Archive for the Random Thoughts Category

A Strength and Conditioning History Lesson

Posted in Guest Authors, Random Thoughts, Training, Training Females, Uncategorized, Youth Training with tags , on April 16, 2012 by mboyle1959

My friend Lance Hooton was kind enough to share this piece of history. This is an absolute “must read” if you are in the field of strength and conditioning.

If Anyone Gets Slower You’re Fired

Look forward to your comments.

The Top 11 Internet Fitness Articles of All Time?

Posted in Core training, Fat Loss, Guest Authors, Injuries, Low Back Pain, Media, Random Thoughts, StrengthCoach.com Updates, Training, Training Females, Uncategorized with tags , on April 14, 2012 by mboyle1959

Tough to follow up the success of the last two days posts but, take a look at this list from StrengthCoach.com member and resident female expert Elsbeth Vaino.

Top 11 Internet Fitness Articles of All Time?

http://elsbethvaino.com/2012/04/top-11-internet-fitness-articles-of-all-time/

Looking forward to more comments.

Is Foam Rolling Bad for You?

Posted in Injuries, Low Back Pain, Random Thoughts, StrengthCoach.com Updates, Training, Training Females with tags , , , on April 12, 2012 by mboyle1959

I wrote this a while ago but finished it yesterday after getting three different versions of “Stop Rolling Your IT band”.  Please let me know what you think.

Is Foam Rolling Bad for You? ( originally written for StrengthCoach.com)

As is always the case in life an on the internet, someone has to decide to take the other side of an argument.

I often think that those who do so are simply looking for recognition in a crowded field.

Recently, we have had two widely distributed “articles” critical of foam rolling. The word articles is in quotes because both so-called articles were actually blog posts.

I find it funny because it seems difficult to me to criticize something that universally makes people feel better.  In one article (which was actually written four years ago), the author, Mike Nelson, makes the very basic case that pain is bad and the foam roller causes pain; therefore, the foam roller must be bad too. However, in reading the authors bio, I can’t help but notice that he has been a student for the last sixteen years as opposed to a coach, and moreover, carries a clear bias toward the neurological origins of pain.

I am not discounting the neurological basis of pain as that would be as illogical.  However the author’s primary premise seems to be that pain is bad and should be avoided at all costs. It is also worth noting that the author is a paid practitioner of a technique he feels is better than foam rolling.

It is obvious that I don’t agree and, I intend to make a scientific case for my disagreement rather than a personal one.

I am also of the belief that pain is bad. However, I will qualify that statement and say that most pain is bad. In the case of the foam roller, I will go so far as to say that pain is good. I frequently tell my athletes that the foam roller is the only violation of our Does It Hurt rule. In a nutshell, my normal reaction to any question as to whether someone should do any exercise is to ask “Does It Hurt”? If the answer is no, then the exercise is generally acceptable. In the case of foam rolling, however, I think we actually need top seek out painful spots. Foam rolling is very counterintuitive.

Mr. Nelson’s theory is based on the belief that pain is neurological and that pain causes reflexive actions, all of which are negative.  However, in the world of physical therapy, the belief is widely held that often painful techniques of soft tissue mobilization are in fact essential to produce long-term healing. What Mr. Nelson fails to acknowledge in his treatise on foam rolling is that in the end, the process is about chemistry, not electricity. All mechanical and neurological inputs become chemical inputs. It is clear scientific fact that the disturbance caused to tissue via mobilization (rolling, massage, Graston. ART)  in effect irritates the tissue. This irritation is painful in the short term, but the response is often a healing one, not a negative one. In soft tissue mobilization, the tissue is deliberately disrupted in order to produce the exact substances that tissue needs to heal and to realign.

Mr. Nelson also attempts to draw a line between massage and foam rolling by saying that the skilled hands of a therapist in essence make soft tissue mobilization OK. His premise is that soft tissue work done by a person is infinitely better than pressure provided by an inanimate object. Again, this logic is flawed.

Mr Nelson makes the case that a skilled therapist knows how much pressure to utilize while a person working on themselves will produce so much pain as to render the technique useless. To be honest , I think most people are much easier on themselves than a therapist would be on them. In fact, I don’t think I have ever seen a bruise produced by a foam roller but I have seen numerous bruises produced by a well meaning massage therapist.

The second, more recent, anti-rolling article focused on the IT band. The author, a muscular therapist, focused on the fact that the IT band could not be changed through foam rolling. He implores us to stop rolling the IT band. Again this “anti” article was widely distributed on the internet.

So, back to why we foam roll. In the simplest sense, rolling is step one on the preparatory process. Our goal pre-exercise is to prepare the tissue for the stresses about to be applied. Proper tissue preparation allows an athlete to perform a workout without injury. I think or hope that we can accept the position that tissue changes in response to stress.

If the tissue is stressed optimally, the resulting adaptation is positive. If the tissue is overstressed by inappropriate volume (too many reps) , speed of lengthening (too fast) ,  or inappropriate overload (to much weight) the tissue response can shift from positive to negative.  Although tissue soreness is deemed normal, we must acknowledge that there is an ideal amount of that normal response, and the response should be limited to the muscle tissue and not be present in the connective tissue. In other words, sore quads would be OK, but sore knees not be OK.

In addition, muscle soreness and tissue damage can be the result of blows to the tissue instead of the planned application of stress. This tissue damage must also be mitigated, not just by time. It is important that tissue maintain its ability to deform properly. Loss of this tissue deformation ability results in what is called  a stress riser. These stress risers set up us up for later injury.

The big take away point is that thousands of athletes are rolling every day and getting a good result. Two blog posts should not be enough to relieve us of our common sense. Pressure to tissue when well applied seems to produce positive results. Even if we are not confident of the exact physiological response, the results of thousands of athletes speak for themselves. Don’t be fooled by internet writers looking to take a contrarian stance to get site hits. Focus on results. Massage works and so does foam rolling. Just ask anyone who does it.

PS- Quick note. I have often said that the density of the roller corresponds to the density of the athlete. If you lack muscle, try Yamuna balls or white soft rollers (yes, I know they don’t last, but it’s a compromise). Progress to the Perform Better black as your tolerance improves.

It’s Not the Program, It’s the Coaching

Posted in Random Thoughts, StrengthCoach.com Updates, Training, Training Females, Uncategorized, Youth Training with tags , on April 11, 2012 by mboyle1959

I wrote this for my StrengthCoach.com site but, wanted to share it with a wider audience.

Sam Dadd, one of my senior coaches at MBSC thought the concept mentioned in the title would make a great article. The discussion began, as many do, with a question in a staff meeting. Why does an assistant go to a new program, institute the same program used in his old job, yet fail to get similar results? Or, why when a head strength coach moves on and the assistant takes over are the results not the same? The obvious answer would be talent however I think that is an oversimplification.

My response to the question was simple and to the point. It’s not the program, it’s the coach.  In the football world legendary coach Bum Phillips described another legend, Paul Bear Bryant’s coaching this way . “He can take his’n and beat your’n and take your’n and beat his’n.” In other words if you and Bryant switched rosters, in a year he’d beat you with your own team.

A good coach with a mediocre program is much better than a great program and a mediocre coach. A program is a piece of paper or a file in a computer. Programs cannot motivate or create accountability. A piece of paper can’t figure out what is inside a person and how to get that out. A great coach can do all those things. A great coach will teach, motivate, and create an accountability system. He will figure out what makes each guy tick and then use that knowledge to get results. I have said for years that all of our programs are the same. Our base philosophy never changes. Want to get fast, run sprints. Want to get strong, lift weights. The difference is in the selling. The difference is in knowing what makes each athlete tick.

Another legendary coach, the late quarterback guru Tom Martinez, described it this way in the book Outliers. “Every kids life is a mix of shit and ice cream. If the kid has had too much shit I mix in some ice cream. If he has had too much ice cream I mix in some shit”. Martinez knew that there was a different key to every lock. To paraphrase Dan John, the key is to find the key.

Bottom line, there is a reason that strength and conditioning coaches Mike Woicek, Al Miller, Rusty Jones and Johnny Parker had a team in almost every Superbowl for about a 15 year period. They were great coaches who got the best out of their players.( Importance of the Strength and Conditioning Coach http://www.strengthcoach.com/public/1263.cfm )

There is a reason a coach like Phil Jackson succeeded in circumstances as different as Chicago and LA  . Coaching matters. Coaches change lives, programs don’t change lives. The people will always matter more than the paper.

Are College Football Players Bodies Being Abused

Posted in Guest Authors, Injuries, Low Back Pain, Media, Random Thoughts, StrengthCoach.com Updates, Training with tags , on April 8, 2012 by mboyle1959

This is a pretty good perspective from agent Jack Bechta. Nice to see that agents are waking up to some of the problems in collegiate strength and conditioning. Thanks to Cal Dietz for forwarding.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Are-college-players-bodies-being-abused.html

Sugar Lawsuit Being Tried In Los Angeles

Posted in Nutrition, Random Thoughts, Uncategorized on April 6, 2012 by mboyle1959

Not sure about the source but I love this. Sugar producers suing the corn people? This is too good.

(Los Angeles, CA)  –  A sweet lawsuit is being tried in Los Angeles this week.  Sugar producers are suing the makers of high fructose corn syrup.  The sugar folks want the corn people to stop saying their products are similar.  The issue is centered on the Corn Refiners Association advertising that claims corn syrup is “nutritionally the same as table sugar.”  The plaintiffs say sugar is a natural product while corn syrup is man-made and less healthy.  The sugar industry also says corn syrup is causing an obesity and diabetes epidemic.  However, the corn producers defend their advertising as “truthful speech.”  High fructose corn syrup is used in soft drinks, breads, cereal and other products.

Pretty Strong for a Girl

Posted in Core training, Fat Loss, Low Back Pain, Random Thoughts, StrengthCoach.com Updates, Training, Training Females, Uncategorized, Youth Training with tags , , on March 28, 2012 by mboyle1959

Yes, the title is a joke. This is another great female strength clip. As I have said for years, our female athletes suffer from low expecations and lack of role models. Neghar is a great role model because she is extremely strong and has developed a physique that most women would aspire to.

A Thought Provoking Video About Youth Sports

Posted in Random Thoughts, Training, Training Females, Youth Training with tags , , on March 21, 2012 by mboyle1959

I just got this video in my email. Take a minute and watch it.

More Evidence Against Early Specialization

Posted in Random Thoughts, StrengthCoach.com Updates, Training, Training Females, Youth Training with tags , , on March 20, 2012 by mboyle1959

If you regularly read this blog you know how I feel kids specializing in one sport too early. I continue to search out the best athletes and find their stories. I can tell you that it is rare that I find a professional athlete who says “my parents pushed me to choose one sport and that is why I am here today”. This is a great read on Jacoby Ellsbury and is more evidence that great athletes are mutli-sport athletes first.

http://www.news-press.com/article/20120318/SPRINGTRAINING/303180051/Ellsbury-once-athlete-all-seasons

Personal Training Mentorship

Posted in Core training, Fat Loss, MBSC News, Random Thoughts, Seminars, Training, Training Females on March 19, 2012 by mboyle1959

MBSC coaches Kevin Carr and Brendan Rearick have put together a great personal training mentorship experience at MBSC.

This mentorship experience has been designed to help in the development of any coach or personal trainer looking to make training people into a career.

  • Are you new to the business?
  • Do you have your own personal training studio?
  • Are you a life long student just looking to get better?
  • Want to know how the best in the world does it?
  • Do you do mostly private and semi private training?
  • Not enough time to go back to school or to do an internship?
To learn more and reserve one of only 10 spots go to 

http://www.bodybyboyle.com/personal-training-mentorship

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 8,427 other followers