7/26/07

Maybe I don’t get it

Here was a reply to my post that typifies the head in the sand approach of the contemporary sheep walkers. It is a classic error in communication in that it is not what I write, it is what you read.

Vern are you serious this man doesn't get it, there are to many variables to just blast the lifts. What did the program look like how much synergist crossover was there between lifts, what where rest intervals, where the athletes wearing belts (a huge no no), did the program have structural balance, was the athlete in structural balance, was she training her mobility, come on Vern maybe you don't get it.

I do get it! I use the Olympic movements when appropriate. I have bee doing Olympic Lifts for almost 45 years. I am USA Weightlifting certified (Perhaps they will remove my certification now) I have made every mistake with the Olympic lifts and every other method. Belts – so what – I understand the research. Go around the country and watch how everyone cinches up their athletes. Is it right? No. I understand all the variables and in the muscle head programs they are seldom if ever taken into consideration unless it is a one on one environment, that NEVER occurs in a collegiate environment and seldom if ever in a professional team environment. That is why the follow-up post on University of Oregon and Jim Radcliffe. He is an Olympic lifter, but he train athletes not Olympic lifters who play football. What the hell is synergist crossover between lifts? Get real. Have you ever had to work with a team of athletes? You get them after practice, the majority of the time when they are fatigued from their training. There is no accounting for individual differences. I will repeat the message again – IT IS ABOUT THE ATHLETE, NOT ABOUT THE EXERCISE OR THE METHOD. CREATE ADAPTABLE ATHLETES READY to PLAY. What is it that I don't get?

3 Comments:

At 7/26/07, 12:30 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Vern
Here is one answer I usually get -"practice"?
TC

 
At 7/26/07, 2:19 PM, Anonymous tlanger said...

Vern,

An interesting question is how adaptable do you want an athlete to become; for example, participating in sports requires basic physical adaptability, but each sport will then have its own specific criteria or in other words Spider Man wouldn’t be a good offensive lineman and he’s pretty darn adaptable! It would seem each athlete needs to have a priority list of what their sport/position requires; however, this would likely clash with the exercises used by many athletic trainers. I know you train athletes from remedial thru sport specific needs, but it would be cool for you to write more on the topic of how you separate what an athlete needs and what the sport requires or in other words do you emphasize an athletes strengths or weaknesses to create more adaptability for their sport? If it’s one or the other it begs the question of how adaptable that athlete really is and if it’s both are you risking the specificity needed to excel? It’s seemingly a fine line and you’re uniquely qualified to write about it…..

Thanks,

Todd Langer
www.balance2posture.com

 
At 7/27/07, 3:55 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Vern,

Interesting topic and post from Todd Langer.

Maybe you can tell more about individual parameters.

If it's not about the exercise or method when are you choosing for an exercise or method and when not.

Thanks.

Mischa, Amsterdam

 

Post a Comment

<< Home