From my observation of the rise of this and that guru over the years, it seems the flow of new ideas and refinement of things slows as the coach or trainer is less and less involved with ongoing training of people.
Giving weekend seminars make them very good at coaching 3-6 basic movements. But ongoing training of people makes them good at adjusting things, and programming, and questioning whether those 3-6 movements are the optimal ones.
As well, weekend seminars makes you orient your approach to what will impress trainers, whereas ongoing training of people makes you think of what will work for athletes or the general public. Unfortunately, these are different things.
It's like the PT school teacher I had who when we arrived in the morning we found him training clients, and at lunch he trained some more - he was a better teacher of personal training than the ones who just taught trainers.
There are many gurus for us trainers to follow. But consider each critically: how long is it since they made their living training members of the general public? If you have been training people for 5 years, and they trained people for 5 years 15 years ago and just did seminars and wrote books since, you may actually know more about training members of the general public than they do.
Thoughts?
Bookmarks