And as CC stated, Phil Hernon (love or hate him) seems to consitently create success. How bout getting some of these guys to write here as well…
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
<<< I expect the reason that various Famous Trainers have no or next to no successful bodybuilders or powerlifters that one can name that attribute any of their success to them is that, well, there aren’t any.[/quote]
How many top bodybuilders, or even REALLY big guys, got there as the result of a decisive relationship with anybody except themselves. In other words, they may pick up principles from or spend time with somebody or a few influences that helped them, but where are the guys proclaiming [quite]“if it weren’t for the genius of ______________ I wouldn’t be here today?”[/quote]
Even some of the ones who credit a certain person or method seem to no longer be training according to those statements whenever you see them.
The very successful bodybuilders always learn from others, but seem to also always put together their training philosophy and methods as a whole on their own.
[quote]Flow wrote:
Are my experiences not worth a thing until I bench 400, squat 500, and deadlift 600? I have to disagree if your answer is ‘yes’.[/quote]
It can help to not turn things into extremes: there is a middle ground between “worth nothing” and “worth writing articles on.”
For example, one might note that I don’t write articles on improving any of those lifts, though I have many years of working at, probably have more knowledge than many, and there are points on which I can help those that are not at an advanced level of performance already.
The reason is largely precisely because my lifts are not the above.
The reason is more genetic than it is stupidity, ignorance, lack of time under the bar or pulling it, or lack of effort.
Still my judgment is that the reader is better served by someone who has put in the time and work well, as I believe I have, but ALSO has gotten the lifts to a fairly elite level.
Regardless that maybe the difference in results is entirely from genetic gifts or conceivably if they’d trained as I did, but with the progression in weights their genetics allowed, they’d have done better yet. But that’s a would’a, could’a, should’a that no one can ever know and just sounds like crying over split milk. That is how people are going to take it. Human nature. We are not going to get past it.
Besides that, as has already been posted, even if genetic gifts are the explanation for how they got to the better, heavier weights, it IS a fact that they are now dealing with heavier weight and therefore are encountering factors that I just have no experience in.
So who cares that better genetics were key to their getting there: regardless, that has provided them with very relevant experiences that those not hoisting weights of that magnitude just haven’t had.
All that doesn’t mean I can’t post something worthwhile to many on the topic, but I’m not going to presume to write an article on any of those lifts.
[quote]Tim Henriques wrote:
Just out of curiousity, do the people that believe it doesn’t really matter what a strength coach/personal trainer, etc looks like also feel it doesn’t really matter what a nutritionist looks like? Does it matter if the nutritionist is fat and overweight or just that they are smart and have a degree? [/quote]
Im a dietitian and I would never listen to a strength coach/nutritionist that is fat or overweight. To me this shows that the person might be book smart and knows theory but when It comes to practice they don’t know shit. If they can’t obtain a lean muscular physique by themselves what makes me think they could do it to me?
Now I would listen to these people on topics not relating to physique transformation, like nutrition support, or diabetes but I would take what they tell me about body transformation with a grain of salt.
I would eventually like to get into the bodybuilding side of nutrition, but until I obtain an impressive physique and have dieted down to contest condition, I’m not going to be working with clients.
If someone wants me to steer them in the right direction or give them pointers about weight loss or muscle gain for general populations, no problem, but when It comes to bodybuilding its a completely different ballpark that you need to experience first hand to be good at.
I think this is were a lot of people develop hate towards dietitians/strength coaches, the majority of them will TRY to give info about physique transformation, when they really don’t have the knowledge or first hand experience to be shelling out info about bodybuilding.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Flow wrote:
Are my experiences not worth a thing until I bench 400, squat 500, and deadlift 600? I have to disagree if your answer is ‘yes’.
It can help to not turn things into extremes: there is a middle ground between “worth nothing” and “worth writing articles on.”[/quote]
I’m talking extremes because that’s the subject being discussed. Big Ron and Dave Tate have achieved the extremes of results, so to speak.
That’s ok, but consider those people that have to scrape by with everything in their toolbox to achieve just decent results will have a more complex understanding of what works, what doesn’t, and what could work given a situation than the gifted folks that deadlift 700 at 18. Although the ‘ungifted’ haven’t achieved an elite level in their own personal competitive experience, they will likely have picked up on the intricacies of each lift above and beyond the gifted individuals, due to all of the factors they had to consider to be successful. This would give them a better eye for which part of the lift to focus on, making them a better coach, and, inherently, a better source of information than someone that can ‘do’ by nature or genetics.
Doing and teaching are different things, although, you are right, they aren’t mutually exclusive.
I’m not talking down to the individuals that are gifted enough to do these things by nature. I am saying that they will not have the type of experience in learning to do things that someone that struggled to get to just decent would. This doesn’t downplay experience, as that is the most important factor to consider.
It is also possible that someone that had to work hard as hell for many years to just be decent wouldn’t have focused on teaching queues, making them a less important source of information than a ‘gifted’ elite lifter that has worked hard to learn coaching techniques.
I think you can learn from anyone. If someone that benches 350 had a pec tear, could they not help some one that benches 500 and had a pec tear? Similar experiences, different weights.
[quote]Flow wrote:
That’s ok, but consider those people that have to scrape by with everything in their toolbox to achieve just decent results will have a more complex understanding of what works, what doesn’t, and what could work given a situation than the gifted folks that deadlift 700 at 18. [/quote]
This isn’t necessarily true. The people you are describing could also just not be cut out genetically to gain large amounts of muscle. Their input would be about equal to guys who can’t sing wondering why no one is coming to them for singing lessons. If they lack even average ability, their input could potentially hold back way more people than it helps reach their full potential.
You see, when skinny authors go on and on about “hardgainers”, more and more people who quite possibly AREN’T begin thinking they are also “hardgainers”. Thanks to the guy who “scraped his toolbox”, more people will have mental blocks towards what they think they can achieve.
Yes, it is possible to be elite and not know how to teach it, but why would someone who feels they have the potential seek out those who don’t first?