Given that its been over 10 years since T-Nation has started, I believe that some of the author’s may have changed their opinions on some of the programs they designed over the years. These questions are for the authors: (the word program/article can be interchanged in my questions)
Are there any programs that you designed early on that you now don’t stand fully behind, or only in certain circumstances?
Are there any programs that you were skeptical of at first (vocalized or not) that were designed by other authors that you now support fully?
What is your personal favorite program that you designed?
These questions are just to make it easier on new readers to sort out what programs to pay attention to.
Not trying to speak for any of the contributors, but I think it’s a key sign of a professional when your training theories evolve as you gain more experience, new science is discovered, and when you simply gain the benefit of hindsight.
For example, I think Cressey and Robertson have mentioned that there are some movements in Magnificent Mobility that they no longer advocate as much. Berardi has shifted away from the P/F, P/C designations. Thibaudeau has gravitated away from a general carb cycling plan.
Cosgrove makes it a regular habit of telling people he doesn’t apologize at all if something he says today contradicts something he said years ago.
I think new readers/new trainees should read whatever they can. There’s (almost) no such thing as a “bad program”, and if it appeared on T-Nation, then there’s definitely nothing wrong with someone trying it out as long as it’s appropriate for their goals and training level.
Just because a coach may have changed their stance on a topic, doesn’t mean it was crap to begin with. They wouldn’t have advocated it in the first place if it was worthless. It’s just that, as time goes on, they find an even better way to get things done.