• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Exercise and fainting?

When I was younger, appearance made a difference in my relationships, but now that I'm mwc, the only real motive is to retain professional currency as a personal trainer. It's very difficult for a personal trainer to have credibility if s/he's not at least trim, if not actually buff.

The downside is that most of my training these days has been very sport-focused. The only way to get credentials in a particular sport is to win competitions, but my *other* jobs prevent me from being reliably in town for races, so I have to go for the appearance instead. At least for now.
I agree there are those for whom your statement is 100% accurate. My unscientific sampling of personal trainers shows 2 different trends for both "gym membership" and sport-specific training. There are many who will only work with a trainer who is a superior representative of fitness/the sport in question.

The second category is primarily the beginner, but in generalization, someone who is non-competitive. It is the person who needs to lose some (perhaps a lot) of weight and relates to someone who is knowlegable, has aerobic and possibly strength fitness, but has excess body fat. Ok - "rounder" or "more average looking" to put it in simple terms. Such instructors can serve as a great role model of someone who is fit (or fitter than average), is regularly active, and still looks like a normal human.

I see a large number of people at triathlons most would never guess to be athletes. Are they in danger of winning a medal? Not a chance in Hell's Kitchen! But they are aerobically fit and have fun doing it. Setting a Personal Record may be important, but that has nothing to do with the body fat % of your coach.

I have 4 "unofficial" tri coaches on my team. Two are competive age-group athletes with impressive physiques. One is a fast swimmer, but is Athena-class (a large woman) and is slow on the bike and run. The 4th is age 65 with bad knees and shoulders. All have completed at least one iron(person) race. It is their ability to work with others, their positive attitudes, and their knowlege of the sport that makes them so popular. Each person will gravitate to a trainer that offers what they are looking for.

And who knows - perhaps your significant other has an opinion about whether or not you are preferred buff or not. Certainly you are preferred healthy.

CriticalThanking
 
I agree there are those for whom your statement is 100% accurate. My unscientific sampling of personal trainers shows 2 different trends for both "gym membership" and sport-specific training. There are many who will only work with a trainer who is a superior representative of fitness/the sport in question.

The second category is primarily the beginner, but in generalization, someone who is non-competitive. It is the person who needs to lose some (perhaps a lot) of weight and relates to someone who is knowlegable, has aerobic and possibly strength fitness, but has excess body fat. Ok - "rounder" or "more average looking" to put it in simple terms. Such instructors can serve as a great role model of someone who is fit (or fitter than average), is regularly active, and still looks like a normal human.

I see a large number of people at triathlons most would never guess to be athletes. Are they in danger of winning a medal? Not a chance in Hell's Kitchen! But they are aerobically fit and have fun doing it. Setting a Personal Record may be important, but that has nothing to do with the body fat % of your coach.

I have 4 "unofficial" tri coaches on my team. Two are competive age-group athletes with impressive physiques. One is a fast swimmer, but is Athena-class (a large woman) and is slow on the bike and run. The 4th is age 65 with bad knees and shoulders. All have completed at least one iron(person) race. It is their ability to work with others, their positive attitudes, and their knowlege of the sport that makes them so popular. Each person will gravitate to a trainer that offers what they are looking for.

And who knows - perhaps your significant other has an opinion about whether or not you are preferred buff or not. Certainly you are preferred healthy.

CriticalThanking



I personally always laugh when I see musclebound baseball players or football players being trained by some chubby coach who has never lifted a weight or played the game in question once in their life. If you don't have personal experience in what you're saying and all of your knowledge comes from books, Then you can't relate with the person you're training. Meaning you probably won't be a very good coach.
 
I personally always laugh when I see musclebound baseball players or football players being trained by some chubby coach who has never lifted a weight or played the game in question once in their life. If you don't have personal experience in what you're saying and all of your knowledge comes from books, Then you can't relate with the person you're training. Meaning you probably won't be a very good coach.
How in the world would you know if the chubby coach ever lifted or not or played? I would be surprised if they never played. I have no numbers, but it would go against what I have seen.

Most doctors have never had life-threatening diseases or injuries, but I'll take their book knowlege any day. Ok - a bit of stretch. Perhaps someone who has no direct experience is not someone to whom you could relate, but would argue that says more about you than the coach.

People with similar experiences can have radically different teaching styles. They may or may not both have the same book learning. Which is better? The one that gets the lesson through to you is better, regardless of background. To me this is not specific to sports, but is a truism for all teaching.

YMMV,

CriticalThanking
 
I personally always laugh when I see musclebound baseball players or football players being trained by some chubby coach who has never lifted a weight or played the game in question once in their life. If you don't have personal experience in what you're saying and all of your knowledge comes from books, Then you can't relate with the person you're training. Meaning you probably won't be a very good coach.

I think this is literally judging a book by its cover, though. I coach at least two sports for which I've never actually trained (diving and water polo), and our club is very competitive.

Coaching is its own skill, and the ability to perform in the sport only has the benefit of impressing parents, which is to say, it's a salespitch thing, because some people judge everything based on looks. As I mentioned earlier, my currency as a personal trainer is very dependent on my appearance, but this is tossing a bone to the public, not an actual requirement.

I used to hire and fire coaches, and over time, I realized that there's no relationship between an applicant's past accomplishments in the sport, if any, and the effectiveness of his coaching.

In fact, the younger the athlete, the less important the coach's connection to the sport, and the more important it is for the coach to be a motivator and class manager. Ten-year-olds don't want to hear war stories about olympic trials.



When I was competitive, my training physicians were Dr. Jack Taunton, Dr. Clyde Smith, and Dr. Clement. Only Dr. Clement was athletic (marathons), but they were all exceptionally competent. My coach was an old summer synchro swimmer, and she put five swimmers into the olympics, eight into the worlds, and about ten into the commonwealths. I didn't see any benefit to my training support being buff olympic medalists.

In fact, there's a sea change in Canada after so many years of 8ty olympic peformance: out with high-profile the ex-athletes who've been running the program into the ground for 20 years, and in with the credentialed coaching / training / performance / nutrition experts. It's possible some of these people may be a bit overweight.
 

Back
Top Bottom