1. I'm not arguing at all.

2. You entered my conversation... not vice versa. With that in mind, you entered a conversation about the efficacy of trainers and started talking about respect. You base your respect on how the life that the provider of information compares to the information itself.

This was apparent when you brought up your amazement wrt to trainers becoming overweight and how you couldn't respect them for doing this.

This, Trevor, is what I'm disagreeing with. My respect isn't based on how they look. It's based on what they know.

You stated, and I quote:

My point has and still is, my respect is based on something different than yours. That is all.

I'm a huge promoter of integrity of information, so I place a huge emphasis on said information and knowledge. We all have different values.

Haha - I'm not basing my "lack of respect" on looks. I'm basing it on character. Its hypocritical, thats all I'm saying. I don't like hypocrites. There for, I find it hard to respect a grossly obese trainer who thinks so highly of them selfs as to charge another on how to be "fit&healthy" yet can't maintain the same standards to them selfs.

If you can't apply a set standard to yourself. How can you be expected to apply them to someone els? Especially in the context of being paid to do so.

I'm not quite sure of your point. But, I do have something against lazy hypocrites. Mind you, Who doesn't may I ask?

I don't think thats a valid "comparison" at all. None the less, doing something while knowing its "negative" isn't hypocritical.

A. I might have smoked one cig in my entire life.
I don't smoke, Its not hypocritical of me to say "you shouldn't smoke". If I smoked on a regular basis than it would be hypocritical of me to say "quit smoking".

B. Honestly, I can't recall the last time I jaywalked. Regardless, I'm not a cop who gives tickets to people and jaywalks himself. That would be hypocritical.

C. Sure, Maybe by a few MPH but never recklessly or intensionally on a road with other drivers.
Again, even If I did that wouldn't be hypocritical. Me condemning some one else for speeding if I did it myself on a regular basis would be hypocritical.

None of these have been brought up in this discussion. So, not quite sure how they related to anything said here.

Conversation = over, at least for me.

I didn't say you are basing it on looks. I said I don't base my opinions on looks.

Oh, Than I interpreted the below wrong, yes? No biggie .

In the context of your post with the above. I would assume you were insinuating that.

A hypocrisy dealing with trainers, IMO, would be a trainer telling someone HOW to lose weight when in reality, they know nothing about the human body or how it's done effectively/efficiently.

A fat trainer isn't a hypocrite just b/c he's fat. He never held himself out to be anything BUT fat, again, IMO.

A hypocrisy is a pretense of having character, beliefs, or principles that one does not really possess.

The trainer, in this particular context, isn't claiming to be something he's not or believe something he doesn't. Just b/c he chooses not be thin means nothing really when you factor in what the job of a trainer is. Not factoring in the job of a trainer is lunacy.

Assumptions and insinuations can get you into trouble when debating.

Trev, you can stick to the semantics all you want.

There's a much larger and critical point to this discussion. If you're debating to debate, which seems to be the case, please let me know up front as I have much better things to do today. I'm usually down for debate... but not today.

If you're not debating to debate..... then I'm pretty sure the horse has been beaten to death. You have an opinion. I have an opinion. They've both been expressed clearly. They aren't aligned.

Big whoop.

I'm not quite sure where the debate is. I'm simply saying practice what you preach. You don't believe you should have to practice what you preach. We disagree, there really is no debate .

I'm not trying to defend my side and either or you (I think). So, its more an "expressing of thoughts" than a debate. As we aren't trying to change one another's view, I don't think lol.

None the less, I agree with you fully on the intelligence of the trainer is of prime importance. I'm just a believer of practice what you preach (boy thats been said to many times in this one post.)

Right, and all along I've been trying to see how your 'standard' would hold up in applicable situations.

That's why I asked and still wonder, "If trainer A was fat and great at training, and trainer B was ripped and okay at training, who would you go with?"

If you wanted to put it in terms that don't involve looks, since that seems to hang up the discussion, how about this:

"If trainer A doesn't practice what he preaches but is great at doing the job of a trainer, and trainer B practiced what he preaches but is okay at doing the job of a trainer, who would you go with?"

And as James was eluding to, how can you put a metric on said practice of preachings? If the metric isn't looks, which is what the original discussion was about and what my original point was about, what metric do you use?

I know a few trainers that don't practice what they preach but they certainly look the look when it comes to being a trainer. They smoke and eat like shit but they're blessed with the genetic card. Based on your values of practiced preachings, what metric would weed out said trainers from the others? This isn't as important a question, but I'm still curious.

You assuming the person has preexisting knowledge of their trainers "talent" level. I'm not...

IF person A walks into the gym. Sees two trainers, onces fat and ones not. Who do you think they are going to go to first?

for me personally, I would hire neither. For the average person, I think the average person will go with the "more fit" of the pack. As, they don't know what makes a great trainer. They see an two individuals competing for your money. One keeps himself in shape the other doesn't, and thats ALL they know. Who would you rather trust your money to in this situation?

My "method"? Knowing what I know I would easily be able to tell which trainer is the "better" in terms of knowledge and so forth. And for that reason, I wouldn't need a trainer in the first place.

HOWEVER, If I knew nothing about these "arts" my "practice what they preach" would weed out the highly overweight trainers. My first impression of a highly overweight trainer would be "this dude can't even keep himself fit. How in the world could he 'teach me' how to be fit"?
Thats a first impression of myself when I see a highly overweight trainer that I have know preexisting knowledge of.

I believe this would be the general first impression of most people.

I believe there is a problem with overweight health professional in general (doctors and nurses included) and while I do not think that weight denotes knowledge, weight does denote character and when putting your body in someones hands, I want those hands to have solid character AND knowledge.

Also I am not saying I need a six pack, far from it. Just someone who shows they care about themselves.

I don't care who you are, you can always use a trainer or inspiration. I train trainers, I get training advice from other trainers, and my needs for a trainer is certianly dedication and passion for fitness and health, two things that usually come with someone who cares about themselves. Not to say there aren't exceptions, but they are few and far between.

Funnily enough, in my experience, most of the trainers who look the part are boobs. In the gyms I've trained at or worked out at, the trainers who look the part normally suck. They're full of vanity and while the client is doing quarter squats on the smith machine, they're either checking out the hot chick doing her billionth crunch or they're making sure their sleeves are rolled up enough to expose their bulging bicep.

Yea, the post is full of my own personal experiences.... but that's where I'm coming from with my opinions since that's all I can go on.

We can run a million what if scenarios and come to different conclusions.

Trevor, you're right, and I said this before in this very thread. It's in the trainer's best interest to look the part. If a prospective client is to walk into a gym without any real knowledge and expecting ALL trainers to be 'good,' who is said client going to choose; a fat trainer or a thin one.

Obviously the thin.

But what's the point... we're not talking about maximizing trainer revenue. We're discussing if a fat trainer presents a moral dilemma. At least that's what this conversation seems to have transformed into.

I totally respect your opinions.... and Leigh's.

They're just not applicable to my experiences.

I'll say this: In an ideal world, of course I'd want all trainers to be fit and slim. I, myself, try and walk the walk, talk the talk as much as possible and I wouldn't have it any other way.

But in the real world, trainer's lifestyle habits are the least of my concern. My primary concern with today's population of trainers is competence wrt the service they provide. We could have every trainer turn into a tub-of-lard and be decades ahead of where we are today in terms of competency if half of said tub-of-lards simply read a book or two.... continued their education and pursuit of knowledge.

The myopic view most people entering this industry take is what's worth talking about IMO.

I think that is a great post and really all I want to add is when I say fit I in no way mean bulging biceps, just not an obvious slob, someone that just screams lazy and they don't take care of themselves and I can't think of one trainer/doctor/nurse I ever met who's appearance in that manner didn't speak exactly to their knowledge. So again I am generalizing from experiance on this but my vision of "fit" merely means, takes care of themselves.

AAAAAAH YOU JUST SAID THE WORD OF THE DAY AAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

Attached Thumbnails

 

On a more serious note, though, not to parrot steve AGAIN in this thread, but this has been my experience as well. In my opinion, If there is a guy with a hose on the outside of his arm, and there is a guy with a bit of a belly on him, but with muscles, I'm gonna go with the belly guy. Chances are, Mr. Ripped is one of those genetic lottery winners (we all know a couple), and the chubby guy has had to work a lot harder to get where he is.

EDIT:
This is just along the lines that we are talking about comparing possible trainers by aesthetics alone.