I meant ecumenical in the more secular usage as a mixture of elements or styles...and I was also referring to the pre SF days, not wishing to see those conflagrations recapitulated here.I think Pavel's article, which dates to shortly after StrongFirst was created, hits the nail on the head - the meaning is clear, nothing religious about it, and no dragons have reared their heads in response.
Ubi fumus est, illic speramus barbeque.
-S-
In these differences, I tend to think of "programming" (what they do to train) more than "technique" (how they do the movements), but of course there are aspects to both that matter. And both are matched to the end objective. Which brings us back to the beacon or what the method is ultimately aimed at -- optimized performance in the sport, or something "beyond that", "a greater purpose", i.e. something "other" than that?
It is both, I would say there are better and worse ways of HOW to handle a bell: grip, swing amplitude, timing, breathing and effort depending on WHAT you want to accomplish. Do what works. If I am training for a long multi day bike tour (nudge nudge wink wink) I am not going make 1k sprints (what ) the basis of my training on a saddle forward aero time trial machine (how). I am going to do way more long rides (what) on a touring bike, with a relaxed geometry requiring a completely different posture and pedaling position than an aero machine would. (how)
Yep... A good example!
