The interview with our latest guest, Steven Plisk, was unfortunately not able to be podcasted because of some severe technical difficulties we had with the audio recording software we were using. We were able to transcribe it though into this readable format so at least we can get the main portion of the interview across to the listeners.
Here is a much condensed bio for Steven Plisk:
Steven Plisk is the Proprietor & Director of Excelsior Sports, and has over 20 years of experience in Sports Performance and Strength & Conditioning. He earned his BS in Exercise & Sport Science at the University at Buffalo and his MS in Kinesiology at the University of Colorado. Steve is a prolific author and presenter at professional conferences and symposia, and chaired the original Strength & Conditioning Professional Standards & Guidelines project.
His detailed resume can be found HERE.
Keats: Steven, we understand that you are actually no longer involved the coaching business anymore and have recently retired from the industry; but you are still involved professionally in some consulting, you’ve got some products as well. Can you tell us a little about what you’re doing with that?
SP: Sure, I don’t do the day-to-day coaching anymore but I am still involved in the professional developmental aspects of the field. The main thing I have on my agenda right now is a conference I’m running with Dartfish, at the University of Cortland, which is part of the SUNY System in upstate New York, and we’re doing that next month which is going to be a cool 2-day symposium. I’m also working with some other colleagues and partners on some products we’ve developed; we have a National Combine Preparation DVD set that we’ve prepared; just all things related to trying to help the field from an educational standpoint.
Patrick: Speaking of that educational standpoint, you place a high demand on evidence-based practice, understanding the science behind strength & conditioning is something that is very important to Keats and myself as well. So for the listeners, can you explain a little about your coaching philosophy and basic ways that you may go about developing a training program for an individual using the science that we currently have available to us.
SP: Sure. Well, being evidence-based is crucial; it’s also seems to be a guaranteed way to make sure that you are a very lonely person; and not very popular. But I can sum up my philosophy into two buzzwords: one is being multidisciplinary. That’s a real hack-kneed term that gets bounced around a lot in this industry, and I’m not sure many who use it really know what it means. But I don’t think we really have a choice in this field because there are so many different disciplines that are involved. Not just from the sciences that are involved – the physiology, the mechanics and so forth; the psychology and all the other retractable aspects, the teaching and the management and so on…I think that being a “generalist” it that sense, is a real important thing to be. The other thing I’ve learned is that, there’s a concept out of management called “best practices,” which might be the most underrated idea in the world. I hope it get more popular because it’s really important. Basically it shows that certain things work better than others. And those things aren’t always really highly scientifically validated; its kind of interesting because what you realize is that evidence exists on a spectrum; there’s an idea called “level of evidence” and Best Practices is based on the idea that empirical evidence is still really valuable, and still need to be battle tested; it still needs to be validated. But it does still take you to a place that is evidence-based and it takes you to a place that’s principled; and those are two truly extraordinary things to be and also really important.
Keats: Wow, that is a very interesting concept. I read about this in some of your writings on your website and it struck me as extremely important concept for people in this industry to understand. It makes sense that not everything in the lab is or a research setting is how things are going to work on the field or court or in real life. However we obviously need to have the more structured and organized lab tests to isolate a specific motor quality, variable or element in a study. Without a true science lab available the coach or strength professional still needs to have an organized way of thinking to determine what the best use of training time is I suppose.
SP: You realize through empirical evidence and experience; it gets right into the whole issue of how coaches and scientists should get along. I don’t know if a lot of coaches appreciate the fact that empirical evidence is were most good scientists are looking for their ideas. There are definitely some scientists that are just wearing a lab coat and trying to get the research money and researching the not so practical stuff; but a good practical scientist is looking to us for empirical ideas that they can then go test in the lab and validate or disprove. But that is were they generate their best ideas.
To read the rest of this interview go to the Reality-Based Fitness Podcast site here.
