# Leadership and PT



## toms3 (4 Oct 2002)

Ok, I have taken a few courses and instructed on a few in my time.  I have noticed that the importance of PT is always stressed..however, not always demeonstrated.  In my opinion, the degree of PT is related to the fitness level of the course leadership.  I am speaking of the Course officer and Course WO.  If you have fit Course officer and/or Course WO the PT will be of a higher standard.  If the opposite is present, the PT will be of a lower standard and the instuctors will be pulled in if they are trying to make the course phyisically challanging...the reason "safety" (safety??).  Anyway...just an observation.  Any thoughts?  Oh...I have observed this in both Reg and Res.

  :sniper:


----------



## combat_medic (4 Oct 2002)

I was on a medical course this summer in CFB Borden, which (obviously) is a pretty slack course PT-wise. Almost every other day we would play soccer, or basketball, or something with the instructors either participating once in a while, or watching from the side lines. I never even SAW my course officer or WO.

My basic and QL3 were very much the same. If the NCO leading PT was in good shape, then the PT would be hard, otherwise, they‘d plan some sort of PT where they could sit on the sidelines and watch.


----------



## armd_recce (5 Oct 2002)

Nothing worse than leadership that can‘t lead, either tactically or physically. The other extreme I have seen is ‘showing off‘, or intentionally working the troops too hard to demonstrate your own fitness level. 
Find a balance, exercise to a common level and have fun. PT can and should be enjoyable, I never saw the point in making it suck. What sort of message does that send?

And am I the only one who would prefer to sing cadence? (helmet on, awaiting the yank lover comments).


----------



## Jarnhamar (5 Oct 2002)

I can‘t see us EVER being alowed to sing songs while running. Can you imagine the amount of work that would go into making sure every allowable song was "proper" and "respectful" and not offending someone or another.  (I wouldnt mind running with a pole and the course number or platoon/coy number).

"The other extreme I have seen is ‘showing off‘, or intentionally working the troops too hard to demonstrate your own fitness level."  I couldn‘t agree more. When someone tries to show off by running their troops int he ground it does not help their PT level one bit, the only thing it does is cause injuries or gives the soldiers some work being creative comming up with fake injuries.


----------



## 49thrca (7 Oct 2002)

Cadence?!

My unit does training in Grayling and I find it humourous to hear the US National Guard to be out singing while they march away from the shacks.

I assume it must actually build confidence.  You‘d have to be crazy or confident to march along singing.

What‘s next?  Skipping and holding hands?

Seriously though....I have to agree with the PT leadership quality concern.  There is nothing worse than seeing leadership fail to acheive the same standards that are set for the troops.

I have been on courses that I have seen staff that try to kill you by running you into the ground and I have seen staff that are simply not up to the standard.

It would appear that there should be some kind of a PT component added to instructor indoc.


----------



## toms3 (7 Oct 2002)

I agree that "showing off" is a problem.  I think that if you are in great shape, sure show it off, but not by killing your troops.  Instead, show off as in "leading by example".  Be an example to the troops, maybe it will motivate them to try a little harder on their own time.

The one thing I don‘t 100% agree with is the comment that PT should be "enjoyable and Fun".  Sure, sports can be enjoyable and fun, however, PT must also be balanced by being challenging and in turn....REWARDING.   A PT session that includes a run and some circuit training might not be considered enjoyable, however, it would be challenging and leave the soldier with a rewarding feeling of accomplishment at the end.   Just have to make sure the PT is appropriate for their abilities.

To sum up my thoughts: to show good leadership when it comes to PT I feel that.... yes....PT should be made "enjoyable and fun" (sports) and also must be balance with challenging/rewarding elements (runs, rucks, circuits) and the "show off running troops into the ground" syndrome must not happen.  

I saw an advertisement in a magazine (for running shoes or power bars) that made a great point, the caption went kinda like this.  "People will walk by a bunch of guys playing basketball and say "hey - that looks like fun",  or watch a street hockey game and say "gee - that looks like fun", but you never hear anyone say that when a runner goes byâ€.

PS....I like your indoc idea, I hear that the new PLQ does have or will have a actual PSP teaching proper PT intruction to the candidates.


----------



## combat_medic (7 Oct 2002)

Hopefully I can make some comments from the pointy end of the stick. I think PT should occasionally be fun, but should still be real to life. Running around in a pair of running shoes and shorts isn‘t realistic training. I‘ve seen many a little scrawny troop who can run like stink, but collapses into a heap when given more than 5 lbs to carry. 

Also, about the "Show Off" PT, I‘ve encountered that as well. On my basic, I was in rotten shape and had a hard time with PT, but having an intructor run/march us until half of us are passing out or puking on the side of the road is ludicrous! If you want to run the mountain maan, go nuts, there‘s the mountain, knock yourself out. If you want US to do it, you may want to build up to that. Yes, lead by example, lead from the front, and be able to keep up, but also be able to motivate through positive (and also negative) reinforcement. 

As for singing: if we could sing songs like "Three German Soldiers Crossed the Line", it would be great, but the CF would probably have a problem with the lyrics.


----------



## toms3 (7 Oct 2002)

Well said Combat Medic.


----------



## armd_recce (7 Oct 2002)

Agreed Digger, I think it‘s a given that fun should = challenging. Not skipping around fun, but rising to the occasion fun. 
I‘d separate the two by defining ‘not fun‘ challenges as those where you are pushed to your limits and have no hope of meeting the standard, and ‘fun‘ challenges as those where you are pushed and through effort can meet the standard. 
It all comes from tailoring the trg to the ability of the troops. 
And I don‘t think PSPs place is instructing the troops in PT, that‘s the leadership‘s job. I think a PT indoc for instrs is a champion idea, and in fact it was done in an ersatz fashion this summer (ie running the plan by PSP to get their comments). But train the instrs, don‘t have PSP staff train the troops... It would be a sad state of affairs if that was necessary!
Yeah I know we‘ll never see it but I still think US cadence sounds keen. I bust some on my discman when I run and it sure makes it more fun.


----------



## combat_medic (7 Oct 2002)

I‘m all for instuctors learning from PSP rather than having PSP run PT. First of all, it shows the instructors leading and participating in the PT (which happens FAR too infrequently for my taste), and there probably aren‘t enough PSP staff to go around.

There‘s nothing more frustrating as an NCM than to see some overweight NCO or Officer who will tell you to go out on PT and not join you, and nothing more inspiring than being led by one of them, who‘s sweating and working alongside you. The senior ranks that the men respect are the ones that lead by example, motivate, and challenge people without overtly frustrating them.


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Oct 2002)

I think the idea behind singing while running is to build up the soldiers lungs, helping them learn to control their breathing and build commradship (sp?).
I think marching and singing helps with moral personally, takes your mind off the pain from the ol‘ catapillar effect.
"slow the pace down"
"Stop running"
"no talking in the ranks" heh

One thing i think we could do without is the 13Km march ‘BFT‘.
Throwing on a pack and forcing someone to drag themselves (if their out of shape) for 13 KMs one a year isnt a way to test someone in my opinion.
The "beep" test is pretty godo to gauge someones stanima but that other test with walking up and down the 3 steps for 15 minutes is a complete joke.


----------



## Pikache (7 Oct 2002)

13k ruck march is off the reserve basics now.

At least I didn‘t have to do it this summer.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (7 Oct 2002)

Ghost, on the Engineers QL3 we do everything with our pennant ( which is composed of our colours and one of the many battles in which the enginners participated).

WRT ruck marches IMHO 13 km might be a bit much to do in one go as pt but I think that at least a 5km march with ~30lbs of kit should be no problem for anyone in the cf, I used to do it every week while I was on my 3‘s course.

WRT to candences, I think that it should be allowed, I know that when I was up at CFSME this year, at least one reserve course had a course song and so did the French Reg. Force course.


----------



## portcullisguy (8 Oct 2002)

I am presently doing a basic course on weekends, which began Oct. 4 and will contnue into March.

Our first PT was Sunday morning, at 0550 hrs, and we wore boots, PT clothing, and webbing, marching only a short distance and back again, and then dragging a fellow recruit across the parade square by the wrists (or by my arm pits, in my case... f***ing armour moron).

Following the PT, the course WO gave us a pep talk by telling us that this was nothing, and that the BFT will require us to do the 13 km ruck march, and then do the fellow soldier drag afterwards... a distance of 30 metres, I believe he said.  He made it sound as if this will be happening by the end of our course.

So... I am going to start ruck marching between course weekends just to build up to it!  Yay!


----------



## toms3 (8 Oct 2002)

Good Idea Portcullisguy.   I sent you a private message regarding it.


----------



## Jarnhamar (8 Oct 2002)

After the 13 Km march you have to carry someone over your shoulders for 100 meters.


----------



## Recce41 (9 Oct 2002)

PT is not an issue if you are willing to doit on you own. Some of us have to do to where we are. As for the soldier drag, Who the F*** is the Course WO, where are the RSS staff. That course WO needs to be kick off the Planet, sorry but thats the Res mentality. If he‘s Reg he really needs to be kicked off the Planet but first in the Nuts. That is why I left the Regt. in the first place some real ****s getting to that rank of SNR NCO.


----------



## toms3 (10 Oct 2002)

Good point Recce41 (did I just say that).  That‘s my feeling.  People should not expect the army (reg or Res) to get them in shape.  It is a reason to get and stay in shape but that‘s it.  You have to do it on your own time.  Crap...never mind the military....everyone should be doing it on their own time.  

Regarding the "soldier drag", I have seen what "Portcullisguy" discribed before...I think its done along the lines of a casualty carry, (kinda like what the firemen and cops do with a life size dummy...hey that sounds funny...what do you think Recce41...just joking).


----------



## portcullisguy (12 Oct 2002)

I‘ve done the drag twice before, both times for police physical testing (PREP test).  You drag a dummy weighing 70kg (a little over 150 lbs) a distance of about 15m (45 feet).  The dummy is dragged around a pylon and back to where you started.  You can drag it by the wrists or under the arms only.  Sounds easy, but you are doing this after spending about 2 minutes running a fairly intense obstacle course, juping over a 4 foot fence, up and down stairs, etc., and doing a push/pull/restraint simulation.

The soldier drag I did on Sunday was a longer distance (and with a heavier, live person), but the lead-up PT work was minimal.  I expected my thighs to burn but this didn‘t happen.  I was more worried about kicking the poor guy accidentally.

The most annoying thing about the PT last Sunday was that I had just gotten my boots very shiny and polished, and then I scuffed the ****  out of them when I was dragged across the parade square.

Next time I‘m being dragged, I‘ll make sure the toes of my boots are off the floor!

I am still trying to buff the scratches out.


----------



## bossi (13 Oct 2002)

Okay, sports fans, I‘ve got a couple of points - bear with me.

First of all, "vocal exercises" during a run actually puts additional strain on your lungs (i.e. if you just chug along in silence, your lungs are only working to keep your legs moving - if you‘re chanting a "jodey", as they‘re called in the U.S., or even if you‘re just talking to each other, your lungs have to work harder).  It‘s a simple trick, and you‘ll get more benefit from a loud run than a quiet one.

I‘ve already made my second point:  It‘s not really "singing" during a run - chanting a "jodey" helps keep everybody in step (the caterpillar effect was already, fondly mentioned ... chuckle)

Now, as to the shape, size and form of PT - the LFCA CIMIC Detachment has adopted "Ultimate" as their team sport.  During CIMIC trg this summer in Edmonton, participants were surprised to discover you can actually work up quite a sweat playing it (basically, you end up concentrating on the game so much, you don‘t realise you‘re actually running "wind sprints" - a.k.a. interval training.  By the end of two weeks, those who had played regularly had to admit they‘d actually done quite a bit of running, but had some fun, too!)

It‘s in this same vein that I‘d mention team sports vice individualism - RMC recently adopted a much more team-oriented approach to their sports program, instead of individual "lone wolf" sports.

From personal experience, I‘ve found hockey to be the best physical fitness sport (and I‘ve even got scientific data to prove it, which should please a certain overly critical participant to this forum.  However, I‘ll have to dig it out - I published an article in the LFCA newspaper back in the 90‘s).

Hockey is "war on ice", derived from lacrosse being "The Little War" (used to settle lesser tribal disputes, the goals might have been miles apart separated by woods and water, more than one ‘ball‘ would have been in play, and fatalities were not unusual).  There‘s a famous quote, to the effect that "Roman exercises were bloodless wars, and their wars were bloody exercises".  I‘ve seen a lot more sweat and blood playing hockey than during ruck marches.

My "prejudice" towards team sports, and trying to have some fun during P.T. training, is due to the many years I spent in recruiting.  I‘d bust my butt getting keen young Canadians to enlist, only to have them brutalised by idiots mascarading as instructors - the end result was that too many recruits would quit, instead of being taught how to have fun while soldiering.

The bottom line remains:  "The more you sweat in peace, the less you bleed during war".

However, there‘s no QR&O, CFAO or DAOD that says it‘s forbidden to have some fun during P.T.

(and, if anybody disagrees, then feel free to lace on the skates and we‘ll settle it the ‘old-time‘ way, on the ice or in the alley, as Major Conn Smythe alluded)

Ironically, it‘s Thanksgiving weekend, and I‘m on my way to the gym - dryland training for hockey - a necessary evil, I have to admit.  C.U. there


----------



## toms3 (13 Oct 2002)

Bossi

I agree that sports are an inportant part of military PT.  Its a fun way to get fit without knowing you are.  However, its not the only cardio PT.  I have spoken to many a new recruite after they have completed their course...and many of them stated disappointment in the fact that there was no hard PT.  They show up on a course expecting to be challanged with more than soccer or volley ball.  

I feel a mix of sports, running, rucking, strenthing PT is required.  I don‘t think hockey is going to prepair you to carry a ruck across the sand.    

Hmmm...I wonder if the JTF has a hockey requirement during selection!


----------

