While training clients, what are we supposed to be looking for? Do we simply show our client an exercise and have them mimic us? Do we tell them to do fifteen repetitions, make them start with point A and end with point B, and ignore everything that takes place in between?
If clients depend on us as exercise professionals to ensure they’re getting the most out of each and every workout, I say our duty lies in enforcing control and precision. Just because the end ranges of motion are critical doesn’t mean that everything else is less important. And that doesn’t mean a client’s structure, her neuromuscular influences, her accustomed level of activity, her body awareness, and her ability to adapt shouldn’t be factored in. From my Resistance Training Specialist notebook: “The outcome of an exercise will only be as good as the precision with which the motion is performed.… It all boils down to the quality of each individual rep; it doesn’t matter how many you do if they all suck!” When we prioritize control, we can tally actual progress and work toward increasing the challenge. Without control or precision, we compromise the standard, rendering measurements of progress useless/unreliable, while undermining the efficiency and quality of a workout. It’s only after the client demonstrates automaticity, or autopilot, that we should add another level of difficulty.
On the other hand, we don’t want to be completely obsessive with instruction. We need to allow the client time to acquire sensory input, adapt and respond to the task at hand, and orchestrate a solution to that specific challenge. If we obsessively correct, we may see diminishing returns in the outcome. Allowing the client time to learn, tracking micro-progress, and gradually building their skill with precision is key to long term progress.