"The Most Controversial Personality in Fitness"

[Scott Sonnon]

I was just called "the most controversial personality in fitness" online. True or not? If so, why? Seems a bit stretched, at least to say "most." I get most unorthodox, but most controversial? It boggles me. I'll wear it like a badge of honor if it's the truth. But do YOU think so, because your opinion is the one that matters?

[Coach Jones]

Let me throw in my two cents...

As most of you know, I have had the priveledge of working with Coach Sonnon since CST Alpha. He's been my coach, mentor, friend and brother for many...MANY years now. I can see how some people might find my opinion somewhat slanted or biased but i'll throw into this thread anyway and let you folks make your own judgements.

When I cam to CST (and to ROSS way back in the day) I didn't do it on a lark. I wasn't looking for the next big thing. I saw on the old Grappler's Toolbox series, a man who could move in a way that I had never seen before. His performance made me rethink the way I had been training and I was and am a person who is resistant to change my ways.

When I showed up at alpha, I did so very much from a position of "show me"..."prove it" and being the creature that I was, I was ready and willing to throw down if it came to that.

Well, coach DID prove it and he did show me. Immidiately what I saw and what he said and DID convinced me andmy ongoing practice with Coach Sonnon's methods proved to me beyond any shadow of a doubt that this man had the goods and was not only leading the pack but leading the leaders of the pack. I jumped in fully and have never looked back - everything about my training has improved in every concievable way.

The methods he was preaching were different, they were in many instances very much opposite of what others were doing and talking about. I saw, heard and read people attacking he and his concpets and methods in every concievable way - railing against them from the highest mountains and as loudly as they could.

Fast forward...

Years later, what he said then and what he says now have not changed. the methods have evolved and continue to evolve and to improve but the message and medium were and are the same. Now, those very same people. The people who railed against Coach and his methods concepts and tools have not only changed their tune but in many cases have not only come around, jumped on the bandwagon etc., but have gone so far as to put out their own material on their version of Coach's work. Changin exercises and movements just enough to alloow them to try and take credit for someone else's ideas and work.

I remember being at the Arnold Classic so many years ago and hearing one "fitness camp" in paticular say, "well, I guess now we have to respect you guys" after seeing us demonstrate Double Bruiser swipes and Bruiser Mills. It's funny for me to see many of these same people now adopting CST exercises and using, teaching and putting out material on Club training themselves.

So does that make for a contravertial figure? I guess it does. If by contraversy you mean someone who leads the pack and takesw the verbal lashings from those who will be taking what he's done and co-opting it years later.

I have no doubt that Coach Sonnon will continue to fire up the field of fitness. More and more will jump on the bandwagon late in the game and try to play catch-up.

Let the railing continue and the contraversy grow, Coach will continue to grow and evolve as will the CST system even as those who first argue and attack before trying to ride coattails sophisticate their own practice in the effort to play catch-up. More power to them.

Let the contraversy rage on!!

[Coach Gostnell]

"...a man who could move in a way that I had never seen before."

That's what hooked me. I haven't been around RMAX nearly as many years as Coach Jones; what's kept me here - in addition to that aesthetically pleasing movement so many CST practitioners express - is that I see actions congruent with the expressed values, an evolving but consistent and unified structure/system that produces results in a healthy way, and personal and professional QUALITY in everything. Not controversial unless someone's not willing to even try it before cementing an opinion.

[mushtaq]

"...a man who could move in a way that I had never seen before."

Yep, that was pretty much it for me as well.

But controversial?

Only if it's controversial to be innovative, think outside the box, put your money where your mouth is and walk your talk.

You don't even go around saying that "the emperor's naked", though you do show the lack of clothing through action to anyone with the eyes to see.

Perhaps it's controversial to produce real value, God knows few enough do.

You can do AND you can teach which is a much rarer combination than people think. The fact that you will compete, and compete in areas where you don't have a specific background (I still watch the video of your San Shou fight from time to time) and make your stuff work could be construed as controversial in some circles. (Mostly the circles of "masters" who are "too dangerous to compete"). The fact that you can and will teach others to do what you do is very controversial. The number of people who withhold key knowledge because they are afraid that they might put themselves out of business, or create competition is way too high.

So perhaps you are controversial, but here's the bottom line. I wouldn't trade an hour of training with you for a year of training with your detractors. Just my opinion.

M

[W_Brister]

Coach,

I don't understand at all how you could be controversial.

I know I haven't benn practicing CST for to long at all, but the benefits I have received from everyone I have met, physically, mentally, and emotionally have been amazing to say the least.

I remember one night when I was training with Jim and he had me watch a video of you, and I was awestruck with the grace you had in every aspect of movement:eek:

I really think all of these detractors should come over and get some CST love! When they pull their heads out of the sand of the status quo!

[hermanchauw]

What is orthodoxy?

If you define being different from the rest as unorthodox, then so be it. Probably most people define it this way.

But i define orthodoxy as being as true as possible. Our bodies are created to move. This system is the truest to human anatomy and physiology, amongst the various systems i am certified in.

[Joseph David]

Coach,
The thing I like most about you being "controversial", is that your willing to take a noble stand for what you believe in. You buck the status quo and that's what people notice. Your unique amalgam of techniques,science and philosophy is THE cutting edge, IMHO. You rock Scott!!!

[John B]

My opinion: Controversial? No. Trailblazer? Yes.

But it’s purely a matter of semantics.

Stating you’re controversial is “them” saying you have a high characteristic of controversy. Controversy being defined as a disputation concerning a matter of opinion; in this case main stream opinion. I don’t see it as being a negative thing at all, though many closed minds would label it that way.

So, then, “they” would be saying the notions you consistently put across tend to go against or dispute (whether intentionally or incidentally) the notions consistently put across by the main stream or majority in this field. They say you’re controversial because CST challenges the bedrock of their health/fitness beliefs, notions that have been in place for the past fifty years, some longer.

The world used to be flat. The Earth used to be at the center of the universe. And the human body used to move in three planes of movement. Though subject to controversy at the time, we now know that the world is indeed round, the Earth finds the sun at the center of its existence and the body moves through six degrees of freedom.

It’s one thing to be controversial for the sake of stirring up some noise. It’s another thing entirely to be controversial simply because the ideals that resonate from your core or essence happen to challenge the pedestal many stand upon.

Mother Nature can't forge new mountains without first shaking a few things up. That's the way it works.

[Wil Boyce, CSCS]

"Most controversial personality in fitness"?

Doubtful... Matt Furey would give you a run for your money in that regard. The difference being, that you actually know what you are talking about when you talk about fitness & conditioning. Furey is only controversial b/c he is trying desperately to be- you are, if at all, controversial b/c you are innovative & challenge the fitness industry's status quo with substantial rationale & results. That makes some uncomfortable, who might call you controversial as a result.

JMHO,
Wil

[hiddenwarrior7]

I'm new to this site and Scott Sonnon... about a year or two.

Controversial... Yes. You definately swim up stream, which is why I visist this site more than any other for fitness related goals.

"Most" Controversial... Hardly. There are many fitnes "gurus" out there who rank a 10 on the controversy scale. Gurus with little or no science, proof, or ability to back up their claims.

So keep up the controversy... but I'm sorry to say you're not number one in that group. :)

Tim

[Swing Kid]

"Most controversial"? I don't think so. Many good trainers recommend the RMax material. I know because I googled a lot to learn more about you and CST. I read your books, bought some DVDs and I can say this is some of the best material in the world of health and fitness I ever saw. Most trainers lack the holistic perspective. Ok there is Paul Chek but he is not the average trainer. Neurology, fascia research, psychology, social and cultural factors etc. is needed to really understand the human body, athletic performance, prehab and rehab. I am impressed with your biography . It is encouraging. All persons who were deep thinkers are somehow "controversial" because they think outside of mainstream ideology. I remember Moshe Feldenkrais, Elsa Gindler, F. M. Alexander, Joseph Pilates, Gerda Alexander and many others. Johann Sebastian Bach was "controversial" when he started his professional career as musician. Albert Einstein was controversial, Sigmund Freud was controversial in the beginning. This "godless jew" was a pain in the ass for all "respectable bourgeois" at the beginning of the 20th century.
John B is right: "It’s one thing to be controversial for the sake of stirring up some noise. It’s another thing entirely to be controversial simply because the ideals that resonate from your core or essence happen to challenge the pedestal many stand upon."
That's the difference between marketing crap and useful knowledge.

[Zig]

You are only controversial from the perspective of someone who ascribes to a single given methodology in its totality (someone who supplants faith with reason). There are a lot of people like this in fitness and martial arts, because perhaps it is in their interest to protect the perceived validity of their pet style or ethos. However, anyone with a more holistic philosophy of life and more acutely of physical training, can easily see the logic and benefit of how you do what you do and why you do it. In todays world it is possible to travel freely and study/integrate Indian, Japanese, Russian and American training and arts into new ideas, new arts and new methodologies of training arrising from their cross pollination and synthesis. This, as far as I can tell, is what you have done.
It's not controversial, it's an integral aspect of being human.
It's an alchemical mind set, a lot of people won't ever get it, because you have to be intellectually curious in order to appreciate the processes involved.
I find your work on Prasara yoga particularly fascinating in this respect.

[RonP]

Congratulations Coach Sonnon! Yes! What a beautiful place for you to be; most controversial personality in fitness. The more they converse, the more they will realize you got it. The more they will realize what they really want is what you got for them. (big smile) Congratulations!

[steg1]

Paradigms in and of themselves don't cause controversy- it's when the paradigms bump into each other that conflict arises. I reckon it's kind of like religion in that respect- when someone has a particular belief system, and looks upon your different beliefs with the shock and horror of someone seeing something out of their understanding. That CST provides fast, undeniable results only makes the conflict greater (the belief systems are that much more different).

I'll admit it- I was a flavor of the month person- that's how I stumbled across CST a few years ago (2005?). The thing that sold me on CST is that, even if you're not as diligent as many of you on this board are in sticking with the routines, the stuff DOES work. Amazingly so, in my opinion.
- Wake up feeling bleh? Do Intuflow/Warrior Wellness- you feel better and awake.
- Want to bulk up? Do a 4/7 for 28 days (or even cheat and take 30). Guess what- bulked up, AND not broken. And TACFIT is nothing short of amazing for building physique.
- Want to be all flowy and flexible? Spend some time following the basic flowfit/bodyflow. I remember using the Bodyflow video for the first time- "Oh my gosh, I'll never be able to do that." Three-four workouts later, "Holy cow! I just did that!" And the stuff is genuinely fun, too- nothing like a few knee switches to make me start smiling- I'll admit it almost makes me feel a bit psycho ("How can this work so well?"), but it DOES instantly improve my mood.

ANYways. My point is that, even with a very short (1 month) experimentation time, I believe that anyone who's honestly TRIED to get started in CST is sold because they FEEL the benefits.

I will remain smug in my belief that following CST principles will keep me in body-heaven for both the short and long run. As for the rest of them, they can generate "controversy" all they want.