0
comments
I'd have to question where the evidence is of the overtrained athlete
as well. Records continue to fall, athletes get faster and bigger. I
don't see a bunch of overtrained athletes, myself. I do agree that
supplementary training should be just that and the vast majority of
training should be sport specific - I believe 80% is pretty much
accepted as minimum amount sport specific. Which most athletes I know
adhere to. So what athletes exactly is Mr. Landau referring to? Is he
seeing this in a particular sport. Football? Baseball? Track?
On 21-Jan-08, at 5:48 PM, W.G. 'Bill' Johnson wrote:
> Mr. Landau writes:
> "The vast training modalities that are introduced today provide an
> athlete with a severe level of over training This "choice" appears to
> appeal to the athlete that cannot discriminate between overkill and
> the exact needed supplementary training. In spite of the said
> training, they can then "get on the field," where they do operate in
> their "real world." My opinion...
>
> 1. What "vast training modalities" are you talking about?
> 2. What "severe level of over training" are you referring to?
> 3. Why is choice in parenthesizes? What are you trying to imply?
> 4. What indices of over training are you using to arrive at this
> conclusion?
> 5. What "choice" are you talking about? And why does this "choice"
> only "appear to appeal to the athlete"?
> 6. Why can't the athlete "discriminate between overkill and the exact
> needed supplementary training"?
> 7. What are they on the field "In spite of the said training"?
>
> And what does any of this have to do with your weak attempts to refute
> the superior efficacy of the use of free weights by a qualified coach
> as a training modality to enhance athleticism?
>
> Please attempt to explicate your position clearly and concisely.
> Employing paragraphs of hasty generalizations, non sequiturs and
> enthymems does nothing to advance your argument.
>
> W.G. Johnson
> Ubermensch Sports Consultancy
> San Diego CA.
>
> .
>
> --- In Supertraining@
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 1/21/2008 6:34:09 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
> > pmg68@... writes:
> >
> > Most machines are based off designs created by a man who was by his
> own
> > admission an "amatuer" anatomists and biomechanist. We don't
> adovocate machines
> > becuase nothing an athlete encounters in the real world application
> is fixed
> > plane. No one here has said that free weight, or Olympic Lifting
> replaces
> > sport specific training. But what it does far far far better than
> machines can
> > do, is train the body to adapt to loads, and exert force in all 3
> planes of
> > motion,much like it will have to in a sport environment.
> >
> > ****
> > Task/Sports performance skill is highly
> > specific and the body adapts to proficient practice of which over
> time. Strength
> > Training is general. While it is obviously important to pay close
> attention to
> > specific "needs," the all around strengthening of muscle structures
> > regardless of plane the is key. Do the best you can with what your
> dealt. The vast
> > training modalities that are introduced today provide an athlete
> with a severe
> > level of over training This "choice" appears to appeal to the
> athlete that
> > cannot discriminate between overkill and the exact needed
> supplementary
> > training. In spite of the said training, they can then "get on the
> field," where
> > they do operate in their "real world." My opinion.....
> >
> > David Landau,
> > Aventura, Florida
> >
>
>
>
Keith Hobman
Saskatoon, Canada
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Sign all letters with full name & city of residence if you
wish them to be published!
Earn your degree in as few as 2 years - Advance your career with an AS, BS, MS degree - College-Finder.net.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
March
0 comments: