Posted on 31 Aug 2009 17:15
by EricT 28 Jan 2013 18:01
By Eric Troy
I've read a couple of journal papers here and there. And I've also published a fair amount of them here on Ground Up Strength, if permission was given to do so. One thing that you may have noticed about journal articles these days is that they are full of tables and supplemental attachments. Some of them useful and essential and some of them ridiculous fluff. You may even have noticed that I routinely leave out many of the tables in these journals. That is because they look particularly useless, adding nothing to the content or readability of the paper and serving only to create noise and distract the reader, taking up his or her precious time.
by EricT 01 Apr 2012 22:37
Or not. One of the most prevailing habits in this industry is to take isolated pieces of information and run with them, making sweeping conclusions with little to no consideration of other factors. Information is nothing in and of itself. It's what you do with it, or, how you apply it in regards to the BIG PICTURE. Probably one of the biggest drawbacks of the information age is unlimited information with limited background. Limited background makes facts interchangeable with knowledge. I discussed this often misunderstood difference between knowledge and facts in my post: Facts, Knowledge, and Reasoning Skills
by EricT 21 Feb 2012 18:54
Popular strength coaches as well as bodybuilding coaches who talk about strength training are always inventing little aphorisms and catch phrases designed to get across some central philosophy or concept inherent to their way of viewing training for strength. Problem is with catch slogans and aphorisms, is that they are designed to sell a concept rather than to teach a concept. An aphorism is only as good as the qualifications you give it when you explain its underlying rationale. With most of these statements, it is the style that sells them, more than the content. One of our members called this type of thing a fallacy by slogan and this is an apt way to put it. A good aphorism is catchy like an infectious rash: Everybody spreads it around and it does more harm than good.
by EricT 21 May 2011 21:32
There is a myth out there in webernet land: You must be balanced and consider all opinions and arguments. You must weigh them all equally. If you don't you are not thinking "critically".
I deal with this all the time. "Is this program any good?," I am asked. "No," I say, "It's crap."
"Why?" They say. "Why don't you ask me why can't dogs fly?" I reply.
by EricT 24 Mar 2011 02:53
Once again, I just came up against one of the most useful words in the English language. Useful because it can be instantly tweaked and expanded to fit the needs of the person using it. Natural is one of those words that is not defined by what it is, but simply by what the person using it thinks it isn't! And I hate it, I tell ya. I cringe even when I let the word slip out. It happened to me not long ago when I realized that I had used the word "natural" in this article about Paradoxical and Diaphragmatic Breathing. It is so easy to fall back on these muddy words and I beat myself up when I do it. And so should you, my fair readers.
by EricT 21 Mar 2011 22:55
So, yes, my titles are weird and not creative. But those two things, strength training concepts and cranks, I will relate to each other. You just wait and see if I don't. I got to thinking about this when a new member came on the forum to introduce himself. He was saying that the concept of the "relative max" from the Singles Scene seemed oddly familiar and reminded him of concepts from Bulgarian weightlifting training. I don't know much about Bulgarian training but I thought, well good. After all I didn't invent it and I can't have been the only person to understand its importance. That would not be good, you see. That would be bad. Because if I'm the ONLY person to actually think a certain concept is really important, it probably isn;t. Because I ain't that smart. I'm average at best but I strive to do above average work.
by EricT 24 Sep 2010 15:45
I recently read a review in Leigh Peele's Blog of Nick Tuminnello's newest product. She mentioned that many people may be a bit tired of the conversation concerning corrective exercise. And for those who engage in strength training as a side line I can see it growing very tiring. I personally do not get tired of discussing things that are worthwhile to discuss. What I do get tired of is when conversation about something like training for strength becomes bottle-necked.
One of my members linked to an article about some self proclaimed "glute master". There seems to be a lot of variations on this theme but "ass master" was already taken. The article turned out to be a lot of very complicated thought that lead the writer to think that strength training was simply taking a bunch of "corrective" exercises (mostly supine or prone) and adding weight to them.
by EricT 31 Aug 2009 14:58
One of those C.H.E.K. videos was just called to my attention and to say the least, I am outraged by it. The subject of the video is "abdominal floor function" (of course..what else does he ever talk about?) and what Chek chooses to do in this 'seminar' is in bad enough taste without turning around and posting it to YouTube.
This page created 31 Aug 2009 17:15
Last updated 26 Oct 2015 01:59