[quote]CLINK wrote:
SAMA sucked. I was glad to see it disappear.
That place smelled like ass and lies. [/quote]
That’s some funny shit. I disagree, but that’s some funny shit
[quote]Edgy wrote:
T-Nation has changed my life, no shit~
Edgy~[/quote]
Same here. I would have not met or spoken to some people if it were not for this site, nor would I know about what I do on nutrition and training. I’ve had the pleasure of going to seminars by Jim Wendler, Ian King, Joe DeFranco, Sebastian Burns, and Paul Chek. If it weren’t for T-Nation, I wouldn’t have known of these people when I did.
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Criticism is GOOD, people NEED it to improve.
Being an asshole is not good. OP wasn’t an asshole.[/quote]
I can pretty much agree with these points. Although…
[quote]mbdix wrote:
When did T-Nation decide that an article like todays is worthy of front page status?[/quote]
As was said, it might’ve been a little while since the last bodypart-specific routine (it really wasn’t, but okay), but I’m not sure what the problem is with a shoulder specialization workout on a muscle building site. (And no, that routine wouldn’t work as “active recovery” in any sense of the term. A change of pace, sure, but it’s pretty much the opposite of active recovery).
[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
Some of the articles suck and many authors have shitty physiques[/quote]
In the last two months, T-Nation has put up 45 articles from 32 different coaches. Not every article will appeal to every reader. It’d be great if it did, but that’s just not reality because different people want/need different info.
But I do have to call bullshit on the old “Hey coach, DYEL?”-line. (Call me biased, no prob.) Many authors have shitty physiques? Many? Of the 32 recent authors, exactly how many had shitty physiques?
Nevermind that coaches are, like, individuals and have their own personal goals with training, regardless of their clientele. (I know Tumminello is big into bouldering, and is in plenty of shape to climb a bunch.) Or when dipsticks complain that Rippetoe “looks like crap”, overlooking that he’s nearly 60, physically worn but still moves heavy weight regularly, and has almost-universal respect from his peers as someone who knows his shit.
Or attacks on Staley, who’s also in his 50s I believe, and recently started competing in Powerlifting. But yep, let’s call him out for having small arms and calves. It’s not like EDT was one of the most popular training protocols around, or anything.
If out-of-shape coaches with legit “shitty physiques” were posting info, I’d be more inclined to agree with that type of criticism. Barring a significant medical issue, a coach should workout, sure. But the presumption that a coach has to have an “impressive” appearance to have credibility is a pretty narrow bodybuilder-centric point of view when there’s just a bit more to coaching than looking jacked. It really is as simple as, not everybody lifts with the intention of getting big.[/quote]
I would agree that one doesn’t have to have a killer physique to be a coach. However, its probably a hell of a marketing tool. Correct me if I’m wrong, isn’t this a bodybuilder centric website?
[quote]CLINK wrote:
SAMA sucked. I was glad to see it disappear.
That place smelled like ass and lies. [/quote]
take that back, Clinkster -
that aint funny -
it smelled like unicorn farts and leprechaun puke - that’s good shit~
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
It’s business. Some of the articles suck and many authors have shitty physiques, but my understanding is that they provide content in exchange for PR. [/quote]
And money! They’re not writing for free. [/quote]
Really, how much do they get paid per article? I guess it depends on the caliber of the author?
[quote]Edgy wrote:
T-Nation has changed my life, no shit~
I’ve bought products from this site and had a great time in SAMA - Vixen thread also -
I miss TC’s articles, but shit changes.
however, I DO think that a trainer should look the part, or not give advice.
apologies if this opinion has encroached upon some delicate feelings~
Edgy~[/quote]
This is a weird thing that people think. A friend/lifting partner of mine has been paid quite well and traveled the world a number of times with some extremely high profile athletes, plus training and treating many that people watch on tv every week durring their seasons.
To look at him you would never guess. Not a big guy by any stretch. Looks in shape for his age, but other than that definitely wouldn’t fit what people who follow the “must look the part” criteria. If a person were to dismiss him based on looking the part they would be missing out on a goldmine of info and experience.
Looking the part does have some merit, but really is not always a great guidline.
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
I still love the site even though I don’t read much of the newer articles come out. I still reference old ones that hit home with me though. In my opinion, CT’s How to Write a Damn Good Program series, Carb Cycling Codex, the newbie series on training and nutrition, and Training Strategy Handbook are the best articles I’ve ever read on training, and if one were to read those articles, they likely would need little else to read for a long time!
As CC said, not all these authors share the same goals, and I’m confused what “looking like s—” means. Does it mean not looking jacked and ripped? Some of these guys train athletes or are athletes themselves, and athletes don’t need to make front covers of Men’s Health or M&F. One might be surprised by the ordinary physiques and strength of some athletes.
Biotest products are very good. I use Surge or Plazma all the time. The forums are good too. I actually met one of my closest friends on here–a real friend that is, one who I talk to and hang with regularly. So it’s not just for shooting the breeze. If I recall correctly, a couple met on here and there have been a few meetups and training sessions with T Nation people. [/quote]
RE: In regards to shitty physiques.
This is just my philosophy if a man doesn’t practice what he preaches the credibility of his statements are slightly suspect.
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
Looking the part does have some merit, but really is not always a great guideline. [/quote]
I’ll admit I used to think that way for awhile.
What really changed my mind was when I realized how many of the top trainers actually hired coaches to help them out. It got me thinking that just because you may be very good at coaching others to reach their goals, it doesn’t mean you’re able to do that for yourself. When you’re looking at yourself, it can be hard to keep proper perspective and resist constantly fiddling with things. Plus there’s the extrinsic motivation issue.
Likewise, in many sports, it’s pretty rare that the best coaches were particularly great themselves. Even going further, there are a lot of great managers that would be absolutely horrible doing the stuff that the people they manage do.
That said… I think it’s important that you have something you can point to and demonstrate results: if not yourself, your clients.
When I stopped listening to the advice of people smaller and weaker than me on how to get bigger and stronger and only listened to people that were bigger and stronger than me, I got a lot bigger and stronger.
It may simply be correlation, but I think it’s an effective way to limit the amount of potentially bad advice I could receive by limiting the source pool in such a way.
see that little feller on the left in this picture? Not much to look at, is he? So if you are basing the quality of a coach’s advice on how he looks, you’d probably dismiss him…
Oops! That’s Ian King, one of the best coaches in the world.
Looks can be deceiving.
[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
It’s business. Some of the articles suck and many authors have shitty physiques, but my understanding is that they provide content in exchange for PR. [/quote]
And money! They’re not writing for free. [/quote]
Really, how much do they get paid per article? I guess it depends on the caliber of the author?
[/quote]
I’m not sure but I heard TN pays well.
With regard to a coach looking the part, this is a bone of contention in alot of sports. How many great fat out of shape football coachers are there? Plenty. They dont seem to lose credibility. I know its different but there are some similiarities.
Alot of guys who are gifted physique wise or strength wise may not know what it takes for a person who isnt gifted. I judge a coach on knowledge, their progress, experience and success rate of their clients. If a coach looks average but can show me what he did to progress and it shows impressive results I will be inclined to listen. If a coach who has run of the mill average genetics and has shown how he turned himself into something impressive I will really listen. If a coach has testimonials that are confirmed and shows how his methods has shown improvements in a wide range of clients…that is the ultimate test of a coach IMO
[quote]Yogi wrote:
Oops! That’s Ian King, one of the best coaches in the world.
[/quote]
Didn’t Kind used to be pretty jacked? I still have my old Printed Testosterone magazines, and he was a pretty beefy dude.
I personally understand that you can be an excellent coach without having excelled yourself, but the part of me that will always be a competitor, will always give the coach who has been through ‘it’ themselves’, and come out on top, a bit more respect.
This may be wrong in some way, but I’m sure the insane amount of online experts constantly quoting studies yet never really being able to produce their own results colors my view a bit. (Totally my own feelings)
S
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]Yogi wrote:
Oops! That’s Ian King, one of the best coaches in the world.
[/quote]
Didn’t Kind used to be pretty jacked? I still have my old Printed Testosterone magazines, and he was a pretty beefy dude.
I personally understand that you can be an excellent coach without having excelled yourself, but the part of me that will always be a competitor, will always give the coach who has been through ‘it’ themselves’, and come out on top, a bit more respect.
This may be wrong in some way, but I’m sure the insane amount of online experts constantly quoting studies yet never really being able to produce their own results colors my view a bit. (Totally my own feelings)
S[/quote]
Ian King.
Not sure how recent this is. Definitely looks like he lifts though!
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
Didn’t Kind used to be pretty jacked? I still have my old Printed Testosterone magazines, and he was a pretty beefy dude. [/quote]
He was pretty big, and still has a decent amount of muscle. I met him in person and he was far from skinny. He was thick and very sturdy looking. This was in the early 2000’s though.
[quote]
I personally understand that you can be an excellent coach without having excelled yourself, but the part of me that will always be a competitor, will always give the coach who has been through ‘it’ themselves’, and come out on top, a bit more respect.
This may be wrong in some way, but I’m sure the insane amount of online experts constantly quoting studies yet never really being able to produce their own results colors my view a bit. (Totally my own feelings)
S[/quote]
I was actually required to read studies on nutrition and exercise in my schooling and I can wholeheartedly say that NEAR NONE or NONE helped me in anyway in coming up with a diet or routine.
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
It’s also that even some dedicated people, like myself, who are not Crossfitters grew a bit tired with ONLY lifting weights and for aesthetics and want to be in shape for other things or just able to move around faster than a walk, like jumping, running, sprinting, and other activities. I’m buying myself battle rope this summer and use plyos and jump roping and regularly run now in addition to my four lifting sessions. I love lifting and all, but just doing the conventional bodybuilding exercises gets old sometimes. I think it’s great more people are starting to do REAL squats and O lift variations. I’m seeing it more and more in gyms I go to. [/quote]
I agree, it’s great to see more and more people lifting ‘for real’ instead of farting about the gym doing worthless exercises, essentially pissing into the wind getting nowhere. That’s not to say people doing big money exercises are doing it right, but at least there on the right track…
I got myself some battling ropes last year but from a marine supply yard for half the price and they’re great! Also made me some slosh pipes, which are bloody great as well (I’m training a team so they come in handy on the pitch).
The idea that you want something more from lifting is I think a universal progression in those that apply the information they learn from sites like Tnation, which I might add has been a goldmine of FREE information (thanks btw). I think the up and coming new breed of lifter no longer sees bodybuilding as a beacon of muscle and fitness that it used to be but things like Crossfit have now taken that mantle. They now gravitate to a new ideal, the Rich Fronnings of this world, the high performance muscle guys of the future! Btw I don’t crossfit either, I just see the trend in the gyms and online.
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
When I stopped listening to the advice of people smaller and weaker than me on how to get bigger and stronger and only listened to people that were bigger and stronger than me, I got a lot bigger and stronger.
It may simply be correlation, but I think it’s an effective way to limit the amount of potentially bad advice I could receive by limiting the source pool in such a way. [/quote]
The other guy in that picture with Ian King is the late Charlie Francis, who trained Ben Johnson to the gold medal and a then world record in the 100m. His PB was 10.1, impressive, but it’s not like he was himself a world record holder or anything, he certainly wouldn’t be comparable to taking lifting advice from Ed Coan, and yet he was a legendary track coach.
I’m not belittling your perspective, as it is certainly a prudent one and will generally lead to good success, I am just noting that you could potentially weed out some extremely worthy coaching.
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]Captnoblivious wrote:
It’s business. Some of the articles suck and many authors have shitty physiques, but my understanding is that they provide content in exchange for PR. [/quote]
And money! They’re not writing for free. [/quote]
Really, how much do they get paid per article? I guess it depends on the caliber of the author?
[/quote]
I’m not sure but I heard TN pays well. [/quote]
Lets get more info on this. Can we get some ball park number?
[quote]red04 wrote:
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
When I stopped listening to the advice of people smaller and weaker than me on how to get bigger and stronger and only listened to people that were bigger and stronger than me, I got a lot bigger and stronger.
It may simply be correlation, but I think it’s an effective way to limit the amount of potentially bad advice I could receive by limiting the source pool in such a way. [/quote]
The other guy in that picture with Ian King is the late Charlie Francis, who trained Ben Johnson to the gold medal and a then world record in the 100m. His PB was 10.1, impressive, but it’s not like he was himself a world record holder or anything, he certainly wouldn’t be comparable to taking lifting advice from Ed Coan, and yet he was a legendary track coach.
I’m not belittling your perspective, as it is certainly a prudent one and will generally lead to good success, I am just noting that you could potentially weed out some extremely worthy coaching.
[/quote]
Not a great comparison. 10.1 is very fast in the 100. The guy who gets last place at the Olympia is what that is comparable to. He didn’t win actually got last, but still very impressive. Plus when he hit 10.1 was a long time ago. I think Jesse Owens and Bob Hayes were around 10 second 100s
[quote]red04 wrote:
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
When I stopped listening to the advice of people smaller and weaker than me on how to get bigger and stronger and only listened to people that were bigger and stronger than me, I got a lot bigger and stronger.
It may simply be correlation, but I think it’s an effective way to limit the amount of potentially bad advice I could receive by limiting the source pool in such a way. [/quote]
The other guy in that picture with Ian King is the late Charlie Francis, who trained Ben Johnson to the gold medal and a then world record in the 100m. His PB was 10.1, impressive, but it’s not like he was himself a world record holder or anything, he certainly wouldn’t be comparable to taking lifting advice from Ed Coan, and yet he was a legendary track coach.
I’m not belittling your perspective, as it is certainly a prudent one and will generally lead to good success, I am just noting that you could potentially weed out some extremely worthy coaching.
[/quote]
I am at peace with that. I feel that, overall, I will weed out far more bad advice than good with this approach. So far, it has yet to burn me.
That said, that still sounds like a pretty strong accomplishment from that coach. If my goal was to be faster, I would listen to him.