Ian King

Be honest? I’d like to see that….  

/by

I must say I was surprised to read this author promote a call for credit to the original source. Very UnAmerican, as least as the US ‘fitness-industry’ has been influenced during the last decade, from 2000 to 2010. A period I refer to as the ‘decade of the bullshitter’.

In this recent book this author referred to another coaches plea for respect and credit to be given to his works.

From what I’ve heard, from the far end of Siberia to Iceland to California, thousands of coaches are performing with their athletes Javorek’s complex exercise, but some of them give credit to themselves. I really worked hard on developing these exercises and I like to share with everyone my ‘little secrets’. Just give credit to the creator.



My original goal with the complex exercises was to find an efficient and aggressive method of performance enhancement that saves time and makes the program more enjoyable. If you choose to use them (in some form) with your athletes, be honest and call your new complex exercises ‘Variations to Javorek’s Complex Exercises’.
–John, D., 2011, Mass Made Simple, Quoting Istvan Javorek’s comments on Javorek’s web site, p. 108

This is the first time I can recall seeing a call of this nature. What I have seen a lot of is what Javorek is referring to – people who know the source, yet choose to take credit, or fail to give credit.

After all, the most common term in the US ‘fitness’ industry lingo of the last decade has been ‘Steal’. Everyone wanted to say they ‘stole’ x from someone else. It was hip. A badge of honor. After all, many of these, especially those who informal education exposure was limited to the period 2000-2011, had been extolled the virtues of stealing. ‘It not cheating’ etc etc. In fact, they had also been extolled to lie.

It was the first time I have seen the act of stealing (in relation to intellectual property) being discouraged. Isn’t that interesting.

As impressive as this is, it did raise a few questions for me.

Firstly, would Americans reach out to non-Americans with the same call? Would Americans encourage their fellow coaches to show the same respect for out-of-country intellectual property? What if those breaching the intellectual property rights of the out-of-country coaches were their mentors, people they had been taught to believe were really knowledgeable, experienced, competent coaches?

I’m not so sure that this would happen. Why? In addition to my belief that America has a history of recognizing only that which is within their own country (have observed this myopic view during my 22 years of travelling in and through North America) it would be a tough pill to swallow for any ‘student’.

Another question, inter linked with the first, relates to the Javoreks plea for those using his intellectual property to be honest. Imagine that – those who seek to control and influence the masses in the US fitness industry being honest. I’d like to see that.

“No, I didn’t come up with that idea.”

“Nor that one.” 

“Or that one.”

“No, not that one either.”

I believe one of the reasons these information brokers fail to give credit when they know the source is that the majority of their publications would be credited. If you took out the credited content, their wouldn’t be enough pages left to hold the book up. Who would buy it? What impact would this have on their reputation? After all, they have wormed for years to be in the position they are in.  Why give it up for honesty? I’ve got certain books on my book shelf where I have color highlighted the copied and / or uncredited content – and there aren’t too many pages left unmarked. The ‘books’ look more like a kids coloring in book than an educational text. On that thought, the kids colouring book would hvae more credibility, and probably more value for a student to study!

Honesty? Istvan would like to see that. I’d like to see that.

Ian King

Do the words ‘volunteer’ and or ‘amateur’ need to be antonyms of excellence?  

/by

Rarely a day passes without the opportunity to watch and analyse a sports coach in action. I don’t mind at what level, what gender, what sport, or what country. I really enjoy studying the art of coaching and asking the question ‘how can it be done better?’

For me, we all have limited resources – limited energy, limited recovery ability, limited time, and limited attention span. The more efficient we teach athlete preparation, the more we have in reserve to include other aspects. Which is divergent to what I see as a growing and continuing trend – the limited focus on improving efficiency and the greater focus on adding more to the athletes schedule, in part because of ‘trends’.

In my discussions with coaches and coaching directors, one common theme appears – ‘We are amateurs and therefore you have to understand Ian’….-read – don’t expect us to pursue excellence because we are ‘just volunteers’.

To which I say – the main differences between a volunteer coach and an elite professional coach is the latter get’s paid, works with higher profiles players with more money at stake, and have bigger egos. There is nothing in my three decades plus of professional observations that leads me to believe that the professional coach is, should or needs to be a better coach. I just don’t understand why the volunteer coach and or amateur coach can’t, shouldn’t or don’t need to strive for excellence. To continually ask and answer the question – ‘How can I do this better? How can I get better results with athletes?’

From my conclusions, we have got sport upside down. The greatest window of opportunity to affect and shape an athlete is when they are young. Very young. And that window reduces with age. In most countries, however, we give the athletes to the volunteers and amateurs during this largest window of opportunity for development. And to those kids that rise to the surface, we give them more funds, allegedly better coaches, and definitely better facilities.  For every kid that rises to the surface in this process, hundreds fall through the cracks, lost potential for all.

Now I don’t have a problem with the fact that most of our young athletes will be coached by volunteers and amateur coaches. What I do have a challenge with is why the assumption that if a coach is a volunteer or amateur that we should all give up and assume the pursuit of excellence is out of the question.

I don’t buy into the cultural perception that to prove you are a great coach you have to show you have worked with elite athletes. Why can’t you be the greatest coach in the land and work with kids? I believe you can, and I believe you should aim to be – because I don’t accept that the words ‘volunteer’ and or ‘amateur’ coach and the world ‘excellence’ are oxymoron’s, incompatible, or are antonyms!

Ian King

Let’s talk about honesty, Lou  

/by

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And other places….

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Kingsports International Australia

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Single leg partial squat

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

Single leg partial squat :

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The times they may be a-changing!  

/by

The Bullshit Backlash

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

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

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

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

Then I came upon this statement:

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

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

Then I learnt more about his initiative:

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

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

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

That’s an exciting possibility!

Naming the decades

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The resistance to change

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

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

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

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

The New Rules

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

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

Lying

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

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

Cheating

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

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

Stealing

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

2010+
Stealing is not acceptable.

Experience

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

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

Names

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

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

Publishing

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

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

Profit

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

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

Sales

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

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

Not if but when

The only question is how long will the change take?

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

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

The Iron Game Woodstock

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

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

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

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

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

Conclusion

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ian King

Out-dated methods – shame, shame, shame!  

/by

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

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

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

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

YOU JUST CAN’T USE SOMETHNING THAT ANOTHER PERSON/S LABELS AS OUTDATEd!

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

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

Now thats ANOTHER logical reason not to static stetch – it’s outdated!!!

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

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

..we need to …

…we shouldn’t …

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

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

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

Ian King

Feedback on my latest book – Barbells & Bullshit  

/by

I recently received this feedback about my latest book:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ian King

The World is Flat!  

/by

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

———————-

New DVD released Oct 2010 –

The World if Flat!
Challenging your point of view!

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

YouTube clips from that DVD:

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

Enough to make your blood boyle

/by

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

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

The program was verbatim save for a few minor details:

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

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

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

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

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

Bulgarian squat

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

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

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

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

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

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

Single leg squat

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

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

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

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

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

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

Squat

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

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

Deadlift

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

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

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

King Deadlift

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

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

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

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

Thin tummy variations:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Toes to sky variations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ian King

Performance coach. Really?  

/by

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Know anyone who would meet these criteria?

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

Ian King

Surely they can perform better than this!  

/by

Many years ago I met a gentleman at a NSCA trade show who owned a major equipment distribution company in the industry, and who had a booth at the trade show. He seemed a genuine person. So recently when I learnt his company was distributing my material – just without my name on it and without any revenues coming to me – I thought – surely they can perform better than this!

After all, isn’t that what a reasonable person would do? Surely they would be reasonable.

I said to my IP attorney ‘This deserves a personal approach. I am sure polite, personal and respectful communication can have these sales to cease and desist’.

So I emailed this gentleman. His response was that he didn’t remember me and that he didn’t know what I was talking about. You could expect that – after all he is a busy man. I understand that. So he referred me to one of his employees.

The employee was polite in his communication. He did remind me that they were after all just the distributors. Perhaps that was to infer they had no moral and or legal obligations? And the end result was – nothing.

And I said to myself – surely they can perform better than this!

So are we talking about difficult to see copyright breaches? Or just a few lines in breach?

Here are just a few of the offending sections. And before we go on, I want to stress – I simply included one example from a variety of different topics – in other words, just a sampling. It is unlikely you would have the attention span to review all the offending sections…..

FROM HOW TO WRITE STRENGTH TRAINING PROGRAMS (King, I., 1998)

However if this sequence shows throughout say a 12 week cycle or beyond, you risk developing muscle imbalances. To avoid this, I alternate or reverse the priorities. See this in Table 4. The key here is starting in a non-specific priority and slowly shifting towards specificity in order of priority.
–King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs (book), Exercise Selection, p. 25

If you continue to follow the exact same movement pattern split for long periods of time, you will very likely develop muscle imbalances and risk injury. To avoid this, alternate (i.e. do the exact opposite movement pattern) or reverse the priorities (i.e. the last movement pattern on the last day becomes the first movement pattern on the first day in the next phase.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 180-181; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 133

…all things being equal, and independent of any specificity demands, the selection of exercises should show balance throughout the body.
–King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs (book), Exercise Selection, p. 41

All things being equal, and independent of any specificity demands, the selection of exercises should show balance throughout the body…
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 66; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 107

Linear periodization : involves a linear progression in lowering reps and increasing load (representing the inverse relationship between volume and intensity).

… The benefits of this method include that it allows the trainee to develop load selection as a progression of reduced reps.

…The disadvantages includes that the early stages may cause a detraining in neural adaptation, and the later stages may cause a detraining in metabolic adaptations.
— King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs (book), p. 81

Linear Periodization: involves a linear progression in lowering reps and increasing load (representing the inverse relationship between volume and intensity).

…Advantages: allows the trainee to increase loading regularly and develop load selection as a progression of reduced reps, simply and effectively.

Disadvantages: may cause a detraining effect in neural adaptation in the early stages, and a detraining effect in metabolic adaptation in the later stages.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 172; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 116

4. Priority: This is what I suggest to be the most important and powerful guide in sequencing exercise – do first whatever is the priority of that phase – even if it does ‘break all the rules’.
— King, I., 1998, How to Write, p. 51

#8: Priority First
As a general rule – the most important qualities/movements to be trained should be trained in the freshest state. Allocate activities in a priority basis to different training days (e.g. number one and two priority need to be trained first on separate days ideally), regardless if this breaks any rules or ‘split’ that you have previously used.
–Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 13

I firmly believe that strength training program design has been historically influenced by anabolic steroids. If you accept the influence that bodybuilding, weightlifting and powerlifting have had on program design, and you understand the role drugs play in these sports, you gain a fuller appreciation of this influence.
— King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs (book), p. 141

…the anabolic steroid issue …It would be short-sighted of me to ignore the influence of these drugs on the sport of bodybuilding. If you understand the influence of bodybuilding on general fitness, and you understand the influence of drugs on competitive bodybuilding, hopefully you can see what I am getting at.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 22; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 28

35 Steps to Writing a Strength Training Program
9. Plan alternating muscle group allocation in subsequent phases to receive varied benefits.
–King, I., How to Write Strength Training Programs, p. 23

Eighteen Steps to Programming Success
18. Plan movement pattern allocation in subsequent phases to achieve varied emphasis and benefits.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible, p. 180

My next and final step is to divide all the above into unilateral and bilateral, and single and double/multi-joint exercises
–King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs, p. 40

Exercises can be progressed as follows:
* Single joint to multiple joint
* Unilateral to bi-lateral.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible, p. 64; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 106

Time magnifies errors in training.
–King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs (book), p. 75

It’s important to recognize that time will magnify any and all errors in training.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible, p. 181

Variation may also give unexpected adaptations from repetitions. A trainee pursuing hypertrophy, after spending considerable time training in classic hypertrophy brackets (e.g. 8-12) may experience further significant hypertrophy when changing to a higher or lower rep bracket. Whilst this appears to contradict the above table, it shows that variety alone can accelerate gains. Note this applies in both strength (neural) and size (metabolic) training. The message is clear – irrespective of the specific goal, training in too narrow a rep bracket may not be as effective as alternating or mixing with different rep brackets. The key is not which reps to use, rather how much time to spend in each different rep bracket.
— King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs, Repetitions, p. 101

An interesting observation is as regards variety in rep selection. While periodization of training has been well documented, if your goal is just hypertrophy – would staying in the hypertrophy rep range be the best choice? Actually – no, a trainee seems to experience the best gains when using both higher and lower reps than the “goal” rep bracket. Basically the lower reps allow heavier weight to be used, so the athlete returns stronger when he or she returns to their original rep bracket. If we go higher – the athlete experiences a longer time under tension and therefore has more endurance when he or she returns to the original rep bracket. The underlying message is obvious – variety alone can accelerate your process and regardless of your goal, the main premise to understand is that it is not merely which rep brackets to use, but also how long to stay within each rep bracket.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 50; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 90

Number of Reps: Again whilst number of reps is a critical issue, it is limited as a measure of volume unless the majority of exercises involve similar metabolic cost
— King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs, Volume, p. 146

I think this [number of reps] is a flawed model as it makes the assumption that all reps are created equal and performed at the same speed.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 49; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 90

A repetition in strength training is one full cycle of the contraction modes involved.
— King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs, Volume, p. 99

A repetition….can be thought of as one full cycle of the contraction modes involved.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 48; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 89

The influence of training age on number of sets: a beginner is not likely to need any more than one to two sets per exercise to gain a training effect. It could be argued that the more advanced a trainee becomes, the more sets required. I believe this is true up to a point. There is a point in time where further increases in volume (no. of sets) will not benefit, and the search for further training effects should be limited to increases in intensity.
— King, I., 1998, How to Write Strength Training Programs, Volume, p. 112

Training Age: a beginner to strength training is unlikely to need exposure to more than 1-2 sets of a given exercise….. And clearly the more advanced trainee needs greater volume, however this is only true up to a point. There is definitely a point of diminishing returns when it comes to total sets, and at this point further progress can only be made by increases in intensity.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 52; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 92-93

FROM GET BUFFED! (King, I., 1999)

Another less common criticism (one I used to get more so in the early 1990s) is that it is too complex and the movements should be ‘just done’. Yes, the system does need to be understood by the program writer (I suspect this to be the greatest challenge to these critics); and yes, it does need to be explained to the trainee. No, it doesn’t have to be executed with perfection – it is just a guideline (so don’t get out your metronome!)…
–King, I., Get Buffed (book), 1999, p. 65

It may appear over-complicated.…A common argument is ‘if I focus on maintaining a 321 speed then I can’t focus on just working hard’.…So the tempo system DOES need to be understood by the coaches and the trainee. Does it need to be executed with a metronome for absolute accuracy? No – it is just a useful guideline.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible, p. 57

The first set
The primary effect of the first work set is shock. The body, subject to the laws of homeostasis and innate protective mechanisms, rarely functions optimally during the first work set.
–King, I., Get Buffed (book), 1999, p. 53-55

…the first set of a workout tends to be a ‘shock’ to the body. The body rarely functions well during the first work set of an exercise.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 54; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 94

The second set
The second work set benefits from the first work set – in what can be described as ‘neural arousal’, or greater neuro-muscular innervation.
–King, I., Get Buffed (book), 1999, p. 53-55

The second set however tends to benefit from the first set in terms ofneural innvervation – the body is ‘awake’ now.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Design Bible, p. 54; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 94

The third and subsequent work sets
In a nut-shell, if you are lifting the same load for say three sets of ten, it is unlikely it was your maximum in set one.
–King, I., Get Buffed (book), 1999, p. 53-55

…In a nutshell if you are still able to lift the same load for three sets, it is likely that you have selected loads based on the facts you are doing three sets – i.e. you didn’t use your maximum load.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 54; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 94

In my opinion, it is difficult to do more than two sets at the same reps and load if the effort is maximal.
–King, I., Get Buffed (book), 1999, p. 53-55

In general, I rarely use more than two sets of the same exercise at the same load.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 54; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 94 (NB. In this rare situation, credit was given, but does provide right to copy text verbatim without appropriate referencing methods)

Australian biomechanist Greg Wilson did some great research in the 1990s in quantifying the role of the SSC. He found that if you do a conventional bench press with an eccentric or lowering phase that was about a second, it took a full four second pause in between the eccentric and concentric to completely eliminate the stretch shortening cycle, i.e. if you lower the bar and you rest it on top of your chest for a period of less than four seconds, you’re still getting an added boost from all the elastic energy.
–King, I., 1999, Get Buffed!, Chapter 12 – What speed of movement should I use?, p. 63

Research by Greg Wilson in 1991 showed that it took 4 seconds to dissipate the stretch shortening cycle in the bench press. In other words – you were still using momentum if the pause was any less than 4 seconds. All this tells us is that for pure muscle work – pausing makes it harder. For strength and speed work, we should exploit the stretch shortening cycle and have no pause.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 57; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 98

For those concerned about power (rate of force development), I don’t recommend using anything less than a fast or attempted-to-be-fast concentric contraction for some 80-90% of total training time.
–King, I., Get Buffed (book), 1999, p. 65

For anyone concerned with power or speed, anything less than an explosive (or an attempt to be explosive) is not recommended for the bulk of your training….
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible, p. 59

Single leg squat:
stand on 1 leg beside the squat rack or similar. Place the other leg out so that the heel stays just off the ground at all times. Bend the support knee and go down as far as you can whilst keeping your foot flat on the ground. 3 seconds down, no pause, controlled explosive up. Initially I suspect your range will be limited but as you get better at it over time, aim to increase range as well (and maybe even more importantly) as reps. Using your bodyweight only, I expect somewhere between 5-10 reps on day one, and look to use DB’s in one hand if you exceed 15 reps. If this is the case, I have to wonder what you were doing during the earlier part of the workout?! Use the squat rack to hold on to for balance if needed (and you probably will need to) but don’t get sucked into the temptation of using it to pull yourself up…
–King, I., Get Buffed (book), 1999, p. 203-204.

One leg squat:
Stand on 1 leg beside the squat rack or similar. Place the other leg out so that the heel stays just off the ground at all times. Bent the support knee and go down as far as you can whilst keeping your foot flat on the ground. 3 seconds down, no pause, controlled explosive up. Initially I suspect your range will be limited but as you get better at it over time, aim to increase range as well (and maybe even more importantly) as reps. Using your bodyweight only, expect somewhere between 5-10 reps on day one, and look to use DB’s in one hand if you exceed 15 reps. Use the squat rack to hold on to for balance if needed (and you probably will need to) but don’t get sucked into the temptation of using it to pull yourself up.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible, p. 83

But if you accept that sport science and sport historians have much in common, you wouldn’t be waiting for full confirmation.
— King, I., 1999, Get Buffed! (book), Ch 22 – Injury prevention, p. 109

Sports scientists have become sports training historians as the researchers tend to study what coaches are doing anyway.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 57; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 40

There is an incredible trend in strength training to do three sets of every exercises. More specifically, three (or more) sets at the same weight on the same exercise -most commonly, 3 sets of 10! Why is this? I’ve asked myself that question many times, and the only answer I come up with is the power of tradition.


You see, these magic numbers were ‘validated’ way back in the late ‘40’s and early ‘50’s by an American army surgeon by the name of De Lorme when he presented research evidence supporting the use of three sets of ten reps. All credit to the contribution De Lorme made to the science of training, but that was fifty years ago. Yet what do you see almost every time you look at a training program? 3 x 10 (or 15 or 12 or 8, or 6 etc.) ! What do you see every time you browse (I say browse, because invariably there’s nothing that warrants reading) through a mainstream bodybuilding magazine? 3 x 10!
— King, I., 1999, Get Buffed, p. 52

Despite the absolute limitless combinations of sets and reps that can be performed – three sets of ten remains the single most common set and rep scheme. In the late 1940’s Thomas DeLorme and his Boston team of orthopaedic surgeons were experiencing difficulties rehabilitating World War II Veterans, so they tried a radically new medical approach: Strength training.


Known as the DeLorme-Watkins protocol, the program consisted of one ste of ten reps at 50% of your ten rep max, one set at 75% and one set at 100%. That was it. That was where the industry standard came from. And here we are over sixty years later and this is still the primary set-rep scheme that most trainers are using. In sixty years have we not learned anything.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 36; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 39

Most train hard and long, and with high frequency. Unless one is supported by a incredibly higher recovery system (natural or chemically enhanced), this approach will result in over-training and non-achievement of goals.


… I have very firm beliefs on this topic. Volume and intensity are inversely related. When one is up, the other is forced down. You cannot do a high volume workout (i.e. a high number of sets) and have as high an intensity as you would have with a lower number of sets. Many kid themselves on this, but you cannot avoid reality.
–King, I., 1999, Get Buffed!, p. 33

…but you cannot train hard and long. I agree with this statement.Volume and intensity are inversely related. When one is up, the other is down. Most trainers, quite honestly, seem unaware of this simple concept, or are perhaps in denial as regards this, but it is an irrefutable fact.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 51; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 92

FROM THE FOUNDATIONS OF PHSYICAL PREPARATION (King, I., 1999/2000)

The principle of recovery recognizes that the training effect is not simply a result of training alone, but occurs from a combination of training and the subsequent recovery from training.
–King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation, Ch 2 – Principles of Training, p. 34.

The principle of recovery and regeneration recognizes that training alone does won’t produce any results. You don’t actually improve as a result of training – you improve as a result of recovering FROM training.
–Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p.43

The principle of specificity suggests that your adaptation to training will be very specific to the nature of the training you are doing. For example if you are doing a number of long, slow jogs per week, your physical capacity to do that specific activity may be enhanced. An acronym that appears to have lost popularity but is quite illustrative of this point is the SAID Principle – specific adaptations to imposed demands.
–King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation, Ch 2 – Principles of Training, p. 35

Specificity
Also known as the SAID principle, which is an acronym for ‘specific adaptation to imposed demand’. This principles suggests that the body adapts to the specific demands placed on it. For example, long slow running will enhance your ability to run long and slow, but is unlikely to enhance your ability to bench press maximal weight. Training programs need to reflect the specific goal that we are trying to achieve.
–Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p.43

Opposite and equal effect
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.

… Lets use swimming for example. Most swimming strokes involve repetitive internal rotation of the upper arm. Consequently the internal rotators of the arm/shoulder become shorter and tighter than the external rotators….

The strong message in the equal and opposite effect concept is that every single training method will have a negative effect – and must be countered. This is why ultimately it is not a question of which is the best training method – rather a matter of using a wide range of methods…
–King, I., 2000, Foundations of Physical Preparation, Ch 2 – Principles of Training, p. 30-31

Equal and Opposite Effect
…This means that in training, there is both a positive and negative outcome to any method used, and that the negative outcome is as equal as the positive one.

…..For example a bench press is a fantastic upper body strength exercise – but when overused it can cause the upper pecs, shoulder and the internal rotators of the arm/shoulder to become shorter and tighter than the external rotators…

…The underlying message of this principle is that every single training method that create a positive change, carries with it an equal negative effect, which must be addressed. As a result, you can see that there cannot be any perfect program – as every program by the nature of this principle will have a negative outcome also.
–Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p.43 (NB. In this rare situation, credit was given, but does provide right to copy text verbatim without appropriate referencing methods)

FROM HOW TO TEACH STRENGTH TRAINING EXERCISES (King, I., 2000)

Slow side raises on Ground:
Lay on your back, knee bent to about 90 degrees, and knees together. Roll the knees over together so that they are on the ground, with the shoulders and upper back still parallel to the ground. Now flex the trunk, basically up towards the roof or sky. I like to have the fingers lightly touching the front of the head, elbow out at 45 degrees from the body, and arm/elbow angle not changing during the lift. The placement of the hands will alter the level of difficulty. The further the hands are above the head, the harder the movement.
— King, I., 2000, How to Teach Strength Training Programs, p. 62

Side raises on Ground:
Lie on your back, knees bent to about 90 degrees and knees together. Roll the knees over together so that they are on the ground with the shoulders and upper back still parallel. Now flex the trunk, basically up towards the roof or sky. I like to have the fingers lightly touching the front of the head, elbow out at 45 degrees from the body, and arm/elbow angle not changing during the lift. The placement of the hands will alter the level of difficulty. The further the hands are above the head, the harder the movement.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 161; Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible, p. 161

DB Bench Press :
• lay on your back (supine) on a bench
• dumbbells in each hand
• have the dumbbells facing palm down towards the feet
• now push the dumbbells straight up until the arms are fully extended
• have the dumbbells nearly touching in this top position
• lower down fully to the starting position
— King, I., 2000, How to Teach Strength Training Programs, p. 144

Incline DB Press:
Lie on your back on an Incline bench, with a DB in each hand, palms facing forward towards the feet. Push the dumbbells straight up until the arms are fully extended – have the DB’s nearly touching in this top position. Lower down fully to the start position.
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Program Design Bible, p. 127

FROM ASK THE MASTER (King., I., 2003)

Designing a prioritization program is a real art that few have mastered.…in essence all programs have an imbalance or a prioritization. This come from the sequence of exercises within the workout and week, the allocation of volume, the relative use ofintensity, the comparative selection of exercise categories and so on.
–King, I., Ask the Master (book), 2003, Program Design – Strength Training, p. 143

Programs can be prioritized by volume of movement (number of sets and reps), sequence of movement (in the workout, in the week and in the program), and loading of movement (amount of weight involved).
–Cosgrove, A., 2005, The Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 66; Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, p. 107

FROM THE WAY OF THE PHYSICAL PREPARATION COACH (King, I., 2005)

Less is more.
This training principle extends from the above, and reinforces that in many cases, you will get a better training effect from doing a smaller amount of training. That is, that you will get more results when you do less training.
— King, I., 2005, The Way of the Physical Preparation Coach, Ch 2 – Training Theory, p. 5

#5: Less is more
Training hard does not necessarily equal more return. Performing more challenging exercises does not mean faster results….Select the LEAST challenging variation for the client – that’s where the best return on investment is going to be….Keep it simple. Less is more.”
–Cosgrove, A., and Cosgrove, R., 2009, Fitness Professionals Bible, 2nd Ed., p. 12

CONCLUSION

I can only conclude that the moral compass of this company defines the sale of publications containing extensive copyright breaches as acceptable.

How does this serve the greater good of the industry? I can understand it helps their bottom line. Is this a case of profit before integrity?

Surely they can perform better than this?