Author: armstrong.wou@gmail.com

Do you live to work, work to live, or live to work?  I know, the question doesn’t sound right, but, trust me, it is what I meant to write.  These are questions of our approach to work and to life.

For, possibly, the majority of people the answer is: “I work to live.”  This is a reasonable answer.  After all, our work should not consume us.  It should provide for the essentials of life—which includes food, housing, clothing, education, recreation, etc.  As the question is traditionally posed—i.e., “Do you live to work or work to live?”—this is the favored response.

Why then do I present “live to work” as two alternatives?  Because, the English language allows for the same words to have different meanings on the basis of emphasis and context.

“Live to work” usually refers to someone whose life centers around his or her work.  On one hand, this can be seen as good—one takes pleasure in going to work.  On the other hand, this can be seen as more of a negative—all one does is work.  This “live to work” is the classic “workaholic”.  One may be driven by the prestige, the money, work ethic, etc.  For such people, there is little time for anything else—family, relationships, exercise, leisure, faith/spirituality, etc.

“Live to work” can, however, present a third approach to work.  It presents what I would petition is the healthiest approach to our work.  It is the “well-centered” approach.

One can emphasize the “work”—as in “live to work”—or one can emphasize the “live”—as in “work to live”.  Alternatively, one can “live to work”.  In other words, one can serve one’s Purpose—or greater calling—in one’s work.

Remember, well-centered fitness includes growth and balance in one’s Spiritual, Physical, Intellectual, Emotional, and Social dimensions.  If we are not living to work—i.e., living Purposefully—we are lacking in one or more dimension.

It is often easy to enjoy the Physical, Intellectual, and/or Emotional aspects of our work.  These are the creative aspect of work. Where we tend to lack most in our work is in the Spiritual and Social dimensions.

Spiritual, remember, is the sense that there is more than self.  So, Spiritually, our work—knowingly or unknowingly—affects countless people beyond ourselves.  This goes far beyond the fact that our work has an immediate effect on someone—a customer/consumer.  This alone can be rewarding, but there is far more satisfaction in work when we recognize that what we are doing can (and does) have far greater impact on others and has a rippling effect (you know, that whole “six-degrees of separation” thing).

One may consider their work insignificant (I only attach doohickeys to whatchamacallits on an assembly line.), but consider who is the recipient of your work—the usefulness of the product, the joy it might bring, the benefits of your employment, etc.  Your work is only as insignificant as you make it.  Sure, it may not come with prestige or a big paycheck, but that does not make it any less important.  The line between ordinary and (extra)ordinary is drawn by our actions.

Somewhere in one’s work, one must interact with someone.  Thus, there is a Social component to our work.  Sometimes interacting with the people at your work—be they bosses, coworkers, or customers—can be the worst part of your job.  It is our choice, however, how we respond to the actions of others.  We must see the opportunities in interacting with difficult people.  Rising above a negative social environment is far more satisfying than getting sucked into it (or letting it suck the life out of you).  Let’s face it.  The work environment often sucks, but we don’t have to be its victims.  Challenging as it may be, we can choose to be positive even among the most negative people.  In doing so, we rob them of power over us—and it seriously messes with them!

Then, of course, there are the social benefits outside of the workplace.  Our income provides us the means to live outside of work.  True, the benefits for some will be much greater than for others.  If we “live to work”, we will miss out of the relational opportunities—in our marriage, family, relationships, community, etc.—if our work takes priority.  As well, our relationships in the workplace will suffer, because it is all about the work itself and not the Purpose of the work.  If we “work to live”, we will likewise miss out on the relational opportunities.  If we are working only to live, we will be driven to work more because we will always want to “live” more.  Thus, we miss making time for others, believing that we are sacrificing for them.  I am sure there is not a spouse or child who has ever said of an employed relation that they wish their husband/wife or father/mother worked more.

Our lives and work lose value when they don’t consider the Spiritual and Social impact of our actions.  It is when we consider our lives and work as Purposeful, however, that we become truly (extra)ordinary.

When given the choice—and you are, after all, given the choice—of whether to live to work, to work to live, or to live to work, choose to live to work!

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

“Try not to become a man of success, but rather try to become a man of value.”—Albert Einstein

I like to relate my attitude toward exercise to the story of the man who is seen hitting himself in the head with a 2×4.  When asked why he is doing this, he responds: “Because it feels so good when I stop.”  Yes, I am an exercise physiologist who doesn’t enjoy exercise.  I used to think (tongue-in-cheek, of course) that people who claimed to enjoy exercise were either not working hard enough or had a screw loose.  Researching for a course I am teaching and reading The Sports Gene, it appears I need to reconsider.

My preparation reminded me of James “Iron Cowboy” Lawrence, who recently completed fifty Ironman distances in fifty states in fifty days.  If you don’t know, an Ironman race includes a 2.4-mile swim, a 112-mile bicycle ride, and a marathon 26.2 mile run.  In total, he swam 120 miles, biked 5,600 miles, and ran 1,311 miles.  That is a total of 7,031 miles.  For comparison, the distance from New York City to Portland, Oregon is 2,896 miles.  So, the Iron Cowboy traveled the distance from NYC to Portland and back and nearly to Omaha, Nebraska!!!  Unbelievable, indeed.

So, what this tells us is that we tolerate exercise differently and vary in our motivation (or lack thereof) to exercise.  Interestingly, research has demonstrated that work ethic may be, in part, genetic.  For some, in fact, exercise may border on addiction.  Others, of course, prefer to be couch potatoes.  Most of us are somewhere in-between.

So, whether you struggle to find the time to exercise or to make the time to exercise, exercise!  Your health doesn’t require 7,031 miles in 50 days.  Just do as much activity as you can, when you can, and as well as you can.  Remember that Kenneth Cooper, the “father of aerobics”, said that “if you run more than 15 miles a week, it’s for something other than aerobic fitness.”

“Exercise is medicine” is a campaign by the American College of Sports Medicine.  For most it means that exercise is the prevention/treatment for hypokinetic diseases like obesity and diabetes.  For others, it is the “drug” of their addiction. 

What this also says is that we recover at quite individual rates.  Thus, for some, long frequent exercise will melt you like a Popsicle in August while others are just warming up.

James Lawrence is an unusual specimen.  He has the drive and the stamina to push through the pain and endure a tremendous amount of physical effort.  He has also developed the recoverability necessary to do something as amazing as run the 50-50-50.  It is interesting that he noted that for the half or so of his fifty Ironman distances in fifty days his body adjusted to the stress and the pain of the exercise.  In the later half or so of the fifty Iron man distances, his performances actually improved.  In other words, he was adapting to the overload—he was able to recover from an incredible amount of work in a short time (traveling from state to state on top of completing his swimming, biking, and running—and consuming the necessary calories—left less than “optimal” time for sleep).

The concept of “maximal recoverable volume”, then, is not only individualized, but seemingly fluid.  Thus, there are no charts or specifics to follow.  One just needs to know and understand his or her body.

Obviously, the Iron Cowboys of the world are quite rare.  Most of us are lucky if we can get out of bed and do some sort of effective exercise.  For these, motivation is the greatest challenge.  Or others, the motivation is there, but there is just not the time to do everything we might want to do.  Wherever you find yourself on the exerciser continuum make yourself exercise—at least minimally.  Do what you enjoy, and do it “reasonably” often.

Exercise can be fun.  If not?  Well, that is no excuse.  Do what you need to be healthy and enjoy the rest of your time.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

“People who wonder if the glass is half empty or half full miss the point.  The glass is refillable.”—Unknown

I saw the above as a meme on social media.  I suspect it was meant to be more social than philosophical (e.g., fill that glass, enjoy, and fill again), but it struck a nerve and inspired me on the tail of yesterday’s post.

We have all pondered the glass half empty or glass half full question.  (Or maybe you have seen the meme that includes the realist?)  But, let’s consider that “the glass is refillable”.  Sure, it means something to the effect of “drink up and pour another”, but I want to dissect the statement.

“The glass is refillable” means:

There is more in the bottle. Joy and blessings are renewable resources.

Our current status is temporary. If we are feeling pessimistic, we need not worry. Things will get better.  If we are feeling optimistic, we are right in feeling so.  Things will get better.

We have a glass. As long as we have a glass to fill, something can go in it. There is opportunity.

I think it is the opportunist who recognizes that “the glass is refillable”.  As I have written several times before, we have three possible responses to our circumstances.  We can view them as 1) burdens (the glass is half empty), 2) challenges (the glass is half full), or opportunities (the glass is refillable).  It is a matter of perspective.  It is a matter of choice.

The glass half empty philosophy carries a negative attitude.  It is the pessimist’s view.

The glass half full is positive, but it is limiting.  It prohibits us from experiencing all the fullness and richness that life has to offer. 

The glass that is refillable offers abundant and infinite enjoyment.  This is the attitude of gratitude.  Gratitude is the alternative to pessimism, optimism, and realism.  Be thankful for what you have and where you are.  Know that the glass is, indeed, “refillable”.

Carpe momento!

 

Image source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3AA_glass_of_red_wine.jpg

“The shortest distance between a crap day and a great day is a decision to adjust your attitude.”—Isaiah Hankel

I love Isaiah Hankel’s frankness.  Many of us will complain today of having a lousy day.  Others will be celebrating the wonderful day they are having.  In both cases, it will probably be attributed to luck or coincidence.  After all, one cannot control the circumstances of one’s day.

It is true that we have little or no control over the events of the day.  We do, however, have control over our response to our circumstances.  Moreover, we have control over how we enter into our circumstances from the start.  How we start out day makes all the difference—between a “crap day” and a “great day”.  The choice is ours.

The decision to adjust our attitude begins with our morning routine—the side of the bed we elect to get up on, so to speak—but it is also a decision that must be repeated countless times throughout the day.  We begin with journaling, positive affirmations, motivational thoughts, etc. to put us is a positive frame of mind.  If you are like me, however, that “positive frame of mind” is quickly challenged as soon as you get into traffic—or sooner (especially if you have children to get off to school *wink*).

Certainly, we get the day we expect.  If you begin the day expecting a “crap day”, it will be a lousy day.  Indeed, it will likely snowball into a worse day.  If we expect a “great day”, it is more likely that we will at least have a good day.  Stuff is going to happen to challenge us.  Expect it.  Deal with it positively.

If we expect a “crap day”, we will likely respond to the most minor of inconveniences with: “See.  I knew it was going to be a bad day.”  Conversely, when we expect a “great day”, we will see the opportunity in the minor inconveniences.  We will see the kismet.  (That is a word that has not popped into my head in a while—it refers to “fate” or “destiny”.)  In other words, we will see the purpose of an event and make the most of it—allow it to work for the good.

It all comes down to decisions.  Viktor Frankel wrote that “between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.”  Stephen Covey wrote about expanding this space—allowing more time to determine our response.  If we “adjust our attitude” at the start of the day, it requires only minor tweaks throughout the day to readjust.  (On occasion, circumstances might require a more major adjustment, but, if our mind is right from the start, the correction will be easier than if our mind is otherwise.)

Attitude has a set-point (like the temperature setting on the thermostat).  Where we set it at the start of the day will have a tremendous impact on where we remain for the day.  Sure, we will have our ups and downs, but we determine whether such ups and downs will fluctuate around “crap day” or “great day”.  If you start your week with “rainy days and Mondays always get me down”, guess what…?

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.  And….

Carpe momento!

Another important principle in exercise is “maximal recoverable volume”.  This is the maximal amount of any exercise one can do in a given workout and adequately recover by the next workout (or set).

Why do I say “adequately”?  This is where the concept of overload comes into play.  Overload, remember, is the principle that in order for a body system to adapt it must be stressed to a level greater than that to which it is accustomed.  In general, we need to keep doing a little more—but not too much—every exercise session.  Herein is where overloading/underloading, over-reaching, and over-training come into play.

I would argue that most of us are under-training.  In other words, we could potentially be doing more—under the right conditions.  It is more likely that we are doing less (much less) than our maximal recoverable volume.  Unless we are an athlete with an extensive practice schedule on top of training and a stressful private life (e.g., the college student-athlete), we are not doing enough to adequately train, let alone overtrain.

Let’s consider overload within the frame of maximal recoverable volume (MRV) as “adequate” training.  Overtraining is where MRV is exceeded beyond (nearly) return.  Too much too quickly or in a short span of time is acute overtraining—overdoing or over-reaching, more specifically.  Yes, we have all been there; done that.  In these cases, a few extra days rest and modifications in programming will be the fix.  Real over-training is the ongoing excessive overload from which one cannot recover—chronic over-training.  Signs of overtraining include: decreased performance, lethargy, irritability, depression, insomnia, suppressed immune system, loss of motivation, etc.  Few of us every really reach this point.

I say “adequately” recover because there are times when we might want to train beyond the ability to completely recover—when we push the load to a point of over-reaching with the intention of following with a period of deload.  A deload is a planned period of reduced load (there are countless theories on how to best accomplish this) with the intent of maximizing recovery.  Over-reaching is, thus, often used to prompt a state of what might be called “hyper-adaptability”.

If all this is confusing (it can be), don’t let it worry you.  The key is to find the training progression that works for you.  Over-training, after all, is really more of an issue of poor planning.  But, so is under-training.  So, what do we do??  How do we make the most of the time we have for training??

We cut out the nonsense and focus on the essentials.  What are the essentials?  First, these are the things that most effectively (and efficiently—remember “opportunity cost”) affect our goals.  The essentials also follow the “K.I.S.S” principle.

It is easy to say “keep it simple”, but fitness is as complex as it is simple.  The complexity is wadding through the trends and marketing so rampant in the fitness industry.  In its simplicity, we start at the health- and motor skill-related components of physical fitness.

Cardiorespiratory fitness.   Years ago, the “Father of Aerobics”, Kenneth Cooper, said “if you are running for more than 30 minutes, you are doing it for more than your health.”  So, how much, depends on goals.  What we do for aerobic fitness depends our “why”.  For example, a marathoner or triathlete will certainly have to train longer and more frequently than one who is interested only in heart health.  There is much evidence that short sessions of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) can improve maximal oxygen consumption and other factors related to cardiorespiratory fitness.  We can’t confuse our cardiorespiratory goals and our body composition goals, however.  Calories burned during aerobic exercise is a consideration for improving body composition rather than cardiorespiratory performance.  Indeed, it is better for the endurance athlete to minimize the energy used in competition.

Muscle strength/endurance.  I have come to the conclusion that strength/endurance programs begin with the ‘basic 5’.  The Basic 5 are the squat, the deadlift, the bench press, overhead presses, and rows.  These are the essentials.

What about biceps, triceps, abdominals, etc.?  These are not the essentials.  Wait, abdominal exercises are “not essential”?  Not really.  That is, not if we are doing the ‘basic 5’ effectively.  The abdominals—the rectus abdominus, transverse abdominus, and the internal/external obliques—are only part of what are considered the “core”.  The core includes all of the muscles that support the spine—the low back and mid-thoracic region—and, thus, stabilize the trunk.  When we lift weights (like the ‘basic 5’) we use the core to “brace the spine”.  (Here is a good read: https://renaissanceperiodization.com/core-bracing/.)  So, if we are lifting weights using exercises that require core bracing, we are thus strengthening the core.

“Excessive” core training is of no real benefit until the body composition is sufficiently low—e.g., with bodybuilders.  In other terms, as long as there is fat there is no real concerns about abdominal muscle “definition”.  So, spending more than a few minutes on abdominal exercise is not the best use of time.  The top priority is first body composition.

Now some can certainly benefit from “core training”.  This would include, of course, beginning exercisers with a weak core.  It also includes athletes.  For the athlete, dynamic core training exercise is ideal—multi-directional movements that involve acceleration and deceleration of the core muscles can improve agility, balance, etc.  Sit-up and crunches, etc. are, for most sports, non-athletic.  Overall, though, it need not take a predominate place in our exercise session.

Flexibility.  Stretching is important.  The time we spend, however, should be driven by opportunity cost.  It should not be ignored (like I often ignore my stretching exercises), but is, likewise, need not take an excessive amount of time.  Focus on your limitations.  For most, 5-10 minutes at the end of the training session (or a brief period of warm-up) is sufficient.

Body Composition.  We know that body composition depends on how much fat we have relative to our lean tissue.  Our approach to improving body composition depends on our specific goals.  Are we interested only in losing fat?  Are we mostly interested in increasing muscle mass?  Or are we interested in having a competitive physique?  Whatever the goals, it all comes down to the management of our diet and exercise.  The best approach is the K.I.S.S. principle, of course.  Small consistent changes have big effects.  The key here is consistency.  Consistency and individuality.  (More of this to come.)

Fitness need not be overwhelming.  Keep it simple and keep it practical.  Keep it specific and effective.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

I often refer to the components of physical fitness—i.e., the health-related components (cardiorespiratory, muscle strength, muscle endurance, flexibility, and body composition) and the motor skill-related components (agility, balance, coordination, reaction time, speed, and power)—and the “principles of adaptation” from exercise science (overload, specificity, progression, reversibility, and individuality).  The novice exerciser might ask: which of these components and principles are most important?  My response is always–all of them!!!  It is important to understand that, no matter what your age or goals, these are all important.  WHY??–because they are.  Physical fitness doesn’t change with the goals, and the same principles apply.

Ideally, we all want to be as fit as possible.  Unfortunately, life happens.  So, we have to consider what is most important.  My students have come to know this as “opportunity cost”.

Opportunity cost is often predicated on time.  Time is a challenge for me, so I presume the reader is likewise challenged.

We don’t have time to waste on exercise that is ineffective or less effective.  It is all about optimization.  Specificity and individuality are our starting point.  Despite a movement toward the practice of a “workout of the day” (WOD), not one of us has the exact same needs, nor do we respond the same to any exercise stimulus.  General fitness programs are fine from a convenience standpoint (and the life of the university strength and conditioning coach would be made more challenging if he/she had to design exercise programs for every individual on top of specifying programs by sport and position in the sport).  It is nonetheless important that the exercise have some level of refinement according to individual goals and fitness levels.  Key here is remembering that our fitness levels and training experience differ from the next guy, as do our genetics.  What works well for one may not work well for the next.

We all start at differing levels of initial fitness—some high and some low (most of us somewhere in-between).  Then, there is the idea of “high responders” and “low responders”.  Unfortunately, for some of us, significant results don’t come as easy as they do for others.  This is okay—unless, of course, you have high aspirations. 

If you are not getting the results you want, there are two options: 1) change your program, or 2) change your goals.  (Quitting exercise or making excuses are not options!)  And just because you are not seeing results (e.g., big muscles, six-pack abs, faster 5-K times, etc.) does not necessarily mean that you are training wrong.  I have tried countless training programs and still don’t look like Greek god.  I am, however, strong (relatively) and healthy.  This matters most.

So, remember that the body makes specific adaptations to the imposed demands and the specificity of the adaptation is limited by individual differences.

So, here are some dos and don’ts of exercise. (Not to be confused with the lists of 3s and 5s you see elsewhere—that I love so much.)

DON’T:

1. give up.
2. compare yourself or your results to another.
3. confuse lack of progress and lack of potential. (A low response may be genetic, but it can also be poor programming. It should not be a reason for #1.)
4. have unrealistic expectations. (In other words, don’t think 30 minutes of exercise 3 times a week is going to have you looking like the fitness models in your magazine. For some, this translates “You aren’t working hard enough to get that big and lean.”  For others, this translates “You aren’t working hard enough to get that big and lean.”  –See where I am going here?)

DO:

1. exercise regularly.
2. set goals according to your desires and personal abilities.
3. use your exercise time wisely. (More to come on this.)
4. be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

“If there is no struggle, there is no progress.”—Frederick Douglass

We often fear change, but change is inevitable.  Change is necessary.  Change is growth—and it hurts.

If change is not uncomfortable, it is probably not change that is associated with growth.  I often compare exercise and life—because that is what I do.  In exercise, the word “variability” is an often misapplied—and, in my opinion, a false—principle of exercise.  It is the concept from which we get “muscle confusion” or the idea that we have to frequently change things to get growth (of the muscle).  People take this and are constantly changing grips and angles and making slight modifications to the exercises, but neglect one thing—the principle of overload (stressing the muscle a bit more than that to which is accustomed by adding weight).  This change is not really uncomfortable.  It mainly serves to minimize boredom.  Progress, i.e., growth, however, comes when there is struggle.  It requires effort.

Life is no different.  If change does not come with some discomfort it is either not sufficient or it is not really progressive.

Progress (i.e., “progressive”) has a negative connotation for some, as it has become fodder for political debate.  It is often a label used for liberals and one that is held with contempt by some conservatives.  Now, my intent is not to use this as a political platform, so whatever one’s political position might be does not matter.  Progressivism (according to Wikipedia) is “based on the Idea of Progress, which asserts that advancements in science, technology, economic development, and social organization are vital to the improvement of the human condition”.  Certainly, this is open to all sorts of political and social debate (which the reader can partake of in their own time, if so desired), but with regards to the pursuit of “well-centered fitness” progress (growth) is the central goal.  Progress is, indeed, “vital to the improvement of the human condition” Spiritually, Physically, Intellectually, Emotionally, and Socially, and progress, as I have asserted, requires change.

We often allow our political and social views to construct imaginary walls which restrict us.  We sometimes speak of “thinking outside the box” when there is no box.  There is no need to think outside of the box.  What we need is to stop believing there is a box at all.  Walt Disney once told a colleague: “No! Don’t think outside the box. Once you say that, you’ve established that there is a box.”  Of course, his reference was to creativity, but it applies no less to growth.

Religion is very much about the construction of walls to our thinking.  There should, however, be a difference between guiding one’s morality and limiting thought.  Christ, after all, came not to “condemn the world, but to save it” (John 3:17, NIV).  Yes, we Christians like to focus on John 3:16 and, as such, construct a box, but our focus should, nevertheless, be on saving the world—improving the social condition—albeit uncomfortable.

If our efforts to change the world don’t cause us some discomfort, we are probably not acting very effectively.  That is, no pain no gain.

Carpe momento!

“There are no constraints on the human mind, no walls around the human spirit, no barriers to our progress except those we ourselves erect.”—Ronald Reagan

 

My sister shared an article* about West Virginia University wide receiver, David Sills V.  Sills made news 6-1/2 years ago when, at the age of 13 years, he committed to USC to play quarterback.  Coaching staffs changes and by his senior year, he decommitted from USC and went to WVU (my alma mater!).  He did not, however, find himself the starting quarterback for the Mountaineers.  Instead, he was moved to wide receiver—where he excels.  The transition wasn’t easy, and it took a brief juco transfer to get the dream of being a quarterback out of his system.  Nonetheless, Sill has found where he is supposed to be.

The whole story is a great read.  There is a lesson in it for all of us, but especially for young athletes—and, particularly, for their parents.  We all dream, but sometimes it takes the death of a dream to reveal what we are supposed to be doing.

The notion of committing to a University at 13 in any sport and/or–especially–at a specific position is absurd and unfair to the athlete. Yet, it is becoming common place for athletes, at the direction, quite often of coaches (interestingly, often coaches who have a financial interest in the athlete’s specialization, e.g., as a private position coach or owner of a club team), to specialize at a very early age.  Unfortunately, more and more parents are being convinced that this is a necessity, if the athlete is to “make it to the next level”.

At 12-13 years, the athlete has only begun to reach the level physical and emotional maturity where sports specialization has any benefit (if there is such a benefit). Early specialization can also rob the athlete of the opportunity to discover where his or her true talent(s) lay.  There is mounting scientific (and empirical, if one is willing to open one’s eye to it) evidence that early specialization is not helpful and even detrimental to the athlete’s long-term success.  In The Sports Gene, David Epstein suggests that athletic success is a matter of “hardware and software”.  In other words, success requires the genetic predisposition and athleticism, as well as the specific skill development.  Prior to the age of 13-14 years, it is best for the athlete to emphasize athletic development and physical maturation.  At 14 years or so, the athlete can quickly develop the specific neural programming that comes with skill development.  The list of athletes who found their sport “late” is quite long.  The story of David Sills V tells us that an athlete can spend years chasing the wrong dream.  It also shows that athleticism counts first.

What is “athleticism”?  It is a rather ambiguous and intangible word.  What does it mean when someone says, “That kid is athletic”?  Personally, I find it a bit hard to express as a list of bullet points.  I find it something that is more intuitive.  It involves how the athlete moves and the degree to which he or she naturally demonstrates motor skill-related fitness—agility, coordination, balance, reaction time, speed, and power.  You just know it when you see it.  Unfortunately, it reveals itself in some kids earlier or later than it does in other kids.  It is unfortunate because some kids get boxed into a sport and position too early and burn out or wear out before they fully find their path.  Meanwhile, other athletes lose interest because they are sidelined before they have the chance to shine—or they learn that they are not as good at 15 as they were at 9.  The flame of the dream either burns out or never fully catches.  Either way, it is a shame for these kids.

As long as there are parents buying to the myth of sports specialization and club sports continue to grow, there will be a push for join the fallacy.  If, as a parent, you see promise in your child’s athleticism, let your priority be that they have fun and just play.  Allow them the opportunity to develop motor skills, as well as other non-sport-specific talents, and let’s not forget academics.  Teach your prospective athlete, above all else, to be coachable.  If you want to spend money to help the child’s prospects in sport, find a qualified strength and conditioning professional who can help them develop physically (and mentally) and focus on motor skill development and injury prevention.  (The rise in ACL injuries among young female athletes—it is not surprising that this is especially true for sports like volleyball and soccer—should be cause for alarm and a strong argument for sports performance conditioning over private position coaching.)

My son is not a starter on his football team.  Unlike many parents, who might be questioning the coaches, I am grateful.  I am, personally, not interested in having him be a starter.  He has phenomenal coaches across his sports.  The athletes are learning first and foremost to be better people through sports.  They are learning to be coachable—on and off the field.  My son is athletic (I married well).  On any given day, he can be the best on the team in a number of positions.  However, it is not every day.  So, for one, I am thankful that he is being made to learn that effort is rewarded.  He has to work harder, if he wants to start.  That said, I realize that starting may actually work to his detriment.  If he starts, it is likely in one position.  He’ll play that position and get pulled on occasion so that all the kids have a chance to play.  As a promising athlete, he can get more playing time being able to fill a variety of holes on the offense or defense.  It is making him better across the board.  It also carries over to (and from) the other sports he enjoys—wrestling and lacrosse.  There are kids on the team who are more consistently good at certain positions.  My son may be better than them or he may not be.  That is for the coaches to decide.  Ultimately, I want my son to be a team player first.  Contribute where he is needed.  Work hard and be coachable.  He will learn to be consistent, and his role on the team will be revealed.  It is not for me to fuel his dreams.  It is not for me to tell the coaches where he should be (or wants to be) playing.  My role as a parent is to support him and the coaches.

I have no idea where sports will lead (he just turned 12 years).  Sports may ultimately not be his thing.  All I ask of him is that he be his best today and be better tomorrow.  He may play defensive end for WVU or wrestle for Iowa.  He may be a lacrosse goalie or a LSM.  He may change sports completely or shift his interests elsewhere.  He may have an athletic scholarship, an academic scholarship, or we might pay for college out-of-pocket.  He might choose a trade over college.  Who knows?  It is his path.  It is his dream to dream.

Carpe momento!

*https://www.si.com/college-football/2017/08/25/david-sills-v-recruitment-usc-west-virginia

Are you getting better—stronger, faster, better endurance, etc.?  If so then your exercise program is working.  “But, I don’t have six pack abs!”  “But, I don’t look like Dwayne Johnson!” “But,…”  Sorry, but maybe you aren’t meant to—and that’s okay.

There are a few things at work, physiologically.  Some are within one’s control, e.g., your exercise programming, diet, recovery, etc.  Also at work are one’s genetics.  I often share the statement from pioneer physiologist, Per Olof Åstrand, that “if you want to be an Olympic champion, choose your parents wisely.  Now, maybe we don’t get to choose our parents, and our genes are what they are, but genetics are never an excuse—never!

I have been taking a much closer look at genetics and physical performance as I prepare for a course I will be teaching this fall, and it is fascinating stuff.  It is also complicated stuff.  But, we don’t have to stress over the complicated stuff, because the basics are pretty insightful.

The way I see it, we all have some level of genetic potential.  The potential is quite specific according to physiological system—e.g., one is predisposed to a high maximal oxygen consumption (i.e., a potential endurance athlete), to pack on a great deal of muscle mass, or not.  Our genetic potentials are individualized and predictive of our potential success (not of our failure, however, because we can all benefit from exercise in some ways—though we might be non-responders in some areas).  We have to take a close look at what we have been given genetically and have reasonable goals.  For example, if you are 5’6”, your likelihood of making it to the NBA is next to zero, unless you have an extraordinary vertical jump and really long arms (successful basketball players all have much greater than average arm-wing-span-to-height ratios—Nate Robinson was shy of 5’8”, but had an arm wing-span of 6’1” and 5’7” Spud Webb had a phenomenal 44” vertical jump).  Some aspects of performance are trainable, but only within the limits of one’s genes.

So, should you have picked your parents poorly, perhaps you need to reconsider your goals and pursue more suitable opportunities.  I, jokingly, refer to myself as a “wrestler trapped in a basketball player’s body”.  Technically, given my rather normal arm-wing-span-to-height ratio and poor vertical jump (I never learned to jump—that is, never trained to jump), even at 6’5”, I don’t truly have a basketball player’s body.  There were probably much better sports for me to have succeeded in than football and wrestling.  My oxidative capacity if on the higher side.  My long body and chicken leg may have suited me to crew—had there been opportunity (I am much too big for endurance running).  If one is content with one’s goals, by all means, train accordingly.  One’s expectations, however, should be reasonable.

I like to lift weights.  I have lifted fairly consistently since I was a freshman in high school.  Now, my training knowledge has vastly improved over the decades, but my body really hasn’t.  I have accepted the reality that I have to train harder and smarter for gains—and that I have to accept that the gains will not be significant.  I am realistic.  I don’t have the body for powerlifting or bodybuilding.  My greatest hope is to keep building (or at least maintain) strength and “look fit”.  I recognize that, for me, without a tremendous dedication of time and extreme dietary control, having my abdominal muscles show is never going to happen.  (I actually realized this when I was 5% body fat in my mid-20s and still did not have a washboard stomach.  I enjoy food too much and looked too skinny.  I have since also found that I can’t seem to have muscle without some fat.  So, I have chosen to “grow into my fat”.)

So, if you are not where you want to be physically, don’t be so quick to give up, blame your trainer, or switch programs.  If you are seeing gains, your program (and trainer) are probably alright.  Just keep at it and don’t compare yourself to the next guy or gal.  Pursue what you want, but don’t stress over what you can’t have.  Be realistic.  Don’t give up.  (And, certainly, don’t use your genetics as an excuse for not being the best you can be!)

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

Image source: http://mymodernmet.com/howard-schatz-beverly-ornstein-athlete/

“There’s always ways of motivating yourself to higher levels. Write about it, dream about it. But after that, turn it into action. Don’t just dream.”—Dan Gable

We all aspire to be something or someone greater.  We are dreamers.  But successful people don’t only dream, they do!

This is the third in my Gable series, and, honestly, I think I could keep going, but it is, perhaps, symbolic to end with this one (though this won’t be the last time I share the inspiration of Coach Gable).  I can keep sharing great quotes and words of inspiration, but these are only as good as the effort that follows them.  An underlying theme of this blog (and, remember, I am more often than not writing to myself) is the encouragement to “be your best today; be better tomorrow.”  This is a charge to action.  This is not a charge to “just dream”.  “Be” is the operative work. “BE your best today; BE better tomorrow”!  Don’t just think about it—act!!

I feel like I can go on writing here, but it would negate the purpose.  You and I don’t need to keep thinking about what we need to do.  We need to start doing.

Carpe momento!