2009 Perform Better Rhode Island Training Summit Review: The Performance Trainers of the Future?
As I have been a trainer for the past 7 years, and an athlete for 24, I have found that many "trainers" of today not only lack experience, but also have no unique thoughts or ideas of their own regarding their job. This can be seen clearly in most new books that have been released by some of these "up-and-coming trainers" which contain little new and original material. Most, if not all of the information was rehashed material that other trainers had already analyzed inside and out, many times before.
It's great to know that trainers are doing outside research by publishing books, but it's not all that impressive when only old information is reiterated. I would rather read something that I disagree with, but that is a new, unique opinion that will make me think, than read something that may be great information, yet is unoriginal. I guess it is acceptable in the training community to continue your practice by reusing old ideas. Although, if you're playing it safe by everyone else's rules, then you are severely limited as a trainer with no room to grow.
The most innovative and successful trainers are those who have tried new ideas and failed time after time to form their best solutions to problems, and assessing those problems. There MUST be trial and error! If someone only succeeds, then they are only one dimensional. Wouldn't you want to be multi-faceted instead of fitting in the cookie-cutter mold of a "trainer"?
The Perform Better Seminar was a showcase of innovative trainers who have probably failed more times than they can count before they found success. They possess unparalleled experience through their experimental trial and error. Mike Boyle, Martin Rooney, Mark Verstegan, they are only a few of such ground-breaking trainers that presented their ideas at the Seminar. All of these trainers possess years of unique experience that have molded their distinctive opinions and practices. The ways in which these trainers interpret the needs of their athletes and clients, along with the successes and failures in their training and careers is most intriguing to me.
The Martin Rooney presentation on "warrior athletes" was one of my favorites. This guy is so enthusiastic and motivating! As cheesy as it sounds, he makes you want to jump out of your seat and take on the world! Not only is Rooney a great motivator, he has searched throughout the world, high and low, to learn from first-hand experience the different types of training methods, and then takes those experiences to form his own interpretation of the various training approaches. Now THAT is cool! It is innovative and exciting for the trainers that learn from him, and even more so for the clients that get to work directly with him.
Rooney made a great point, though, when he said he will NOT give a client a certain exercise, or volume of exercises, that he hasn't already done beforehand on his own. He makes sure that he has mastered the movement or exercise before coaching his clients. He himself performs the exercises in order to communicate the correct form and process of exercises to the client.
I saw a ton of trainers that, to be put bluntly, absolutely sucked at the hands-on sessions of the seminar. If they can't move or perform the exercises correctly, or stabilize themselves, then how good of a trainer can they be? This was a bit mind boggling to me. It is scary to know that some clients of these "trainers" are getting half-assed sessions from someone who doesn't have the strength or mobility to do the exercises themselves, and teach them incorrectly.
These are what I call "cheerleader trainers" that may motivate their clients to work hard, but don't coach or cue the necessary movement and/or stability patterns. If they themselves are not able to do the workouts the prescribe, how can they accurately assess others? Martin Rooney and Mark Verstegan both mentioned how most trainers don't help their clients: they hurt them by giving the clients too much volume, or such complicated exercises that the trainers themselves can't even do them.
Just a side comment: Mark Verstegan is a training MACHINE. He is a great example of an expert strength coach. His experience and longevity in the training world made him able to answer any question that the audience asked. Many trainers will not put themselves on the stand in fear of being wrong or not knowing the answer. Verstegan DID put himself out there and answered every question clearly and with ease. He had extremely positive energy, and was very poised. He had the qualities of a veteran in the business. He also had the best sound effects for his demonstations that I have ever heard from anyone in trying to explain exercises or movements, which made for a VERY entertaining presentation!
The other presentation that impressed me was by Stuart McGill. He is always on the cutting edge of things! His reinterpretation of Bruce Lee's "full body pulsing" technique or "control of chi" (which I believe is called Wang Chung technique) was really interesting. This type of training technique helps condition the body for maximum speed and power. I really enjoyed how he implemented these different types of exercises at the hands-on portion of the seminar. He really made me think about taking old, timeless ideas and combining them with new, innovating ideas to create training programs in order to build a stable ground base for beginners, and also be able to further refine a conditioned athlete.
