Monday 19 October 2015

Axle Pressing Oct 19

6 @ 50lbs
6 @ 70lbs
6 @ 90lbs
6 @ 120
3 @ 150
3 @ 170
2 @ 190
13 @ 120
10 @ 120

I really wanted to bust 200 today at least for a single but this was only my second workout that I've done with the axle bar and the second strict rep with 190 was super grindy so I figured it was better to leave something in the tank. I still haven't decided whether I like this movement enough to make it a primary and work it off percentages or leave it as an accessory once I start the next training block in earnest.

Thursday 15 October 2015

The Scientist and the Lawyer

“A thinker sees his own actions as experiments and questions--as attempts to find out something. Success and failure are for him answers above all.”

Friedrich Nietzche



This sentiment has been echoed many times by many brilliant men, but I’m not sure I’ve read it better articulated than this and it speaks to something I feel like the fitness industry could use a lot more of – good science. If you think about it, being involved in fitness is one of the greatest responsibilities you could possibly bring on yourself. Regular exercise is one of the pillars that form your vitality – how you feel, how you move, and how long you’re going to stick around on this Earth. Even if that isn’t why someone starts training with you, is it really that much less important to help them to love how they look, to perform and stay injury-free while playing a sport that makes them happy, or experience the profound joy of achieving a goal? If someone has chosen this responsibility, I believe that they have also chosen the burden of continuous self-improvement.

Now, what does this have to do with lawyers and scientists?

For starters, it’s worth mentioning that I don’t have anything against lawyers. Their job is both noble and necessary in the context of the job itself, but I’ll get to that later. First, we’ll talk about scientists – specifically, how a scientist responds having been posed a question. Let’s say that question is something like: “What is the best program for improving strength?”

Step 1: Gather general data from previous experiments which are relevant to the question.

This one is pretty simple – read, watch, or talk to people that have asked the same question and performed experiments already. Use a variety of sources and look for similarities and differences. If there are large differences, try to understand why by looking closer at their experimentation. Findings from larger pools of data with more controlled conditions are generally more reliable, but a scientist understands that even the most conclusive findings can only be called “the most likely to be true”, not necessarily “the truth”. If there are different, but positive findings, look at the consistencies between them. These will form the foundation of what can be called a positive finding in your own experiment. In our case, it may be as simple as “Did most of the tested athletes become stronger in a safe, measurable way?”.

Step 2: Form a hypothesis.

Based on the best available data from previous experiments, what conditions do you believe will yield the most positive results? Essentially, this is an educated guess – emphasis on the education.

Step 3: Conduct an experiment to test your hypothesis.

This is where those under your instruction try the program, you do it yourself, or both. It’s also the part where new data is created that will benefit you and those that come after you on the same path.

Step 4: Analyze the results of the experiment to draw a conclusion.

Weigh the data against the hypothesis, and see how it matches up. If your findings are positive, fine tune as needed and continue the experiment. If not, go back to the research stage and start again with a new hypothesis. To a scientist, nothing is sacred but the truth.


Now, let’s take a look at the lawyer’s approach:

Step 1: Conclusion

As you can see, already a huge difference. The lawyer starts with a conclusion which is their client’s position. They don’t start with a question of what is right, true or correct, because that isn’t their job. Their job is to represent their client to the best of their ability and trust in the judge and jury to decide who is right. Lawyers in the movies that take it on themselves to gather evidence or dramatically roll over on their crooked clients in open court would in reality end up in a lot of trouble. That’s all well and good for the legal system, but if you’re having trouble seeing what this has to do with the fitness industry, think of it this way:

Lawyer = A coach, trainer or marketer

Client = Equipment, exercise technique, program etc. that the person has created themselves or otherwise aligned themselves with

Judge and Jury = The clients, athletes, peers, friends or anyone else who would be exposed to the information and possibly listen to it or pay for it

Now, let’s say hypothetically that a trainer with no kettlebell training or experience whatsoever decides they’re going to cash in on their growing popularity and make a kettlebell DVD or start offering classes. It’s far too easy to justify this kind of behaviour by blaming the people that signed up for the class or bought the DVD, because it’s up to them decide what’s right using their money. The fitness industry isn’t a courtroom, and if you call yourself a trainer then it IS your job to do what’s right, and strive to offer the best possible product even if it isn’t necessary in order to net clients. It isn’t their job to know the difference between one convincing trainer and another, that’s part of the reason they’re looking for one in the first place. The fact that someone has taken a step to seek out help from a trainer to achieve their goals is a precious, important thing in a time when anyone can flip through youtube videos for an hour and think they have it all figured out. Some trainers will reward them for taking that step, others will make them regret it.

Step 2: Gather Specific Data that Benefits the Conclusion

Working backwards from a conclusion, the next step is to gather data that at least appears credible to support the conclusion. If you happen to be the lawyer on the right side, that data will be much easier to find, but even if you aren’t, the unfortunate truth is that credible-looking data can be found to support just about anything. If you were looking for all general data that was relevant to the question, you still may have found that study or article but also overwhelming evidence against it. That would have forced you to further scrutinize it, and perhaps you would have found that the experiment was flawed, or inconclusive, or that the findings were changed to suit an agenda. There is nothing easier, however, than not finding these things when you’re choosing not to look for them. If it looks official enough and you sell it well, then it can do the job.

This is made even easier by rampant confirmation bias – something to which no human being is entirely immune. If someone knows someone that threw out their back doing squats, they’re more likely to nod and listen when someone starts shouting on the internet against overwhelming evidence that squats are a dangerous exercise that should be banned in all gyms. Take a closer look at the horrific form that led to that injury? Who has that kind of time?

Step 3: Create a Compelling Argument

Fitness would hardly be the first industry in which one side had conclusive, legitimate evidence but was overshadowed by an opponent that was more charismatic, engaging and marketable. Sometimes the evidence alone isn’t enough, and this is something the scientist types can learn from the lawyer types. It isn’t just about debates, it’s about teaching. One thing that all the world’s best teachers have in common is that they can articulate a very complicated topic in such a way that someone with much less education can understand it. It can be a long and difficult process to not only seek out the best information but then learn to articulate it well, but it’s necessary to take care of your clients.


***


Perhaps the biggest problem I have with this sequence of events is that once someone aligns themselves with a certain belief system in fitness, the analysis and experimentation is often lost and protecting the product becomes more sacred than the truth. A great example would be the argument of “hardstyle” kettlebell training versus GS. They are two entirely different training systems that happen to share a common piece of equipment and are often looking to achieve completely different goals. This is not a ‘right or wrong’ argument, and the fact that someone would be arguing that one is right and the other is wrong already tells me that they have not gone out of their way to gather general data and learn about the other side. It’s easier to deliberately choose ignorance on behalf of both themselves and their clients and protect the product you’ve aligned yourself with. The fitness industry needs more trainers with the scientist’s mentality. Educate yourself, gather data from a variety of credible sources, and hold the truth sacred. Challenge yourself to be open to change, if that’s what the evidence tells you. Your clients aren’t likely to up and leave you because you were making a mistake teaching them the kettlebell clean and want to correct it. They want - and deserve - a trainer that puts his clients’ safety first and genuinely wants them to achieve their goals, and sometimes change is part of that.

Thursday 30 July 2015

The Contrast Method Part 1: Introduction to the Contrast Method

The contrast method, put simply is that the load of a given exercise changes at certain points or throughout the range of motion, as opposed to static or consistent resistance which would remain the same. The reasoning for why you would use the contrast method is fairly straight-forward, but when and how to apply it can be much more complicated. In this series of articles, I will explain the what, why, when and how of the contrast method and hopefully shine some light on how it can be used effectively to smash through plateaus!

First off, I should explain what "accomodation" means in the context of the contrast method. For every exercise, a strength curve exists. This refers to the difficulty by which a given load can be lifted through different parts of the ROM. At the beginning of an exercise, when the mechanical advantage of the joints is at its lowest and the muscles are stretched out and at their weakest, a given load would be much more difficult to move than near the end, Looking around a gym, it doesn't take long to notice the "quarter squatters" and "quarter benchers" loading on up to 150% of the weight they can actually take through a full range of motion, then only moving it a few inches. Obviously, this is not an effective way to build a strong, balanced body. However, static resistance taken through a full range of motion isn't necessarily perfect either, since the development of the entire movement is limited by how much can be handled in its weakest range. This poses the following potential issues:

1) The muscles responsible for finishing the lift can lag in development, since the weight that can be handled at the bottom isn't nearly so difficult once it passes the point where the mechanical advantage ticks over to positive contribution. This is why many raw powerlifters can actually find themselves weaker in the lockout of a bench press than in the initial drive off the chest, and must use board presses or rack lockouts to bring up their triceps.

2) Rate of Force Development, or RFD can suffer. RFD is extremely important not only in the success of maximal lifts but also in athletic carryover. To maximize neurological output in a lift, the lifter should be driving as explosively as possible against the resistance. Using static resistance, it's possible for a certain load to force the athlete to drive hard to get it moving, but then slow down once it has momentum and approaches lockout. This is inefficient, and will make strength progression slower and more difficult.

As with anything else in the strength world, there are many different ways to deal with these issues and not every athlete responds as well to the contrast method as others, but it gives intermediate to advanced athletes a tool which they can use to accomodate for this strength curve, by adding more resistance throughout the ROM. Two major tools can be used, bands and chains. The chains can be mounted either directly to the implement if the kinetic chain is short like in a floor press, or extended to start further away if it's longer like in a squat. There are commercially available chain extenders, but I like to use dog leashes. They're MUCH cheaper and do just as good a job. Bands must be anchored to the implement using band pegs, heavy dumbbells or whatever else you have available.

Using the example of a kettlebell press, it isn't uncommon for someone whose max press is 24KG to be able to push press 32KG, so their triceps are able to lock that weight out and the muscles of their shoulders and upper back are able to support it at the top. Push pressing heavier weight won't necessarily carry back over to the strict press, since the leg drive is too much of an unknown factor. However, adding an 8KG chain that is mostly coiled on the floor to start and is fully raised by lockout will allow the lifter to perform a strict press which maxes out both the weight they're able to drive out of the rack and the weight they're able to lock out, so all of the muscles involved in the lift from beginning to end are working to their potential. Also, the RFD will be improved since the lifter will be forced to drive explosively through the entire range of motion. If they slow down, they may fail to 'out-run' the resistance as it is added on. This will result in higher neurological efficiency and stronger lifts.

Hopefully this first part has helped you to understand the basic overall idea of the contrast method and why it can be an excellent tool for intermediate to advanced athletes. If you would like to know why I wouldn't typically recommend this method for beginners, how bands are VERY different than chains, and some ideas on how to program the contrast method, stay tuned for Part 2!

Saturday 25 July 2015

Supplement Spotlight: Agatsu Recover-Me

So a few weeks ago I received my Recover-Me in the mail. I wanted to wait to post anything about it until I'd been through a few different kinds of training with and without it to see if I noticed a difference and if so, how much.

I was fairly confident just based on the source. I've actually always been a fan of supplements since I tried Gaspari Superpump 250 for the first time - I think I was maybe 16. I've tried a lot of crap over the years and picked up a few products along the way that have been really helpful and trustworthy but supplements have consistently been a part of my routine. The thing is, Shawn is not that guy. When he says that he had to create supplements in order to feel like it was worth taking them, it isn't just marketing hype, it's reality. The same obsessive pursuit of greatness that lead to the success of Agatsu's educational courses and equipment is definitely evident in this supplement.

Essentially, Recover-Me is designed to, well, help with recovery. I think the biggest difference I've noticed is not the amount of soreness but in the manageability of what soreness I do experience. If you're truly pushing yourself then nothing is magically going to eradicate all the discomfort that goes with that, but there's pain that you just have to wait out and then there's pain that with stretching, mobility and foam rolling can actually be dealt with. I find that since starting to take Recover-Me, I'm not only less sore in general but pretty much all of the soreness I do experience has been the latter, that through work I can deal with.

Since I've significantly ramped up my training as I prepare for the CBJJD worlds in Brazil, this has proven invaluable alongside diet, recovery work and hydration to help me get ready for the next training session. Get yours at:

http://www.agatsu.com/store/products/recover-me/

Monday 13 July 2015

Slowly but Surely... Box Squats and Banded Leg Press July 6

Squats have been rough the last couple of months, and surprisingly not due to knee issues. Despite training camp and everything else my whole lower body has actually held together wonderfully. The trouble has been getting into position properly, as tightly under the bar as I should be for heavier lifts. I haven't had the same kind of shoulder mobility i'm used to. Last night though, I felt it again - that feeling of the bar being completely connected and nice and light out of the rack even with heavy weight.

Triples up to 315 w/o belt

Belt

335 x 3

Wraps

355 x 3, 365 x 5

365 x 5 wasn't in the plan but the plan is fluid right now. Honestly with how up and down everything has been injury-wise it would just be depressing trying to operate within the parameters of a program with set percentages. That'll have to wait till after Brazil, now when I lift it's about doing the best I can do that day. After the third rep at 365 I made a decision that heavier than this wasn't in the cards tonight, but I could squeeze out a couple more with this weight now that I had momentum. Felt really good as I'm fairly sure my best ever healthy set of 5 was around 375.

Leg Press - sets of 6 w/2 second pause at the bottom and 150lbs of band tension

90, 180, 270, 360, 450, 540

This felt good too. It had been a while since I'd done leg press in general but there's something about it with a pause and band tension that blows up my quads in a way nothing else does. I'm very glute and hamstring dominant when I box squat so it's a nice balance.



Friday 10 July 2015

Why Get Certified?

Let me tell you a story about my first tattoo. It was around 2004 when I stepped into Bear's Skin Art on walk-in Saturday to have two kanji characters tattooed - "Good" and "Evil" on my upper back. I have two resounding memories from that day. One of them is Bear's stance on gun ownership - "An armed society is a polite society", he said - and the other was his reaction when I told him I wanted kanji done. As soon as I showed him the picture of the characters, he asked if I'd had it read by anyone other than the person that wrote it, and immediately added that if not, I should go and not bother coming back until I had. I'm a bit more liberal when it comes to gun control, but thankfully we saw eye to eye on the tattoos in foreign languages thing. I think as a society in general we all kind of cringe at the idea of the guy walking around with a tattoo that he thinks means "Heavenly Gates of Extreme Fighting Spirit" but actually translates to "Furnace. Women find me unsettling. Mayonnaise."

Why then would someone pay $80 an hour to train with someone who lists their credentials on their website as "Fitness Expert with 10 Years of Experience"?

"Fitness Expert", "Fitness Guru", "_______ years of training/experience/exposure" are all widely spread terms used to convey a sense that a person knows what they're doing, yet none of these terms in and of themselves mean anything at all. 10 years of experience could mean the person started walking on a treadmill ten years ago and decided they were good enough at it to tell their friends they were all doing it wrong, or it could mean they were heading up the strength and conditioning for the Miami Heat, or it could mean anything in between. If you're training with them then you're essentially gambling $80/h that it's at least closer to the latter than the former. Fortunately for me, I'm involved in martial arts as well so I get a double dose of this. I'm not sure there are enough legs on insects in the world to count the number of times someone has bravely strode onto a message board to say some variation of "belts don't matter bro, I'm not a black belt and I've tapped out lots of black belts". First of all, no he probably hasn't. Second of all, you know who you've never heard say belts don't matter in BJJ? Yeah, a black belt. The whole notion of belts (or certifications) not mattering at all is an entirely self-serving concept and it's often used by people who don't have accreditation simply to justify continuing to charge for their services without having to put time, energy or money into getting any.

Now, I know what some of you may be thinking and yes, you are absolutely correct. It is 100% possible for someone without a kettlebell certification to know what they're doing, just like it's possible that Tekken 5's unverified tattoo actually means what he thinks it does. It's also 100% possible that someone WITH a kettlebell certification could be a hack. Certifications aren't absolute like that. However, and here is what you should really take away from this whole article so I'm going to make it bigger and bold to ensure just that:

"Accreditation means that at one point in time, someone reputable other than the person themselves acknowledged that they had achieved a certain baseline of skill and understanding in a given field."

That's what it really boils down to. Accreditation is meant to establish a baseline. If you ask someone if they know what they're doing and they say yes but only they can verify it, then you can choose to believe them or choose not to but ultimately you just don't know. If at least, at some point, someone with a proven track record signed off on the fact that they know what they're doing, then you know that it's a safe bet they still do. Does that really seem like the craziest idea anyone ever had? Why would you fight against that?

Now what if I told you that as an added bonus to having your (possible) awesomeness verified officially, you could learn new things, open up new possibilities for your own training and form lifelong friendships? Wouldn't that be worth at least checking out the link below? I know I thought so when the website looked very different about ten years ago, and I have never, ever stopped being happy and thankful that I did.



Sunday 21 June 2015

GS Circuit Wednesday, June 17

I was playing around more with the mini-pentathlon concept and decided I'd try doing 5 of each exercise per arm, in order, with each kettlebell size from 8KG to 28KG, without rest. I did kind of a 'rapid fire' transition from kettlebell to kettlebell - I lined all the kettlebells up in front of me and once I finished the last push press with my left arm, I'd do a downswing, put it to the side and at the same time get my hand on the next kettlebell to do the first clean.

The biggest challenge actually ended up being chalk. The whole process from beginning to finish was 22 minutes of straight work and because I wasn't taking breaks I couldn't re-chalk. My hands were pretty much completely un-chalked and sweaty by midway through my work with the 20kg bell, so I ended up having to grip the 24 and 28 really hard on the downswings so I wouldn't drop them. The snatches were particularly interesting. Overall the workout averaged out to about 5400KG of varied work in about 22 minutes, or roughly 245kg per minute. I wasn't trying for a particular pace since I had no idea what to expect. Next time I try it I think I'll allow a 10-20 second break between sizes just to re-chalk if needed.