than Himself”.
• “That human acts are not ruled by the providence of God”.
• “That the world is eternal”.
• “That there was never a first human”.
–https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condemnations_of_1210–1277

History is littered with examples of suppression of freedom of thinking. Now if you are still reading this article, and if you resonate with the belief that you should reach your own, objective conclusions, then here is one phenomenal role model to guide and inspire you. Buckminster-Fuller, considered one of the greatest thinkers of the 20th Century, wrote:

I jettisoned all I had ever been taught to believe and proceeded thereafter to reason and act only on the basis of direct personal experience … Exploring, experiencing, feeling, and – to the best of my ability – acting strictly and only on my individual intuition, I became impelled to write this book… –Buckminster-Fuller, referring to his book ‘Critical Path’, 1981.

I am not alone in my encouragement to you to temper your compliance with the dominant ‘scientific’ theories:

I think that in modern Western society, there seems to be a powerful cultural conditioning that is based on science. But in some instances, the basic premises and parameters set up by Western science can limit your ability to deal with certain realities. For instance, you have the constraints of the idea that everything can be explained within the framework of a single lifetime, and you combine this with the notion that everything can and must be explained and accounted for. But when you encounter phenomena that you cannot account for, then there’s kind of a tension created; it’s almost a feeling of agony. –Howard C. Culter and the Dalai Lama, 1998

Again I share I am not seeking to be disrespectful of science as it currently is.

Research is nice and I’m definitely not critical at all of the contribution of academics. But my decision to train a certain way is not based on the latest research. It’s based on the conclusions I’ve reached on cause and effect relationships in the real world. People can become too infatuated with the concept of science.

For me, success in sport is about winning. Athletes aren’t going to get offended if I don’t comply with the latest research. They just want to win. So the research is nice, but it’s always going to be limited. We’re not dealing with a college age volunteer in a six week program; we’re dealing with a human being that’s been working for fifteen to twenty years to take his body beyond where it’s gone before. –Shugart, C., 2000, Meet the press: Coach of Coaches – An interview with Ian King, t-mag.com 29 Friday 2000

I also acknowledge that the easiest thing to do is to conform. However I encourage you to reflect on this perspective on conformity:

The opposite of courage in our society is not cowardice, it is conformity. –Rollo May

I have been encouraging you to resist the pressures of conformity for:

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. Make our own minds up based on a combination of respect for your intuition, the athlete/client’s intuition, the results, and in respect of the body of knowledge available. –King, I.., 2005, The way of the physical preparation coach (book), p. 17

It is rewarding to see individuals chose to be objective, to trial training methods and reach their own conclusions, even if they are contrary to the dominant beliefs:

“…from young, I was led to believe that an individual’s level of flexibility is determined by genetics. As I grew older I got stiffer and when I started my formal education, I was educated that flexibility is not a vital determining factor in sports and that dynamic stretches were more than sufficient to both warm-up the joint and muscles, as well as to improve flexibility.

To be honest, with all the research papers and articles being put through my mind at that time, it did seem logical for a naive mind that was easily convinced. However, I am glad that I was shown the art of stretching…I have never experienced such levels of flexibilities in my life and I’m thankful that I chose to open my mind to a concept that was challenged by the origins of my knowledge in this field. I spend close to half or on some days, more than half of my time stretching my frontal muscle groups & performing tension releasing work with my ‘poor man’s masseur’ as it has significantly improved my overall health. Stretching will also and always be a main training tool/stapler in the programs that I design, due to it’s massive benefits that I have attained and am still experiencing.” -Tze, KSI L1 Student Coach

In essence I am suggesting that if you do what everyone else is doing, you are not only failing to fulfill your potential, you are failing to fulfill the potential of your client:

Look at it this way. If you do it the way everyone else is doing it – all things being equal, how are you going to be better than everyone else? Realistically changes do occur (albeit slowly) in sport training – because someone dared to do it differently. These people gain the advantage, are at the cutting edge. The sheep follow. Which do you want to be? –King, I., 1997, Winning and Losing, p. 30

Give you a hint – if what I teach is what the majority do, I would be very concerned. I want to do what few do, to get a competitive advantage. –King, I., 2003, Ask the Master, (book) p. 32

Conclusion

I am going to be straight – if you find yourself doing what the majority are doing, and your goal is to be the best you can be – you should be very concerned. I see this as evidence that you are not thinking for yourself, rather that you are conforming.

Now this is not bad or good from one perspective – even Master Sifu in the movie Kung Fu Panda will tell you there is not such thing as good or bad! If you have no desire to fulfill your potential, if your personality is such that you would prefer to conform, then keep going. The world needs all kinds, and the statistical reality has a pattern of talking about the 90-95% that just want to be average, the same as everyone else.

But if you are seeking to be the best you can be, to give you clients the best opportunity to be the best they can be – to be in the 5 to 10% of high achievers – then you need to stop seeking to be like everyone else and think for yourself!

Ian King

Strength training makes you weak and should not be done  

/by

We’ve been conducting some studies lately and have reached the conclusion that strength training is bad and should not be done.

The protocol we have been using has been to complete a set of near Repetition Maximum reps in the squat, and to test vertical jump and speed within a few minutes of the sets.

There was a direct correlation between level of muscle fatigue and reduced strength, power and speed. There is also a direct correlation between the number of sets and the decrement in strength, power and speed.

The evidence is clear – strength training makes you weaker and slower, and should not be conducted. If you must do strength training, the lower you Repetition maximum you go the less strength, power and speed you will loose, and the less sets you do, the same applies.

I have conferred with a number or colleagues on this and it is our learned recommendation you stop strength training.

Whilst this position has not been formally adopted by any professional development associations, we are confident we will find enough academics and marketing gurus whose lack of strength and understanding of strength should be sufficient motivation for them to temporarily adopt a falsehood until they conduct further personal investigations and gain a higher level of knowledge and personal competence in this area, which will be followed by a range of trend based crappy e-products that create short term cash and the perception of marking leading knowledge, advocating the use of strength training.

And due to the fact that, in the 1950 words of the great Dr Albert Schweitzer, ‘man does not think’ (read – most humans are too dumb or at least have been dumb-downed to question powerful presented paradigms and trends} this will be a really easy sell.

By then, there will be a generation of humans who struggle to loose the conditioning that strength is bad, and who will pass this myth on to their children in a highly non-scientific way, and another if not more generations of humans will suffer for this falsehood that suited the vested interests of a minority.

Hold it – I might be getting confused with the fate of stretching….

PS. Make sure the masses don’t hear that if you waited a few more minutes to test strength it would be a different outcome…

PPS. How is that blindness side-effect going?….

Ian King

The post 2000 fitness ‘professional’ – the long road back  

/by

I often comment on how there’s some really distinct believes and behaviours that I believe identify the persons new to the ‘fitness industry’ post 2000, as a result of the ‘influences’ they were exposed to in this heavily internet marketing based decade. This is a decade I have called a number of things from the Decade of Deceit to the Decade of Bullshit. And these poor souls brought their blank slate into this environment. It’s been an interesting phenomenon to observe. I believe it sent this gullible, trusting cohort on a money and time wasting merry-go-round of confusion.

When someone shared this article with me, written by a Oliver Cummings out of the UK, it summed up this experience better than I could, because he lived it. I learnt from reading the article he fitted the description to a T- a post 2000 entrant to the industry, and he got caught up what most if not all post 2000 newbies got caught up in. To his credit it looks like he has begun the long journey back from this, and in his own words, its been a long road back.

A question I have of those who suffered this fate, this post-2000 intake or cohort – can the mind ever be emptied enough recover from the information they absorbed during this decade when they were so malleable?

Here’s the article, and here’s the authors contact details: oliver_cummings@hotmail.co.uk

“Part 1 of 2. After a conversation with some clients this past week about training methods and a younger trainer last week who asked me about some of the biggest mistakes I’ve made during the last 12 years of coaching, I thought I’d share some of these.

1) Becoming a Functional Trainer specialising in movement patterns. After graduating in 2002, I went on and got my fitness qualifications to work in a gym and quickly found out I didn’t know much so I started reading lots of books on the latest wave of training that was hitting the states – functional training. Shit I was doing it all wrong, barbell curls and any form of sit ups were now on the banned list. So off I went to Canada after devouring the previous 12 months study material to get qualified as a Functional Trainer. From squatting on swiss balls, doing single leg work on wobble boards, stability cushions, to lunging in every angle imaginable with a rotational twist always involved, sometimes even blindfolded..yip that was the “advanced stage..”, and performing countless core drills and exercises to activate the transversus abdominis and other core muscles I didn’t know existed, I wore that t-shirt loud and proud. Apparently my clients and myself were using corrective exercise to improve how our body’s functioned in real life. All this twisting and bending was how we were meant to move as human beings. And I was sold the idea that there would be a transfer over to speed and strength due to being able to recruit my stabilisers much more effectively. Result? Strength and power went backwards, and the back pain that some of my clients and myself were suffering from at that time got worse. This was back in 2003-2004. That shit never worked then and doesn’t work now, no matter how much the new governing body selling their certification program try to convince us.

2) The assessment guy. As part of becoming a functional trainer who now specialised in movement patterns, I needed be able to assess and correct. This consisted of a comprehensive assessment of posture, balance, flexibility, and movement assessments. The assessment took 1 -2 hours to complete for one person which bored the life out of clients, myself included if I’m being honest.

The results of the assessments were now showing that most of my clients and myself were dysfunctional in some way or another– from leg length differences to over tight muscle groups, shoulders not being level on either side, too much forward head carriage, to core being weak and a lot more. The results highlighted red flags which now needed priority in programme design and prevented me from giving clients a lot of the traditional lifts in the gym, these big compound lifts could now kill us. Training programmes were now called Corrective Exercise programmes and consisted of 4 phases of development lasting 6-8 weeks each before you were allowed to pick anything heavy up off the floor. By the end of stage 4 you had lost the will to live never mind lift heavy.

What I’ve learned from experience is that every training session is a testing session. Coaching involves observing clients closely – looking at how their body moves while they perform the warm up and during the training session itself. Things can be corrected on the spot with proper coaching cues. For Gaelic players and soccer players, with a sound athletic programme in place that accounts for structural balance there is no need to spend 4-8 weeks focusing primarily on movement prep and core activation work. All these things can be part of the overall programme but not at the expense of getting the real job done in the weights room – developing explosive strength and power.

With all the work going into FMS and core work over the past few years there seems to be little carryover in preventing injuries going by the global epidemic in sports injuries. As an observation after doing a few thousand hours of assessing normal clients and Gaelic players, a lot of the movement tests can be learned in a relatively short period of time. I still assess all new clients but the difference now and back then is that I’m more specific on what I’m testing for whether it’s a sports person looking to improve speed or a new client with a long term injury. Most of the time all I want to see if there is a major difference between left and right, and if pain exists when they move. After that were good to train.

3) Buying into the whole core myth. This ties in with the first two points. Spending an extensive part of your training time strengthening and activating the core muscles means nothing if your ankles, hamstrings, or neck are weak. Where can all this new core strength go? Your ankles are continually breaking down, your hamstrings are tearing every other game and you think training the core will correct these problems. Fantasy land. I used to believe this too until I found much more effective ways of training for both injury prevention and performance.

Here’s another thing, if you’re sucking your core in to activate your transversus when doing any form of athletic or core training you are destabilising the spine and making the core weaker. If you’re being taught to do this by a physio or anyone else like I was years ago in my functional trainer days then you need to direct them to the work of Dr Stuart McGill a professor of spine biomechanics who has done extensive research on patients and elite athletes with back injuries. Ask any boxer to suck in his abs when punching or when being punched to see his response, or a powerlifter at the bottom of a squat or deadlift – that weight won’t be coming back up again. Instead learn to brace the abs. Squeezing a crap activates the abs more than all that “suck your belly button in” nonsense. Train the abs just like any other body part, no need to specialise unless there is a major weakness, and don’t forget to blast the lower back, when it gets stronger the whole mid-section does too.

4) Joining the Anti-Stretching Establishment. At the time of studying for a sports science degree the research was coming out that static stretching did not reduce injuries and it actually decreased power output if performed before a training session. So I basically stopped stretching and focused instead on dynamic warm up movements. Problem was I sitting all day at university, my hips were becoming chronically tighter, and doing 10-15 minutes of dynamic movements only loosened them up for the training session ahead but did not correct the tightness that was restricting movement. And in today’s day and age this is a common theme for people who drive to work and sit all day over an office desk.

As with any type of training there’s a time and place for all types of stretching. If certain muscles are experiencing chronic tightness get them stretched statically and hold the stretch for 2-5 minutes, 15 second holds don’t cut it as most of us have experienced. Other muscles not as tight can be stretched dynamically, with bands or with PNF.

As much as strength training can enhance athleticism and improve a person’s physique, I’ve learned to incorporate a lot more stretching into the programmes over the years as opposed to 100% dynamic based stretching, and as a result seen a reduction in soft tissue injuries, better range of movement at the bottom of squats and other lower limb exercises and an improvement in stride length while sprinting especially with Gaelic players. For clients pressed for time, static stretching for the lower body specifically the hip area can be performed between rest intervals during upper body training sessions to accommodate training economy. And for coaches who overthink about calming the parasympathetic nervous system down too much doing all this static stretching then weigh out the pros and cons. Having banged up hips from years of sports training won’t benefit performance.

5) Training every client for body composition goals and thinking they need to be at an impressively low level of bodyfat to gain recognition as a trainer who knows what I’m doing. I fell into the trap of thinking every client had my goals – which was to be as lean as possible at all times during the year. Problem was I wasn’t listening to what their goals truly were. If you were a male I wanted you at 10-12% or below bodyfat and if you were a female 15-20%. And in the process I don’t want you having a life away from the gym because that means you won’t hit those figures. And we got to get you in there in 12 weeks or less.

What I’ve learned is that not every client wants to walk about lean or ripped. Some clients just want to get healthier, lose weight to look respectable, and be able to train 3-4 times weekly to feel good about themselves. For quite a few this is much better than doing nothing at all to improve their health or fitness. Being satisfied overweight and not getting healthier or improving fitness levels is not what I’m talking about here, going to the extreme of not being able to eat out and enjoy food on the banned list for 3-6 months is. For competitive athletes, and females and males getting ready for figure or bodybuilding competitions who I have dealt with that’s a whole different ball game. And clients who sign up specifically for a transformation challenge obviously the guidelines are a lot stricter.

But for people new to fitness and those already involved who don’t want the extreme approach the key is compliance and to find what is sustainable long term while keeping the client involved in fitness, otherwise we lose them.

As a side note to this, back in my body composition days, I used to keep my subcutaneous bodyfat at no higher than 12% year round, because I needed to be able to do it myself and to gain respect from clients who would see that if I can be relatively lean all year then I must know what I’m doing. My theory was true to a certain extent but over time I’ve found that the reality is 9 times out of 10, clients or potential clients don’t care if a trainer has a six pack or not. Looking like a sack of shit obviously isn’t a good advertisement for business, being in shape is and can help..a bit. BUT the only thing they truly want to know is can we help them achieve what their looking for. If you’re a new trainer on the scene – that means 3 years or less and you think the current trend on social media of showing what you ate for breakfast and displaying how lean your serratus anterior is I’ve got news for you – clients don’t give one shit. That does not inspire or motivate or help get you new clients.

Arriving at Westside Barbell in Columbus Ohio back in 2008 to spend 2 weeks with Louis Simmons, and after spending the previous year or so training Westside style and mixing it with a strict paleo diet which I had been eating anyway since 2004, Louie shook my hand welcomed me into the gym and asked me if I was a tennis player. Thanks Louie. So much for getting lean.

6) The ball buster. I’ll keep this brief. Training should be conducted with proper intensity and positive stress should be applied at a progressive rate over time so as to get an adaptation response. If too much stress is applied overtime and the person struggles to adapt to the new stress then signs and symptoms of over-reaching can start to show up. That’s when it’s time to back off. If every session is the ball buster, harder than last time, longer than last time etc then progress stalls. We eventually set people up for failure. Being the hardest trainer in town delivering the hardest sessions in town is the one of the first mistakes the new trainer makes to create an impression and looking back I did it too. Not that my sessions are any easier now or less intense, the difference is periodisation of intensity and volume over 4-8-12 weeks periods to get the best possible training outcome. When delivering sessions now I’m asking myself, will this help and progress the client or leave them so tired and fatigued they have a hard time recovering from it. Training clients into a state of exhaustion seems to be a current trend in the fitness industry whereby if they are not on their back wiped out at the end of it the session then it wasn’t productive. From a recovery point of view this is called bullshit. My primary role is to provide a safe and effective coaching environment, and to help a client, not exhaust them. Having a team of paramedics land at one of the gyms I was working at before soon taught me a lesson to calm the fuck down with clients. The minimal effective dose to get the best training response is always the best method. Anything beyond that is a waste of time and messes with the whole recovery process – that forgotten piece of the training process where we do nothing but do the most important thing.

7) The more I learn the less I know. Becoming too emotionally attached to one style of training was something that I suffered from years ago. I’ve invested a fair chunk of my income since 2002 on certification programmes, seminars, workshops, and in private internships, not to mention taking time off from work to shadow coaches at the top of their game in NFL, professional boxing, English and Welsh rugby, and functional nutrition/medicine in America, Canada, and Europe. I look back at the early days and realise that with the few strength and conditioning, nutrition and fitness qualifications I had gained, some good others not so good, that I was becoming attached to certain styles of training and nutrition. Why?

It’s all I knew at the time and I had just spent a fair amount of money and time getting qualified in them so I did become emotionally attached to some of them. Plus I went to these courses and internships to learn with an open mind which I still do, but at the beginning I opened my mind up too much to new ideas that my brain nearly fell out. The old saying that a little bit of knowledge can be dangerous is so true in the fitness industry and hands up it applied to me before. I look at some trainers today who have been in the industry less than 3-5 years which is nothing and they fall into the same trap of believing everything they have been taught in the weekend certification programme they attended or the 4 year sport science degree they have recently completed or worse the latest e-book. Now when I attend seminars or complete certification programmes

I’m looking for that 5-10% piece of information that I feel could be valuable and can be integrated into my system of training. I’m not looking to radically change everything come Monday morning when back at work, I’m looking to fit different pieces of the jigsaw puzzle together so that I can now offer a better way of getting results with clients or teams. Having interned with some of the best coaches in the world and applied their methods over a 12-13 year period I’ve a bit of an idea of what works now and what doesn’t and in comparison to 10 years ago I’m much better at detecting bullshit when I’m looking at new methods from both certification programmes and coaches. I’m still searching for answers to stuff I haven’t figured out and there’s a lot of stuff I haven’t figured out yet.

8) Gurus are a dime a dozen. This follows on from the last point. If you’re a new trainer then you need to learn fast that nobody has all the answers. I used to believe every word that came out of some coaches mouths but found that when I applied some of the information it didn’t work, sometimes results got worse, and sometimes their advice accelerated results greatly. It all gets back to the famous Bruce Lee quote “absorb what is useful, discard what is not.” Every coach has flaws, every training programme has flaws, nothing perfect exists in the training world no matter what the guru tells us or the latest up and coming coach who has had a bit of success over the last 3 year period. The world of strength and conditioning does not begin and end with any one person’s methods no matter how successful they have become. The key is to learn from different coaches and see what works for yourself in your environment.

How do you pick a coach to learn from? Here’s a few tips. Look at their background. How many years have they been coaching? Anything less than 5-7 and be careful. What is their track record? What coaches at the top did they learn from themselves and how many? Success leaves clues. Pick people who have had success, have been in the industry for a respectable period of time, and have learned a lot from other successful coaches at the top themselves.

Bonus tip – being successful on social media platforms and having a good few thousand raving fans and likes means nothing. As for online coaches who have more online clients than people in real life, that isn’t coaching. That’s cutting and pasting programmes and sending it off to the new online client. The best coaches who I have learned from, you won’t find on social media, ever. They are too busy in the real world coaching some of the best athletes in the world. That’s not to say there aren’t any top coaches on the internet, there’s quite a few using the internet to get their information out there. The problem is there is a lot of bullshitters using social media to make themselves look like experts. If their blogging and answering questions on the internet at peak gym times Monday to Friday then you got to question who the hell their coaching in real life.

9) The business of fitness marketing. During the whole time of interning, and attending seminars and courses the common piece of business advice from a lot of the coaches was that when you start to produce results the clients will soon knock on the door. This is partly true and to this day a fair chunk of my business whether it is individuals or teams still comes from referrals which I am always thankful for. There have been times in the past however when business was really bad. Leaving a gym I had worked at for 6 years in 2009 to start working in another gym resulted in losing quite a few clients due to the new gym being geographically too far away to travel for a lot of clients. After quickly discovering that thinking good thoughts and spreading love and positivity out into the universe didn’t attract new clients it gave me a good kick up the arse to start reading reality books like business and marketing. Something that I felt I didn’t need to know and actually hated the thought of to be honest, but it needed to be done as I was self-employed and running a personal training business meant if I didn’t have clients I didn’t get paid and just like everyone else I had bills to pay.

Fast forward 6 years later and I still haven’t really applied anywhere near the amount of the marketing info that I have learned but have become a lot more clued up on the overall business side of things and now appreciate the value of understanding and knowing my numbers, tracking, and generally keeping account of everything. I have during this time read and followed leading figures in the fitness marketing side of things, and have signed up and paid quite a bit for business mentorship programmes. Having already learnt from my past mistakes on the training side of things, I was now able to make a good decision whether Coach X from sunshine coast in some part of America (who I had never heard of before) and was promising to show the secrets to getting more clients than you can handle and earning a 6 figure annual income was legit or a fraud.

I’ve put 6 figure in as it’s the common trend in their advertisements. Their mystical methods that had them running massively successful gyms and bootcamps yet they decided to sell up and teach their principles to gullible personal trainers because there must be more money in that, or they didn’t actually run a successful business at all. What you will find with a lot of these fitness marketing gurus and companies is that 90% of their information products comes from basic books on business and marketing, with the language slightly changed to suit fitness. If you want to learn more about business do yourself a favour and read anything by Michael E. Gerber or Michael Port before you blow money on some guy who for all we know could be and likely is running an imaginary 6 figure business while sitting with his laptop in the bedroom of his parent’s house.

There are however really good business coaches out there who have and still do run successful gyms and other fitness businesses. Find one stick to his methods and don’t get lost amongst all the rest of the noise.

The key point to understand if you’re new to the industry – learn your trade first then study business but don’t leave it to 8 years down the line like I did. But get a handle of the basic business stuff from day one as it will help. On the other hand if you know more about Instagram and other forms of social media than you do about proper programme design and coaching then your priorities are all wrong.

A really good tip for letting people know you’re a trainer on Facebook is to do the following. Go on a diet that absolutely kills you for 12-16 weeks, knock some strong fat burners and whatever else down the neck during this time, train cardio on an empty stomach 5 mornings weekly and weight train in the afternoon. I’m assuming you’re in your twenties and have no family commitments or anything outside of the gym to distract you – you know like real life stuff. Once you’ve leaned out get the fake tan on and get a photo shoot done.

Once you’ve nailed that now you can start advertising for clients on social media. Here’s the rules. Peter Thomas after your name and designer boxer shorts for the profile pic. Daily motivational quotes will now be the norm from here on in not to mention pictures of your breakfast just for extra inspiration. And remember to hit that beast mode button after every training session just in case we forgot about your AM workout that happened 4 hours beforehand. Now go search for that ideal high end client who will stick to your realistic guidelines for getting in shape. Marketing made simple.

That’s pretty much it, I could go into much more detail on any of the above points and I could share much more but I honestly haven’t got the time. Hopefully the new kids on the block learnt something and the more experienced guys in the industry can associate with some of the points.

To finish off I just want to let any coaches know my internship programme will be starting in January 2016. Level 1 National Trainer will last for one weekend and if you pass all practical and written exams you can proceed to Level 2 International Master Trainer which will take 2 weekends to complete. Once you complete Master Trainer Level 2 after 2 weekends you will have your name put up as an affiliated link on my website. This will help clients in your local area find you. But if you don’t reinvest into the programme and retake exams within a 2 year period I will take your name down off the website because I’ll be teaching completely different material in 2 years, and what you were taught 2 years previous to this won’t work anymore. This is the way a lot of fitness qualifications are done now so my Master Trainer Award will be no different. Get signed up on the link below.”

Ian King

Beyond sets and reps – securing your economic future (what few in physical preparation will tell you about)  

/by

I’m going to give you a brief economics lesson because we are holistic teachers. So if you find that boring or offensive, you can shut down, close the email and go back to whatever you are going. After all I know there are many who, for whatever reason, have interest only for the narrow focus of their tomorrow. No future focus.

On the flip, if you have any inkling that the future economy could have a massive impact on your personal financial security, your ability to put food on the table and the ability for you to cloth your children, you might choose to read on.

I have been holding back on this message to you for nearly 15 years, waiting to see if the signs support the predictions I have been collating from those whose insights into future economy I trust. And as the time is getting closer, if I don’t tell you know, I will suffer regret for my silence.

So on one side I have the risk of the small percent who will opt out in disgust at our audacity to talk about something outside of sets and reps, body fat and how to get bigger and stronger. I do that, and have been prolific contributor in professional development for many decades. What I also do it teach holistically. You can tell me you are only interested in sets and reps and bodyfat and strength all you want, but know that some point in your future your ability to do those things will be impacted directly or indirectly by your ability to create the legal tender to survive.

So if your head isn’t in the sand by now, I want to share with you the consensus of opinion from my teachers about the impending economic challenges we may face in the next few years.

I was raised in a Great Depression household, where my father watched his father struggle during the Great Depression of the 1930s and the flat 1940s. It left a strong imprint on that generation. However as the western economies boomed through the 1970s and beyond, the next generation became complacent. After witnessing the 2001 9/11 impact on the US economy I wanted to learn the signs and triggers of any potential future depression, so I could be forewarned and share this with others.

Those in my inner coaching circle who were with me in the early 2000s will vividly recall me talking about the prediction that the world economy would suffer a significant downturn in the 2007-2008 period.

This prediction was spot on – the US suffered what become known as the ‘Sub-Prime’ loans crisis, where the collapse of a large number of housing loans brought the US economy to it’s knees. Australia called it’s economic challenges the ‘Global Financial Crisis’ (GFC).

Now as a person who earns their money training people, you may ask what does this have to do with me. I not interested in economics or future predictions! I understand this, but what I want to share it this – when the economy turns down significantly you are/will be affected.

Why do I say this? I watched the impact of the 2007-2009 economic downturn in various countries.

As a student of futurism and holism, the study of future economic changes of significance has been. Sport sponsorship reduced sharply and wages and number of positions in sport contracted. Everyone in the general population was affected financially, and the spending on non-essential services such as gym membership and personal training declined.

I have many wealthy friends and after watching the impact on them during the 2007-2009 period, I learnt that no-one is immune.

So you can stick your head in the sand and say ‘If its not about sets and reps, I couldn’t give a flying f—!’. And I look forward studying the outcome of this group, as well as the group who take my future economy concerns more seriously.

One of the strongest themes I have seen about the economy in the immediate future is reference to 2016. Which is why now, in 2015, there has never been a better or more important time to learn new skills such as those taught hrough the KSI Leveraged Income Challenge. Click here to learn more:
http://bit.ly/LeverageIncomeChallengeInterest

Robert Kiyosaki, US financial educator, has been calling this period for some time, writing about this in his book “Rich Dad’s Prophecy: Why the Biggest Stock Market Crash in History Is Still Coming… And How You Can Prepare Yourself.” http://www.smh.com.au/business/robert-kiyosaki-says-to-prepare-for-the-worst-20141114-11jyhr.html
http://www.news.com.au/finance/money/is-the-us-at-risk-of-a-hyperinflation-collapse/story-e6frfmci-1227144167041

US futurist Harry Dent is also very concerned about this period, writing about it in his recent book “The Demographic Cliff: How to Survive and Prosper During the Great Deflation of 2014–2019.”
http://www.theaureport.com/pub/na/harry-dent-how-to-prosper-in-the-coming-downturn

Thom Hartmann promotes his new book ‘The Crash of 2016’ with the suggestion that another great depression looms over the United States in 2016, because of all the economic fraud and corruption by the 1%, the mega corporation, and politicians all buying laws to enrich themselves, and bankrupting the rest of the economy. (sounds like what I see in the fitness industry – self enrichment at the cost of the masses…)
tube.com/watch?v=2FyK8xqfRhc

“We’ve been saying for years that we believe the period of 2016-2018 is the start of an overwhelming financial crisis, possibly much worse than the 2000/2001 stock market collapse, and the 2008/2009 credit crisis. 2016 appears to be the peak of the financial markets and economic escalation, with the giant reverse beginning as early as 2016 and as late as 2018, but more likely as late as 2017.”
— Scott Petullo and Stephen Petullo, http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/financial-markets-prediction-2016-2018-start-of-major-financial-tragedy

This is just a sample of those who express concern for the economy during this period. And of course there are as many who say don’t worry, there will be no crash.

Now let’s say the doom predictions are all wrong. That nothing happens. Or better still the economy booms in that time. I am very happy. I don’t need to be right. I don’t expect my teachers to be right. I just want to act and see them act in the best interests of those we seek to serve, to be honest, and to help others be prepared for the possibilities.

However there is one thing I feel very confident of guaranteeing you – the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer. Your income’s buying power will shrink. The cost of living will rise faster than your wage rises. In summary if you don’t start doing things differently, you will slide down the standard of living scales. So you can tell me now that all you want to do is think, learn and talk about sets and reps and bodyfat and getting stronger – and I will ask you how you are going in 10, 20, 30, 40 years etc from now what you are doing, what you are interested in, and how life is going for you. I am confident those who take action will respond positively, and those who shut down and put their heads in the sand will have a ‘different’ outlook than the one than have now, one where regret will most likely figure prominently….

As individuals and as a company we do three things – we train athletes, we teach coaches, and we change lives holistically.

We currently giving you a phenomenal opportunity to change and create a stronger position from which to deal with any possible future economic downturns, as well as change your life now matter what happens. Through the KSI Leveraged Income Challenge. Click here to learn more:
http://bit.ly/LeverageIncomeChallengeInterest

There are ways to take control of your financial destiny, and they are exciting opportunities. Darren Hardy, Founder of Success Magazine and student of success, is passionate that now is the time to begin your entrepreneurial journey. http://bit.ly/TheresNeverBeenABettterTime

Ian King

Ian King

Planning a specialisation strength program  

/by

One of the great challenges for a person (including the ‘professional’ coach/consultant) is to design a strength training program around a body part or line of movement specialisation program. This challenge was reflected in this question i received from a KSI client:

Since I no longer train for sporting prowess/performance (basketball and track), but simply for health/fitness (and to keep up with my kids’ play) yet, feeling like a “somewhat” concrete goal might be fun, I’ve been looking at various “symmetry” scales and formulae (McCallum’s, as well as Willoughby’s in your GBIV), which has quickly made me become aware of a few things: My training/sporting background gave me a solid lower-body foundation (hips/glutes being 3” above “ideal”, thighs 2½” above “ideal”, and calves 1″), but to the “detriment” of upper body symmetry.

For example, according to various scales (and, of course, I realize fully this is just for “fun” and to give a general perspective on things), chest size is below by 2”, arms by 1 to 1½ inches, forearms 1 inch, and neck, 1¼ inch!!!!!

In terms of strength, and as one would expect, lower body strength is well above average, and upper body is just around average, except for one glaring exception: shoulder pressing strength is well below (in spite of having reasonable shoulder development?!?). So, this leads me to the following (and was hoping to get your feedback)…

I was considering giving your Great Guns program a go (which I thought would be a great way of emphasizing arm/forearm development), but was wondering how to prioritize (or deprioritize the lower body, as the case may be) other lagging parts (neck, chest, and, then, shoulder pressing strength)?

Should I postpone those other areas to future cycles/phases? Is there any way to work on chest size AND shoulder strength, WHILE still prioritizing arms? Or is this overkill? Your comments, as always, are appreciated.—Éric

To which I responded with:

Eric- a specialization program is just that – specializing in one area. What I taught in my 1998 ‘How to Write’, in my 1999 book ‘Get Buffed!’ and throughout my articles in various magazines (hard copy and online), every singe program creates a priority – by virtue of the sequence, relative volumes and relative load potential of the exercises provided.

You are leaning towards doing the arm specialization program, which is great, but at the same time are wishing you could specialize in a number of other muscle groups. When you specialize by sequence – which is inherent in all program by default – assuming volume to each muscle group or line of movement is equal, you still have prioritization or specialisation.

However when you add prioritization or specialization by volume also, which occurs in specialization programs such as the ‘Great Guns’ program – you are forced then to reduce volume in other muscle groups or lines of movement. What you are being tempted to do is overload your program, which in turn will overload your body. This is common in strength training, and the most common outcome is the conclusion that growth without drugs is impossible.

This is not correct. The best way to answer your own question – and that is the purpose and intent of my educational material, to help you make your own decisions – is to determine the amount of volume (lets use the simple method of number of sets to measure that) to your number one specialization. In this case, you have nominated your arms.

Lets take my general recommended volume range of 8-15 sets per workout (not including abdominal, control or warm up sets) and use the average number of 12. Now lets use my maximum number of workouts per 7 day cycle that I believe suits most and that is four workouts a week. We are left with 60 work sets in total for the week.

Once you have worked out how many sets you want to allocate from these 60 sets to your number one specialization priority (in this case your arms), then allocate volume (total number of sets) to your remaining body.

You can show a secondary priority and a third priority – in fact this will happen by default – and so to some extent you can sequence your priorities, but no other muscle group other than your arms is going to get real prioritisation.

On the flip side the only way you can do a specialization program and get away with it is to put other muscle groups / lines of movement on hold, or in maintenance. This applies to training outside of strength training also, which has direct application for all athletes.

So I know, I have not answered your question in the way you may have been hoping – in the old world ‘I am the guru and the only way you will get anywhere is through me’ approach – but I believe I have answered your question from the ‘you are your own guru’ perspective, or at least nudged you to realize your own ability to answer your questions.—Ian King

Now I’ll be the first to agree that the challenge of designing a strength program around a specialisation program is a challenging task. The approach I use and teach my high level coaches at an individual consulting level is one that applies a series of high level decisions and a considerable time to construct the training program, which is a level of excellence and cost that many avoid in the ‘hope’ that their quicker, less considered decisions are adequate. I am continually amazed at how humans give their motor vehicle more individualised service than their bodies! To answer the challenges presented by this task i encourage close study of my Get Buffed! educational series and or a program design consultation with one of my high level coaches.Ian King PS. The following response was received:

Ian… Contrary to what you might have implied in your last paragraph, this has been IMMENSELY useful. Right in line with your espoused philosophy and educational approach of “teaching a man how to fish” rather than simply “giving him the fish”

As you know, I already own a very extensive library of much of your material but, in some cases, getting a fresh perspective and slightly different angle (with a more specific context) on some of the ideas can help one along in exactly the right way.

This will help guide me with my planned phases. If need be, I’ll send you a copy of my written program, for some more specific guidelines, but I feel you’ve already done more than enough.

As always, I’m grateful for your time, insights and wisdom.

Be well…
-Eric

Ian King

Inspiring a new generation of coaches to think for themselves  

/by

Inspiring a new generation of coaches to think for themselves (And reference the source in a way that was selectively forgotten during the first decade of the 21st century….)

 

I recently received an message from a reader and it went like this:

Hi Ian, I have written an article based on the interview that you did with John Meadows and Shelby Starnes about stretching. It sumarises the things you talked about and I give my on take on parts of it. I just want to thank you for bringing this to my attention as its not something I had ever previously considered in my training, but now I do.

I hope I’ve translated the messages correctly. My article’s name is ‘Stretching is King’ I’m a primary school teacher and I’ve hopes of one day moving my learning on strength and conditioning education into the real world. I’ve trained for over 10 years myself and helped to coach friends during this time but as you say, and as I know from my current job, ‘learning is doing’ and in some capacity, whilst raring two children and holding down other obligations, this is my passion, education and teaching. I’ve done my best to read and watch everything you’ve done so far and the honest of your information is what is different to those who attach it to a sales or marketing ploy and it is tangible the passion you have. Thanks.

Part 1 https://da-dk.facebook.com/536020846487579/photos/pb.536020846487579.-2207520000.1395985026./553231818099815/?type=1

Part 2 https://m.facebook.com/536020846487579/photos/a.546284098794587.1073741829.536020846487579/557198894369774/?type=1&refid=17

It’s great to see a new generation of coaches and teachers being exposed to the possibilities of the human body, rather than the dominant dogma of any given era. And to return to a higher level of integrity where writers accurately and honestly reflect the source of their information. This is encouraging and exciting for the future, even if only for those who are positively impacted by individuals such as this!

Ian King

Ian King

Before you apply the stimulus – in each and every decision in training

/by

I recently visited the dentist for work on my teeth. At a point in the surgery, under a local anaesthetic, I began coughing and was aware of a sensation affecting first my head, then my whole body. I realized that the dentist had just inserted a compound in my teeth, and I intuitively felt I was reacting negatively to this compound. I was quicker to reach this conclusion due to the work I done over the years refining my reading of intuitive feelings.

I immediately raised this possibility with the dentist, to which he assured me was not possible because the compound was a naturally occurring substance. At the end the treatment my symptoms had not abated, and I raised this possibility that my body was reacting negatively once again. I raised this again for a third time in the waiting room post the treatment, whilst paying for the service. On all three occasions I was told it can’t be, and given the same reasons – it was a natural substance and no-one has eve reacted poorly to it.

Within hours I was totally incapacitated in bed, unable to work, struggling to function. By the end of the day I was back at the dental surgery, asking them to remove the substance, which they did. Almost immediately the acute symptoms lifted, with the residual effects affecting me for the next day or so. In the western world approach to medicine, dentistry and related fields there is no provision for assessing the potential impacts of a treatment before applying it. And feedback such as what I provided is typically disregarded.

These professions, at least as measured by the history of professional education, are far older than physical preparation, therefore I should have no surprise that in physical preparation professional development there is also no provision for seeking guidance in any format about the potential impact of any given training stimulus before it is applied. The ability to do so is virtually unheard of, and those who professional and commercial values would be at risk of being devalued if the masses were to rapidly accept the possibility that it could be done are not about to allow this approach to be promoted and endorsed.

At every level of program design and training application in the training process there is the need and opportunity to do exactly this – gain rapid information to guide each and every decision about what may be the potential impact of applying any given stimulus. This is something we teach to the coaches in the KSI Coaching Program. It can be done, we believe should be done, and we do it. Keeping in mind my belief that strength training has the most powerful ability to change the structure and function of the body per unit time than any other of the physical quality trainings, you may appreciate my concern of how strength training exercises, methods and other loading parameters are applied in the complete absence of any of these predeterminations.

Essentially, within weeks, a human’s life can be changed forever for the better or worse – and I suggest for the overwhelming majority of time for the worse. I believe that few who make and influence these training decisions have any real world insights into the long-term adaptations that result from the stimulus they are blindly applying.

This is not good enough. It is not optimal. The fact that this non-discerning approach re potential impacts of training on the body short, medium and long term) is ignored by the masses is not cause to continue down this path. It is, for me, cause for massive concern and motive to change, to learn how to do it better.

Ian King

Coach King, What do you think of CrossFit?  

/by

I recently received another request to share my thoughts about cross-fit.

“As someone who I look up to a greatly respect in the area of physical training, I am interested what your thoughts are on CrossFit as an effective training program?”

Before I responded in full asked “Tell me what you think about CrossFit.” I value the market research that consumer comments provide. The writer kindly responded in full and I will share his response in the below.

Firstly I would like to establish commonality in grounds for discussion. In any meaningful dialogue I believe it’s important that meanings are clarified and defined.

To this end, CrossFit is simply a word, or a mixing of two words. So in itself, CrossFit has no more meaning than the meaning a person attaches to it. For most people, the meaning will be shaped by their experiences or perception of what this word (or two words) stands for.

According to Wikipedia, CrossFit is:

CrossFit is a strength and conditioning program with the aim of improving, among other things, cardiovascular/respiratory endurance, stamina, strength, flexibility, power, speed, coordination, agility, balance, and accuracy. It advocates a perpetually varied mix of aerobic exercise, gymnastics (body weight exercises), and Olympic weight lifting.

This source provides further clarification with:

CrossFit Inc. describes its strength and conditioning program as “constantly varied functional movements executed at high intensity across broad modal and time domains with the stated goal of improving fitness, which it defines as “work capacity across broad time and modal domains.” Hour-long classes at affiliated gyms, or “boxes”, typically include a warm-up, a skill development segment, the high-intensity “workout of the day” (or WOD), and a period of individual or group stretching. Some boxes also often have a strength focused movement prior to the WOD. Performance on each WOD is often scored and/or ranked to encourage competition and to track individual progress. Some affiliates offer additional classes, such as Olympic weightlifting, which are not centered around a WOD. (1)

Acknowledge success

Before I go any further I also want to acknowledge the success of CrossFit as measured by financial value and growth.

To his credit from a financial and organizational perspective, the founder of CrossFit Inc, founder Greg Glassman, has been able to retain control over his training concepts. In contrast, I have watched my original training concepts and methods be published extensively by various ‘authors’ without reference or credit. Take the ‘Functional Training Movement’ for example – if you took my concepts out of the books written by one of the more prolific authors in this sector, the book would fall over. Interesting when you consider this same person orchestrated a mass walkout of one of my seminar in 1999 on the basis of how terrible the content was, only to turn around and republish all the content during the next decade in complete absence of crediting or acknowledgement. So kudos to Greg. He had the business acumen I lacked in the 1990s. He has managed to date to avoid the damage caused by those who adhere to the ‘New Rules’ of publishing in strength training.

The value of CrossFit is reflected in the reported $16 million CrossFit Inc paid his ex-wife for her share in the company.

In relation to growth, since its inception in 2000, the number of affiliated gyms globally is quoted at 9,000 or more. Glassman commercial approach deserves recognition.

Drivers

So what has driven CrossFit? I identify two main drivers of any new trend or movement (apparently it is now a ‘sport’ also). Firstly, the demand from consumers is based on the ‘new’ paradigm solving a problem that was not being solved by their prior solutions. The second driver is marketing forces, driven by commercial interests.

The growth and relatively longevity of the CrossFit movement or trend suggests that it is providing solutions to the unresolved needs of many people. I will leave exactly how to social researchers, however I suspect it may be the attraction of group training combined with the feeling of working hard, meeting the masses perception of what training should feel like.

The involvement of a large fitness industry company in Reebok, who around 2010 entered into a ten year agreement with CrossFit, suggests commercial marketing motivation to contribute to growing the trend. The impact in prize money alone compares a $25,000 total prize money in CrossFit Games 2010 to $1,000,000 in 2011. (2)

It is now in the interests of Reebok to drive this vehicle commercially.

The success to date of CrossFit is undeniable. More evidence of this is the number of my ‘colleagues’ who have become overnight experts on CrossFit, allowing them to jump on it’s band wagon of success.

Now let’s get more specific about CrossFit as a training method.

Opposite and Equal

The attraction of CrossFit to commerce and consumer has been established. So what is it actually going to create in terms of long and short term training effects?

A valuable insight into the potential short term impact of CrossFit as a training method is provided in the response I received from the person who raised the question about CrossFit with me. They wrote:

“Well, I have been involved in CrossFit for about 16 months and found it to be very effective in developing all aspects of fitness. I became leaner, increased my endurance, flexibility, co-ordination, power, speed and strength.”

As CrossFit rises in popularity the amount of what I call short term research conducted on CrossFit (1) will increase. Here’s an example:

A 2010 U.S. Army study conducted during a 6-week period produced an average power output increase of 20% among participants, measured by benchmark WODs. The average one repetition maximum weight deadlift increased by 21.11%. (3)

My attitude is you can wait for the studies but you don’t have to. You can reach conclusions earlier and benefit. Additionally, most studies will be short-term in nature. What may be lacking is a fuller understanding of the long-term impacts of participation in CrossFit.

To help answer that question, there’s a concept that is extremely relevant – the opposite and equal concept. It’s an original concept I released in 1999:

This is a very interesting principle, a concept that I have created. One that upon mastering will assist you to avoid negative outcomes from training. The concept is based on the belief that to every action (in training) there is a positive and a negative outcome, and that often the negative outcome is equal or as powerful as the positive outcome. (4)

Strengths

The strengths of CrossFit are easy to identify. It has attracted a large and enthusiastic following in a short period of time. To achieve this it must be providing a solution that its participants had not been able to find previously.

Additionally once any belief or movement or trend reaches a percentage of market saturation it experiences a degree of self-perpetuating increase. Behavioural scientists suggest that in the same time it takes a new idea to reach 10% of the market, it shoots to 90%. So however long it takes for 10% of the market to accept and join in with an idea, it can advance another 80% in market participation in the same time.

I suggest CrossFit has or is reaching this tipping point.

From what I can see and hear, its participants enjoy the group motivation and the experience of pushing themselves. To this extent CrossFit has achieved a phenomenal job in creating this ‘community’ atmosphere.

Along with this level of physical effort come physical adaptations, including the ones listed by the person who wrote in with the question – effective in developing all aspects of fitness. They became leaner, increased their endurance, flexibility, co-ordination, power, speed and strength.

I would like to place this in context:

• I still call this a short or medium term result, not a long term result.
• I am not making any comment in this article about the effectiveness of CrossFit to transfer to any specific event or sport other than general fitness adaptations and participation in the ‘sport’ of CrossFit itself. The discussion of merits of CrossFit for specific occupational and or sporting outcomes is outside the context of this article, although very deserving of focus in an article dedicated to this topic.

Another strength of CrossFit is that it embraces a wide range of exercises, many of them with excellent theoretical benefits. In fact you could attribute any rise in participation numbers in strength sports (Olympic Weightlifting, powerlifting) to CrossFit.

Additionally, the characteristic of CrossFit to provide frequent variety in exercise programs may be attractive to many who require this to keep the motivation to train.

Now as my opposite and equal concepts suggests, there is an equally powerful downside to CrossFit that need to be considered.

Even the writer of the question that promoted this response recognized this, to their credit:

“There are a lot of things I like about CrossFit, however, I do understand that there are negatives as well.”

Weaknesses

Most of my initial concerns for CrossFit participants revolve around injury potential. I was not surprised when the question writer shared the below:

“Recently I suffered an injury at training, and while it did not occur doing a typical CrossFit exercise, I wonder if the training I have been performing over the past 16 months may have contributed to it. I was in a group fitness class and was asked to perform single-leg bounding over a short distance (around 15-20 meters). This was early in the morning, and there was dew on the grass. Upon landing, my right foot slipped forwards. There was a loud noise and a sharp pain in my knee. I found out later that I had a proximal rupture of the patella tendon. Not a common injury, as you are probably aware, and I was told that it is quite likely I had a pre-disposing weakness in the tendon. I have had a bit of a history if chondromalacia patella, which I had been managing, but no real issues with the knee besides that.”

1 Individualization: The concept of individualization has been a long-touted one in the physical training industry. It makes most text books. I describe this principle of training as:

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 – speed, strength, endurance, flexibility and so on. (5)

In group exercise, the ability to individualize training is negated, which includes CrossFit.

Now rather than single out CrossFit for this flaw, I suggest that unlike say technology in general, I have seen no advancement at all in over three decades of industry involvement in the ability of fitness ‘professionals’ to individualize training.

There are a number of reasons I propose for this incredible limitation in this industry:

• The focus on research for justification of training protocols – it is difficult if not impossible to find a research study on your specific client giving you answers to stimuli (the training program) that has not been applied yet.
• The complete absence of teaching of the art of training, as opposed to the science of training.
• The willingness of what I certain inexperienced and incompetent individuals to position themselves as ‘experts’, write books and give seminars on how to train people. The people I refer to are very good networkers, very good marketers, will to deceive to create false perceptions of their guru-ness, yet have never coached or trained people to any level of success. In other words they are incompetent yet teaching. An excellent saying I learnt from John C. Maxwell is this:

You teach what you know but you reproduce what you are.

Therefore what they say and write about sounds great, but all that is developed in their paying audience is more of their incompetence, and no advancement occurs in average professional competencies. Unless you believe the ability to market through misleading content is an advancement – you can read more about this in my book ‘Barbells & Bullshit’ (6).

Therefore a person going to see a ‘personal trainer’ is unlikely to receive any more individualization in training than they would if they participated in group training.

2 Level of difficulty in exercise: A CrossFit class can contain a diverse range of exercises including many classics such as Olympic and power lifts. This is great in theory – total body, dynamic exercises etc. However from a finer point of view these exercises can be classed as higher level of difficulty which is associated with higher levels of risk for those whose bodies are or may never be ready for them.

In my 1998 book ‘How to Write Strength Training Programs’ (7) I provide the following guidelines for exercise selection:

Exercise selection in strength training refers to which exercise to use. Exercise selection is often presented as a difficult or confusing task, but the following should simplify this aspect of writing programs. When choosing exercises consider the following:

1. Training method.
2. Exercise suitability.
3. Specificity.
4. Injury history/prevention needs.
5. Training history.
6. Current physical status.
7. Strengths and weaknesses.
8. Level of supervision.
9. Balance. (7)

If you have multiple individuals in the class, it is in my opinion totally improbable that advanced exercises are suitable to them all.

3 Unfamiliar exercises: CrossFit characteristically provides high levels of variety in exercise. This alone could provides a discussion of the merits of this strategy as to the whether it is optimal to train with exploitation of the variety variable, however that is a discussion again beyond the level of this article.

What I will focus on is the impact of conducting a relatively unfamiliar exercise (that is you may not have done it for a few weeks). From a muscle perspective, this ‘shock’ can provide the delayed muscles soreness that some seek to validate their training. In other words, it can feel good. My concern is that loading a relatively new exercise is not necessary or wise for the majority of people the majority of the time.

In sharing my progressive loading models in my Get Buffed! books, I wrote:

In brief, I suggest that the first week of any new training cycle be treated as an ‘exposure week’, not a maximum effort week. What is often overlooked is the adaptation that results simply from the exposure – not only is a maximum effort unnecessary, it may also be counterproductive! Additionally, this sub-maximal approach in the first week allows for greater focus on technique. (8)

4 Extreme loading and technical breakdown: CrossFit is also characterized by high intensity of effort and high loading. In essence, there is a risk most participants are exceeding their technical limit most of the time.

I call this your technical limit – the loading limit before you lose the technical model you have chosen. This is a pretty redundant concept to most in the gym and they have no technical model – they just lift. Now this is great for some competitive lifters, who success is determined simply by whether the load goes from Point A to Point B within minimum guidelines. But if you want to selectively recruit specific muscles for sport performance or aseptic reasons – get a technical model. (9)

I have been discouraging this approach for a number of decades. I published the below nearly 25 years ago:

All individuals will have a ‘technique limit’ in weight selection at any given time on each exercise. The training effect will increase the limit progressively. Utilisation of loads in excess of that technique limit will result in technique breakdown and should be discouraged. (10)

The greatest concern as it relates to CrossFit participants is the injury risk:

In the case where loading exceeds technical ability, injury potential is increased, athlete’s career lengths are reduced, life-time quality of life is reduced, and transfer is reduced. (11)

5 High volumes: CrossFit is also characterized by high volume, although I appreciate this relative nature of this comment. To place it in context, I share my definition of relative volume as measured in number of sets.

Generally speaking, any number of work sets exceeding a total of 12 for the workout (yes, that right, 12 sets for the total workout, not per muscle group!) should only be contemplated by those with optimal lifestyles and recovery conditions. If you have a day job and/or consider your recovery average, this rules you out. (12)

Now in fairness the above describes conventional set, rest strength training. In relation to circuit training, I allow a higher number of sets. In my Guidelines for optimal number of sets per training session for each generalized training method (13) I provide up to 30 sets allowance, however this is on the basis of lower intensity sets.

The risks of high volume work are the reduced ability to recovery, and the increased injury risk associated with training under residual fatigue. I believe injuries resulting from progressive build up of residual fatigue are the ones least likely to be correctly related to their cause.

The battle against ineffective, inefficient and injury creating high volume training will never be over. (14)

6 Imbalances in the training program: In 1998 I released for the first time my concept of ‘Lines of Movement’:

That’s a concept I am sure you have never heard before because this is the first time I have really spoken about it. (15)

Now I am going to show you how I break the muscle groups up: (16)

Lower body:
Quad dominant
Hip dominant

Upper body:
Horizontal plane push
Horizontal plane pull
Vertical plane push
Vertical plane pull

I taught this with the intent of helping the world of strength training reduce their injuries from muscle imbalances. This intent has not been overly successful, in part I suggest because the concept was hijacked by the industry leading plagiarists who really didn’t understand it and therefore could not possibly teach it in with the impact of its intention.

From my generalized understanding CrossFit, there are potential program design imbalances e.g. more exposure to quad dominant exercises than hip dominant exercises, resulting in injury potential. This point was not lost on the question writer:

“My thoughts are that CrossFit did contribute to my injury due to the large volume of jumping, squatting and running. I would love to know your thoughts on this as well.”

7 Time magnifies error: I released a saying in 1998 –

Time magnifies errors in training (17).

All the above concerns will be magnified over time. Considering the extreme nature – volume, intensity, and exercise selection – I suggest you can expect some significant physical complications the longer one participates in activities such as CrossFit. There are many physical therapists and chiropractors who echo this sentiment. Additionally, I am very familiar with the impact on the body of those who participate occupationally in such training environments, especially the Special Forces military personnel.

Summary

The points I raise above in my concerns were well summarized by the question writer whose question stimulated this article:

“…I do understand that there are negatives as well. The focus of the WODS is to perform a given amount of reps in as little time as possible, or to perform as many reps as possible in a given time limit. This can lead to a breakdown in form and potential injury. The volume of training also seems to be quite high and could lead to overtraining and overuse injuries if not properly managed. There is also no individualization in the training program. Though some coaches are quite good at pointing out what you need to work on and many clients will use “open box” time to work on these.”

In summary, when (not if) a person comes to me and tells me of their injuries whilst participating in CrossFit, I initially ask if they plan to continue in CrossFit. If they do, I tell them I cannot help them. I have a saying that you cannot successfully solve an injury problem in the same environment that it was created in (18) and this is more applicable in any training environment that magnifies its flaws, as I suggest CrossFit does.

Conclusion

In conclusion I have been impressed with the magnitude and success of the CrossFit movement, and I am delighted to see the achievement of Greg Glassman in maintaining control of his intellectual property. There are many ways to achieve fulfilment in exercise and participation is CrossFit is an option. The power that Glassman and CrossFit have is their ability to refine and adapt their training protocols to deal with any recognition of the injury potential associated. Whether they do is unknown and their prerogative. Perhaps the masses are happy to take the injury risks in return for what their culture and environment offers.

As to you as an individual making this decision, it is yours to make. For me the body the only one we have for life, and should be treated with the utmost respect and care. I have worked with many athletes who have taken these risks in their training and competition with the potential for great reward, and I can understand why they have done this. An Olympic medal or world championship or playing professional sport comes with many financial and social rewards, and I know even as they suffer physically for the years after, most feel the sacrifice was worth it.

The question I believe you need to ask yourself is – are the rewards and benefits of CrossFit as it is currently conducted worth the risk for you? Only you can answer that, and I respect whatever decision you make.

References

(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CrossFit
(2) http://www.afr.com/p/national/little_caution_over_the_crossfit_NlmYqOEvlcD1tAkVQGt94L
(3) Crossfit Study”. U.S. Army. May 2010. Retrieved 11 April 2014.
(4) King, I., 1999/2000, Foundations of physical preparation , p. 25
(5) King, I., 1999/2000, Foundations of physical preparation , p. 30
(6) King, I., 2010, Barbells & Bullshit: Challenging your thinking.
(7) King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs (book), p.38
(8) King, I., 1999, Get Buffed!™(book), p. 23-26
(9) King, I., 2000, Heavy Metal #4, t-mag.com
(10) King, I.J, 1990,: Guidelines for the Safe Implementation of Strength Training Programs, The Sportsmed Newsletter (Qld Branch of the ASMF Newsletter), February issue 1990
(11) King, I., 2005, The way of the physical preparation coach, p. 48
(12) King, I., 1999, Get Buffed!™, p. 53-56
(13) King, I., 1999, Get Buffed!™, p. 34
(14) King, I., 2011, Legacy – Ian King’s Training Innovations, p. 82
(15) King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs
(16) King, I., 1998, Strength Specialization Series (DVD), Disc 3
(17) King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs (book), p.75
(18) I wonder how long it will take for the industries leading plagiarists – and they are truly world champions at it – to be publishing this saying/concept one as their own…You may even hear it as soon as the upcoming ‘functional training’ seminars in the US…

Ian King

Looking for the messages from the Lance events  

/by

Watching the Lance Armstrong drug allegations situation I feel this event may be more significant that it appears on the surface. It certainly raised a lot of questions for me – including how far into cycling will the expose go and will it jump to other sports. However the biggest question I have yet to answer is why such a big name American athlete has been ‘taken down’. If you read between the lines there has arguably been a degree of protection offered to high profile US athletes in relation to positive or potentially positive drug tests, so why Lance?

I can only think of two possibilities. Firstly he really upset someone. However the collateral damage to the sport of cycling is too big for this. Which leaves me with my second possible answer – it’s a genuine desire to play it straight, a rare example in a sporting landscape that has all the rules but so few ever get caught up on the wrong side of the rules.

If this is the case, what is driving this position of greater integrity? Is this a sign of the promise of 2012 and the ushering in of a higher social values with the Age of Aquarius?

This will be interesting to watch, to see if this is just that or an aberration before things return to the way they were.

Nike’s decision to cut ties with Lance was either a case of their corporate ethics genuinely being violated, or they were concerned about the impact on their bottom line. Either way, it was a significant move.
One thing I can say with certainty is that I have not seen any promise of this greater integrity in corporate or organizational ethics in physical preparation. I am familiar with certain US companies that see fit to continue to retain and endorse certain individuals who values and actions include publishing other peoples works unreferenced, uncredited and in many cases verbatim, and on a number of occasions claiming or inferring it as their own. In essence, what I believe has been the greatest intellectual property heist in modern physical preparation. Yet these companies still endorse and engage these individuals.

Will the corporate integrity shown in cycling and Nike spread to physical preparation? I hope so, for everyone’s sake.

Ian King

They will be exposed – in a way that will last forever  

/by

They will be exposed – in a way that will stand forever

I received a number of responses to the blog article ‘Can’t attract athlete clients? Here’s three solutions’. Here is one of them, and my response.

“Hi Ian, why the protection of xx in this article? Sure that’s who is being referred to in this – his plagiarism should be greatly exposed – unless of course there is some legal agenda ? Keep up the great work, best wishes, Mark.”

Mark, in response to your post: Thank you for your comments. I value hearing your concern that the actions of plagiarists and copyright infringers be exposed. I will take a moment to respond to your post if I may.

The examples used in this article were simply that – examples. The main aim and message of this article was in relation to the most common solutions used to gain work with athletes, and concluded with my recommended method. I did not want to dilute this message.

Another consideration in my decisions in writing this article was my concern that naming people for negative contributions gives too much credit and attention to them, which is in part what they seek – attention. Therefore I am very conscious of this and selective in my use for this reason. I do not wish to bring the spotlight on these people any more than is worthy. Unfortunately, there is time when it is necessary to bring them into the light. I would much prefer to bring the light to those who make a positive contribution to the industry specifically the betterment of humanity generally. The people you refer to, in my opinion, do not fall into this category.

A further consideration is that I recognize the substantial number of people who either lack the intelligence or the integrity to acknowledge the extensive intellectual property infringements, for varying reasons not limited to because they don’t want to, because ‘he’s a really nice guy’, or because they have a vested interest in maintaining the veneer that nothing inappropriate has occurred. I seek to avoid exposure to this sub-section of the industry as they further damage my belief in the goodness of humanity.

However, when the medium is appropriate, I assure you, there is no ‘protection’ of those who choose this path of deceit and misleading. A reality for me is that when th0se who seek this instant gratification to be ‘experienced’ and an expert in their field actually reaching the conclusions and achievements and theories the claim to have, do these acts of intellectual property infringement, they overlook the far-reaching implications that the written word becomes an artefact that potentially lasts for centuries.

Therefore long after their lives have ended, their lasting legacy will be these artefacts, which will forever bear testament to their actions as serial plagiarists. This fate will befall both their self-published as well as their mainstream published artefacts.

I would like to gift you a copy of the e-book version of my book ‘Barbells & Bullshit’. You will note that this text begins to expose the extent of the infringements. Send me an email at question@kingsports.net so I have an email address for you.

I would also to draw your attention to the future release of my book and course titled ‘Apocalypse – What some are willing to do, others are willing to turn a blind eye to, and the majority have got no idea about’. The electronic course version will be in excess of 750 pages. This publication exposes what I describe as the greatest intellectual property heist in modern physical preparation, and all the individuals and companies that have participated.

In conclusion we share the belief that the actions of plagiarist should be exposed, and during the remainder of my life I will do just that. I optimistically trust that, for the betterment of those entering our industry, as well as for the greater good of society as a whole, those supporting our position in this and other matters of integrity will grow, and contribute to forcing a change in the values of American-led professional and commercial standards in such as a way that acts such as these will be more effectively discouraged and ultimately stamped out.