[quote]Sneaky weasel wrote:
What matters is that the nature of the training means corresponds to the bioenergetic demands of the sport activity, and that you, as a trainer, generate a positive transference from the training setting onto the field.[/quote]
No. Shit. You’re being extremely pedantic about this and I’m starting to wonder if it’s on purpose.
Getting athletes strong will usually result in the greatest amount of carryover to their sports. That is whole premise behind the generalization.
[quote]Sneaky weasel wrote:
But your contention that everyone is using a template has nothing to do with your original contention: that maximal strength and training like a powerlifter is effective for all athletes. This is an excessively generalized and therefore incorrect statement.[/quote]
The fact that you think it is incorrect because it is a generalization reveals a fundamental difference in our way of thinking. You probably think stereotypes are necessarily incorrect too, aye? Well, I don’t. Generalization is a perfectly rational, legitimate form of argument. It is simply making logical inductions from a set of data. I will defend generalization to the death because it is used every single day. It is, by far, the most frequently employed method by which humans process empirical data and make sense of reality.
[quote]Sneaky weasel wrote:
But we’re not talking about non-athletes. You made a specific, unqualified contention that the performance-oriented crowd should ALWAYS just get stronger. This is FALSE. Even if we were to abstract the discussion to the level of thought experiments, it would be FALSE, because it’s very easy to come up with a scenario in which the trainee is NOT served by getting stronger. Your grandiose generalizations make your positions untenable.[/quote]
It isn’t false because it’s a GENERALIZATION not an ABSOLUTE and the former need only be true in a MAJORITY of cases in order to be considered true overall. What I wrote is absolutely true in the majority of cases, so bugger off.
The difference between a logical proposition and a generalization is that the latter can’t be disproven by one counter-example; the former can.
[quote]Sneaky weasel wrote:
A sprinter who runs faster than he did a year ago, but still places last in every race is still a poor sprinter, and I would be inclined to question the validity of his training methods. I would not be inclined to listen to his claims that he has found the ultimate principles of training for his sport.
If you are small and lean, as you say, these adjectives apply equally well to many sprinters, gymnasts, Olympic weightlifters in the lower weight classes, rock climbers, male Crossfitters, and every kid who posts in the RMP forum asking for critiques of his “hawt abz.” This does not place you in a position to declare a monopoly on effective training via your “principles,” since all of them arrived at their level of development via different means.
[/quote]
Rock climbers don’t have X-Frames. I do. I’m not at the top, but I’m not at the bottom, either. Like most people, I’m somewhere in the middle. That is why it is FAR more useful, in general, to measure a person’s relative progress than their absolute rank in any given ability.
If all you care about are absolutes, then go find someone who was 200 lbs. of muscle before they ever lifted a weight. Go find yourself a Paul Dillett to admire.
Most people respect relative achievements because most people aren’t Paul Dilletts. They didn’t start at the top, either.
[quote]dankid wrote:
First off, I thought everyone could fit into one of two classifications as to how you should train them. And I thought you said that you never change your views on anything, because you are ALWAYS right. But its clear that just a few months ago you stated that a navy seal would need a SPECIALIZED program. So what is it? According to you, he would have to either fit into the “just get em stronger” athlete crowd, or the “just get em lean and ripped” soccer mom crowd.[/quote]
Completely different context. This thread was made in the context of a trainer who works at a commercial facility. NAVY Seals don’t train with PT’s, give me a break.
Furthermore, if a Seal is weak, then yes, you’re damn right he needs to get strong before he does anything else. As I said before, you have to earn the right to do “specialization” work. Most Seals have probably earned that right. The average person hasn’t. Nor have many aspiring athletes who are just beginning to take training seriously.
When Dave Tate says, “Just shut up the hell up and squat”, he does not put in a qualifier to say that his advice is only for non-professional powerlifters who aren’t already lifting more than 6 plates a side. This is taken to be self-evident. It’s the same thing with my advice, so stop being a dumbass and figure it out yourself.
Obviously, these principles don’t apply to people who already have a high level of strength or muscle mass. But those types of people aren’t training in commercial gyms with PT’s.
[quote]dankid wrote:
I know that you think you are far superior to everyone else, as you have compared yourself to some of the top coaches and trainers, but your insight is extremely basic at best. You MIGHT be one step ahead of the average 24hour fitness/commercial gym trainer, but the fact that you think you are some sort of genius is going to prevent you from ever seeing the bigger picture.[/quote]
To call me “one step ahead of the average 24-hour trainer” is an insult, which I’m sure you know. It is completely untrue. However, I know the standards on here. I’m up against a mountain. There is basically nothing I could possibly do that would elevate me to the status of someone like Chad Waterbury. The mere fact that he contributes here automatically renders him and his theories “superior” to mine, regardless of the content of either. In fact, Chad Waterbury has consistently posted zany and outrageous theories (“Momentum = hypertrophy”) which have even earned him flak from the crowd here, yet I still can’t touch his level of authority, no matter how hard I might try.
People like you endorse and perpetuate academic elitism, which I despise. Luckily, I don’t post to be accepted by others. I post in order to prove them wrong and validate my own beliefs. As I said before, I elevate myself at other peoples’ expense. Often times, people don’t realize when they’ve been trounced. That’s fine by me.
If my insight is so “basic”, why must I devote pages of writing to explain it and defend it against those who don’t understand it? Doesn’t seem so basic, after all.
I’m either wrong or I’m right.
If I’m wrong, then prove me wrong. If I’m right but what I’m saying is “basic”, then explain to me why no one besides me is doing it or saying it.
The reason I’ve compared myself to some of the top coaches and trainers is very simple and perfectly legitimate: We happen to have arrived at the exact same conclusions independently. Whenever this happens, it is an indication of something going on.
As they say, great minds think alike.
Great minds often reach the same conclusions by different means.
This is a recurring theme throughout the history of science and the advancement of knowledge. It is very notable and significant when it occurs. That’s why I like to point it out.
Every time I read a Poliquin article, I pick out at least one tidbit which had already occured to me before in one form or another. I take this as a sign that I’m on the right track and know what I’m doing.
There comes a time when you are no longer approach all new information with the wide-eyed gaze of a deer caught in headlights.
I have spent years informing myself of all the various schools of thought and putting their ideas to the test. I am not a newbie and should no longer act like one. When someone presents a new idea - be it Dave Tate or Poliquin - I don’t have to ooh and ahh and act like some cult devotee. I am going to critically analyze all new theories, regardless of their source.
You don’t understand this, because you’re not there yet. Apparently, most people on this site are still in the “deer caught in headlights” phase.
There is VERY LITTLE in this game (or any other) that is brand new. Everything was already done before you were born. So, either everyone is equally “cutting edge”, or nobody is.
