Real Progessive Training
I’m working on a project right now…I might call it “Real Progressive Training” or something catchier, like – HOT TRAINING FOR FUNCTIONAL SUPERFITNESS BODY HOT! Yes, I said “hot” twice! If that doesn’t get your attention, nothing will! I might add the word “kardashian” to the title too…for no specific reason…
But that aside, let’s talk about “functional training” for a second. It’s constantly on my mind. As a trainer, I want my clients’ function to improve. I want them to have greater range of motion in their joints, with greater control of that range of motion, and greater strength (of all types) in that control.
One of my biggest pet peeves in this industry, though, is mindless application of methods. “Functional Training” is still a hot topic, and everyone attributes “functional” benefits to their product – Crossfit, TRX, stability balls, etc. Let’s take the example of stability balls.
Stability Balls
If you haven’t heard of stability balls, I’m not sure where you’ve been. They’re everywhere. They’re in homes, they’re sold as “functional” desk chairs, they’re in gyms, they’re in the street!!! Stability balls, aka Swiss balls, were first used as circus implements in Italy, back in the earlier part of the 1900’s. A Swiss physiotherpist found that the instability caused by the balls helped her patients to recover normal function more quickly.
I would imagine it was an inductive case of monkey-see, monkey-do. If the people with the greatest balance in the world (circus performers) balance on these things, using them with my clients (albeit in a toned-down manner) will eventually bestow unto them a small fraction of the attributes those circus performers have.
Anyhow, soon physical therapists all over the world were using these things with their clients, to introduce instability, and thereby challenge their clients’ proprioceptive (awareness of position in space/time) and kinesthetic abilities.
One young enterprising trainer (Paul Chek) grasped onto the potential for the use of these tools in training normal clients. Another inductive case of monkey-see, monkey-do. It probably went like this - “If it helps sick people to get better faster, it must help people who are well to get even better.”
However, instead of going back to the souce (the circus), and taking cues from there, this trainer took all his cues from the physical therapists. He basically started giving sick-people exercises to non-sick people. This is now a huge (and hugely misguided) industry – giving physical therapy/rehabilitative exercises to general personal training clients.
That’s not to say that there shouldn’t be any crossover, or that knowing these techniques is bad. However, these techniques are usually misused, and certainly overused by personal trainers.
Case In Point
Let me relay a personal story first. A good friend was doing bench presses on a stability ball, with 70lb dumbbells. The ball burst. He landed on his back on the floor. When his elbows hit the floor with those 70lb dumbbells on top of them, his radial and ulnar bones shattered. He was in immobilization rings for six weeks, and in physical therapy (not personal training) for six months afterward.
There are two points I want to make here:
1. Once you pass a certain weight threshold, why would you want to be unstable?! Further, and related, at that threshold, how unstable are you, really? In the image above, with the 100-and-whatever-pound dumbbell pushing down into the floor, how unstable is that guy (that’s Paul Chek, for those who don’t know). And,
2. At what point do you throw the risk/reward calculation out the window? Take the above example again. What is he gaining, that can’t be gained in another (safer) way? Is it really necessary to do that movement, that way? What happens if that ball bursts? It may not seem like very far, but 2 feet is a long way to go when you have 100+ pounds on your chest. Ribs will break, at a minimum. What if the ball slips out behind him? Broken coccyx? Why the hell is that bench right there?! He’s not using it for anything! Is it there just to compound the danger?!
Consider this, friends, before you buy in to “functional” training. Use your common sense. And when my next project is done, buy my book.

July 5, 2009 at 1:44 pm
I agree. I noticed (at the beginning of this craze) that “benching” using a stability ball forced me to use far less weight than on a stable surface, which changed what I was doing. Maybe I ‘worked my whole body’ but iI cut the weight I was lifting by at least 1/3.
July 5, 2009 at 8:27 pm
Lauren, it definitely limits your working-weight to use a stability ball. I’m of the school that you should really stick to bodyweight (almost) exclusively with stability ball work.
July 5, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Josh, AMEN!!! I could not agree more with you on this subject. Is it really necessary to be that “unstable”? In all reality, what Chek is doing in that picture has absolutely no carry over into the real world except for the fact that some people might look at it and for some reason think it is this great idea.
July 5, 2009 at 8:28 pm
Thanks for the comment! Yeah…I think what really bothers me about it is that people will look at it and think it’s a good idea!!
July 7, 2009 at 12:26 am
great points, josh. i agree that the tool needs to fit the task, and focusing too much on corrective or rehabilitative exercises for clients, especially those who are apparently “functional” do not need more instability to get more results. I see plenty of trainers throw clients with poor single-leg balance on a dyna-disc, when the logic there seems to be backwards: Why make them more unstable to get them to train for stability? perhaps taking off their shoes may be a good start…
Just like most of America, swiss balls, dyna discs and all the fun toys sell because they entice us with the promise of results “quicker”, however, 99% of the time this just isn’t the case.
July 7, 2009 at 11:47 am
Right on Charlie. Not only will being barefoot really help your balance/proprioception, but so will building STRENGTH in/around the joints in question…