George Locke
Level 2 Valued Member
Hey,
I've been getting more into StrongFirst style training, although I enjoy doing my own programming (badly, I'm sure) too much to stick with any of the programs y'all offer, at least at this time in my life. I've read S&S and ETK, and, most recently, The Naked Warrior. I've enjoyed trying to employ the techniques described in TNW (e.g. spiral tension, irradiation), with good effect afaict.
Strength training is a hobby of mine; another one of my hobbies is "scientific skepticism" Skeptical movement - Wikipedia and cultivating my critical thinking skills. One common critical thinking recommendation/tool is to seek out opposing viewpoints so as to better understand the strengths and weaknesses of one's own beliefs. So I'm wondering if there's any critique of the ideas and methods of StrongFirst that you've seen that struck you as being relatively fair or well informed.
It's difficult to find. To put it sarcastically, anyone who disagrees with me is obviously wrong and they very well could be a poopyface. IOW, given a premise that StrongFirst is doing a lot of things right, anyone who says different would ipso facto be making some error; a maximally "fair and well informed" critique would become an affirmation and not a critique. More concretely, if you look for people with bad things to say about kettlebells broadly, you'll find lots of stuff like, "I don't think kettlebells do a terribly good job at developing any parameter unrelated to kettlebells," that, I'm sorry to say, coming from a coach I like and respect for being generally science-guided. I can provide the link if you want, but the point is that this can hardly even be called a critique (the statement was made without elaboration). It tells me nothing except this one man's opinion, which is not what I'm after.
Is there anyone who has seriously considered StrongFirst programming and offered comment?
I've been getting more into StrongFirst style training, although I enjoy doing my own programming (badly, I'm sure) too much to stick with any of the programs y'all offer, at least at this time in my life. I've read S&S and ETK, and, most recently, The Naked Warrior. I've enjoyed trying to employ the techniques described in TNW (e.g. spiral tension, irradiation), with good effect afaict.
Strength training is a hobby of mine; another one of my hobbies is "scientific skepticism" Skeptical movement - Wikipedia and cultivating my critical thinking skills. One common critical thinking recommendation/tool is to seek out opposing viewpoints so as to better understand the strengths and weaknesses of one's own beliefs. So I'm wondering if there's any critique of the ideas and methods of StrongFirst that you've seen that struck you as being relatively fair or well informed.
It's difficult to find. To put it sarcastically, anyone who disagrees with me is obviously wrong and they very well could be a poopyface. IOW, given a premise that StrongFirst is doing a lot of things right, anyone who says different would ipso facto be making some error; a maximally "fair and well informed" critique would become an affirmation and not a critique. More concretely, if you look for people with bad things to say about kettlebells broadly, you'll find lots of stuff like, "I don't think kettlebells do a terribly good job at developing any parameter unrelated to kettlebells," that, I'm sorry to say, coming from a coach I like and respect for being generally science-guided. I can provide the link if you want, but the point is that this can hardly even be called a critique (the statement was made without elaboration). It tells me nothing except this one man's opinion, which is not what I'm after.
Is there anyone who has seriously considered StrongFirst programming and offered comment?