Wednesday, August 19, 2009


Is it just me or our we (as a strength and conditioning/fitness industry) getting WAY too far ahead of ourselves with some of the stuff that is out there?

I work at a Division I university and most of the athletes I work with are not anywhere near "elite". We benefit very highly from the most basic of training... DONE WELL.

I am just worried that the 'smarter' (or better yet, cuter) we all get with "new" training ideas, the more confused many of us are really becoming.

“Before I learned martial arts, a punch was just a punch and a kick was just a kick. When I studied martial arts, a punch was no longer just a punch and a kick was no longer just a kick. Now I understand martial arts, and a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick.”
-Bruce Lee

Thoughts? Anyone.



Mike T Nelson said...

I like that word "Simplexity" and love the Bruce Lee quote.

I've been thinking a lot lately about the amazing physiques and performances the old time strongmen/ athletes did in the late 1800s and early 1900s with nothing fancy and how we can pair that with our understanding on exercise physiology and neurology. Sort of an "old meets new"

Too often I think we can get wrapped up in doing something new because it is new. The criteria should be "is it effective?"

Rock on
Mike T Nelson PhD(c)

Extreme Human Performance

Dustin S. said...

Could not agree more.

Kids will benefit more from doing a few things well than doing a wide variety of things poorly.

Aaron Schwenzfeier said...

I appreciate the comments fellas... "effective simplexity".

jleeger said...

Aaron, you're right on the money here.

I think the crazy complexity we see today does signify something, though. I think we need to work a better path out of it.

That being said, I think most of the "hard work" has been done already. The Soviets kept such immaculate records on their athletes...that data is a goldmine, and Siff's Supertraining just scratches the surface. I wish we had greater access to it...I can only shell out so many dollars to EFTS for those manuscripts every year before I go broke!

Prilepin's chart points the way. So does the Egoscue approach to alignment (though it's a little obscured by Egoscue's semi-mystical e-cises).

I think the "method" needs to be wrought out of the ore that's been mined for the past 100 years...but who's going to do it?