I find that many times, in matters of training, there are
many things that we consider good and bad.
The good are those things worth pursuing and the bad are those things
that we should avoid. However, these
good and bad things are simply assumed, and more precisely presumed whenever
matters of training are discussed, and it artificially and arbitrarily
influences the way that discussion and advice is vectored. I argue that it is the imperative of all
trainees to question everything and assumed nothing when it comes to becoming
bigger and stronger.
This guy coulda done himself a favor if he bothered to ask his trainer "why?"
One of the most pervasive and destructive assumed evils in
training is that of injuries. For some
reason, it is always a given that injuries are “bad” things, and therefore all
training should be based around remaining injury free. I have even witnessed some trainees argue
that being injury free is the MOST important thing about training. This is insanity. The most important thing about training is
meeting the goal of your training, and if your goal is to be injury free, I
cannot see any reason to even ENGAGE in training. Simply driving to the gym puts you at an
INCREDIBLE risk of getting into a car accident, resulting in massive injury and
possible fatality. Additionally, the
shower is one of the most dangerous places in the home, with an incredibly high
risk of slipping and cracking your skull, but not showering after training
could result in some sort of bacterial infection, so you’re pretty much screwed
there too. I haven’t even begun to
address the potential for risks associated with actually performing any manner
of training, but needless to say, life is a deathtrap. If injuries are to be avoided, so is
training.
WHY are injuries bad?
What makes them worth avoiding?
Because they make us feel bad?
Folks, this is called hedonism: the avoidance of displeasure and pursuit
of only pleasure. There is no room for
the hedonist in training, as those unwilling to endure misery will not
prosper. Or are we claiming that
injuries will ruin our ability to train/compete? How then, do we explain the cases of Matt
Kroczaleski, Dave Tate, Brandon Lilly, Louie Simmons, Dorian Yates, etc etc,
all lifters who excelled to some of the highest echelons of their endeavors
while suffering catastrophic injuries along the way? Are we willing to believe that the
recreational lifter who works a desk job is somehow going to injure themselves
even worse than these individuals while lifting substantially less weight with
lower intensities less frequently? Are
“career ending injuries” actually career ending?
If this dude can come back from this, I assure you that your tendinitis will be fine
Instead, I offer the reality that we do not consider
injuries inherently bad, but simply instead as something that “is”. Injuries are a fact of training as much as
they are a fact of simply existing. If
we vector our training to avoid injury, we vector our training to avoid
training. We should instead train the
way that makes us bigger and stronger, and be at peace with the fact that, yes,
we will most likely get injured. Once
the injury happens, we simply adapt, overcome, and heal, giving us an
opportunity to become stronger in many ways.
By declaring all injuries universally bad and worth avoiding, all we
manage to do is make ourselves weaker overall.
Once we allow ourselves to be willing to be injured in the pursuit of
greatness, we stand a much better chance of achieving our goals.
In contrast, we are also told many things are good, and find
ourselves pursuing them because they are good…but what MAKES them good? Mobility is constantly espoused as a good
quality, one we should always be in the pursuit of, to the point that entire
books, websites, seminars, and CAREERS have been dedicated to the furthering of
mobility…but Jesus, how mobile do you really need to be to lift some
weights? How mobile was Paul
Anderson? Look at him squat; dude’s
hamstrings ran into his calves and he couldn’t get down much further than
that. Good enough for a gold medal and
some of the strongest feats a human could ever accomplish, but the internet
would have you believe he needs to work on his mobility until he can squat
ATG. Look, if you want to be a
contortionist, mobility probably SHOULD be your primary focus, but if all you
wanna do is the big 3 or run with some kegs, you probably don’t need to spend a
whole lot of time getting mobile. You
can get mobile ENOUGH, but why spend time getting more mobile when your goal is
to get big and strong?
When your "ATG" is powerlifting legal, and you're just so goddamn strong it doesn't matter
The supplement industries have been bamboozling us in this
same way for decades as well.
Pre-workouts increase performance in training. Is that a good thing? Really?
Why? Why are we trying for
maximal performance in training versus competition? Why not build up our baseline of strength in
an unaroused state that can be easily replicated and tracked in order to ensure
progress versus constantly training in varied states of arousal via stimulants
that make training difficult to evaluate?
Is doing 3 more reps as a result of being overstimulated necessarily
better than 3 fewer reps when you’re at rock bottom? And this is one of the more easily understood
“goods” out there. What about the more
obscure stuff that supplement companies promise you under the assumption that
those things are good? Increased
pumps? Do I want that? Scientifically formulated to increase base
levels of testosterone by over 40 points?
Is that good? The most high tech arginine
delivery mechanism legally available?
What the f**k does that even mean?!
The only “good” here is that which helps you accomplish your
goals. Escape morality here; you’re
allowed moral relativism when it comes to your training. The goal posts ARE allowed to move, good and
bad ARE malleable and influenced by external factors, and YOU are the decider
of it all. Don’t let alone dictate what
is good and bad for you; question everything that is told to you and force THEM
to justify it.
What's the worst that could happen?
And be prepared to piss a lot of people off in the
process. That’s a lesson Socrates
learned.
Great Article. Look forward to your thoughts every week
ReplyDeleteBtw, what is the lightest strongman weight class ? 180/185?
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comments dude. For your question; it depends on the fed. NAS has 175 class for men, and USS has as low as 148, but it depends on who shows up really. You thinking about a show?
DeleteI just asked out of curiosity. My main goal atm is getting to the level of leanness required for a 4 pack and then work from there. Coming down from 230(currently 205) and it looks like I'll need to be around 155-165 to get there. Really frustrated I let myself get this fat lol
ReplyDeleteIt happens to the best of us dude, haha. It's just ab opportunity for you to build back bigger and stronger.
DeleteYes you're right. I'm actually considering just getting stupid shredded by early 2018, /'f build from there. Id be skinny but my conditioning and athleticism would be improved helping progress in other area.
ReplyDeleteWhat's your opinion on a large scale body recompostion? I know you don't like traditional bulking and cutting cycles and short term solutions . Thank you for your responses by the way , they're quite helpful.
ReplyDeletePretty much my current philosophy is this.
DeleteWeight gain/weight loss is more a product of recovery directed by training.
During periods of high volume training and conditioning, you require high amounts of food to facilitate recovery from training. This results in weight gain. You gradually increase volume and conditioning work, and with that comes a gradually increase in food to recover, and with that comes a gradual increase in bodyweight.
Eventually, you will have increased the volume of training to the point that you simply cannot eat enough to recover. This necessitates a gradual reduction in volume with an increase in training intensity (a peak essentially), which in turn means less food is required for recovery, which in turn results in weight loss.
I think it's ultimately a game of gradual changes. The mistake people make is getting into "bulk/cut mindset", where they just go 100% one way or the other, and end up getting very fat or very weak. I think letting training guide the physiological changes goes a long way.
Hope that helps!