Just Give Me The Answer, Part Deux

“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.”

This premise formed the basis of yesterday's post. And while in it is contained a lot of truth (and I expounded upon what I take it to mean), we also can't use this as an excuse to do nothing. Centrism, nuance, and research are fine stances to take, but they don't make the world move. We can't necessarily label ourselves wise just because we can't make decisions. We're just not that special. In some cases we're simply being pussies.

Digging further into Russell's quote is the original writing from whence it came:

The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt. Even those of the intelligent who believe that they have a nostrum are too individualistic to combine with other intelligent men from whom they differ on minor points.

From "The Triumph of Stupidity," written in 1933, lamenting the rise of the Nazi party (attribution: http://quoteinvestigator.com/2015/03/04/self-doubt/). Following the quote of interest, he notes that too often we allow trivial details to derail what could otherwise be beneficial partnerships. For the time being, go with what you know. Don't solidify what you think you know already as being objective truth; keep searching, but you have to do something at some point. You're not smart enough not to.

Interesting side note:
I found this blog post while researching Russell's writing. Very good stuff!

Just Give Me The Answer

Because most of us are just trying to feel our way through this thing called life, we're often looking for solutions to our issues, whatever they may be. In this void, many people are willing to jump up with the definitive answers to all of life's questions. Unfortunately, many aspects of life are not as simple as most would like to make them out to be. But taking the time to parse out possible solutions, or the time spent sitting on your hands rather than making a decision, can seem rather daunting. This indecision makes those "truth sayers" appealing, and gives rise to the plethora of talking heads we see today.
But do they actually have the answers? Hard to say definitively, but it's unlikely. More probably is that they have an answer that fits their particular experiences and set of circumstances, which in reality simply makes them as ignorant as anyone else. I think what you'll find is that most who are as informed as possible on many things aren't quick to make absolute statements. Unfortunately for those who take a nuanced stance, this isn't what the masses want.

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." -Bertrand Russell

Addiction by Distraction

I've written before that we, as a populace, are addicted to entertainment. Constantly looking at our phones, the TV, anything but ourselves. After further reflection, I think that is untrue. We are not addicted to entertainment, because much of what we are doing isn't actually entertaining us at all. What we're addicted to is distraction. We're constantly in search of something to distract us from, well, ourselves mostly. On Joe Rogan's podcast, Dan Harris and Sam Harris were noting that there was a study where people indicated they would rather receive some sort of discomfort (I believe it was an electric shock or something) than be alone with their thoughts.
What are we so afraid of? Why do we need to be distracted?
Are we afraid of confronting the reality of ourselves? What we are, and what we could be? Or is it, at this point, a habitual psychological addiction, in which are simply addicted to the act of finding distraction? I'm more inclined to believe it's the former, though undoubtedly it is a mix of the two.
As with anything, reversing the trend requires introspection (that, ironically, we are loathe to do and therefore unlikely to undertake) and confronting the reality of addiction that has taken hold. Only then can we reverse the momentum and begin to steer the ship in the appropriate direction toward fixing the issue.
Start small. Take 10 minutes out of your day (preferably in early, on the off chance that it kick-starts the habit for the rest of the day) to remove distractions. Put your phone somewhere you can't see it, turn the TV and radio off. And just be. You don't have to meditate. You don't have to think about anything in particular. But do your best not to be taken in by other, non-technological distractions (food, chores, "work", etc.) that may do their best to take your focus away from yourself.
If you listen to music, watch TV, or in some other way multi-task while doing work that matters, do what you can to reduce it. Forget trying to be good at multi-tasking. Get really good at mono-tasking. You will likely find you accomplish more than you have before.
What are you waiting for?

Why?

Early in my coaching career, I was easily frustrated by those athletes who needed to know the why of everything. When told what to do next, they would ask, "why?" It seemed, to me, like the act of a defiant athlete trying to be difficult. In fact, I once remember telling my brother something along the lines of, "if there's one thing not to do when you get to college, it's ask your coaches why you're doing something." As I've matured and (hopefully) improved, I understand that these are the athletes you want. The inquisitive ones, the ones who are trying to parse out not only what to do, but the reasoning behind it. 
To the young or uninformed coach, this likely comes across as a challenge to authority. In some cases, undoubtedly, it is. But it also gives us an opportunity to demonstrate expertise as well as set them up for success. Eventually, they will no longer be under your wing. Part of your job as coach is to teach them to fly, so that when they aren't with you, they will be OK, even if they are under the guidance of an idiot. Dan Pfaff has noted that great athletes should have a "PhD in their event." A well-informed coach, who is able to relay the appropriate information, in the appropriate way, at the appropriate time, is invaluable and will likely produce excellent results, as they better grasp the concepts and realities of training.
Understanding why something is done provides context and allows us to apply similar means and methods across different situations, changing the necessary elements based on need. Simply copying and pasting what you saw someone else do doesn't necessarily produce the desired outcome, because they may have used it for a totally different reason; which means that trying to get the result you are might not work.
Where possible, figure out the why. Then, figure out the what, the when, and the how.

Mental Toughness

One thing James Smith has preached a lot recently is the elimination of the current construct of "mental toughness." It is non-specific and does not provide context or quantification. What he stresses is that this "mental toughness" is actually a collection of several qualities, including aggressiveness, durability/resilience, resolve, composure, and positive thinking, among others.
These qualities are all trainable, and in particular, within the sport. He also notes that, "there is no such thing as tough; you are either trained or untrained." Our response in a given situation is a result of life experiences paired with inborn genetic traits. This is training. Consider the sport of American football. Perhaps, for instance, you have a defensive player who is unwilling to be involved in tackling beyond cursory attempts. They will not "stick their nose in." This refusal is generally deemed that the player is not "tough" enough. What they lack is a desire to engage in contact, colored by their past experiences, or, void of those experiences (such as someone playing for the first time), what they anticipate will be the experience upon contact.
Coaches must realize the ability they have to control and improve this. The immediate reaction is likely to vilify, demean, or shame the individual; and/or simply run them until they puke. Setting aside the absurdity of physical punishment, what would be wrong with simply reducing the intensity of the "exercise" (in this instance, tackling), via a reduction in speed and hitting power? Reinforce proper takedown mechanics, repeat as much as necessary, producing an "inoculation" against the stressor (the experience of the tackle). Once this has taken hold, gradually increase the intensity, such that they become immune to the negative experience of the tackle itself. Certainly there are those with inborn traits which predispose them to actually enjoying this experience - these athletes, just like any who have genetic advantages in certain abilities, will not have to necessarily start with the regressed versions.
Analyze the athlete, work backwards from the goal, and construct a logical plan to get there.

We're All Babies

Being a parent has, in my opinion, helped my coaching immensely. Within my own household, I have 2 humans I get to watch grow and develop daily. While they are clearly not "performing" in their daily lives at a high level, it enables me the ability to see growth in real-time. Today I was reminded while watching my nearly 1-year old daughter that just because we cannot communicate verbally does not mean we do not understand what we are hearing or seeing. I told her it was bath time and she immediately headed for the stairs and up to the bathroom, despite her inability to even reply with something as simple as "OK." 
As coaches, it's important to take this to heart. For instance, we may be able to identify a movement efficiency without being able to competently explain exactly why it is occurring or exactly how to fix it; or to explain it in a way that the athlete understands. But this just means we have to continue to work and grow toward an even better understanding that does allow us to communicate effectively. As well, realize that just because the athlete isn't doing what we're asking of them, it isn't necessarily because they don't understand. They just might not be capable of it. If they lack the motor control or physical abilities to carry out what is being asked of them, it is our duty to do what is necessary to either increase their comprehension of the task, or improve the requisite abilities to allow them to carry it out.
They might not be ignoring you, they're just babies.
You're not an idiot; you're just a baby.

Do Something

"Vision without action is a dream. Action without vision is a nightmare."

This is the yin and yang of the universe - going all out, all the time will eventually get you killed; whereas doing nothing will do the same, just in a different way. Yes, we have to take time for contemplation and information gathering. Making an uninformed decision is nearly as bad as not making one at all. But at a certain point, you have to realize you have about as much knowledge and wisdom as you can hope to at the present moment, and you have to make a decision. The time is going to pass either way; you might as well do something to move forward with it.
Remember that the action you take doesn't have to be all or nothing - the actions you take might simply be small, preparatory steps so that the next "big" one has everything in place. But do something. If there's one thing I've learned from reading (and living), it's this:

No one who is where you want to be got there by standing still.

We can justify and excuse away our inactivity very easily. Surely "they" had access to information or resources we don't, they don't have the same roadblocks we have, it's just not the right time. But eventually you'll realize that the excuses don't matter; the universe doesn't care. What gets done is what matters. So don't just stand there - fucking do something.

I Don't Know

One of the things I struggle with (which is readily apparent if you've read nearly anything else I've written), is the realization that there is still a great deal I don't know, even within the field I've spent a decade plus investigating and practicing. And the reality, of course, is that I will never know it all. No matter how much time I spend reading, watching, listening, and doing, I will never know, understand, or realize it all. And all of that comes into even greater focus when reading coaches like Stuart McMillan and Dan Pfaff acknowledge that they don't have all the answers, either.
So imagine my frustration and anger when I see people speak with such certainty on many matters political, sociological, psychological, economic, medical, and so forth, despite having very little (if any) experience, knowledge, aptitude, or background in any of those areas (though, admittedly, extensive experience is not a prerequisite for expertise, but I digress).
Why are we afraid to admit we don't know something? I used to spend far too much time wrapped in debate, particularly on subjects I had little more than a passing knowledge of, but plenty of opinion. Over time, I was no longer young enough to know everything (thanks Oscar Wilde!), and began to simply step back and step away from debate. Quite simply, nuance is too often absent, and it is usually driven by opinion and emotion, rather than reason and patience. No one is there to listen, and everyone is just waiting their turn to talk.
Discussion, conversely, is where progress is made. If people are willing to recognize the gaps in their knowledge, and actually learn from others (assuming the points being made have basis in fact, or are at least based on solid theoretical grounds), we can actually move forward. Instead, too often we spin ourselves round in circles, into the dirt, yelling over one another.

"The whole problem of the world is that fools and fanatics are always so sure of themselves, while wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell

Moving Forward

Every day gets me closer to understanding just what the hell I'm doing with this training thing; that is, what the training process means and how to better influence it, both in the short and long term. However, it also requires that I'm willing to put myself out there and test these theories. The best concepts mean nothing if they are not put into practice. This means being willing to be wrong, but also being willing to acknowledge when I'm wrong and change course. Then, using these incorrect avenues as teaching moments for myself to illuminate gaps in my knowledge, and hopefully prevent myself from making the same mistake again. The second half of this is the important part; it is not simply enough to acknowledge a mistake - you must do your best to keep it from being repeated. We can't possibly see every possible outcome, but we need to do our best to try. Use the data to inform decision making moving forward.

The Mind Killer

Once again, I'm going to give daily writing a try. I've been recently inspired by my friend Ryan Esdohr, who is upping his writing game. As usual, the only reason for me not to do this is laziness. Do I have plenty of other time commitments? Sure. But I can fit this in, if desired.
The sole motivator for me the last few days has been the number of blog posts/social media shares/articles/etc. simply slapping me in the face, telling me to move forward in spite of doubt. Stuart McMillan puts out fantastic training-related material, but, in my opinion, his daily Instagram posts (some of which have a training bent) have been even more valuable to me. He seems to let you in to the doubt he feels, and the mindset that he approaches things with. The knowledge that, while he doesn't have all the answers, he has a lot, and the mindset to find the ones he doesn't have. This speaks to me so loudly, I have to be willing to put ego aside and move forward. Don't fear being wrong. Don't fear what others will say. Fear doing nothing. Fear is the mind killer. 

"A coward dies a thousand times before his death, but the valiant taste of death but once." -Shakespeare, Julius Caesar

Training Update

After cutting for the last ~6 weeks, I've decided to go ahead and officially end the diet for the time being (I say "officially" because there were some weekends in there where things got out of hand). I'm not as lean as I had hoped, but I definitely got a bit leaner. I'll perform a 2 week diet break using Lyle McDonald's macro recommendations from Guide to Flexible Dieting to set intakes. I'll re-assess after the 2 weeks whether I want to cut a bit further or start to bulk. Daily macros come out to:
P: 172
C: 272
F: 74

My plan is to "borrow" some calories from carbs and fat to get to 200 grams of protein daily. Undoubtedly some days will not be precisely to plan, but I should be able to remain relatively on track. Goals are to diversify my intake such that I'm not eating the same thing every day. Changing up and getting calories from many different protein, carb, and fat sources.

Upper body training going forward will continue with the modified "How I Would Westside" article written by Chad Wesley Smith, while I will continue with my lower body training as before, which is centered around power and submaximal poundages. I managed to squat 315 quite easily, with no psyche up, utilizing this method. I think, moving forward, with maintenance or excess calories, I should be able to continue to progress. I also plan to add in running to work toward a sub-20 minute 5k next summer. I will, for the time being, focus on a combination of slow mileage and Charlie Francis-inspired tempo runs, while slowly adding in longer runs on weekends when possible. We'll see how it goes.