THERE IS NO LACK OF PEOPLE IN GYMS TODAY WHO ACTUALLY WANT TO GET BETTER.
Who know that maybe whatever someone else is doing may not actually be the best for them. Who feel as if there could actually be a better way. But when they attempt to follow that thought, to experiment, to perhaps make something fit them or feel better, it’s only a matter of time until being confronted with the stereotypical gym bro who lets them know they are overcomplicating or overthinking it. And some version of the following conversation occurs:
“Just stick with the basics, bro. That machine won’t grow your back.”
“But I don’t feel barbell rows in my back. They hurt my elbows, wrists, and lower back.”
“You can’t argue with results. They work. Look at Ronnie Coleman. Look at Dorian Yates. You think you can grow a back better than them?”
And then our “thinker” will generally sulk back to the rack, thinking, “Well, that is true,” and continue to row. (If only he could fast-forward 10 years to see the result of “sticking with the basics”— potentially jacked-up elbows but still no lats.) We’ve all been there!
It’s not that “it works” isn’t good logic or a bad reason to choose an activity or exercise. At the end of the day, if it doesn’t produce results, I would agree— why would you do it? I mean, would you follow the training routine of the best marathon runner in the world if your goal was to be Mr. Olympia one day? Of course not. Why? I don’t need science or studies to validate the decision, I just know that training that way has never worked— never produced an Olympia- caliber physique. So it does make a lot of sense to start by following a Mr. Olympia routine if you want to look like Mr. Olympia. So what’s the problem?
“It works” isn’t the problem. How we define “works” is the problem. So let’s examine a few things I think are important to consider, as we better define this word. Works? For whom? Compared with what? As fast as possible? Injury-free? As efficient as possible?
Click "NEXT PAGE" to continue >>