I Hate “functional training.”

I hate the term “functional training.” Not because I don't believe in training for function. Quite the opposite. I hate the term because everything is functional. In fact, I cringe every time somebody says, "Yeah, I'm swinging this kettlebell around because I'm doing "functional training." 

Muscle has a function. Strength has a function. A squat has a function. A curl has a function. Running, rowing, rucking, carrying, climbing and pressing all have functions.
So when someone tells me an exercise is “more functional,” my first question is simple:
Functional for what? That's where I think we need a better term.

I call it "Operational Training".

​Operational Training s is the ability to use your physical capabilities for a specific purpose. It isn't about making an exercise look complicated. It isn't about balancing on unstable surfaces, combining five movements into one, or making traditional strength training look less traditional. It's about developing a body that can perform when performance is required.

That means building muscle and strength.
It means developing conditioning and work capacity.
It means carrying weight.
It means moving yourself through space.
It means being able to continue producing useful work when you're tired.

And it means having enough physical capacity that the demands of real life don't exceed your preparation. That's the difference.

Build. Burn. Carry.

Build the physical hardware. Burn develops the engine. Carry teaches you to put that hardware and that engine to work under load. This is why I don't believe you have to choose between bodybuilding and conditioning. You don't have to choose between getting stronger and becoming harder to fatigue. You can build a powerful body and then teach it how to operate. That's what Operational Training means to me. Not training that simply looks functional.

Training with a purpose.

Because the goal isn't to perform functional exercises. The goal is to become a more capable human being.