Amped Training

Like this article? Share it!

Nuggets of Vitriol

September 8, 2007

I've been slacking on my Hater Nation updates lately, mainly since I've been on a sub-vacation. With that in mind, I threw together some hate that's been brewing and decided to let it fly as a single Q&A type article. So behold, the new Nuggets of Vitriol feature.

Q: If the program I use doesn't really matter, then why do people say a program is inefficient or will not work, instead of just saying 'yes you will get results off of it as well as this one'?

A: The program you use, within reason, really doesn't matter. I've noted before that there are a handful of guidelines that need to be in play, and beyond these the trivia is trivial.

I have my own preferences for how to do things, because that's just how I like to do things. It doesn't give it any inherent superiority to what someone else likes to do, as long as the guidelines are in play.

Now, with that in mind, I tend to judge things as 1) things that suck because they don't follow the guidelines and 2) things that suck because I just wouldn't want to do them for reasons that may or may not be rational. There's a distinction, and an important one.

If something just sucks, then it sucks. If something sucks "in my opinion", then you may or may not want to do it and see results from it.

Goals are another matter to keep in mind. A program has to push you towards where you want to be. Sometimes people pick out programs that don't do this, or are counter to what they say they want to do, and this as well is cause for saying a program is bad.

The ultimate metric, in my mind, is the outcome. If something gets you where you want to be, or even moves you in that direction, it's likely "good". Even I have to grudgingly admit at times that a program I think sucks or is gay "works", because it gets results.

The argument will then shift to "well if you'd done X instead of Y, you'd have done better". This is called a retarded argument, as 1) there's no way to know this and 2) what you respond to as optimal is different at any given stage of training. What is "best" for you now will probably not be "best" for you in 6 months.

When I criticize a program, it's based on all those variables. Does it follow the basic rules? Is it designed with your goal in mind? Is it implemented in a way that agrees with my experience?

Generally my rationale is to say I think there are better ways to do things, and I wouldn't personally use nor give that program to anyone. Sometimes this is experience, sometimes it's just personal bias.

Then again, sometimes it's just easier to tell someone to shut the fuck up and go to the gym, rather than argue pointlessly with every dipshit that has some favorite pet program/trainer; at the end of the day the results won't be different enough to make that arguing worthwhile. That's the real lesson here. Arguing over efficiency and efficacy is fine and dandy, but going to the gym and working hard is what will net you the results.