So one thing I wanted to try was to jot down random thoughts all week and just start writing a few sentences in a thread. I tend to think it will take up less time and still give a window in what is driving me at the moment.
1. Perfecting and dialing in Kettlebell Ballistics maybe has the most value for energy systems training. At the very least, it adds variety, but all the collateral benefits of training in a concurrent model dominated by kettlebell ballistics seems quite efficient.
2. The side press seems to be rather underused especially with folks with stiff shoulders. Is this a solace for stiff 1-1s on the FMS Shoulder Mobility?
Aside from this, don’t you have to have your hips turned out 45 degrees away from the pressing side to do a side press?
3. Pavel has a few exercises that he uses to describe the WTF Effect, the kettlebell swing most notably. The WTF Effect flippantly describes how seemingly very distant qualities are improved from a training scheme that doesn’t focus on these qualities.
I say add the pull-up to the WTF effect exercises if it’s not already been discussed.
Someone that can bang out a few tactical pull-ups is never terribly overweight. They are never weak. They are never terribly unathletic movers. They rarely if ever have back pain. They typically have a strong core. Heavy pull-ups usually get you big reps.
The brachiation effects that are often shrouded in ancient or dated physical culture really have quite a but if value when we look.
4. Using methods or technologies that yield daily readiness is a very, very different approach in the different phases of Block Training.
Monitoring for Realization is very, very different than during Transmutation and Accumulation.
The cost of training as you build up or improve qualities is quite high. When we are “peaking” or closing in on the big goal of demonstrating all these new qualities, there should be a much smaller cost of training. It’s too late to get better at anything. Now it’s time to keep overall intensities at a level where we are close to 100% of what we can do come game day.
In Omegawave terminology, what you are capable of doing is known as Preparedness, and what you can express at any given day is Readiness. When you have great handles, through whatever means you choose to monitor, it provides great information for making informed decisions on training.
Using this approach, Preparedness will ascend and mildly plateau as you enter Realization. However, the bell ringing thought is how you can still bring intensities/volumes/loads that still get you better with a very low cost allostatically during Realization.
This approach really only works when you have a particular event that you are getting revved up to do. It won’t make sense if you are just training without a defined event with parameters that you have to duplicate and deliver.
This discussion came out of how to use Omegawave for bodybuilding, and I struggled to collect my thoughts until maybe we had a 12-week program that you knew was the best program for you to peak for a show. Then training would all be funneled into being Prepared and Ready to crush those 12 weeks. The 12 weeks I guess would be the Realization. I guess.
5. Based on the thoughts above, maybe there’s a big difference between Program Design and Program Intent.
Maybe Design is filling up the Excel blocks with what exercises will have the best carryover to your goals. Awareness of fundamental skills and abilities and the movements of the terminal event will guide this.
Intent is melding those movements with intensities, volumes, etc. that will lead to the terminal event being less daunting than the final acquisitions of training.
6. The more I think about this equation, the more I see how it explains a lot.
Genetics + Individual + Training = Results
If we were a machine, training with particular intent and design would get us the results we want.
However, as an individual, we have a different reception to changing our body every day, and if we know this, we can better decide what type of manual therapy, how heavy to load, how hard to push for each training session to get the most out of that training session.
And some strategies will never get us certain results based on genetics or structural changes of the individual.
There’s more to it than just what the method is supposed to do. Having some kind of idea of where the individual is in the Alarm-Resistance-Recovery-Supercompensation probably is paramount in making training or rehab decisions.
7. As the Preparedness curve plateaus as we approach a competition, I don’t know if the semantics are best suggesting we are getting better. I think we are getting Readier.
8. Is it correct that Lorimer Moseley at a conference in Boston suggested that we should reconsider the term Neuromatrix in favor of the term Biomatrix?
Did he say that we have a body that is connected to our brain?
Pain science can go top-down and bottom-up.
9. In deciding to have surgery, I’ve asked folks to think of 2 things rarely discussed. These are the 2 things that drove me to have surgery back in December.
Okay, so you can probably do okay without surgery, but do you think you’ll be able to throw BP to your son 10-15 years from now?
Okay, so you can probably do okay without surgery, but getting something done now in your middle 30s might be a less invasive surgery and one that you can recover from easier than what you’ll get in your middle 50s.
We need surgeons. Training and Rehab doesn’t fix everything.
10. Is it accurate that a possible explanation for trigger points is that the different distant areas were once the same area in the developing fetus? Dare I use the word phylogenetic?
Aside, how can anyone suggest trigger points don’t exist? Doesn’t David Butler call it a cultural thing in America?
11. There are 11-13 muscles that refer pain to the shoulder in Travel’s text.
12. When you eat a lot of vegetables, you don’t get hungry. How ’bout them apples…………………, which are fruit?
I can’t decipher how much of your tone in #8 above is sarcasm and what is not. I have found pain science interesting, but I have wondered if some people aren’t overstating the case for it. Is this, in part, what you are saying? That physical interventions are still a very viable way to deal with chronic pain states? Is that what you mean by “bottom-up”?
Thanks, I enjoy the blog,