Other/Mixed Expert/Professional versus Amateur Disconnect

[Anna C]

• Motivation: Can train like a pro

• Dedication: Can train like a pro

• Attention to detail: Can train like a pro

• Access to pro level coaching: Maybe. sport and financial dependent

• Arena of competition: Dependent upon discipline

• Level of play: most of us are just mortals

• Intensity: most of us are just mortals here as well

I like this. Yes, any mere mortal can approach their task (training or performance) with professionalism. I would recommend it. That's where the first 3 things come in, and those 3 things get results for everyone, no matter their level.

As for coaching -- most people mistakenly believe that coaches are for pros. Coaches are for ANYONE! I wish the fitness industry had a better model for "coach" other than "personal trainer." So many people could benefit.

 

[The Nail]

I like this. Yes, any mere mortal can approach their task (training or performance) with professionalism. I would recommend it. That's where the first 3 things come in, and those 3 things get results for everyone, no matter their level.

As for coaching -- most people mistakenly believe that coaches are for pros. Coaches are for ANYONE! I wish the fitness industry had a better model for "coach" other than "personal trainer." So many people could benefit.

Agree! Hiring @Al Ciampa was the best move I ever made.

 

[John Spezzano]

Great thread. As a lifelong martial artist myself, I've seen many reasons that people pursue martial arts training. Even aside from becoming a "pro" fighter very few folks even compete. Take BJJ for example, clearly of the most popular martial arts these days with a HUGE competition element. I'd guess that less than 10% of practitioners ever step on the mat to compete even once, much less regularly. And that's OK because obviously their goal (at least for now) isn't competition. I was never driven to compete outside of what I felt a good teacher should understand. I did a handful of amateur Muay Thai fights and a handful of BJJ competitions from white belt to brown belt. They were all a blast but I'm not a driven competitor like some of my friends. Anyway, this is a long way of saying that as coaches we must address the needs of the "average Joe" because they will be the majority of our students. And in my experience, they work harder and more consistently than competitors who often need extra care that they probably haven't earned.

I also think there's something to be said for an amateur coach. By that I mean someone who does not coach full time can often be an outstanding coach. Their passion for coaching is not diluted nor is it affected by the fact of having no other professional pursuit. There's nothing wrong with coaching full time if you can do the balancing act required to continue training while coaching all the time. I've taught in some capacity since 1995 and was full time from 2005 - 2016. Though nowadays I work two careers (my gym in downtown Los Angeles and film production work) I actually enjoy BOTH of them more and I do them both better as well! For me this is a more natural balance than coaching full time.

Just some thoughts. Terrific thread!

 

[Steve W.]

Dan John addresses this issue through his quadrants concept from Easy Strength.

If you are a kid learning and playing lots of different sports and games -- Quadrant 1.
If you are a high level athlete (Division 1 varsity, pro, national or international competitor) -- Quadrant 2 or 4 (depending on the nature of your sport).
If you are everyone else -- Quadrant 3.

 

[offwidth]

I like this. Yes, any mere mortal can approach their task (training or performance) with professionalism. I would recommend it. That's where the first 3 things come in, and those 3 things get results for everyone, no matter their level.

As for coaching -- most people mistakenly believe that coaches are for pros. Coaches are for ANYONE! I wish the fitness industry had a better model for "coach" other than "personal trainer." So many people could benefit.

Yes, that was my point exactly... us mere mortals can access coaches (and in many cases should) I used 'maybe' in respect to being able to access the same level of coaching as a pro. Depending upon your sport this may not be feasible. But that shouldn't stop getting some level of coaching, even if it's not world class.

 

[kenaces]

This is where SOC differs from sport: you can be mortal, train intelligently and meet SOC standards, moving forward to be a competent and valuable team member.

What is SOC?

 

[Bunn]

Yes, any mere mortal can approach their task (training or performance) with professionalism.

@Anna C hit on something good here, and I personally believe this is Pavels and the Strong First communities approach to training. Whether you are a mortal or mutant, approach your training as a "professional", do the work, do the work consistently, and do the work to the best of your ability.

 

[Abdul-Rasheed]

• Motivation: Can train like a pro

• Dedication: Can train like a pro

• Attention to detail: Can train like a pro

• Access to pro level coaching: Maybe. sport and financial dependent

• Arena of competition: Dependent upon discipline

• Level of play: most of us are just mortals

• Intensity: most of us are just mortals here as well

This is brilliant, the way it is broken down. Thanks a lot.

 

[vegpedlr]

Another issue in amateurs trying to train like pros is background and training history. They’ve already put in years of work on the basics, so now their training unique and individualized. So it probably doesn’t apply to the rest of us. This was highlighted to me by a very popular video of UCI XC MTB champion Niño Schurter training in the gym. His coaches have devised a very unique training program to mimic the demands of modern World Cup XCO racing. Would it benefit the average trail rider? Maybe, but the average Joe doesn’t have his huge aerobic base, nor do we know what kind of strength history he has. Not to mention he has some of the best technical skill of any XC rider ever. MTB strength coach James Wilson summed it up with “You’re not Niño!” so what works for him might not apply to someone who hasn’t logged the time on the basics.

I heard another example from Lindsey Vonn on the Rich Roll podcast. She described her training as mostly core focused, whatever that means. But that doesn’t account for the millions of pounds she’s already lifted to build herself up, or the thousands of miles she’s skied already.

That said, I still enjoy reading about how the elites train. There’s always the chance something interesting pops up that I could experiment with.

 

[Abdul-Rasheed]

• Motivation: Can train like a pro
• Dedication: Can train like a pro
• Attention to detail: Can train like a pro
• Access to pro level coaching: Maybe. sport and financial dependent
• Arena of competition: Dependent upon discipline
• Level of play: most of us are just mortals
• Intensity: most of us are just mortals here as well

My apologies if this is not relevant to the thread, but, I couldn't resist quoting the following from Anna to the question "what an improvement in form means to me". I saw and loved parallels in the way you guys, dug into the details underneath the words "training" and "improvement".

Great questions to ponder. Some thoughts on what form improvements can bring... Maybe not more weight on the bar initially, but a greater potential for more weight on the bar. Opening up new space in front of you; lifting more weight with greater skill, strength, finesse, and safety. Taming the impulses, refining. Mastery over the details of the movement. Providing the example for others to emulate even as they start out. Using the muscles more in harmony, leading to less creaks, aches, and pains as we age. A slight edge on recovery as the body has less microdamage to repair from poor use and more from good use. Some of this may be real and some just powerful imagery, but it all seems worth striving for.

 

[WhatWouldHulkDo]

I am obviously dense... but I don't get the point here.

Most folks will never be world class at anything we take up, got it... so what? Are we looking for permission to stop aspiring? Permission to not follow the advice or style of those better than us, and instead just do what we like? Nobody needs permission for any of that, very few of us have to answer to anyone but ourselves for our physical state. If you're happy and want for nothing, then obviously you're doing the right thing.

I personally think there is value in aspiration, and equal value in learning to balance aspiration against reality (e.g. don't train like a mutant if you aren't a mutant).

 

[Bill Been]

There are some concepts around this subject that people sorta step into and out of, some others that get rolled into a big mess..... It's hard to be clear on some of this. Let's try, nonetheless:
- I have argued many times that strength underpins every expression of athletic movement, therefore a well-developed baseline of strength is the single most "impactful" (I sorta hate that word, but I've never found a more accurate replacement) thing you can do for your sport - whether you play that sport recreationally, or professionally, at a high level of skill or a low one.
- I have argued also that developing this baseline of strength is much LESS impactful on the continuous development of sport skill than is widely assumed;
- I have also argued that the program that develops this baseline of strength will not cost you an appreciable amount of your previously-existing conditioning base, even if you halt conditioning entirely for the duration of this process;
- Finally, I have argued that a comprehensive barbell program that is simple and that uses LOAD as the only training variable develops this strength base very, very rapidly and to an extent that most people - even here - think is not possible in the absence of anabolics. Such a program does not "cycle", is not "periodized", and has no planned de-loads. Such a program is available to those who have never done one, or those returning to serious training, but it IS NOT available to the Elite level strength athletes whose programs are so often inappropriately copied;

Progressing beyond a 370 deadlift for a male in this age demographic does not require a strength specialization. It does require a tiny bit of knowledge beyond "see if you can lift that". But throwing in the towel at that strength level is not made necessary because additional progress would be too costly to training time needed for the sport skill.

You should not copy the Elites. Especially Elite strength athletes. What they have to do to disrupt homeostasis in order to provoke a beneficial strength adaptation versus what YOU have to do to accomplish the same thing are night and day different. Ironically, the Elite lifter wishes desperately that he could use a program like you can use - adding weight every session. Instead, he must carefully and methodically manage stress and fatigue, dancing a pretty narrow line that accumulates stimuli over weeks, then finally months, culminating in a performance that takes everything he has. Using this guy's program - when you yourself are still miles from your genetic ceiling and fully capable of rapid strength gains - is like a kid who can barely catch a football spending hours doing one-hand catch drills because he saw Odell Beckham doing them. That's what the Elite of that sport do, right? So, if I want to play like Odell, I gotta train like Odell, right? No. Wrong. You need to train like a guy who desperately needs to be able to reliably catch the ball with both hands. Odell can already do that.

The Elites often say they're simply better at the fundamentals than everybody else. Lots of Special Operations soldiers, sailors, and Airmen have told me that. And it makes sense: why would the Higher Ups give a complicated mission with numerous facets to plan and execute to a guy who hasn't proven he can reliably make his bed? Does making your bed or shining your boots better prepare you to infiltrate hostile territory to rescue the downed pilot? No, but the character trait of doing the basics with unrelenting excellence is the basis for progressing beyond the basics. In my day job of flying super cool jets and generally stomping the planet like a rock star, I have achieved what is universally recognized as "expert level". I may be blessed with whatever genetic component there is to flying airplanes. But, when crap goes sideways, it's the proper execution of the absolute basics that saves the day, not the advanced techniques I employ otherwise. The solid execution of the basics of flying airplanes is available to everyone who has bothered to learn to fly airplanes. How far I go beyond that, compared to how far another pilot may go is irrelevant. We both still owe it to ourselves and our professionalism to be excellent at the basics.

So, don't use the training programs of the elites, but DO use their mastery of the basics with consistency and focus.

 

[kiwipete]

The Elites often say they're simply better at the fundamentals than everybody else. Lots of Special Operations soldiers, sailors, and Airmen have told me that. And it makes sense: why would the Higher Ups give a complicated mission with numerous facets to plan and execute to a guy who hasn't proven he can reliably make his bed? Does making your bed or shining your boots better prepare you to infiltrate hostile territory to rescue the downed pilot? No, but the character trait of doing the basics with unrelenting excellence is the basis for progressing beyond the basics. In my day job of flying super cool jets and generally stomping the planet like a rock star, I have achieved what is universally recognized as "expert level". I may be blessed with whatever genetic component there is to flying airplanes. But, when crap goes sideways, it's the proper execution of the absolute basics that saves the day, not the advanced techniques I employ otherwise. The solid execution of the basics of flying airplanes is available to everyone who has bothered to learn to fly airplanes. How far I go beyond that, compared to how far another pilot may go is irrelevant. We both still owe it to ourselves and our professionalism to be excellent at the basics.

Where's the 'love it!' button?!

Completely agree with your words, especially the last paragraph and sentence

 

[Mirek]

... a comprehensive barbell program that is simple and that uses LOAD as the only training variable develops this strength base very, very rapidly and to an extent that most people - even here - think is not possible in the absence of anabolics.

And the name of that Holy Grail is.....?

 

[jef]

So, don't use the training programs of the elites, but DO use their mastery of the basics with consistency and focus.

Good summary.

 

[WhatWouldHulkDo]

And the name of that Holy Grail is.....?

My interpretation is that, rather than there being a single program that will work for everyone, for a given trainee (subject to the caveats he described) there is some reasonably straightforward program that will make them quite strong. I believe that, anyway.

 

[Mirek]

My interpretation is that, rather than there being a single program that will work for everyone, for a given trainee (subject to the caveats he described) there is some reasonably straightforward program that will make them quite strong. I believe that, anyway.

Yep, that's pretty clear. But all those "programms for everyone" must have some common denominator, so to say.

 

[Anna C]

And the name of that Holy Grail is.....?

The Starting Strength Novice Linear Progression is the one that Bill coached me through last year. I did it in from Mach - May of 2018 and summarized it in my Training Log. Even though I wasn't a beginner at the time, I was still a "novice" as defined by the program (able to stress, recover, adapt, and lift stronger in the next session) and it produced some signifcant increases in squat, deadlift, bench press, and press strength. I was also able to demonstrate that I didn't lose anything in the tested conditioning events during this 13 week period.

As Bill states, this is a good example, relative to the topic of this thread, of how a uniquely simple program works to drive a strength adaptation for an amateur or novice. And it works so well and so fast (caveat: don't read "easy".... it's not!) that there's no need to follow the complicated programming of the expert or professional.

 

[Mirek]

The Starting Strength Novice Linear Progression is the one that Bill coached me through last year. I did it in from Mach - May of 2018 and summarized it in my Training Log. Even though I wasn't a beginner at the time, I was still a "novice" as defined by the program (able to stress, recover, adapt, and lift stronger in the next session) and it produced some signifcant increases in squat, deadlift, bench press, and press strength. I was also able to demonstrate that I didn't lose anything in the tested conditioning events during this 13 week period.

As Bill states, this is a good example, relative to the topic of this thread, of how a uniquely simple program works to drive a strength adaptation for an amateur or novice. And it works so well and so fast (caveat: don't read "easy".... it's not!) that there's no need to follow the complicated programming of the expert or professional.

So the linear progression using big, compound, movements like bench, squat, deadlift, press is name of the game here, I guess.

So what happened after those 3-4 months?

 

[Antti]

I will add that linear progression is by no means something for only the novice to use. People like Coan, the greatest powerlifter of all time, used it all the time.

Interestingly, that's something that stands for both the novice and the elite, so maybe something that belongs in this thread.