Old Forum Charles Staley article
- Thread starter Rickard
- Start date
- Status
dobie
Level 5 Valued Member
He also just wrote an article about jogging and that it is basically useless, unless it's jogging vs. doing nothing. I think his opinion is wrong in this article. As much as I favor Higher intensity and resistance training with weights, kettlebells, body, etc, I think most need balance which would include aerobic type work-running at the magic 65-70% range as an example. Military operators would fall into this category of needing a balanced approach with all methods for improvement being used. I think for him to suggest jogging as always inferior to weights and high intensity is both misleading and not responsible.
The Scientist
Level 3 Valued Member
Reading the jogging article, I don't think it is really as extreme as it appears. He is simply saying that any benefit you may get from jogging can be obtained in a more efficient way from other activities, without many of the downsides. It is hard to argue that military personal are better off with long, grueling "runs" than with something like swings or weighted vest walking. These give all the same benefits of cardiovascular training that jogging does, while also increasing strength and avoiding joint impact problems.
Also, I think he is talking about jogging as training - trying to improve your time or distance in a setting that pushes the limits of your ability. I agree completely that this is a terrible idea with few benefits and lots of downsides. He is not talking about jogging lightly for an easy day if you enjoy it.
Also, Brian said " I think for him to suggest jogging as always inferior to weights and high intensity is both misleading and not responsible."
Mr. Staley laid out his argument to support this statement, and I agree with him for the most part. What part of this is irresponsible? What specific claims that he made do you think are untrue?
Also, I think he is talking about jogging as training - trying to improve your time or distance in a setting that pushes the limits of your ability. I agree completely that this is a terrible idea with few benefits and lots of downsides. He is not talking about jogging lightly for an easy day if you enjoy it.
Also, Brian said " I think for him to suggest jogging as always inferior to weights and high intensity is both misleading and not responsible."
Mr. Staley laid out his argument to support this statement, and I agree with him for the most part. What part of this is irresponsible? What specific claims that he made do you think are untrue?
The Scientist
Level 3 Valued Member
Nick,
Did you read the article? He is recommending sprinting over jogging, and he is a very capable athlete, especially for his age.
Did you read the article? He is recommending sprinting over jogging, and he is a very capable athlete, especially for his age.
dobie
Level 5 Valued Member
first off jogging is running depending on the pace-6.5mph is jogging and running-one in the same. Military op's community needs to run for the job-seals-special forces-etc. they need to be experienced in running, if not they have a high likelihood of stress fractures. Also, how about untrained folk's with low level's of fitness?
jgruginski
Level 3 Valued Member
I highly respect Charles. However, there are many subtleties of the Tabata research that weren't fully stated or stated at all e.g. Tabata CV benefits severely tapered off after 3 weeks. Glycolytic adaptations are quickly gained and easily lost. Pavel's roadwork article pretty much lays that out. I think the current Tabata infatuation has gone too far, but I can't hate too much as I am only recently converted...
23rdwave
Level 5 Valued Member
The Scientist,
Sprinting is not the same as fast running. Navy Seals need to be able to run 6 miles at a sub 7:30 pace 5 days a week. Marty Gallagher, former Masters Powerlifting World Champion and coach of the USA team powerlifting world champions, advocates running or walking long distances for strength athletes. Marty can run. Charles Staley can't. The "runners are sissies" argument is sexist and homophobic crap from a guy who will probably drop dead from a heart attack one day. Runners will outlive the weightlifters. And if you are going to try the runners are weak argument, think Bruce Lee or Muhammad Ali. The world's fittest athlete is Joe Decker, former US Army Mountain Division, two time Vermont Death Race winner and finisher of the Ultra Grand Slam and Badwater 135.
Sprinting is not the same as fast running. Navy Seals need to be able to run 6 miles at a sub 7:30 pace 5 days a week. Marty Gallagher, former Masters Powerlifting World Champion and coach of the USA team powerlifting world champions, advocates running or walking long distances for strength athletes. Marty can run. Charles Staley can't. The "runners are sissies" argument is sexist and homophobic crap from a guy who will probably drop dead from a heart attack one day. Runners will outlive the weightlifters. And if you are going to try the runners are weak argument, think Bruce Lee or Muhammad Ali. The world's fittest athlete is Joe Decker, former US Army Mountain Division, two time Vermont Death Race winner and finisher of the Ultra Grand Slam and Badwater 135.
Fajita_McJones
Level 2 Valued Member
Navy Seals have to run at that pace more so because they are told to run like that than because they need it for their job. Sprints, loaded carries, more sprints, loaded carries up several flights of stairs and more sprints and loaded carries are way more practical and have greater carryover to other aspects of the job for people in the military than running at a brisk pace in a t shirt and shorts. Not saying it doesn't have a purpose ("because it sucks and will make you want to quit" comes to mind), but other than a few examples like in the Battle of Mogadishu, long distance running isn't all that commonplace and the carryover from better forms of training will prepare for it well enough that it shouldn't be the foundation of PT.
The Scientist
Level 3 Valued Member
"Sprinting is not the same as fast running. Navy Seals need to be able to run 6 miles at a sub 7:30 pace 5 days a week."
Running at a 7:30 pace is not fast. It is just a decent time if you are going for six consecutive miles. Also, just because SEALs are required to do it for their training does not mean that it is essential for their success in battle. I am admittedly have no military experience, but I would be shocked if any special ops agent ever runs for six miles straight during a battle. Just because it has always been done that way does not make it the best form of training.
"Marty can run. Charles Staley can’t."
Do you know both of these men personally? Have you ever tested their running performance? What distance was used, and under what conditions?
"The “runners are sissies” argument is sexist and homophobic crap from a guy who will probably drop dead from a heart attack one day"
Here you sound like you have a bit of a chip and are angry about something that was never mentioned in the article. Very strange.
"Runners will outlive the weightlifters."
You have no evidence to support this claim. In fact, recent evidence has supported the hypothesis that moderate running (only a few miles, several times a week) produces greater gains in life expectancy than very long-distance running.
"And if you are going to try the runners are weak argument, think Bruce Lee or Muhammad Ali."
These men may have used running in their training, but they were not competitive runners and they never would have even placed in a competitive distance race. Also, they would both lose to much stronger fighters of today. Bruce Lee may have been amazingly strong for his weight, and a great fighter against people his size, but put him up against a powerful man like Tyson.
"The world’s fittest athlete is Joe Decker, former US Army Mountain Division, two time Vermont Death Race winner and finisher of the Ultra Grand Slam and Badwater 135."
I'll steal one from Dan John here: "Fit for what task"? So he can move is own body around for a very large number of repetitions. He is obviously very "fit" to do that. This is not something that any human being ever has to do, unless they are doing it for a race. Lifting heavy things is something that people do every day. If I knew that I would be given a random practical task (not just moving myself through space) and could choose one person to help me, the marathoner loses every time. I would take the most powerful, non-obese human I could find. A 105kg weight class olympic lifter would fit the bill perfectly. Life is not an aerobic activity, and running for long distance has no practical application for 99% of humanity.
Running at a 7:30 pace is not fast. It is just a decent time if you are going for six consecutive miles. Also, just because SEALs are required to do it for their training does not mean that it is essential for their success in battle. I am admittedly have no military experience, but I would be shocked if any special ops agent ever runs for six miles straight during a battle. Just because it has always been done that way does not make it the best form of training.
"Marty can run. Charles Staley can’t."
Do you know both of these men personally? Have you ever tested their running performance? What distance was used, and under what conditions?
"The “runners are sissies” argument is sexist and homophobic crap from a guy who will probably drop dead from a heart attack one day"
Here you sound like you have a bit of a chip and are angry about something that was never mentioned in the article. Very strange.
"Runners will outlive the weightlifters."
You have no evidence to support this claim. In fact, recent evidence has supported the hypothesis that moderate running (only a few miles, several times a week) produces greater gains in life expectancy than very long-distance running.
"And if you are going to try the runners are weak argument, think Bruce Lee or Muhammad Ali."
These men may have used running in their training, but they were not competitive runners and they never would have even placed in a competitive distance race. Also, they would both lose to much stronger fighters of today. Bruce Lee may have been amazingly strong for his weight, and a great fighter against people his size, but put him up against a powerful man like Tyson.
"The world’s fittest athlete is Joe Decker, former US Army Mountain Division, two time Vermont Death Race winner and finisher of the Ultra Grand Slam and Badwater 135."
I'll steal one from Dan John here: "Fit for what task"? So he can move is own body around for a very large number of repetitions. He is obviously very "fit" to do that. This is not something that any human being ever has to do, unless they are doing it for a race. Lifting heavy things is something that people do every day. If I knew that I would be given a random practical task (not just moving myself through space) and could choose one person to help me, the marathoner loses every time. I would take the most powerful, non-obese human I could find. A 105kg weight class olympic lifter would fit the bill perfectly. Life is not an aerobic activity, and running for long distance has no practical application for 99% of humanity.
23rdwave
Level 5 Valued Member
Marty Gallagher' Purposeful Primitive
http://www.dragondoor.com/b37/
Joe Decker
http://gutcheckfitness.com
I am a track and field coach and the best athletes on the team are not the throwers (or the distance runners, obviously) but the multi-event participants. If Rafer Johnson was only a strength athlete he would have had no chance against C.K Yang, who won 7 of the 10 events in the 1960 Olympics decathlon. It came down to the final event, the 1500m.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ONuflK8vy-0
Many power lifters can't climb a few flights of stairs without their hearts racing. How is that being fit? In our modern world the machines can do the heavy lifting. Ever hear of a forklift? Panel is always pointing to the fighter and soldier as the ideal, the warriors. What have I missed?
http://www.dragondoor.com/b37/
Joe Decker
http://gutcheckfitness.com
I am a track and field coach and the best athletes on the team are not the throwers (or the distance runners, obviously) but the multi-event participants. If Rafer Johnson was only a strength athlete he would have had no chance against C.K Yang, who won 7 of the 10 events in the 1960 Olympics decathlon. It came down to the final event, the 1500m.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ONuflK8vy-0
Many power lifters can't climb a few flights of stairs without their hearts racing. How is that being fit? In our modern world the machines can do the heavy lifting. Ever hear of a forklift? Panel is always pointing to the fighter and soldier as the ideal, the warriors. What have I missed?
The Scientist
Level 3 Valued Member
The problem is that your evaluation of the "best athlete" is entirely your own construction of what "best" means. For what sport? I am not an athlete, so I am concerned with practical abilities. I grew up on a farm, and still work with my Grandfather on that farm occasionally. I have recently spend a few 8-hour days of loading hay and splitting wood. This is work that a forklift just can't do. A marathon runner would smoke me in a run, but most of them could never keep up the endurance task of lifting logs all day, because they are likely too weak to lift them in the first place, let alone hundreds of times. A quick look at the winners of every major marathon in recent history will confirm this: on average, the better you are at running very long distances, the more weak an emaciated you are. The men that run near 2 hour marathons are almost all at a BMI of 17-18, or 140lbs at 6 feet tall. This is not a fit man. This is someone who is only good at moving their body.
As for Pavel setting up the fighter as an ideal: I agree. The thing we disagree about is if running miles at a time is something that will make a fighter better. I would always rather have the strong, explosively fast man on my side. Again, middleweight olympic lifters. Not hulking 300 lb powerlifters, and not tiny runners.
Also, why is it then that Pavel seems to always base his fighter/soldier programs around deadliest, presses, swings, snatches, etc... If running is invalid it seems to be as a way to pass a military fitness test, or as a moderate addition for some conditioning. These are things that I am fine with. It is training for a 5 mile run where the bulk of your training energy is going into improving that performance. That is what I am saying is counterproductive. Jogging can be fine in moderation, but not as your primary program.
As for Pavel setting up the fighter as an ideal: I agree. The thing we disagree about is if running miles at a time is something that will make a fighter better. I would always rather have the strong, explosively fast man on my side. Again, middleweight olympic lifters. Not hulking 300 lb powerlifters, and not tiny runners.
Also, why is it then that Pavel seems to always base his fighter/soldier programs around deadliest, presses, swings, snatches, etc... If running is invalid it seems to be as a way to pass a military fitness test, or as a moderate addition for some conditioning. These are things that I am fine with. It is training for a 5 mile run where the bulk of your training energy is going into improving that performance. That is what I am saying is counterproductive. Jogging can be fine in moderation, but not as your primary program.
23rdwave
Level 5 Valued Member
The marathoners were born that way not made. Just as the Klitschko brothers were born not made. Valery Federenko runs marathon distances and he is not thin. Paul McElroy lifts and bends nails like a man 1.5x his size but does not get bigger as he gets stronger. Every photo on T-Nation is of men with veins a-poppin' and people like Staley promote the idea that bigger is better. Stronger is better but not bigger. The more weight one carries the harder the heart has to work.
I already mentioned Joe Decker and Marty Gallagher and provided a link for each. They are proof that the "running makes you thin and weak" theory is invalid.
The middleweight olympic lifters became weightlifters because they were not good enough for there sport of choice. If you are looking for the best athletes they are running. How many times does LeBron James run up and down the court every other night? Whether it's the New Zealand All Blacks or Barcelona if one can't run they are not on the pitch.
As for the military, when my great great uncle was in WWI he marched from Split, Croatia to Russia and then back again after spending 6 months in a POW camp. And when people have escaped oppressive regimes they needed to go far and move fast. A car, train, plane or boat is not always an option. If I ever have to grab my rucksack and "light out for the territories" I am prepared to do it on my own two feet if it comes to that.
I already mentioned Joe Decker and Marty Gallagher and provided a link for each. They are proof that the "running makes you thin and weak" theory is invalid.
The middleweight olympic lifters became weightlifters because they were not good enough for there sport of choice. If you are looking for the best athletes they are running. How many times does LeBron James run up and down the court every other night? Whether it's the New Zealand All Blacks or Barcelona if one can't run they are not on the pitch.
As for the military, when my great great uncle was in WWI he marched from Split, Croatia to Russia and then back again after spending 6 months in a POW camp. And when people have escaped oppressive regimes they needed to go far and move fast. A car, train, plane or boat is not always an option. If I ever have to grab my rucksack and "light out for the territories" I am prepared to do it on my own two feet if it comes to that.
dobie
Level 5 Valued Member
Nick,
Some very good points. My wife most weeks runs 40-50 miles, she grew up on a farm and can also do heavy lifting outside all day. I think people need balance-for me I want to be able to go run 6 miles at a good pace and also be strong without being bigger then I am, smaller actually. Iv'e got the "strong part" figured out, running is my weakness so I'm working on that. Any suggestions?
Some very good points. My wife most weeks runs 40-50 miles, she grew up on a farm and can also do heavy lifting outside all day. I think people need balance-for me I want to be able to go run 6 miles at a good pace and also be strong without being bigger then I am, smaller actually. Iv'e got the "strong part" figured out, running is my weakness so I'm working on that. Any suggestions?
The Scientist
Level 3 Valued Member
I will try one last time to make this point: nobody is saying that running is a bad thing. The things that I am saying are:
- Walking is great. I love hiking, and I use weighted vest walking for conditioning.
- Running very fast is great. I use interval sprints occasionally in training when I can get outside, and I enjoy that as well.
- Jogging as a moderate conditioning activity, or for a relaxing easy day when you are not lifting is fine. This seems to be what Gallagher is recommending.
- The only thing I have a problem with is training as a distance runner. Gallagher is not having his powerlifters train their 5 mile time, with the goal of pushing that time down as far as possible. He is using it as a low, stress, moderate effort conditioning exercise.
Also, I don't know how strong Joe Decker is, but the man is clearly an outlier that falls way outside the normal range of human ability. Using one extreme example does not prove anything. Empirical evidence has repeatedly validated the SAID theory of adaptation: training for multiple athletic abilities at the same time will decrease your success in both endeavors. If you want to be a generalist, that is fine, but you can't be the best at everything. At some point running for distance will compromise your strength, and training for strength will compromise your endurance capabilities.
- Walking is great. I love hiking, and I use weighted vest walking for conditioning.
- Running very fast is great. I use interval sprints occasionally in training when I can get outside, and I enjoy that as well.
- Jogging as a moderate conditioning activity, or for a relaxing easy day when you are not lifting is fine. This seems to be what Gallagher is recommending.
- The only thing I have a problem with is training as a distance runner. Gallagher is not having his powerlifters train their 5 mile time, with the goal of pushing that time down as far as possible. He is using it as a low, stress, moderate effort conditioning exercise.
Also, I don't know how strong Joe Decker is, but the man is clearly an outlier that falls way outside the normal range of human ability. Using one extreme example does not prove anything. Empirical evidence has repeatedly validated the SAID theory of adaptation: training for multiple athletic abilities at the same time will decrease your success in both endeavors. If you want to be a generalist, that is fine, but you can't be the best at everything. At some point running for distance will compromise your strength, and training for strength will compromise your endurance capabilities.
23rdwave
Level 5 Valued Member
The Scientist,
The world's greatest athlete is decathlete Ashton Eaton. Ask Usain Bolt. I referenced Rafer Johnson earlier which you have ignored. And, once more, I am talking about "running" not "jogging". The super heavyweights cannot run so walking and sprinting is all they can do but those of us who look more like Pavel and Mark Toomey than Dan John and Mikhail Koklyaev can and should run. One does not need to run marathons or even half marathons but if one weighs under 100kg and cannot run a 10k all out I would suggest that they are lacking in something. Running has other benefits besides the physical. I am outside with the mountain bikers, kayakers, birders, photographers, etc. as well as the hawks, vultures, owls, geese, coyotes, rabbits, deer and so on. And we are all, fish/fowl/human, having a better time than the guy in his garage pressing his kettlebell. I am also that guy in his garage so I know what I am talking about.
Brian D,
The easiest way to improve at distance running is to run negative splits. Try to be faster in the second half of the run. The faster you run the first half the harder it will be to beat your time or distance in the second half. I run 1-2 hours on horse trails along the American River in Sacramento, CA then turn around and try to beat my time on the way back. This is both mentally and physically challenging but the results speak for themselves. I have focused on negative splits for the last 12-15 months and am now faster at 46 (one month shy of 47) than I was at 30. At 5' 9.5" I am under 180 for the first time in 15 years. I use barbell, kbs and body weight exercises and prefer the GTG method for strength but 2-3x a year I will do a 4-8 week cycle of barbell deadlifts (traditional, sumo, one-legged and suitcase) or the ROP.
The world's greatest athlete is decathlete Ashton Eaton. Ask Usain Bolt. I referenced Rafer Johnson earlier which you have ignored. And, once more, I am talking about "running" not "jogging". The super heavyweights cannot run so walking and sprinting is all they can do but those of us who look more like Pavel and Mark Toomey than Dan John and Mikhail Koklyaev can and should run. One does not need to run marathons or even half marathons but if one weighs under 100kg and cannot run a 10k all out I would suggest that they are lacking in something. Running has other benefits besides the physical. I am outside with the mountain bikers, kayakers, birders, photographers, etc. as well as the hawks, vultures, owls, geese, coyotes, rabbits, deer and so on. And we are all, fish/fowl/human, having a better time than the guy in his garage pressing his kettlebell. I am also that guy in his garage so I know what I am talking about.
Brian D,
The easiest way to improve at distance running is to run negative splits. Try to be faster in the second half of the run. The faster you run the first half the harder it will be to beat your time or distance in the second half. I run 1-2 hours on horse trails along the American River in Sacramento, CA then turn around and try to beat my time on the way back. This is both mentally and physically challenging but the results speak for themselves. I have focused on negative splits for the last 12-15 months and am now faster at 46 (one month shy of 47) than I was at 30. At 5' 9.5" I am under 180 for the first time in 15 years. I use barbell, kbs and body weight exercises and prefer the GTG method for strength but 2-3x a year I will do a 4-8 week cycle of barbell deadlifts (traditional, sumo, one-legged and suitcase) or the ROP.
Jason Ginsberg
Level 4 Valued Member
I think it's interesting to read what John McCallum, who Dan John calls "the Socrates of weightlifting", has to say about running and lifting: http://ditillo2.blogspot.com/2008/09/running-john-mccallum.html
Life would be easier and lifting forums less contentious if people would realize we don't all have to train the same way; there's more than one path up the mountain.
Life would be easier and lifting forums less contentious if people would realize we don't all have to train the same way; there's more than one path up the mountain.
The Scientist
Level 3 Valued Member
"The world’s greatest athlete is decathlete Ashton Eaton. Ask Usain Bolt"
I don't understand what your subjective opinion about who is "the best" has anything to do with this.
One last thought to leave you with: if the ideal fighter or soldier is small and wiry, why are nearly all fighting sports divided into weight classes for competition? Doesn't that directly imply that the larger, stronger men would always beat the small, weaker ones? Giving the small people their own weight class is the only way that they will be able to compete. This is why fighters avoid gaining weight. It is not to be a better fighter, it is to avoid moving up a weight class and having to fight bigger, stronger people. That said, I am completely happy and healthy at 6', 200lbs, and have no desire to be any larger.
Who knows, maybe I'll go for a run tomorrow...
I don't understand what your subjective opinion about who is "the best" has anything to do with this.
One last thought to leave you with: if the ideal fighter or soldier is small and wiry, why are nearly all fighting sports divided into weight classes for competition? Doesn't that directly imply that the larger, stronger men would always beat the small, weaker ones? Giving the small people their own weight class is the only way that they will be able to compete. This is why fighters avoid gaining weight. It is not to be a better fighter, it is to avoid moving up a weight class and having to fight bigger, stronger people. That said, I am completely happy and healthy at 6', 200lbs, and have no desire to be any larger.
Who knows, maybe I'll go for a run tomorrow...
Kamper
Level 1 Valued Member
I think the beginnings of wisdom here are actually in Easy Strength, with the quadrant system. Ironically, power lifters and marathoners belong to the same quadrant - can't remember which one, but it's "one quality, high proficiency." They each need to do basically one thing, but do it extremely well. To compare specialists to each other or to generalists really makes very little sense. If you have glaucoma, you don't want to hear that your GP or your cardiologist is actually superior in some metaphysical sense to your opthalmologist. I suspect most people on this board, like me, are looking more for quadrant three (I think) i.e, lots of qualities, don't care so much about proficiency in any one quality, because mostly what I am looking to do is be healthy, stay active, and have fun. I've always found Staley's articles to be extremely helpful, especially his most recent T-nation publication, guess I disagree with him about the benefits of long easy runs - I think as long as you allow for recovery and don't get tight, they are very beneficial. Plus, I enjoy them. But sprinting is fun too. It depends.
- Status