Holistic training…

Aaron Schwenzfeier posted a GREAT post on training the other day (among several recently…you’re getting GOOD Aaron!):

Which prompted an “offline” conversation about training. Here’s the summary:

With well-designed programming it isn’t necessary to separate “therapy” “stretching” “power” “strength” etc. as much as most folks think it is nowadays – particularly for the non-professional athlete (which includes high school and college athletes and amateur competitors).

Those things – and the people who specialize in them – become necessary when the athlete breaks down. And that happens because they’re in a “separationist” training paradigm to begin with.

My statement assumes that the athlete is training holistically to begin with. The progression of science over the past 90 years has been down increasingly narrow alleys (specialization and reduction), so most athletes aren’t training holistically, and most coaches aren’t thinking holistically.

Pete Egoscue’s “tomato patch” was a great example of part of the holistic training concept, but that old B&W film of the Polish Weightlifting team training is even better (and Pete E borrowed the idea of the Patch from that film). Here it is:

How does a weightlifter train (in that day)? – running up hills, jumping up steps (or hills), rolling and tumbling, “cross-training” (enjoying other sports casually), and…practicing weightlifting.

What they didn’t show in that video was the rest of the weightlifter’s day (which I can only guess at for that team specifically, but this is what most of the Eastern Bloc camps I’ve read about did) – classes in A&P, sessions with the sports psychologist, massage, sauna, active stretching, eating, resting and sleeping.

A lot of that training was outdoors and in the “elements” outdoors. Rain, snow, etc. Poland is home to one of the last primeval forests in the world (or vice versa). So add to that list all of the benefits (“physiological” or “psychological”) of training in the outdoors and of training in a forest.

But I think this type of thing is lost on most modern S&C coaches – even the most progressive among them.

Some hint at a pathway to the holistic concept – stick to the physiology – but I don’t think this scope is broad enough.

The physiology is extremely simple. There are a few very simple things that offer significantly greater results/effects (the old 80/20 rule) in any given area (stretching, therapy, strength/power/speed, etc.). Stick to those things.

All well and good, but what is the limit of the physiology? When you train with Mick Dodge you learn that “The trees are your external organs…” And, certain movements provide more benefits than other movements do. Brachiation provides grip and shoulder strength, flexibility, and patterning.

I think this is the real genius of “great” coaches (S&C or otherwise). They stick to simple fundamental principles that were proven (or known through experience) to produce the desired result and consider the whole ecology of their habitat.

Bill Bowerman is one good example – Hard/Easy training…sprints and long slow distance…if the athlete shows up to practice with a weird physiology (back then he just would take their pulse and look at their features) send them home to sleep or rest.

Here’s another:

16-minute hill runs would be unheard of today in this world of “sport-specific” and “energy-system” training. But Rice (and his coach) knew something that others still simply can’t grasp (because they’re holding onto their graphs and charts so tightly) – train the whole animal and succeed.

Playgrounds, The New Yorker, and Total Crap

An article in the most recent New Yorker entitled “State of Play,” gives a brief outline of the history of playgrounds in New York City, along with an overview of some of the playgrounds coming soon to a borough near you.

And it’s total crap.

Here’s the original Seward Park Playground:

And here’s David Rockwell’s upcoming Imagination Playground:

Don’t get me wrong. I like the idea of big blocks, and movable pieces. But the idea that imagination is contingent on those things is a perversion of thought, a disservice to imagination, and a marketing pitch.

What happened to playgrounds like the one the Bar-barians use? They’ve all disappeared in favor of molded-plastic “safe-houses.”

Don’t tell me it doesn’t take imagination to come up with some of those moves…

What about the outdoors? What about the playground of the woods? When I was a kid, it was my favorite place to play, hands down:

If the argument for these new-fangled playgrounds is that they’re more conducive to healthy imaginations, because they offer “movable objects,” and “diverse variegated shapes,” how do they stack up (pardon the pun) against nature – where there are sticks, stones, branches, leaves, dirt, water…and [gasp] other living creatures!!!

Not only that, but what about the fact that being in nature reduces stress hormones, improves mood, and increases the amount of physical activity you do?

It’s also nice and cool in the woods on a hot summer day. Ever notice that?

Oh oh! I’ve got another one! How about the fact that nature isn’t made of plastic? It’s totally biodegradable people! It’s GREEN! Get with the green revolution!

I’m making a serious effort to stay as positive as possible here.

Instead of planting some trees, grasses, and native plants, New York City has hired some architects to create safe playgrounds that will look like hell in 30 years after the sun beats down on them and degrades their plastic parts…or those parts get stolen or vandalized.

What are we afraid of? That, if we don’t “produce” something, it has no value? Or that, if we stop “producing” “things” we won’t be able to “make money?”

Don’t you see the fallacy in that? You’re just creating value anyway. I mean, actively making it up! Money is make-believe. We agree on the value of it. We agree that one thing is worth another. We agree to “follow the rules” of this game.

Now that’s what I call using your imagination!

However, we seem to be stuck in the game. We’ve mistaken the game for reality.

The reality is that the oil spill in the Gulf comes from this money-game we’ve decided to play.

The reality is that the plastic playgrounds of the future are made out of petroleum products.

The reality is that we have a choice. We can choose to plant park-grounds made of things that recycle the carbon we keep pumping out. We can choose to make places that are soft as grass…or we can choose to make places that are soft as “pebbled rubber.”

You choose.

Just don’t blame your choice on [your lack of] Imagination.

Here’s a good history of playgrounds in New York City.

Frank Forencich Asks – Where’s My Habitat?

Frank Forencich of Exuberant Animal points out an issue with the way we approach ourselves in the world in a recent blog post.

His complaint is that we (as individuals, and culturally) separate ourselves from our habitats to such a degree that we’ve lost touch with reality.

I couldn’t agree more.

However, I wonder how to go about changing this. And in this post, I ask for your feedback.

Below is my response to Frank’s blog post. Please let me know your thoughts on how to do this – how to get people reconnected with their habitat, with the land that gives them life, in a visceral way.

The oil spill in the Gulf is at least in part a result of our society’s (societies’) addictive use of oil…we can’t separate the drillers from the people for whom they are drilling.

People are so distracted from anything real (habitat)…what will bring them back to awareness? How does one engender awareness?

Science is a process of thought that relies on separating things. It takes dynamic systems and “analyzes” them – breaks them down into “constituent parts” – which is a fallacy. Once you’ve killed and dissected a dog, where is the dog? It isn’t there anymore…a bunch of “parts” are.

We extend this tendency (or habit, whatever it is) into philosophical, religious, economic, and political thinking…

That is, it always comes down to – “This piece is wrong/bad, we must fix it.”

Thus, from the get-go, we’re off on the wrong foot. If we interfered, and that’s what “broke” it, how can we “fix” it by interfering again?

Better to stop doing.