Month: July 2017

I shared, yesterday, the “3 F’s of change” (James C. Hunter)—Foundation, Feedback, and Friction.  These have inspired quite a bit of thought about a number of things that I am sure I will be sharing over the days to come.  Today, it will be giving some of my thoughts on education.

I am an educator and have a number of great teachers in my family.  I support education.  I am also highly critical of education.  I sometimes appear overly critical of education.  I appear so critical because 1) I am passionate about it, and 2) I see the product of education.  I intend to be constructively critical, but it doesn’t always come across as such.  (So, please, if you continue reading, understand this to be my intent.)

Change is essential—particularly in education.  “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results” (Albert Einstein).  Education in the United States has remained virtually unchanged for generations.  It hardly keeps up with our changing society.

I believe that education is the root solution for every problem that is facing our world today.  So, yes, I am passionate that about it!  We rightly consider education to be a fundamental right.  I support public education.  I do not, however, take access to education lightly.  In other words, I believe that as educators we have a moral obligation to provide more than a degree, and students have an obligation to do more than just show up.

A diploma might have its greatest value when one runs out of toilet paper—unless it leads to a better society.  Recent graduates often complain about the lack of jobs and opportunity, as well as the mounting debt that higher education causes.  There is certainly some truth to these concerns, however….

Education is expensive.  There is no denying this.  In many cases, going into debt to be educated is necessary.  Wisdom, however, is warranted.  Questions need to be asked.  What am I getting in return for this debt?  Can I afford this now?  Would I be better to postpose my education and save some money?  Is this “stuff” I “need” (e.g., new phone, computer, car, clothes, etc.) necessary?  For what am I being educated?  Will there be a career for me when I complete the degree? Et cetera.

If you are not going to be able to pay the debt because the field of choice is a low-paying field, then, well, Forrest Gump nailed it: “Stupid is as stupid does.”  On one hand, the student has responsibility, here.  On the other hand, we educators have to take some of the blame.  Believe me, as an exercise science professor, I often ask myself: “What the hell am I doing?”  (Kiplinger.com recently listed Exercise Science as the #10 “Worst College Majors for Your Career 2016-2017”.  In the March 2009 issue of Professionalization of Exercise Physiology online, respected chair of the Department of Exercise Physiology at The College of St. Scholastica and editor of PEPonline, published an article, “Exercise Science Is Not a Sound College Investment”.)  Now, certainly, there is much truth to the Kiplinger ranking and Dr. Boones’ statement about the degree.  Kiplinger looks at exercise science as a route to a career as a fitness trainer.  Dr. Boone addresses that the majority of exercise programs are designed to prepare students for advanced degrees—more debt.  I see the points being made, but I also see the great opportunity in an exercise science degree.  (I personally believe it should be the preferred route to all advanced medical degrees, e.g., MD, DO, DPT, PA, etc.  I also see that, for students preparing for these professions, there are other career options, if they fail to obtain admission to medical school, etc.)  The key to making an exercise science program (or any academic program) successful and valuable is in taking care not to merely prepare students for a job (e.g., fitness instructor) or for graduate school.  Rather, education—and this should be understood as the role of all education—is to prepare students to become a creative member of society.  In other words, education should—must—not merely prepare students for jobs.  Instead, education should be preparing job creators.  Unfortunately, educators—particularly in higher education—are too focused on their own disciplines and fail to see the broader connections that should be made during a college degree.  Often educators train students from their perspective of the discipline for the purpose of preparing one for a career in said disciple.  Decades ago, this may have worked.  Times, as Bob Dyan sang, “they are a changin’”.

I believe that education needs to be more flexible.  Information is so easily accessible to all levels of society through the Internet and books.  The traditional lecture/notetaking format must give way to developing critical thinking skills.  I expect my students to challenge what I teach and what society attempts to teach.  There is so much discussion, lately, or “fake news”.  The fitness industry, from my perspective, is more driven by marketing than physiology.  Educated people must be discerning.

Education (Kindergarten through PhD) must provide more than a certificate of completion (i.e., diploma).  Education is to be the foundation for future life.  It should prepare students to become productive members of society.

It is important to note that “educated” is not limited to scholarship.  Indeed, we would be nowhere without people skilled in trades or willing to take on the physical labor that builds the thinks that the thinkers create.  Such persons are critical to society and should me considered for their contribution.  Without the creators, though, there is no hope for the laborer.  We must produce creators!

I support STEAM education.  There is much talk of STEM education in schools—Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics—but there is also a critical contribution to be made by the Arts (and, of course, I demand that Physical Education be included).  As educators, no matter what our discipline, we need to understand the role that each of these—each of us—play in producing a well-educated society.

I propose a system that broadly educated at all levels to provide the skills for everyone to succeed.  Rather than teach to a battery of tests or to an antiquated degree plan, we must focus of delivering the skills that will ultimately add value to the educated.

A diploma is expensive and should be thought of as more than a purchase.  An education is an investment in our society, as well as the student.  The value of an education must appreciate with time or it is money wasted.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow!

Carpe momento!

I recently started my (almost) 12-year-old son and his friend lifting weights.  Many parents question when to start their young athlete in a weight training or sports preparation program.  So, I thought I might address the idea of beginning weight training for children.

It has been within the last 20 years or so that we (exercise scientists) have even begun to explore starting kids lifting weights before high school.  And there still remains some resistance among coaches in some sports to have the athletes lift at all.  (I had heard a story from one parent a couple of years ago about a coach who threatened to cut any players who participated in any outside conditioning.)  On the other hand, there are the coaches who insist on year-around “sport-specific” training and having complete control of the athlete.  I don’t have too much favorable to say for such coaches.  Fortunately, the science has begun to demonstrate the benefits of preparation for youth sports.  Indeed, the evidence is mounting, in my informed opinion, that it is essential.

We discuss the age at which a child can/should begin resistance training in several of my courses.  My instruction is always that a child should begin resistance training from birth.  Notice, I am saying resistance training.  This is not weight training, per se, and not all weight training is appropriate fro children until they reach the appropriate stage of development (note: “stage”, not “age”).  What I mean by resistance training from birth is that muscle responds to the resistance to its contraction—e.g., lifting something provides resistance and pushing against a limb as one is attempting to move it provides resistance.  Take note of what happens when you grab a baby’s foot.  What does she do?  She pushes back.  Resistance training.  Such play is essential for building the strength to sit, stand, walk, etc.  Adding weights is just a progression.

So, to the question: “At what age can a child should start ‘lifting weights’?”  When they reach a stage of readiness.  When they ask, and when they can maintain the level of focus and enthusiasm to perform the movements safely.  (For the sake of the professional’s sanity, please, don’t force your athletes into conditioning programs.)  In my experience, this comes around the age of junior high school (7^th or 8^th grade)—possibly younger in some.  I have seen kids as young as 8 be focused and ready, but this is atypical.

So, your athlete wants to start lifting weight?  Where do you start?

My preference for all beginning weight trainers is to start on machines, if possible.  This gives the exerciser a “feel” for how the muscles need to contract when performing specific movements.  From here, one can progress to less and less stable movements using free weights.  The challenge for young athletes, however, is that, at nearly all gyms, these machines are built for average sized adults.  There are machines out there that are designed specifically for kids, but good luck finding access to them.

This leaves us with body weight exercises and free weights.  In my opinion, body weight exercises and calisthetics should be part of physical education from the start, and, thus, the athlete should have a foundation prior to starting with weights.  (I say “should” because most kids are not getting adequate PE in school.)

Over the years, there was an unwarranted fear of free weight exercises for prepubescent children.  The concern was for the risk of injuring the growth plates.  While injuring the growth plates is serious (the growth plates are cartilage and cartilage takes longer to heal than bone; so, an injury could result in impaired growth in the bone), the likelihood from performing free weight exercises in proper form is unlikely.  Indeed, bone is strengthened by the forces applied to it (i.e., “Wolff’s Law”).  For prepubescent girls, in particular, weight-bearing exercise is important for strong bones and minimizing the risk of osteoporosis later in life.  (There are a number of benefits for young ladies that I will save for another post).

So, the only danger in children doing free weight exercises is in doing them with poor form and without proper supervision.  Before a child starts lifting heavier weights, he or she should demonstrate mastery of the technique.  With any strength training, strength increases first come from improved neuromuscular coordination (e.g., motor unit recruitment and synchronization).  Thus, I prefer to stick to the basics before getting crazy with variety.  As well, the exercises can be performed with greater frequency (even daily) because the stress is to the nervous system not the skeletal muscle tissue and recovery is fast.  There is some evidence that more frequent training, in beginners, will increase the strength gains.  (It is not until someone is lifting really heavy weights that maximal recoverable volume becomes a more significant concern.  So, don’t worry that you have to stick to an every-other-day schedule—at least initially.)

In sticking to the basics, I have settled on five exercises: squat, deadlift, bench, lat pulldown, and overhead press.  For the squat, I have found the “landmine” squat to be a good start.  The spine does not bear the weight, and the athlete can focus on keeping a neutral spine and sitting back into the squat.  The deadlift can seem intimidating, but it is an essential exercise and learning the techniques is better earlier than later.  Of utmost importance is that the athlete learn the proper hip hinge and to pull the weight with the glutes (butt) and hamstrings.  Once the athlete masters these, (s)he will be ready to add some variety (but know that the notion of “muscle confusion” is a myth—stick to the basics!)

The repetitions (reps) don’t need to be high (i.e., >10-12 reps).  Too high of reps is likely to lead to a breakdown in technique, which will defeat our purposes.  I like to keep the squat and deadlift at about 8 and 5 reps, respectively, to start.  The bench, pulldown, and press can go as high as 10.  Three working sets (you might want a couple of unweighted sets to “practice” the movement and warm up before adding weight—remember we are keeping it light to start) should be sufficient.  The weight used should be challenging, but not cause a breakdown of technique.

Don’t rush adding weight or expect your 12 year-old to start looking like Arnold Schwarzenegger to quickly.  Keep the focus on proper form and enjoying the activity.

You might also notice that I didn’t include “curls for the girls”.  First, these are considered accessory lifts.  Second, the basic five will involve the biceps and triceps, so they will develop, as well.  Third, curls are not athletic movements.  Finally, we don’t want to develop lifters who spend their focus at the gym on bench and curls.  Overall, athletic performance is the goal.  Asthetics will follow with proper lifting.  Later, if the athlete wants to pursue bodybuilding more refined movements will be necessary.  Until then, the K.I.S.S. principle applies.

Keep it fun.  Keep it simple.  Above all, keep it safe.

In addition to weight training, don’t forget that there are other aspects of conditioning to consider—e.g., cardiorespiratory endurance, muscle endurance, agility, speed, etc.  (More on these to come.)

Change is a critical part of growth and self-improvement.  I have adopted the term for constant improvement, kaizen, frequently used in business circles.  At it’s very core, “well-centered fitness” requires constant movement toward self-improvement, i.e., continued growth.  In his book, The World’s Most Powerful Leadership Principle, James C. Hunter considers the “3 F’s of change”.  These are: 1) Foundation, 2) Feedback, and 3) Friction (pp. 173-184).  As I consider these, I find that my mind comes to so many ways that these can be applied Spiritually, Physically, Intellectually, Emotionally, and Socially in our lives—in our pursuit of growth and “well-centeredness”.

First, before any change can occur, one must want to change.  No measure of pressure, coercion, or any self-improvement book or seminar can cause one to change unless he or she decides there is a need and a desire to change.  Remember the Transtheoretical Model for Behavioral Change?  We cycle through 5 Stages of Change: Precontemplation, Contemplation, Preparation, Action, and Maintenance.  Included at any time within the process of change, of course, is the potential for Relapse.  In considering these, the “3 F’s” find great utility.

Foundation.  Foundation is education.  In all of the early stages of change, the best strategy is to provide the basic knowledge that will trigger a desire to change.  One cannot decide to do something they do not know can or needs to be done.  Consider someone who opens a business, yet fails to advertise.  Countless people may have no knowledge that there is such a service (precontemplation), while many may hunger for the services of such a business but not know that the business exists (contemplation).  One cannot simple open the doors to a business and expect the profits to just start pouring in.  Wisely, a successful business person will “educate” the community about his/her services.

Corporations are notorious for hiring consultants to “train” employees.  My father was a management consultant and once published an article “The Boss Got a New Book”.  The premise was that every time a leader read a new best-selling book on success he/she would be on fire to implement the strategy.  Seminars and workshops would be scheduled, everyone will get excited (for a while), and maybe there would be change.  (James C. Hunter suggests that maybe 10% of the people involved in the seminar/workshop/training will actually change.)  There may be improvement for a while, but it soon gravitates back to old habits and stagnation.

It is import to lay the foundation—to set the standards that are expected.  However, education alone does little to promote lasting change.  One can read or attend all of the workshops he/she can, but there needs to be further action.  Quite simply, there needs to be action.  One must take the steps to change, and this is rarely done alone.

Feedback.  Feedback, according to Hunter, is where we “identify the gaps between the set standard and current performance”.  There will be a great need for support in trying to change.  Certainly, we can self-evaluate (one of the reasons I encourage journaling and do so, myself), but we will want and need feedback from people who are significant in our lives.  (I am constantly encouraging my children to call me out when I do or say things that I am teaching them not to do—and they do.  They know I am not perfect and that it is not okay for me to be hypocritical.)  Having mentors is critical.  We need to have frank discussions with people who will challenge us.  If you never have difficult or heated discussions with your friends, you might want to consider with whom you are spending your time.  Remember: iron sharpens iron (Proverbs 27:17).

I also like the concept of a Mastermind group, which can take may take many forms, but is essentially the feedback piece we need for continuous self-improvement (kaizen).  Remember: “You are the average of the five people you spend the most time with” (Jim Rohn).  Choose the people who will give your honest feedback.

Friction.  Friction is the critical extension of Feedback.  Contractually, as a faculty member at the university at which I teach, I am required once a year to be “observed” in my teaching by a peer in my division (i.e., my academic unit).  In turn, I observe one of my peers.  It is one of the most useless activities I have to do as a member of a faculty (and academics do some really useless stuff!).  Being “observed” means I get a pat on the back from one of my peers and this goes up, I don’t know how many levels, and gets filed somewhere.  I have had nine of these at my current institution, and none have helped me be a better teacher.  After all, I tend to know what I do well (or think I do well).  I would much prefer criticism, however, that is not part of the culture.

At two other institution I have taught, we received peer evaluations.  At my first institution, these did include things upon which to improve, but were rarely what I would label as “friction—a healthy tension, if you prefer” (James C. Hunter).  In the four years I was at Hope College, in Holland, Michigan, I received what I found to be helpful evaluations.  My department chair, Dr. Richard Ray, in my first evaluation, gave me three pages of feedback on my Anatomy lecture.  While most of the evaluation was favorable—ouch!—there was quite a bit of criticism.  It was a shock, coming from a public institution that worried about writing anything that might hypothetically be used against you in the tenure/promotion process.  Dr. Ray’s evaluation was useful.  Among academic leaders I have worked with over the years, Rich was (is) one of my biggest supporters.  The pain I felt reading the review was not offense, it was humility.  Dr. Ray was honest and wrote with a desire to see me be my absolute best, and in the four years I spent at Hope College I grew the most as a teacher.

Unfortunately, we are moving away from creating a healthy tension most everywhere in our society.  I am sure that I will write to this in days to come.  We need to stop thinking self-esteem is so fragile and leave our “safe spaces” for the healthy spaces where friction is encouraged. Criticism is really not a horrible thing—when offered constructively.  Friction is necessary.  Physical laws aside, social friction—appropriately applied—can shape and polish.

I have much more to say on this topic, but, until then….

Be your best today; be better tomorrow!

Carpe momento!

“Do not waste time bothering whether you ‘love’ your neighbor; act as if you did. As soon as we do this we find one of the great secrets.  When you are behaving as if you loved someone, you will presently come to love him.”—C.S. Lewis

I wrote on this topic a while back and shared a passage I wrote for my son in Lessons for Liam.  From time to time, however, I need to remind myself.

In many ways, I believe I have little trouble loving my neighbor.  It is, after all, the basis for my faith (John 13:34).  The greater challenge for me is to like my “neighbor”.  Thankfully, it was never said that we have to “like your neighbor”.  Some people, after all, are real jerks—myself (hopefully only on occasion) included.

“I am third”—my God is first, my family and friends are second, and I am third—speaks to the command to love your neighbor.  To love someone is to see beyond what you don’t like about them and to remove yourself from the center of the Universe.  Love does not require agreement.  It does not require anything other than acknowledgement that we are one.  As a scientist, this very Spiritual concept is quite clear.  We all share the very real energy of Creation.  As we look closely—we’re talking quantum physics close—at the physical world, it becomes increasingly spiritual.  We consume/absorb/inspire carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, and the various elements of the periodic table.  At the same time, we excrete/radiate/expire these very same elements that were once us and now become another, only to be passed on to yet another.  On the very smallest scale we and the Universe are but forms of vibrating energy, the source of which has and will continue to be argued in philosophical, scientific, and theological circles for millennia.  So, with this understanding, “love” is easy.

Unfortunately, this same energy takes the form of ideas.  It is the intellectual, emotional, and social personification of these ideas that challenge our ability to love.  It is the disharmony of ideas that leads one to hate.

Yes, I disagree with a lot of ideas and, as a consequence, people.  I don’t like people.  I don’t like the actions people take or don’t take.  I can be quite unlikeable, myself.  When it comes to ideas, personalities, and the like, I (we) have a simple choice: we can love or we can hate.  Love, despite our differences, chooses to work toward unity.  Hated, alternatively, chooses to separate.  “Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails…” (Galatians 13:4-8, NIV).  Nowhere does it say love has to like.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

“Loving your neighbor means many things.  It means doing them no harm.  It means offering your assistance when you are able.  It means giving the gift of your time and resources.  It means listening when you want to talk; giving when you want to take.  It means yielding to the will of others.  It means not judging.  It means tolerance.  It means patience.  It means being kind when you don’t want to be.  It means sacrifice.  It means forgiveness.  Loving your neighbor means acting is such a way as to mutually benefit all people.

Your neighbor is not just the person next door.  It is the person across town.  It is the person on the other side of the country—on the other side of the world.  Your neighbor is male and female.  Your neighbor is of all faiths.  Your neighbor is of all colors, cultures, and lifestyles.  Your neighbor is your friend.  Your neighbor is your enemy.  Love your neighbor!”—Lessons for Liam

There is a principle in exercise science called the “principle of specificity”.  This states that “a body system makes specific adaptations to imposed demands.”  Thus, it is sometimes referred to as the “S.A.I.D. principle”.  Basically, if you want to improve strength, strength train; if you want to improve cardiorespiratory endurance, do aerobic exercise, etc.  Train specific to the bioenergetics and physical demands of the sport and desired outcome.

When it comes to youth sports, it is common to hear the phrase “sport-specific training”.  It is especially common to hear this from parents and coaches who have been convinced that young athletes need to “specialize” early to be “successful”.  Now, obviously, there are certain “skill-specific” or “energy system-specific” demands of sport, but, otherwise, the notion of “sport-specific training”, as it applied to conditioning, is nonsense.  Specificity applies to the specific health- and motor skill-related components of fitness.  Thus, athletic conditioning is athletic conditioning.  It doesn’t matter what the sport, strength is strength and agility is agility.  If you want to make agility basketball-specific, for example, put a basketball in the athlete’s hand, if you must, but it is still agility.

Parents, what is most important is that you allow your athlete an off-season for recovery and pre-season conditioning.  If you are allowing your athlete to play year-around you risk injuring the athlete, as well as burnout.  You shorten the collegiate and professional career you fantasize.  If you want to see your child succeed in sports, allow them at least a season to work with a qualified strength and conditioning professional.  Better, yet, encourage them to follow a year-around conditioning program to supplement their sport skills-training and play.  Also, don’t wait until the weeks before the season starts to begin the “pre-season”.

Let young athletes enjoy their sport.  Make it fun.  Make it safe.  Part of making sports participation possible and fun is conditioning.  Don’t neglect preseason training, but, likewise, keep it fun.

Remind your young athlete to “be your best today; be better tomorrow!”

Carpe momento!

I often use the phrase “well-centered fitness”.  I distinguish this from the concept of “wellness” that most have heard often.  If you have graduated from college in the last couple of decades or so, you likely took a required course that emphasized wellness.  Wellness is defined as the balance among (usually) 5 or 6 “dimensions”.  These dimensions are Spiritual, Physical, Intellectual, Emotional, and Social.  Some instructors might include Environmental and/or Occupational, but I see these as more intertwined with the basic 5-dimensional model of wellness.

I prefer “well-centered fitness” over merely “wellness” for one major distinction.  Wellness emphasizes balance.  Well-centeredness emphasizes the necessity for growth beyond simply balance.  Well-centeredness requires change.

In The World’s Most Powerful Leadership Principle, James C. Hunter poses the question: “’By definition, can you improve if you don’t change?’”  The answer is certainly “no”.  Likewise, well-centered fitness emphasizes a growth-mindset.  In business circles, the term used for constant improvement is kaizen.  In life, like in business, if we are not growing, we are stagnating or shrinking.  Well-centered fitness seeks growth in the Spiritual, Physical, Intellectual, Emotional, and Social dimensions.  If I were Dr. Suess, I would say that a well-centered person keeps “bettering and bettering”.

It is not enough to be balanced in life.  We need to seek to be our best today and be better tomorrow.  I see well-centeredness as bullseye that keeps getting smaller as our aim improves.  I believe, legendary coach, Vince Lombardi captured this when he said, “Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence.”

I have read criticisms of the quote “Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you’ll land among the stars”, which I have seen attributed to a number of different sources.  The critics say “why shoot for the closest planetary object?”  The point these critics are missing is that we have to shoot for something.  My friend, Coyte Cooper (Make Your Mark; www.coytecooper.com) suggests that goals should be unreasonable by normal standards.  He does not suggest that unreasonable should be impossible.  Unreasonable suggest that we might miss, but we are going to be better off even if we come up short.  True the “shoot for the moon” statement is flawed in that, if we land among the stars, we have gone beyond the moon, but going further than our intended goal is actually a good thing.  If we aim for the stars—too far beyond our capabilities—we are more likely to miss our target.  (As well, “among the stars” is pretty general.)  In addition, if we can hit our goal—e.g., “the moon”—what is the point in repeatedly aiming for the same target.  We get better by making the target more difficult to hit.  Thus, is well-centered fitness.  This is kaizen.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

 

I friend asked me for my opinion about her high school-aged son being asked to gain 50 pounds for his position by his defensive coach in football.  This is not an infrequent request (on the part of the friend, as well as the coach).  Neither is it an unreasonable request, though it is one that merits consideration.  From my viewpoint, as an exercise physiologist and a parent, I have to ask a few questions:

1. How will 50 lb of added weight impact performance?
2. Does the athlete want to play beyond high school?
3. What is the proposed timeline?

On top of these, it is important to ask about the athlete’s current eating and training habits. 

Many coaches believe that size alone will make a kid a better football player.  Maybe.  More than likely, though, the added weight will be fat and make the athlete slower.  Even added muscle will slow the athlete, if they don’t train for speed and explosiveness.  Power is Force times Velocity.  Strength is the maximal amount of weight that can be lifted one time (i.e., “one repetition maximum” or “1RM”).  In athletics, power is king (or queen).  In football, for example, how quickly one can move off of the line will be more relevant than how much one can squat or bench (though strength + speed is best).

Does the athlete want to play in college?  Many kids are good enough to excel in high school, but the numbers of good football players who go on to play college ball shrinks dramatically—especially if we limit discussion to NCAA Division I college football.  If playing in college is the goal, it is performance that will get one noticed by scouts.  Size is a factor, but athleticism is the priority.  Scouts and coaches can see potential for size growth in a high school football player.  It is somewhat like looking at a Great Dane puppy.  Moreover, college strength and conditioning coaches are payed the big bucks (I say this somewhat tongue-in-cheek because I have friends in the S&C field, and, while some are starting to make very nice salaries, most are underpaid) to make your athlete bigger, stronger, and faster.  Most, I trust, would prefer to manage the athlete’s weight by adding muscle rather than adding muscle and cutting fat.  So, for the kid who wants to play at the next level put down the calorie-laden “weight-gain shake” and pick up a barbell.  Eat healthy and train.

Recently, I offered advice to men over 50: 1) Lift weights; 2) lift more weight than they did last time; 3) eat; 4) sleep; and 5) repeat.  That is pretty much the secret to increasing muscle mass at any age.  Effort—the right effort—will produce results.

I suggested to my friend that her son focus on five lifts: squats, deadlifts, bench, shoulder press, and rows.  I say this for several reasons.  First, these are the basic lifts.  These will yield the most bang for the buck.  That also allow the athlete to focus on lifting with proper technique and intensity.  As the athlete gains skill in lifting, he/she might then move onto Olympic-style lifts (e.g., cleans) for explosive power. Second, these will add the most mass quickly.  Curls may be for the girls, but one can waste a lot of time pumping up the arms for very little mass gained and even less functionality.  And, for the athlete who wants to impress, the arms will get bigger doing the aforementioned core lifts and the girls will be more impressed by the starter on the field than the benchwarmer with big guns and chicken legs (just sayin’).

Work with a skilled coach.  A group of high school kids reading Muscle & Fitness and Men’s Health are not going to see the results that they will get in a structured weight-training program.

What is the timeline?  Hypertrophy takes time.  It cannot be expected that an athlete (in a well-designed program) will put on more than a few pounds of muscle in a month.  Gaining weight at a faster rate is likely to include quite a bit of fat, too.  For football, this may not be so bad—provided the muscle gain exceeds the fat gain.

Eat healthy?  Have your athlete watch Greater before embarking on a massive weight gaining program.  Former Arkansas Razorback guard, Brandon Burlsworth, gained 80 lb his Senior year (earning the nickname, “Cheesecake”, from his brother) only to have to work his tail off to lose the tremendous amount of fat he gained and replace it with muscle.

If your kid’s coach wants him (or her, but if your daughter is being asked to gain 50 lb you will really want to question the coach) to gain 50 pounds, approach it with caution and intelligence.  Make sure he gains it in the squat rack and not on the couch.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow!

There seems to be an ever-escalating left-right battle in American society for political correctness.  Not the “political correctness” that is intended to show respect to other persons.  Rather it is a battle of “I am correct and you are wrong”.  The gap between sides is spreading rapidly.

The biggest problem with these extremes is that no one seems to have read The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People.  Or, at least, everyone skipped the habit: seek first to understand, then seek to be understood.  This habit, my reader, is what it means to be open-minded.

On one side, we have (and allow me to stereotype a bit to make my point) a group that are so strongly committed in their belief system that they cannot accept any belief or practice that runs counter to this.  On the other side, we have a group who is so “open-minded” that they can’t tolerate “close-minded” or “narrow-minded” people.  Neither side believes that they can coexist.  Thus, they focus all their energy on destroying the “enemy” and building walls rather than building bridges that might unite.  Who is right?  Who is wrong?  Honestly, when it comes to the polarity of our political and social segregation, I take a view of “get over yourselves!”

I am somewhat specific in my example, but this is not the only division in society.  There are far too many things that separate us.  These are possibly the most apparent at the moment, but certainly not the only or the worst conflicting views in our divided communities.  This is perhaps a lazy path for me to make a point, but tolerate me for a moment.  And, if you read my words and think you know what group(s) to whom I speak, you are quite possibly wrong.

We all have views that are extreme to someone.  That is okay.  In fact, it is better than okay.  This is what makes America great—our diversity.  Solutions to the great problems of the world come from sharing ideas and removing the walls of the imaginary box that contains us.

So, what does it mean to have an “open mind”?  To those who believe themselves to have an open mind, it means no boundaries.  It means no judgement (unless, of course, you do not share their enlightenment).  To those who hold on dearly to learned “values”, having an open mind can be threatening.  Thus, it has come to a question of “tolerance”.  This is not correct, however.

Tolerance and open-mindedness are not synonyms (O.K., according to Roget, perhaps, they are).  Tolerance and open-mindedness permit personal boundaries.  Tolerance is perceived as a “free-for-all” by some (maybe both sides of the stereotypical divide).  For some, it means “let others be”.  For others, it is a threat to society.  And I am not certain that there is not some truth in both.

We just celebrated our nation’s freedom.  We celebrate a freedom that came at great cost and continues to come with a cost.  Freedom demands some level of tolerance.  Freedom also demands some constraints—boundaries.  So, there must be limits to tolerance to have a functional society—a free society.

Open-mindedness is the acceptance that our own worldview is limited.  It is not a question of correctness.

When I say, “I am open-minded”, I am not throwing my values out the window.  What I am saying is that I do not have all the answers.  I am saying that this is what I believe to be truth, but I accept that truth may be bigger than the box I have built for myself.  I am not willing to compromise my values, but I am willing to allow them to be called into question.  Moreover, I am open to allowing them to be applied differently than I presently apply them.

I believe that when we stand firm on our values, but have an open mind, we are capable of being united.  When we have an open mind there ceases to be “us” and “them”, and we achieve true diversity.

Carpe momento!

LET AMERICA BE AMERICA AGAIN
by Langston Hughes

Let America be America again.
Let it be the dream it used to be.
Let it be the pioneer on the plain
Seeking a home where he himself is free.

(America never was America to me.)

Let America be the dream the dreamers dreamed–
Let it be that great strong land of love
Where never kings connive nor tyrants scheme
That any man be crushed by one above.

(It never was America to me.)

O, let my land be a land where Liberty
Is crowned with no false patriotic wreath,
But opportunity is real, and life is free,
Equality is in the air we breathe.

(There’s never been equality for me,
Nor freedom in this “homeland of the free.”)

Say, who are you that mumbles in the dark?
And who are you that draws your veil across the stars?

I am the poor white, fooled and pushed apart,
I am the Negro bearing slavery’s scars.
I am the red man driven from the land,
I am the immigrant clutching the hope I seek–
And finding only the same old stupid plan
Of dog eat dog, of mighty crush the weak.

I am the young man, full of strength and hope,
Tangled in that ancient endless chain
Of profit, power, gain, of grab the land!
Of grab the gold! Of grab the ways of satisfying need!
Of work the men! Of take the pay!
Of owning everything for one’s own greed!

I am the farmer, bondsman to the soil.
I am the worker sold to the machine.
I am the Negro, servant to you all.
I am the people, humble, hungry, mean–
Hungry yet today despite the dream.
Beaten yet today–O, Pioneers!
I am the man who never got ahead,
The poorest worker bartered through the years.

Yet I’m the one who dreamt our basic dream
In the Old World while still a serf of kings,
Who dreamt a dream so strong, so brave, so true,
That even yet its mighty daring sings
In every brick and stone, in every furrow turned
That’s made America the land it has become.
O, I’m the man who sailed those early seas
In search of what I meant to be my home–
For I’m the one who left dark Ireland’s shore,
And Poland’s plain, and England’s grassy lea,
And torn from Black Africa’s strand I came
To build a “homeland of the free.”

The free?

Who said the free? Not me?
Surely not me? The millions on relief today?
The millions shot down when we strike?
The millions who have nothing for our pay?
For all the dreams we’ve dreamed
And all the songs we’ve sung
And all the hopes we’ve held
And all the flags we’ve hung,
The millions who have nothing for our pay–
Except the dream that’s almost dead today.

O, let America be America again–
The land that never has been yet–
And yet must be–the land where every man is free.
The land that’s mine–the poor man’s, Indian’s, Negro’s, ME–
Who made America,
Whose sweat and blood, whose faith and pain,
Whose hand at the foundry, whose plow in the rain,
Must bring back our mighty dream again.
Sure, call me any ugly name you choose–
The steel of freedom does not stain.
From those who live like leeches on the people’s lives,
We must take back our land again,
America!

O, yes,
I say it plain,
America never was America to me,
And yet I swear this oath–
America will be!

Out of the rack and ruin of our gangster death,
The rape and rot of graft, and stealth, and lies,
We, the people, must redeem
The land, the mines, the plants, the rivers.
The mountains and the endless plain–
All, all the stretch of these great green states–
And make America again!

 

Image source: https://gowdy.house.gov/sites/gowdy.house.gov/files/styles/congress_featured_image/public/featured_image/Flag-RequestsSmall.jpg?itok=ncw0Vdyy

I have to include We Are Marshall on my list of inspirational sports movies.  Despite being a WVU graduate and a Mountaineer, I have an affinity for the Thundering Herd.  The tragedy that befell the 1970 Marshall football team and the community in Huntington, West Virginia and the literal phoenix-like return of football to Marshall is an inspiring story.

Of course, I love the scene where then Mountaineer coach, Bobby Bowden sees that Marshall coach Jack Lengyel noticed the green crosses on the backs of the WVU football helmets and says, “Colors clash a bit, don’t they?”  Coach Lengyel responds, “That’s first class, Coach. First class.”  One would have to know the in-state rivalry between the two West Virginia schools to fully grasp the significance, but it was a first-class action.  It demonstrates the character of one who lays personal feelings aside to help a neighbor in need.

Lengyel was charged with making a football team out of almost nothing.  He had little time to recruit and NCAA rules had to be challenged to make a team.  Moreover, he had to inspire the community, as well as the players—and he did just that.

His speech at the memorial for the victims of the plane crash says it all:

“For those of you who may not know, this is the final resting place for six members of the 1970 Thundering Herd. The plane crash that took their lives was so severe, so absolute, that their bodies were unable to be identified. So, they were buried here. Together. Six players. Six teammates. Six Sons of Marshall. This is our past, gentlemen. This is where we have been. This is how we got here. This is who we are. Today, I want to talk about our opponent this afternoon. They’re bigger, faster, stronger, more experienced and, on paper, they’re just better. And they know it, too. But I want to tell you something that they don’t know. They don’t know your heart. I do. I’ve seen it. You have shown it to me. You have shown this coaching staff, your teammates. You have shown yourselves just exactly who you are in here. [Thumps his chest]

When you take that field today, you’ve got to lay that heart on the line, men. From the souls of your feet, with every ounce of blood you’ve got in your body, lay it on the line until the final whistle blows. And if you do that, if you do that, we cannot lose. We may be behind on the scoreboard at the end of the game, but, if you play like that, we cannot be defeated. Now we came here, today, to remember six young men and sixty-nine others who will not be on the field with you today, but they will be watching. You can bet your ass that they’ll be gritting their teeth with every snap of that football. You understand me? How you play today, from this moment on is how you will be remembered. This is your opportunity to rise from these ashes and grab glory. We are…

Marshall!”

Carpe momento!

Image source: http://www.marshall.edu/special-collections/memorial/images/teamphoto2_800.jpg