Strength Training is Learning from Tail Events
Strength
Training is Learning from Tail Events
By
Nassim Nichoals Taleb
Taken from:
Medium
I was
honored to be asked by Mark Rippetoe to write the foreword of [book]. But the
reader may ask the following: What does someone whose research is on the risk
of random events, particularly extremes, have to do with strength training?
Well, the
Starting Strength approach is precisely about extremes, what people in my
business call the “tails,” the rare events that are consequential though of low
probability. Just as systems learn from extremes, and for preparedness,
calibrate themselves to withstand large shocks, so does the human body. Indeed,
our body should be seen a risk management system meant to handle our
environment, paying more attention to extremes than ordinary events, and
disproportionally learning from these.
You will
never get an idea of the strength of a bridge by driving several hundred cars
on it, making sure they are all of different colors and makes, which would
correspond to representative traffic. No, an engineer would subject it instead
to a few multi-ton vehicles. You may not thus map all the risks, as heavy
trucks will not show material fatigue, but you can get a solid picture of the
overall safety.
Likewise,
to train pilots, we do not make them spend time on the tarmac flirting with
flight attendants, then switch the autopilot on and start daydreaming about
vacations, thinking about mortgages or meditating about corporate airline
intrigues — which represent about the bulk of the life of a pilot. We make
pilots learn from storms, difficult landings, and intricate situations — again,
from the tails.
So when it
comes to physical training, there is no point engaging in the time-consuming
repetitive replication of an active environment and its daily grind, unless you
need to do so for realism, therapy, or pleasure. Just calibrate to the extreme
and work your way down from there.
The other
reason Rip asked me to write this foreword is because I am myself engaged in a
variant of his exercise program — and the ethics of skin in the game dictate
that one should be eating his own cooking, tell us what you think and what you
do. I learned that what you do for training needs to be separate from what you
do for pleasure. I enjoy hiking, walking, ocean swimming, riding my bicycle,
that sort of things; but I have no illusion that these activities will make me
stronger. They may be necessary, but for other reasons than the attainment of
strength. I just consider walking necessary therapy, like sleeping.
It also
happened that part of my research in risk overlaps with complexity theory. The
first thing one learns about complex systems is that they are not a sum of body
parts: a system is a collection of interactions, not an addition of individual
responses. Your body cannot be trained with specific and local muscle exercises.
When you try to lift a heavy object, you recruit every muscle in your body,
though some more than others. The heavier the weight, that is, the more in the
tails, the higher number of muscles involved. You also produce a variety of
opaque interactions between these fibers.
This
complex system method applies to all situations, even when you engage in
physical therapy, as I did for an injured shoulder. I discovered that doing the
more natural barbell presses and (initially assisted) pull-ups, works better and
more robustly than the complicated and time consuming multi-colored elastic
bands prized by physical therapists. Why don’t physical therapists make you do
these robust barbell exercises? Simply, because they have a rent to pay and,
just as with gyms, single-exercise machines look fancier and more impressive to
the laity.
Further,
muscles are not the whole story. In a line of research pioneered by Gerard
Karsenty and his colleagues, the skeleton with its few hundred bones has been
shown to be endocrine apparatus, regulating blood sugar, fertility, muscle
growth, and even memory. So an optimal exercise would need to work, in addition
to every muscle in your body, every bone as well, by subjecting the skeleton to
weight stressors in order to remind it that the external world exists.
Finally,
the body is extremely opaque; it is hard to understand the exact physiological
mechanisms.
So we would
like to make sure our methodology is robust and can stand the judgment of time.
We have had theories of how muscles grow; these come and go. We have theories
of nutrition; these come and go — the most robust is the one that favors
occasional periodic fasts. But we are quite certain that while theories come
and go, the phenomenologies stay; in other words, that in two thousand years
the method of whole-body workout in the tails will still work, though the
interpretation and “scientific” spin will change — just as two thousand five
hundred years ago, Milo of Croton carried an ox on his shoulders and got
stronger as the ox grew.
Comments
Post a Comment