Ian King

Lines of movement – the origin and intent of the concept  

/by

In 1998 I released a wide range of original, innovate training concepts developed during the prior 18 years of coaching, based on extensive personal professional experiences training large numbers of elite athletes. Many of these methods have gone on to shape how the world trains.

I have summarized many of these in the on-line course ‘KSI Level 1 – Legacy’, which was released for the first time about two years ago.

For example, I began my first public extensive teaching of the concept of lines of movement in 1998 with the following statement:

….To balance the athlete I work on a ratio of 1 to 1 of hip and quad dominant – in general. And I can assure you – most programs you’ll see are 2 to 1 – quad and hip.

That’s a concept I’m sure you’ll have never heard before because this is the first time I have spoken about it. (1)

The following shows a breakdown of the body into major muscle groups/lines of movement, and then into examples of exercises. It is what I call ‘the family trees of exercise’. Use this to assess balance in your exercise selection…. (2)

Now I am going to show you how I break the muscle groups up:(3)

Lower body:
Quad dominant
Hip dominant

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

These concepts are now used throughout the world. Ethical and well read authors and presenters reference and credit the origin.

Initially these concepts were referenced and credited accurately. For example, this was said about one concept, a concept I called ‘lines of movement’:

Before Ian popped up from Down Under, most coaches said to train all the muscles of the legs in one session and use the most efficient exercises. That means squatting and deadlifting on the same day. Problem — As effective as these big mass builders are, they’re also very fatiguing and really sap your energy levels. If you start your workout with squats, your deadlifts will suffer and vice versa.…

To help you understand how to divide and balance out your training, Ian came up with a list of major muscle groups that reflects their function:

Horizontal pulling (row)
Horizontal pushing (bench press)
Vertical pulling (chin-up)
Vertical pushing (shoulder press)
Hip dominant (deadlifts)
Quad dominant (squats)….

Ian has a few other categories for abs, lower back, calves, and arms, but the ones above are main muscle groups you need to worry about. Based on this list, you need to be doing vertical as well as horizontal pushing and you need to be doing the same number of sets for each and keep the rep ranges equal where appropriate.

Let me give you an example of how this list can help you. Before Ian provided this simple list, I did almost nothing but chin-up variations for back training. Sure, I did rows occasionally, but not very often as compared to chins. This was an imbalance. Now I do just as many sets of horizontal pulling as I do vertical pulling and it’s really helped my back development….(4)

To reinforce this point, here’s a program published in a popular men’s magazine in the US in 1997, about six months prior to the 1998 release of many of my concepts including lines of movement.

Stage 1: Wks 1-4 – The ‘bodybuilding’ phase (5)

A (Day 1)             B (Day 2)      (Day 3)        C (Day 4)           D (Day 5)        (Day 6)    (Day 7)

Incline Bar Press  Squat Off      Off               Bench Press       Hack Squats      Cardio      Rest day
DB Press              Leg Press                           Dips                   Lunge
Pull-down            Romanian Deadlift             Seated C/Row   Leg Extension
Bent-over Row    Glut/Ham Raise                 Upright Row      Lying Leg Curl
DB Sh Press         Standing Calf Raise           O/head Tri Ext  Seated Calf Raise
Barbell Curl
Hanging Leg Raise                                         Hanging Leg Raise
Crunch Abs (if not done on day 3)                Crunch Abs (if not done on day 3)
Oblique Crunch                                              Oblique Crunch

You will note the absence of many concepts that I released in 1998 in this program. e.g. lines of movement, uni-lateral bodwyweight exercises, abs first, control drills, pre-training stretching etc etc.

However in 2005 two ‘books’ were ‘published’ by two different and ‘effective’(6)  marketers, both of which ‘publications’ contained a wide range of my original ideas in the absence of referencing or credits (7).For example, both of these publications taught and used the concept of lines of movement without any referencing or credits (8). Both ‘authors’ were in seminars where I taught this concept in or around 1999 and or ordered my books and videos where I taught these as original concepts (9). So I conclude they knew the origin and simply choose to ignore it.

2005 formed a watershed year for my concepts, and since then I have seen a number of additional publications where the authors and or publishers have made no attempt to provide accurate credits or referencing, or at best a diluted one.

I believe that well-researched writers and teachers with integrity will apply acceptable professional guidelines when using the original works of others. Those who lack these two qualities don’t.
I watched this direction with interest. I raised these matters with a number of private organizations, professional bodies and publishers. Over time it appeared that values other than honest writings, ethical referencing and legally compliant copyright respect were not high on the priorities of these entities.

To the one particular staunch defender of this plagiarism – I share my belief that the willingness of these organizations to continue to associate with and endorse these individuals is not a reflection of the right of these individuals to carte blanche use of my intellectual property in the absence of professionally accepted standards of referencing and crediting – rather is it a reflection of the values of these entities, the implications of which will be judged by history.

I understand there is a market segment who belief that it doesn’t matter where the information comes from, as long as they get it. I respect their right to form any opinion they choose. However let me share mine position – those who lack the trait of honesty and long term application that would result in developing their own experiences to teach and sell do not understand the concepts, do no teach them accurately, have not used them long term in true practical application, and when either a new trend comes along or they feel it’s time to dump these concepts, will do so. Their motive to create short term personal and commercial gain by being the one to bring ‘new concepts’ to the market – I suggest this serves only themselves.

I also recognize that there may be some pain involved in me putting my hand up to correct this information. Those who entered to industry post 2000 and were first exposed to the un-referenced diluted versions may struggle with the idea that their source failed to teach the full picture. Some of the pain may even be deflected back to us.

None of this will change what the direction we are taking – to accurately and honestly teach my original concepts. To regain the legacy.

Despite the widespread teaching of my concepts by ‘authors’ such as this, or perhaps because of, the true intent and power of my concepts has not been put to use. The world is no better off. Sure a handful of new entrants to our industry have been given an impressive collection of information – but nothing really has changed. The reasons I created these concepts – to produce superior performances and reduced injuries – has not occurred.

This is disappointing but not totally surprising. I believe you will not serve humanity in the absence of a true deserve to serve. When the motive is to gain credit for new idea and short term cash flow, neither of these motives form what I call true intent, and therefore the original intent of the concepts falls short of their potential.

To address these issues, a few years ago I decided to collate my concepts and provide a summary of them in a way that included the history of why and how I developed them, and the most extensive explanation available as to how to use them. I called this the ‘KSI Level 1 – Legacy Course’. This is the first step in balancing the misinformation for self-serving purposes that has denied the world the opportunity to fully benefit from my original, innovative training concepts – concepts shaped, tested and proven by decades of practical application.

For the last two years this course has been available and undergone a long testing period. It began with a trial group that were virtually given the course, and even now, towards the end of the testing period, the price of the Legacy Course is only twice what many paid in the mid-2000’s for a document that was in essence a very poor copy of my How to Write / Get Buffed! TM and How to Teach books.

Perhaps over time, as more people gain access to the original content rather than the diluted plagiarized and/or unreferenced versions, the power of these concepts will come closer to fulfilling their potential in serving the world in optimizing performance and reducing injury.

Recently I was giving a lecture at a university in the US on the subject of ‘lines of movement’. I was given three hours to teach this concept. As I taught, it struck me that the content I was sharing would be so powerful for the world to gain an insight into where concepts such as this came from, why they were created, and their original and true intent in how to apply them.

To this effect, I have decided to make this three part seminar – Lines of Movement – available for order. You can order and watch this electronically delivered video by clicking on this link.

http://www.kingsports.net/products-ksi-evid-Linesofmovement.htm

If you value honesty, if you value learning from the source, and if you value learning the true intent of one of the many concepts I have created that have changed the way the world trains – I believe you will enjoy this video program!

(1) King, I., 1998, Strength Specialization Series (DVD), Disc 3, approx 1hr 06m 00sec in
(2) King, I., 1998, How to write strength training programs, p. 38
(3) King, I., 1998, Strength Specialization Series (DVD), Disc 3, approx 1hr 03m 00sec in
(4) Shugart, Chris, 2001, The Ian King Cheat Sheets, Part 1 – A quick and dirty look at all the cool stuff Ian King has taught us so far, Fri, Aug 24, 2001, T-mag.com
(5) Reference available upon request.
(6) If you can call deceit ‘effective’
(7) One even made the effort to use his own words
(8) Interestingly both ‘authors’ claimed to have ‘read everything there is to read in physical preparation’
(9) Although one did claim the content of my seminar was so bad he needed to walk out and take as many of the audience with him!

Ian King

The only coaching program that can and does teach the art of coaching by doing

/by

Every day my coaches and I train athletes, and every day provides new experiences. Today one of my coaches and I were working on a few elite athletes from another country. One of them asked later how I learnt what I did. I said:

“By training athletes”.

Another asked how my coach learnt his skills, and this got me thinking. My answer was:

“By working beside me in many different individual athlete and coach situations in many different sports at all levels in many different countries over many years.” 

As I reflected on how competent the top KSI coaches are, I was reminded of how special our program is. I believe no one offers a teaching experience like this. Yet I am continually amazed at how many are drawn to the bright lights and seductive marketing of certain programs, only to feel short-changed. I can understand how easy it is to be tricked into believing these ‘teachers’ will improve your coaching.

I know one personal trainer who we gave a work experience opportunity to about a decade ago. This personal trainer was simply giving a guided experience in how to write a generic program (and he choose to take the program and publish it and sell it in more than one publication for personal gain) This personal trainer never met the players, coaches or administrators. Never even laid eyes on them, let alone coached them. This personal trainer never saw any interaction between myself and athletes, in this program or any other. And yet ever this personal trainers marketing has claimed  they have worked with elite players in this code, which we have good reason to believe this ‘personal trainer’ refers to the one generic program with no athlete contact.

You learn little by exchange of information compared to what you learn when you are actively involved, observing or assisting, in high level coaches executing their competencies. If you want to learn how to physically train athletes, I suggest you take more than most in reviewing your choices in teaching before investing your time and money.

It’s really nice that you are making charitable contributions however I suggest more worthy causes for this charity than the ones you have been donating to! I also feel you may actually want to learn how to coach one day (just maybe) and get value for your time and money.

Real athletes. Real coaches. Real learning. The KSI Coaching Program. The only program than can or does teach the art of coaching by doing.  http://bit.ly/10pXQu3

Ian King

Wow! There is some integrity left!  

/by

WOW! Fortunately I was sitting down! I just received an email from an American publishing company seeking permission to reprint some of my works!!!!! And they were going to reference it!!! Wow!!! I am almost in a state of shock. Just when I thought integrity in publishing had left the US!

And further it was just for one relatively small piece of information, a concept I had expressed in a table format in 1992!

After watching now a decade of publishing of my works by individuals and publishing houses with no reference to the source – including page after page of verbatim copying, covering in excess of 20 different publications – I had come to the conclusion that the ‘new rules’ of publishing were not only dominant, they were the new rules!

Lying, cheating and stealing has, from my perspective, dominated the US based strength and fitness scene since 2003. I’m not the first person to raise this concern, nor do I expect to be the last. However what I exposed what so staggeringly expansive it was a shock to me. Even though there are many who believe that stealing is okay as long as they benefit individually …

Well first off, I don’t care if someone plagiarized health info. As long as that info is correct.

….I still maintain a dim view of society where this behaviour is tolerated, let alone endorsed. Oh, and by the way – when someone cuts and pastes others works, and when they apply their paraphrasing creativity (like reversing words, mixing up the paragraph, substituting examples…) – it is never going to be a correct reflection of the original intent of the author.

And endorsed it has been. From national professional organizations to publishing houses, my direct communication to them has at least forced them to confirm their official position – that they endorse plagiarism and plagiarists.

Which is why I was so pleasantly surprised to see a publishing house taking the time to seek permission and reference other peoples works!!!!

And more than this – this book they were putting together is based on the authors personal experiences (amazing difference that!) over twenty years of developing the concept. I know this because I was working closely with the author back then. So this is very unusual in the modern world of bullshit publishing – someone taking the time, applying long term determination, delayed gratification – to develop an artifact that will have meaning decades from now, and where works other than the authors is used, appropriate professional referencing applied.

Wow! That is going to be one book I recommend on any ethical professionals library!

And the name of the publisher – Human Kinetics….I have just gained a lot of respect for this company if this example is an accurate reflection of how they fact check and do business. I know a number of other publishers that could take a lesson here.

Ian King

And then it was over

/by

I was driving past a playing field at 6am this morning and saw a group of young people participating in a group training session. I thought on my way back I would stop and watch, get some cultural insights. A few minutes later I was back, and pulled over, enjoying the fresh morning sun and the crisp morning air. They were stretching, in a static hip flexor position, a very popular one, however it only covers half the work needed in that area, so I hoped they would show greater variety in this position. They didn’t. In fairness I didn’t know if they had done this before I stopped. But what I did note was they were doing two stretches in one – an upper body one at the same time they were doing a lower body one. I could see the influence for this, as it’s a current dominant trend.

I was looking forward to the rest of the workout. Then they stopped. I was wondering if it was a drink break, but by the way they were back slapping and packing up I realised it was all over.

Then I remembered – you only do static stretching, at the end of the workout! Another new trend. Then I saw the heavy ropes being packed up, and the Prowler. That was all I needed to know – they were doing all the ‘current things’.

I have had this discussion with many around the world – athletes, coaches, and personal trainers. And one thing keeps coming up – they can rationalize the benefits of it. Overlooking the fact that most of these rationalizations are little more than parroting the marketing – let me make this point. I am not interested in whether you think it is beneficial. I want to know if it is the best thing to be doing. I want to know if you have asked yourself this question. I want to know if you have put in the energy that the end users adaptations deserve as to whether what you are doing is the best choice.

Now if you are involved in personal training, I can cut you some slack. Expectations on outcome are less precise. The main concern is the injury potential of what you are doing. But if you are involved with athletes, there is more weighing on your decisions as the outcome as measured by competitive success is more specific – very specific – and the rationalization that it’s a dominant trend or you can regurgitate the benefits are of even less value, and any absence of discernment in decision making more potentially serious – you are now not only dealing with injury potential, you are also dealing with performance decrement or increase.

The unique thing about sports training is you can’t market or convince your way onto the podium.

So I repeat – I am not interested in the rationalization of the benefits of your training choices. I am not interested whether what you choose to do is the current dominant trend (in fact I am almost definitely going to be concerned if this is the case). I just want to know how much discernment you are willing to employ in your decision making. The world needs more discernment, less non-thinking compliance to training methods and exercise equipment.

Ian King

The future is here

/by

Over a decade ago i concluded that the business model used by our partner company was ahead of its time. This conclusion was based on my study of business books that described new trends in business.  Some of my current top team members became business partners on the basis of these writings.  Now i believe – the future is here. And here is an example, another mainstream conventional business product distribution shifting to our way of business. One of the first was computers, with Michael Dell’s direct to the customer model. Now read what’s happening in cars sales and distribution – and not just bottom end cars – this article is about the top end of the brand options.

“How about a car dealership with, er, no cars.  Audi’s virtual showroom in London is hailed  as the future of automobile retailing.   ‘Audio City is revolutionizing the future of retailing by combining digital product presentation and personal contact with dealers’, says Interbrand, which annually rates the value of global car companies. Other makers, including BMW and Infiniti, are working on similar products.” (1)

That’s what we do. We offer personal relationships to consumer, using virtual displays and a small amount of hard product, and arrange distribution from the manufacturer to the consumer. We even offer customization at a level not yet achieved by any other in our industry.

Make no mistake – the future is here. It’s time to stop thinking and living in the past. That’s going to be tough for many who do not embrace change, and who cling to the mind-set of the masses. But then being left behind economically and in standard of living – the price you will pay for failing to keep up and change – is not going to be very easy either. And that ‘un-ease’ will be experienced by more than yourself. It will be experienced by all those who depend on you – you partner, your off-spring, your relatives and any others you influence.  There is one saying that will always apply – the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Your decision in embracing new models of commerce will in a significant way determine if you are part of the poor getting poorer equation.

Yes, the future is here. I embraced it over a decade ago and have been paving the way for thousands who have followed my lead. Are you still living in the past? If so, and i expect that would be the honest answer, you probably have  a collection of vinyl records also…

Want to learn more? Email question@kingsports.net.

(1)    Duff, Craig, 2012, Soft sell via the hard drive, The Saturday Mail, Brisbane, p. 3 of the Cars Guide lift-out.

Ian King

Physical preparation coach and father understands the limitations of earned income  

/by

Carl was born in Birmingham, England originally, and moved to Cornwall when he was 11. He competed in many sports as a kid – karate, rugby, soccer track & field to name a few. Carl is now a 4 time state powerlifting champion and plans to add a fifth title shortly. He is also a medallist at national level

As he describes it, he drifted through the earlier years of his life without a great deal of care or regard for him self or health. He met his wife in England and came over to Australia as a young adult. Around 2004 his dad had heart surgery, so Carl flew back to the UK. During this visit he made a clear and conscious decision that he did not want to follow this health path.

Carl took up weight training at about 18 years of age and training was the thing he would look forward to during his earlier jobs as work such as driving forklifts and as a boner in a meatworks. His dad’s surgery was a catalyst for him deciding to enter the health and fitness industry as a personal trainer. Since then his journey has taken him across the world and lead him to find like minded people and role models.

He is now also involved in the KSI Coaching program (Level 5) and has increased his athlete client base substantially. Despite being on the road to achieve what most in physical preparation deem to be the ideal client base, Carl recognizes that this is more to life than working. As a father and husband with a young family, the limitations of earned income are very apparent to him. It doesn’t matter how high profile the athlete, or how high the hourly rate – it’s a very limited income source. IF you don’t work, you don’t get paid. And when you are working, you are not with your family.

In Carl’s search a better way to live life, Carl choose to join our entrepreneurial group, where he is a few years into gaining a degree of leverage. His goal is to master the art of leveraged income, and continue working with selected clients by choose – not by necessity.

From using the products alone, Carl feels he has experienced amazing results, especially post children in terms of my energy and recovery abilities. From his involvement in our mastermind group, he feels he as learned how business works and a great deal about his mindset towards money. The growth I have had in business and as a man have been amazing & I am enjoying the journey of challenges and success.

Carl is grateful for finding our entrepreneurial group and looks forward to sharing it with many others who want to take control of their own health & wealth.

Ian King

Personal Trainer Professional Development – the KSI Way  

/by

In 1998 I recorded a live seminar in which I released for the first time a number of my unique, original innovations in training that I had developed, tested and refined in the prior 18 years of coaching. The concepts released in that seminar have proven to be the most influential (and most imitated/copied) concepts on the planet.

The impact and value of these concepts has, in my opinion, been diluted by the extent of copying they have been subject to. Many personal trainers in the US market have been exposed to some of these concepts – however in a diluted, confused and off-intent manner. Here’s a chance for you to get it right.

Spend a day live in seminar and learn first hand, from the source, the most effective methods for how to write and how to teach training programs, aimed at personal trainers.

This one day seminar will be equally divided between ‘how to write’ and ‘how to teach’, using methods many seek to imamate, but only KSI can truly teach – because we created them! These methods are timeless – you will not need to rely on the ‘latest trend’ or the ‘latest equipment’ when you follow the path taught during this seminar.

Take my exercise innovations for example. One of them, the single leg stiff legged deadlift, was first reproduced without consent of acknowledgement in a Men’s Health magazine in the early 2000s, but a so called ‘student’ of KSI. Something went badly wrong, because the picture accompanying the short article was of a person with the non-working leg lifted back up in the air, making the exercise virtually useless. Suffice to say, this ‘variation’ has now become a main-stay of the ‘functional training movement’ – without anyone realizing how this exercise came to be!

Or take my lines of movement concept – you know the horizontal and vertical push/pull, and quad and hip dominant. For the first few years post release most acknowledged the source, however one particular ‘variation’ of this concept changed the word ‘quad’ for ‘knee’. Pity whoever did this didn’t read the original rationale behind my word selection, as clearly outlined in my 2000 ‘How to Teach’ book. And it hasn’t helped that he most prolific publisher of my concept didn’t seem keen to acknowledge the source for the first 10 years after he caused a mass walkout of my 1999 north-east USA seminar!

Or take the business advice I rolled out in my 1999 ‘So you want to become a physical preparation coach’ book. Not be confused of course with the article of the same name with the exception of the words ‘personal trainer’ inserted, published nearly a decade later.

Or take my ‘over-reaction/under-reaction’ saying and concept. In my limited exposure to marketing-dependant US personal trainer ‘education’ I recently learned that it was apparently the concept of ‘another’ persons’!

Or take my concept of ‘Capable vs. Optimal’ – reversing the words to ‘Optimal vs. Capable’ may fool the masses to thinking it is original, but for me the willingness and propensity to flip words around for self serving purposes is at the expense of the receiver of the message.

Or take my philosophies for example. When you read a paragraph that is poorly paraphrased from my book ‘The Way of the Physical Preparation Coach’, such as this one, that a certain internet magazine thought it was okay to leave posted on their site:

My original version 2005:
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….

‘Later version’ 2006:

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

…and in the same article read the ‘author’ claim the philosophies are based on their ‘own experiences’…how many times do you need to be lied to before you realize it’s not in your best interests?

Or during the last seven years you could have paid anywhere between one to two thousand dollars to attend a Californian based seminar on program design, in which you would have been taught my concepts such as family trees, progressing and regressing exercise, reversing exercise sequence in subsequent programs, using the first stage to develop and correct muscle balances and so on. You would probably have got more value by reading my ‘How to Write’ and ‘How to Teach’ books – at least you would have got the honest original source. It least you would receive honest information. And you could have used that money difference to contribute to a worthwhile charity of your choice.

And even when you read in other’s ‘works’ where they could not be bothered to paraphrase and write exactly the same things, such as this paragraph, which has appeared a number of times verbatim in the ‘works’ of the same ‘author’:

all things being equal, and independent of any specificity demands, the selection of exercises should show balance throughout the body

…I still suggest the message is lost. And then there is of course the issue that you are getting your education from thieves who compound the integrity issue by seeking to claim it as their own…

Now some suggest that they don’t care where they get their information? Let me share some insights – most of what you are being taught has not been done by the marketer teaching you it, because for the most part many of them don’t train. To add to this non-experience based training, you often get ‘athlete preparation’ tips, peppered with vague references such as the first name of a boxing medallist from an Olympic games (at a time when the ‘speaker’ was a teenager)….by ‘coaches’ that are only coaches by virtue of calling themselves a ‘coach’ (or more importantly, a performance expert), who have not accumulated enough coaching experience to warrant teaching anyone.

Now if you are happy to be bullshitted to, go ahead and keep learning from these sources. For those who would prefer to get it straight without the BS, here is your chance – learn from the source!

Personal trainer professional development – the KSI Way! Sunday 19 August 2012, Los Angeles. Register here: http://bit.ly/PkWbfK

Ian King

You’re up to date? Then I’m scared for the athlete  

/by

Among the many emails I receive was one recently from a sports coach seeking advice on their warm up strategy. In the email was the comment that they made every effort ‘to keep up to date’. Upon reviewing the warm up I noted conformity to trends, including predominantly ‘dynamic warm up drills’.

Here are abbreviated version of some of the points I responded with:

1. My general rule of thumb for a young athlete to have any chance of avoiding developing injuries is to ensure that at least x% of their total training time is dedicated to tension reducing activities such as stretching, massage, and other recovery methods…

2. There is no such thing as a dynamic stretch in my opinion. There is a dynamic movement and we can discuss the role of this in the warm up in a separate discussion if you wish. I understand that the dominant paradigm is that there is such a thing as a dynamic stretch. Problem is if you continue doing what most believe and do, any coach and athlete will receive what most get – injuries earlier, more frequent and more severe than necessary…..

3. Cool downs are over-rated and in the scheme of the limited time most athletes/coaches get in their specific sports training, redundant.

4. Static stretching at end of training. I am fully aware again of the power and prevalence of this paradigm. I am also aware of the theory of the benefits of this toward recovery. However I state quite simply that compared to the value of stretching before training, and compared to the training impact of stretching earlier in the training session when the energy and focus is higher – there is no comparison….

The full response is available to Level 1 and above KSI coaches at the http://coachking.net/amember/ site.

I was at a game of sport at the weekend, as I am multiple times most weekends, and I noted a group of young athletes being warmed up by their coaches. When I say them doing walking lunges, dynamic external rotations of the hips and walking partial range lateral lunge squats – it struck me – this coach is ‘up to date’!

Whenever I see coaches provided the dominant paradigms of the day (which change decade to decade) I know that whilst their coaches feel good in ‘being up to date’, I cringe for the athlete. I don’t want coaches to be ‘up to date’, which for me is a euphemism for being trend compliant – I want them to be analytical and critical thinkers. Or at worst use their common sense. Forget about being ‘up to date’. You might get a warm feeling, but the athletes are getting wrecked.

Ian King

Could this be the beginning of a return to integrity?  

/by

In my Barbells & Bullshit series (2009, book, video and audio) I spoke of a possible return to integrity at a global social level, brought about by a number of factors including the dawn of a new Age, the Age of Aquarius. So you can imagine I was very excited when I came upon one of the first fitness industry writers calling for integrity:

I’m taking it upon myself to clean up the online strength & conditioning world, one guru at a time…Hopefully this will make a difference and keep gurus more grounded and honest, but in the meantime, I’m goin’ hunting!

I was further excited when I read his list of the top 12 things the online industry could learn from the journal publication process:

1. No plagiarism tolerable – you give credit where credit is due

I was attracted to the promise of what this writers actions may result in:

….these posts will serve four purposes:


1. They might make gurus think twice about what they say


2. They’ll teach my readers to think critically and sift through the b.s.


3. They might help cult followers wake up and smell the coffee


4. Critical analysis and discussion can only lead to more knowledge and advancements in sports science

The writer had a definite focus on plagiarism:

7. Plagiarism

I was further impressed in another article with the suggestion that those who put profit ahead of principle would be ‘shunned by the same industry that made him rich’. You see, I have not seen this to date.

It’s funny when I stumble upon a site that steals my work right out from underneath me. Personal Trainer/Life Coach Danny plagiarizes my Deadlifting article from Wannabebig here, here, and here. I encourage anyone out there to spread my methods and advice. It’s always nice when individuals give credit to the originator too. But if you use someone’s exact wording from an article, the least you could do is reference the article!

I pity the individual whose primary goal is to maximize profit at any expense. This individual will never get a second chance to make a first impression, and unless he changes his ways he’ll be shunned by the same industry that made him rich since the experts will see through his bullshit and the consumers will eventually realize that they’ve been scammed.

Those who are aware of the copyright breaches that have been conducted in relation to my works have certainly not shunned the offenders. If anything, they have embraced them and provided excuses and justifications and excuses for them. Surely not this writer however, based on what I have read.

And when I read the below I thought he may have been referring to my situation!

Here’s another thing I can’t tell you: the number of times I see my colleagues get “ripped off” by aspiring writers who try to play another individual’s idea off as their own. It’s not necessary to credit every single aspect of every article, but novel ideas should be credited and in general your articles should reference other writers.
…I want to make sure I’m not repeating something someone else made public. We all have unique readers and should therefore be sharing others’ brilliant work, but we should make sure to give credit where credit is due.

This sounded great! I was truly happy to read a person seeking to return integrity to the American-led fitness industry, especially in the much-needed area of publishing.Imagine that – another person who believed it was inappropriate for a person to seek to take credit for another person’s concepts! And who believes that one should make the effort before publishing to ensure this!

Now this was published in the lead up to the first  guru-grilling’ , so I thought if I analyzed this first ‘guru grilling’ it would give me an indication as to whether the actions would support the rhetoric.

This writer was a self-proclaimed ‘guru-hunter’, which was very promising.

After reading this first ‘guru grilling’ I was concerned as to whether this writer had the conviction of his claims, as I felt he broke some of his own rules:

There’s nothing wrong with arguing and disagreeing. Just be sure to focus on the topic, not the person. Sure you can mention a person and quote them in your argument, but be fair, give them the benefit of the doubt, and don’t call them names.

I was willing to give him some latitude – he appeared to be upset by the perception of the treatment he had received, so I read on.

And then I found a very specific reference that I believe would be an excellent test of the congruency between his words and his actions, this in a post below one of his articles:

Dave C says:
August 20, 2010 at 5:43 pm
Awesome vids from Ian King, that guy is spot on with his stuff, very funny. Any opinion on his claims of plagiarism by some very well known coaches?

What would the response be? I quickly found out:

Bret Contreras says:

August 22, 2010 at 1:35 am


Dave, I didn’t watch this video because I’ve already spoken to some of the accused. I think it’s a bit of a misunderstanding on the part of the accused. I believe Ian has accused a few coaches and one in particular I feel was very undeserved of this accusation. There is definitely some damning evidence regarding the main target of the accused but I think that he obviously learned his lesson and won’t continue to do it. Since I really like the main target of the accused, I am biased. I think this guy is one of the nicest guys in the industry and I feel horrible about the entire situation. I can definitely see Ian’s point though.  

I was shocked – not what I was expecting. Looks like I was not the only one:

Josh R. says:
August 23, 2010 at 1:24 pm


The main accused person is 100% guilty of plagiarism and should have to deal with consequences that are commensurate to the gravity of his actions. The accused has a history besides this of copying other people’s work, almost word for word. If this were any other field aside from the lucrative cash cow side of the fitness industry, he would of likely faced graver consequences. Directly copying someone’s written work is completely unethical to our society’s standards.

The response confirmed some key points in the original response by the writer:

Bret Contreras says:
August 23, 2010 at 4:29 pm
Josh, not trying to make excuses for the accused, but have you ever met him? One of the nicest guys you’ll ever meet. That’s why it’s hard for me to be objective here. I also don’t like to speculate when I haven’t heard both sides of the story. I know it sounds like I’m making excuses as I’ve heard of the other situations as well, but I’m just wondering if there is more to the story that I don’t know.

So to summarize:

• I didn’t watch this video because I’ve already spoken to some of the accused.

• I think it’s a bit of a misunderstanding on the part of the accused.

• … [the main target] obviously learned his lesson and won’t continue to do it.

• I really like the main target of the accused, I am biased

• I think this guy is one of the nicest guys in the industry

• … have you ever met him [the accused]? One of the nicest guys you’ll ever meet.

•  I’m just wondering if there is more to the story that I don’t know.

I also wondered why no names were being mentioned – they were coded as ‘main target’ etc. This struck me because in another article in the ‘guru-grilling’ series, the writer has very clearly spoken about the need to name people you are talking about:

Reason One Violations – Making Shit Up, Being a Jealous Hater, Talking About Stuff Without Possessing Experience, Cherry Picking, Not Admitting When Wrong, Being Too Scared to Name Names

 7. Why are you afraid to name names?

Ian King says:

May 28, 2012 at 5:39 pm

Bret – I tire of people making excuses for blatant copyright breaching or plagiarism as you would call academia. One of these ‘nice’ guys (we can go without name use if you want) has published enough of my work verbatim to fill a book, and used this content to form the basis of books and articles of many years. This is irrefutable. If you have seen anywhere that permission was granted for use let me know. It doesn’t exist. Who would give permission to copy such extensive volumes of work? Where are the credits? Where is the ‘permission given’ to copy? It doesn’t exist because – it doesn’t exist. And where the paraphrasing was used that may avoid legal definition of copyright breach, this issue of non-original work comes into play. I understand the inter-connecters of friends and not wanting to throw these associates under the bus etc etc – so I appreciate you and others want to keep out of this – but lets call a spade a spade – this is in my 30 years of being in the industry the most extensive case of copyright breaching I have ever seen – so please, let’s not pretend is a minor issue or a ‘mis-understanding’.
 I appreciate you efforts to stamp out plagiarism, non-crediting, and non-original works. I would hope therefore it would be difficult to side-step this one, no-matter how many time it is claimed the dog ate the permission letter…..I don’t normally engage in forum / blog exchanges about this, however after publishing so many innovations over the last few decades it’s not much fun watching the attempts to take credit or benefit commercially and professionally from my works. It’s even less fun watching professionals with integrity turn a blind eye out of fear of offending their buddies or damaging their cash cow, especially in these public forums. The message to others if the industry turns a collective blind eye to this is more of the same. Thank you for your time.

By then I stumbled upon another article by this writer that included adulating comments about certain ‘coaches’ , and I realized that it would be very unlikely that this writer would apply his ‘commandments’ and ‘guru-grilling’ against certain people. They were buddies.

Unfortunately I don’t think there will be too many people concerned by the threat:But perhaps it is the beginning of something greater – a genuine return to integrity. A world where those who lie, cheat and steal are truly shunned.

If you want to avoid my scrutiny, just be humble, be cautious with your conclusions (say things like, “I feel,” “I think,” “It is my belief,” etc.), don’t act like you’re superior to all the hardworking trainers out there, stick to what you know, gain experience with something before drawing a conclusion, focus on science, present both sides of an argument, and in general don’t alienate other trainers and try to brainwash your followers. Hopefully this will make a difference and keep gurus more grounded and honest, but in the meantime, I’m goin’ hunting!

It was great to see the issue of integrity and zero tolerance to plagiarism. It didn’t rise to the promise of the writer’s words but it was a start.Anyway, I always seek to act respectfully and understand that in this case he would not want to name is friends, so in my response I respectfully complied with this mode of communication:

Note – References available on request

Ian King

Update re KSI Coaching Program  

/by

With the increased interest in our coaching program, combined with our growing awareness of how unique, special and powerful our coaching programs are, we recognize the need to simply and streamline the program, allowing all to investigate whether this is a fit for them, and progress along the path up to at least the level of longer-term committment, which is usually the major factor that seperates participants in the program.

So click on the link below to check out the current shape of the KSI Coaching Program.
http://www.kingsports.net/kingcoaches.htm.
We then encourage you to email us or post on the forum any questions you may have about where you are up to in the program and where you would like to go.

We are preparing to run a Level 1 in MA and CA, USA, in Nov 2011, and then 2012 will be a massive year. For some of you there may be just one or two components that are missing then you will be able to join us in Park City in August 2012 for what is shaping to be the most significant year in our collective lives.

In addition there is the planned 2012 World Tour (yet to be formally announced) which may present some of you with more exposure to our coaching program.

To summarize for you, the Legacy Course is now Level 1, the on-line theory course known as ‘Foundations’ is Level 2, and the relatively new two day practical course (introduced less than a year ago and another factor that really separates what we do from the imitators – we actually can and do coach athletes, and teach you the same) is Level 3.

Once you have achieved all three you are eligible to join us for the Level 4 – Resident Coaching Camp – a 3 day live-in coaching camp providing you with a variety of coaching experiences you are not likely to get anywhere else in the world, and the final step in the part-time end of the KSI Coaching Program.

From then on, Level 5 is a one year commitment, Level 6 longer, and Level 7 is the domain of those who seek excellence the KSI way. Essentially coaching at a level most dream of.

To summarize the KSI Coaching Program consists of the following levels:

* Level 1 – Legacy Theory Course
* Level 2 – Foundations Theory Course
* Level 3 – Art of Coaching Practical Course
* Level 4 – Resident Coaching Course
* Level 5 – Coach Intern Program
* Level 6 – Coach Mentor Program
* Level 7 – Graduate Coach Program

Essentially each level is a pre-requisite for the next level however we are flexible with the first three, provided they are completed prior to Level 4. This flexibility is necessary considering some of you completed some of these components in previous years.

If you still have questions after reading this summary, please email us at question@kingsports.net. See you at a course soon!

Ian King