Is your training making you fragile???
Or...Is your training making you "anti-fragile"?
I’ve been reading a great book called Antifragile: Things that Gain from Disorder, by Nassim Nicholas Taleb.
While reading I’ve realised that some of the concepts presented more eloquently describe my approach to training and exercise.
The book is based around the concept of anti-fragility, which stems from the fact that we have no real opposing term for something that is fragile. We have terms like robust and resilient, but if fragility assumes that something is broken under stress, anti-fragility assumes that something thrives under stress.
You may consider that any exercise meets this description of anti-fragility, that is, exercise allows us to be anti-fragile, but like the author when he discusses exercise in the book, you would be mistaken.
In my Not Really Yoga program, I talk a lot about how stretching just makes you good at stretching. That is, stretching doesn’t necessarily allow you to use the range of motion that you gain from stretching, and the entire premise of that system is based around ensuring that increases in rage of motion are functional.
The same can be said for exercise.
Most exercises, just make you good at that exercise.
To some extent, the functional movement craze grew out of the notion, but it still doesn’t allow us to become anti-fragile. Just because we decide to program exercise based on lunging, squatting etc, it doesn’t mean we are any better prepared for an adverse event on the body. We are by all means still as fragile as before we started the training. Sure, we may be robust and resilient, but have we become better equipped to deal with an adverse event, than before we started the training.
I would say probably not, and in many cases, given that many people enter these programs with plenty of baggage on board, I would say in many cases they are worse off.
If you are punching the screen right now and in the early stages of posting me an abusive message, chill for a second and consider something. I’m not saying that this stuff doesn’t make you stronger, or better at lots of stuff.
It just doesn’t prepare you any better to deal with an adverse event.
If you think I’m wrong, then how can someone who is able to squat 200kg blow out a knee when 1/2 of their bodyweight hits the ground in an awkward position.
To add some more quotable content to this little shebang, lets consider the notion that injuries tend to occur in positions that you haven’t trained. It’s unlikely the athlete with a200kg squat is going to blow a knee out in a squat position. Throw a few degrees of adduction and internal rotation into the mix, and I can guarantee that if the knee hasn’t become vulnerable, the mind certainly has.
This isn’t to say that vulnerable positions equal injury, though I would argue that lack of exposure to, for want of a better word, vulnerable positions certainly increases risk.
I could rant on for pages on this, but hopefully the vibe of what I’m saying is coming across. It would be remiss me however if I didn’t give a few steps towards becoming anti-fragile.
In my opinion, these things need to be addressed.
1. Variety of movement
2. Ensuring muscles that control a joint, contribute to position and control in the desired manner
3. Becoming familiar with vulnerable joint angles
4. Progressively loading vulnerable angles
Considering muscles attach to bony stuff, the first port of call is to ensure that the muscles can gain control of the things they attach to well. Remember, strength is neural. It is the ability of the brain to get a clear line of communication to as many motor units as possible to fire in sequence to lift heavy stuff. When this suffers, it isn’t just vulnerability that is the concern, it is also a loss of efficiency and strength.