HEAVYWEIGHT COACH (why the average coach shouldn't be training heavy weights)

[Woldog]

I am fully aware my weight is a LIABILITY and is dangerous into advanced age

I once cut over 70lbs over 4 months for for a long awaited rematch that i won

I actually fought as light at 205 up to a massive 330

There are lots of pro football lineman that are 30% bodyfat just like me

Many of them are 6' 8" 375 so yeah...they are a bit "stronger" than me!!

yeah bro they are also in their 20's or early 30's not 45.

 

[KnightTemplar]

Peak physical condition right here. 6'1" 285. He probably weighs a lot less now though.

 

[-guerilla-]

yeah bro they are also in their 20's or early 30's not 45.

Yeah and likely juiced out of their minds

I have NEVER touched a PED...

Never put a needle in my ass

Im just a 45yr old guy who drinks a lot of beer and only works out 3 days a week anymore

I've been in the ring with enough champions to know EXACTLLY where I stand and i never claimed to be any more than a washed up decent b level heavyweight mma fighter who helped lay the first paving stones for the sport back in the dark days of NHB by organizing the largest and longest lasting MMA club in the region at great personal costs

For gods sake man we were just a bunch of friends from High School who got together at the local community center after class laid out the mats and did some wrestling Judo and kickboxing until the UFC aired in 1993

That night we all drank a bunch of beer smoked blunts and watched the fights

The next day everybody wanted to do MMA from then on out so I had no other choice but to found Louisville MMA Fight Club

the rest my son is history

https://forums.sherdog.com/threads/...lub-founding-fathers-of-american-mma.3991429/

 

[monkeyrhythm]

Yeah i mentioned him and several other great smaller trainers

They would have been MORE SUCESSFUL with heavyweights if they were heavyweights themselves

Why do you believe that?

Is it because you can't comprehend the possibility of an analytical framework which is able to identify and address all the unique "idiosyncracies" of being a heavyweight fighter? Because, individually, you are overly reliant on your intuition and personal brand of common sense?

Often it's the fact that someone ISN'T genetically perfect for a given task which spurs them on to achieve excellence.
Michael Jordan would not necessarily have been a better basketball player if he was taller.
Einstein would not definitely have been a more accomplished scientist if he was smarter.

You have no basis whatsoever to assert that Manny would have been a more successful trainer if he himself was a bigger man.

 

[monkeyrhythm]

On another note, cognitive science has shown us that it when it comes to problem solving and innovation, less experience can sometimes be an advantage. This is because, once we’ve understood a problem and settled on a solution it can be incredibly challenging to use a different architectural lens than the one we now believe to be optimal; if a subsequent problem or requirement is too similar then we have great difficulty seeing the wood from the trees. Where the next phase of development/progress necessitates an architectural innovation, almost without exception the breakthrough is made by somebody else.
The more experience an individual has, the more likely it is that they've developed biases which become blockers to understanding situational and individual idiosyncrasies. On this basis, it's reasonable to consider that Manny may have been LESS SUCCESSFUL as trainer of heavyweights had he himself been a heavyweight fighter.

 

[-guerilla-]

Why do you believe that?
Is it because you can't comprehend the possibility of an analytical framework which is able to identify and address all the unique "idiosyncracies" of being a heavyweight fighter? Because, individually, you are overly reliant on your intuition and personal brand of common sense?
Often it's the fact that someone ISN'T genetically perfect for a given task which spurs them on to achieve excellence.
Michael Jordan would not necessarily have been a better basketball player if he was taller.
Einstein would not definitely have been a more accomplished scientist if he was smarter.
You have no basis whatsoever to assert that Manny would have been a more successful trainer if he himself was a bigger man.

On another note, cognitive science has shown us that it when it comes to problem solving and innovation, less experience can sometimes be an advantage. This is because, once we’ve understood a problem and settled on a solution it can be incredibly challenging to use a different architectural lens than the one we now believe to be optimal; if a subsequent problem or requirement is too similar then we have great difficulty seeing the wood from the trees. Where the next phase of development/progress necessitates an architectural innovation, almost without exception the breakthrough is made by somebody else.
The more experience an individual has, the more likely it is that they've developed biases which become blockers to understanding situational and individual idiosyncrasies. On this basis, it's reasonable to consider that Manny may have been LESS SUCCESSFUL as trainer of heavyweights had he himself been a heavyweight fighter.

good points

I believe that heavy weights are the best at training other heavy weights because I have had enough smaller coaches asking me to do foolish things (like run as far as a 115!) (From the op) because they didn't understand the abilities and limitations of the larger frame

When I took over my old high school wrestling team and changed the program by eliminating running and focusing exclusively on wrestling my heavyweights performance Skyrocketed

As a heavyweight myself who suffered the foolish one size fits all training strategys smaller coaches tried to implememt I knew that asking my 280 lb athletes to run as far as a 115 lb athlete was the epitome of foolish

...of course no one would expect that 115 pound athlete to lift as much absolute weight as the 280 lb athlete in the weight room LOL

The fact is smaller athletes are actually more durable less prone to injury and are stronger pound for pound in their larger cohort

Smaller athletes are also capable of taking much harder punches without going down thus their fight strategy must be very different than the larger more delicate more knockout prone athlete

It's actually very simple science explained in the ant and the elephant conundrum as the ant can lift some 16 times it's body weight where an elephant can only lift 1/8 of its bodyweight

The simple scientific theory is "Personified" in compeditive weightlifting as the smallest athletes are capable of OUTLIFTING the largest athletes by an exponential degree (pound for pound of course not absolute)

"This Tiny Woman is One of the World's Strongest Humans....Technically, she's 137 percent stronger than The Mountain"

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/pae8bk/this-tiny-woman-is-one-of-the-worlds-strongest-humans

 

[monkeyrhythm]

good points

I believe that heavy weights are the best at training other heavy weights because I have had enough smaller coaches asking me to do foolish things (like run as far as a 115!) (From the op) because they didn't understand the abilities and limitations of the larger frame

When I took over my old high school wrestling team and changed the program by eliminating running and focusing exclusively on wrestling my heavyweights performance Skyrocketed

As a heavyweight myself who suffered the foolish one size fits all training strategys smaller coaches tried to implememt I knew that asking my 280 lb athletes to run as far as a 115 lb athlete was the epitome of foolish

...of course no one would expect that 115 pound athlete to lift as much absolute weight as the 280 lb athlete in the weight room LOL

The fact is smaller athletes are actually more durable less prone to injury and are stronger pound for pound in their larger cohort

Smaller athletes are also capable of taking much harder punches without going down thus their fight strategy must be very different than the larger more delicate more knockout prone athlete

It's actually very simple science explained in the ant and the elephant conundrum as the ant can lift some 16 times it's body weight where an elephant can only lift 1/8 of its bodyweight

The simple scientific theory is "Personified" in compeditive weightlifting as the smallest athletes are capable of OUTLIFTING the largest athletes by an exponential degree (pound for pound of course not absolute)

"This Tiny Woman is One of the World's Strongest Humans....Technically, she's 137 percent stronger than The Mountain"

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/pae8bk/this-tiny-woman-is-one-of-the-worlds-strongest-humans

I completely agree that intelligence and critical thinking competence are relatively uncommon; however, possession of these attributes are not related to an individuals stature.

 

[-guerilla-]

I completely agree that intelligence and critical thinking competence are relatively uncommon; however, possession of these attributes are not related to an individuals stature.

That is true a small man can be just as competent to coach as a larger man however the larger man will be more familiar with the idiosyncrasies associated with the unique class of heavyweight Combat Athletics

The same could be said that a bantam fly or lightweight coach would be ideal for smaller competitors as a super heavyweight would not have the intimate knowledge of the idiosyncrasies involved with that class of Combat Sports

This Thread is an exercise in the Ethereal and not necessarily logistically Appliable to everyday
training opportunities because you must work with what you're given so if the local kickboxing gym has a head coach who is tall and thin and you are short and strong then you have to train with him because it's not as if there's a bunch of gyms to choose from are there however in a perfect world if you had an MMA gym on every corner you are best advised to find a coach who matches your physical descriptions as close as possible

That "YODA" CRAP is for the movies

 

[monkeyrhythm]

That is true a small man can be just as competent to coach as a larger man however the larger man will be more familiar with the idiosyncrasies associated with the unique class of heavyweight Combat Athletics

The same could be said that a bantam fly or lightweight coach would be ideal for smaller competitors as a super heavyweight would not have the intimate knowledge of the idiosyncrasies involved with that class of Combat Sports

This Thread is an exercise in the Ethereal and not necessarily logistically Appliable to everyday
training opportunities because you must work with what you're given so if the local kickboxing gym has a head coach who is tall and thin and you are short and strong then you have to train with him because it's not as if there's a bunch of gyms to choose from are there however in a perfect world if you had an MMA gym on every corner you are best advised to find a coach who matches your physical descriptions as close as possible

That "YODA" CRAP is for the movies

But a professional fighter at the top of their profession has their pick of coaches to choose from; they are not restricted by geography/locality. Both Lennox Lewis and Wladimir Klitschko (for example) chose to be coached by a bantamweight so, evidently, they don't subscribe to your viewpoint.

 

[ROcknrollracing]

Clubber Lang didn’t even need a coach to win the world heavyweight championship

 

[-guerilla-]

But a professional fighter at the top of their profession has their pick of coaches to choose from; they are not restricted by geography/locality. Both Lennox Lewis and Wladimir Klitschko (for example) chose to be coached by a bantamweight so, evidently, they don't subscribe to your viewpoint.

a professional fighter at the top of their profession has their pick of coaches to choose from; they are not restricted by geography/locality. Both Lennox Lewis and Wladimir Klitschko (for example) are coached by a team of individuals who include heavyweight specialist that understand their unique class and it's Unique requirements

The point is best made when you look at a person starting out in their athletic career as the coach who helps shape them from the beginning has the greatest influence on their style and thus that is the most important coach of their athletic career in many ways

that in mind when your first starting out it is important that you try to find a coach who approximates your physical characteristics in order to make the most of your training time

this may not be the head coach but at least an individual in the gym who is in the coaching capacity that approximates your physic

this thread describes an absolute ideal scenario however in most cases general access personality and costs dictate what gym an individual goes to rather than what is the absolute epitome of training opportunity for them

 

[-guerilla-]

Clubber Lang didn’t even need a coach to win the world heavyweight championship

Even in fantasy the point is well made

"Clubber" was his OWN COACH thus literally depicts the theory that one should be trained by a coach that is as similar to the athlete in every way shape form or fashion as possible for the optimal conveyance of skills

I can remember going to each Community Center through town trying to establish a kickboxing wrestling and Judo program and I had the most trouble in parts of town where I was racially foreign to them

both in the Hispanic, black and Asian areas I was less well-received as a white Coach than I was in the white areas

because of this slight difference in my presentation it was more difficult for me to establish programs in these parts of town however I was still able to achieve some level of success but I was University more successful and well received in areas where I was racially similar to the general population

Even something as simple as race makes a big difference and it is a romantic notion to see a little old Jewish man coach a big Italian to proficiency in a combat sport but it is always the case that individuals are best trained and succeed the most under their own culture their own people and their own weight class

 

[j-boxing]

@monkeyrhythm, you are a man of uncommon tolerance and perseverance.

 

[-guerilla-]

@monkeyrhythm, you are a man of uncommon tolerance and perseverance.

Dont let your emotions distract you from the point at hand

Bring your logic toe to toe and see how it gos

At least monkey tries to outmanuver me instead of just throwin a personal insult as he packs up his balls and runs for the hills

Ive been debating theses points for decades so i know the angles

Ill admit

you are tougher than most at maintaining your cool and you clearly have some knollege but you still show emotions that weaken your arguments and give me opportunities to dissect your points

 

[j-boxing]

Dont let your emotions distract you from the point at hand

Bring your logic toe to toe and see how it gos

At least monkey tries to outmanuver me instead of just throwin a personal insult as he packs up his balls and runs for the hills

Ive been debating theses points for decades so i know the angles

Ill admit

you are tougher than most at maintaining your cool and you clearly have some knollege but you still show emotions that weaken your arguments and give me opportunities to dissect your points

I have brought my logic "toe to toe". I was one of the first in this thread to point out that your claim about optimal HW coaching is a non sequitur.

I'm not sure what emotions of mine you're talking about. And I have no idea what emotionally weakened "arguments" and "points" of mine you've "dissected".

My only argument was that your claim about optimal HW coaching didn't follow from the premises in your original post.

You've certainly never "dissected" that argument. Instead - if I remember rightly - what you did was make several strange claims about sports science and statistics. Neither I nor anyone else who read them seemed to understand them.

I admit to being slightly curious as to why you start these threads and then revive them after they've obviously run their course. But, whatever mate.

 

[-guerilla-]

I have brought my logic "toe to toe". I was one of the first in this thread to point out that your claim about optimal HW coaching is a non sequitur.

I'm not sure what emotions of mine you're talking about. And I have no idea what emotionally weakened "arguments" and "points" of mine you've "dissected".

My only argument was that your claim about optimal HW coaching didn't follow from the premises in your original post.

You've certainly never "dissected" that argument. Instead - if I remember rightly - what you did was make several strange claims about sports science and statistics. Neither I nor anyone else who read them seemed to understand them.

I admit to being slightly curious as to why you start these threads and then revive them after they've obviously run their course. But, whatever mate.

I didn't "revive" this simple truth of the boxing...

Larry Holmes did when he recently said that Deontay Wilder lost because his coach wasent a heavyweight and thus didn't understand the idiosyncrasies and requirements of the heavyweight combat athlete

My threads are designed to draw in people who think they know something about combat Athletics cuz they watched Rocky a bunch of times and train at the local strip mall

I enjoy crushing conventional wisdom and fight fallacys

Popular opnion is often wrought with fallacy and thats something we need to clarify

I remember when mike tyson was talking about driving the nose bone into the brain for an instant kill

Whew...that BS is still believed by chumps TODAY!!!

ANYWAY

Max kellerman
Stacey McKinnley
Larry Holmes
All made it clear that heavyweight athletes who are being trained by men smaller than them are not making the most of their fight career or are a unique class with unique requirements WILDLY different than the smaller calsses

In the future if I run across another champion, trainer or analysts say it again I'm going to post their video and "revive" This Thread yet again

all you guys who refute me stay well hidden behind your computer screens with Anonymous names and backgrounds otherwise you might have to admit you were wrong

Smart strategy

 

[monkeyrhythm]

@monkeyrhythm, you are a man of uncommon tolerance and perseverance.

I said way back in an earlier post that I was “learning something” and I meant it. This and the cardio thread are a goldmine when it comes to a number of interests of mine, such as information processing, knowledge acquisition, critical thinking, heuristics (cognitive shortcuts), discourse and the philosophy of science. I don’t think Guerilla is trolling (in the most part), and I also don’t believe that the way he thinks (in general) is particularly unusual.

He very much reminds me of a friend of mine who I get on really well with, but if we get into the weeds of many of his beliefs and why he holds those beliefs I’m invariably taken aback as to just how differently our minds work. I find cognition in general fascinating; for example, studies have shown that a significant percentage of (perfectly functional) people don’t have any type of inner monologue whatsoever; that blows my mind.

I have a sneaking suspicion that despite us being very different characters Guerilla and I could share a bottle of whisky and a smoke and have a genuine laugh.

*we’d no doubt have to agree to disagree on quite a lot though…

 

[-guerilla-]

I said way back in an earlier post that I was “learning something” and I meant it. This and the cardio thread are a goldmine when it comes to a number of interests of mine, such as information processing, knowledge acquisition, critical thinking, heuristics (cognitive shortcuts), discourse and the philosophy of science. I don’t think Guerilla is trolling (in the most part), and I also don’t believe that the way he thinks (in general) is particularly unusual.

He very much reminds me of a friend of mine who I get on really well with, but if we get into the weeds of many of his beliefs and why he holds those beliefs I’m invariably taken aback as to just how differently our minds work. I find cognition in general fascinating; for example, studies have shown that a significant percentage of (perfectly functional) people don’t have any type of inner monologue whatsoever; that blows my mind.

I have a sneaking suspicion that despite us being very different characters Guerilla and I could share a bottle of whisky and a smoke and have a genuine laugh.

*we’d no doubt have to agree to disagree on quite a lot though…

Well thats touching and likely highly accurate

I am in no way shape form or fashion "trolling" but i deffinatly use click bait language and when responders get saucy i reply accordingly but never escalate an argument...
I soley reply in kind

Your one of the more intelligent posters around here that actually takes the time to read, dissect comprehend and understand the threads you are involved with

Thats why you dont get angry, you actually UNDERSTAND what people are saying

My threads are designed to get a lot of responses and views so they come off as preachy, defiant and agressive...its a
"sales tactic"

Thats not the way i act in real life and its not an internet "persona"

Its a well derived strategy to expose fallacies and problems with our cultures treatment of martial arts and combat sports precipitated from my real world first-hand experience and deep reverence for such endevors

When I say I'm a founding father of american mixed martial arts that means that I am one of thousands of individuals who supported the sport in the beginning and accepted it's lessons wholeheartedly into my core beliefs by converting a club that did kickboxing judo and wrestling to NHB at great personal risk in both the physical and liabal rhelms

It doesn't mean I'm implying that I single-handedly create "MMA" at the community center in Louisville Kentucky back in 1993

You and a tiny handful of other people that have responded my threads comprehend this

The un washed masses of slack Jawed fan boys however respond with vitriol, aggression, confusion and rage and quickly turn to personal insults and comically attempt to interrogate me on my background for "legitimacy" because they either were to stupid to comprehend what i was saying or were intentionally trying to twist my meaning to gather individuals to their cause in some kind of "crowd funded" propaganda exercise

I enjoy both types of Responders hence I really enjoy this trollpharm gif merchant website with a tiny handful of intelligent experienced posters like yourself who enjoy engaging in a lively debate about martial arts and combat Sports

 

[-guerilla-]

@monkeyrhythm said:
"The more experience an individual has, the more likely it is that they've developed biases which become blockers to understanding situational and individual idiosyncrasies"

Guerrilla:
While this is true in some cases I think it is genuinely rare and often times the interpretation of this problem is actually an issue with politics and not a actual logistic and plausible reason why this Old Coach has an unusual belief

 

[monkeyrhythm]

@monkeyrhythm said:
"The more experience an individual has, the more likely it is that they've developed biases which become blockers to understanding situational and individual idiosyncrasies"

Guerrilla:
While this is true in some cases I think it is genuinely rare and often times the interpretation of this problem is actually an issue with politics and not a actual logistic and plausible reason why this Old Coach has an unusual belief

It's so common that it's practically a universal truth. If you're interested in the science a good place to start is with Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky’s work on cognitive reasoning, covered in Kahneman’s 2011 book ‘Thinking Fast and Slow’.