So how do we adapt the model to the individual that we're working with? Good morning. Happy Monday. I have no coffee in hand and it is perfect. That's good. Okay. kind of another wacky schedule for the week because of the upcoming New Year's and all that good stuff. So we're going to dive right into today's Q&A. This comes from D Wayne, Capital D Wayne. So I'm not sure if it's one word or two. So we're going to call you D Wayne. I hope that's okay. Dwayne says, after watching quite a few of your videos, your model seems to be quite extensive. Do you find that there's a difference in how you work with higher level athletes like the pros compared to the less accomplished of developing athletes? In other words, do you adapt the model to the athlete in question? Let's talk about why we even have a model in the first place. The first reason that we have one is because things are just way too complex for us to understand. So we have to create a model that allows us to simplify the complexity. And so what we have is we have how and why questions that need to be answered in regards to certain capabilities or structural influences. And then how the athlete in question then then produces their their performance and so that's what the model allows us to do so rather than adapting a model to the individual what we want to have is we want to have this this coherent and comprehensive model that allows us to work with with literally anyone and so. When we think about the contents of this model, and we're talking about attributes that may have influences. So this is our wide versus narrow archetypes. This is pelvis shape or foot type. Thorax to pelvis configuration is an influence. Internal force management, breathing strategies, external movement strategies. So when we talk about compressive strategies or compensatory activities, some of these are actually very, very useful for performance. And so we have to take those into consideration. And then we can throw tissue behavior in regards to our stiffness and yielding capabilities. And so what we want to make sure is that we can apply all of these to every situation. So if we're just talking about the high end performer, one of the things that we want to consider first and foremost with those guys is that they are not average. They are at the one end of the normal curve. So they are special human beings that were born with certain structures and certain capabilities that allowed them to develop and demonstrate superpowers. And so we never want to treat them like the average. But what's unique about them is that they have their idiosyncratic structures and behaviors that allow them to produce more speed, higher jumps, and higher force output than your average Joe. What they actually do for us is they provide us an understanding of what the rules actually are. For instance, a while back we talked about the higher performance foot and what we should expect to see from that. Let me cut away to that for a short explanation. So we can get a representation of what I'm talking about when we're talking about their idiosyncratic structures and behaviors and how they influence performance. As I move through middle, this is where the arch is going to move down towards the ground. So this is your traditional pronation. This is tibial interrotation. So this is a lower arch. Here's the key element of this that I want you to understand is that the maximum force into the ground is that maximum pronation. And where that is, max propulsion is just as that medial calcaneus re-brakes from the ground. And so this is actually a low position of the arch because right after that I'm going to get a bunch of concentric orientation on the planar aspect of the foot. This is what they traditionally call that windlass effect. I'm going to crank that sucker back into an externally rotated position. That is traditionally considered this high propulsive foot with the force application came just prior to that. And so this is the demonstration of what happens after that force production. And so when we talk about a performance related foot, this is why we're going to see lower arches on a lot of these really, really high performance. And so people look at these feet, And they go, oh, these are really crappy feet because pronation has always been described as this accommodative foot position, which is not untrue, but the highest force production also happens in maximum pronation. So that's where our max propulsion is. So now if we're talking about training the developing athlete, we still need to consider the same attributes. The model is the same. that we would use for the high performer. However, what we might have in comparison to the high performer are a deficit due to structure that the high performer has naturally or a potential lack of development and this allows us to now target our interventions for the developing athlete So let's just say that we had an athlete that was jumping down from a box and we see the knees moving close together. And so this actually may represent is knee-centric orientation of the pelvic outlet, which is a low power landing. So where a high performer may actually have a narrower pelvic outlet, by structure or the ability to create concentric orientation, this individual whose needs are coming together can't do that. So now what do we do? Well, this allows us to target our interventions. So what we might do is we might create a compensatory strategy in regards to how we love this individual based on their physical structure. And so in this case, we might use sort of a reverse band box squat initially to teach them how to manage their internal forces more effectively to actually develop the ability to create the concentric orientation in the pelvic diaphragm by reducing the internal loads and as we progress this individual through some form of progressive loading from a regular box squat or eventually some progressive overload on a barbell will eventually move them towards say a seated box jump which allows them to position the pelvis correctly to produce force to orient the pelvic diaphragm in such a way to produce greater force to teach them a more effective exhalation strategy and so now that's how we raise the performance. So again, the model that we're using to teach this person to create a higher force or higher power output is actually the same model that we would use for our high performers. So again, Dwayne, there's really no difference in how we would apply this. Again, the goal is to create an extensive and coherent model so we don't have to change the model. In fact, if you have to create too many rules, changes are, you have an inferior model that you're using. So I hope that answers your question, Dwayne. If not, please send me another question at askbillhartman at gmail.com, askbillhartman at gmail.com, and then we'll see you guys tomorrow. So let's revisit Lee Taft's Playa Step, shall we? Good morning. Happy Tuesday. I have normal coffee in hand and it is perfect. All right. It's only Tuesday, but I'm having a pretty good week. Big call on IFSU yesterday. Went long, but it only seemed like a few minutes. Really enjoying how people are catching on to things and doing great work out there, so I appreciate you guys on there. Quick reminder, Coffee and Coaches Conference call Thursday morning, New Year's Eve Day. We're gonna do it anyway, 6 a.m., grab some coffee, and then join us for that. Those calls are getting really good. So don't miss out. Let's go ahead and dig in today's Q&A and this comes from Austin. And Austin says, the fall step when going from parallel stance to sprint seems to be a point of contention amongst coaches. It's a common strategy used by athletes and some say it improves performance while others insist it slows the athlete down. How do you view this strategy in regards to your model and do you coach it or advise against it and why? Thanks. So, Austin, we've talked about this actually a little bit, and I've got a couple videos up on the YouTubes. One called Cutting from the Inside Out, I believe, and the other one is actually examining this concept that you're asking about. There tends to be two camps. There tends to be the camp that says, yes, it's representative of a normal aspect of performance that actually enhances our ability to move quickly and change direction. And then there's the other camp that just doesn't understand it. and so then they say whether it's a negative and and it creates interference and and I would be in the camp that says that it's a normal aspect of performance um and for various reasons and we're going to talk about those calling it a false step immediately creates this negative connotation and so again um it's either representative of a human's inability to name things poorly or or they or tendency to name things poorly Or again, they're just trying to convince you that it's a negative. My buddy, Lee Taft has done a great job in reframing this exceptionally well by referring to it as a plow step and then showing how it's beneficial. He's done it repeatedly over and over again. you'll see the athletes will use this naturally you're never going to coach somebody out of it it's actually necessary to redirect forces and so we're talking about internal forces and the external forces to move quickly in the direction that is desired and so you can do all the drills you want to try to get rid of it But once the athlete is performing in context, it comes right back because it is essential. It's a combination of Newton's third law, connected tissue behaviors, muscle orientation, skeletal orientation, and then optimizing internal forces. So let's talk about these internal forces a little bit. Because I had a question on IFAS University about this too, and we kind of touched on it. But basically when we're talking about internal forces, we're talking about gut movement and gut orientation and things like that. And so one of the kickers here is that if you can't get your guts moving in the right direction and if you can't get them moving quickly, you are not going to move in the right direction and you are not going to move quickly. And so it doesn't matter what we're talking about. If we're talking about a squat, And we're coming up through the sticking point of the squat. You have to be able to elevate your guts against the downward pressures that are associated with the internal pressure and then the external load. And if you can't push the guts up, I got news for you. You're not going to finish your squat. And so we're talking about changes of direction. We're talking about acceleration. We're talking about accelerating from a static position. If you can't redirect your guts and if you cannot accelerate them, you cannot accelerate yourself. Okay? Now I have a video that talks specifically about this and I actually lay it out through the concentric and eccentric orientations, the yielding and overcoming strategies. So literally I take it step by step.

What they actually do for us is they provide us an understanding of what the rules actually are. For instance, a while back we talked about the higher performance foot and what we should expect to see from that. Let me cut away to that for a short explanation. So we can get a representation of what I'm talking about when we're talking about their idiosyncratic structures and behaviors and how they influence performance. As I move through middle, this is where the arch is going to move down towards the ground. So this is your traditional pronation. This is tibial interrotation. So this is a lower arch. Here's the key element of this that I want you to understand is that the maximum force into the ground is that maximum pronation. And where that is, max propulsion is just as that medial calcaneus re-brakes from the ground. And so this is actually a low position of the arch because right after that I'm going to get a bunch of concentric orientation on the plantar aspect of the foot. This is what they traditionally call that windlass effect. I'm going to crank that sucker back into an externally rotated position. That is traditionally considered this high propulsive foot with the force application came just prior to that. And so this is the demonstration of what happens after that force production. And so when we talk about a performance related foot, this is why we're going to see lower arches on a lot of these really, really high performance. And so people look at these feet, and they go, oh, these are really crappy feet because pronation has always been described as this accommodative foot position, which is not untrue, but the highest force production also happens in maximum pronation. So that's where our max propulsion is. So now if we're talking about training the developing athlete, we still need to consider the same attributes. The model is the same that we would use for the high performer. However, what we might have in comparison to the high performer are a deficit due to structure that the high performer has naturally or a potential lack of development and this allows us to now target our interventions for the developing athlete. So let's just say that we had an athlete that was jumping down from a box and we see the knees moving close together. And so what this actually may represent is knee-centric orientation of the pelvic outlet, which is a low power landing. So where a high performer may actually have a narrower pelvic outlet, by structure or the ability to create concentric orientation, this individual whose knees are coming together can't do that. So now what do we do? Well, this allows us to target our interventions. So what we might do is we might create a compensatory strategy in regards to how we load this individual based on their physical structure.

In this case, we might use a reverse band box squat initially to teach them how to manage internal forces more effectively to develop the ability to create concentric orientation in the pelvic diaphragm by reducing internal loads. As we progress this individual through progressive loading from a regular box squat or eventually progressive overload on a barbell, we will eventually move them towards a seated box jump. This allows them to position the pelvis correctly to produce force, orient the pelvic diaphragm to produce greater force, and teach them a more effective exhalation strategy. That is how we raise performance. The model we use to teach this person to create higher force or higher power output is actually the same model we would use for high performers. There is really no difference in how we would apply this. The goal is to create an extensive and coherent model so we don't have to change the model. In fact, if you have to create too many rule changes, you probably have an inferior model.

There tends to be the camp that says yes, it's representative of a normal aspect of performance that actually enhances our ability to move quickly and change direction. And then there's the other camp that just doesn't understand it and so then they say whether it's a negative and it creates interference and I would be in the camp that says that it's a normal aspect of performance for various reasons. And we're going to talk about those. Calling it a false step immediately creates this negative connotation and so again, it's either representative of a human's inability to name things poorly or they're just trying to convince you that it's a negative. My buddy, Lee Taft has done a great job in reframing this exceptionally well by referring to it as a plow step and then showing how it's beneficial. He's done it repeatedly over and over again. You'll see the athletes will use this naturally. You're never going to coach somebody out of it; it's actually necessary to redirect forces. So we're talking about internal forces and the external forces to move quickly in the direction that is desired. And so you can do all the drills you want to try to get rid of it, but once the athlete is performing in context, it comes right back because it is essential. It's a combination of Newton's third law, connected tissue behaviors, muscle orientation, skeletal orientation, and then optimizing internal forces. So let's talk about these internal forces a little bit. Because I had a question on IFAS University about this too, and we kind of touched on it. But basically when we're talking about internal forces, we're talking about gut movement and gut orientation and things like that. And so one of the kickers here is that if you can't get your guts moving in the right direction and if you can't get them moving quickly, you are not going to move in the right direction and you are not going to move quickly. And so it doesn't matter what we're talking about. If we're talking about a squat and we're coming up through the sticking point of the squat, you have to be able to elevate your guts against the downward pressures that are associated with the internal pressure and then the external load. And if you can't push the guts up, you're not going to finish your squat. And so we're talking about changes of direction. We're talking about acceleration. We're talking about accelerating from a static position. If you can't redirect your guts and if you cannot accelerate them, you cannot accelerate yourself. Now I have a video that talks specifically about this and I actually lay it out through the concentric and eccentric orientations, the yielding and overcoming strategies. So literally I take it step by step.

So rather than repeating myself, here's what I want to do. I want to go ahead and cut to that video here. Let me preface this by making sure that you have a little bit of an understanding. Watch the videos that are associated with concentric and eccentric orientation, overcoming and yielding actions first. So watch those videos first because what you need to have, you need to have an understanding of those concepts. Then you go to this video and then it sort of all clicks and kind of makes sense. So please watch those videos first. So we're going to cut to a breakdown of lead task plio step from the inside. We're going to talk about the internal mechanics that everybody has questions about. So we'll go to that. After that, you're on your own for the rest of the day, so have a great day. I will see you guys tomorrow. So I have a question from Justin. And Justin asks, I've been thinking about the mechanics of base-stealing in baseball and trying to use your rethinking agility video as a reference for understanding. But I was wondering if you could clarify the pelvic floor mechanics if you're starting from a lateral stance without a cut or change of direction preceding the acceleration. So this is a really good question because I think there's probably a little bit of a misunderstanding as to how this movement is initiated, especially in regard to base stealing. It's also going to reinforce an element of strategy that my buddy Lee Taft promotes called the plyo step. So if we think about the element of base stealing from what we would consider a more lateralized stance, if I'm going to be running this way towards second base, I have to initiate a strategy on the left leg to allow me to push to the right. I'm starting with my foot on the ground so right away I am in a propulsive strategy but what I'm actually going to do is I have to create an internal force so I literally have to get my guts to move in this direction first and then push them as quickly as possible to the right. So what I actually do is I unweight this left foot and what that does is it causes the left anterior outlet to essentially orient and create a yielding strategy which makes my guts fall down and to the left. As I then pick up my propulsive strategy on this side, I again re-elevate the anterior pelvic outlet which pushes the guts to the right. So I get this swoosh to the left and a swoosh to the right that accelerates me towards second base. This is literally the foundation for Lee Taft's Pliostat. It's the internal mechanics that are created by the external strategy. If I didn't take advantage of these internal mechanics, I would never be able to move quickly.

Justin, this is a representation of the internal dynamics at the pelvic outlets. We're looking down inside of the pelvis and this is going to represent how we create the gradients and the internal forces that allow us to accelerate toward second base as quickly as possible. So I'm going to be starting from a relative position of symmetry here. So this is sort of a hinge position that you'll typically see in somebody that's taken their lead off of first base. And so because they're hinged, they've got a concentric overcoming strategy bilaterally anteriorly and a yielding strategy posteriorly. So this allows them to bend forward at the hip. Now I have to create my plyo step just like my buddy Lee Taft would coach. And so the way that I create this is I have to create what looks like an early propulsive strategy on the left side. So this would be, if I was stepping forward in normal gait, this would be even before my foot hit the ground. So literally what I'm going to do over here is I'm going to unweight my left foot and what that creates is the orientation inside the pelvis where I actually get my guts to start spinning into the left. I have to accelerate my guts in the opposing direction because what I'm going to do as soon as I reload that foot I'm going to actually start to spin my guts in the opposite direction. So I drew this really, really small because this moment in time happens so fast because it's going to lead me into my max propulsive phase. So this gets the guts spinning left. I switch my orientation as quickly as possible. That gets the guts spinning to the right and then I hit my max propulsive phase here. And so what happens here, this is where the gut acceleration just goes crazy. So I kick my guts as hard as I can to the right and that's spin internally is what accelerates me towards second base. Then it's just a matter of flip-flopping strategies again and I'm off and running. But again, so I go from a position of symmetry. I drop the guts down into the left anteriorly. That spins the guts to the left. I immediately flip-flop my strategies to spin the guts going to the right and then I accelerate them with max propulsion and that gets me towards second base.

Quick reminder, tomorrow is Thursday, 6 a.m. Coffee and Coaches Conference call. The calls have been getting really, really good, with really smart people joining us, asking great questions, and having great discussions, so make yourself some coffee and join us at 6 a.m. tomorrow. Now, my little preamble was a hint here. I'm not really sure how this one's going to go. There's a lot of things potentially to talk about here regarding this question. So let me just read the question and we'll have at it. This comes from Robert, and Robert says: 'Thanks for putting out all the content that you do. You're welcome, Robert. It has been very helpful. Considering the extent of your model, are there any principles that you find are absolutely foundational to the successful application of your model?' Have a great day. Thank you for that, Robert. Yeah, I have some principles to live by or to follow. They are adaptable and ever-changing. I think that as you gain new information, they are going to change. So real quick, though, first and foremost, what I would say is the number one principle is you should probably draw out your model. So whatever you think that you know or how you do things, it needs to have some sort of physical representation. Get it out of your head. Get it on paper so you can actually see what you do. And so right there is a representation of where my model stands right now. It is adaptable and ever-changing. There are several things that change within that that are not represented in the graphic itself because each element of that graphic is then broken down into smaller and smaller parts. And so now let's kind of dig into some principles, and these are things that I sort of write down as I go that remind me of certain concepts. So again, it just keeps me on track and provides a framework for decision-making, structuring, and then determining the best courses of action. So principle number one is actually pretty simple, and it's based on the Hippocratic Oath: basically, do no harm, preserve the dignity of your client or patient, and then teach the next generation what you know. And I think that we have a responsibility for that. So that's a biggie. And again, it's kind of at the top of the list. Next principle: seek the minimum adaptation that allows the maximum output. So this goes towards conservation of resources. So it would be like if you took a drug that had an effect and then you took more drug, and then there's no additional benefit to that, that's a waste. So we do the same thing with resources. So if we're training someone or if we're rehabilitating someone, then we want to promote the desired adaptation. And then we want to make sure that we're conserving the remainder of resources so they remain adaptable in other aspects because if we overshoot and we apply too much effort, then all we're doing is drawing on resources that we could be using for other things like recovery and rest and regeneration. So again, that goes towards conservation of resources. Principle: humans are complex adaptive systems and will behave as such, so there's an element of unpredictability in all complex systems. So we have to appreciate that fact. So we have constraints: these are behavioral constraints or structural constraints that we have to pay attention to. There's going to be a hierarchy of systems. I say hierarchy because we never know what element of the system is running the show, per se. We can say that certain things are predominant at certain times, and through experience, we can determine what may be running the show, but ultimately, we have to consider that we have this integration of a massive number of subsystems that we have to attend to. You have all sorts of concepts like degeneracy, adaptation, non-linearity, emergence, and self-organization that are also in play with complex systems. So we must pay attention to that. Along the same lines with the complex systems principle, there may be more than one solution that will result in the desired outcome. And so these are one of those things where there is a cause and effect that's associated with working with a complex system, but we just don't know what those are until we do something. So you'll see, like in coaching, we'll see a probe-sense-respond kind of concept. So what we have to do is act to run an experiment to see what happens, and then that guides us into the next principle. And knowing full well that there may be more than one solution. So if we looked at something as simple as choosing which exercise we want to do, there may be multiple exercises that will provide us a solution to a problem. Simple principle: do what is most important. Many things appear to be important and impact the system, but again, we have to consider the heterarchy when we're talking about what would be the best course of action. Sometimes we don't know. Again, we have to experiment, but with experience and time, we can reduce the probabilities and come up with a potential solution. Principle: supplementary training is not done in isolation from all other demands, whether perceived or not. So this is one of those things where people start to throw things in, and they go, 'Oh, it doesn't make that much impact,' but you might actually be creating interference for yourself. So for those of you that are fond of the concept of a finisher in a workout where you're trying to kick somebody's butt so that they feel like they worked out before they walk out the door, you're doing this extra work, and you actually might be creating interference for something else if it is in conflict with the desired outcome. So keep that in mind. Principle: be comfortable with uncertainty and the unknown. So again, we're dealing with complex systems; we don't know what those outcomes are going to be. And so we have to sort of pay attention to what's going on, and that's going to help us determine the next course of action. All models are principles, and all models must be adaptive because behavior is an emergent property of a complex system. We don't know what's going to happen, and so we have to have a model that can adapt to the idiosyncratic elements as each individual is going to behave a little bit differently. We have concepts that we can follow; obviously, we have constraints that we can be aware of, but again, each person is going to have those little idiosyncratic elements that the model must be able to adapt to. Principle: once movement repertoire is dependent on the ability of the body to access full excursion of breathing. So when I refer to two strategies in one plane, the universal principle is that movement takes place through expansion and compression. We do the same thing. Breathing is one of those ultimate representations of our ability to expand as we breathe in, and the ability to compress as we breathe out, and especially with breathing, the fluid that we're using is air, and air is compressible and expandable. And so again, if we don't have that full respiratory repertoire, then the chances of us being able to move with full adaptability is slim to none because chances are we're going to be using some form of compensatory strategy; we're going to be using some form of superficial musculature that's going to prohibit our ability to fully access our movement options. Principle: there is no one best way to move. So again, if you've read the work of Nikolai Bernstein, you've read about 'repetition without repetition.' And so under these circumstances, we're not going to be able to reproduce the same movement over and over again. So even though it might look the same, let's take a baseball pitcher for example: they throw a baseball in a very specific manner, and each pitch might look exactly the same. What we know full well, and we can actually track these things, is those movements are never the same, although they are similar. So we're playing with signal and noise here where we want to minimize the amount of noise when we're talking about high levels of performance. So we can have a reproducible outcome even though it might not be exact, but there's not one best way. What we want to have is as many ways as necessary so the brain and the body can come up with a solution for any movement that would be within a specific context. Principle: neutral spine is immeasurable and unnecessary as a concept, so the neutral word is on the list of dirty words that we try not to use because we can't even tell if anybody would be there, nor do we know if anything is optimal. So what we're looking for, and let's just talk about the axial skeleton as a representation of this, is we want what we want is not one ideal; we want an adaptable axial skeleton that allows us to effectively distribute and transmit the forces that we're exposed to within a specific context. That's what's going to give us the best shot at a favorable outcome but also health at the same time. So let's get rid of the whole neutral word and let's move on to something that is more associated with making sure that we have that adaptability. Principle: any model of movement must be coherent with physics. This kind of seems a little obvious, but we have to appreciate the fact that we are part of this universe and so we must behave as such. So we have to follow the guidelines of physics. So again, when I talk about things like expansion and compression, that's a universal principle; it's like we can't deny that. All we have to do is then recognize, well, how do we respect that principle? Then we can actually have a deeper understanding of how we move. Principle: remember where they came from. So this is sort of a two-fold principle: it represents an embryological 'remember where they came from' and then a learning-based 'remember where they came from.' So if we can understand how we evolved in our own development, a lot of the reasoning behind how we achieve certain movement outcomes is much easier to understand. So that's why we want to learn the embryological foundations; they are underappreciated and they answer many, many of those questions. Secondly, when we're working with an individual, we want to remember where they came from. So they've already learned certain behaviors and certain strategies, and those are ingrained, if you will. And so when we're trying to make changes in someone's ability to move differently...

And then we want to make sure that we're conserving the remainder of resources so they remain adaptable in other aspects because if we overshoot and we apply too much effort then all we're doing is drawing on resources that we could be using for other things like recovery and rest and regeneration. So again that goes towards conservation of resources. Principle humans are complex adaptive systems and will behave as such so there's an element of unpredictability in all complex systems so we have to appreciate that fact and so we have constraints so these are behavioral constraints or structural constraints that we have to pay attention to there's going to be a hierarchy of systems so I say hierarchy because we never know what element of the system is running the show per se we can say that certain things are predominant at certain times through experience we can determine what may be running the show, but ultimately we have to consider that we have this integration of a massive number of subsystems that we have to attend to. You have all sorts of concepts like degeneracy, acceptation, non-linearity, emergency, emergence, and self-organization that are also in play with complex systems. So we must pay attention to that. along the same lines with complex systems principle would be there may be more than one solution that will result in the desired outcome. And so these are one of those things that there is a cause and effect that's associated with elements of working with a complex system, but we just don't know what those are until we do something. So you'll see like in Kevin, we'll see like a probe sense respond kind of a concept. So what we have to do is we act to run an experiment to see what happens. And then that guides us into the next principle and knowing full well that there may be more than one solution. So if we looked at something as simple as choosing which exercise that we want to do, there may be multiple exercises that will provide us a solution to a problem. Simple principle. Do what is most important. Many things appear to be important and impact the system. But again, we have to consider the heterarchy when we're talking about what would be the best course of action. Sometimes we don't know. Again, we have to experiment. But with experience and time, we can reduce the probabilities and come up with a potential solution.

Principle supplementary training is not done in isolation from all other demands whether perceived or not. So this is one of those things that people start to throw things in; they go, 'Oh, it doesn't make that much impact,' but you might actually be creating interference for yourself. So those of you that are fond of the concept of a finisher in a workout where you're trying to kick somebody's butt so that they feel like they worked out before they walk out the door—you're doing this extra work, and you actually might be creating interference for something else if it is in conflict with the desired outcome. So keep that in mind. Principle: be comfortable with uncertainty and unknown. So again, we're dealing with complex systems; we don't know what those outcomes are going to be. And so we have to sort of pay attention to what's going on, and that's going to help us determine the next course of action. All models are principles. All models must be adaptive because behavior is an emergent property of a complex system. We don't know what's going to happen. And so we have to have a model that can adapt to the idiosyncratic elements as each individual is going to behave a little bit differently. We have concepts that we can follow. Obviously, we have constraints that we can be aware of. But again, each person is going to have those little idiosyncratic elements that the model must be able to adapt to. Principle: once movement repertoire is dependent on the ability of the body to access full excursion of breathing. So what you refer me to talk about two strategies, one plane. So universal principle is that movement takes place through expansion and compression. We do the same thing. Breathing is one of those ultimate representations of our ability to expand as we breathe in, ability to compress as we breathe out. And especially with breathing, the fluid that we're using is air, and air is compressible and expandable. So again, if we don't have that full repertoire of breathing, then the chances of us being able to move with full adaptability are slim to none because chances are we're going to be using some form of compensatory strategy. We're going to be using some form of superficial musculature that's going to prohibit our ability to fully access our movement options. Principle: there is no one best way to move. So once again, if you read the work of Nikolai Bernstein, you've read about repetition without repetition. And so under these circumstances, we're not going to be able to reproduce the same movement over and over again. So even though it might look the same, let's take a baseball pitcher for example. So they throw a baseball in a very specific manner, and each pitch might look exactly the same. What we know full well and we can actually track these things is that motions are never the same, although they are similar. So we're playing with signal and noise here where we want to minimize the amount of noise when we're talking about high levels of performance. So we can have a reproducible outcome even though it might not be exact, but there's not one best way. What we want to have is as many ways as necessary so the brain and the body can come up with a solution for any movement that would be within a specific context. Principle: neutral spine is immeasurable and unnecessary as a concept. So the neutral word is on the list of dirty words that we try not to use because we can't even tell if anybody is there nor do we know if anything is optimal. So what we're looking for is not one ideal; what we want is an adaptable axial skeleton that allows us to effectively distribute and transmit the forces that we're exposed to within a specific context. That's what's going to give us the best shot at a favorable outcome but also health at the same time. So let's get rid of the whole neutral word and let's move on to something that is more associated with making sure that we have that adaptability. Principle: any model of movement must be coherent with physics. This kind of seems a little obvious, but we have to appreciate the fact that we are part of this universe and so we must behave as such. So we have to follow the guidelines of physics. So again, when I talk about things like expansion and compression, that's a universal principle. It's like we can't deny that. What we have to do is then recognize: well, how do we respect that principle? Then we can actually have a deeper understanding of how we move. Principle: remember where they came from. So this is sort of a two-fold principle. It represents an embryological remember where they came from and then a learning-based remember where they came from. So if we can understand how we evolved in our own development, a lot of the reasoning behind how we achieve certain movement outcomes is much easier to understand. So that's why we want to learn the embryological foundations. They are underappreciated and they answer many, many of those questions. Secondly, when we're working with an individual, we want to remember where they came from. So they've already learned certain behaviors and certain strategies, and those are ingrained, if you will. And so when we're trying to make changes in someone's ability to move differently, we have to respect the fact that even though we might be able to demonstrate a change, they may default back to what they are more comfortable with, or what has been ingrained through time and experience. So we have to give them time to learn something new. And so again, when we see a regression, it's not that we did the wrong thing; it just may be that they didn't have enough time or exposure to the new information to process that and then establish a new behavioral output. Principle: movement arises morphologically due to hydrostatics and hydrodynamics in helical patterns. This goes towards what you're made of and what your structure is. So you're 99% water and 1% stuff. And so you're basically a big bag of water. You have to follow those principles. And so those are based on hydrostatics and hydrodynamics. And so that's where we want to start to push our understanding so we can get a better grasp on how we actually move through space. Principle: the strategy utilized to manage internal forces is limited and predictable within limits based on the common constraints of the system. So we have internal forces and we have external forces and we have to manage both of those. And so one of the things we have to recognize is how we control the insides matters. So we are designed such that our internal forces can behave separately from what we see in this symmetrical movement system on the outside. And so a lot of the behaviors that we'll see that produce limitations in movement or interference are actually just associated with us controlling those internal forces. Thankfully, we do have an understanding of some of the constraints of the system, and so we can narrow probabilities to where we might have some predictability as to what your strategies may be. That becomes helpful, but it's typically acquired through repetition and experience. And again, we always have to consider the idiosyncratic elements of that individual system as to how they're going to behave.

We know full well and we can actually track these things that those movements are never the same, although they are similar. So we're playing with signal and noise here where we want to minimize the amount of noise when we're talking about high levels of performance. So we can have a reproducible outcome even though it might not be exact, but there's not one best way. What we want to have is as many ways as necessary so the brain and the body can come up with a solution for any movement that would be within a specific context. Neutral spine is immeasurable and unnecessary as a concept. So the neutral word is on the list of dirty words that we try not to use because we can't even tell if anybody would be there nor do we know if anything is optimal. So what we're looking for and let's just talk about the axial skeleton as a representation of this is what we want is not one ideal. What we want is an adaptable axial skeleton that allows us to effectively distribute and transmit the forces that we're exposed to within a specific context. That's what's going to give us the best shot at a favorable outcome but also health at the same time. So let's get rid of the whole neutral word and let's move on to something that is more associated with making sure that we have that adaptability. Any model of movement must be coherent with physics. This kind of seems a little obvious, but we have to appreciate the fact that we are part of this universe and so we must behave as such. So we have to follow the guidelines of physics. So again, when I talk about things like expansion and compression, that's a universal principle. It's like we can't deny that. All we have to do is then recognize is, well, how do we respect that principle? Then we can actually have a deeper understanding of how we move.

Then we have to respect the fact that even though we might be able to demonstrate a change, they may default back to what they are more comfortable with, or like I said, what has been ingrained through time and experience. So we have to give them time to learn something new. And so again, when we see a regression, it's not that we did the wrong thing, it just may be that they didn't have enough time or exposure to the new information to process that and then establish a new behavioral output. Principle. Movement arises morphologically due to hydrostatics and hydrodynamics in helical patterns. So this goes towards what you're made of and what your structure is. So you're 99% water and 1% stuff. And so you're basically a big bag of water. You have to follow those principles. And so those are based on hydrostatics and hydrodynamics. And so that's where we want to start to push our understanding so we can get a better grasp on how we actually move through space.

My question is, so as I see it, we could do a lot of things right with a client and restore a lot of movement variability, get the system to be more adaptable and all of that. But if they leave the training room and they start walking poorly with a bad gait pattern, then it'll essentially reverse those adaptations or it'll at least cause negative interference. So my question is, do we just assume that once we've restored movement variability to the system that they're going to walk better, or should we actually teach our clients how to walk if there's a significant problem with their movement variability?

What they're going to demonstrate to you is how they're managing forces when they're walking, right? It's very difficult to identify. And they can show you things as to how they are actually strategizing to move through space. But all they're doing is solving a problem. So they're taking whatever constraints that they have, so their physical structure, whatever they've learned, whatever abilities that they have, and then they have internal forces and external forces to manage as they walk across the ground. And that's what you're seeing. You're just seeing a solution. Right, so you don't teach them how to do that they just do it, but they're giving you a representation of where they may have a limited capability and so then your job is to identify that. So rather than teaching them how to walk and saying oh they're going to walk out with a bad gate pattern and ruin all of my good work. what they're telling you is that they didn't recapture another strategy that allowed them to make a change that you saw was initially unfavorable and then move towards what you would perceive as being more favorable. OK, got it. So you don't have to teach them. So you give somebody an activity with an intent to make a change in their movement capabilities. And then what you should then do is you have a test of some sort, right? So I say, okay, I'm looking at you. There's something I see that I'm not thrilled with. I intervene in some way and then I do a retest. And when I say that it's not like a formal test or anything, it's like, it could be literally, okay, now let me see your split squat. Did the split squat get better? Good, then the intervention was effective. So that's a learning-based adaptation in almost every situation because you don't have time to change fitness on anybody under those acute circumstances, right? Again, it's a learning-based adaptation. Your question, Mark, is, did I give you the appropriate strategy for you to learn something new, to demonstrate something new? Then did you do enough of that that your system actually learned to adapt to that?

When you say you lose ER, do you lose it in the measurement or you lose it in the structure? In the measurement. What's the difference? You're losing ER spaces. Do you understand the reorientation? Joe? I think I do, but maybe not. Let me just talk about it. So if you buy a kinesiology book and they look at the stuff back here and they say that oh these are the external rotators right until you start to do this. Or if I do this. So as the stuff that's attached to the femur from the pelvis if I move towards any degree of traditional hip flexion if you will they change direction of pull. They become internal rotators. So if I do this and they become internal rotators they're going to bring this along for the ride. And so the more anterior orientation I have the more extra rotation I'm going to lose. That's why the anti-orientation or that's why the ER measure is such a useful measure for the anti-orientations. And then you compare the two sides and right away you start to get this beautiful picture of like oh the left side's more forward that means he's pushing more from the backside which means I'm going to have this kind of a flatter orientation in turn. Whereas if the right side's more forward that's going to be tipping me up on an oblique. Now keep in mind that there's a lot of straight aheads and then there's a lot of obliques. I could literally go like that and I can create an infinite number of directions between those two orientations. That's why you'll get some varying degrees of ERs on IRs throughout. Does that make sense?

What's the difference? You're losing ER spaces. Do you understand the reorientation? Joe? Let me just talk about it. So if you buy a kinesiology book, and they look at the stuff back here, and they say that, oh, these are the external rotators, right? Until you start to do this. Or if I do this. So as the stuff that's attached to the femur from the pelvis, if I move towards any degree of traditional hip flexion, if you will, they change direction of pull. They become internal rotators. So if I do this and they become internal rotators, they're going to bring this along for the ride. And so the more anterior orientation I have, the more extra rotation I'm going to lose. That's why the anti-orientation, or that's why the ER measure is such a useful measure for the anti-orientations. And then you compare the two sides and right away, you start to get this beautiful picture of like, oh, the left side's more forward. That means he's pushing more from the backside, which means I'm going to have this kind of a flatter orientation in turn. Whereas if the right side's more forward, that's going to be tipping me up on an oblique. Now keep in mind that there's a lot of straight aheads and then there's a lot of obliques. I could literally go like that and I can create an infinite number of directions between those two orientations. That's why you'll get some varying degrees of ERs on IRs throughout.

I think I do, but maybe not.

Let me explain. When you examine a kinesiology book's coverage of this area, it identifies these as the external rotators. However, this changes when you perform movements like hip flexion. As the structures connecting the femur to the pelvis move into any degree of traditional hip flexion, their direction of pull changes, making them internal rotators. When they become internal rotators, they cause the femur to follow that rotational path. Therefore, a more anterior orientation results in greater external rotation loss. This is why the external rotation measurement is such a useful indicator for anti-orientations. By comparing both sides, you immediately gain a clear picture: for instance, if the left side is more forward, it indicates the person is pushing more from the backside, leading to a flatter orientation. Conversely, if the right side is more forward, it creates an oblique tip. Remember that there are many straight-ahead and oblique orientations, and one can create infinite directional variations between these two extremes. This explains the varying degrees of external and internal rotations observed throughout.

Absolutely.

In regards to everything you just talked about, I know sometimes people have an easier time rotating to the left or rotating to the right. I was wondering if you could just talk about that a little in context of the fact that people posturally tend to rotate right more and how maybe someone who has an easier time directionally rotating to the left in terms of range of motion how that might present.

Well, some people are okay, so we have some physical structure stuff that makes you a little bit better at turning than other people. You have superficial strategies that will take your capacity to turn away from you. So sometimes that's intentional with training, and sometimes that's an accidental byproduct of structure or training. And again, some people are just going to have an easier time managing these strategies. So the people that come to see me, for instance, typically have pain-related issues or performance-related issues where they have interference. They're dealing with forces that they have to manage, and their strategy is less effective than they would like it to be. Again, all you're looking at is people that can manage it better than others, so they turn well, and then the people that don't turn as well have problems. Again, it might be an oversimplification for you, but that's the reality. And again, that's why some of these turning tests, like if you ever do a seated rotation with a patient or a client and then you do your intervention and then you do your retest and it gets better, so what happened? Well, you just gave them more capability to manage all of these forces, and so now they can control the turns much more effectively. Some people just have it, some people don't. You know, if you, I always make reference to the normal curve, like a bell-shaped curve. I don't see average. I never see average people because average people just don't have problems. So why do we expect anybody else to have the same adaptability? Why do we put all of these people into a category and say, this is better, this is worse, because there's going to be some people that are adaptable to it and some people that can't? And then they look at the people that can't and say, well, this is the rule then. So we were born to run on grass because primitive man ran on grass—primitive man ran on grass because they didn't have asphalt and they didn't have Nike Free and all sorts of stuff like that, right? So let's not romanticize primitive man all that much because it's not that sexy, because think about all the smells and stuff that they had to live through. So what we're actually having a discussion about is who's adaptable and who's not. So if you're going to have to run on asphalt, guess what? You might not be the person that can run on asphalt. Maybe your system just doesn't tolerate it. Maybe you haven't learned an appropriate strategy. Maybe you haven't trained well enough to be able to tolerate it. Maybe you did something stupid and you raised your training output too fast.

And so now your system, which could have absorbed it if you did it more gradually, just can't do it and it breaks instead. You just have to look at this from an adaptability standpoint. There are going to be some people that, as I am fond of saying, are like there are some people that would have been food for something else in a more primitive situation because they're not well designed to remain upright nor move quickly across the ground. I mean that's just the reality. I don't know what animals were around when man first showed up. But I imagine there was a lot of big, angry animals that were very hungry and the really slow people didn't survive. We're just talking about the same thing. We're just talking about an adaptability problem, right? Some people can run barefoot and be perfectly fine. Some people can't. Some people can run on asphalt. Some people can't and not everybody has the adaptability to do anything that they please.

Is adaptability, is that something we can gauge at all or is it we put them through?

Yeah, you train them and you go, what can you do?

Yeah, okay.

I mean, that's a small dose of reality. Sometimes you actually got to do stuff to figure out what stuff you can do. Good morning. Happy Friday. I have neuro coffee in hand and it is perfect. Okay, we're going to do something a little bit different for this morning's Q&A. Something came up on the Coffee and Coaches conference call yesterday that was really, really good. I think it's an important thing for a lot of people that get into the fitness industry and rehab industries for that matter to understand is that we always want to set we always say that we want to work with everybody we don't want to limit ourselves and what we need to understand is that as we market our services that we have to start thinking more specifically while we may want to work with anybody and everybody when we direct our marketing we want to focus on that what Seth Gordon would call like a small viable audience and so I'm going to show you a segment from the call where we talked Nate through a process to sort of find his ideal client. And I think it's going to be very, very useful for a lot of people that are started out as technicians and now have become business people, whether they want it to be or not. And keep in mind, I am regurgitating information that I've learned from others. So, Pat Rigsby, I suggest you track down Pat. Pat's one of our greatest business coaches that we've ever had at IFAST and they've helped me personally, so I want to give him props. Dr. Michael Russell is right up there. As far as helping me work my way through this whole business world, which is really uncomfortable for me. Like I said, read the E-Meth so you understand who you are and what your role will be going into your business and how you might need to learn to evolve. This is a great little segment. It's a little uncomfortable for Nate. We kind of put him on the spot, so Nate's a trooper. I appreciate you, Nate. And the rest of the day, you enjoy your new year and we will see you next week.

As a business owner who works for myself without employees, I struggle with social media. I'm not good at it and haven't used it to grow my business yet. I'm unsure whether it's something I want to spend time on developing since I haven't utilized it for business growth. Given your business's growth through social media expansion, I'm curious about how much you use it and what value you find in it. I'd also appreciate hearing opinions from others on this call.

There's a very simple answer to this. Very simple. Who do you work with?

A large variety of people.

No. Who do you work with?

Mostly.