Starting Strength and other reading

[EZA]

I have a secret for anyone who thinks Verkhoshansky and Zatsiorsky are overcomplicating simple things: Human Performance is complicated! The reality is that 99% of books out there and training information you've read is actually oversimplifying very complicated things.

How the body works, how it adapts to training, how it improves, etc. is incredibly complicated because these things involve virtually ever major system within the body - many of which we don't fully understand.

We've been studying muscles for hundreds of years and millions upon millions of dollars have been spent on research and yet we still don't know at a fundamental level the exact causes of muscular fatigue and there are many unanswered questions about the sliding filament theory of muscular contraction.

The inner workings of the human body are infiniately complex and how they all work together in the context of performance is not something that anybody has even close to all the answers to.

Other books you've read haven't even scratched the surface of what human performance really is and Zatsiorsky and Verkhoshansky are simply at a much higher level than what you've read. These are two of the greatest sports scientists of our time, Verkhoshansky literally pioneered the concept of plyometrics and vastly expanded our knowledge of human performance through his work.

If you want to read simple books and get the same results as everyone else by all means don't read Zatsiorsky, Verkhoshansky or any one of a number of other authors who are too complicated.

[Hexagon]

Now you made me wanna read those books.

Thanks.

[Snitz]

Starting Strength & Practical Programming are great, and even essential IMO, but DON'T buy his third book, Strong Enough. It's basically just bits and pieces from the other two, without TOO much information to learn from. It's kind of motivational at times, but ultimately not really helpful.

[ghostwipe]

Originally Posted by EZA

I have a secret for anyone who thinks Verkhoshansky and Zatsiorsky are overcomplicating simple things: Human Performance is complicated! The reality is that 99% of books out there and training information you've read is actually oversimplifying very complicated things.

How the body works, how it adapts to training, how it improves, etc. is incredibly complicated because these things involve virtually ever major system within the body - many of which we don't fully understand.

We've been studying muscles for hundreds of years and millions upon millions of dollars have been spent on research and yet we still don't know at a fundamental level the exact causes of muscular fatigue and there are many unanswered questions about the sliding filament theory of muscular contraction.

The inner workings of the human body are infiniately complex and how they all work together in the context of performance is not something that anybody has even close to all the answers to.

Other books you've read haven't even scratched the surface of what human performance really is and Zatsiorsky and Verkhoshansky are simply at a much higher level than what you've read. These are two of the greatest sports scientists of our time, Verkhoshansky literally pioneered the concept of plyometrics and vastly expanded our knowledge of human performance through his work.

It's hard to stay abreast of all the new research in the sports science field; if you wouldn't mind, it'd be great if you could post links to articles or other sources for relevant new info, studies, etc. Especially concerning sports science, muscle adaptation and its correlations to the central nervous system.

[oxcart]

Originally Posted by EZA

I have a secret for anyone who thinks Verkhoshansky and Zatsiorsky are overcomplicating simple things: Human Performance is complicated! The reality is that 99% of books out there and training information you've read is actually oversimplifying very complicated things.

........

If you want to read simple books and get the same results as everyone else by all means don't read Zatsiorsky, Verkhoshansky or any one of a number of other authors who are too complicated.

There's a difference between explaining a complicated topic and overcomplicating a topic. Science & Practice of Strength training is (IMO) unnecessarily complicated. For example - RFD has been explained by many authors. The Zat explanation is the most complicated one I've seen.

[oxcart]

Double.

[oxcart]

Originally Posted by B3rserk3R

Chaos Mitten you've read thibs book and didn't like it?

I would have thought Boye'se book would be informative, even if I don't like his uber-patronizing writing style.

There's nothing wrong with Boyle's book. It's a perfectly sensible book about athletic development for sports rather than PL/OL.

- importance of conditioning for athletes
- importance of balance between strength: hamstring vs quad
- importance of balance between strength: pull vs push
- medicine ball training
- unilateral work and general prehab
- brief mention of o-lifting
- few templates to show it all together

What's the problem?

[EZA]

RFD is a good example, it has been explained by many others, but mostly their explanations are incorrect or overly simplified. Rate of Force Development is a principle of physics and Zatsiorsky is one of the premier sports biomechanists, of course he's going to give a more complicated view of it, but it's also more in depth and will give you a greater understanding. Reading many other authors take on it doesn't give you the full picture of it and largely oversimplifies a complicated topic.

Read those other authors and then explain to me exactly what RFD is, how it relates to training, what are the factors that determine it, how it's best improved, what are the limiting factors, etc.

I would also say Science and Practice of Strength Training is not very complicated at all generally speaking, his other works that are biomechanic books are far more complicated as are Verkhoshansky's and one of my favorite authors Atko Viru's best books are way out there but they have tremendously valuable information.

You also don't need to understand everything you read to be able to gain something from reading it. Even if you think the book is overly complicated you will still find something in there that is helpful to your training. I've learned a great deal from books I could barely understand at different points because in the process of trying to figure out what they are talking about you learn more than you ever will reading something simple and easy to read.

[fennway4414]

Originally Posted by EZA

RFD is a good example, it has been explained by many others, but mostly their explanations are incorrect or overly simplified. Rate of Force Development is a principle of physics and Zatsiorsky is one of the premier sports biomechanists, of course he's going to give a more complicated view of it, but it's also more in depth and will give you a greater understanding. Reading many other authors take on it doesn't give you the full picture of it and largely oversimplifies a complicated topic.

Read those other authors and then explain to me exactly what RFD is, how it relates to training, what are the factors that determine it, how it's best improved, what are the limiting factors, etc.

I would also say Science and Practice of Strength Training is not very complicated at all generally speaking, his other works that are biomechanic books are far more complicated as are Verkhoshansky's and one of my favorite authors Atko Viru's best books are way out there but they have tremendously valuable information.

You also don't need to understand everything you read to be able to gain something from reading it. Even if you think the book is overly complicated you will still find something in there that is helpful to your training. I've learned a great deal from books I could barely understand at different points because in the process of trying to figure out what they are talking about you learn more than you ever will reading something simple and easy to read.

I always have and always will suck in science, so maybe that's why I had a hard time understanding it. The book was also VERY dry, which compounded its difficulty.

Also, I'm not going anywhere in strength training besides having some fun and joining some amateur competitions. Knowing every detail of everything involved in what I do in the gym, while it would be awesome to know, isn't a necessity to me. For you, it is because it's your profession. Different point of views is all it I guess.

[EZA]

Have you read Supertraining? Now that's dry material, I didn't think Science and Practice was that dry really but it's all a matter of perspective. If you want to really see dry look at Zatsiorky's book "Kinematics of Human Motion" now that is dry reading. On another note, it's sad to me is that Zatsiorsky is at Penn State but because they're a HIT program he's had no input or say in the strength and conditioning programs at that school, it's totally ridiculous.