North Coast Miller
Level 9 Valued Member
A lot of the uninitiated just don't grasp this. If it ever "worked", it still does. Amazing to me the worldview out there.
Joel the Savage
Level 6 Valued Member
There are good carpenters and there are bad carpenters.
There's very few carpenters out there that's the best carpenter in the world. B ut there are very many talented carpenters that care about their work.
Unfortunately there's carpenters that just shows up and do their hours and don't care about the end result.
And there's carpenters that just plainly sucks.
You can have gone to the best carpentry-school in the world, have practiced and worked alongside the best carpenters in the world and still be a crappy carpenter.
There's very few carpenters out there that's the best carpenter in the world. B ut there are very many talented carpenters that care about their work.
Unfortunately there's carpenters that just shows up and do their hours and don't care about the end result.
And there's carpenters that just plainly sucks.
You can have gone to the best carpentry-school in the world, have practiced and worked alongside the best carpenters in the world and still be a crappy carpenter.
Joel the Savage
Level 6 Valued Member
Yes. But it can work better!
A dwarf standing on the shoulder of a giant can see further than the giant himself.
Unfortunately people usually think it's enough tp stand on the shoulders of giants, they miss the part about seeing further... Or they think they just need to be giants.
North Coast Miller
Level 9 Valued Member
Not all giants are the same height...You can stand on the shoulders of one and not see over the head of another.
Adachi
Level 7 Valued Member
I wish there were additional options to this poll. I have been on both sides of very specific education and practice in my small niche corner of the industry. and I have found a common theme.
there is a Venn diagram between book learnin' and street smarts. And I have been responsible for designing firmwide training (12 week course curriculum) that would help to bridge the gap for a ~30 office, 1000+ employee firm.
There is an overlap between the two domains. But...
but there are things I learned in a classroom that I never would have encountered in industry that make me more able than my peers.
there are things I experienced in the industry that the classroom didn't touch even with a ten-foot pole.
in my view, there's a positive differential of probability toward the experience side. but there is a large chance that the cert informs the trainer in ways the experienced trainer may not have access to.
there is a Venn diagram between book learnin' and street smarts. And I have been responsible for designing firmwide training (12 week course curriculum) that would help to bridge the gap for a ~30 office, 1000+ employee firm.
There is an overlap between the two domains. But...
but there are things I learned in a classroom that I never would have encountered in industry that make me more able than my peers.
there are things I experienced in the industry that the classroom didn't touch even with a ten-foot pole.
in my view, there's a positive differential of probability toward the experience side. but there is a large chance that the cert informs the trainer in ways the experienced trainer may not have access to.
Last edited:
GreenSoup
Level 6 Valued Member
I think the pandemic taught us a lot about experts. When it started, masking was dangerous. If you worked in construction or were just a hobbyist who had dozens of NIOSH-certified N95 masks lying around, those masks would kill you and your family. Don't wear them. Then for YEARS you were told you could wear a flimsy, unrated cloth with plainly visible air gaps or you were a menace who wanted to kill everyone. And then most of us could write a book about the rest.
Trust in certified authority is dead. The highest paid, most specially certified individual deserves the same suspicion as the guy giving free candy from the back of his van. That's not to say your best friend can't be a candy maker who just drove by, or to say a diploma can't accurately reflect specialized learning. But you need more than just a piece of paper.
If a guy can prove "this is what I can do" then that allows a bit more respect. If he says "this is how I did it" then, if true, that could be a path forward for you. If someone else says "this is what I can do because he taught it to me" it's even better. Seek references! But this is all a matter of building trust in an individual after trust has been shattered for decades across so many industries and disciplines.
Trust in certified authority is dead. The highest paid, most specially certified individual deserves the same suspicion as the guy giving free candy from the back of his van. That's not to say your best friend can't be a candy maker who just drove by, or to say a diploma can't accurately reflect specialized learning. But you need more than just a piece of paper.
If a guy can prove "this is what I can do" then that allows a bit more respect. If he says "this is how I did it" then, if true, that could be a path forward for you. If someone else says "this is what I can do because he taught it to me" it's even better. Seek references! But this is all a matter of building trust in an individual after trust has been shattered for decades across so many industries and disciplines.
silveraw
Level 9 Valued Member
For sure, One of the worst fitness courses I ever purchased was done by some SF certified people. On the other hand, some of the greatest and most insightful fitness content I've seen put together was by someone with zero certifications who wasn't even in the fitness industry. They just did it as a passion project.
Disclaimer: quality evaluations are my personal opinion and may not represent your experience.
Antti
Level 10 Valued Member
I think it's fairly obvious that the only real metric we have when it comes to evaluating coaches is the results. Who have they trained? Where did they get? Where did they start from? How hard was it for them?
And it's not easy to evaluate coaches based on the results. On one hand, the freaks of nature seem to develop no matter what the coach has them do. On the other hand, the most trained ones have a hard time on developing more. Beginners, again, seem to develop no matter what the coach has them do. Still, there are people who any coach can't get anything from.
What I'd do is talk with the people the coach has trained. Talk a lot.
Sadly, this method of evaluating is not a good one for coaches in the early parts of their career, or who do it part time and don't thus have that many clients. In that case, one would just have to have a thorough chat with the coach and maybe give it a shot.
One thing to look at is how long a trainee has been with the coach. If you have someone have the same clients for years, I'd say at least something must be done right. Again, not a good metric for the pure beginner coach.
And it's not easy to evaluate coaches based on the results. On one hand, the freaks of nature seem to develop no matter what the coach has them do. On the other hand, the most trained ones have a hard time on developing more. Beginners, again, seem to develop no matter what the coach has them do. Still, there are people who any coach can't get anything from.
What I'd do is talk with the people the coach has trained. Talk a lot.
Sadly, this method of evaluating is not a good one for coaches in the early parts of their career, or who do it part time and don't thus have that many clients. In that case, one would just have to have a thorough chat with the coach and maybe give it a shot.
One thing to look at is how long a trainee has been with the coach. If you have someone have the same clients for years, I'd say at least something must be done right. Again, not a good metric for the pure beginner coach.
Kenny Croxdale
Level 7 Valued Member
Funny
I got a chuckle out of this.
What makes this so funny is that it is true.
Boris Bachmann
Level 8 Valued Member
AKCHUALLY... I don't know how common it would be that someone went to THE BEST field-related school, worked and practiced with THE BEST in the world and still be "crappy". Not great? Sure. But crappy? Doubtful.
It's like, for example, if you're the worst marathoner out of Iten, you're probably not bad... I swam for a D1 swim team. The worst swimmer on the team was still All-State high school level.
offwidth
Level 10 Valued Member
Well… as @Steve Freides has sometimes quipped….
“What do you call a person that graduated in last place in medical school…? doctor.”
“What do you call a person that graduated in last place in medical school…? doctor.”
Yes, but ...
It can be taught better. In particular I am reminded of what Louis Simmons said about Pavel, which is that he reverse engineers what great lifters do naturally. There is the thing, and then there is how the thing is taught, and the latter is what makes the difference for those of us who haven't been able to figure out the best path ourselves.
-S-
I would argue that results, if we mean improvements in weights lifted, 5k times, etc., aren't all that matter. As a music teacher, I do not try to make my students the best performers possible, I teach them in the way that lets music improve their lives as much as possible. Just as here at StrongFirst we say, "Your strength has a higher purpose," so it is with me as a music teacher. Results are usually measured by performance; real results for non-competitive athletes sometimes cannot be measured. E.g., it's a great coach that keeps a student motivated and interested in coming to their class, week after week, and year after year, because attending improves the student's life - if the student makes very little measurable progress, this is still a great coach.
Different coaches and different students will interact in different ways and we shouldn't lump them all together under a single metric if for no other reason than that some kinds of "progress" are difficult to measure.
-S-
silveraw
Level 9 Valued Member
I’ve worked with a nepo hire or two. They were friendly, but didn’t exactly have the skill set required for the job. Despite having all the right education checkboxes.
bluejeff
Level 7 Valued Member
Oh man, there are so many directions to take this... While some experts in certain fields have "failed" the public, there is quite a bit of misinformation that has poisoned the well from which experts speak. The growing anti-science trend out there is, imo, dangerous. Yes, scientists make mistakes. Yes, sometimes there are those who deceive for personal gain. The majority, however, are not doing that. Studies get misrepresented by the media, and misrepresented by trainers (certified or not) in their own corner of media as well. What we need is accountability for those who fail to acknowledge mistakes or deception, and from the other side, the willingness to accept that "certified authority" is not, and should not claim to be, infallible. Good scientific professionals do not make absolute statements. They make statements about "support (or not) of [x]," not "proof of [x]." The layperson wants a black and white, yes/no answer. The layperson needs to be better at accepting there is almost always no such thing.
This is its own can of worms, but there are a lot of voices out there (in many fields of life) who are not trained in the fields about which they make commentary on, who make a lot of noise. Just like we want trainers who can produce results, we should want the voices influencing the public to be versed in actual, real-world outcomes. Sadly, this is often isn't the case.
If you have plumbing issues, you call a plumber, not an electrician who knows a plumber. If you want to be a strong powerlifter, you hire a PL coach, not a gymnastic coach who has dabbled in deadlifting. If you are experiencing mental health issues, you see a therapist (sorry, not sorry; the gym is not therapy). It should be the same whenever you seek information about the world.
Speaking to the fitness and health space, there is also a growing trend of doubt in public experts. But it's not black and white. Some long-standing experts are refusing to acknowledge new research and new approaches. On the other side, the "non-certified" sometimes need to listen more to what researchers are saying.
It's not black and white.
I think the elephant in the room is that trainers must start somewhere. As much as we all would like trainers who produce results, sometimes we have to acknowledge that new trainers must get their experience from somewhere. Just like in my above statements, I think the trainers and trainees have to meet each other in the middle. Communication skills and developing good relationships with clients are important.
You know, I don't quite know what to make of that statement anymore. I can't tell if it's a jab at those who didn't do as well, or an acknowledgement that even being last in a tough program still means you made it through a tough program. I am getting into junior/senior level physics courses, and I struggle a lot, despite putting in dawn-to-dusk work efforts most days of the week. When I talk to engineering students, they have a tough time grasping things that I consider basic. To be fair, I would have a tough time grasping some things they consider basic!
The person who graduated last in med school still knows FAR more than someone who doesn't. They also put in a lot more effort than those who didn't. The above statement kind of makes it sound like the person graduating last was lazy or incompetent, but you don't get into med school, and stay all the way through graduation, by being incompetent and lazy.
I'm not sure how much it is anti-science versus anti-authoritarian or anti-establishment. While this might seem similar, I do not see an anti-science trend per se. Without trying to start a political argument, I think there is quite a difference. I think you see this very clearly in how they are quite ready to use science that supports their anti-authoritarian/establishment movement.
This isn't new. The hallmarks of an anti-authoritarian or anti-establishment movement are refusal to cooperate, undermining the narrative, challenging establishment/institutions, localization, and often some form of proselytization (e.g. not content to form an enclave, but to attempt to spread the word and convince others of your cause). Again, without making a political statement or whether it is right or wrong, you can see this during the 2020 years in regards to That Which Cannot Be Named, but it is the same strategy used for various movements for civil rights or social progressivisms. Whether it is MLK or the Hippies ... or the Suffragettes... or Ghandi and his followers... You also see it in more violently in the Black Panthers or the Weathermen. Again, I want to be clear, I am not equating these movements, or making a moral statement regarding any of them historically or currently. In a slightly more trivial vein, you see this in CrossFit, kettlebells and yes even our very own Anti-Glycolytic Training method.
You are right, and you are right that they can make recommendations. That isn't always the case of how they communicate, especially when they are attempting to make a social, political, or environmental change. Scientists are people, and as such, are prone to push agendas. The state of science education - teaching people how to think, question, and explore - is quite poor and has instead been replaced largely with memorization, regurgitation, and poor critical thinking skills. And yes, this extends into medicine.
@Steve Freides if you feel this is too political, please feel free to delete.
It would be too political only in retrospect depending on if and how others respond to it.
-S-
steve-in-kville
Level 5 Valued Member
I'd say both. Back in my ambulance days, I'd rather be partnered with a seasoned EMT with good attitude, than with a brand-new paramedic that was cocky.
Maybe not an apple to apples comparison, but its close.
Maybe not an apple to apples comparison, but its close.
Abishai
Level 5 Valued Member
Spot on.
While I respect science (and am currently in university), I think it is important for people to do their self-experimentation. I lose respect for scientists who can't accept results that do not align with current science or try to make sure people worship science without being able to think for themselves. Research proves likelihood not fact and science often does not take into account personal variables like mileage.
YMMV.
Abishai
Level 5 Valued Member
not too mention the source o research funding.