Catching up

I've been completely MIA for a couple of weeks and a lot has happened so I wanted to do a little catching up.

1) Last week I was officially offered a job as a strength and conditioning coach at RPI in Troy. I'm really excited to be starting there and hopefully making a difference with their athletes, student body and faculty. Any one know any realtors in the area that can find decent housing?

2)I had a really busy weekend; Saturday morning I was able to put on two separate clinics. 1 for a high school girls basketball program and another one for a group of local coaches. It's always fun doing what I can to help people understand what I do and why I do it. Hopefully they had fun and learned something in the process. After I was done, however, I had completely lost my voice and had to go to a seminar near Boston without the ability to speak...

3)I attended an awesome seminar put on by Eric Cressey (Strength coach) and Mike Reinold (PT for the Red Sox as well as a Boston hospital I believe). It was 7 hours learning about movement impairments and treatments/training protocols for the shoulder. The information was great and am looking forward to learning more about the subject.

On a side note, do any other trainers out there find that most people don't realize how much goes into trying to become a decent trainer? If I get in a discussion with an accountant about taxes, I keep my mouth shut with the exception of asking questions, and I listen. But if an accountant gets in a discussion with me about training, chances are they'll argue and tell me why what they're doing at the gym is right but it's a mystery why they're always in pain and get no results. Reading Men's or Women's Health once a month, and watching the Biggest Loser, doesnt make you an expert.

4)I recently completed (almost) Cresseys' Maximum Strength program. A 16 week workout geared towards strength (duh). I have to say I feel great. Other than coming down with a cold/bacterial infection(?) during the last week, and being unable to retest, my results have been great. I don't need to test to know I am much stronger, healthier and even have less pain in my lower back. I did it as much for the process of being committed to a program as I did for the results. I actually plan on doing it once more before switching it up. It's a simple to follow, well described program that will help anyone get over any plateaus they've experienced on their own programs. I recommend checking it out.



5)Last night I received this email from an athlete of mine who just finished her senior year as a division I field hockey player. It made me feel great and I wanted to share. This is more of a testimony to her hard work than anything I did.

"Hi Jon,

I meant to e-mail you earlier right after the season ended but things got crazy trying to catch up on sleep, work and fun time. But the reason why I am e-mailing is because I just wanted to tell you that I had one of the best seasons in my field hockey career this past fall. When I came into preseason, I was one of the strongest players, physically and mentally. I killed the fitness test because of your advice that you had given me (by not running many miles). In past years, I was one of the smaller ones getting pushed around in the circle defensively and offensively, however this year I was actually knocking girls over that were bigger than me (I did not drop any shoulders into them but was able to hold my ground). When we did our weight lifting test, I was able to do 3 chin-ups (more than most of the girls on our team were able to do). My conditioning was amazing; I was able to run non-stop on the field throughout the entire game. Working with you over the summer was one of the best decisions that I had made. I am not going to lie, I was not going to go to the gym because I hate going to gyms and not comfortable enough to do it on my own, however working with you, learning how to do basic things that would prevent injuries, and seeing myself get stronger over the weeks was one of the best things."

Champs Again!

Alright, after letting it set in for a couple of days I wanted to share a couple thoughts about the Greatest Franchise ever taking home another title.

There's one thing that struck me as a little odd in my reaction to the last out on Wednesday night. It actually felt slightly anti-climactic watching the final out. But it wasn't because I didn't care. Actually I was much more into this World Series than many of the past ones the Yankees have played in, but I think the difference is in how I view things. The older I get, the less I focus on results. The process is what really matters, whether it's baseball, school (how many of us knew how to get the grade without doing any actual learning?), or life.

So even though almost every non-Yankee fan will complain about the lack of a strict salary cap and blame the Yankees for ruining baseball by buying championships, let's remember that no matter how much money you spend you don't get a free pass to the World Series. The process has to be the same for the Yankees as it would for any other team. Before the season I honestly thought it would be hard to root for the team with such high profile free agents bought last off-season, but as the summer rolled along and the more games I watched, the more I came to feel a part of this Yankees team, and that is what makes being a fan really enjoyable.

And as much as everybody hates the Yankees, it's clear that they also need the Yankees.. As much as I love watching it, baseball simply would not get the ratings it needs to survive without a villain. And if you don't think the Yankees aren't the epitome of a villain then you're crazy. Football ratings are so good because the American people love the product. Outside of the die-hards, baseball lacks the appeal of football and needs other story lines to drive ratings. Need proof? Look at the ratings for the last 2 World Series. The Yankees/Phillies averaged around a 12 (translated into X-million viewers, not sure of the exact formula), where the Phillies/Rays averaged a 7-8. That's a huge difference in number of viewers, because the Yankees will draw interest of people around the country who simply want to see them lose.

If you look at the highest rated Series in history, most of them involve the Yankees. One exception would be 2004, game 4, when the Red Sox were about to clinch their first title in a thousand years.

I'm just glad I'm on the fun side of the fence when it comes to the Yankees!

Is it important to be well-rounded?

There seems to be a sentiment today, especially among obsessive parents, that their kids need to be really "well-rounded." Now, I think it's a great idea to expose young kids to as much as possible so they know what's out there and can then decide for themselves what they are interested in and begin to choose their own path.

But what about when we get older? Is it really necessary to be so worldly once we establish ourselves in a given field? It sounds fine and dandy, but let's be honest; Does anyone really care if their car mechanic knows a lick about world history? Or how about if their Doctor can discuss the arts? I personally could care less whether or not a professional athlete could name the capital of Finland, but yet we carry this assumption that everybody should be "all-knowing," and we make fun of them (behind their back of course) if they don't.

Now, I think that everyone should be well-rounded by a different defenition. It is each person's responsibility to be as well-versed in their field as they can possibly be. In the example of the fitness industry, this means to avoid becoming a "fad" guy/girl. Now, there are plenty of top professionals who are known for one thing; "The corrective guy", "The Kettlebell Guy", "The Speed Guy", etc. But talk to any of these people and they are incredibly knowledgeable about every aspect of fitness/health and human performance.

Try to open up a debate about the economy, however, and you'd be hardpressed to get an intelligent response that doesn't directly relate to their own situation as a fitness professional.

Is this such a bad thing?

I've reference a book, Outliers, a few times in this blog. Specifically, I was blown away by the 10,000 hour rule Gladwell talks about. In short, any extremely successful individual has accumulated at least 10,000 of quality practice in their given field to get to where they are.

Now, as I think back to my college experience and how "well-rounded" it was, I wonder if it really was worth it. How many hours did I spend in class, on homework, and studying for classes that served no purpose to get me where I want to be? These required gen-ed classes probably cost me hundreds of hours that I could have used to better prepare me to be a better fitness professional (would I have used them to do that? I don't know, but work with me here). The classes that I took that actually have helped me along my path, including graduate school, could easily have been done in about 3 years.

To be honest, I think the most well-rounded people are great for Trivia games, and carrying conversations with people they don't know, which can be valuable.

I guess I'd argue that it's more valuable to be extremely knowledgeable in a single field rather than fairly knowledgeable in every field.

Thoughts?

Jon

Understanding Strength

I hear many people come to me with their "Whoa is me" tales of not being able to make any progress with their exercise routine. Many claim they can't get past plateaus even though they spend 5 days a week in the gym. Some have no idea why they can't lose those last 10 pounds, or gain 10 pounds, or do a push up, or a pull-up, or whatever the case may be. My personal favorite is when I hear the defeatist cry that "It's my metabolism", not having any clue what the word even means, assuming it's a genetic set-point like body temperature that can never change.

Well it can change. In fact, the physiological quality that best predicts metabolic rate is lean muscle mass. That's right, the more lean mass the higher the metabolic rate, the easier it is for you to get more work done and burn more fat. And unlike a lot of studies that show correllations with no reasonable argument for cause and effect, the act of increasing muscle mass will in fact increase your metabolism. Obviously this isn't the only way to lost pounds, but it is a very important component.

So here's where the problem lies: How do we build lean mass? Being a naive (fairly) young trainer, I thought everyone had a good understanding on how to build strength, but it has become clear that most gym-goers have no idea even with all the science available to them to help them out. Don't take offense if this is you, but most men who workout on their own go into the gym with no real plan (other than "it's a bench day, or today is back and bi's). Most women who go will invariably spend 30-60 minutes rotating between their favorite pieces of cardio equipment while they read about 9 ways to please their man (Hint: if none of them include leaving us alone during the game, find a new magazine. But I digress), followed by a few isolation "strength" exercises.

And what they (you!) will both do is pick your exercises and do 2-3 sets of 8-10 reps every single time. The volume never changes, the rep scheme never varies, and you try to add a little bit of weight each time (men) or use the same (extremely) light weight to try to lose their trouble areas (women). You know what else never changes? You. You'll make progress for a few weeks, then either give up or just plateau and the excuses start flying.

So how do we build strength while avoiding plateaus? Once you've adjusted to a strength training routine, you need to adjust the volume, intensity, and exercises to keep things fresh. One of the simplest ways to do this, while keeping the same exercise routine for several weeks, is to have a pre-planned variance with your sets/reps and overall volume.

Here's an example of a very basic exercise list I might use with an average client:

1a) Walking lunges
1b) Push-up progression
2a) Stability ball bridge (hip extensions)
2b) Lat pulldown
3a) Front planks
3b) Stability ball side sit-ups

Now, three of these would use resistance (lunges, push-ups, and lat pulldown, and even side sit ups in some cases). The average person would do 3 sets of 8-10 reps. The total volume, for say lunges, would be 30 reps x external resistance. In keeping the volume the same every day, the only way to progressively overload (KEY for making progress) is to add weight every session.

Well this will only work for so long before we teeter out. So we need another way to progressively add volume. So what were the other factors? Sets, reps (you could also include rest intervals). This gives us 3 other ways to increase our volume without ever even changing the weight! Here's a set/rep scheme for 4 weeks that I might use with the lunges and push ups. This is written for someone who may be working out 4x/week.

Week 1: 3x10 each (30 total reps)
Week 2: 4x6 each (24 reps)
Week 3: 4x10 each (40 reps)
Week 4: 2x10 each (20 reps)


You'll notice the volume goes up and down from week to week; this is a great way to allow the muscles to regenerate without taking time off. I stole this pattern from Eric Cressey's Maximum Strength protocol, where week 1 is high volume, week 2 is medium, week 3 is very high, and week 4 is low. It has been very effective as I've been going through his 16 week program myself.

The key to making programs like this work however, are understanding how to use the sets/reps schemes. I have been really surprised at the number of people who would pick the same exact weight for 4 sets of 6 reps, as they would for 3 sets of 10.

If you want to make progress you must pick a weight that challenges you for that set! In other words, the last 2 reps should be a little slower, and much harder (but done with perfect form) if you want to continue making progress.

This was just a very basic example, and designing programs can get to be a lot of fun with committed clients who you can really make a difference with.

I turned this post into kind of a ramble, but hopefully some of it made sense and gave you a couple of principles you can apply to your own workouts if you aren't already.

Jon

Rewards of being a trainer...

Ask any trainer/strength coach about why they got into the industry and I guarantee not one of them will say "the money." And as Mike Boyle often says, not many of us gave up brain surgery to start training athletes.

So why do we do it?

I've always known what my motivation was, but the other day it was reaffirmed by one of my young "athletes".

I recently wrote about the value of praising effort over performance, an idea I took from the book Nurture Shock. I gave a story of a young (9 year old) athlete who was struggling, and getting frustrated when he couldn't perform certain coordination drills or games. And I think I pointed out how much more effort he put in when I made it clear that effort was all I expected, and how he continued to get himself up time after time after falling down (literally a couple dozen times in a single "workout").

Well a couple of days ago, with the same class and young athlete, we did a similar workout to the one from a few weeks ago (including a lot of ladder drills, and some linear acceleration games/ball drops, etc.). The same drills that led to Ryan falling down so many times before, were almost perfected by him on Monday. And let me tell you, his eyes lit up like the 4th. His footwork was almost flawless and his feet were much quicker-and I don't think he fell once.

This isn't the first time I've seen this, but it never gets old. This is why we need to stay patient with our kids. Statistics say that Ryan will probably never be an "elite" athlete, and many parents and coaches see this as enough reason to not pay for training like we give. And many of Ryan's friends, maybe even parents, won't notice much of a difference right away, making it difficult to put a value on the training he's been given.

But I bet if they do notice anything, it's that he's willing to try anything now because he knows a concentrated effort will be rewarded in the end. It's not magic, voo-doo, or slight of hands tricks. It's simply allowing each kid to try to reach their own potential. We'll never know what the ceiling is for most of these kids, but the least we can do is get them to try to find it for themselves.

Top 9 Reasons the Yankees will win

Top 9 Reasons the Yankees will win the World Series that don’t include money…

1. Star factor…Stars seen at regular season Yankee games include Jay-Z, Kate Hudson, Spike Lee, Billy Crystal, Adam Sandler, Chris Rock, Jack Nicholson, and Paul McCartney. At Philly, they’ll be lucky to get a decrepit Sylvester Stallone. Now that I think about it, if Philly decided to show this face on the Jumbo-tron while the Yankees are hitting, they may be in trouble.

2. Philly Fans are outmatched. For as much credit as Philly fans get for being insolent and completely obnoxious about their sports (which is true), I think they have been weathered a little bit after being spoiled last year by being spoon-fed in the world series by the awe-struck Tampa Bay Rays. Besides, their fans still fall a distant second to some of the crazies that frequent the Bronx.

3. Ryan Howard won’t know what to do with the short porch in right. Ever hear a hitter talk about what happens when you start trying to hit home runs? You don’t think this will happen when Howard looks down the right field line? 

4. Winning the Quadruple-A (some call it the National League) title does not mean you were playing real baseball.

5. Pedro Martinez is Philly’s number 2. Really? This is what they’re coming with? One good start in the playoffs (at age 50 I think) and he is now the savior. He was old in 2004. That was 5 years ago. Yanks will be into the Phils bullpen by the 4th inning.

6. On that note, the Philly’s don’t win without 4, 8 inning starts out of their pitchers. Their bullpen is about as useful as a screen door on a submarine.

7. Their nickname is the Phillies. This is the best they could do? They’re either named after female horses, or they were not creative enough to come up with a name so they just used the abbreviated version of the city name. Either way, let’s get real.

8. Derek Jeter. 9 Years without a World Series ring is considered a great career for most. That’s a drought for the Yankee captain. Plus he once said something along the lines of, "I'm not going down the Miss Universe road again." How many people can utter that phrase? The guy's a winner.

9. Kate Hudson. She gets full credit for the Arod turnaround in the playoffs. Seriously, I’d hit .450 in the postseason too if I knew I was going home to that every night.

Get better!

I talk a lot about the difference between training and working out. If you are charging people to come to you, you better deliver "training" and not "workouts."

What's the difference? Really it comes down to having long term goals, knowing what you need to improve on, and taking steps to actually get better at what you do. Does this mean getting as tired and sore as you can in a workout? Sometimes. But it shouldn't be the only goal of your program. You will burnout quick, and you may not even necessarily be getting any closer to your goals (depending on what they are).

I deal with a lot of athletes, who all have fairly similar goals (with some variation). They want to get better at their sport by getting (some combination of) faster, stronger, quicker, bigger, smaller, etc.

Piggy-backing with my last post regarding crossfit, where I pointed out the need for quality movement versus high training volume, there are ways to get closer to these goals without running the athletes into the ground.

Here's an example of a recent workout I did with some high school athletes:

I work with a small-school, varsity level high school team. This particular day, the seniors were missing for college visits and I was only left with 2 girls; both sophomores of really slender build and a general lack of strength. This is in contrast with a lot of the other girls that normally come (who I had originally planned that class around). I immediately shifted the focus of the day by asking them individually what their goals were. I knew what I was going to do with them, but I wanted them to know as well. (Good coaching tip: if the athletes feel involved in the process, their commitment level is much higher).

They both gave me great goals. Specifically, they wanted to get better at multi-directional speed. So after a good dynamic warm-up, I had a couple of options. Sure, I could've thrown some cones out there and ran them through countless repetitions of cutting drills. They would've gotten their change of direction reps in, been tired, and been nice and sore the next day from all the decelerating. But would that have made them better? Not necessarily.

With their willingness to learn, I thought it would be effective to take the time to actually break down the mechanics of a cut, have them practice it piece-by-piece until they were working at full speed. We started by learning the correct angle to place the feet when cutting, working in rehearsed patterns (where they knew where to cut), and finally to reactive full speed games (like mirror drills).



They barely got tired and would not get sore, but they both felt they got better, and that's all we can do as coaches.

After we finished this, they completed a great strength workout where they worked on improving movement patterns that we all need; lunging, pushing, pulling, and core stability.

So I hope you take the time (for yourself if not for athletes) to set goals with your training, and life for that matter, to make it easier to attack the goals aggressively but not always with misdirected wreckless abandon, as we've seen with a lot of group exercise/training classes. But if you need more visual reinforcement, here's a link that Brian "Sticks" Matthews shared with me. It contains videos that certain trainers are proud of. Hope you know enough to judge for yourself...

http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fvimeo.com%2F1869376&h=1ec9c17d4d3711a56205b3f3db9139ad

Jon