New Barry Ross article.

I am not here to defend Barry’s character or his insights. Just as I don’t know your client base or number of elite or emerging elite athletes you’re coaching, you likewise don’t know the extent of his. Nor does it matter, because it’s drifting from the initial reason I came back to post to this thread in the first place: the dismissing of a study conducted by an Air Force officer for a legitimate graduate level project because the findings seemed to corroborate the points Barry highlighted in his protocol. By all means dispute the methodology, control group, etc. of that study That is part of good academic debate. But what saddened me was the dismissal of someone’s efforts primarily because they seemed to reinforce points proposed by someone various forum members simply do not like. That just doesn’t seem fair or professional. Officer Pike was not shilling for Barry Ross. I feel sorry for Officer Pike. He did nothing wrong

Further, I don’t know if it is fair to assume that Barry’s strength protocol is largely untested without knowing his client base or ties to the research community. After all, it is that very research that forms the basis of his approach. And if you set the value of his client base to world class athletes using his protocol, then you are indeed correct, that his approach is untested among an elect group for whom very few of us ever have the opportunity to train. Would it be fair to offer that your protocols are unproven because I don’t see any Olympic finalists in your resume? Of course not.

And if the man happened to be coaching national class athletes within your area, which could indeed be the case, what would it matter? If someone dislikes him and what he stands for, mentioning those individuals he is training will be met with either challenges by those who dispute those relationships (without really knowing their history or background), or charges that he has resorted to shameless pandering or bogus connections to sell a book. In other words, he’s damned if he does, and damned if he doesn’t.

If you have read Underground Secrets, didn’t like the book, and didn’t catch the clearly “tongue-in-cheek” nature of the phrase itself and the cover of the book, that’s fine.

We are all able to write our own texts based upon what we have learned through our associations, contacts, experiences, and educational backgrounds.

Regarding the previous comments about “why the lies” and being “dumb on purpose,” might not those also constitute “poor remarks” about someone you do not really know?

Do I now go back to bearpowered and claim I’ve been called a ‘liar’ or ‘dumb’ by members of this forum? Of course not.

Once again, my point is that it is neither fair nor professional to challenge someone’s character on the basis of partial information or comments taken out of context or suspected motives And this is what I believe has been the case with Officer Pike. Sadly, that is no longer the point being discussed now.

And on a final note, since I’ve told this to him many times, I didn’t think much of Barry in our initial exchanges either, until I got to know the man.

We should all take a lesson from Charlie, whose shoulders are indeed broad enough to look beyond those remarks that others would find offensive or disrespectful. Charlie’s art is his ability to find some good in the message regardless of any initial impressions as to the character of the messenger.

Why are you bringing up Officer Pike or anybody else? I don’t know who that is nor do I care who it is. Do you actually read what is written and who it is written by? You are bringing up so many tangent topics and red herrings, it makes your points even more unintelligible. The point is Barry has said numerous disparaging things about CF and his fellow elite coaches, along with their methods, ethics, etc. To deny that much is incredible to say the least.

Lies is a fact–I know that you participated in discussions (as in, you posted in the same thread, not that you agreed) where Barry made such comments.

Playing dumb–acting as-if the old forum where all of this took place wasn’t deleted or that none of this happened.

Those are facts, sorry. They aren’t meant and can’t be interpreted as disrespectful as I am using the dictionary provided terms for such occurrences. I am curious why you don’t just address what is said and instead go off on such tangents.

Red herrings?? tangents??

Go back to the very first of my posts to this thread. Here’s what I said:

“I’ve found a few previous posts to this thread somewhat disconcerting. It saddens me that forum members would denigrate the insights of Officer David Pike without knowing the background, particulars, or focus of his study. Pike, a US Air Force 2nd Lieutenant, was conducting a graduate school research project involving several fellow officers.”

In my last post, I reiterated that point:

“Once again, my point is that it is neither fair nor professional to challenge someone’s character on the basis of partial information or comments taken out of context or suspected motives And this is what I believe has been the case with Officer Pike. Sadly, that is no longer the point being discussed now.”

I noted from the outset that what you or anyone else says about either of us is of no concern. You’re certainly entitled to your opinion in that regard. A large part of that initial article posted focused on David Pike’s study.

I was concerned that comments such as “a pathetic attempt to sell a book/DVD based on a training protocol that does not match that used by any top elite runner” cast Dave’s research in a bad way. That troubled me. Maybe in hindsight I was completely wrong on that point. Maybe Officer Pike’s study had little or nothing to do with opinions that followed the post. Maybe it was all about Barry, and some interesting research simply was of no consequence.

On lies regarding what you believe to have been ad hominem attacks on specific coaches in the field, or the assumption that there were clandestine deletions to remove these attacks, why don’t you simply write Barry for an explanation before offering your interpretations?

Maybe he will tell you that the things he said “can’t be interpreted as disrespectful” because he was “using the dictionary provided terms” for his statements? And really, what were those statements? And do you sincerely believe they are now all gone by purposeful deletion? And why would he delete them?

You’ll never get these issues resolved until you ask for an explanation… unless you feel comfortable with your theory that there was some conspiracy to destroy these disparaging remarks, just so someone like you wouldn’t be able to find them again and use them against him?

Now who is being dumb?

But let’s see, that “dumb” could mean–by dictionary definition–lacking the power of speech, conspicuously unintelligent, or unintentional and haphazard.

  1. Please point out anywhere where somebody said anything about David Pike. Literally a single word about him. Nobody mentioned him in this thread, outside of what Barry included in his article. You consistently talking about it is tangent and a red herring to what has been said.

  2. Please point out the ad hominem attacks on Barry. Ad hominem attacks are attacks on someone’s character when something else is being debated. You claim his beliefs are in line with Charlie, when he has said things to the contrary. That is a fact, not an ad hominem attack.

  3. Playing or acting dumb does not necessarily mean being dumb. Acting as-if you misunderstood what was said very clearly is playing dumb. You consistently bringing up David Pike when nobody knows nor cares about him (in reference to this thread) is playing dumb.

  4. The comments Youngy made were in reference to Barry Ross, who has made numerous, quite pathetic, attempts to sell various products, including online speed training and the like. I do not see how this relates to the character of David Pike, which was not in question.

  5. I have no desire to write to Barry about why he suddenly had a change or heart. I simply want it to be known what was in fact said, however poor your memory of what happened may be. The fact is he said many terrible things about a variety of people and deleted the forum to start anew. I hardly consider that an ad hominem attack, but rather a statement of the events.

Ken Jakalski

Your posts have been valuable however engaging in a further discussion with Fogelson is futile. I refer to an earlier discussion on another thread. Fogelson mixed up a field of science with cartoon characters for the duration of a discussion.

anthropometrica not athropomorphic

Note the repetitive use of the word anthropomorphic by Fogelson.

And on top of that, there is the issue of anthropomorphic differences, which are perhaps the most obvious. Even with everything else being equal, this would be huge in sprinting

the studies which have showed physiological differences in individuals who do not even train, the anthropomorphic differences which are minimal influenced by anything other than genetics, and more that make me come to this conclusion.

I quote a common definition of the word on the internet


“ Attribution of human motivation, characteristics, or behavior to inanimate objects, animals, or natural phenomena” or “attribution of human qualities to nonhumans.” Examples includes Roger Rabbit,Daffy Duck, Mickey Mouse. LOL

Is fogelson an anthropomorphic cartoon character :?:rolleyes:

Now the field of science that is relevent to this discussion is- anthropometrica which relates to the measurement of human body.[/QUOTE]

No need to say anymore? Spend your time responding to Weyland , Taylor etc credible biomechanists and physiologists.

I do have a copy of Underground Secrets and found it to be interesting.

I do think that anyone that puts out such a book should be prepared to put out any fires with stats or progressions of athletes.

It really is that simple.

So let me recap what has transpired so that fogelson can then have his last word, which I’m sure he is going to take.

One of Barry’s articles appeared at the beginning of this thread. It probably came from Pavel’s site.

My concerns was that some of the comments after the posting reflected unfavorably on the Pike study which, in my opinion, was central to that post. Fogelson did not understand why I ever brought Pike up in the first place, since nobody had mentioned his name directly.

In the ensuing posts, the following points emerged:

  1. He believes that various members of the Felix family posted on Barry’s site challenging Barry Ross on issues such as his true role in “coaching’ Ms. Felix
  2. He believes that Barry then banned said members of the Felix family from the site for this reason
  3. He believes that Barry has, at least on the previous or old forum’ made disparaging remarks regarding several elite coaches, including Charlie; he has not explained whether or not he believes these comments were ad hominem attacks on these individuals (ad hominem attacks referring to what Barry said and not Fogelson), or simply challenges to the way these coaches approach their training
  4. He believes that all these attacks/ comments have now been removed from the forum (“deleted the old forum to start anew”), preventing members from seeing exactly what Barry had said. Questions remain why Barry would have removed these posts, or what purpose removing those posts would have served
  5. He believes that I have been posting to those same forums, that I know he has delivered these personal attacks, and that I am lying when I say that I believe that these comments were never intended as personal attacks on a particular coach.
  6. He believes that there is no point to my posts because they contain red herrings and because I have gone off on tangents.

My recommendation was that he contact Barry directly for an explanation

  1. His response is that he has no desire to write to Barry about why he suddenly had a “change or [of] heart.”

To my memory, this is what has recently transpired, but then again I’ve been told I have a " poor memory of what happened."

I don’t see what all the fuss is about especially with this latest article. I still think deadlifts are a helpful and simple way to help low level runners get better. Gives them some strength and requires some good CNS output for people who have no gas. Keep in mind that most of these athletes know little and have no coach. Tell them to do 1 thing…they can probably handle that.

-Teach them to deadlift properly (hardest part)
-Give them some progressions

I hope no one is saying this is going to produce elite runners but it’s good stuff for the newbie bro athlete who is currently doing weighted arm swings and calf raises to get faster.

It is hard to dispel the affectiveness of a program unless it has been tried. Many times the principles are usually the same even when the methods are different. I made significant improvements in my 40 yard dash when using Barry’s methods combined with my sprint training. Although, I do enjoy building the physiques of my athletes with additional supplemental exercises as long as it is not a detriment to their performance on the field.

Jimmy Lamour

I think it’s about time to weigh in here!

  1. I have banned exactly 2 people from the bearpowered forums. One of them relatively recently and the other one was on the old forum.

  2. Paul Felix was banned from the old forum because he was pretending to be another member of the extended family. I believe that he did so to allow freedom to say what he pleased without fear of creating problems at the Christian college where he was a professor of Greek and/or his local church body.

  3. Mr. Felix, using his alter ego, complained about a number of things including the fact that Allyson had a sore back for a couple of weeks. It was the psoas muscles, which is not uncommon when beginning the deadlift.

This occurred around the beginning of her final high school season, but Mr. Felix decided to throw it in his post.
She had some treatments from a chiropractor (which wasn’t necessary for the condition) and took an ibuprofen based product for a few days. The pain left, she went on to the fastest time in the world that year.

  1. I thought it was Mr. Felix from the beginning but I wasn’t sure, so I baited him by asking a question that only he would know the answer. In his zeal to discredit me, he jumped on the bait. He followed up with another post immediately, writing “you tricked me.”

  2. Unbeknown to Mr. Felix, another church member happened to be on the BP site when Felix pulled his shenanigan. That person was Wes Smith, the head coach and long time member of the church that was affiliated with the college.
    Smith posted specifically to Mr. Felix about his misrepresentation of who he was and some other matters including the possibility of problems he might have with the church body and the college.
    After a private discussion between the two, Mr. Felix emailed me an apology.

  3. That forum was NOT deleted at that time. It was locked so that the discussion between Felix and Smith would not be public because it had nothing to do with the public.
    I kept it then because I did not, and do not, trust Paul Felix.

  4. In more recent times, our forum was attacked with a virus and all of it had to be deleted, including the Felix thread.

  5. Certainly Felix can provide his own side of the incident to others if he chooses to do so.

However, here’s some info that should be kept in mind:
I ended the relationship with the Felix family. Our history with that family dated back to when my 27 year old son was very young.
Wes Felix, Allyson’s older brother, and my son would switch weekend overnights between households when they were in elementary school together.

I ended the relationship after Allyson ran in the USA nationals and before the World Championship meet. The verbal agreement to end at the USA meet was set at the beginning of the track season of her final year in high school. The agreement was between Felix, sprint coach John Patton and me. Patton agreed to go on to the World’s with her.
He is just as upset with the treatment accorded to us at the end of the season as I was.

After the U.S. meet, I told Allyson that I was no longer interested in providing strength workouts for her. She asked why and I reminded her of our agreement at the beginning of the season.
The real reason I did not continue to work with her had to do with a meeting between Mr. and Mrs. Felix and me.
As for their side of the story, they have every right to say what they believe happened.

My background is in business. I’ve negotiated or assisted the negotiation of sports contracts in basketball and hockey through the 80’s and early 90’s.
Prior to our “falling out”, I suggested to Allyson that she stay away from collegiate competition because of the great potential for injury. I explained to her that she was good enough to go pro right out of high school and that she could get a shoe company to pick up her college tuition. I met with her mom and dad a few weeks later and explained the same to them.

Indeed, that is what happened.

So fogelson, that’s the real story not what you or others think. It’s always dangerous to take third or fourth hand info as the truth and spread it around.
It’s even worse to “guess.”
You weren’t there and neither was the person who gave out erroneous info in the first place.

Barry Ross

Great, simple post with which I agree.

I’d much rather see progressions of sprinters than all this talk about studies, The Felix family, church, and viruses.

What differentiates the elite and the non-elite is rate of force delivery at ground contact time. Since no one really knows why one athlete has the ability to provide greater support force at contact, no one has the ideal workout.

It should be obvious that one of the better methods of training involves recruitment of the biggest, fastest firing MU’s since rate of speed decrement over time is caused by the abundance of anaerobic fuel.
The deadlift is excellent for recruitment of MU’s in the weight room (depending on how one uses it) and far superior to the squat because of a much lower probability of hamstring problems.

That is a reasonable argument. I don’t know if I’d say deadlift is “far superior” to the squat though. I think it’s easier to teach to beginners…

There are many ways to skin a cat. Saying that one way is far superior to another depends on many issues:

  • Your ability to teach and monitor technique
  • The ability of the athlete to respond to the teaching and monitoring (some athletes hate squatting and deadlifting - do you force feed them?)
  • Equipment at your disposal
  • Contact time in the weight room and time/energy availability of that athlete (if they play many sports)
  • Number of athletes you are teaching/monitoring at one time
  • Previous injury history
  • Etcetera, etcetera

I think if you fall back onto Charlie’s motor unit diagram displaying numerous lifting exercises and activities, you will always be able to come up with an exercise scheme that best fits your circumstances. I’m not a fan of saying that one particular lift is superior to another. As Charlie always says, “It depends…”

And, I do believe that when one puts forward an argument for or against a particular exercise/training scheme, there would be less friction with other forum members if they worded it as, “In my experience, I have found that such-and-such works best,” rather than “My methods are superior, and nothing else comes close.” Of course, the latter approach seems to sell more products to the less-educated masses.

“What differentiates the elite and the non-elite is rate of force delivery at ground contact time. Since no one really knows why one athlete has the ability to provide greater support force at contact, no one has the ideal workout.”

“It should be obvious that one of the better methods of training involves recruitment of the biggest, fastest firing MU’s since rate of speed decrement over time is caused by the abundance of anaerobic fuel.
The deadlift is excellent for recruitment of MU’s in the weight room (depending on how one uses it) and far superior to the squat because of a much lower probability of hamstring problems.”

elite athletes as in just sprinters? it has nothing to do with relaxation or the ability to rapidly relax muscles? Deadlift causing less hamstring problems? Any data or rational to share there? Motor used are not just recruited by max weight but also speed. True a good point about anaerobic resource hence charlies use of weights as a general stimulator means that involves the CNS which can be tapers freeing up more resources come competition time. Additionally the weight room shouldnt necessarily be another room, but rather an extension of everything else that is going on and programed cohesively. I keep seeing people search for the holy grail of weight room exercises or so called max strength, but no one having considering the cost to the overal program or the actual transfer (i.e. look at who has gone sub 9.8) of the strength training means. Too bad there arent power racks right by the field in indoor facilities.

Since apparently Ken and Barry are both equally incapable of actually reading my original post and continue to ramble on complete tangents because they can’t stick to the points.

Point is, Barry has said MANY bad things about elite coaches, including Charlie. He said bad things about the Felix family. He eventually deleted all threads associated and the entire old forum and has since changed his tone.

His lies and complete misunderstanding of pretty much everything has not stopped, however.

Here is an example of Barry blatantly misquoting and misinterpreting things somebody has said.:

But here are the gems (I’ll summarize his ‘point’ and provide the link),

“Heavy deadlifts before races have no effect on race performance”

“Because you can use more weight in a deadlift, it recruits more motor units and is better”

PowerBear says: “The squat does not require anywhere near the number of muscles involved in the Dl so it’s not as efficient an exercise.”

Maximal rounded back deadlifts are okay! Just an adaptation.

And how about the fabulous lower back lifts? I mean deadlifts.

And let us not forget Mike Young’s dismantling of Barry Ross’s “theories”

What hamstring problems? I would bet that the incidence of low back strain in the deadlift is greater than the incidence of hamstring problems due to the squat.

I think it’s fairly common knowledge that it’s easier to get someone to DL properly(as in Trap Bar DL form)than it is to squat. This allows you to load up beginners much sooner than if you had to work through squat progressions.

Even though it’s easy as pie to get results from younger athletes, I’d still enjoy seeing Bear Powered case studies.

By the time a lifter has developed a 2x bodyweight deadlift, he’s probably not considered a beginner. Certainly, a 3x bodyweight deadlifter has spent enough time in the gym to squat properly. While the deadlift is a great exercise, especially for beginners, I believe it is too taxing to be THE core lift for advanced lifters, whether they are competitive weightlifters or sprinters. Even many powerlifters, who train to deadlift competitively, don’t deadlift nearly as often as they squat because it is too hard on the body, and many Olympic lifters don’t deadlift at all. Most do squat. Keep the deadlift in the program, but there is no reason to drop the squat.