In my last blog post, I talked about the professionalism side of things with respect to narrowing down our applicant pool for Cressey Performance internships. Today, I want to talk about a few more things an applicant can do to separate himself/herself from the remaining pack at final cuts.
Mistake #6: Not reading - You can bet that I am probably going to ask you what the last thing you read was during your interview. Unfortunately, required school reading and Barstool Sports don't count. And, don't say in your application that you read all my stuff if you aren't subscribed to my FREE newsletter; I can quickly check up on that.
Mistake #7: Not applyingearly - Generally, applications that are received on deadline day or right before it are already playing from behind the 8-ball. Honestly, we normally have 1-2 applicants we already really like well before this final rush because they have gotten on our radar screens by applying early. So, get your application in early; it shows you are really excited and care.
Mistake #8: Not finding a go-between of significance - Most of our internship selections are individuals who have been, in one way or another, "connected" with a member of our staff, one of our previous interns, or some industry colleague of ours. When these individuals can speak directly to your personality, skills, and work ethic, it immediately gives you a leg up on the competition. Obviously, people who go out of their way to visit Cressey Performance and experience our environment and culture are putting themselves in a better position as well. However, if you're applying from afar and can't make it to Boston, go out of you way to visit one of our colleagues elsewhere - whether it's at their facility or at a seminar. These initiatives show that you care about getting better and can win people over.
Mistake #9: Not showing that you can and have coached before - We don't care about your GPA. The fact that you started an exercise science club at your college is nice, but it doesn't speak to your abilities as a coach or how successful you'd be in our model. What we want to see is that you've gotten out there and coached before - regardless of whether it's personal training, collegiate strength and conditioning, previous internships, or even just your little sister's soccer team. It means that you'll have gotten past the initial awkwardness of coaching someone when you aren't comfortable with your abilities yet. Just as importantly, it means that you are better prepared to deal with clients and athletes who may be intimidated by a new training experience.
Mistake #10: Not being energetic - For us, this is huge. We know we can teach you everything you need to know to be successful at Cressey Performance. The only things we can't teach you are professionalism (as I noted in my last post) and energy. You don't necessarily have to be an always clapping, in-your-face, "rah-rah" coach (although there is a place for folks like that), but it is important to show excitement about working with clients, learning, and becoming a part of something special. So, when you're on the phone for your interview, enunciate! Ask questions. Talk about how we fit into your career plans. Show an interest in what we do and we'll show an interest in you.
Obviously, the attitude and energy you'll need for a given position will depend on the facility in question, so go out of you way to learn about a facility's culture before you apply and, later, interview.
Hopefully, these ten tips give you some insights into what we look for when we review applications and carry out interviews. I can't say that it's the same across the board for all facilities in our industry, but I think you'll find a lot of similarities between us and our colleagues.
At Cressey Performance, we have a few interns in the spring (1/5 - 5/10), summer (6/1 - 8/30), and fall (9/1-12/23). Over the past three years, this internship program has "kicked out" some coaches who are doing great things in the industry, including names you'll recognize like Brian St. Pierre (who we wound up hiring as our first employee), Kevin Neeld (now a hockey expert and director at Endeavor Fitness), Kevin Larrabee (now on staff at Mike Boyle's place), Chris Howard (Cressey Performance's newest employee), and Roger Lawson (World-Class Rock, Paper, Scissors Competitor):
There are several more who are either still in school or out in the world doing great things - and we're really proud of them.
In light of the successes of these folks (and, presumably, the outlandish intern-hazing death circuits we've featured in this blog), Cressey Performance internships have become coveted ones. In fact, for the three internship positions we had available for this summer, we had 33 applicants. It proved to be a huge challenge for us to narrow it down to our final few, as we had strong applicants, and many of them came with recommendations from good friends/colleagues of mine in the industry.
With that in mind, since I know we have a lot of industry up-and-comers reading this blog, I thought I'd throw out my top five mistakes that intern applicants make - at least in my experience. Not surprisingly, most (if not all) of these bulletpoints also apply to to the application process for a job.
Mistake #1: Spelling "Cressey" incorrectly. - I'm dead serious; this really happened. One international applicant read about the internships at www.ericcressEy.com and download the application form at www.cressEyperformance.com, but somehow found a way to spell my last name "Cressy"on the mailing envelope and at least 4-5 times in his application essay - which was stapled to the application with the word "Cressey Performance' across the top. Attention to detail and the ability to follow directions are important - and this cut us down to 32 candidates pretty darn quickly.
Mistake #2: Not proofreading your application essay. - This was an issue for quite a few others. It's really unfortunate, as some folks may be great coaches who are articulate in speaking, but just don't come across well in writing. However, we're talking about a 500-word essay. It wouldn't be wrong to ask 2-3 friends, parents, or colleagues to have a look at it to make sure it's clean. So, you could say that in my eyes, a poorly written application essay doesn't just show that you're unprepared in the context of a crucial skill in the working world, but also that you aren't comfortable asking for help. I want all of our interns to be secure (and humble) enough to admit when they don't know/understand something so that we can teach them.
Mistake #3: Glazing right over the application. - We had this issue with a few applicants for different reasons. Two applicants glazed over the application and just included their essay and resume, and while they were good candidates in terms of the essay and their qualifications, the simple fact that they did not include the application added five minutes to our internship coordinator Pete's day as he tried to track down their contact info, references, and desired internship period (spring, summer, or fall). A few others had such poor handwriting that we had to contact them with follow-up emails to determine what they were really trying to relate. Pete is already a super-busy guy with the regular goings-on of CP, so someone who comes up short on such a simple task stands out to us as someone who is going to throw up "inefficiency roadblocks" as an intern down the road, as opposed to becoming a thriving member of the team.
Mistake #4: Acting like an immature bag-of-worthlessness in your social networking profile(s). - Research from the University of Dayton's Career Services showed that approximately 40% of employers check out job applicants on Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, etc. before making a hiring decision. CP is proud to be among those 40%. Dropping F-bombs left and right and posting pictures of you boozing are not good ways to win over potential employers and internship supervisors - especially since we know many of our interns become very popular with clients and eventually form Facebook friendships. And, many of our clients are impressionable young athletes; you need to prove to us that you are mature enough to be role models for them.
Mistake #5: Attempting to always go through Eric. - Yes, I just referred to myself in the third person, but that's not the point. We had a few applicants who would call or email constantly to request more information about the internship: dates it runs, application deadlines, housing recommendations, etc. As I noted above, in addition to being our business director, my business partner Pete is also the internship coordinator. He took this position not only because he's beyond qualified for it, but because I don't have the time or desire to manage the logistics of the preparation for the program. My responsibilities are working with the interns once they arrive, and - to that end - I refer all inquiries directly to Pete during the application process. Still, we have had several people call/email who big-leagued Pete by refusing to interact with him, instead requesting to always speak with me. Invariably, when I speak with them (if I do contact them at all), the questions all wind up being ones that Pete could have fielded easily - and with more detail than I could. So, the take-home lesson is to always deal with the internship coordinator - because he a) controls your future more than anyone else, b) will immediately black-list you if you big-league him, and c) will actually give you the best responses of anyone in the process. Remember that there is a difference between being proactive and being a pain in the butt; persistence is fine, but cumbersome is something difficult is another thing altogether.
You'll notice that none of these five mistakes had anything to do with coaching ability, academic performance/GPA, and previous experience. Very simply, we can rule out a good 50% of candidates simply because they haven't established themselves as professionals. As an example, Roger Lawson was one of our most popular interns of all time with clients - and he did it with ZERO academic background in fitness (he graduated with a degree in English Literature). However, his application and essay were thorough and professional, and he was humble and "politely persistent" - so he made it past the first round over people who had as much as six years of experience in the classroom and training world than he did.
Some recommended reading for those out there who are worried about making it past this first stage:
How to Win Friends and Influence People - It should cost you about $1 on Amazon, and you should read it within a day.
Made to Stick- Discusses the importance of first impressions and how to make yourself "stick" in someone's mind during the selection process.
Never Eat Alone- It's about networking, but not the cheesy kind where you just name drop.
Peak- This book explains a lot of why our business (or any business) is successful.
In my next post, I'll talk about what separates the folks in the final decision process after the initial "cuts."
Here are a few recommendations for this week:
East Coast Muscle - Recently, Men's Health Fitness Editor Adam Bornstein traveled all along the East Coast to check out several training facilities - one of which was Cressey Performance. This blog post details his experiences and features a picture of one dead sexy guy named Cressey lifting heavy stuff.
Five Resistance Training Myths in the Running World - This is one of my most popular articles of all-time, and with the number of crazy endurance folks getting ready for the Boston Marathon in 10-degree weather, it seemed like a fitting time to bring this piece to the forefront once again.
Made to Stick - Someone mentioned this in conversation the other day, and it reminded me that it was one of my favorite books of the past five years. It's a great read - whether you're a teacher, trainer, parent, or any of a number of other things!
Simplistic Programming
Let's face it. There are so many aspects to Strength & Conditioning that it's easy to be left wondering, "How am I going to fit everything in?" For a young coach, program design can be somewhat of a frustrating process. But, over time, as experience rolls in and confidence flourishes, the program design conundrum dies down. You find that there's more than one way to skin a cat and the concept of simplicity always seems to come to the forefront. Take a look at the following list of potential program components:
Strength TrainingPower TrainingMovements SkillsFlexibility Speed DevelopmentMobilityAnaerobic/Aerobic ConditioningWarm UpStabilitySoft Tissue WorkEtc. . .Etc. . .
Admittedly, I am one of those overwhelmed ones at times, asking myself how I'm going to "fit it all in."
However, as I noted, the K.I.S.S. principle seems to always be the end result of my analysis - KEEP IT SIMPLE, STUPID! Yet, this simple approach doesn't seem to mesh well with having multiple training goals for one training cycle. This brings me to my main point. You don't HAVE to have a zillion training goals for every day/week/etc. of a training period. It's OK to focus primarily on one or two things only and hammer them home.
Maybe for Athlete A, he doesn't need all this "fancy stuff" and instead just needs to not be as weak as his little sister. Or Athlete B for that matter, who's "strong enough" and would greatly enhance his/her athleticism by focusing on his/her rate of force development.
Here at Cressey Performance, things like plyometric work are condensed into one or two training sessions. Speed development and movement skills are also allocated to particular training days. As the days go by, I'm seeing more and more value of consolidating program components into particular time periods instead of trying to cover all my athletic bases in the same session, month, etc. Another point being that it's OK to let other things slide a bit while you hone in on a higher yield area. Some people may need more corrective exercise at a particular time and less strength work at the moment.
Conversely, even though it would behoove us to simplify our programming approach we must at the same time remember what Albert Einstein said - "Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler." This is where the Art of coaching comes in, as we find a simultaneous balance between simplifying our programs and having them still be very effective in yielding great results.
Simplistic Coaching
During my last internship, with Coach Michael Boyle, I had a coaching epiphany that helped me to realize how my explanation of exercises to large groups needed to be simple if it was going to be effective. I needed to make all my coaching cues much simpler as well. If you haven't read that brief post before you can find it here.
At CP, I find myself in a one-on-one situation a lot more and guess what I found? The concept of simplistic explanations and coaching cues is STILL true! Who would'a thunk it?!?! I realized that just because I can spend more time with an individual doesn't mean I need to talk his/her ear off with long lists of directions. The one client standing there in front of you still responds to the same simple explanations and demonstrations that a group of people do. The biggest difference I can find in this regard is that I might increase my initial number of coaching points to three things when explaining an exercise.
I can remember my football coach saying to me that the average human mind can only remember seven things at once. They're already counting how many reps they're doing as #1, and if I give 3 pointers to remember, that's a total of four synapses. But, let's be honest, we've all worked with clients who seem to "not be present in the moment;" it's like their minds are somewhere else when you're talking to them. So, for this reason, I'll leave the other three synapses open for "whatever." However, I'm very open to hearing what your suggestions are for filling in the rest of the synapses; feel free to post a comment below.
Having said all this, I've found there are two types of clients (as time goes on, maybe I'll discover more): the visual learner and the verbal learner. After you've taken a new client through a warm-up, foam rolling, stretching, etc. you get a feel of their kinesthetic maturity. You can already tell how well they respond to being shown an exercise or being told how to do an exercise. This way, by the time you get over to the resistance training component, you have an idea of where to start - whether it's more demonstration and less verbage or vice versa.
Has the following scenario every happened to you?
A kid or adult you're coaching is standing there watching and listening to everything you say and do. You give full disclosure in your explanations and demonstrations. It's now his turn to attempt the movement and he does EVERYTHING wrong! It's like he wasn't even listening to what you just said and for some reason your demonstrations went right through his eyes and out the apparent hole in the back of his head!
(I apologize, but you'll have to turn your volume up because the audio quality is not that good)
So, I hope you the reader can appreciate my thoughts on the issue. For some, like my mentors Eric Cressey and Mike Boyle, this concept came into fruition many years ago. I'm glad I was able to realize the same thing while under their tutelage and not out on my own. An intern's time here Cressey Performance is very fulfilling and the whole staff has so much to offer that there's never a dull moment in the day.
Sam Leahey can be reached at sam.leahey@gmail.com.
I'm really fired up today to announce that our new website is now live at www.CresseyPerformance.com.
This site is a lot more representative of our facility than the old one, for sure, but it's also going to become a "destination" for CP clients and those looking for "info-tainment," as my business partner Pete will be regularly updating a blog at the new site about the goings-on at the facility. There are still a few things we need to add, but for the most part, this thing is ready to go. Let's just say that you'll probably be able to live vicariously through this blog if you're too far away to actually become a regular client of Cressey Performance! So, be sure to subscribe to the blog while you're over there.
It's been something we've been meaning to do for quite some time, and it would not have come to the fruition without the help of CP client Tim Roy and his incredible team at Dynamic Diagrams, an internationally-recognized studio that has provided services to clients such as Hewlett-Packard, Sirius Satellite Radio, the Getty Museum, and the World Health Organization. Dynamic Diagrams did an excellent job bringing this new site to life and we are very appreciative of their support - and have quickly become "raving fans." And the only part of the bargain we have to keep is no sessions on the Prowler for the next two months for Tim and his wife!
Check them out at www.DynamicDiagrams.com.
Here's a good read from yesterday's Boston Herald that alludes to my work with Kevin Youkilis this off-season. Steve Buckley interviewed me for it on Wednesday, and the piece came out great.
Kevin Youklis Right at Home in Hub
Preface 1
If you're like me, you foster a great appreciation for the work Eric Cressey does both in cyberspace and in person through mediums like seminars, conferences, etc. However often times Eric's readers do not benefit from what goes on behind the scenes at Cressey Performance. In fact, I would venture to say that at most top notch Strength & Conditioning facilities around the country this privilege often falls upon interns, as they are learning day in and day out from the entire staff.
So, my fellow Cressey disciples, never fear because there is a solution! Eric has asked me to write regular blog posts regarding my internship here at Cressey Performance. This will include many training epiphanies and revelations, "ah-ha" moments, coaching insights, and just flat-out Eric Cressey madness! Being able to get inside the mind of Eric Cressey and his staff is a tremendous honor and I would love to share all that comes out it.
Hope you enjoy!
Appreciating Differences
We had a splendid seminar recently at Cressey Performance with Neil Rampe as the speaker. Beyond the actual shop talk I noticed a similar thread in his speech. He often would finish up a slide summary with the question "Can you appreciate that?" He'd present his knowledge and then ask the audience, "Can you appreciate that?" Notice what he did not say. Neil didn't present his rationale, science, and/or theory and ask attendees "Do you see how I'm right and so and so is wrong?" In fact, I don't recall him ever even using the words "right" or "wrong." It was always "Can you appreciate this or that?" In one such example he taught to appreciate asymmetries in the body. More specific to this discussion though, Neil discussed the appreciation of different schools of thought from Janda, Sahrmann, Kolar, Myers, PRI, and others.
This concept of appreciating different perspectives, instead of trying to prove right or wrong, I find more and more useful the longer I coach. More practically, I find this coming into fruition over simple things in the Strength & Conditioning field. Take a simple exercise like the One-Arm Cable Row for example. Should you retract both shoulder blades when your row or just the side that is doing the rowing? Is one way right and the other is wrong? Really? A more noble argument I've found is which one is more optimal for what you're trying to accomplish. In reality neither one is wrong; they're just different!
What about if you place certain components of your program in different spots than others. Is it "wrong" to put static stretching at the beginning or end of a workout? Is either way "right?" I don't think so. They both can be applied appropriately at either end of the session. What about a quadruped t-spine mobility drill. Should the arms and femurs be completely perpendicular to the ground or should you be sitting back slightly on your calves?
Again, is either version wrong? Nope, just another example of different ways to skin a cat.
Oftentimes, it's young up-and-coming coaches like myself that fall victim to training arguments. Alwyn Cosgrove talked about this once when he said something to the effect of:
"If you put all the greatest coaches in a room they will agree on most things and disagree on few things. If you put all their students in one room they'll be arguing all day long over the differences."
I hope I quoted Alwyn correctly, but either way, you get the point. In most cases, one perspective or difference may be more optimal than the other in terms of the goals it's trying to accomplish. Only in a few cases is either side wrong or right. So, the next time you're listening to someone give advice - be it for programming or just in general terms - appreciate where they're coming from. Understand WHY he is suggesting something. Is the person a powerlifter? Is he a physical therapist? Is the person a Strength & Condtioning coach, athletic trainer, doctor, chiropractor, or a professor? Does he work in group training settings, semi-private, or a one-on-one situation? Understanding all these different perspectives can allow you to APPRECIATE what the other person is saying without getting all indignant because you think he's "wrong."
Thanks, Eric, for helping me realize this valuable lesson!
You can contact Sam Leahey at sam.leahey@gmail.com.
Today, we've got another great guest post from Matt Blake."If I embark on a voyage of exploration, and I set as my goals the willingness to follow any lead, pursue any interesting observation, overcome any difficulties, and I end up in some exotic locale that might be very different from my predictions before setting out, have I changed my destination in any way? I would say not; the sine qua non of science is not the conclusions we reach but the process we use to arrive at them, and that is the polestar by which we navigate."-PZ Myers, Biologist, University of Minnesota
One might ask why the heck a pitching coach is leading off his article on a fitness expert's blog with a quote from a biologist, and how it would have any relevance to the topic at hand. Where could this possibly be going?
Well, I recently attended the American Baseball Coaches Association "Hot Stove" Pitching Discussion in Dallas, Texas on January 10th with about 200-300 coaches from all over the country. And, I would say that this notion was the overriding theme to take away from the event.
This "Hot Stove" pitching discussion was part of the bigger national convention that takes place every year. This event provided an outstanding forum for people to hear some leading thinkers in baseball discuss pitching in an informal public setting. Some of the notable attendees of this event were Tom House, Alan Jaeger, Brent Strom, and Derek Johnson. For those of you who are unfamiliar with these names, I'll give you a brief description of each.
Tom House is a former major leaguer, former major league pitching coach, and is regarded as one of the great modern day pitching gurus and currently coaches at the University of Southern California.
Alan Jaeger runs Jaegersports.com and has an outstanding understanding of long toss, arm care and how it should be applied to your player's development.
Brent Strom is a former major leaguer, is an instructor in the St. Louis Cardinals system, and teams up with Ron Wolforth to run the Ultimate Pitching Coaches Bootcamp every year. They also run some outstanding Elite Pitcher Bootcamps during the summer. These two presented early in the weekend and are proponents of the "Blending" and "Chunking" theories and advocate for training pitchers through the use of athletic and aggressive throwing drills.
Derek Johnson is currently the Pitching Coach at Vanderbilt University and is regarded as one of the premier pitching coaches in the country. Producing ten drafted pitchers (including three first-rounders) over the last three years will usually do that.
Honestly, this is just a handful of people in a room that included dozens of D1/D2/D3 pitching coaches, as well as numerous outstanding high school coaches, but these guys really stand out with their contributions to the pitching community's knowledge base.
Tom House did his part by speaking to the crowd about the importance of being able to accept new ideas that run counter to your current train of thought. He brought up an interesting point regarding the need to be strong enough to change your positions and adapt your training methods as the information presented to you deems necessary. This is not too far from what you see happening on the strength and conditioning front every day. If I remember correctly, it wasn't too long ago that Mike Boyle questioned the value of the almighty squat. Who would have thunk it? This is a great example of a man following a process of logical thought to create his own philosophy even if it runs counter to much of the traditional thought. You don't need to agree with him on this, as we still use a lot of squatting variations at Cressey Performance, but based on his interpretation of the research, this is what he thought gave him the best value in the risk/reward category for his athletes.
On the baseball side, this idea was none more evident than when Tom House was challenged about the effectiveness of the towel drill and admitted he was wrong about this drill in its original form. This drill has been a staple in many pitching coaches' dry work for years. In coming to understand where the towel drill was lacking, Tom has recently changed the weight of the implement in the drill from 2 oz to 5/6/7oz depending on the training intentions. This essentially changed the deceleration demands to be more similar to a baseball and worked to counter the argument at hand, by letting everyone know, that as science has progressed he has needed to adapt his training methods.
One of the other important topics that House brought up was the need to understand the science behind the overhead throw. If we expect to train players at the highest level, we need to know what is actually happening in the body. By incorporating information relating to a player's "Kinematic Sequence," one is more apt to see where players are either efficient or inefficient in creating energy and delivering force to the ball. Understanding the sequencing of the body's rotations is essential to getting the timing of the delivery right and avoiding stressful mechanic flaws.
The way he phrased it may or may not have gone over a lot of coaches' heads and split the camp into science-based vs. common sense/feel coaches. But, I obviously believe Tom is right on this point or I wouldn't spend my waking life in Eric's facility. On the flip side, I can also understand where coaches who do not naturally gravitate to the analytical style would find other ways to communicate this information than the technical jargon House used. At the end of the day, your players either understand what you're saying or they don't. If they don't, you need to come back to their level of thought before they tune you out.
Along these lines, one of the points I strongly agree with Tom on is the need to look at the golf industry and how advanced their level of instruction is in the private sector. Greg Rose and the people of the Titleist Performance Institute are doing some great things on the technology front, as far as analyzing swings and doing physical assessments to improve golf technique. Obviously, this is a different beast with the way their market dynamics have been established, but there is enough money within the baseball industry to start dedicating some of our resources to making sure we have the best information available to the general public. The rate at which players are getting injured because people are simply uninformed is not okay in this supposed "Information Age."
One of the refreshing things to see is that people are at least beginning to recognize that we can't be so rigid in our approach to training pitchers. We are just now leaving an era where we thought we had all the answers and we could box up our pitchers to 90 degree angles and call it a day. Funny that injuries are up at nearly every level of the game from little league to the Pros, so obviously something isn't working. With that said, I'll leave you with one last short story that Tom House provided us at the convention. It has do with a time when he was coaching Nolan Ryan on the Texas Rangers. Nolan credits a lot of his success later on in his career due to the physical shape Coach House got him in. Obviously, this is a second-hand retelling of a story, so I'll leave it up to Tom to come over to Ericcressey.com and correct me in the comments section, but I think you'll get the gist.
As many of you know, Coach House is famous for really being a pioneer on the biomechanical analysis front. One day, House was attempting to talk to Nolan Ryan about his famously high leg kick, by letting him know that it might make more sense to bring his leg kick down a bit and get himself a little more under control. In Nolan Ryan's Texan drawl, he calmly responded, "Tom, with all due respect sir... I understand you know a lot about the game, but if there's one thing I know.... It's that the higher I lift my leg here, the harder I'm gonna throw this baseball. So you can go ahead and stick that in your computer of yours." And if that doesn't bring this discussion full circle, I'm not quite sure what will.
In the end, I think as important as it is to follow the research, it is just as important to let the common sense/feel aspects drive the questions being researched. Obviously, science is continuously digging deeper, but if we don't listen to our athletes, we may be digging in the wrong places. Like I've said before, the athlete throws the baseball, so giving them the necessary information and letting them find their own signature style with it is essential to their development.
Matt Blake can be reached at mablak07@gmail.com.Related PostsA New Model for Training Between Starts: Part 1Philosophizing from Goliath's ShouldersA Baseball Training Interview with Eric CresseySign-up Today for our FREE Baseball Newsletter and Receive a Copy of the Exact Stretches
used by Cressey Performance Pitchers after they Throw!
Thus far this week, we've covered the top articles, product reviews, videos, and guest submissions of the year. Today, I just wanted to cover the stuff that was fun for me to write (or film) - and it isn't just exclusive to EricCressey.com.
Birthday Blogging: 28 Years, 28 Favorites - I just remember that this thing rolled off my fingertips as I wrote it on my 28th birthday.
What Folks are Saying about the Cressey Performance Majestic Fleece - I just remember that we had to film this about 47 times because none of us could stop laughing.
The Opportunity Cost of Your Time - I don't know why this one was fun to write, but it was. I suppose it might have something to do with the fact that I started out at business school, and then moved over to the exercise science world to complete my undergraduate degree.
The Truth About Unstable Surface Training - This was actually introduced at the end of 2008 (and written in sections between 2005 and 2008), but deserves mention in light of its first full year of availability. I'm most proud of this work because it took a ton of time to compile both the literature and our original research, which was the first of its kind. Nobody had looked at how a long-term training lower-body unstable surface training intervention would affect healthy, trained athletes' performance. This book presents not only those results, but a series of practical application recommendations that are of value to any strength coach, personal trainer, or other fitness professional.
Lower Back Savers Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3 - Featured at T-Muscle, these were really fun to write because I had a chance to be dorky and practical at the same time, blending research with what we've anecdotally seen in those with lower back issues. Honestly, I still have enough content to write a part 4, and that may come around in the next few months.
