About becoming a personal trainer

Kyle Aaron said:

Lots of politics at one of the two workplaces. All we're doing is teaching and encouraging people to pick up heavy shit and put it down again, seriously guys, build a bridge and get over it.

Click to expand...

Lots of politics where I'm working now too, can get very nasty.

Training a guy the other day, he said, "Fck, it's hot, I need shorts. These track pants are worn out anyway. Got some scissors?"

I went to the office, got him some scissors. He cut the lower legs off his track pants, I binned them. I looked at the rough cut. "I can honestly say that you did not miss your true calling as tailor."
"That's better," he said.
"It's pretty ghetto, I like it."

Ten minutes later he came to do deadlifts.
"Okay, 100kg, five reps."
"Fck, now I remember why I was wearing long pants."
"You could just go for long socks, 70s style."
"But then I would look like a knob."
"I hate to break it to you but you ain't exactly haute coteur right now."
"Fck you."
"Better make it six reps."

hahahahah classic

My Cert III/IV may not have been brilliant, but at least I didn't get a degree, like this guy.

Exercise science degrees should not entitle you to be a strength coach, unless you do specific subjects AND spend numerous hours learning from a reputable coach. Thats why I read shit loads of rippetoe, tate, wendler, simmons, etc etc etc and am trying to get some training under a good coach (that will also work with my hours for EP accreditation).

Exercise science degrees do get you ready for future research, further study to be an exercise physiologist, physio etc, ability to perform extensive (read unimportant) testing, a base to train to be a strength coach and ability to be a basic PT work for the average population.

Sure. I was just quoting, feeling sorry for the guy. He chose the wrong path to reach his destination.

I am just raging after a day where I got a heap of myths and misconceptions from clients and gym-goers. There was the guy with the chunky belly who came two hours a week but spent the rest of the week sitting down and eating junk and wanted ab exercises to lose his belly, the woman who wanted to get stronger, but was afraid she'd bulk up enormously if she did so, another guy who said "but I thought it was dangerous to your knees to squat low," and so on.

Oh well, at least I didn't see anyone [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8futcHtIHs&feature=related]spotting Smith machine half-squats onto a bench[/ame].

dave said:

Exercise science degrees should not entitle you to be a strength coach, unless you do specific subjects AND spend numerous hours learning from a reputable coach.

Exercise science degrees do get you ready for future research, further study to be an exercise physiologist, physio etc, ability to perform extensive (read unimportant) testing, a base to train to be a strength coach and ability to be a basic PT work for the average population.

Click to expand...

I agree with the first paragraph (although no such specific subjects are available as part of my course - in fact of the few subjects or prac hours (of which there are maybe 2) where strength training is 'covered' none have been up to par) in this quote, and disagree with the bold part.

Mate, if your Ex Sci degree doesn't even qualify you as much as Cert III/IV does, then... well, I feel sorry for you. Surely it's gotta do more than that. I mean, it's a degree.

The first part of the bold statement is a reiteration of the first paragraph. Why do you not think an ex science graduate can not train an average person as a PT (don't forget you are supposed to perform at least 300 hours practical work in an ex science course).

Kyle Aaron said:

Mate, if your Ex Sci degree doesn't even qualify you as much as Cert III/IV does, then... well, I feel sorry for you. Surely it's gotta do more than that. I mean, it's a degree.

Click to expand...

It does, I can get them after completion of my degree. Doesn't change the fact that the degree itself will simply be a piece of paper. I realised it would be nothing more than a piece of paper a long time ago - I'm merely here to finish it at this point.

dave said:

The first part of the bold statement is a reiteration of the first paragraph. Why do you not think an ex science graduate can not train an average person as a PT (don't forget you are supposed to perform at least 300 hours practical work in an ex science course).

Click to expand...

Because the fundamentals put forward by the course, at least as far as strength training are concerned, are ridiculous. Following ACSM guidelines (which dictates 8-10 seperate exercises with 2-3 sets of 10-12 reps as a general rule) for resistance training? Ridiculous. Teaching improper bench press and squat technique? Ridiculous. Glossing over deadlift technique/pressing technique entirely? Ridiculous.

If you want to design an aerobic workout (slap someone on a cycle or treadmill at x intensity for y minutes) then sure, the degree I am doing would let you give basic PT to the general population.

Our course requirements are 140 hours, btw. We do graduate as ES not EP though, EP requires the extra hours in a clinical environment.

I believe a cert III/IV should be like an apprenticeship and that no person who has only done a cert III/IV without adequate experience outside of that course should not be allowed to train people. I know you agree with that, so technically you do not think a cert III/IV is just enough either. An exercise science degree is similar, you learn a lot more that is not applicable to training as a PT, it is not called a Bachelor of Personal Training for a reason. There are a lot of jobs out there that it gives you a background for.

dave said:

I believe a cert III/IV should be like an apprenticeship and that no person who has only done a cert III/IV without adequate experience outside of that course should not be allowed to train people. I know you agree with that, so technically you do not think a cert III/IV is just enough either.

Click to expand...

Correct.

dave said:

An exercise science degree is similar, you learn a lot more that is not applicable to training as a PT, it is not called a Bachelor of Personal Training for a reason. There are a lot of jobs out there that it gives you a background for.

Click to expand...

Yeah I understand this now, coming into the degree I did not.

You need a better university, we did 300 hours. RMIT in Melbourne put you through ASAC quals during their exercise science course, I did not go there but I know those who did. My current course as an EP is about 1000 hours worth with 500 EXACT clinical contact hours that means prescribing and overseeing exercise and testing not just being at the place.

ACSM guidelines suck balls and I have never used them BUT it allows you to save your own ass if legally something comes back to bite you, that one of the main reasons why it is taught. I learnt my advanced resistance training from Con Hyrsomallis who taught us power cleans, power shrugs etc (plus other crap like balance work) he was good and would teach outside of the ACSM guidlines, I still feel that the subject was not enough but he made sure we got a good understanding. The rest of my course was like yours unless I got a lecturer or tutor for a one on one talk that was outside of the curriculum and as long as they were interested in lifting or anaerobic training.

Also remember most PT clients are not normally interested in weight training ask Kyle how hard it is to get clients to get off a treadmill or bike and lift something. So a rudimentary education in lifting is enough for a PT. So basic squatting, deadlifting, pressing technique with the ability to expand upon it later on. I know this is not taught well but it is fairly easy to learn.

The Bachelor of Personal Training thing was more for Kyle moons as I knew you would have worked that out.

dave said:

I believe a cert III/IV should be like an apprenticeship and that no person who has only done a cert III/IV without adequate experience outside of that course should not be allowed to train people. I know you agree with that, so technically you do not think a cert III/IV is just enough either.

Click to expand...

Yes, that's correct, I do believe that. And like other apprenticeships, it should be made shorter or longer based on the effort, past experience and current capabilities of the apprentice.

dave said:

Also remember most PT clients are not normally interested in weight training ask Kyle how hard it is to get clients to get off a treadmill or bike and lift something.

Click to expand...

It's usually not a challenge to get them to do resistance work as such. The challenge is in getting them to be consistent, and to do progressive resistance training. That is, many people will drop from their routines exercises they find difficult, or not have routines at all but just do random exercises, and even with a consistent routine they'll use the same weights, reps and sets for weeks or months.

dave said:

Snip

Click to expand...

I'm at the University of Sydney. I don't think a different university would have a course that differed enough to merit going one place over the other.

I don't care about being classed as an EP (as I don't want to work in a clinical capacity) so my hours are not geared to clinical settings at all - I'm doing hours with people I want to learn from that will give me a better understanding of coaching etc. I will continue to learn from them and others after graduating, so I'm happy with that.

"How do you start your clients out?" asked the other trainer.
"I just begin them with a squat."
"Me too! First a swiss ball squat, then I move them to the Smith machine, then dumbbells, then -"
"I just start them with a simple bodyweight squat. I find most people can handle it."
"Really?"
"Yes. Of course they might begin with not many reps and a shorter range of motion, fairly soon they're going right below parallel."
"You know it's not necessary for them to go below parallel."
"Why not?"
"It doesn't work their quads any more than above."
"I agree. I don't have them go deep for their quads, I have them go deep to work their glutes and hamstrings. This is also good for their flexibility."
"If they need flexibility work, do that, isolate it."
"That's a fair approach. What I like to do is to pick a few exercises that do a few things at once. A simple bodyweight squat will improve their strength, flexibility, balance and so on."
"Better to isolate it."
"Perhaps. But I ask myself, do they have to sit down and stand up in day-to-day life? Yes. Do they have to stand on a wobbling surface in day-to-day life? I've yet to train a sailor, so no. So I try to work them as they'll work, live, and play sports - on their feet moving their whole body. Thus, squatting nice and deep."
"But that's unsafe for their knees."
"Actually a deep squat balances the forces on the knees, a half squat makes it unbalanced, as the quadriceps pull across the joint more forcefully than the hamstrings under it."
"But the hamstrings aren't involved in the squat. There have been many studies of the electrical activity."
"When you look into those studies, generally you find the squat technique was a bit dodgy. For example one study was of Smith machine squats to well above parallel. Well, most trainers and any coach could tell them that there'd be little or no hamstring involvement in a Smith machine half-squat. That's why I say, go deep with just your bodyweight or a barbell."
"But there's no hamstring involvement in the squat. Studies show that."
"What is the function of the hamstrings?"
"What?"
"Well, the biceps are elbow flexors. The quadriceps are knee extensors. What do the hamstrings do?"
"They are knee flexors."
"And?"
"And... hip extensors."
"A squat involves hip extension. How can you have hip extension without using hip extensors?"
"Well, the glutes."
"And what are the hamstrings doing?"
"Nothing. They're not involved in the squat."
"So the hip is extending by means of the gluteus maximus contracting and shortening, meanwhile the hamstrings just sit there slackly? Squat now, deep, and feel your hamstrings as you stand up."
"I know how to squat."
"Just squat and feel them."
"The studies show -"
"I know what the studies say. Okay, let's say the studies are right, the hamstrings are not contracting during the squat. Answer me then: why do my hamstrings hurt the day after squatting?"
"What?"
"If the hamstrings are uninvolved in the squat, what is happening to my hamstrings which makes them hurt after squatting?"

There was no answer to what I thought was a simple and fair question. Ironically, this same trainer had earlier been saying, "See, we trainers should have regular meetings to talk about these things to make sure we're all on the same page, I don't know why the manager isn't interested in that." I imagine the manager has something against a big brawl starting.

Kyle, are you aware if any of your colleagues check out this thread, or AusBB in general?

I doubt it. However, my practice is never to say anything about someone I've not already said to them. That's both online and in person. Nor do I pass on anything obviously confidential.

There are many things I've held back, both good and bad, quite a few incidents and conversations.

I have perhaps overemphasised the silly and amusing conversations and clients; but hey, I've tried to be entertaining. I'm actually learning a lot from many people. For example at one of the gyms we have exercise physiologists, when dealing with clients with patellar maltracking, femoral stress fractures, acromioplasty and so on, these people are invaluable.

Saw one of my clients in the gym last night.

"Kyle, I was going to ask you... this muscle here," she pointed to her left forearm and the brachioradialis, "I don't know what it's called," she said, "the wanking muscle?"
"Um..."
"Anyway, it hurts. Could that be from the inverted rows we did the other day?"
"Yes, inverted rows would work that muscle. But it could be other work you do."
"No, I'm right-handed," she said.

I guess it's good when a client is comfortable with their trainer. Sort of.