Someone had to write about it, so I did........

I am going to be pretty up front here as the situation is getting ridiculous, and to hopefully spark some good debate.

Recently there is a growing trend in the UK health and fitness industry of pseudo strength coaches selling athletic training courses to pt's and instructors. It is good that trainers are taking a interest in other areas and methods of training, however a key point to make is to learn what is necessary, not what looks sexy to your clients.

I have posted some interesting questions below for debate and they might serve as a starting point if a trainer is considering attending one of these courses. I have deliberately left the answers to the questions out as I do not was to indoctrinate people with my views, but rather let them realise the answers through debate.

Some thoughts to consider:

• Are the courses independently verified by anyone or organisation?

·         How is the quality and the accuracy of information being ensured?

·         What if the information was wrong that you were receiving, who would challenge it?

•    Is the instructor trained in the art of passing on information to a variety of learners?

·         What qualification and expertise do they have in delivering technically sound information and teaching it to different learners?

•    Is there an equality assurance system in place to ensure a constant high level of teaching and      assessment?

• If the course is so great, then why are the courses targeted at the H&F industry and not at performance coaches?

• In relation to the above, you have to ask the question why are these courses marketed to the H&F industry. Is it because it is an easier sell? Are you being used?

• When a coach says they have worked with an athlete or studied under a famous coach, how can you be sure they actually have, what did they actually learn and how much did they learn?

• A S&C internship is generally a year. Can you really learn how to work with athletes in a week?

• Who has the coach actually worked with over a long term basis, and what impact did they have on a long term basis.

• What qualifications does the teacher actually hold in the areas they profess to be 'experts' in?

• Is there scientific rational behind everything they do, say and teach?

• How many people have actually failed the course? In reality a good course should be hard to pass. If these numbers do not exist, you have to challenge if the course is sold for money or for actually developing true trainers.

• If you are attending a internship, why do you need to pay for it?

·         Make sure that the course teaches you a multitude of different skills. Athletes and sports are individual; one type of training or programming does not work for all. Remember if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

• If your PT course took three months, then a S&C qualification would take longer.

• What is the background to the applied theory? Was it designed for body builders, Olympic lifters or strongmen? It is unlikely that you’ll work in a PT setting with any of these, so why learn them? Would these methods work with your local football team?

• Does the course rely on the use of fancy equipment i.e. prowlers and kettle bells? If so, is this really practical to the type of work PT’s will be doing with local teams?

• What would do if you had a swimmer or thrower with a shoulder injury, and could not OH press?

• What emphasis is placed on speed, agility and injury pre-habilitation training? If none then you won’t develop actually develop athletes. Strength only serves to improve these qualities. 

• Lastly is the programme orthopedically sound? How do you know that you are not adding strength to dysfunction?

Strength and conditioning is a highly scientific subject where coaches have to understand and synthesise complex information, then pass it onto athletes practically in a way that they understand in order to get the best adaptation. The only way you can do this is by opening up the theory books, reading it, and then practicing your ability to teach it over a number of years. Effectively you are a scientist, trainer and teacher. There are no short cuts.

I feel that there is a growing trend towards the manipulation of trainers and the H&F industry,  and away from sound assessment and science. It is key to always question and maintain a healthy level of scepticism about the motives of these courses and what they can actually do for your clients.

One last thought, do you think that Doris the 45 year old house wife wanting to loose a few pounds will have the mental commitment to spend 6 months learning to Olympic lift or work at 100% on intensive intervals? Would this be the best use of your time? Ill let you answer that one.

Lets start the discussion!