It’s sad that the vast majority of people on this forum simply do not know how to argue. Asking rhetorical questions, restating the same claims already made albeit in a more aggressive and vulgar manner, etc., does not constitute argument. I gave arguments that were not dealt with outside of the response (that’s already been given): “Your idea of programming is a daydream.”
I, unlike anyone else here it seems, an open to being wrong. I’m not under the impression that anything I’m saying is fact or deductively certain. But that’s where conversation is suppose to help. Telling someone that their ideas are nonsense, a day dream, etc., is not a conversation. In fact, it’s the end of one.
Again, great arguments/responses. Such a welcoming group of folks you are! A community so open to learning and educating. Really inspiring. This is truly how dialogue is meant to be had. I love being called cocky by someone who never fails to ask another person what his or her deadlift is just to compare to his own, and then thereby invalidate the other person’s argument when it’s not greater than his. A person who claims I’m just here to impress Rip when a couple hours into conversation with that person, he went and vented to his guru Dan John everything I had to say just to validate his own beliefs. I love when someone over the internet pretends to know my willpower and personality traits. It’s great dialoguing with someone who discourages you from getting stronger by saying you’ll never be as strong as them. Again, the environment you guys are fostering here is really conducive to communication and growth.
The old phrase about a picture being worth a thousand words also seems to be true in this case.
Yes? Kind of? I think it depends on what resources you're talking about. If it's time and effort, then yes, it's optimal in that, if they choose to prioritize it, they will get the best results they can. If it's genetics, drugs, the ability to withstand huge training loads, etc, then no, not really.
I don't think I'm explaining well, so I'll do two quick examples.
1) 1000 people are all on the same training program, and they all leave the gym early to go watch TV. In this case, yeah, there is clearly a way to get more optimal results for everyone by having them prioritize training and put in the time.
2) 1000 people are using the Bulgarian method. 900 of them get injured or burn out completely, 80 have on and off tweaks that set back their training but make some progress, and 20 become nationally competitive. Is the training optimal? Well, for those 20 people, sure, but otherwise no.
I'm still not being very clear, I'm sure, but I think what I'm saying is obvious enough that you already know it anyway. So I'm sticking with my original answer. Definitely kind of.
Last edited by Sean Herbison; 11-29-2017 at 01:38 PM.