|
At The U of Strength, we don’t call it strength training. We call it force development. That distinction matters.
Strength is certainly important, but simply increasing the amount of weight an athlete can lift does not tell us the whole story. Sport requires athletes to interact with forces constantly. They must accept force, produce force, transmit force, redirect force, and express force, often within fractions of a second and under constantly changing conditions. The weight room can help build the physical resources required to solve these problems, but those resources are only part of the process. The question isn’t simply: How strong is the athlete? A more useful question is: How much force does the athlete possess, and how effectively can they express it when the environment demands it? This leads us to an important distinction between force potential and force expression. Force Potential vs. Force Expression We view force development through two interconnected lenses. 1. Force Potential Force potential represents the athlete’s capacity to generate force. It can be influenced by factors such as muscular capacity, neural output, coordination, tissue qualities, training experience, and the athlete’s ability to organize their body against resistance. In simple terms: How much force does the athlete have available? The weight room provides us with an environment where we can intentionally expand this capacity. But possessing force is different from being able to use it. 2. Force Expression Force expression is the athlete’s ability to access and apply their available force within the time, space, and informational constraints of movement. Sport rarely provides athletes with unlimited preparation time. They must accelerate when space appears. Decelerate when an opponent changes direction. Reorganize their body after contact. Jump from imperfect positions. Redirect force when their original movement solution is no longer available. The athlete may possess tremendous force potential, but the sporting environment determines how much of that potential can actually be expressed. This is why weight room numbers alone cannot define athletic performance. Force potential is what the athlete possesses. Force expression is what the athlete can access when the situation demands it. You Can’t Express What You Don’t Possess While force expression matters tremendously, force potential cannot be ignored. There is a simple relationship: You can’t express force you don’t possess. Developing greater physical capacities expands the athlete’s potential movement toolbox. This is particularly important throughout long-term athletic development. Resistance training can help athletes develop greater physical capacity, improve coordination under load, increase tolerance to force, and provide additional movement options. But the objective isn’t simply to make the athlete stronger. The objective is to develop physical resources that can eventually become useful outside the weight room. For that reason, we organize our force potential development around three interconnected qualities: Acceptance. Production. Transmission. 1. Force Acceptance: Yielding Force acceptance refers to the athlete’s ability to receive, manage, and organize force entering the system. Think about the demands of sport: Landing from a jump. Decelerating from high speed. Lowering the center of mass before changing direction. Managing contact from an opponent. Transitioning from one movement solution into another. The athlete isn’t simply “absorbing” force. They are actively organizing themselves around the forces created by the environment. We often use yielding strategies to develop this capacity. These may include different landing variations, “fake” throws, eccentric actions, deceleration problems, and other environments that expose athletes to different magnitudes, directions, and durations of force. The goal isn’t to create one perfect position. It is to expand the athlete’s ability to successfully manage force across many situations. 2. Force Production: Overcoming Force production is probably what most people associate with traditional strength training. The athlete must generate enough force to overcome an external resistance. Squatting. Pressing. Pulling. Jumping.. These are all examples of force production. But simply increasing load is not the only way to develop this quality. We can manipulate resistance, range of motion, starting position, velocity, intent, stance, and many other constraints to change the problem presented to the athlete. This is where individualization becomes important. The athlete shouldn’t have to fit the exercise. The exercise should fit the athlete. Instead of forcing every athlete through identical exercises and progressions, we can manipulate the training environment based on what the athlete needs. The exercise is simply a vehicle. The adaptation is the destination. 3. Force Transmission: Elasticity Force does not simply need to be accepted or produced. It also needs to move efficiently through the system. This is where force transmission becomes important. We associate transmission with elasticity, the athlete’s ability to rapidly manage and transfer force through interconnected segments of the body. Sprinting provides a simple example. At high speeds, athletes do not have unlimited time to produce force against the ground. Ground contact opportunities become increasingly brief. The athlete must arrive prepared to interact with the ground, manage the incoming forces, and rapidly redirect those forces into the next action. This requires more than strength. It requires timing. Rhythm. Coordination. Pretensioning. Stiffness where necessary. Compliance where necessary. And the ability to organize those qualities at speed. Elastic training therefore becomes another important piece of the force development puzzle. These Qualities Don’t Exist in Isolation Acceptance, production, and transmission are useful categories for organizing training, but the human body doesn’t experience them as isolated qualities. Every athletic action contains some interaction between them. An athlete sprinting must accept force when the foot contacts the ground, transmit force through the system, and produce force to project into the next step. An athlete changing direction must manage incoming momentum, reorganize their body, and produce force into a new direction. An athlete landing from a jump must manage force before transitioning into whatever action comes next. The goal of training isn’t to create athletes who are great at isolated categories. The goal is to provide them with physical resources they can integrate into adaptable movement solutions. Bridging Force Potential & Force Expression This is where athletic development becomes more interesting. The weight room can increase force potential. But sport asks athletes to express that potential under very different conditions. Sport contains uncertainty. Opponents. Teammates. Time pressure. Limited space. Changing visual information. Fatigue. Contact. Emotional pressure. No perfectly controlled weight room environment can completely recreate those demands, and it shouldn’t try to. Instead, we can view training as a continuum. On one side, we develop the athlete’s physical resources. On the other, we create environments that require athletes to explore how those resources can be expressed. Resistance training, sprinting, jumping, landing activities, and small sided games can all play different roles within that process. The goal is not to make everything look like the sport. The goal is to build capacity and create opportunities for that capacity to become usable. Develop the Human, Not the Exercise This is ultimately why we prefer the term force development. Strength training can unintentionally become centered around exercises. What is your squat? What is your bench? What is your deadlift? How much weight did you add? Those numbers can provide useful information, but they are not the athlete. At The U of Strength, we’re interested in the larger system. Can the athlete accept force? Can they produce it? Can they transmit it? Can they redirect it? Can they access it quickly? Can they organize it from different positions? And ultimately: Can they express it when the environment demands it? The weight room should expand the athlete’s movement possibilities, not restrict them to a collection of exercises. Because the goal isn’t to create better lifters. The goal is to develop athletes with a larger toolbox of force solutions available when sport asks them to solve a problem.
0 Comments
Sport is complex.
Athletes are constantly required to perceive information, make decisions, organize their bodies, and adapt their movement solutions based on what is happening around them. The question for coaches is: How do we prepare athletes for complexity without immediately overwhelming them with complexity? Two approaches often used in motor learning are task decomposition and task simplification. Although both can make a difficult task more manageable, they accomplish it in very different ways. Task Decomposition Task decomposition involves breaking a complex movement problem into smaller, isolated components. Instead of practicing the complete task, we remove certain elements and train individual pieces separately. A common example in athletic development is a closed change of direction drill. The athlete may know:
The physical movement may resemble something that occurs during competition, but much of the information that normally regulates that movement has been removed. There is no opponent to read. There is no space to protect or attack. There is little uncertainty. There may be no meaningful decision. The movement has been separated from the environment that normally gives it purpose. This doesn’t mean decomposition can never have value. There may be situations where temporarily isolating a component allows an athlete to explore or develop a particular physical capacity. The problem occurs when isolated movement becomes the destination rather than a bridge toward more representative behavior. Task Simplification Task simplification takes a different approach. Instead of breaking the problem apart, we keep the problem intact while reducing its complexity. The athlete still has to perceive. The athlete still has to decide. The athlete still has to act. But the environment is manipulated so the problem is more manageable for the individual. At The U of Strength, this may involve manipulating:
Instead of removing perception and decision-making, we adjust the environment around them. Simplify the Environment, Not the Athlete Consider a developing youthlete learning to solve a 1v1 situation. We could begin with a predetermined cone drill. The athlete knows where to run and where to cut. They can repeatedly practice the movement pattern, but the decision has already been made for them. Or we could create a simplified 1v1. Reduce the playing space. Slow the starting velocity. Give each participant one clear objective. Limit the number of possible outcomes. Now the activity is easier to manage, but something important remains:
Perception & Action Remain Connected This distinction matters because movement in sport does not occur independently of information. Athletes perceive to act and act to perceive. An offensive athlete changing direction because a defender closes space is solving a different problem than an athlete changing direction because a cone tells them where to cut. The physical shapes might occasionally look similar. The process that created them is not. When we completely remove the information surrounding movement, we risk training the movement separately from the perceptual information that gives it meaning. Task simplification allows us to reduce difficulty while maintaining this perception-action relationship. Complexity Should Be a Dial Representative training does not mean every activity needs maximum chaos. More uncertainty isn’t automatically better. More participants aren’t automatically better. Faster isn’t automatically better. Complexity should be treated as a dial rather than an on/off switch. For inexperienced athletes, we can turn the dial down. As their action capabilities and experience develop, we can gradually turn it up. Add space. Increase velocity. Introduce another participant. Expand the available choices. Change the numerical relationship. Create an advantage or disadvantage. Manipulate the rules. Increase uncertainty. The environment grows alongside the athlete. This allows us to expose youthletes to uncertainty without throwing them immediately into situations they aren’t prepared to solve. Build Toward the Messiness of Sport The goal isn’t to make training complicated simply because sport is complicated. The goal is to create an appropriate relationship between the athlete and the problem. Sometimes that means reducing velocity. Sometimes it means reducing the number of participants. Sometimes it means shrinking the space or simplifying the rules. But whenever possible, we want to preserve the information that allows athletes to perceive, decide, and adapt. Don’t automatically break the movement into pieces. Simplify the problem. Scale the environment. Manage the uncertainty. Then gradually expose the athlete to more information and more possible solutions. Because eventually, the game gets messy. Our job is to help athletes become comfortable solving problems when it does. Meaningful speed and gamespeed development require more than teaching athletes how to move. Sport is a constantly changing environment. Athletes must perceive information, make decisions, organize their bodies, apply force, and adapt their actions in real time.
That means our training environments need to develop both how athletes move and how they interact with the information around them. At The U of Strength, we use five gamespeed principles to guide the design of these environments. 1. Appreciating Space Space is never static. Open lanes appear and disappear. Gaps close. Angles change. Teammates and opponents constantly reshape the available movement options. Athletes must learn to perceive these changes and understand how space can be attacked, protected, created, or manipulated. Our activities intentionally keep the spatial environment dynamic so athletes are required to continuously identify opportunities and adjust their movement accordingly. See the space. Understand the space. Manipulate the space. 2. Respecting Speed Speed isn’t simply about moving as fast as possible. Effective athletes understand when to accelerate, when to decelerate, when to maintain speed, and when to change tempo. The ability to regulate speed is often more important than simply producing maximal velocity. Training should therefore give athletes opportunities to modulate their speed based on what is happening around them, not based solely on a predetermined instruction. Speed is a tool. Knowing when and how to use it is the skill. 3. Managing Uncertainty Sport is unpredictable. The opponent doesn’t follow a script. The ball doesn’t always arrive where expected. Teammates make unexpected movements. Opportunities can appear and disappear in an instant. Training should expose athletes to this uncertainty. By manipulating constraints, changing task demands, introducing variability, and avoiding excessive repetition of identical solutions, athletes learn to perceive, anticipate, adapt, and act without knowing exactly what will happen next. The goal isn’t to create athletes who are experts at reproducing one solution. It’s to develop athletes who can find solutions. 4. Being Comfortable in Uncomfortable Conditions Competition rarely gives athletes perfect positions, perfect surfaces, or perfect amounts of time. They may have to accelerate from awkward positions, change direction while off-balance, make decisions while fatigued, or produce force when their body isn’t organized exactly as they would prefer. These situations aren’t errors in the system. They’re part of the system. Training environments should provide athletes with opportunities to experience unfavorable positions and unexpected perturbations, forcing them to self-organize and solve movement problems. 5. Team Synergies Sport is a collective problem. An athlete’s movement doesn’t happen in isolation. Teammates, opponents, the ball, space, and the actions of others all influence what happens next. Team-based activities develop the ability to coordinate movement, communicate, share timing, and respond to the intentions of others. The goal isn’t simply to make individuals “better” movers. It’s to develop athletes who can connect their actions with the actions of others. From Gamespeed to Biomechanics Gamespeed principles describe the environment in which movement occurs. Biomechanical principles help us understand the movement solutions that emerge within that environment. We aren’t trying to force every athlete into one “perfect” technique. Instead, we look for attractors, movement characteristics that tend to help athletes solve particular problems effectively. Key Attractors of Acceleration Acceleration requires an athlete to effectively project the body and organize force application relative to the desired direction. Some of the key attractors we look for include: 1. Lower center of gravity
These aren’t positions we demand. They are solutions we create opportunities for athletes to discover and refine. Key Attractors for Change of Direction Change of direction introduces another layer of complexity. The athlete must manage existing momentum, reorganize the body, apply force, and redirect the center of mass toward the next action, often within a very limited amount of time. Some of the attractors we look for include: 1. An effective relationship between the center of mass & base of support 2. Foot placement outside the hip crease 3. A foot plant from above that allows the athlete to effectively accept & redirect force 4. Generating force opposite the subsequent action 5. Steering the foot through inside- & outside-edge control Again, these aren’t rigid technical positions. Context matters. The athlete’s speed, direction, intent, task, opponent, surface, fatigue, and available space can all change the solution. That’s why we focus less on creating a single “correct” movement and more on expanding an athlete’s movement bandwidth. Connecting the Pieces Gamespeed and biomechanics shouldn’t exist as separate training worlds. The environment provides the problem. The athlete perceives the problem, selects an action, and organizes the body to solve it. Sometimes that solution looks clean and predictable. Sometimes it looks awkward. Sometimes it changes from repetition to repetition. That’s the nature of sport. Our job isn’t to eliminate variability. It’s to create environments where athletes can develop the physical capabilities, perceptual skills, and adaptability required to navigate it. Appreciate space. Respect speed. Manage uncertainty. Become comfortable in uncomfortable conditions. Build team synergies. Then give athletes the opportunity to discover the movement solutions that allow them to thrive. When coaches hear the term training load, they often think about numbers.
Sets. Reps. Weight. Distance. Speed. Duration. Heart rate. GPS data. These metrics can be useful. But they only tell us part of the story. Training load is not simply how much an athlete does. It is the demand we intentionally place on the athlete. And that demand can be physical, psychological, emotional, social, or environmental. This distinction matters because two athletes can complete the exact same activity and experience completely different loads. The activity may look identical. The training effect may not be. What Is Training Load? At its simplest: Training load is the demand placed on the athlete. That demand can come from the amount of force an athlete has to produce, the speed at which they have to move, the number of decisions they have to make, the uncertainty they have to manage, or the pressure created by the environment. This gives us a more useful way to think about training. The activity is simply the vehicle. The load is the demand we are trying to create through that vehicle. Physical Load Physical load refers to the mechanical and physiological demands placed on the athlete. This might include:
For example, if our goal is to expose an athlete to greater elastic demands, we can manipulate the activity to increase velocity, ground interaction, stiffness, or the magnitude of force being produced and accepted. If the goal is repeatability, we may manipulate work-to-rest ratios, duration, density, or the number of repeated efforts. The activity hasn't necessarily changed. The demand has. Psychological Load Not all training stress comes from the muscles. An athlete can experience a significant training demand through perception, decision-making, attention, and uncertainty. This is especially important when using small sided games. Consider a simple 1v1 activity. We can manipulate:
The physical movement may look similar, but the psychological demand can change dramatically. A predictable drill may require the athlete to execute. A chaotic game may require the athlete to perceive, decide, and act. Both are training. But they create different problems for the athlete to solve. The Environment Is Part of the Load One of the easiest ways to change training load is to change the environment. A larger playing area creates different movement opportunities than a smaller one. A stable surface creates a different demand than an uneven surface. A predictable environment creates a different perceptual challenge than an unpredictable one. Adding teammates, opponents, boundaries, equipment, or time constraints can further change the affordances available to the athlete. This is why we don't view the environment as something separate from training. The environment helps create the training load. Same Activity, Different Load This is where training design becomes interesting. Imagine we use the same small sided game with the same athletes. Instead of simply repeating it session after session, we can manipulate the constraints depending on the demand we want to emphasize. Speed & Elasticity We may manipulate:
The goal is to create opportunities for high-velocity movement and elastic solutions. Strength, Power & Change of Direction We may manipulate:
Now the athlete is exposed to greater demands around force production, force acceptance, and changing direction. Repeatability & Work Capacity We may manipulate:
The same vehicle can create a completely different demand. This is why simply naming the activity doesn’t tell us what the athlete is actually training. Load Is About Intent Intent is one of the most important components of training load. A movement performed with maximal intent creates a different demand than the same movement performed extensively. A jump for max height creates a different problem than an extensive ankle jump. A dynamic change of direction creates a different demand than a predetermined change of direction. A 1v0 where the athlete knows exactly what is coming creates a different experience than a 1v1 where the athlete has to interact with an opponent. The exercise is only the starting point. Our intent determines how we use it. External Load vs. Internal Load Traditional discussions around training load often separate load into external and internal measures. External load describes what the athlete does. Examples include:
Internal load describes how the athlete responds. Examples include:
Both can provide valuable information. But neither completely explains the training experience. Two athletes can produce the same external workload and experience it very differently. That is why context matters. Measuring Load Isn’t the Same as Understanding Load Technology has made it easier than ever to collect information. We can measure almost everything. But measurement and understanding are not the same thing. A GPS device can tell us how far an athlete traveled. It doesn't necessarily tell us why they traveled that distance. A force plate can tell us how an athlete generates force. It doesn't automatically tell us what problem the athlete was solving. A heart-rate monitor can tell us about physiological response. It doesn't explain the athlete's perception of the task. Data can inform our decisions. It shouldn't replace them. The coach still has to interpret the information within the context of the athlete, the activity, and the goal of the session. Training Load Should Be Individualized Another important consideration is that the same task does not create the same load for everyone. An activity that is low demand for one athlete may be highly demanding for another. Experience, physical qualities, skill, confidence, fatigue, attention, and previous exposure all influence how an athlete responds to a task. This is one reason we favor adaptable training environments. Rather than trying to prescribe the exact same experience to every athlete, we can create conditions that allow the athlete to interact with the task and adapt accordingly. The goal isn't always to make every athlete do more. The goal is to expose them to the right amount of the right demand. The Coach’s Job: Manipulate the Demand This changes the role of the coach. Instead of simply selecting exercises, we become designers of the training environment. We can manipulate:
Small changes can create significantly different demands. This gives us more options without constantly needing new exercises. The Activity Is the Vehicle This is ultimately how we think about training load. The activity itself is not the destination. It is the vehicle we use to expose the athlete to a particular demand. A med ball can be used to train different qualities. A jump can be manipulated to create different force and velocity demands. A small sided game can be organized around different physical or psychological objectives. A sprint can be performed in a predictable environment or surrounded by uncertainty. The exercise doesn't automatically determine the training effect. The design determines the demand. Training Load Is a Design Problem Training load isn't simply something we calculate after a session. It is something we design before the session. We decide what demands matter. We determine how much exposure is appropriate. We manipulate the environment to create those demands. We observe how the athlete responds. Then we adjust. This creates a more dynamic approach to training, one where load isn't reduced to a single number. Because athletic development is not simply about doing more. It is about creating the right problems, with the right intent, at the right time. The activity is the vehicle. The load is the demand. The design is what connects the two. For years, athletic development has been heavily influenced by the idea that there is a “correct” way to move.
A certain position. A certain joint angle. A certain sequence. A certain technique that should be repeated until it becomes automatic. But human movement, and especially sporting movement, is rarely that simple. Movement is not a fixed product. It is a constantly adapting solution to a constantly changing problem. This is where the concepts of attractors and fluctuators can provide a different lens for understanding how athletes learn to move. What Is an Attractor? In motor learning and dynamical systems theory, an attractor represents a movement solution that an athlete tends to gravitate toward because it helps them successfully solve a particular task. Importantly, an attractor isn’t a rigid position or a predetermined technical model. It is better understood as a stable tendency within the movement system. An athlete may consistently organize their body in a particular way when accelerating, changing direction, landing, throwing, or jumping because that solution has proven useful. That solution emerges from the interaction of multiple factors:
Two athletes can solve the same problem differently while both producing effective outcomes. That’s an important distinction. Consistency doesn’t have to mean identical movement. Then There Are Fluctuators If attractors represent stability, fluctuators represent variability. They are the small changes and adjustments occurring within the movement system that allow an athlete to adapt when the conditions surrounding the task change. And sport is essentially one giant collection of changing conditions.
And when the problem changes, the solution may need to change with it. This is why variability shouldn’t automatically be viewed as a mistake. Sometimes variability is the mechanism that allows adaptability to emerge. Stability + Variability The relationship between attractors and fluctuators gives us an interesting way to think about athletic development. The attractor provides stability. The fluctuator provides adaptability. You need both. An athlete with no stability may struggle to consistently organize an effective solution. But an athlete with too much rigidity may struggle to adapt when the environment presents something unexpected. Think about a soccer player changing direction. There may be certain underlying principles that consistently emerge:
But the exact movement solution doesn’t need to look identical every time. The opponent, speed, angle, space, surface, and intent can all change. The principles remain relatively stable while the expression of those principles fluctuates. That’s functional adaptability. Why “Good Movement” Doesn’t Exist This doesn’t mean that anything an athlete does is automatically “good”. It means that evaluating movement solely against a predetermined visual model can be misleading. A movement can look different and still be effective. A movement can look “messy” and still solve the problem. And a movement can look technically beautiful in a controlled environment while failing when the environment becomes unpredictable. Instead of asking: “Does this movement look right?” We can ask: “Did the athlete successfully solve the problem?” And perhaps more importantly: “Can they solve the problem again when the conditions change?” That is a much more meaningful question for sport. From Prescribing Positions to Developing Principles This changes the role of the coach. Rather than constantly prescribing exact positions, we can create environments that encourage athletes to discover useful solutions. Instead of eliminating every deviation from a predetermined technique, we can explore whether the deviation represents a problem, or simply an alternative solution. The coach becomes less of a movement sculptor and more of an environment designer.
And then we observe how the athlete adapts. Repetition Without Repetition This connects with a fundamental concept in motor learning: repetition without repetition. The athlete needs enough repetition to develop stable solutions, but not so much repetition that the solution becomes dependent on identical conditions. The goal isn’t to eliminate variability. The goal is to make variability functional. The athlete learns the underlying solution while continuously adjusting its expression. This is one reason we shouldn’t confuse movement variability with movement inconsistency. An athlete can display considerable movement variability while maintaining consistency in the outcome or underlying intention. That’s not a breakdown of the system. That’s the system adapting. What This Means for Athletic Development When we view movement through the lens of attractors and fluctuators, our goal begins to shift. We’re no longer trying to manufacture a single “perfect” movement pattern. We’re trying to help athletes develop a movement bandwidth, a collection of stable tendencies and adaptable solutions that allow them to navigate unpredictable environments. We want athletes who can:
Because sport doesn’t reward athletes for producing the same movement every time. It rewards athletes for producing effective solutions when the problem keeps changing. The goal isn’t movement perfection. The goal is functional adaptability. Build the attractors. Allow the fluctuations. Let the athlete learn to navigate the space between them. |
AuthorJamie Smith is a proud husband and father, passionate about all things relating to athletic development and a life long learner, who is open to unorthodox ideas as long they are beneficial to his athletes. Categories
All
|
RSS Feed
Services |
The Gym |
|
Tel: (860) 833-9366
Email: [email protected]
*By accessing this website and/or purchasing or utilizing the articles, emails, programs, images, videos, services and/or products, you are agreeing to this disclaimer in its entirety. The content on this website and the educational products sold within are the intellectual property of The U of Strength, LLC and may not be replicated, reproduced, or sold without prior written consent from The U of Strength, LLC. Website, social media and product content provided is for informational purposes and meant to be utilized by athletes, sport coaches, and fitness professionals at their own discretion. It is not meant to substitute advice or guidance from qualified medical experts, and misuse of the information can result in serious injury. Any fitness program should be administered under the discretion of qualified professionals who take into account individual differences in health and ability. While our programs have found success with the athletes who train at our facility, individual results vary and we do not guarantee any specific results. The U of Strength, LLC assumes no liability from the misuse of the content provided or products purchased. Users assume all risk when implementing our ideas in theirs or their clients’ real life training experiences.
Email: [email protected]
*By accessing this website and/or purchasing or utilizing the articles, emails, programs, images, videos, services and/or products, you are agreeing to this disclaimer in its entirety. The content on this website and the educational products sold within are the intellectual property of The U of Strength, LLC and may not be replicated, reproduced, or sold without prior written consent from The U of Strength, LLC. Website, social media and product content provided is for informational purposes and meant to be utilized by athletes, sport coaches, and fitness professionals at their own discretion. It is not meant to substitute advice or guidance from qualified medical experts, and misuse of the information can result in serious injury. Any fitness program should be administered under the discretion of qualified professionals who take into account individual differences in health and ability. While our programs have found success with the athletes who train at our facility, individual results vary and we do not guarantee any specific results. The U of Strength, LLC assumes no liability from the misuse of the content provided or products purchased. Users assume all risk when implementing our ideas in theirs or their clients’ real life training experiences.