Month: August 2018

How do we make exercise fun?  Easy answer: We don’t.

Exercise is not supposed to be fun.  It is work.  Exercise is performed for three purposes only: 1) to improve performance, 2) improve health, and/or 3) to improve appearance.  Improvement, i.e., adaptation, is driven by overload (in order for a body system to adapt, it must be stressed to a level greater than that to which it is accustomed).  Anything less yields no progress or the return to a lower training state.  Exercise is pushing beyond one’s current level of comfort.

I like to tell my students my philosophy on exercise: It is like the guy who is hitting himself in the head with a 2×4.  When asked “Why?”, he responds, “Because it feels so good when I stop.”  This is exercise.  We “suffer” for an hour or so a day so the rest of the day is better.

I question when someone says they “enjoy exercise”.  It is possible that they are referring to the outcome of the exercise—when they are through.  If, however, they are enjoying the exercise session, they are either not working hard enough, have a high tolerance for pain and recover fast, or they have a rare physiological/psychological disorder in which pain is imperceptible.  Only in the latter case is the answer: “You can train harder.”  It is true that one may not wish to train harder.  In which case, then, I would argue that they do not wish to exercise.  What they desire is “physical activity.”

Physical activity is defined as any activity about resting levels.  We are all “physically active” to some degree, if we get out of bed in the morning.  Some are more physically active than others.  Exercise is a subcategory of physical activity—performed, again, for the purposes of improving performance, health, and/or personal appearance.  Some have jobs that require great physical exertion, but this is not exercise.  Such people may not need or want as much exercise as us sedentary workers, but their job is not exercise—as I presume they don’t ask for more strenuous work on a regular basis for the aforementioned purposes.

Exercise need not be torturous, but it has to be uncomfortable.  It needs to be progressive—in other word, one has to be adding more work (on average) to each exercise session over time.

If the weights or intensity of the cardio have not changed for a long time, you are going through the motions of exercise.  If you are not feeling discomfort and perspiring, you are not exercising—you are active, at best.  Push yourself.  “Get tough and a funny thing happens: life gets easier” (Dani Shugart).  Make the “fun” part of exercise the inevitable physiological and psychological changes that will come from working hard and pushing yourself.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

“Strength doesn’t come from what you can do. It comes from overcoming the things you once thought you couldn’t.”—Rikki Rogers

I preach: “Be your best today; be better tomorrow.” For some, our best today may be the ability to struggle through yet another day.  The increment of “better” may not be much.  In some conditions, better is simply “not worse”.

I am blessed with very good health.  I don’t have to ask the question, “Why me?”, when I wake up in the morning.  I attribute much of my health to regular exercise and a sensible diet, but also the question lingers: “Why not me?”  Many are born with conditions or come upon them in their later years at no fault of their own.  I appreciate the struggles that many of my friends face.  While we may often feel the need to encourage them, more often, they are the ones encouraging us.

A friend suggested I write about “how people with disabilities need to exercise, too”.  A great topic idea!  This friend, by the way, has Rheumatoid Arthritis, a very debilitating disease, yet she makes every effort to remain physically active and have a positive outlook on life.

I am often inspired by the “no excuses” attitude of persons with profound physical limitations (Kyle Maynard, Anthony Robles, Zion Shaver, Bethany Hamilton, and countless Paralympians come to mind—as well as many everyday heroes).  I am also inspired by the (extra)ordinary people with less celebrity.  Many of us, who can find any excuse not to exercise, should be mindful of those who daily overcome what might be perceived as a “justified excuse” to not exercise.  There are, indeed, no excuses.

There are no excuses, only challenges.  Many people have barriers to exercise—in other words, they can’t just walk into the local gym, pick up a weight, and start lifting.  Barriers, however, are merely temporary hinderances.  They can and must be conquered.  There is always a way to exercise—some creativity may be required.

Everyone can—and should exercise.  I have come across few medical conditions for which exercise is entirely contraindicated.  Indeed, there might be restrictions (multiple sclerosis patients, for example, must be extremely cautious about over-heating), but these never can always be addressed.

I am not a fan of the labels “disabled” or “disability”, but “differently ability” has less flow.  By definition, a disability is simply an “a physical, mental, cognitive, or developmental condition that impairs, interferes with, or limits a person’s ability to engage in certain tasks or actions or participate in typical daily activities and interactions” (Merriam-Webster).  Truth be told, we all have something that affects, i.e., interferes with, one’s performance of the task at hand—this is “individuality”.  Knowledge of exercise—specifically, the physiological responses to exercise—is essential to assure safe and effective exercise performance.  Thus, one should seek qualified professional assistance.  (This is the case whatever one’s “disability”.)

I apply the “dynamics systems approach” to exercise.  This considers the interactions between the individual characteristics, the environment, and the task at hand.  This is all the more apparent in considering individual differences (i.e., disabilities).

When it comes physical, intellectual, and/or developmental impairments, no barrier is insurmountable.  As a trainer, I always enjoyed the challenge of finding ways around the perceived obstacles to exercise.  I have seen trainers who are especially capable at working with “disabled exercisers”.  Such trainers light up when they work with special needs exercisers.  These are the trainers to hire when there is a need.  The best trainer isn’t necessarily the one with the best physique.  The best trainers have the knowledge and the ability to apply this knowledge in a wide range of individual circumstances.

Everyone should exercise.  If one finds himself or herself in some way limited, this should not prevent one from exercising.  See it as an opportunity.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

“More enduringly than any other sport, wrestling teaches self-control and pride. Some have wrestled without great skill – none have wrestled without pride.”—Dan Gable

Wrestling preseason is upon us.  As any regular reader of this blog knows, I love the sport of wrestling. I was an average wrestler in high school—at best—nevertheless, it is the best sport in which I have ever participated.  It isn’t the only sport, of course, but, above anything, it is a keystone sport.  I wish every kid—boy and girl—would have the opportunity to participate in wrestling at least once in their early years.  Why?  Because….

Wrestling teaches self-disciple.  I like to think of wrestling as being unique in that it has three levels of competition: team v. team, wrestler v. wrestler, and wrestler v. him/herself.  “Hunger” is a multi-faceted word when it comes to wrestling.  There is, of course, the hunger to succeed.  But there is also the hunger pangs that come with cutting weight.  Beyond the discipline of drilling and conditioning, wrestlers have to “make weight”.  Wrestlers weigh in before competition, so it is daily weight checks, cutting food intake, withholding water,… sacrifice and self-control.

Few athletes work as hard as wrestlers.  I never knew what it was like to sweat until I wrestled.  I was never in better condition than when I wrestled.  Like all sports—but ramped up a degree or two (or three)—wrestling requires the athlete to push through the hard practices.  I still appreciate the days of high school practice when, drenched in sweat, we left the wrestling room after a hard practice of drilling to run in the pool deck (the hottest place in the school), to lift weights, do “Russian conditioning”, sprints, stairs, or whatever was on the agenda for the day.  When you wanted to stop, there was always one more to do.  I learned to not quit.

Wrestling is relational.  My son pointed out recently that one of the things he loves about wrestling is that he gets to know kids at a wide range of grade levels.  In lacrosse and football, he always participates on teams limited to a grade level above or below his grade.  His club practices includes grades through high school.  He especially appreciates the leadership and example he receives from the varsity kids.

Wrestling is competitive but it is supportive, as well.  I emphasize to my son (better I say I reemphasize since he hears this from his coaches regularly) that he should always partner not with the kids he can beat, but rather the kids he wants to beat.  In the wrestling room, there is no need to look good for the coaches.  The wrestler has to be good.  The coaches can’t pick favorites for the starting line-up.  Rather, the wrestler proves his/her worthiness to be in the starting line-up by defeating the others in the weight class.  As a team, the objective is for everyone to get better—the better your practice partner becomes, the better you become.

Some of my best friendships remain with old teammates and people with whom I have connected over the sport of wrestling.

Wrestling is foundational to all sports.  Above anything else, the skills of wrestling carry over to all sports.  I am hard-pressed to think of any sport that cannot benefit from some experience wrestling.  Countless college and professional football coaches have argued that wrestlers make the best linemen (and other position players).  I see firsthand the benefits of wrestling on my son’s lacrosse play.  Whatever the sport, wrestling provides a foundation of strength, power, agility, balance, muscle coordination, reaction time, and general preparatory conditioning that carries over to other sports.

I preach multi-sport participation—especially before the age of 12 years.  Wrestling need never become a primary sport, but making it one’s winter sport or giving the kid a season or more of club wrestling can help him or her be a better athlete.  I have even seen kids who play basketball participate also in a few club practices a week.  It can’t hurt.

Beware, though.  Wrestling can get in a kid’s blood.  Good, average, or poor, “once you’ve wrestled, everything else in life is easy” (Dan Gable).

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

Yesterday, I wrote about macro balance and the need for carbohydrates relative to physical activity.  To better understand the high-fat/low-carbohydrate v. low-fat/high-carbohydrate debate, it is helpful to understand what is referred to as the “crossover effect” in exercise physiology.

The crossover effect refers to the shift in fuel used by the body to produce adenosine triphosphate (ATP; the fuel for muscle contraction) as the intensity (or duration) of exercise increases.  At very low intensities of physical activity (<30% VO₂max) the primary fuel source is fat.  (Conversely, physical efforts that can be sustained for very long durations use fat.)  High intensity exercise (>70% VO₂max; or short duration) relies primarily on carbohydrate.  As the intensity of the exercise increases, dependence of fat decreases and carbohydrate increases.  Metabolism shifts somewhere in between, depending on training and the individual.  It is believed that, with appropriate diet and training, metabolism can be shifted to rely more heavily on fat.  Sports nutritionist, Bob Seebohar*, refers to this as the “metabolic efficiency point”.  The caveat is that this is affected by and applicable to endurance exercise performance.  In other words, a shift to greater fat metabolism can benefit endurance athletes but will have little benefit to the performance of high-intensity exercise—e.g., sprint, strength, or power performance.

Another important concept for consideration is “lactate threshold”—the point at which the athlete begins to accumulate lactate (the by-product of anaerobic metabolism) in the blood.  Interestingly, lactate threshold occurs 50-60% of VO₂max in the untrained and 65-80% of VO₂max in endurance-trained individuals.  The physiology is beyond today’s writing, but suffice it to say that lactate threshold is an important predictor of exercise performance and intensity.  (The athlete who can compete at a higher lactate threshold can, thus, outperform a competitor of similar VO₂max but lower lactate threshold.)  A higher lactate threshold and reduced reliance on carbohydrates for fuel spares muscle glycogen for high-intensity performance.

So, the bottom line?  Fat metabolism can be amped up by consuming less carbohydrate and more “healthy” fats, but carbohydrates—specifically, muscle glycogen—is still essential for the performance of activities greater than lactate threshold.  Thus, for the sedentary individual (and, please, let’s not be sedentary) or the endurance athlete, the “metabolic efficiency point” can be shifted by eating a lower carbohydrate diet (and simply by doing moderate-to-high intensity endurance exercise).  Glycogen remains, however, necessary for the highest intensities.

It was mentioned, yesterday, that creatine supplementation (creatine monohydrate or creating HCl) can help, but there remains the need for adequate glycogen in the muscle.

In the past, “carbohydrate loading” was popular among distance runners.  For the endurance athlete, high-carbs are less of a concern for body composition.  Traditional carbohydrate loading is less important than simply getting sufficient calories—and making sure that muscle and liver glycogen are topped-off.

While the ketogenic diet is effective for  shifting the “metabolic efficiency point”, the extremely low carbohydrate intake will likely deplete glycogen stores with high-intensity exercise.  Thus, there is a need for carbohydrate in the diet.  If one takes the high-fat/low-carb approach, the practice of “carb cycling” is warranted.  This involves cycling high-fat/low-carb and low-fat/high-carb days (there are varying approaches, e.g., 3:1 ratio, but it is up to the individual to determine what is best).

Hopefully, this adds some clarification to the argument that a ketogenic diet is of little value to the athlete who is performing at intensities near or above the lactate threshold.  For most nonathletes, this is not of great concern.  For intense exercise (>75% maximal performance), carbohydrates are necessary.  While a high-fat diet can increase the metabolic efficiency point and, thereby, promote greater reliance on stored body fat, high-performance endurance athletes rarely carry “excess” body fat.  As well, consuming sufficient calories tends to be the greater challenge.  Weight lifters may wish to cut body fat from time to time, but maintenance of muscle mass and strength is critical—thus, carbs are necessary.

Eat to perform.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

*http://running.competitor.com/2010/10/nutrition/become-a-fat-burning-machine_8244

It is pretty well established, in my professional opinion (i.e., the scientific literature), that the primary factor in body weight management is caloric balance.  I have shared several times that this can be estimated to account for about half of our weight management efforts.  It is established that there are but three diets—eucaloric (in which body weight is maintained; calories in = calories out), hypercaloric (weight is being gained; calories in > calories out), and hypocaloric (weight is being lost; calories in < calories out).  In other words, to lose weight one must be on a hypocaloric diet.  Eat less and one will lose weight—thus, if you are trying to lose weight and not, you may not be consuming the calories (or expending the calories) you think you are.

Now, there may be circumstances where caloric balance is adversely affected (e.g., one is eating too few calories or has been hypocaloric for too long—metabolism has slowed), but as a rule a modest reduction in caloric balance (3500-7000 kcal per week) will lead to a sustainable fat loss (our goal, after all, is to lose fat not muscle) over time.  Thus, I would like to put some focus on “macros”.  Dr. Mike Israetel (Temple University; Renaissance Periodization) estimates that macro balance accounts for about 30% of weight management.  What, then, is a macro?

Macros (or macronutrients) include the carbohydrates, fats, and proteins in the diet.  There is no consensus on what is the ideal macro balance.  This is mostly attributable to the fact that caloric balance plays a bigger role and the science is not very uniform in how this is controlled in the many studies.  It is also ascribed to the fact that everyone is different and will, thus, respond differently to the variety of diets.  So, how can one know which macro approach is best—for them?  In my experience, trial and error.

Selecting the appropriate macro balance will depend on one’s goals and exercise habits.  With these in mind, it is a bit easier to sort through all the confusion and diet hype.  While there are many names for diets in popular use (e.g., “ketogenic”, “Paleo”, “Wild Diet”, “Adkin’s”, “Weight Watchers”, “Mediterranean Diet”, etc.), they all ascribe some degree of macro balance—whether explicit or implicit—as well as addressing caloric balance.  Thus, I prefer to just look at the numbers.

If caloric balance is most important, why even bother with counting macros?  Honestly, if you are sedentary and significantly over-weight, it is probably not going to make much difference (Dr. Mark Haub, Kansas State University, lost 27 lb in 10 weeks on the “Twinkie Diet”).  If you are concerned, however, about performance, it will matter.

When it comes to macro balance, it is best to first address protein.  Protein is, perhaps, the most stable of the macro needs.  There is some greater need for athletes—or nonathletes who exercise intensely and for prolonged durations.  Protein accounts for roughly 5-15% of one’s energy needs (i.e., rather little protein is used to make adenosine triphosphate or ATP for muscular contraction).  The body prefers to reserve protein for tissue structure, enzymes, etc.

The Dietary Reference Intake (DRI) for protein is 0.8 g per kg of body weight (0.36 g per pound).  Note, these values are the minimum necessary to prevent a deficiency.  A common recommendation for the average individual is around 0.6 g per pound.  If one is active—and particularly if one is trying to build muscles—the recommendations go up.  How much higher is cause for debate.  The high end is probably not near as high as bodybuilders might consume, e.g., >2 g/lb (but, since bodybuilders need to be hypercaloric to build muscle, it doesn’t matter much for them).  The low end (0.6-0.8 g per pound) is probably sufficient for the regular exerciser.  For most intense exercisers, 1.0 g per pound seems to be a reasonable target.  Thus, I recommend (once the total daily energy expenditure is established) setting 1.0 g/lb as the goal and determining the remaining macro balance—carbohydrates and fats—based on the remaining calories and personal needs and preference.

The options that remain are: 1) zero carbs, 2) low carbs, and 3) high carbs.  (Which, conversely, implies: 1) high fat, 2) low fat, and 3) zero fat. –Note that “zero” is not really “0”.  We have an essential need for some fat and carbs, and it is unlikely that anyone can totally eliminate either from the diet.)  Briefly, I would like to address the pros and cons of each diet.

Zero carbs.  This is your true “ketogenic diet”—less than 20-25 g of carbs.  Since protein in established at 1 g per pound of body weight, this means that nearly all of the remaining calories must come from “healthy” fats—ideally, avocados, olive oil, eggs, coconut oil, nuts, etc.

One of the biggest pros to a zero carb diet is that it will accelerate fat loss.  The body will rely on fat (stored, if the diet is hypocaloric) which results in the production of ketones.  There are medical benefits to ketosis—for some—but that is for another time.  And, if we are discussing weight management, we are actually talking about managing body fat stores.  Zero carbs is the fastest way to getting lean.

When it comes to performance, however, zero carbs will have a negative impact.  If one is over-fat and sedentary, this will make little difference.  If one is an endurance athlete, however, I am of the opinion that the jury is still out.  Many argue that it has no effect (some argue it has benefit) for endurance performance.  This may be true for long-distance endurance efforts where the body relies more heavily of fat metabolism for ATP production.  For the strength athlete and anyone looking to build muscle, I believe it safe to say that performance will be impaired.  High-intensity muscle contraction relies on the glycolytic (i.e., blood glucose and muscle glycogen) and the ATP-PC (stores of ATP and phosphocreatine in the muscle; more on this later) energy systems for the fuel to contract the muscle.  Since muscle hypertrophy and strength depend on overloading the muscle, anything that impairs the intensity of the workout and the volume of exercise performed will impact gains.

High carbs/low fats.  High carbs are best reserved for athletes involved in intense training.  For the average sedentary person, high carbs are likely to lead to greater fat deposition.  Carbs also have the lowest thermogenic effect of food than fats and proteins (proteins have the highest).  Thus, higher carbohydrate consumption has a more negative effect on fat burning.  For the athlete, high carbs are beneficial to performance.  Greater than 1.5 g per pound of body weight is recommended on intense training days.

Low carbs/high fats.  This approach seems to be the best approach for most who are seeking to gain muscle with minimal gain in fat—or optimally to lose fat while gaining or, at least, preserving muscle.  Here, 0.5-1.0 g carbs per pound is recommended, depending on training.  The benefit, here is that fat loss and performance is optimized.

I find, personally, that my performance tanks when I go below 50-60 g of carbs (<0.3 g/lb).  However, if I go much above 1.0 g/lb, my performance improves, but I lose the fight with body fat.  This is me, however, and everyone needs to find their own balance.  I do find that the higher fats are more satisfying and I am less inclined to be hungry and snack—thus, my total caloric intake is better controlled.

Remember, fat loss is most dependent upon being in a hypocaloric state.  Begin with determining what is your daily caloric need to maintain your weight.  Increase physical activity and cut your caloric intake to create a daily deficit of 500-1000 kcal per day (to lose 1-2 lb per week).  Then, determine what macro balance best fits your needs and preference.  Weight loss will likely be greater on a low carb diet owing to greater water loss (carbs tend to retain fluid), so do not be deceived into thinking that you are losing fat at a faster rate.  Use the mirror as your best indicator of body composition changes.

As, ultimately, muscle performance is dependent upon the availability of ATP, the goal should be to maximize stores for exercise.  It is recommended to plan carbohydrate consumption around training, if possible.  If, like me, training times don’t conform to optimal nutrient timing, reserve the greater carb consumption for the evening meal.  I also recommend supplementing with some form of creatine (creatine monohydrate or creatine HCl) to support the stores of ATP and the diet’s ability to restore ATP during exercise.  Creatine is perhaps the most well-documented supplement shown to have a positive effect on muscle performance and muscle performance.  As I, personally, experiment with reduced carbohydrates, I am finding that creatine doses pre- and post-exercise are increasing my performance and decreasing prolonged muscle soreness and cramping.  Currently, I am taking approximately 750 mg (1/8 tsp) of pure creatine HCl before and after each workout (according to the recommended dosage).  Micronized creatine monohydrate is fine but absorbs less effectively into the digestive tract and may require higher dosing and may cause greater gastric upset.  Research comparing the effectiveness of the different forms of creatine is yet limited.  Both seem to have the same overall effect and can offset some of the performance impairment caused by a low carb diet.

So, hopefully, some confusion over fats and carbs has been abated by this brief discussion.  The bottom line is that one should balance calories and macronutrients according to the individual needs.  Macro balance need not be so complicated.  Nor should macro balance be cause for heated debate.  Find what works best for you and stick with it.  Success requires effort—and the right effort.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

“Do or do not, there is no try.”—Yoda

If you don’t frequently call into Dr. Rob Gilbert’s “Success Hotline”—(973) 743-4690—I recommend you do.  You will be motivated.

The other day, I watched a short video on Wrestling Mindset with Dr. Gilbert explaining that there “is no try”.  He asks Gene Zanetti to pick up a chair, which he easily does.  He asks him to not pick up the chair, which he easily does not.  Then, of course, Dr. Gilbert asks him to try to pick up the chair, which, of course, he cannot.  It is a simple, yet fascinating, demonstration.  There simply is no such thing as “trying”.  We either do or we don’t.  (Yoda is, indeed, wise.)

I often refer to the saying that “in wrestling there are no losers, only winners and learners”.  We either doing or we are not.  We are succeeding or failing—both are better than doing nothing.

I pass on to my children a lesson a pastor friend taught us years ago.  “’Can’t’ never did anything.”  I don’t allow the word.  One who says he or she “can’t” do something believes that there is a “try” but refuses to exert the effort.  “Can’t” does do anything.  “Can” may fail—and fail often—but it does.  “Can” keeps doing until it is done right.

If we are asked to lift something that is beyond our strength capacity, this does not mean we “can’t”.  It means we have not yet acquired the necessary strength.  If what we are asked to lift is bolted to the floor, again, this does not mean we “can’t”.  It means we haven’t loosened the bolts.

To do what we desire to do does not involve “trying”.  Doing requires the proper preparation and exertion of effort.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

“Over the past half century, in the United States and other developed nations, children’s free play with other children has declined sharply. Over the same period, anxiety, depression, suicide, feelings of helplessness, and narcissism have increased sharply in children, adolescents, and young adults…. Play functions as the major means by which children (1) develop intrinsic interests and competencies; (2) learn how to make decisions, solve problems, exert self-control, and follow rules; (3) learn to regulate their emotions; (4) make friends and learn to get along with others as equals; and (5) experience joy. Through all of these effects, play promotes mental health.”—Peter Gray*

Kids across the U.S. are starting back to school.  If your family is like mine, you received a long list of items that parents are to purchase for the start of the school year—pencils (Ticonderoga #2 and colored), paper, notebooks, rulers, scissors, glue sticks, etc.  Never on the list have I seen “comfortable athletic shoes”.  Perhaps, it is just expected that kids will have these?

I am an advocate for more Physical Education in our schools, as well as more recreational time and organized sports (which are increasingly dropped at the middle school level).  My son (going into 8^th grade) no longer has P.E.—it is called “Wellness”, meaning that much of the activity time that was once P.E. is now occupied with Health lessons.  My daughter, like most primary/elementary school children, gets two P.E. classes per week.  Fortunately, she at least gets some additional recess time (and my son has sports).  This is concerning—and a source of personal frustration when it draws close to standardized test season and it is increasingly apparent that the focus is on test scores.  (By no means do I blame the teachers, as they have their hands tied by state and federal regulations, distorted expectations, and limited/misappropriated resources.)

Play has a crucial role in preadolescent development.  According to Dr. Gray, “play functions as the major means by which children”:

(1) develop intrinsic interests and competencies.  Free-play allows children to explore within their own interests.  Structured Physical Education has its place, but, more than just this, kids need time to just play.  And this extends beyond the school day.  When kids come home after school, they need to do more than just homework and sit in front of the television.  Times have changed in the 40+ years since I was a child.  We had only a handful of channels on a black and white TV, no video games or cell phones.  We were expected to get outside and play—the only expectation being that we were home in time for supper (and we were usually deaf to mother’s call to come home).  Today, too many parents have a fear of letting their kids play out of sight.  We live in an age where “free range parenting” is prohibited (except in Utah).

(2) learn how to make decisions, solve problems, exert self-control, and follow rules.  By no means do I support bullying of any kind, but there is, in my humble opinion, to the “zero tolerance” policies that pervade our schools.  Kids need to learn and practice conflict resolution and deal with rejection.  We cannot legislate human behavior.  It is learned and practiced by trial and error.  In other words, we must let kids fail and deal with the consequences.  There will be bumps and bruises along the way, but the benefit of conflict is stronger children physically, emotionally, and socially.

(3) learn to regulate their emotions.  I know I sound cold in this age of “safe spaces” and “tolerance”, but I want my kids to experience failure and to know that they are entitled only to what they earn.  I will never teach my son that “men don’t cry”.  I do teach my children, however, that there are more or less appropriate emotional responses to social situations.  Often, these lessons are taught at the expense of my own need to grow emotionally.

(4) make friends and learn to get along with others as equals.  Perhaps, I am overly optimistic, but I believe that, if kids were left free to play and resolve conflicts and build relationships on their terms, the issues of racism, classism, and individual differences would resolve themselves.  Instead, as parents and educators, we put labels on people and legislate social interaction.  Moreover, as parents, we set up false expectations for our children that are sure to leave them disappointed or with a false sense of superiority.

(5) experience joy.  There is no denying that play is fun—when it is free and unrestricted.  So, let the kids play!

I was inspired this morning but an article** about the urging of the American Academy of Pediatrics for pediatricians to write “prescriptions for play” during early childhood well-visits.  Personally, I would be embarrassed to have to have a physician explain to me the importance of play.  Granted, exercise science is my profession, but it baffles me that this is such a growing societal concern.  The author goes on to discuss the growing emphasis on early academics and academic achievement.  The recommendation for the injection of more play in schools ins emphasized, but, most importantly, the author suggests that “maybe it’s time for parents to take back play from both the teachers and the doctors (and) carve-out abundant time and space for free play”.

Maybe it is time to loosen the restrictions on “free range parenting” and to push the kids outside.  If there are concerns for safety, then we parents and neighbors have a responsibility to keep kids safe—not by wrapping them in “bubble wrap” but by keeping watch from an appropriate distance.  We need to take a good hard look at how the structuring of our suburban communities are isolating our children and lending themselves to the rising psychopathologies that are appearing in the children and adolescents—who are fast becoming adults.

*Gray, P. The decline of play and the rise of psychopathology in children and adolescents.  American Journal of Play, 3(4): 443-463, 2011.

**https://fee.org/articles/pediatricians-are-now-writing-prescriptions-for-play-during-well-child-visits/

Image source: www.wildwoodplaygrounds.com

“Consider becoming the type of energy that no matter where you go, or where you are, you always add value to the spaces and lives of those around you.”—Anonymous

Remember science class: the law of conservation of energy?  The law of conservation of energy states that energy can be neither created nor destroyed.  Physical energy—chemical, mechanical, thermal, electrical, etc.—is rather obvious.  There is also a Spiritual energy—that is perhaps closely associated with Physical energy.

When we begin to examine life at a subatomic level, we find energy that runs between all life.  We find that as we explore the Physical there is a Spiritual connection that exists among all.  Remember that the Spiritual dimension of well-centered fitness is defined as a belief that there is something greater than self.  I see quantum physics as an opening to the understanding of the Spiritual-Physical connection.

One need not understand quantum physics or get overly philosophical or theological to see that we all have a certain unquantifiable “energy” that we radiate.  We often discuss this as “positive” or “negative”—though it is likely much more complex than this.

I saw the above quote this morning, and it inspired me to consider this “Spiritual energy”.  If Newtonian physics could be applied to the Spiritual dimension, Newton’s first law (every object will remain at rest or in uniform motion unless compelled to change its state by an external force) would apply.  According to the quote and the application of Newton’s first law, we are adding or removing value to the spaces and lives around us by the energy we radiate.  Unless dead or comatose, we are radiating some energy.  The nature of said energy is largely a matter of choice.

With this understanding, it is, of course, obvious that we are affected by the energy that surrounds us.  This is where I like to apply Jim Rohn’s statement that “you are the average of the five people you spend the most time with.”  Certainly, we are affected by all people with whom we come in contact, but it is most important with whom we most associate—and the contribution of energy we make it is also important.  The negativity of the one can bring down the energy in the room.  Conversely, the positive energy of just one can profoundly affect the surrounding space.

What separates this “Spiritual energy” from Physical energy is the matter of will.  We determine the energy we exude and choose to either absorb or counter the energy in our surrounding space.  Thus, we choose the type of energy—i.e., positive or negative—that we bring into the space and lives around us.  No matter what is happening around us, our response is under our control.

Psychologists talk of “locus of control”—whether we feel we are in control of our circumstances (i.e., internal locus of control) or circumstances are in control of us (i.e., external locus of control).  Now, we all know that “stuff happens” (Forrest Gump)—good and bad.  We do not have absolute control over the circumstances of our lives.  We do, however, have control over our response.  The degree to which we accept responsibility for our response affects the degree to which “stuff” affects us.

So, as we go forth in our lives, today, may we choose to be positive energy and “always add value to the spaces and lives of those around (us)”.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

Yesterday, I cautioned against over-specialization and “wasting” money on private coaching.  Today, I’d like to address what the young athlete should be doing to be successful in sports.

Work hard.  Nothing other than a solid work ethic can make an athlete (extra)ordinary.  To be one’s best takes effort.  Some are born with natural talent, but even the greatest natural athletes have to work to refine their talent.

While the “10,000 hour rule” reported in Malcolm Gladwell’s Outliers may not be a hard-fast law, there is support of the suggestion that “practice makes perfect”—well, that practice makes one better.  As legendary coach Vince Lombardi said: “Practice does not make perfect. Only perfect practice makes perfect.” He also said that: “Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence.”  Anders Ericsson, whose research inspired Gladwell’s suggestion of the “10,000 hour rule”, however, is not so quick to claim that practice alone leads to success.  Nevertheless, the more we work at something, the better we will be.  Success is never just handed to us.

Conditioning.  Beyond skill practice, athletes need to prepare physically.  I suggested that sport-specific training is a myth perpetuated by the club sport industry, coaches (particularly club team coaches), and parental competition.  Nevertheless, conditioning is important.  The demands of sports differ, but the underlying physiological principles that govern performance are the same no matter what the sport.  Parameters of health-related physical fitness—cardiorespiratory endurance, muscle endurance, muscle strength, flexibility, and body composition—are the same whether one is an endurance athlete, power athlete, or skill athlete.  Likewise, all athletes have varying needs for motor skill-related physical fitness—speed, power, agility, balance, coordination, and reaction-time.  There is no sport-specific way of training these.  Agility, for example, refers to the ability to change direction quickly and accurately.  Agility is agility—whether one is on the volleyball court, the football field, or the basketball court.

Major components of conditioning require qualified strength and conditioning coaches.  Sports performance training is a much better investment than paying for a position coach.  General preparatory training (GPT) is essential during the off-season—thus, an off-season is essential.

Another, sometimes overlooked, component for GPT is sensory training.  Reaction time and other aspects of motor skill-related fitness can be augmented with vision training.  Stroboscopic training, using the technology developed by Dr. Alan Reichow, co-founder of the Pacific University Sports Vision Program and former Global Research Director for Vision Science for Nike, is valuable to nearly all athletes.  Two products are available that have demonstrated success in improving sports vision—e.g. reaction time, peripheral vision, visual acuity, tracking, etc.—include the Senaptec Stobe (formerly the Nike Vapor Strobe) and the Vima Rev (Sport or Tactical).  Personally, I recommend the Vima Rev for the advancements made over the earlier Strobes.  For an athlete who wants to perceive the field of play better, this training is a must.

Weight lifting is not sport-specific (unless, of course, one is a powerlifter or Olympic weightlifter).  Strength is strength.  Power is power.  Speed is speed.  A muscle does not know the reason for which it is contracting.  The brain tells it contract, and it contracts.

Condition for athleticism.  Practice skill for sports success.

Study.  Unfortunately, it is statistically improbable that a high school athlete is going to play in college.  If one does, it is not likely to involve big scholarship dollars.  Fewer than 2% of high school athletes receive scholarships, and these average less the $11,000.  In other words, “full-rides” should not be banked on.  So, be prepared academically to use your brain to supplement any athletic scholarships with academic money.

Don’t expect a scholarship.  Certainly, the athlete should train for one and sell his or her talents to athletic programs, but a better use of the parents’ dollars are to save for tuition and college expenses.  If the scholarship comes great—the athlete has a nest egg to start life after college (or for graduate school)—if not, college debt will be minimized.  Spending dollars on position coaches and year-around club team travel can be much like buying a lottery ticket.  The odds are not great.

Choose your parents wisely.  No amount of conditioning and practice can make an elite athlete.  If the genetic aren’t present—if the hardware isn’t right—no amount of training (software programming) is going help.  You just can’t run OS-X on an Apple II computer.  Know your potential and…

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!

“Not worrying about trying to fit in a box.  Going to focus on improving me and nothing else.”—Sandi

I write to inspire myself—with the hope that it might inspire others, as well.  Thus, I am always seeking inspiration (especially as I continue my efforts to post something on a daily basis).  Thankfully, I came across the statement above on a friend’s social media post.  Sandi has come a long and admirable way on her journey as a bodybuilder.  Few recognize the effort that goes into physique training—the hours in the gym and the sacrifice when it comes to food—or the frequent setbacks.  Sandi has, twice this summer, fallen just one place shy of earning her pro card.  In photographs, the difference between 1^st and 2^nd place is only in the eyes of the judges.  Sandi’s response?  The quote above.  She is going to keep working hard and focus on improving herself—not trying to be anyone else.  This is what I call “grattitude”.

We all have the tendency to compare ourselves—our success (or perceived lack of success)—to that of others.  To be like someone else—or even to be “better” than someone else—should never be our goal.  We are not on this earth to be like anyone else—or to be anyone else.  We are here to be ourselves—the best “self” we can be.

While, I believe, competition is healthy, we should not be competing simply to be the best.  Rather we must compete to be the best each of us can be.  When we fall short of first place, we learn we have room for improvement—and, certainly, even those who bring home the gold medal or championship trophy can improve.  I believe true champions are not focused on being the best.  Rather they are focused on being their best.

Every day is an opportunity.

Be your best today; be better tomorrow.

Carpe momento!