Topic: worst coaching error

[Dave Chiu]

What sounds more right to you:

1 -- Athletes need to adapt to coaches.

2 -- Coaches need to adapt to athletes.

When lifters (especially Jr's) go to big int'l meets, and compete under the care of an ad hoc coach (assigned by USAW), shouldn't it be the coach's job to gain and apply an understanding of the athlete that will optimize their performance?

What if someone you just met this week told you to change your shoes, wear (or not wear) a belt contrary to your habit, widen your grip, or something else according to their concept of what's good for most, ABRUPTLY ON THE DAY OF THE MEET?

What if the coach thought it would charge your adrenalin by purposely misreporting the "attempts til you" so that you would be shocked to find out you are the lifter several attempts before you had been told?

Pretty outrageous, right?

What about a coach deliberately ignoring written guidance on what a lifter is used to for a warm-up and attempt selections?  Sounds very un-professional.

Is there a list of prescribed practices that ad hoc coaches are to follow so that massive investments of time/energy/money are not wasted by their incompetence?

Why are we paying (thru USAW) for people who's purpose seems to be teaching the young athletes by negative example how they don't want to get screwed NEXT TIME?

[Jim Hooper]

I'm trying to imagine a scenario where a coach anywhere north of clinical mental retardation would coach the way you describe. 

Bribery by an opponent is the only thing that comes to mind so far.

Let me guess:  the thus-coached lifter's results were somewhere south of "sucked."

Over the long haul, coaches and athletes adapt to each other, same as any other long term human relationship.  Short term, ad hoc, they should let lifters dance with the gals that brought them, and like physicians, "first do no harm."  You don't need a rule or policy for that, or shouldn't.  Its common sense.

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

Honestly, I can see both sides of this. As I was coming up through the jr ranks, I pretty much was self coached by necessity with John T. Thrush writing my programs via snail mail. I learned technique mostly at the jr camps, or at least massively improved technique. If the coaches then had been afraid to teach me out of fear of offending me/my coach, I wouldn't have gone far in the sport. I did not incorporate everything the coaches told me, but picked through and used what made sense and worked for me. I volunteer coached a schoolage camp at the OTC a few years back and ran in to this problem hard core. Several of the lifters, at least, didn't like me trying to help. Some were snotty, defiant, and angry though I am positive it was 100% my fault due to this misunderstanding and I am not blaming them. I simply didn't expect such resistance/hostility and it was tough to adapt to. From my perspective, I was the coach, they were the athlete, and it was their job to politely listen to my tips and then ignore or use it as they saw fit. So, I am sure I wasn't as gentle and sensitive in giving the tips as I needed to be, in hindsight. Overall, it left a bad taste in my mouth and I decided coaching other people's lifters is simply something I don't want to do, so I swore off accepting coaching assignments and am only interested in coaching my own lifters.

[Patrick Dupont]

That’s a big problem. Not only in the US or Canada but in Western Europe as well.

First, if you give disinterested advices for the sport’s sake and, of course, for free, the people you try to help will behave defiant toward you and even treat you with disdain, on purpose to make you feel bad whatever your achievements… even when you hold World records and both MD and PhD degrees with a CSCS*D and USAW III under your arm !

That’s nothing personal. It’s the way life goes : people are conditioned to show no respect for free gifts, even if they come from heaven (ahem  ; there already are some examples in the Bible, I think, but it has become even worse with the development of consumerism: if it's for free, they consider it worthless... even if it's priceless!).

On the other hand, you can be the lowest **** on earth, they will find you positively MAHAR-velous (O ! My God, King **** is so great !) as soon as you organize some AWFULLY EXPENSIVE bootcamp where you will talk crap and « learn » crazy things to the admiratively listening crowd : a phenomenon called the « Veblen effect » in socio-economical lingo.

Then, in free countries, Olympic weightlifters as well as powerlifters often choose the sport, I believe, because there’s no pressure from outside : no money, no media, no coaches. That can be a reason why even well-meant coaches with a lot of theoretical knowledge and pratical experience (or even success) are rejected.

And eventually, there are the bad coaches mentioned by Dave who don’t know **** and just break their athletes with crazy HIT methods or WPC dogma. They give coaching a bad name and make everybody suspicious of a profession which should be put under close scrutiny year in, year out for common good.

[Dave Chiu]

Great replies -- both reinforcing and perspective broadening!!

I agree that it is a two way street, and from my own decades of teaching, I can understand how even Jesus was not believed/followed by the majority of those who actually heard his voice and witnessed his miracles.

My beef is w/ assigned coaches who ignore background guidance and dictate ignorantly in a way that DE-MOTIVATES the lifter.

[Jim Hooper]

The scenario first laid out in this thread was that of an ad hoc coach changing a lifter's technique and routine immediately prior to going on the platform at an international competition.  There's only one side to that:  its moronic, and virtually guarantees failure.

Technique camps are precisely the opposite:  the whole point is to evaluate, identify flaws, and absolutely experiment with and hopefully improve the lifter's mechanics.   So, heck yes the good coach will be giving tips in that scenario.  Why would anyone even bother with a technique camp if they did not expect to change their technique?    But that was not the hypothetical posed.

 

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

Yea, you are right that it is different. I guess the story just brought up the memory. I was thinking maybe it was also my inexperience coaching women versus men that made things uncomfortable for me. I haven't ever gotten the same reactions from boys who kind of act more like I said, they ignore you if you don't tell them what they want to hear, unless you have trust established first. On the other hand, some of the girls responded well and no one can please everyone. It just sort of made me only want to coach my own athletes.

[Jim Hooper]

Amen and don't feel like you are the only one.  I coach a varied group of kids that range from All-American swimmers, to wrestlers and football players who lift off season, to kids who lift as their primary sport, and both genders.  Finding that bond and right kind of communication is as individualized as they are unique.  Its great when things gel and you get on the same page, but it takes more time and effort with some than with others.  I find it very different coaching OL from coaching team level sports (e.g., football), but probably even more rewarding when that relationship develops and the results start to come.  Technical issues are the hardest -- it can be hard for the teenaged athlete to put what they are sensing into words that we accurately understand, and difficult for us to say in words what we want them to understand.  And you find there are kids who get it much better visually by seeing and imitating ("visule" learners), others who are highly coachable with talking through things, and still others who "get it" through just repetition and letting their body more or less teach itself how to move.  But when they want to get there from here, we can usually find the way.  The kind of reactions you got and described are very tough to react to, for sure.