I think people just feel offended when you say your training system is significantly superior
A good start would be giving:
clear examples of how you trained some athletes (General principles, not # of sets)
the results
Here is the problem, when results are given nobody believes them. For instance, did DB not pull someone off the Supertraining site and put 35 lbs or 40 lbs on his bench in like three weeks or less or did I read it wrong? Still not good enough right? If we name drop then that doesn’t do it because we are bragging. What do you guys want to see? World records right? Because the only way a program works is if somebody on it sets a world record. I see!
Clemson you name all of these times and that’s what makes the system superior huh? Interesting, do we know what all the athletes were doing? I mean everything!! I won’t go there. Next, if I said we had Stanley Cup Champions who dominate on the ice speed wise would you say I am the authority on hockey training? I hope you wouldn’t! I just don’t see how name dropping like that helps with anything?? Yet, people now accuse us of that. Man oh man it’s like you are never satisfied. First you claim that we never give names, and then you claim we brag too much. Sounds as if you guys are a bit confused of just cant think of any other stupid arguments
Westside guys don’t train football players huh? Man I could swear I have read a lot of programs that follow those guys. Who was talking about skill development like kicking? I am talking about developing an athlete that can change direction and display his or her strength in a variety of different ways on the field of play. I don’t claim superior programming, I claim complete. Very complete. Why do I see a lot of different writers popping up with stuff that DB wrote about? Then, they claim they don’t believe in what he does. That’s like a drug addict denying he has a problem. You didn’t create it. Maybe neither did he but at least tell people where you got it from or don’t deny it.
My first few years learning with DB were unbelievable. (Who ever he is) he could look at a film and know exactly what to do with an athlete over the next month to push results like never before! Why is this bad? Would I lie Clemson? Ya, I know that six figure check that I pay the rent with is why I say it. Please. I love training athletes. I want the best for them! This system has given them all an opportunity to get better from top to bottom. This guy would watch film and then tell me things through their movement profile that was unbelievable. These are the things he began to teach me about. He say, take a Saturday and just watch people move in the mall. See how everyone is different. Watch animals and see why they are faster. Evaluate all movement and the answers get easier. Charlie I am sure has this knack to!
An example that’s simple but this never seems to satisfy anyone. Had a D-1 football player come to me about a month ago? He had a stained hamstring and a personal best forty of 4.45 seconds. When I watched him run he looked weak. No posterior strength. Three workouts addressing that and he clocked two low 4.2 forties. Now, you might have some guys faster, but that’s a great improvement to somebody who is already pretty fast. Why did it work? It’s an eye for how each athlete moves. This one was a no brainer, but it’s the point of attacking weaknesses to get great results. Clemson did he run 3.7 no? So, in this case the program probably sucked huh? Sorry guys I just cant seem to live up to your standards.
Ask any one, and we need every ones help here. Did anybody get screwed by DB in their quest to get better? If so tell us and we can see how we can fix it. I just don’t believe the system is a profit generator. You would be amazed at some of the names that have called for consults when he said he wouldn’t post names.
There are a million programs posted on sites every where? You want more??
How about more posts like:
We trained an athlete in _______ sport. We determined ________ were the goals. We noticed _______ weaknesses which we determined by ________.
We used ______ methods and ______ programming because _______. The result was ______.
I’m not sure what your motive is for posting here. If you’re trying to defend DB, then ignore the personal attacks and talk about the training and results.
Chris Korfist posted “Sprinters Symptoms and solutions part 3” which has an explanation of a program with X athlete, trained for y sport, we chose z exercise for A reason. basically what you want
He also updated the progress in the proof of pudding article and his deconstruction of speed article looks at an athlte and shows progress and regression when switching to a different program
…40 pounds in 6 months vs. 80 pounds in 2 months, how is that “all in all” equal?
…I agree about the AMT jumps and RFI work unless someone can come up with something from say, the Soviet Sports Review or some other obscure source.
…Although I understand the points you are trying to make I have seen some of Dr. Siff’s programs in action.
I’ve said many times I think everybody can learn something from everybody else including DB. However, being openminded is a lot like being an entrepreneur. Most people would rather be told what to do and what to learn and have the security of a normal job then to go their own way and have to figure things out on their own.
If you look at the people getting results in any industry including this one they are the entrepreneurs. They search, sift, implement, throw out, take, search some more and gradually make things better and better. Most good trainers are like that.
However, most people aren’t. They have to be all or nothing at all and something is either great or it sux.
There are of course obvious reasons why people like to piss and moan about various “unscientific” aspects of the program. This is already a “cliquish” type industry and when you rag on people like Siff, Simmons, and fall outside the “good ol boy” network, in addition to misrepresenting yourself - that will surely bring out the flame throwers and they will search for anything negative they can find so that shouldn’t be surprising. But having said that you can’t whine about the part of his methodology that revolves around known physiological principles and in that respect he does have some interesting stuff and some aspects of his organization of known information are quite ingenious IMO - even if they are complicated for the avg. person. I imagine there’s a lot of people who read and learn from DBs stuff who won’t admit to it.
Considering this industry, the behavior of the parties involved and the fact that there are more Chiefs then Indians nothing should be surprising.