Pages
Categories
- Commentary
- Interviews
- Nutrition
- Prehab / Rehab
- Product Review
- Research Review
- Training
- Uncategorized
Archives
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
My Newsletter
Sign up for my newsletter and receive a free report!
Learn how to dramatically improve your lower body mobility and performance!
Meta
Autor: markyoung
~ 04/12/09

Hey Mike! Thanks for taking the time to drop some knowledge bombs on us today. Obviously I’m already sold on your new product Assess and Correct, but why don’t you give the readers a little rundown on what exactly it is so we know just what we’re talking about here?
Thanks for having me, Mark!
I think Assess and Correct is a powerful tool, as it allows each client to go through over 25 assessments to determine what exactly their specific movement limitations are.
Beyond just telling you what’s tight, weak, stiff, etc., we build off that knowledge with specific corrective exercises to help address those issues! So if your glutes test weak, we have developed specific exercises to help correct those issues.
And finally, we know and understand that everyone who purchases this product has different levels of dysfunction, so we’ve created progressions to work through instead of just pre-canning one or two exercises. Quite simply, everyone from the weekend warrior to the elite-level athlete will be able to assess themselves and create a warm-up routine that addresses their specific needs, with an exercise routine that’s specific to their current level of fitness.

It seems that a growing segment of the fitness industry is already using The Functional Movement Screen. What do you think is the major difference between this and Assess & Correct?
Damn Mark, are you trying to get me in trouble with Gray and Lee? The last thing I need is a pipe-bomb sitting in my mailbox when I get home someday!
In all seriousness, I have great respect for what Lee and Gray have done with the FMS. Quite simply, they’ve brought assessment to the forefront of the industry, and you have to applaud them for that.
I think with A&C, our goal has been to not only make the assessment more comprehensive, but more convenient as well. The beauty of the FMS is its simplicity – seven tests and you’re done. However, you need to find someone with knowledge of the FMS to assess and score you.
With A&C, there’s a little bit more work involved up front – you have to take static pictures of yourself, along with videotaping yourself perform the various assessments. However, you can do everything yourself! Without ever leaving your home, you can determine your specific movement limitations from head-to-toe, along with how to address them.
Obviously you don’t want to spend all day assessing people. Do you think that anyone currently using the movement screen should switch to A&C? If not, how could they combine the two resources to get the best possible assessment and treatment protocol for themselves or their clients?
I think it’s going to be hard to convert people over – many people like the FMS due to its ease of use, along with the fact that you can screen people fairly quickly.
Again, with A&C the biggest difference is it’s going to take more time, but it’s also more comprehensive. Whether it’s with A&C or a new client at IFAST, I would always like to err on the side of more information, using a more comprehensive testing system, than not.
Could you combine the two products? Sure. However, I think on some levels that may be redundant, as we’re looking for a lot of the same issues.
What do you know about Z-Health and what do you think about their mobility drills vs those in A&C?
I have the utmost respect for Dr. Cobb and his system. The biggest issue with Z isn’t the system or the drills, but rather the “in-your-face” nature of some of their practitioners.
Even though I think A&C is a fantastic product, I never want to box myself into thinking there’s only one way to do things. I’m only R-Phase certified in Z, so I can’t speak for the entire system, but I really liken some of the R-Phase drills to micro-mobility. The goal is to really isolate out each individual joint to promote better movement. I can definitely see value in this, and I think there’s as much value in the improvements you’d see in motor control/body awareness as there is in the improved mobility.
To summarize, I think A&C would be superior to the end-user in the fact that you have a specific idea of your limitations and what you need to address when it’s all said and done. Unless you meet with a Z-Health trainer for an assessment, you can’t do this with the current DVD’s and manuals they have available.

I’ve recently heard a lot of people suggesting that the fitness industry has become too much about mobility and activation these days and too little about just getting strong and sexy. Are we spending too much time on “corrective movements”? And how do you think mobility work and activation fit into the bigger picture?
I think it all depends on who you’re reading and listening to!
I’ve heard both sides argued lately – some say we’re too caught up in “fixing” things, and others who say we still aren’t good enough at it yet.
I think many of the corrective naysayers are minimalists at heart, and I can understand that to a degree. However, when you start digging into the research, there’s actual evidence that often it’s not just the strength of a muscle that’s important, but your neuromuscular/motor control. In other words, who cares if it’s strong if you can’t use it!
This is where that whole mindset goes – I don’t care if you want to lose fat, add muscle, get strong or perform at a high-level. I want to help you get there, but I also see the big picture. If I assess you up front and notice specific movement limitations, why would I not address them?
Why would I assume that I can train around them, or somehow magically make them disappear?
This is the “corrective” mindset – to assess limitations and correct them via training. This could include foam rolling, mobility work, or even the dreaded activation work. The part you have to focus on, however, is that this is just part of the programming – not all of it. It’s all pieces to the puzzle.
At the risk of sounding arrogant, Bill and I get some really beat up people at our gym. Same thing goes for Eric. I think between the three of us, we have a pretty good idea of what works and what doesn’t. If foam rolling, mobility, or activation drills didn’t work, we wouldn’t use them. Period.
And finally, a little word association:
Squats – Fantastic, when performed and programmed appropriately. And we use all types: Plate, front, back, safety bar, to a box, free squat, pause squats, full ROM, limited ROM, etc.
Beer – My favorite calorie-laden beverage. Ever since my Australia trip I’ve been hooked on Heineken, but only because I can’t get my hands on Victoria’s Bitter (VB’s) around here!
Crunches – A horrible exercise that not only wrecks backs, but wrecks posture as well. If your goal is neutral spine and a healthy back, crunches shouldn’t be in your vocabulary, let alone your program.
Fat Loss – The “new” hot topic. Fat loss is always going to be at the fore-front of the fitness industry, but I’m fed-up with fitness marketing. Fat loss promotions tend to be the worst.
Twitter – Not sure on this one. I can see where some people would really enjoy it, but I guess I’m not that interested in talking about myself all day. Plus, I’m more of a Facebook whore than a Twitter whore. What can I say, I’m old-school!
That Mark Young clown – A great up-and-coming coach, with a balanced view on training. I love the fact that you’re willing to read and/or listen to anything, even if it’s out of your comfort zone. That’s what will make you successful.
Thanks Mike for the interview. Where can people learn more about you or pick up a copy of Assess & Correct?
Thanks for having me Mark! Sorry if I tend to ramble a bit, but your questions got me fired up!
My blog, newsletter, articles and Podcast can all be found at RobertsonTrainingSystems.com. If you’re interested in picking up a copy of Assess and Correct, check out the Assess and Correct Website. There you’ll find testimonials from other coaches, more info about the product, as well as video clips directly from the video so you can see how things work.
Mark,
Before asking a question, congratulations on the newest addition to your family. I hope this is the start of several decades of joy for all of you!
It’s hard not to get the message that spinal flexion exercises (especially forward flexion and side bending) are anathema in the fitness industry these days on account of being “spine wreckers”. But what do you (and possibly Mike) think about using parameters like the ones Pvael Tsatsouline lays out in some of his work pertaining to “core” training, namely doing 3-5 sets of 3-5 reps (he has advised 3-5 minutes rest in various places, but these could be worked in as filler between other stuff or with shorter rest periods).
Would these types of parameters allow for a small measure of side bending and flexion work (for someone who wasn’t already majorly kyphotic or presenting with a history of disc issues) without causing problems?
I get the sense a lot of the time that these types of exercises (involving flexion and side bending) are just plain bad news. Some go so far as to say that the may grudgingly allow for a stubborn client to do a very small volume but that it confers not benefit whatsoever. But there’s a part of me that wonders if a very small and controlled amount can indeed have positive benefits and if it is merely the excess and the wild misapplication of movements or poor quality of execution that often is responsible (in conjunction with poor habits the other 23 hours of the day)for deleterious effects on the spine.
I definitely recognize that an athlete would not derive a massive amount out of endless volumes of such work, but it seems like a minimum amount of work to build up strength in most ranges of motion wouldn’t be a bad thing, even if people gung ho about specificity claim otherwise. And I obviously do not disagree that a lage volume of such work is a problem in the making, but parameters like 3-5 sets of 3-5 reps no more than 1 or 2 times per week (and not necessarily in all training blocks) seems like it wouldn’t create problems unless the persona was already majorly jacked up (in which case an assessment should have told you to stear clear of these for now in the first place). If anything, I’d almost be worried if a person had problems with such a low volume of those types of movements, as it would seem to indicate a problem all its own.
Then again, I am probably just an ignorant guy who has always gotten most of my knowledge in the gym and doesn’t have the research and scientific background to strongly back up my thoughts on the matter.
Comment by Rob Difilipo — December 4, 2009 @ 11:27 AM
Hey Mark,
1. Congrads on being a proud dad.
2. I continue to love your site and this was a great interview thank you for asking the questions we all were wondering. I will throw in my quick opinion on A&C..I think its fantastic, it has helped me out a lot. I like the FMS and have used it to the best of my knowledge, I would also use the McGill endurance tests, and now I have another great tool that helps me incorporate some Kendall and PT type tests as well (Bill is one smart dude). I think its helpful to know movement patterns but at times you need to FORCE a client to take care of their body and stretch and A&C will allow you to hit them with what they need most and send them on their way. So anyway I love it.
3. If I may be so bold I have a quick comment for Rob Difilipo. Rob a couple of thoughts. To your comment to do “minimum amount of work to build up strength in most ranges of motion wouldn’t be a bad thing” one thought I have is, science aside on why its not a good idea, I understand you want to work every area even if its low volume however I think a lot of people work this range as it is, we sit in flexion and posterior pelvic tilt all the time(and its a longer volume), even when we diligently try not to. So it seems to make more sense to work the abs/core for its true purpose..anti-extension, transfer hoop stress, anti-rotation and so on. In the case of someone who wants to FEEL their abs being used try swiss ball roll outs and progress to ab wheel roll outs (with neutral spine) or a pallof press. I have never had a client want to go back to crunches after some of the exercises that train the “core” for its true purpose. There are a lot of other exercises you can use as well. Anyway just some thoughts.
Thanks Mark, great stuff.
Comment by Pete Brown — December 5, 2009 @ 9:50 AM
Hey Rob,
Thanks so much for the comment!
I can’t speak for Mike, but when people ask if they can do flexion exercises I’m inclined to ask why they feel they’re needed in the first place. From a purely aesthetic perspective, I can’t say that I think crunches (or even weighted crunches) have a great deal to do with appearance of the abdominals. We all have a six pack (or eight pack depending on the number of ligaments) beneath the abdominal fat. Lose this and you’ll have abs…period. The more shredded you are the better they’ll look. Will abdominal training make the abs more visible? Maybe. But I don’t think they really hypertrophy that much.
When I think about training the abs (or anterior core) I think of it more as a means to provide support for the rest of the body so it can handle greater loads, prevent injury, perform better. In doing this my body will ultimately be able to train harder. This will allow me to make great improvements in appearance and performance.
With regards to training specific angles for strength, a recent study has shown that doing static exercises has some transfer to sit-ups. Now, I’m not saying that I really like sit-ups as a measurement tool for core strength, but it is a start.
Check out this post for more info on the study. I have to admit that this study is still sitting beside my computer waiting to be read, but at least it provides some support for the notion that crunches aren’t necessary.
Will everyone who does crunches get a bad back? Probably not. But why take that chance when other options are just as good?
Comment by markyoung — December 7, 2009 @ 2:50 PM
Thanks Pete!
I agree with all of this except for the notion that we all sit in lumbar flexion. I personally find that this is more common in men than women. Women seem to be locked into extension more often in my experience.
Comment by markyoung — December 7, 2009 @ 2:52 PM