PDA

View Full Version : The Crossfit Total


Steve Shafley
12-14-2006, 06:22 AM
Great idea. The lifts involved are easy to perform, and could really be the foundation you could lay everything on.

However, what the results on the WOD blog comments are illustrating is:

1. You don't build strength accidentally (as in a random performance of the lifts, or similar lifts, for various rep loads, doesn't program for max strength)

2. There is a long road ahead of many here, even with Rip giving a lot of input on the programming of the slow lifts for the WOD.

3. In my opinion, you need to have some kind of gathering together for the XF total. Me doing it in my basement is going to significantly different than me doing it in front of other "competitors". This type of gathering would also help cement proper form and mechanics. Because a 1RM loaded squat is completely different than a "mature" BW squat.

Comments on #1:

Many have commented on this. It's really quite basic. There is a certain level of strength you are going to acquire going through the motions. After that, it takes a dedicated program to increase it. By dedicated, I am asserting that you will, indeed, need to specialize on these movements to the detriment of metabolic conditioning.

This is particularly applicable for those coming from a endurance background, marathoners, tri-athletes, etc.

Otherwise, you are going to plateau.

I really like that phrase. "You don't build strength accidentally." This is applicable across a number of different types of workout regimens, from your typical gym rat "curl and bench" routine, to the WOD. If you aren't focused on a goal, it's not just going to happen.

Comments on #2:

The continual evolution of the WOD. When you can encompass everything and call it XF, then when is anything not Crossfit? There seems to be a continual broadening of the types of training and activities that are included under the XF umbrella. When your personal WOD looks like a Westside Barbell routine, then it's not XF anymore.

Robb had a very interesting idea when he called for a WOD comparision, so I went back and looked.

There is still a focus on metcons. I do see more chippers in the last year or so, as opposed to some of the more focused WOD (less exercises, more rounds or reps). There is about 2x-3x the frequency of lower rep work, which seems to shake out to a roughly 2x weekly programming for 1-2 heavy lifts, which aren't usually repeated except on a monthly basis.

I seem to see less gymnastics derived movements programmed, at least in the last month.

Interestingly enough, Ernie Frantz' powerlifting routines kind of looked like this:

Monday: Squat Assistance
Tuesday: Bench Assistance
Thursday: Deadlift Assistance
Saturday: Total day for the powerlifts, fully geared up.

I might have the days wrong, but he did successfully use the "one meet a week" kind of situation to prep his PL club.

Mike ODonnell
12-14-2006, 07:23 AM
The continual evolution of the WOD. When you can encompass everything and call it "Brand A", then when is anything not "Brand A"?

Going the route of not using names, but I was thinking that same thing as Steve mentioned. I don't think anyone can come out and say Brand B's program is not as good as Brand A's program, when Brand B may have a written down 12 week progression, and Brand A's program is not known day to day and can be changed at any time. It's just to open sourced.

It should say Brand B is good for X, and Brand A is good for Y. X & Y being different types of goals or performance endeavors (strength, powerlifters, rowing, bowlers..whatever). But again, was just a thought I had and don't want this to turn into anything more than that.

Steve Shafley
12-14-2006, 10:19 AM
I think for GPP "Brand A" is hard to beat. But, being able to crush the benchmarks in a Brand A workout does not mean things are going to translate to a particular sport, unless that workout targets the particular qualities for that sport.

Brand A.

Heh.

Good call, though, because you can apply the same kind of criticisms to inappropriate applications of the olympic lifts, WSB programs, 5x5, Hypertrophy-Specific

Mike ODonnell
12-14-2006, 10:54 AM
I think for GPP "Brand A" is hard to beat.

I agree on that.....no arguements here. But of course it's only as effective as how you apply it to your specific needs and goals. So if I use a workout from Brand A once a week and supplement the rest of the week with other Brand B..C..D routines, am I now only doing the Brand A workout? Are all my results all from Brand A? I don't see how. I also chuckle when I hear "Hey, look a functional workout in the magazine....or the movies.....they are doing Brand A...Rocky does Brand A....Olympians do Brand A....My math teacher does Brand A....everyone stole it from Brand A..." Ummmm....doing a pushup doesn't make it a Brand A copyrighted workout, or using a dumbbell/sandbag/pullup bar/oly bar doesn't mean that either. I think that goes back to having an open source ever changing program that can take credit for anything that is now applied.

I am glad there is a Brand A that brings excellent programs for GPP and unique combinations to light for the better off of the general public's fitness level. I am glad there are Brand As, Bs, Cs who publicly show and share their training philosophies on the internet for free so people like me can learn and learn and learn. Although I just someday someone will come see my training business and say "Hey you stole Brand A's idea" because I had a dumbbell in the room and it will probably send me over the edge. lol

Pierre Auge
12-21-2006, 08:56 PM
I think the great thing about Brand A, is that it being Open Source allows a revisionary model of advancement. The only issue I see is that we only have Brand A
and we need to have the same model applied within a
Brand B and
Brand C

or even sub brands maybe such as Brand A Rev.0.001A
The big argument these days is that Brand A is the only Brand doing what it is doing, which I have to agree it is. There is no alternative Brand B which uses the same open source operating model as Brand A.

I think in order for Brand A to improve significantly is to have Brand B competing with it in its own game!

Sorry for the giberish I'm stupid!

Secondly both Brand A and Brand B NEED to start using data collection, collation, and analysis rather than just opinionative analysis!!!

Anyway Merry Christmas I'm off to visit the famdamly for the weekend.

Neal Winkler
12-22-2006, 06:13 AM
I like the idea of the total too, but if the whole point is too test one's overall functional strength capacity, I'm wondering if the front squat would of been a better choice since far more likely to be found in nature. The past few years I've been an odd object lifter for my job (lot attendant at Home Depot), and the lifts that I have found are required the most are front squat, deadlift, hang clean and snatch pulls, presses, pushing and pulling that would be akin to sled pushing and pulling, farmers walks, and zercher type lifts where you use the knees/legs for assistance. I can't think of one instance where I've ever had to use a back squat, it's just not all that practical. Although I suppose since you can do more wieght it will make you able to lift more opposed to a front squat, and it's not like it's that far of a stretch just to use a front type squat when you encounter it in the real world.

Robb Wolf
12-28-2006, 09:59 AM
I like the idea of the total too, but if the whole point is too test one's overall functional strength capacity, I'm wondering if the front squat would of been a better choice since far more likely to be found in nature. The past few years I've been an odd object lifter for my job (lot attendant at Home Depot), and the lifts that I have found are required the most are front squat, deadlift, hang clean and snatch pulls, presses, pushing and pulling that would be akin to sled pushing and pulling, farmers walks, and zercher type lifts where you use the knees/legs for assistance. I can't think of one instance where I've ever had to use a back squat, it's just not all that practical. Although I suppose since you can do more wieght it will make you able to lift more opposed to a front squat, and it's not like it's that far of a stretch just to use a front type squat when you encounter it in the real world.

Neal-
Good observations. Another question I have, and I touched on this elsewhere, IF a foundational strength base is requisite to smoking CF WOD's is a randomized approach to strength development the best way to go? I'd argue no...so where does that leave CrossFit? Does one need a non-randomized foundational strength base to excel at "Constantly varied, if not randomized functional movements performed at high intensity..."?

Lots of fun stuff to play around with here.

Mike ODonnell
12-28-2006, 10:26 AM
I'd say...keep it simple:

1) Lift compound movements heavy
2) Do sprint/interval work
3) Add in Sport/Activity specific training
4) Do consistently, monitor progress and increase volume

What more does one really need?

Elliot Royce
12-28-2006, 11:20 AM
Well, for what it's worth, my observation would be that there is nothing magic about CF but that it has 3 clear benefits for me:

first, the way the non-strength training WODs are constructed and with the time component, it forces you to go all out in a way that most, non-coached workouts do not. It's that intensity that creates growth. Now, I'm someone who needs his butt kicked so maybe for more hardcore guys it's not so important.

second, and related, the WODs are just damn efficient timewise.

And, third, the WODs continually surprise me by unearthing weaknesses. Again, perhaps if I were an elite athlete, I wouldn't have any weaknesses or have fixed them, but right now I've got plenty to work on. Case in point, overhead squats are a complete pain due to inadequate shoulder flexibility. Never was a problem just lifting weights.

Without the WODs, I'd be more inclined to just lift for strength. I find it so much easier to apply maximum effort to lifting a heavy weight than to rowing or pullups.

Not saying that this is true for everyone, and as I posted elsewhere I'm constantly supplementing with other exercises.

Craig Cooper
12-29-2006, 03:59 PM
IF a foundational strength base is requisite to smoking CF WOD's, is a randomized approach to strength development the best way to go? I'd argue no...so where does that leave CrossFit? Does one need a non-randomized foundational strength base to excel at "Constantly varied, if not randomized functional movements performed at high intensity..."?

This is the question that plagues me constantly, and why I think it's silly that CF refuses to document results, insisting that the black box rules all. I think that CF is great, but it would be great to see what kind of results people are seeing from doing just the WOD on the main page. I think that it's pretty safe to say that if you take someone who is deconditioned and throw WODs at them as their main source of exercise that it will produce a level of overall fitness far greater than a traditional cardio + strength training program would, which is great if you don't have any specific goals, but what if you do? Even if your goal is to smoke as many WODs as you can, I think that some degree of specialization and organized programming is required. I remember Robb saying in a different thread that those who produce the best WOD times came to CF as an accomplished athlete, so the question once again is which program produced these results, CF or their previous endeavors?

Pierre Auge
12-29-2006, 06:56 PM
Does one need a non-randomized foundational strength base to excel at "Constantly varied, if not randomized functional movements performed at high intensity..."?

Robb,
I think the issue is this, NO ONE is presenting broad measurable "data" and that includes everyone of us. Until that changes all we're doing is opinionation of observation.

I'm working on changing that, gimme some time bros...

Steve Liberati
12-29-2006, 08:40 PM
Sure there is no program out there that is perfect. The trick is finding a program that not only has merit, but most importantly works well for the individual. In other words, it must be effective, challenging and enjoyable all at the same time. I've tried many program over the years that were effective and challenging but very few of them were fun (where I looked forward to my next workout). And as fitness is my only sport, having fun in the process takes precedence.

So despite its weaknesses, Crossfit will remain my preferred method of training (at least for now).

Mike ODonnell
12-30-2006, 08:58 AM
Consistency is the biggest factor in my opinon for gains.....if you follow a simple program religiously of basic lifts...you will see great gains....so if your workout keeps you motivated, makes you do it consistently and lets you increase volume you will get results....it's that simple. Crossfit does a good job at keeping people motivated day in and out, and that is why it is successful. A sense of community is always going to bring people together and working hard day in and out. Curves gets people in and out too....because it provides a sense of community for people who need it. A workout doesn't need to be a business to get results. You pick your Brand A...B..C... workout depending on what your goals are and what motivates you.

As far as measuring results....it's hard to do that for Brand A since most people do hybrid versions with their own ME/sport specific and additional workouts on top of the WOD. So technically Brand A can not take credit for gains unless their test group did their exact workout day in and out with no additional outside programs.....you can't just group every version of exercise and call it your own....Just cause I wrote a book doesn't mean I published everything in the library. Just my $0.02. In the end...some programs work for some....some work for others....so Brands need to just accept fitness as organic, a life in itself...every evolving with influences from everywhere....and stop trying to take control and credit and exist harmonously with it. Health and Fitness is a journey.....not a contest to see who is right.

Steve Liberati
12-30-2006, 12:57 PM
well said Mike and some very good points. Especially like the last sentence you wrote.

"Health and Fitness is a journey.....not a contest to see who is right."

Simply put, in the end the best theory in the world can't touch good ol' hardwork. So the take home message should be "Quit thinking about it and just get out there and DO IT!"

Robb Wolf
01-03-2007, 07:28 AM
Pierre-
I might be missing something, if so hammer me on this but my main point is
if one is looking at how to succeed at a given sport and in this case I'm
thinking about the Sport of Fitness:CrosFit, then we need to consider the
full developmental process of the top performers. The top performers have
come to the game with an impressive strength base, conversely, the greatest
limiting factor with regards to performance is strength. This makes sense
in that if one is "very" strong one may rely on smaller motorneurons for a
given work output, thus reducing lactate production and relying on fatigue
resistant fiber types.

That's one issue. Another issue, and this may largely be my own thing but CF
makes the claim of the fittest folks around and puts forth a framework that
recommends metabolic conditioning as the basis for athletic development
(see CFJ "what is Fitness?"). CrossFit is certainly an open, evolving and
adaptable system but I want to make the point publically I guess about the
need to prioritize strength development in order to reach the highest
ranks of CF performance. When the CFJ issue discussing the CFT came out I
think Coach Glassman's wording was something to the effect "Rip and I were
talking about the need for foundational strength..." right on. Good stuff. I'm just not going to let some kind of Orwellian shift occur such that one day we read on the CF front page "It is the CrossFit contention that development of absolute strength qualities is paramount to sporting success..." or something similarly hoity-toity. I am making the point that Coach Rutherford articulated this observation first in the "community driven" programing generally known as CrossFit.

Another issue. In the current CFJ Prof. Kilgore asks the question "How can CF simultaneously improve strength AND aerobic capacity (VO2 max)?" Prof. Kilgore then details strength training and aerobic training as stand alone entities and then contrasts this with CF programming which garners improvements in both qualities. all good stuff but then he concedes that one will not make as good strength gains following CF as stand alone strength training. Additionally he makes the point that short sprint oriented training enhances aerobic capacity while degrading strength less than traditional "cardio". Again this is good stuff but the recommendation to use intervals to improve aeorobic capacity with minimum impact upon max power production is made in the supposedly worthless NSCA Essentials of Strength & Conditioning! I'm at the gym right now and do not have the reference, I will dig up the page number later. Without reverting to a scientific study perhaps some logic and intuition can help here. if you have a purely strength trained individual or aerobicizer they will likely suck at CF because they have never TRAINED specific to CF. Take an individual who olifts a few days per week and performs sprint intervals a few days per week and you have someone who can walk into a CF style workout and do comparatively well. After a few weeks of doing mixed modal-CF training this individual will crush. One might argue this individual is fitter and that might be correct but it is without question this individual has gotten better at doing mixed modal activities! the SAID principle is not everything but it does describe a lot.

Now am I saying Cf programming is bad or ineffective? Absolutely not. I use it daily in my training practice and it is without a doubt amazingly effective and perhaps most importantly, time efficient. I've seen it transform people and improve their quality of life immeasurably (Dan if you are reading this what do you want to bet this will fall under the category "damming by faint praise?). The point I want to make is when a claim of producing elite fitness is made full disclosure is important for intellectual integrity. If you have some walk-on Olifting studs transform into CF monsters...where does the attribution go? Natalie Woolfolk can Olift like crazy and due to her gymnastics background can still perform free standing HSPU's. She is 6months of CF training away from burying every female on the planet. My point however is just because she is a (potential) top CF athlete...is that because of CF? Did CF develop her strength base? No. So now we have the CF total...and going back to my original post, how should one implement the CF Total to post the best score at the Sport of Fitness? It's not by randomization...and randomization is a cornerstone of the Cf credo. That is fine for metabolic conditioning, not for strength development.

Thoughts and comments appreciated.

Josh Whiting
01-03-2007, 08:21 AM
I suppose an imrportant question is what is the best way to met con while having the minimum effect on strength (and for athletes allowing the maximum amount of practise). The answer to this could be a number of things: Intervals based on a single activity (i.e hill sprints/track work), the CF Girls, Bodyweights GPP training or any number of other activities I am sure we could all think of.

In my experience my ability to work at a high intensity in sport has always been highest when I have incuded some sort of single activity interval training a couple of times a week. I am not saying that this is all you need, but my fitness drops considerably without it.

As far as strength goes I am not too sure. Until recently I had not really done any serious strength training for a while (until April 06), due to spending all my time playing sport. I know I could BLDL 220kg at a bodyweight of 90kg in April solely from doing the WOD for 4 months, however I found the strain on my body too much to do the amount of sports training I do now. My conditioning was not as high as it is now through almost exclusively playing sport with a couple of weekly run thrown in.

At the moment I am breaking my training up into strength training and single effort conditioning with a small amount of bodyweight GPP work. In a few months I should have a personal opinion on whether this is better for me than just the WOD in terms of strength development (for me personally). Although I think it should be more effective time will tell.

I'll finish by saying that this is not a knock on crossfit, it's just that I found it hard to train mma at a high intensity on a daily basis while doing the WOD. I'm not having this problem now and I'm training 9 - 11 times a week.

Mike ODonnell
01-03-2007, 09:17 AM
A real study is to take deconditioned people of ordinary life and put them on different programs to measure output. Some may have better strength, some better endurance, some better scores on a CF workout, etc. But one program will not maximize all. If you are using athletes, it's easier to train them as they already have a strong base of strength and work load capacity. The people who say they get big strength on CF have never done serious strength programs in the first place (or in a long time), so how is that fair to compare? How do you know that a basic powerlifting program would of gotten you better results? No one knows until they do it.

I agree with Robb on that best CF scores are people with a solid strength background. I bet if you took someone with a strength background and had them do simple sprinting drills 2x a week, after a month or so they would put up great numbers in a CF workout. Now take someone doing CF only and test their strength in 1 month, it won't compare to someone who powerlifts. I think it's great to have all sorts of variables in training, O-lifts, powerlifting, explosiveness, metabolic conditioning....etc.

For me it goes back to fitness programs are not supposed to be this complicated. Give me 2 people.....one does CF only workouts.....one does a mix of 5x5 and sprints.....chances are they both end up with good results. Consistency is what breed results. So if a program keeps someone consistent and going hard then they will see great results. One Olympian may do workout A, one may do workout B and another workout C....but they are still all Olympians.

Pierre Auge
01-03-2007, 12:40 PM
Robb,
CrossFit wont make you better at anything, but the "application" of anything!

Do you see where I'm going now?

Robb Wolf
01-03-2007, 07:11 PM
Robb,
CrossFit wont make you better at anything, but the "application" of anything!

Do you see where I'm going now?
LOL! No sir...no more clarity from that! Is it that one is optimally "well rounded"? Ready for anything?

Steve Shafley
01-03-2007, 07:38 PM
CrossFit wont make you better at anything, but the "application" of anything!

How so, Pierre? I am always such a doubting Thomas.

There are "meta-principles" underlying training. XF does a good job of covering some of these, of that I have no doubt. There are some that aren't covered, the big one being maximal strength, with Gregg engaging Rippetoe and Kilgore to help bring it up to speed.

But, bringing it up to speed is changing the programming dramatically. When is it not XF? When it's no longer a WOD from Santa Cruz? Because today's WOD (Back squat 5, 5, 5, 5, 5) really isn't. The 5x5 method is very old, and was popularized by Bill Starr in "The Strongest Shall Survive" (incidentally, Bill Starr was one of Mark Rippetoe's mentors, and Mark sells all of Bill's books for him) How can you call 5x5 "Crossfit"? It's not.

I do have a strong doubt that XF makes the "application" of "anything" better. Many things, yeah, but everything? No.

In addition, the definition of XF is always in flux, like Robb pointed out above.

When discussing this, we need to draw the line. The definition is sufficiently vague to cover almost anything, yet there are people training out there who use similar methods and have never heard of XF.

I still disdain Gregg's statement that specialization punishes the athlete in most sports. Simple observation disproves that.

Sprinters? Specialized
Gymnasts? Specialized
Jumpers? Specialized
Throwers? Specialized
Climbers? Specialized
Lifters? Specialized

Look at that list, all of those sports are something XF claims to have drawn something from.

Combat sports? If the WOD detracts from skills training (and for many, it will) is it appropriate?

What XF is struggling against, right now, is the fact that it's being relegated to "tool" status. It's appropriate to pull out when you need that tool, but it's not appropriate to use at all times. For some reason Gregg feels this is a complete threat to the entire program, so much that he's got to act unsavory if his golden child is criticized.

Pierre Auge
01-03-2007, 08:15 PM
Maybe! I'm not going to make this easy on you...

I'm going to try and make this as apparent as possible without giving it away. I'm not so bright so I want you to understand my point not just hear it.

The idea I'm coming from is the question of why do we train? What's the purpose? Is training simply the progression toward a goal? Or is it something like Mark Rippeteo's (similar to Art Devany's) thought of "Human beings are not normal in the absence of hard physical activity" and that training is the simulation of natural human effort?

What if such hard physical labour is the place where the skills in which we so covet are meant to be applied? I believe this to be the case... We aren't meant to train for the sake of training. We are meant to work for the sake of being productive toward survival, for lack of a better term.

So why do I consider a high volume max effort progressive overload type of exercise as practice? My opinion here is that we're naturally meant to function this way and are therefore are capable of it for farely extended efforts. I think our aerobic capacity is meant for two things, running away when we didn't realise it was time to go south a week earlier in October. And working really hard a little bit at a time throughout our days everyday... We are practicing our natural tendency toward a required heavy physical effort.

Training I think looks alot more like those events in the natural world where we are using the skills we aquire through our normal daily activities in a scenario where they must peak. Predatory activities for example require all of the skills that CrossFit sells itself as producing.

I think CrossFit type training is in one way the practical simulation of predatory behavior. It isn't so much that predatory behavior produces predatory skill, but that predatory skill which should be inherent in our physiology doesn't become expressed without a need to express it... This is just one example of what I think this type of mixed modality exercise actually does.

Take for example Natalie Woolfolk, is her ability as an athlete the natural expression of the activities of her daily routine? And are her skills only being expressed under the stress of competition at max efforts? Is it natural to express ones maximum effort only when one is prepapared and ready to do so? Or is it natural to express ones maximum effort when one least expects it?

Now do you see where I'm going?

Steve Shafley
01-03-2007, 08:37 PM
We are on sufficiently different wavelengths to really not be talking about the same subject here.

With that last post, I can see where you are coming from more effectively, and can understand your viewpoint, at least a bit better.

You are saying that XF-style mixed modality mimics the activities of a Hunter Gatherer sufficiently enough to allow for optimal gene expression, no?

Jonathan Reik
01-03-2007, 09:03 PM
A little fired-up today, eh Robb? Nice to see.

Shaf, as always, wielding Occam's razor and nicely summarizing the current state of affairs...

I couldn't agree more (with Shaf)... in fact, when I stumbled onto the website, I thought that I had found the golden child, er rather, the golden program... cardiovascular fitness without sacrificing strength... a holy grail of sorts that trained all aspects... I watched the videos of Amundson, Josh Everett, and Twardokens... and said "yeah... exactly!" The "ultimate program" idea was so tantalizing that it was kinda disappointing for me to come to the realization that it isn't the end-all and be-all... and that it hadn't necessarily created those monsters that I wanted to emulate. I can imagine it would be harder for someone with much more of a vested interest in it. And I still think that it's a worthy goal. (faint praise?)

As I see it, Robb's point seems to be that if you took untrained 18-year-old identical twins and

-trained Twin A for 3 years with olympic lifts, supporting slow lifts (squats/dl's, presses, etc) through a periodized program, and added some sprint intervals... and then put them on CF for six months

-and trained Twin B for 3-1/2 years of CF

that Twin A would handily beat Twin B at "Helen" or "Fran" or "Cindy".

(Does specialization in CrossFit punish the CrossFit athlete?)

Pierre, I'm still not quite sure where you're going. I'll take a stab at it... are you saying that:

-humans are evolved to strongly exert themselves in many different ways
-Crossfit forces its practicioners to strongly exert themselves in many different ways (as opposed to say, just doing Oly lifts and some sprints)
-and therfore, following the crossfit program can allow us to best express our genotypes in the phenotype that we've evolved to produce

Kinda like CrossFit is the paleo diet of exercise?

If so, it seems like you and Robb are talking about two different things.

Jonathan Reik
01-03-2007, 09:04 PM
Whoops, Shaf already said it... too slow. :)

Pierre Auge
01-03-2007, 10:26 PM
I'm not disagreeing with Robb, thats the first thing that has to be understood...

I think that Robb, if he references the article I wrote and sent him will know where I'm going... Steve and Jonathan yes and maybe not I don't know I'm just thinking out typed!

I'm going to use the word again - Application.

I think the application has to be there, if like Robb said we are trying to specialize in the application of "The Sport of Fitness/CrossFit" than we have to come to the conclusion that this activity is necessary to be good at it...

Robb is the one who said it! Natalie Woolfolk can Olift like crazy and due to her gymnastics background can still perform free standing HSPU's. She is 6months of CF training away from burying every female on the planet.

Yes she is 6months of CF training away from burying every female on the planet. I totally agree she is 6 months of CF training away from burying every female on the planet.

Totally! So your saying at some point someone will have to CrossFit in order to be good at CrossFit... And someone will have to Olift to be a good Olifter, and someone will have to sprint to be a good sprinter! But neither will be the best at the other we all agree on this point.

My point is this: whatever you're good at you will have an opposing counter balancing reaction. She wont be such a good Olifter at that point which would be a terrible loss to the sport... IMHO

Who wants to bet that Josh Everett can smoke me on Fran?

I'll take that bet!!!

But who wants to bet that he can smoke me on Cindy? Bets anyone?

I'm not saying I'm as good of a CrossFitter as Josh (I'm not). My point is that it balances out. Eventually your not going to be good at something, that is until you start doing it, with me its thinking, I'm not good at that!

I think the point is that CrossFit is going to be as effective an S&C program as the people who apply it! There is that word again "application"... I like Socrates for the fact that he had his students purposefully define all of the words they used.

And I try to apply this (without getting my head cut-off like they did)
Training = Constantly Varied, Functional Movement at high Intensity
Practice = Consistent, Specific Movement at low Intensity (sounds like 5x5)

See how I give myself a means by which to quantify myself?
Now do you see where I'm going?

Anyway I'm stupid but CrossFit is going to look like CrossFit is going to look. And you know what, its broad definition allows it to do so.

I already regret posting this because I have forgotten my point.......
See what I mean I'm bad at thinking!

-Ross Hunt
01-03-2007, 10:49 PM
Why take our bearings for training from 'nature' in the sense that's meant by De Vany and Cordain and geneticists, anyway?

If we accept that, as it plays out in training, what's healthy and what's fit (for any particular sport) are very seldom precisely the same, then 'nature' looks like it's the proper standard for health, and it looks like other things are the standards for fitness.







In other news, lifting heavy things is fun.

Steve Shafley
01-04-2007, 05:52 AM
To be good at a benchmark WOD you have to practice the benchmark WOD. There is no doubt about it. This is why XF HQ continually issues those challenges I find ludicrous.

I could issue a similar challenge. I could challenge you to squat 495# then eat an entire large, meat-lovers pizza, with thick crust, and drink a six pack of Arrogant Bastard Ale then do 20 rep squats with 315#. For time. Do you think any of the Santa Cruz female XF trainers could do that (or even the male trainers, for that matter), much less beat me in a timed competition? I have my doubts.

That'd be one hell of a spectacle, though.

The specificity of the challenge makes it a losing proposition for anybody but an athlete who's prepared for the challenge by practicing for the specific challenge, whether by inclination or by deliberate choice.

I could bring someone into my limited basement gym, and absolutely bury them with a workout. Does that mean "Basement Shaf-Fit" is untouchable as a workout program? No, it doesn't.

There have not been enough real world competitions or enough world class athletes developed by XF to make that determination, yet. I'm not saying it's not going to happen, and, once again, I'm not denigrating the XF tools as being extremely effective when used for the right purpose, I'm just saying that it's not the only game in town.

Once again, I'm off on a tangent that's not addressing what Pierre wrote, rather my own vague and incoherent agenda. Sorry.

Mike ODonnell
01-04-2007, 06:31 AM
Same arguement seems to come about. I respect Pierre to have his opinion, and I like some of the XF workouts, but to that end will not take XF as the best workout for anyone route. Does that mean that I wouldn't have a XF style metcon day for a client? No. But it means I have a programming idea in mind before I start training someone. XF is like any other coach out there, leanring from others programming and adjusting. Nothing wrong with that. I just don't agree with anyone who says it was all their idea and it's the only way to go....especially when you don't even know what the next workout is going to be.

PS. OD-Fit T-shirts are now available.

Chris Goodrich
01-04-2007, 02:14 PM
Let me try and summarize/synthesize some of the critiques of crossfit from this thread as a launching point for some questions:

A beginner following tthe CF WOD will relatively quickly progress from novice to intermediate phase (using Rippetoe's definitions of training phases) because they don't need complex periodization. However, as they reach the intermediate phase their progress will slow due to the lack of periodization and eventually stall, preventing them from reaching the elite level of Crossfit (and possibly not even the advanced level). However, a trainee who has reached the advanced or elite level of strength through periodized training who then adopts the WOD would quickly be able to reach elite status at Crossfit. Is that about correct (leaving aside for the moment issues of credit or the use of the WOD score as a measure of ultimate fitness)?

If this critique is correct, what is the best path for a trainee without a strong strength training background who nevertheless is trying to maximize Crossfit-style performace? Is the recent addition of more strenght oriented WODs enough? Is the black box better? Or something like cycling the mass gain program for a few months followed by the WOD for a few and back again?

Pierre Auge
01-04-2007, 02:21 PM
Now we're all on the same page I think. Steve, Mike, we're looking at the same thing just from different perpectives.

Your right your workouts would burry me. But I could squat 245# then eat an entire large, meat-lovers pizza, with thick crust, and drink a six pack of Arrogant Bastard Ale then do 20 rep squats with 185#. And I may give you a go, in a timed competition? You'd be surprised buds!!!

As long as we both agree that I weigh 140lbs...

Hey I think we may have something here for the first annual Performance Menu Competitive Challenge, anybody with me?

Whatever makes us better at things we want to get better at... At the same time standardized tests must be used. Like a marathon you either win or you don't. Or Powerlifting you either lifted it or you didn't, relative to your weight class you won. But in this case I don't think Fran is a bad standardised test. If at 140lbs I do it faster than you with the same load than I think you need to re-evaluate something. Because it should be the other way around. It gives us a means by which to test our weaknesses.

Just workout, then compete, be better than we are. Anyway I hardly ever workout and can do all of the CrossFit girls as prescribed and in fairly decent times. So I'm just arguing for the hell of it... All I know is that doing CrossFit improves all of the 10 biomarkers, and that is a test that many other types of exercise wont. Or will not as effectively. Just something to consider.

Yael Grauer
01-04-2007, 02:38 PM
Or something like cycling the mass gain program for a few months followed by the WOD for a few and back again?

I'm experimenting with that right now-- in my first week of a scaled version of the mass gain program (with some Enamait thrown in) which I'm going to do for anywhere from 7 to 21 weeks to build a more solid strength base, and then go from there... maybe try my score again at some of the benchmark WODs afterwards... and see if that helps wean me off the bench dips and ridiculous jumping pullups where the chair is doing 90% of the work.

Robb Wolf
01-04-2007, 03:24 PM
Kreiki!
The thread really took off. Touching on something Steve said. CF (IMO) became so enamored with promoting its brand of fitness that it missed the opportunity to also lend its wares to endeavors OUTSIDE the accepted CF model of fitness. I think that was a huge loss…again just my opinion however. As is made apparent quite frequently they are achieving “Significant Market Share”.

Jonathan-
You are right on with the Twins analogy and I think that is a very important point to make when someone is claiming to produce the “Fittest People on the Planet”. What standards are you using and what is the TOTAL developmental process. John Frankl talked a lot about the difference in giving an NCAA wrestler some submission skills and watching them kill people because they have been toughened for YEARS and have significant grappling ability. This in contrast with taking someone off the street and teaching them BJJ as their first art, teaching them how to condition and plan training…how to make weight, how to be mentally tough. Both people represent significant developmental processes but how much LESS development is necessary for the NCAA wrestler? How can someone who has only recently shown this person some submissions claim development of all the attributes? You can‘t do it.

Pierre-
I think we are talking about different things here. I’m really looking at the epistemology of the training process, particularly of creating “Elite Athletics”. In the case of CrossFit this has shifted from Metcon to it would appear Foundational strength. I’m just documenting that shift and apparently, generating some thinking in the process.
Regarding the Natalie Wolfolk analogy:
My point is that you will only see a CF athlete attain heights like a Josh Everett after they have the foundational strength base…and I’d not count Josh out of the Cindy race. I logged 16 rounds of Mary at one cert (5 HSPU, 10 Pistols, 15 pull-ups) in 20 min. Josh posted 14 and change. And he can Olift me into the ground…

Chris-
Great summary and that is precisely the question I asked: What is the best route for developing significant foundational strength? There are a few venues for finding this answer…PL’ing, OL’ing and gymnastics come immediately to mind. Coach Sommer has taken some elements common to PL’ing and is producing gymnastics monsters…this is not because he has pegged out their metabolic conditioning! It is because he is making his athletes amazingly STRONG.

Mike-
I’m in for the OD-Fit T-shirts! Put me down for one, extra squidly.

Ron Nelson
01-04-2007, 04:14 PM
This has been a very interesting thread; too bad I was "out of it" for about three days and missed some of the action. I was training for Steve's "Pizza/Arrogant Bastard" challenge, but I forgot the pizza. Can you say, "3 day hangover?"

As for the shift in the CF paradigm, I would guess that CF has recognized some shortcomings and addressed them. Simple as that. As an "open source" program, it would be silly not to adapt and constantly improve as time went on. As Dan would say, "Everything works, for a time" (that might be paraphrased, but you get the drift). In other words, CF was working and working well. . .for a time. It needed to make a shift and address its own weaknesses (thinking out loud here, not criticizing); hence, Rippetoe is brought in for the slow lifts. Result, way more max effort/rep effort work on the big 2 lifts (DL and Squat). As for the third, the press, it still appears to be the bastard step-child in the CF lift family. Check out the video posting from the other day. Clearly, it was intended to point out the benefit of the push-press and push jerk over the standard press (same weight, same reps, way faster work). Problem there is, where is the maximal strength in the press? I love push presses because they don't hurt my ego. A strict press kills me because I'm a huge wuss when it comes to shoulder work.

So, that's why I decided to forgo the CF work for a while and concentrate on my foundational strength. I've been using Cosgrove's "New Rules" program for the past three weeks and like it so far. Allen and I have kicked around the idea of a "New Rules" thread and should start it soon.

After the strength comes up to where I'm comfortable, I'll give the CF WOD another go. I'm just skeptical when it comes to posting times because I feel there's a lot of BS times/results being thrown up in the comments and I've said so numerous times over there.

Pierre Auge
01-04-2007, 04:34 PM
Rob,
I admit it we were not talking about the same thing! Frankly I have no idea what I've been talking about.......

So here's my question? Does the shift from metcon to foundational strength really matter? Its not the first shift I've seen in the program and I'm sure you've seen shifts before having been around much longer than I.

Thing is I dont actually do the ME blackbox stuff... I have a tendency toward non linear 10x3, 6x2, 2x5, or 5x5 followed immediately by chipper style WOD's. Then I do the same non linear type thing immediately after the WOD with gymnastics skills.

I use the WOD's from the main page that I like and those I don't I replace with stuff I really suck at! I pretty much replace anything I have a natural tendency to be good at and go for things I hate. Whenever I've done this I've had very good consistent results.

Question: Am I still doing CrossFit?

I think so, my workouts are constantly varied, functional and high intensity. They produce similar results than the Rx'd WOD, frankly I'm probably stronger pound for pound than most others within my weight class (within CrossFit I'm no Naim Sulemanolu). Yes thats a result of my unprescribed pre and post wod training, but that is semantics. The WOD makes me better at its application.

I'm just not arrogant enough to call this Fitness with Pierre. Which come to think of it if I moved to a highly populated US destination and spoke with a french accent I bet I could do well for myself. Though I'm sure I would be expected to teach Pilates, no thanks, I like my manhood...

Anyway I hear and respect where your coming from Robb, Steve, Mike, Chris and everyone else. I just think that we're missing the forest for the trees, CF isn't competing in anyone elses arena's they are building their own...

Oh and I can't find any refrences to myself doing Mary at any time to be quite honest. But my best total on Cinday which was in march of last year (2006) at 28 rounds. I think I remember puking that day but I'm not sure...
I average anywhere between 23 and 25, my own training is far too inconsistent. I hate that workout. (Dude's I haven't worked out since the Rhabdo and I feel like crap!)

Ron if you want to challenge any post (time:load) I make I will gladly make a video to prove it. Oddly enough I've been surprised by how many people are actually capable of what they post. By evalutating in person and observing them during workouts.

Mike ODonnell
01-04-2007, 05:21 PM
Question: Am I still doing CrossFit?
I think so, my workouts are constantly varied, functional and high intensity.
So does any workout that includes varied functional exercises at high intensity mean it's copyrighted to CF? Unless you do it exactly and call it "Fran", I dont see how it can be.


I'm just not arrogant enough to call this Fitness with Pierre.

Honestly, if you have learned workouts from other people and apply it in your own way, why not call it OD-Fit...I mean Pierre-Fit. If you are just out there to help people, you think they care what the workout is and where it came from? They just want results. If you have a functional based workout business then you should be able to call it whatever you want, as long as you are not plagerizing it workout for workout....but then that goes back to, what does CF own besides Fran and the other named workouts? More importantly, why care so much about it? If you make a workout and other people follow your model, that's a compliment.


I just think that we're missing the forest for the trees, CF isn't competing in anyone elses arena's they are building their own...

I could care less where they are competing, it's the attempted monopoly of everything functional by anyone that is rediculous. Maybe I am a dreamer, but my goal is to help my clients with the best program I know, not to prove I have the best program there is to other trainers. I chose this line of work to #1 learn everything I can about health and fitness, and #2 to apply it the best I know how to help others....in the end I don't ask for credit as it was never my goal. Plus you can't own a style of fitness, only your specific program in writing and your marketed business name. Curves came first...and then there was Cuts...Slim and Tone....Ladies Workout Express.....and all existed harmonously without any firebombing of eachother. (as far as I know....but I heard Jazzercise was pisssed!)

CF will always had an influence in my training, much like many other sources. But we all didn't wake up one day knowing how to workout...it had to be learned from outside sources, none of who have ever asked for credit....otherwise my business name would be something like OD-Cross-Boyle-Chek-Dr Sears-Star-Cosgrove-Santana-Poliquin-Wolf-Fit. And there is no way I can get that on any business card or T-shirt.

Pierre Auge
01-04-2007, 06:07 PM
Mike,
ok yes those are all good points I agree with. Really I have no reason to argue I just have nothing better to do!

This has been a very VERY VERY slow week...

Mike ODonnell
01-04-2007, 06:26 PM
ok yes those are all good points I agree with.

Why did I just hear this thread coming to a screeching halt.......We agree? Damn......what fun is that. :eek:

I agree...I need business to pick up too. Few more posts and I might be close to moderator status....and I can't handle that responsibility.

Pierre Auge
01-04-2007, 06:56 PM
Ok you want a solid argument here's one:

Why would I be so defensive of CrossFit?

Well I'm not so much defensive of CrossFit, I'm defensive of the CrossFit community because IT is responsible for the fact that I know Robb Wolf, Mike Burgener and the entire Mike's Gym clan, Mark Rippetoe, Eva. T, Eugene Allen, Doug Chapman, Skip Chase, and many others. Indirectly responsible for introducing me to Steve Schafley, Mike ODonnell, Glenn Pendlay and so many other good people its not even funny.

Now this is what I figure, I knew OF quite a few of these people before I knew of CrossFit. How many other organizations in the past two decades have brought together so many quality people from so many different disciplines of physicality and caused such a MASSIVE ARRAY of discontent, argument and discussion?

I think if nothing else it has value for defense if for no other reason than it makes us question ourselves!

Mike ODonnell
01-04-2007, 08:15 PM
Defensive is good, it shows passion. Open mindedness is good too, and you have plenty of that.

My life is more like Arnold lead me to the Jack Lalane Gym which introduced me to the guy who showed me a muscle mag which made me read about Dan Duchaine who got me looking into taking protein which made me read more books about working out which...............fast foward............lead me to the internet and then all hell broke loose....which led me to where I am right now and every positive influence on the way. Every thread I read is an influence into my world in some manner whether to remind myself to take more ZMA....or try a new workout progression. It's all a community.....from which many will converse, ideas will conflict, and all will grow.

I never claim to know it all....just to have my opinion at that time.

They are going to start charging me and Pierre rent around here...or pay by post.

Steve Shafley
01-04-2007, 08:21 PM
This is going off in a completely different direction.

Pierre: Since I don't get any slack cut for being, uh, heavier and, uh, less conditioned than I should be for XFHQ challenges, I'm not giving you any slack for the Basement Shaf-Fit Challenge (TM) (CR)

495! 5 plates a side! Plus, you're Canadian, and probably have some kind of genetic expression for beer consumption that would bury me alive if I cut you some slack.

Heh.

On the Crossfit Community: Here I go again! Beating that dead horse! Bam bam BAM! bam bam BAM!

I've been there since 2002. Look it up on my user profile. I really didn't become super active there until Dan John really started to get involved in the community. Because he was enthusiastic about it, and really liked what he was reading and seeing, and that enthusiasm infected me.

At one point in time, it was a superlative community. And, really, it's not bad now, it's just not the same.

I noticed things getting shaky when...stay with me now...I noticed Dan Silver (the prophet? the messiah?) was no longer "welcome" to post there. Could that have been the tipping point? I don't know why he stopped posting there, whether it was by hook or by crook, but I remember when it happened pretty clearly. I thought it was a loss. You need the tricksters and the shamen if you want a successful community.

Then, Dan John mentioned something that occurred during a seminar in Colorado, where he presented some material, and, almost immediately afterwards, it was publicly scoffed at by Greg. This raised my eyebrows a bit.

This isn't in chronological order, so bear with my rambling remembrances.

And then the number Crossfit affiliates EXPLODED. Shit, they were cropping up everywhere, and that's cool, because I loved the micro-gym concept. I'd even considered jumping into the fray with what would have been the second XF affiliate in Michigan. (or first, I don't know if I was seriously considering it before Hyperfit-USA became an affiliate or not, but they're in Ann Arbor, so it really didn't count)

And, that's when I noticed it first...the public tongue lashing Greg gave Josh Hillis (Hollis?) in the WOD blog for a comment he made on the Dragondoor.com forums. I was like HOLY JESUS GLASSMAN LAYETH THE SMACKETH DOWN ON YOUNG JOSH...it was like hitting a puppy with a baseball bat.

Then it on with Dan. Then Mark. Then the rest.

And after the incident with Dan, and the exchange Greg and I had in the Pukie's Bucket thread, he no longer bothered to participate in the forum. His own damn forum, and he couldn't be bothered anymore.

I tried to hold on, but couldn't. It's not really the same, anymore, as it was, even a year ago. Growing pains, really, and a dilution of discussion that was fun, focused, and explored the concepts of fitness, strength, nutrition, and XF in an exploratory and collaborative fashion.

And the spin doctoring. ( I had to go back and delete some stuff I said, due to being a bit vicious. Needless to say, I didn't and still don't appreciate certain individuals who clumsily attempted said spin-doctoring)

Your opinions may vary, I understand that.

Mike ODonnell
01-04-2007, 08:37 PM
I'll be Shaf-Fit's first affiliate.

Pierre Auge
01-04-2007, 09:06 PM
Steve,
as you know I was not an active member of the community then, I was doing other things like digging holes in the frozen earth in order to live in and survive the northern prairies. And doing advanced combatives courses and a slew of other bullshit. I was on the outside looking in...

I totally respect what you are saying and truly KNOW why you feel that the way you feel. I want you to quickly review the names on the list I mentioned and than consider why I may not have mentioned others. I will not insult anyone thats not my game, I've done that I've received it and its just not what I'm about. At the same time, I'm willing to look past certain arrogance in some instances if mine can be ignored for the advancement of my own goals and those of others if those goals are mutually concerned.

I debate with certain individuals on some topics on a regular basis. If I were in the position I am now when certain events took place lets say about a year ago my conscience would have caused me to do some things I would probably regret having done or said by now.

I'm sure you've noticed I'm a bit brash and freewilly with the sharing of my opinions, well its not just here that I am like that. I'm just cocky all of the time! Cocky but not an asshole... Oddly enough I am still extremely active in a community where the elders seem to have left and let the kids go lord of the flies. It's not because I like the crazy kids, its that some of the other folks who have stuck around with me are really great people. Anyways I'm probably going to get kicked out eventually anyways so whatever...


I should be a politician, no I have self respect!

Yael Grauer
01-04-2007, 09:42 PM
Well, I'm feeling kinda left out because Pierre is beating me at my own game of random and disjointed statements, so I decided to take that last post to babelfish.altavista.com/tr and translate it into German, and then from German to French, and then back to English again, and this is what I got. :D Btw, this is because somebody on the CF board accused Pierre and I of being the CF'ers with the most time on their hands, and I'm fighting for the title.


as you know it, I an active member was then not teve the community, made me other things like drillings digging in, to live inside and survive the frozen mass the grass country of North. And to make has advanced course combative and a race of other Bullshit. I was on the outside which looks at totals... me respects, which you say and to WHITE really, why you believe that the manner that you feel. I wish you to them names on the list repeats quickly that I consider and mentioned, why I cannot have perhaps mentioned others. I do not humiliate thats my play, made me that I did not receive it and his Juste, that I am. I am at the same time ready, behind certain Arroganz if in some cases to look at, the well can be neglected for the control of my own objectives and those of others, if these objectives are concerned mutually. I discuss regularly with certain private individuals on some topics. Ahead if I were in that a position, to have made now probably now me, as so certain cases to take place legends one leaves are approximately year, my gewissenhaftigkeit me to cause to have would become to make some things, me, regretted or to have said. I am sure, considered you that I do not divide here a brash and freewilly with the top of my opinions, well his Juste am who I am like that. I am right whole time cocky! Cocky however not Arschloch... Unusually enough I am still active in a community extremely, in oldest seems to leave and the kids outward journey make the Lord of the flies. They is not because I can be the insane kids, some-a other people which are around with me really large people adhered. Anyhow me a step probably finally maintenance in one way or another like also always takes... I should be a politician, no me have a autorespect! __________________ What trains a person a specialist? Will to suffer for it! suffer like for!

Pierre Auge
01-05-2007, 12:51 AM
OMG thats too funny!!!

And I SOOOOOO have way more time on my hands!

Seriously where the link to that post on CrossFit Yael?

Yael Grauer
01-05-2007, 01:10 AM
It was in the comments section on one of the WOD days. Sometime this week, I think.

Anyway, I agree with your "solid argument" in defense of Crossfit. If it wasn't for CF I would never have been able to bug Robb with my diet questions, or gotten to spend 10 minutes learning how to do jumping kips with the beautiful Eva T, or gotten to share fine chocolate and painkillers with relative strangers in other states, or been schooled on my bad form by some incredible athletes, or gotten public feedback on my facial expressions, or found a really incredible MMA group in Tucson...the list goes on and on. But this isn't to say that it's not up for criticism/discussion/debate etc. esp. from all you badass coaches and trainers that have personal experience you can share with us that is helping me get through the learning curve a little faster. I liked this thread a lot better when it was about fitness. :) Lots to learn there.

Pierre Auge
01-05-2007, 04:34 AM
Yeah I like the CrossFit Total too it gives the CrossFit community something simple to focus on and progress toward without negating the idea of constant varied functional movement.

Huh I should have said that 3 days ago!

I still have WAAYYYYYYYY more time on my hands than you Yael....

Mike ODonnell
01-05-2007, 04:49 AM
While the Total is something to strive for and see improvements on (and that is a good thing), I question the reason it was invented. Was it really for each person to measure success (as you could of already done that when comparing lifts on different days) or so CF can argue that their workouts/program increase power best? If it's the first then it is a good idea, if it is the second then it is self serving and not good. Either way, it's for their community so I do not bother with it. I already see numbers go up my in workouts (cause I write them down) and personal progress is what counts for me.

The real number if proving the effectiveness of a program would not the the total, but rather the difference between starting total and current total. That's the progress that needs to be charted to know whether any program is effective.

Steve Shafley
01-05-2007, 05:41 AM
And it comes full circle.

I think I would have leaned towards a power clean/push press + front squat (with the PC/PP used to score the PP, and maybe a separate PC to score for that lift)

Or is that too OLyish, as opposed to to PLyish.

Allen Yeh
01-05-2007, 06:53 AM
And, that's when I noticed it first...the public tongue lashing Greg gave Josh Hillis (Hollis?) in the WOD blog for a comment he made on the Dragondoor.com forums. I was like HOLY JESUS GLASSMAN LAYETH THE SMACKETH DOWN ON YOUNG JOSH...it was like hitting a puppy with a baseball bat.

Hillis is correct.

I agree that it's just not the same over there and the personal attacks along with a heavy dose of politics kind of drove me away from the message board.

I've said it once and I'll say it again...thank you for the Performance Menu.

Pierre Auge
01-05-2007, 07:13 AM
Steve,
I have no idea!

Mike,
I hope its for reason 1...

Allen,
ditto!

My thought all along has been that to measure my performance in the sport of do all sports. Is to do all sports! Like 2007 will be my first year as a competitive Olifter, and lightweight powerlifter. I would do gymnastics but they wont let me because I'm old, and I suck at it. So I'm going to keep plugging away at it.

Thats what I think its good for.

Ken Urakawa
01-05-2007, 09:45 AM
Just to refuel the fire (sorry, I've been out for a few days)--I do recall sometime last year there was a PLer who tried Linda as his first XF workout, and smoked it in some ridiculous time (20-ish, maybe?). I recall a fair amount of outrage...

Anyway, just want to join Steve in the dead horse beatings, but that was one of the things that first led me to think along the lines that this thread has been folloing (somewhat). Absolute strength certainly would seem to be an incredible advantage for most WODs.


Now can we get back to the Arrogant Bastard discussions?

Robert McBee
01-05-2007, 10:02 AM
So a theme of this thread is that Crossfit could never live up to its promised effectiveness without addressing a requisite strength base component. If they continued to ignore this then the critique would be that Crossfit is resistent to change, Glassman's ego etc... Is that about right? Enter the CF Total, ME days and now instead of being recognized as a program that is open to change and experimenting, evolving, the criticism is that Crossfit is some sort of usurper trying to be all things fitness. Well, yes, Crossfit is trying to be 'all things fitness'. I would agree its not there yet but hell, its an ambitious goal and light years better than standard big box programming. I'm just seeing alot of contradiction here putting Crossfit in this 'damned if you do...' spot that I don't feel it deserves regardless of personal feelings and conflicts. And in that vein...

...I understand the point(s) made about being turned off by attacks, behavior, and certain personalities on the Crossfit board and forums. No excuse for it IMO and I've been guilty of it myself. Mom raised me to have better manners than that though. Still, I've noticed the same, and worse, on every fitness board I've ever read, not just CF. I just want to point out though that if you find that so distasteful at Crossfit, don't be just as guilty of perpetuating the same behavior here, otherwise, what seperates you? I point this out because there is some undeniable CF bashing going on here (interlaced with some very thought provoking analysis re: strength base).

Thanks gang, peace to you even when we don't agree, and here's to being 'stronger longer' in '07! Cheers

Mike ODonnell
01-05-2007, 12:05 PM
For the record I wouldn't bash the workouts, as I like some of them....just the assumption that it's the only right way and everyone else is wrong. Although only a small percentage of the community over there, I just couldnt post any longer because I found myself getting too negative and took the advice "if you don't like it, then you can leave" so I left. I don't want turn this into a bashing post because then we are no better than the rest. So will keep it scientific.

Irony is that when Men's Health did the Crossfit article a year or so ago, go find the next issue and see the only person who wrote in, got printed and defended the workout. Yep...Me. (used up some of my 15min of fame). Although I was more defending the type of functional interval workout, and not so much the company name, but never claimed it to be the only way to work out.

If you want strength, train for strength. If you want Power, you do power programs. If you want a little of each then yes you can mix it up simliar to a CF WOD to get the benefit of all types of workouts. But where you may get 110% progress in strength on a pure strength program, you may only get 85% progress on a randomized approach encorporating strength here and there, as the other workouts will take away from it.

josh everett
01-05-2007, 01:15 PM
Ken 20 something on Linda is not very good.

Pierre Auge
01-05-2007, 02:19 PM
But where you may get 110% progress in strength on a pure strength program, you may only get 85% progress on a randomized approach encorporating strength here and there, as the other workouts will take away from it.

Mike,
isn't that what they've been claiming all along though? You might only progress at 85% (or some subjective percentage) from a specialised program but will progress at this percentage point more evenly amongst all 10 physical skill. So yes specialised adaptation in muted but on the whole adaptation is increased.

Josh,
now that you're about can I randomly insult your Cindy scores again? Sorry about that brother I randomly picked somebody really good at Fran to make a point. I realized soon after that it was completely ineffectual just like this conversation.

Mike ODonnell
01-05-2007, 02:24 PM
I've lost all bearing on this thread.....we need a do-over without using program names and just talking scientifically about workouts.

Ron Nelson
01-05-2007, 02:54 PM
Pierre,
I don't think I've ever called you out on your times, but once the number of postings per day for the WOD reached 300 or so, the BS factor rose exponentially. Something like 3bs:1true. Add to that the number who ignore ROM and you've got my point. Anyway, I got caught up in the groupthink and trying to fit in and pushed myself to do things I wasn't ready to do. My result was overtraining. Not CF's fault; mine and my ego's.
That's why Shaf-Fit is for me. I can eat pizza/drink good beer with anyone.
I said, ANYONE. I have the physique to prove it.

It was interesting to see Steve mention Dan Silver's departure as the sign of bad things to come. He and I both exited the boards about the same time; just no one really noticed when I left. We both knew the time had come to leave as a sense of humor and occasional off-topic posts were totally frowned upon by certain moderators (Robb, you were not one of them) and we were told so in numerous e-mails. He and I discussed this in Vegas back in 2005 and came to the mutual conclusion we were better off not spending any time thinking about it. I will say this, the Message Board and CF seem to be both separate and connected in that Greg has little to do with the boards, yet provides the space for it to exist.

Now, when is the Arrogant Bastard challenge? I'm taking Pierre to clean up. I mean literally. I'll throw up so hard if I even try it.

Pierre Auge
01-05-2007, 03:10 PM
Boys I'm right there with all of you!

This will be my last post to this thread.

Ron sorry if I assumed you were I seriously have had very LITTLE sleep in a very long time and it is starting to do weird things to me. Including making me lazy and useless. I have way too much time on my hands but I'm playing a waiting game these days! UGhh

Steve Shafley
01-05-2007, 04:17 PM
It was Kevin McCloskey, a powerlifter from Richmond, VA, who posted the Cindy? time. He's a long time member of the Power and Bulk board.

Heh. I don't even know if I could do my own challenge. I'm still excruciatingly sore from my workout Wednesday.

Ron Nelson
01-05-2007, 06:14 PM
Pierre,
No sweat. Get some rest before Robb comes over and blacks out your windows and puts a blindfold on you.

BTW, read the Rippetoe interview on EFTS. Confirmed what I suspected about my own CF abilities. Only 45 lbs away from that 300lb squat.

Never said I was a great squatter.

Nicki Violetti
01-05-2007, 07:33 PM
Robert’s point is valid. We have been critiquing CF for a lack of foundational strength programming, and critique still the addition of the CF Total as CF attempting to be “all things fitness.” Being “all things fitness” is great for business, and recognizing a deficiency and instituting a change to resolve that deficiency is nothing but laudable. However, as an open source/community driven model it is both imperative and “ethical” that contributors to the evolution of the program/product are properly credited for assisting in said evolution, especially when there has been so much drama regarding intellectual property.

Foul must be called when it is said that the CF Total arose as a byproduct of a conversation between Glassman and Rip regarding the need for a more solid strength base when in fact it was another member of the CF community, one Michael Rutherford, who originally made this observation, implemented ME programming in his clinical practice, and published his results.

Bashing is never productive. Constructive dialogue is…even if the subject matter is full of emotion for various reasons. Constructive criticism is also productive…if the person on the receiving end is open to the learning experience. This board seems to be full of such people. I’m grateful for that.

Robb Wolf
01-05-2007, 07:39 PM
Rob-
My intention was to highlight two main things…and a slew of other minor crap. The first I want to make a clear documentation of where the initial impetus to add foundational PLANNED strength work came from. Why? Because there has been such a piss-storm regarding people “stealing” Crossfit intellectual property. Some of this has been apparent from the main page and message board. I saw a mountain of this from my front row vantage point. I’m buggared by it.

My second point is that it’s dishonest to lay claim to a top tier athlete who came to your programming a stud. Just my opinion.

Those are the main points and are fraught with heavy emotional baggage from past experiences…I try to remain objective but may not always do a great job of that. A sub point I made and I think it’s an important distinction on what you said about putting CF in damned if you do/don’t situation, I don’t think the way the CF total is being approached is optimal, if they want to optimize the system they need to tweak some things….and I guess somewhat circularly, I want to document that statement publicly. Why? Because again…there has been such a bunch of crap regarding who thought what up first and I guess I just want my squeaky little voice to be heard on this.

I think something that folks have been circuling, and that several people have voiced, is not an issue with CF programming but with how people have been treated at various times on the front page and message board. I think that is in pretty stark contrast with what has happened thus far in this thread. No one has been called a coward or had their moral character challenged. This is larely a snowball cast into hell or a voice into the either as no one outside this thread will give a whit what the opinion is here…but it still matters to me.

Pierre Auge
01-05-2007, 07:43 PM
Ok I lied this is my last post to this thread:

I'm sad now!


Let me just say this that while credit is not always given due at least here it seems to have been at least to an extent, though perhaps not in the most public of forums: In the CrossFit Journal Blog are Under CrossFit Total

11. Posted by Rutman on December 4, 2006 02:47 AM

Good work Rip. I've voiced the very same opinion on max effort work for a considerable amount of time. In fact. A template modification that includes more frequent ME work or your new TOTAL accelerates CrossFit benchmarks/WOD performance like nothing else.

12. Posted by Coach on December 4, 2006 07:53 AM

Chip #9, Rip's being diplomatic. The notion has no logical, physiological, mechanical, or empirical foundations. It's unexplainable, damned near invincible, ignorance. The greater strain is put on the knees by not letting them pass over the toe, e.g. wall-sit and Smith Machine squats where trapping the hip puts an enormous shear force on the knee.

Rutman #11, Your voice had long been heard and jived with what we were all seeing, and the CF prescription has drifted accordingly over the last six to eight months. One of the primary values of the CFT is motivational and we're seeing the desired effect already. We've turned the increased ME prescription into sport; the excitement/enthusiasm expressed around these fundamental lifts is new to our community.

All,
Rip, Rutman, and Burgener are critical to the CF synthesis.

I don't want to insult anyone please just take this at its most basic form. It doesn't excuse past mistakes but it does show a lean toward more diplomacy in actions. I can't and wont speak fo anyone but myself. I think perhaps the simple fact here is that it took more than one voice to get the point across after much drilling. Thats all I have to say about that... again this is neither a defense of past offenses or a lauding of character, simply an observation.

I personally do owe the Glassman's a dept of gratitude, but that doesn't keep me from having my own opinions as he has recently discovered.

Steve Shafley
01-05-2007, 07:50 PM
Good posts by all.

Steve Shafley
01-05-2007, 07:52 PM
Pierre.

I not only played AD&D, but also Runequest, and later on GURPS.

I've got boxes of role playing stuff from the 80s in my basement mouldering. I think I should ebay them, but my attempted auction of a PS3 left me sour.

Mike ODonnell
01-05-2007, 07:52 PM
Well said Nicki.

There are many coaches much smarter than me willing to teach and not require their name on my business card, and for that I am thankful.

And does Robb realize that he still has the web address for the crossfit journal in his signature after every post....I'm so confused now...

Robert McBee
01-06-2007, 12:02 AM
Thanks Nikki and Robb for the thoughtful and revealing responses. I honestly had no idea a tempest was raging over who created what and on what timeline and who has property rights etc. Even with my considerable lack of awareness, I thought all aspects of Coach Rut's work were undisputed and properly credited to him. I'm dismayed by reports to the contrary. The initial, as far as I know, blowup involving name-calling and property rights violations you referred to left me feeling literally awful and I've ignored everything since outside of the daily WOD which I still view as an exciting and interesting experiment. So, I'm not going to delve any deeper into the latest episode. I can appreciate the personal and professional stress you must have felt over these issues. It does indeed matter Robb and you're not alone because integrity affects us all.

Ok, I'm shutting up. Next rounds on me...

Yael Grauer
01-06-2007, 09:22 AM
I don’t think the way the CF total is being approached is optimal, if they want to optimize the system they need to tweak some things….

So is anybody but me dying to know what Robb would tweak to optimize the system? Would love to hear it.

I for one would love to see CF be as kick-ass as possible because there are tons of soldiers, cops, firefighters, etc. who use the WOD on a regular basis and I think the majority of us would agree that it's in everyone's best interest for them to be able to perform their jobs as well as possible, and that fitness plays a huge role in this. But it's something I've wondered about, re: the whole "open source model" and "evidence-based fitness" ideas--which are awesome ideas...what about the power bias article and the fact that Robb has had experience with his clients which indicate that adding 1 min of rest in between exercises in the benchmark WODs improves performance in said benchmark WODs? That people who practiced it that way over time were less gassed when they went back to the rx'ed benchmark WOD? Since this analysis is evidence-based (both mathematically and empirically or clinically or however you want to use it), and would improve fitness (or at the very least, one's score on benchmark WODs) shouldn't it therefore be worked in somehow?

Steve Shafley
01-06-2007, 09:26 AM
The WOD is exceptional for LEOs, firefighters, and soldiers, as long as DOMS and exhaustion doesn't hinder their performance on the job.

Mike ODonnell
01-06-2007, 10:30 AM
I agree to the fact that a program that has strength, explosiveness and anaerobic threshold training is optimal for people in very physical lines of work like police, fire, etc. Do they need a 500 DL? Probably not. Do they need speed and strength to subdue a criminal or strenght and endurance to carry a 100lb water hose up a flight of stairs....hell yeah.

CF meets those needs very well.

Would a Firefighter be a Oly weightlifter? Only if he did specific training for that. Is crossfit specific training? No, it's generally spread different training protocols. Is Crossfit easier for someone with a Strength background? Yep. Does it make an athlete from an average person with no strength experience? Maybe to some extent, but it may not be the most optimal way. Is CF the only way to train for all methods of fitness, of course not. Does it promote a community that learns and keeps people consistent, Yep. Is consistency more important than what the workout needs to be? For the general public Yes.

Steve Liberati
01-06-2007, 11:19 AM
And does Robb realize that he still has the web address for the crossfit journal in his signature after every post....I'm so confused now...

Not trying to speak for Rob here, but it sounds like his perception of the CrossFit concept as a fitness program has not change (with several modifications of course!), only his feelings towards its founder has changed.

From the sounds of it, things could have been handled much more...whats the word?...."diplomatically".

But then again, its none of my business.

Mike ODonnell
01-06-2007, 01:19 PM
Wasn't implying anything about the functional fitness model of programming that CF uses......I just figured he might want to change it to the PM menu instead and "pimp" his own publication for the "chedda" ;)

Is that how the kids say it nowadays??

Elliot Royce
01-06-2007, 02:13 PM
I'm only going to comment in a limited way. I am not a long-time CFitter and not a personal trainer or expert in any way on exercise. I am fitter than most people but probably less fit than 95% of the people on this board (and maybe I'm being generous to myself).

Reading all the exchanges, it seems like there is more of atmosphere of a family feud than a completely dispassionate evaluation. In addition, I am struck by how high your expectations seem to be of any fitness program. On the one hand, I think those high expectations are great because you are constantly seeking to compare, critique, measure and improve. On the other hand, as Glassman points out on the site, it's a free program developed ad hoc and take it or leave it. I mean, no one is paying hundreds of dollars for the WODs, etc. It seems a bit harsh to critique something offered generously and without guarantees.

Do I detect the disappointment that comes from finding that the Holy Grail was not really what it was cracked up to be? Or that perhaps one Grail does not fit all (to mix metaphors)? Maybe you feel that CF has been oversold? I could understand that, but that feeling occurs with any new trend and can it really be blamed on Glassman? Seems to me that a lot of us end up proselytizing others more than the web site does.

Maybe I just see things differently since I've always been lazy enough to see CF only as a means to an end, namely better athletic performance and overall fitness. I don't get a kick from maxxing out on the Girls. That's not to criticize those who do, they have my admiration from a distance, the same way marathon runners do. I'm just a lazy guy who wants to be highly fit and therefore wants the most efficient way to do it. Dropping a minute from my time on a WOD is good because it means I'm getting fitter but I reserve my competitive juices for scoring a goal in hockey or lifting more in a snatch.

Perhaps we should just keep in mind what someone remarked on, which is that we end up through an interest in CF having access to an incredibly rich and informed running dialogue on fitness, nutrition, life, whatever. The CF board is remarkably free of the sort of rancor that you get elsewhere.

As I posted nearer the top of this post, I don't think CF is magic but it has some highly useful tools for training. Since I'm not an expert, am not writing my own book on fitness and have no clients, it's less important if it is the one and only approach to fitness. And I certainly have to do a lot more work before I can say I'm anywhere near being fit by anyone's definition of functional.

Whoops I meant for this to be two paragraphs and look what happened!

Mike ODonnell
01-06-2007, 04:31 PM
CF workouts - great ideas, great metcons, very effective
CF community - great people, great coaches
Results - a workout that evolves thanks to numerous sources and give great results for anyone who sticks with it.

I have gotten sidetracked on this discussion, for that I appologize and wish to end this positively.

Yael Grauer
01-07-2007, 01:55 PM
The WOD is exceptional for LEOs, firefighters, and soldiers, as long as DOMS and exhaustion doesn't hinder their performance on the job.

It's true, and I had friends going through the police academy who were way ahead of the game fitness-wise because of CF. And yet, several LEOs and soliders have told me that they've lost muscle mass from doing the WOD and want to go back to their old workouts. And I've sent them links to the articles on ME black box--one advocates for 2 CF WODs and one ME black box, one advocates for three days of CF-ing and three days of ME work (one UB, one LB and one FB).

Mike ODonnell
01-07-2007, 07:31 PM
Iseveral LEOs and soliders have told me that they've lost muscle mass from doing the WOD and want to go back to their old workouts. .

I would guess that they did not increase calorie intake enough to maintain muscle to offset that the increased metabolic demand from those workouts. Metcons especially are great training, but also increase the metabolism for 12-24 hours after. Good for fat loss, but must also make sure the cal intake is there to prevent muscle breakdown. When in doubt for lack of muscle gain or fat loss, nutrition is usually the cause 85% of the time.

Yael Grauer
01-07-2007, 08:40 PM
I would guess that they did not increase calorie intake enough to maintain muscle to offset that the increased metabolic demand from those workouts. Metcons especially are great training, but also increase the metabolism for 12-24 hours after. Good for fat loss, but must also make sure the cal intake is there to prevent muscle breakdown. When in doubt for lack of muscle gain or fat loss, nutrition is usually the cause 85% of the time.

These are avid Athlete Zoners, except for one guy who's half-Zone and half Body for Life. Maybe it is all diet, but my guess is that lifting less than one had in the past in order to do more metcon will decrease muscle over time (months), and vice versa.

Steve Shafley
01-07-2007, 08:57 PM
The body becomes it's function.

Metcon done preferentially over heavy lifting is going to lead to a slow loss of muscle mass, and probably a quick loss of fat.

The adaptations will be towards energy systems efficiencies and substrate uses, and not hypertrophy and strength.

Mike ODonnell
01-08-2007, 05:21 AM
These are avid Athlete Zoners, except for one guy who's half-Zone and half Body for Life.

Is it true Zone? or Zone with 3-5x fat? So many have different variables. A true zone is really low in calories, especially for anyone doing serious metabolic work 3-4x a week. Also zone is generally lower in protein vs like a Paleo approach where you will see people trying to get in like 1-1.5g/lb of bodyweight for more muscle. Great for weight loss, but it will take some muscle with it. For example if someone wants to gain muscle they may need a steady intake of 3500+ calories, where like a zone with only 3x fat multipliers will only put you in the area of 2500 calories. Unless they can specifically tell you how many calories per day they intake...then they probably need to go back and write it down to see where they are at. They may be surprised to see how low it may be. When in doubt....up the blocks, up the protein, up the calories.

Like Steve mentioned also, if they are lean enough now and want to put on weight, then it might be time to cut back on the metcons and focus just on a hypertrophy/strength cycle.

Steve Shafley
01-08-2007, 06:34 AM
I was thinking I need to lose about 50#, so even if the fireman does only metcons, he should still be able to drag me out of a burning building.

I am taking my chances now that the fireman follows Rut's ME Black Box stuff.

Yael Grauer
01-08-2007, 08:57 AM
Athlete's Zone is zone plus fat. But since the variable here isn't diet but programming (i.e. they didn't lose muscle mass doing ME work over time, but did lose muscle mass doing less ME work over time, on the same diet) I'm still going to put my money on it having something to do with programming.

But I suppose this brings up another question. Despite my fruit-rich breakfast shakes, I feel better when I eat more protein and way less carbs than the Zone prescribes, but this of course means I can't do as much metcon. So do I change my diet so I can do certain workouts, or do I change my workouts to fit what I think is an optimal diet? I vote for the latter.

Steve Shafley
01-08-2007, 09:02 AM
Yael:

Keep the carbs to right before and after training then.

Targeted ingestion is probably going to allow you to eat low carb most of the time, yet get your blood sugar levels up for training effectively.

Nothing wrong with that.

I had great success with the Anabolic Diet during a rugby season, except I lost an extraordinary amount of weight.

I'd just start carbing up the day before my games, on Friday, and Saturday before and after the game, and get back to the low carb stuff on Sunday.

I got used to training in a low carb environment during the week.

Performance was markedly high during games on the weekend.

Yael Grauer
01-08-2007, 10:15 AM
On my high carb days I do carbs right before and after training, and I try to cycle it so I'm doing high carb on days I do martial arts. But I've found that a small amount of starch with dinner helps me sleep better (a friend's theory is that it pushes the tryptophan I've eaten during the day across the blood-brain barrier to make some nice serotonin) and some fruit on those slow-dragging mornings gives me a bit of energy (not every morning). Other than that I'm eating almost all fat and protein (with some veggies thrown in) but I'm happy with eating less carbs and doing less metcon in the winter. I guess my question isn't specifically about me but more of a general question: should you change your diet to fit your programming, or should you change your programming to fit your (optimal) diet.

Mike ODonnell
01-08-2007, 10:21 AM
I was thinking I need to lose about 50#, so even if the fireman does only metcons, he should still be able to drag me out of a burning building.

I am taking my chances now that the fireman follows Rut's ME Black Box stuff.

Possibly the funniest thing I have read in a long time!

I know I would be repeating, so I'll just stick with my nutrition is the key answer. The metabolic demands and effects will be different from different programming (ie ME vs metcon). Metcon will require more calories to just maintain the mass because of the after affect that lasts for 24 hours, thats why so many without diet changes see a decline in body mass. Not saying this is also a factor, but most people I talk to say and do completely different things when eating, like they say "I follow the zone" but when asked to write it down they are all over the place, missing meals and 1000 cal short of where they said they were. May not be an issue with your friends, but I still suspect most people assume they are doing diet right. I think most people tend to put 90% of their effort into finding and using the perfect exercise program, when really 90% of their results are nutrition and thats where 10% of their effort goes. My $0.02, Canadian.

Yael Grauer
01-08-2007, 11:20 AM
So are you saying that someone who switches from more lifting and less metcon to more metcon and less lifting will not lose any strength or size as long as they get more calories?

Mike ODonnell
01-08-2007, 11:43 AM
So are you saying that someone who switches from more lifting and less metcon to more metcon and less lifting will not lose any strength or size as long as they get more calories?

Not 100% exactly, I would imply that shifting say from ME to Metcon focus would require more calories to maintain. Metcon workouts certainly have more glycogen depletion when compared to ME style. Plus Metcon can elevate metabolism for hours, so hence more calories burned. Strength is a skill (and like any skill) and has to be practiced in order to maintain or progress.

Size is best broken into 2 parts...fat and muscle. Could a person keep muscle while doing mainly metcons? Yes but some loss may occur. Now obviously fat loss will occur while doing metcons....so in general someone's size will go down mainly from the high percentage of fat loss (as fat takes up more room than muscle).

So can someone really gain muscle and lose fat at the same time? Possible but nutrition has to be right on the money. Most people just go between micro cycles of muscle gain and fat loss. With the gain cycle they also gain some fat....and with the loss cycle they also lose some muscle. But it's usually a small percentage each way.

Recovery is also a big part. Muscle grows when you are not working out, muscle is broken down when you workout. So if people are over-training and under-recovering, muscle balance will go negative. Recovery is nutrition, rest days and sleep. Hope that makes sense.

Yael Grauer
01-08-2007, 11:52 AM
Okay, so I'll still tell my buddies who are losing size (due to too much metcon or not enough calories or whatever) to do ME black box every other workout or at least every third workout, but if they insist on sticking with their same workout, I'll tell 'em to eat more. Got it.

This is the thread that never ends. :)

Mike ODonnell
01-08-2007, 12:14 PM
I gain the most muscle if I do only a 5x5/ME/heavy compound movements workout 3x a week with little to no metcon. Then I add the metcon back in and ramp down the heavy stuff to lower body fat. Endless combinations.

I believe even the the atheltic zone and CF WODs they say that you do the zone till you get to the body fat % you want, and then up the fat cal till you stop losing lbs. If you get to 5x fat and are still losing, then you add more blocks....like if you were at (just random numbers here) 16 blocks and 5xfat and still losing, you now jump to 18block and 2-3x fat. I dont do the zone but I remember that is how it was phrased.

Robb Wolf
01-08-2007, 04:27 PM
Hey Everybody-

I took a few days away from even looking at the board to get some perspective on things...looks like the thread has quieted down and I don't want to get it stirred back up but I did want to say a few things.

First, Elliot-
I think you were right on. There certainly are elements of a family feud/bad break-up here. It's a serious bummer for me personally. There are a load of people in the Cf community I will likely never see again as I am now "unclean" and supposedly working with "unsavory elements" like Gym Jones. What a farce. It's a frustrating situation that I just get to live with.

Pierre-
Thanks for hanging in there and keeping some perspective. As confusing as you are sometimes you are a VERY bright dude and I think you saw through some of my BS early on. thanks for bringing some balance to the whole discussion.

Ron, Steve, Mike-
Thank you guys for being the smarty-pants you all are...and for remembering some of the key points of this whole story. I'm really grateful you guys choose to fritter away time here.

Yael-
Thank you for being...well, you.

So why the link to the CFJ? I have and always will love and support CrossFit. Some may not believe that. THEY can buggar off.

Brad Hirakawa
01-08-2007, 05:22 PM
Robb, I would vote for you, if you ran for Governor of California.

:)

Brad

Robb Wolf
01-08-2007, 05:42 PM
Robb, I would vote for you, if you ran for Governor of California.

:)

Brad

LOL! well...that's one!

Mike ODonnell
01-08-2007, 06:18 PM
Is this the part where the group hug comes in?....and if so, who took my wallet?

Yael Grauer
01-08-2007, 07:32 PM
That's my wallet.

Mike ODonnell
01-08-2007, 07:40 PM
Had I had another Guiness I would of said something about your hand in my front pocket looking for it....but that would of been rude. My...this thread has everything!

Yael Grauer
01-08-2007, 08:11 PM
...

Allen Yeh
01-09-2007, 04:23 AM
Is this the part where the group hug comes in?....and if so, who took my wallet?

kumbaya.....

Scott Kustes
01-09-2007, 07:08 AM
LOL! well...that's one!
I'd vote for you too, but I'm not a registered Californian. So I guess you're still stuck with one. Sorry.

Robb Wolf
01-09-2007, 07:33 AM
Drama, intrigue, Love...loss, and apparently Mike and Yael doing some drunk "hide the wallet".

Mike-
If Yael was from Chico I'd recommend a course of Cipro. Chico girls are "fun" but not what I'd call clean. You should be fine however.

Yael Grauer
01-09-2007, 07:37 AM
Oh, the things we do for free wallets...

Mike ODonnell
01-09-2007, 08:41 AM
Cipro....Yikes....

Steve Shafley
01-09-2007, 03:03 PM
I just wanted to jump this to 100 posts.

Cassidy Drake
01-09-2007, 03:27 PM
Rob-
My intention was to highlight two main things…and a slew of other minor crap. The first I want to make a clear documentation of where the initial impetus to add foundational PLANNED strength work came from. Why? Because there has been such a piss-storm regarding people “stealing” Crossfit intellectual property. Some of this has been apparent from the main page and message board. I saw a mountain of this from my front row vantage point. I’m buggared by it.

My second point is that it’s dishonest to lay claim to a top tier athlete who came to your programming a stud. Just my opinion.

Those are the main points and are fraught with heavy emotional baggage from past experiences…I try to remain objective but may not always do a great job of that. A sub point I made and I think it’s an important distinction on what you said about putting CF in damned if you do/don’t situation, I don’t think the way the CF total is being approached is optimal, if they want to optimize the system they need to tweak some things….and I guess somewhat circularly, I want to document that statement publicly. Why? Because again…there has been such a bunch of crap regarding who thought what up first and I guess I just want my squeaky little voice to be heard on this.

I think something that folks have been circuling, and that several people have voiced, is not an issue with CF programming but with how people have been treated at various times on the front page and message board. I think that is in pretty stark contrast with what has happened thus far in this thread. No one has been called a coward or had their moral character challenged. This is larely a snowball cast into hell or a voice into the either as no one outside this thread will give a whit what the opinion is here…but it still matters to me.


I always wondered how you stole something that no one really invented lol. So if I run a gym and use metabolic conditioning, oly lifts, etc and don't give crossfit respect is that bad? I don't lay claim to any one system and I think that is what Robb is trying to say here. Westside, Poliquin, Crossfit, Dan John, Robb, myself and others. i go with what Bruce Lee said "absorb what is usefull, throw out which is not" that is what crossfit is in a sense correct? Well then Linda Lee should be suing the pants off of them for stealing "his intellectual properties lol"


Second point I agree completely.

LOL so which came firs tthe chicken or the egg lol. You and I know why it is that way Robb, but the world is perfect in the fact that we have such diversity, some of us live it, others shun the thought.

On the last one, I made myself look bad over there no one else did it. i acted like a jack ass, and well got called on it. on another note, it didn't need to go to the point of people on the forum making fun of my wife in a wedding picture. Alas, I am glad Robb has his own place now. I am sure crossfit will continue to do well, as will others in the org continue to leave. Either way, varying degrees of fitness has always been a argument for some reason lol.

Pierre Auge
01-09-2007, 03:29 PM
I thought we were going to have a Squats, Pizza and Beer eating contest but I guess not...

Hey Steve you know what would make that an interesting challenge? If the goal was simply max volume in Watts within a given time so if you put out 15,000ft-lbs in 15 minutes with 455 and I put out 15000ft-lbs in 15 minutes with 185 I will have done considerably more reps than you but the workload would be the same. Yet I'm sure you could throw out reps with 185 like a monkey eating bananas.

But imagine having three attempts with a bunch of competitors everyone varying their loads up and down to find a peak spead coefficient in a search for efficiency. That would be something else. Minimum weight is bodyweight.

Call it WATTLifting, Eh!

Ron Nelson
01-09-2007, 03:29 PM
NO that's not my wallet, and yes I am happy to see you. grrrrrrr, baby!

Robbo,
Glad to be here and glad you let idiots like me post and disrupt the flow of knowledge.

Brad,
Kiss ass. I'd vote for Robb, but he's impose a mandatory curfew of nightfall and close the bars at dusk. But, if he needed a chief of staff. . . (I think that gets us back to the whole wallet thing)

Yael Grauer
01-09-2007, 03:33 PM
Black-out curtains on every window and grass-fed beef in every pot!

Can I be campaign manager?

Ron Nelson
01-09-2007, 03:34 PM
i go with what Bruce Lee said "absorb what is usefull, throw out which is not" that is what crossfit is in a sense correct? Well then Linda Lee should be suing the pants off of them for stealing "his intellectual properties lol"


I think Mike O' Donnell said, "Drink what is useful and leave the lager for the suckers."

I try to live by that one.

Mike ODonnell
01-09-2007, 05:21 PM
I think Mike O' Donnell said, "Drink what is useful and leave the lager for the suckers."

He..he...he.....Beeer...Mmmmmmmmm.....(droool)

Ron Nelson
01-09-2007, 06:16 PM
He..he...he.....Beeer...Mmmmmmmmm.....(droool)

Thought you'd enjoy that.

. . .and the thread made its slow decent into Hell. In other news, a Chico fitness club owner has declared his candidacy for governor of California.

Mike ODonnell
01-09-2007, 07:09 PM
Is Cipro his new mascot on his campaign posters?

Steve Shafley
01-09-2007, 07:20 PM
better make that "governor for life"

Yael Grauer
01-09-2007, 07:22 PM
Is Cipro his new mascot on his campaign posters?

He's getting funding from the pharmas??! I'm shocked! No wonder Brad wants to vote for him.

Mike ODonnell
01-09-2007, 08:07 PM
This post has got to get the award for "the biggest emotional rollercoaster with dynamic plot twists and a shocking ending more absurb than the usual suspects".....and still going....

Ron Nelson
01-09-2007, 10:29 PM
better make that "governor for life"

That's funny.

Now his mascot will be Bill Phillips.

Jerry Brown knows Cipro.

Scott Kustes
01-10-2007, 06:40 AM
better make that "governor for life"
We could sell tickets to the Governator/Robb Wolf cage match...duel to the death for the right to run California. Robb, you need a cool name similar to "The Governator" if you ever hope to best him.

Ron Nelson
01-10-2007, 08:39 AM
We could sell tickets to the Governator/Robb Wolf cage match...duel to the death for the right to run California. Robb, you need a cool name similar to "The Governator" if you ever hope to best him.

With Arnie's broken leg, Robb is at an advantage. Robb's nickname could be "The Sandman" or "The Paleo Warrior."

"The Fast-in-ator?"

Mike ODonnell
01-10-2007, 11:18 AM
"The Paleo Warrior."

Wasn't that a wrestler in 1984?

Nicki Violetti
01-10-2007, 01:15 PM
Sorry to disappoint you all. But Robb is not running for governor. I refuse to be the wife of a politician.

Greg Everett
01-10-2007, 01:31 PM
I guess you'll just have to settle for being his mistress then.

Yael Grauer
01-10-2007, 01:36 PM
I thought Robb was married to his keyboard.

Nicki Violetti
01-10-2007, 02:04 PM
Greg - It might not actually be that bad...I would probably get taken out to dinner more:)

Yael - He is. So in a way I am already sort of like his mistress without the wine/dine element.

Robb Wolf
01-10-2007, 02:14 PM
Uh...(thinking of some way to kill this damn thread) I'll take Arnie on, but you guys would be nuts to put me in charge of anything. Nicki only keeps me around because she has the wacky "man-keyboard-love" fetish. Sick stuff if you really think about it.

Greg just keeps me around because he kicks my ass at everything.

I like the sound of "paleo Warrior". I think someone was thinking of "ultimate Warrior". that guys was AWESOME. Not as chatty as Randy-Macho-Man-Savage...but awesome none the less.

You know...Nicki does have some kind of a Kenedy/shriver-esque eye-brow thing going on. I'm In for Politics! Let the dirty deals, sex parties (keyboards included) and debauchery begin!

Mike ODonnell
01-10-2007, 05:25 PM
Rocky VII will come out before this thread ends......and yes the last one was VI...IV was the Russian.....V was Tommy Gun.....I wont even get into which ones had Clubber Lang and Apollo Creed as that is already mandatory reading in most schools.

Allen Yeh
01-11-2007, 03:27 AM
This thread took a turn for the "huh...wtf is going on" area...

Jane Michel
05-30-2007, 05:07 PM
Has anyone made changes since the beginning of the thread and incorporated more ME work like Starting Strength or the ME Black Box? If yes, what have you been doing and how has that affected your WODs?

Mike ODonnell
05-30-2007, 07:13 PM
This thread still has a pulse??

Pierre Auge
05-30-2007, 08:32 PM
Soooooooooooooooo - what's a CrossFit Total?

Ron Nelson
05-30-2007, 08:49 PM
Freakin' Canadian troublemaker.

Hey, is it an insult to call a Canadian from anywhere but B.C. a "Canuck?"

oh, and how's that Stanley Cup thing going?

Pierre Auge
05-30-2007, 09:28 PM
Ummmm no we call ourselves Canuck's as long as you pronounce it properly - Can-knuck

knuck as in knuckle

Ummm right now I could really care less how the Cup race is going. Its game 2 of the finals. It wont get interesting at least until game 3 or 4... And then I still might care less - I used to play hockey I've not much interest in watching it.

Jane Michel
05-31-2007, 07:06 AM
This thread still has a pulse??

yes it does :D this thread led me to question whether CF has helped me (average person rather than elite athlete) improve in any way.. and i'm changing things up because the answer was "not significantly".

Robb Wolf
05-31-2007, 09:50 AM
Alicia-
I've been doing CrossFit for almost 6 years. When I rolled into the scene the WO's appeared un-doable and it took me about 3-4 months to progress to doing full, unmodified WOD's. From there it was not long before climbing to the top 5% of the CF food chain...this was completely an artifact of my power lifting, OL and gymnastics base. It took me about 2 years to figure out that a VERY good strength base was requisite to top level performance in the Sport of Fitness. RUTMAN actually opened my eyes to this and this is where I started thinking about and tinkering with the Power Bias approach.

Here are some approaches I know have worked with regards to CF success:

1-Show up to the game a strong athlete. Josh Everett, Greg Amundson. Show up to the game strong...graft on strength endurance.

2-Calhoon High School Powerlfiting. This was in one of the CFJ's and these folks used some SMART WOD's to increase GPP. If I recall they were using something like a Helen and a Fran mixed among 4 days of periodized block strength work on the squat, DL and bench. These folks make strong PL'ers and some top tier crossfitters.

3-Burgner Franken Fitters. Become an Olifter with the Burgner camp. Incorporate CF in the off season. Kick everyones ass.

4-RUTMAN's ME-Black Box approach. His kid won a 3rd in state with a wicked double leg take down, gnarly conditioning and national level olifts...using the ME Black box approach.

5-Starting Strength- I know Rip has made some very strong athletes who have consequently posted significant CF performances.

We saw a trend with our clients...folks got a little stronger, dip numbers went up a bit, pull-ups a bit but we had nothing near top tier performance. We had a couple of collegiate athletes roll in who had PHENOMENAL strength and power bases. A volleyball player (female) and a foot ball player (male) I can think of specifically who were both picked up with good schools and both posted very good scores on CF diagnostics. It was relatively easy to turn these folks into top performers due to their strength and power base whereas our mountain bikers and runners were never going to be better than C or D level CF'ers without significantly more strength.
So now most of our non-bariatric/weight loss clients...folks who are actually trying to get high level CF type performance...we have these folks start off with DL, a press and a pull...linear progression until we need to shift to block style periodized training. Then some kind of WOD, sprints or the like. It is very effective. I would not doubt that a Pavelesque approach of 2-3 weeks of strength work followed by 2-3 weeks of met-con might work even better but our clients are crack heads for the Met-cons.

I don't think there is any doubt that for most sports, including CF, being as strong as possible, without limiting sport specific practice, is vitally important for success.

If one looks at the crossfit.com WOD from several years ago to now one will see a dramatic shift in emphasis reflecting the need for more strength.

Pierre Auge
05-31-2007, 10:01 AM
I think one of the major contributers to this factor is also the fact that for the longest time people were encouraged to scale down to achieve max intensity if strength was a limiting factor.

I shifted a long time ago to the notion that if its heavy you'll do it slower but its going to make you stronger. I'm not sure why it took Rip to convince everyone of that - but even now people don't really get it.

Allen Yeh
05-31-2007, 10:09 AM
Great post Robb!

Robb Wolf
05-31-2007, 12:48 PM
I think one of the major contributors to this factor is also the fact that for the longest time people were encouraged to scale down to achieve max intensity if strength was a limiting factor.

I shifted a long time ago to the notion that if its heavy you'll do it slower but its going to make you stronger. I'm not sure why it took Rip to convince everyone of that - but even now people don't really get it.

Pierre-
Because there is an enamorment with Pukie and CrossFit for CrossFit's sake...not for YOUR betterment. There is also a fear that someone might do a WOD and say "that was easy". Even if the statement was from ignorance and lack of exposure to a crushing stimulus like Fran. Rip was just a prominent, well respected coach who said "you need to be strong first...period".

Kelly Starrett of CF San Francisco had a great piece on this topic a few months ago. Check out "A Word on Heavy Lifting" (http://sanfranciscocrossfit.blogspot.com/2006_11_01_archive.html)

Pierre Auge
05-31-2007, 04:17 PM
Yeah you're right on that one Robb, which is pretty rare :)

Funny though I throw up more than anybody when I workout but I still put more emphasis on lifting heavy than most. I'm trying this eating alot thing so we'll see how lifting without being in a caloric deficit works out for me. Its frankly weird... Good thing I lean out easily.

Hmmmphhhh funny shit anyways - yeah Kelly is pretty smart.

Jane Michel
05-31-2007, 06:45 PM
robb,

that was one of the more informative posts i've ever read on CF and here. it had the kind of objectivity that i was looking for and had specific useful suggestions... plus experience from a personal and trainer's point of view to back it up.

coach rut replied to an email i sent him after posting about this at CF, and he suggested Starting Strength with a 8-15 minute WOD after. i think i'll do that and move to ME Black Box when i stall on it.

when you say smart WODs like helen and fran, what do you mean?

also, you said on the CF forums that you were on the anabolic diet and have moved to zone, cutting down the carb blocks. is there any reason for the move?

pierre
i thought we were still being encouraged to scale! and you're right about scaling... scaling was what i did and i found myself getting through WODs faster but at the same time getting weaker.

Jane Michel
05-31-2007, 06:56 PM
also, does anyone remember which CFJ issue calhoun high school powerlifting was featured in? it doesn't show up on the CF FAQ page.

Chris Forbis
05-31-2007, 07:16 PM
Issue 33, May 2005


Spotlight in OSX rules.

Pierre Auge
05-31-2007, 08:10 PM
Yeah look for Bagwell...

Alicia,

scaling intelligently is near an art form! Finding that balance between what's too heavy and whats too light for an individual is often not what it appears to be.

For instance I've got a couple as clients. Now both of them are very strong but the husband has some shoulder weaknesses which because he has some significant CrossFit based cardiovascular fitness and a good strength based in general tends to cause him shoulder injuries.

He is very strong but as soon as I put a dumbbell in the guys hands he is incredibly likely to hurt himself. So what happens his wife tends to use the same weights in unilateral movements as he does. She's a tough chicky by the way.

The solution there is to get him to do tons of unilateral movements but I had to convince him to scale back considerably and work his way up basically with a linear strength progression. He's coming along well.

My point is had I left him to his own devices he would simply have done one of two things: One - Hurt himself or Two - Scaled so low that he wouldn't ever progress. Luckily he listens very well...

Don't scale any lower than your ability to perform a movement safely for 5-10 consecutive repetitions. Why because if you can do 5-10 at a time then you can do a hundred, it just might take you an hour. And I'm ok with that! Actually I will stop a person at 25 - 30 minutes but thats because we do heavy lifting before most of our WODs anyways.

Do I make sense?

Daniel Myers
05-31-2007, 08:14 PM
I haven't been around CrossFit as long as most on this board -- only about a year -- but even in that time there's been a big shift in that community. Starting Strength has had a huge impact, to the point where some people are advocating doing that before moving into the WODs.

You can't argue with the positive results, but this shift does raise some interesting issues. "Constantly varied, if not randomized" is still a key phrase, but once people identify specific goals they seem to move to a specialized plan, and minimize the variation.

For example, the CrossFit Games are coming up. If you wanted to win those events, how would you train? I'm guessing that following the main page WOD wouldn't yield the best performance for the official "sport" of CrossFit. If that's true, what does it say about CrossFit programming in general?

I don't really know, but it makes an interesting thought exercise.

Pierre Auge
05-31-2007, 08:39 PM
Think about it this way, the WOD isn't the only thing a person should be doing to develop physically. This is something that CrossFit tries but perhaps does a poor job of getting across. If you want to achieve maximum result with the WOD you need to practice as many of the individual skills as is feasibly possible outside of just doing the WOD. Practice is key!

Dave Van Skike
05-31-2007, 09:05 PM
Think about it this way, the WOD isn't the only thing a person should be doing to develop physically. This is something that CrossFit tries but perhaps does a poor job of getting across. If you want to achieve maximum result with the WOD you need to practice as many of the individual skills as is feasibly possible outside of just doing the WOD. Practice is key!

This is one of the things that has kept me from really adopting crossfit, which I think is an otherwise great all around fun system....the amount of skills it takes to not just rock the WOD but enjoy it are too broad. I'm not really interested in learning a huge amount of gymnastics movements in addition to the oly lifts in addition to perfecting the various BW exercises. I'd rather do it now....I'd rather be "good" on the Dave Tate scale at one thing than suck or shit at a bunch of things...

That said, my primary focus right now is to be passably decent at the lifts that make up the crossfit total.

Pierre Auge
06-01-2007, 07:58 AM
Dave that is one mentality, but if you consider it realistically if you workout 3 times per week and set aside 30 minutes for practice and 30 minutes for the WOD each of those days. Then you simply split that 30 minute practice period out by performing 3x10 minute sessions or 6x5 minute sessions of a different skill each. Multiply that by 3 days per week that is 3 skills each with 30 minutes of contructive work or 6 skills each with 15 minutes of work per week.

It's truly surprising how productive 15 to 30 minutes of practice per week will develop a skill with some consistency. If you have a good plan for alternating those skills then you can really broaden that skill base. Smarter planning will have you select the skills with the greatest transfer to others and return on investment.

Now do the math for someone working out 5+ times. Or doing practice sessions twice per day. These are the people you've got to watch out for.

Simplicity I think is the power of CrossFit. We all just over think it, myself included.

Either way I must admit that having the dedication to be really good at one particular skill is admirable.

Mike ODonnell
06-01-2007, 08:02 AM
Either way I must admit that having the dedication to be really good at one particular skill is admirable.

I'm guessing that being an alcoholic is not one of those skills......

Dave Van Skike
06-01-2007, 09:18 AM
Dave that is one mentality, but if you consider it realistically if you workout 3 times per week and set aside 30 minutes for practice and 30 minutes for the WOD each of those days. Then you simply split that 30 minute practice period out by performing 3x10 minute sessions or 6x5 minute sessions of a different skill each. Multiply that by 3 days per week that is 3 skills each with 30 minutes of contructive work or 6 skills each with 15 minutes of work per week.

It's truly surprising how productive 15 to 30 minutes of practice per week will develop a skill with some consistency. If you have a good plan for alternating those skills then you can really broaden that skill base. Smarter planning will have you select the skills with the greatest transfer to others and return on investment.

Now do the math for someone working out 5+ times. Or doing practice sessions twice per day. These are the people you've got to watch out for.

Simplicity I think is the power of CrossFit. We all just over think it, myself included.

Either way I must admit that having the dedication to be really good at one particular skill is admirable.

Your point is well taken. I've never really given it a long term go picking up skills one by one. thsi is in part due to the way I like to train...alone. Folks at a crossfit facility training with others probably do pick up the skills quickly... I like to hamper myself by nearly always training alone and self taught at that... far below optimum for picking up new skills....

Robb Wolf
06-01-2007, 09:25 AM
robb,

that was one of the more informative posts i've ever read on CF and here. it had the kind of objectivity that i was looking for and had specific useful suggestions... plus experience from a personal and trainer's point of view to back it up.

coach rut replied to an email i sent him after posting about this at CF, and he suggested Starting Strength with a 8-15 minute WOD after. i think i'll do that and move to ME Black Box when i stall on it.

when you say smart WODs like helen and fran, what do you mean?

also, you said on the CF forums that you were on the anabolic diet and have moved to zone, cutting down the carb blocks. is there any reason for the move?

pierre
i thought we were still being encouraged to scale! and you're right about scaling... scaling was what i did and i found myself getting through WODs faster but at the same time getting weaker.

Alicia-
Thanks for the props! By smart WOD's I mean intensity and brevity...with some not insignificant power and strength demands. Build GPP but leave a little in the tank for other activities. About 3 years ago the WOD's were just becoming more and more volume. Kelly is a perfect example: 5 rounds of 400M run, 30 box jumps, 30 Wall ball.

That is just a shit load of work...great for a gut check and mental toughness but you really need to monitor how and when you drop those in. A few WOD's like that and there is not much left for strength development IMO. I'll likely be called a pussy for that sentiment but from my own experience of coaching folks and trying to maintain/improve my own athleticism and CF numbers those gigantic scorchers take a bunch.

I've bene doing a weighed measure Zoen because we are really pushng our clients to do ti and I felt like if I could nto nut-up an ddo it I had no business recomendign it to others. Lead by example perhaps? I'm adapting...I'm very lean, performance is good but it is a daily struggle. I hate the weighing amdn measurign...always feel a little hungry even at 5x fat...oh well! I just tweak things such that I do ~50% of my carb blocks as fruit in the post WO period and then it makes the later meals easier to manage.

Robb Wolf
06-01-2007, 09:32 AM
I haven't been around CrossFit as long as most on this board -- only about a year -- but even in that time there's been a big shift in that community. Starting Strength has had a huge impact, to the point where some people are advocating doing that before moving into the WODs.

You can't argue with the positive results, but this shift does raise some interesting issues. "Constantly varied, if not randomized" is still a key phrase, but once people identify specific goals they seem to move to a specialized plan, and minimize the variation.

For example, the CrossFit Games are coming up. If you wanted to win those events, how would you train? I'm guessing that following the main page WOD wouldn't yield the best performance for the official "sport" of CrossFit. If that's true, what does it say about CrossFit programming in general?

I don't really know, but it makes an interesting thought exercise.

Daniel-
I commented on this earlier in the thread. Namely that one is not going to achieve the top levels of performance in CF without a significant strength base and one is not going to develop that base from classic CF programming. The constantly varied element is PERFECT for metabolic conditioning...it keeps the stimulus randomized and avoids adaptation and efficiency. That is not the way to go about developing maximum strength.

When an analysis of Greg Amundsons performance demonstrates he is capable of 3/4 horsepower output that is testament to his mental toughness, his strength base and his strength-endurance development. He arrived on the scene a BIG strong guy...glazing over that fact does not serve the community of folks who are trying to reach higher levels of performance.

Some of the issues of the CF games were also discussed...I think it is pretty good stuff and worth a read...way back in this thread.

josh everett
06-01-2007, 07:27 PM
"When an analysis of Greg Amundsons performance demonstrates he is capable of 3/4 horsepower output that is testament to his mental toughness, his strength base and his strength-endurance development. He arrived on the scene a BIG strong guy...glazing over that fact does not serve the community of folks who are trying to reach higher levels of performance. "

Robb, I don't know Amundson extremely well and maybe I'm not remembering correctly but... I'm pretty sure when I met him 3-4 years ago he had some very ordinary to low numbers in the DL & oly-lifts. I know he has practiced & improved on the strength lifts over the years and has done this with some supplemental training in addition to typical crossfit WODs. It was my impression that he has greatly developed thru his work with Glassman. Was he strong coming into crossfit?

Sorry i don't know how to use the quote mode you guys use. Mongo just lifts wts, Mongo not know computers!

Pierre Auge
06-01-2007, 07:37 PM
Well I think Robb is a pussy!

Just kidding my friend - you're right in my opinion the insanely high volume workouts MUST not just should but MUST be used wisely and be limited in degree. Essentially I've seen the best results with my people with short sub 10-15 minute WOD's Monday to Friday preceded by heavy ME work. Saturday's and Sunday's are reserved for long drawn out 20-40 minute efforts but anything past 40 minutes is stupid and not productive in my opinion.

Even with this kind of schedule we are seeing people who are capable of just about anything just about any day of the week. We've also noticed something else. Our people have lost all fear towards physical strife.

Pierre Auge
06-01-2007, 07:50 PM
"When an analysis of Greg Amundsons performance demonstrates he is capable of 3/4 horsepower output that is testament to his mental toughness, his strength base and his strength-endurance development. He arrived on the scene a BIG strong guy...glazing over that fact does not serve the community of folks who are trying to reach higher levels of performance. "

Robb, I don't know Amundson extremely well and maybe I'm not remembering correctly but... I'm pretty sure when I met him 3-4 years ago he had some very ordinary to low numbers in the DL & oly-lifts. I know he has practiced & improved on the strength lifts over the years and has done this with some supplemental training in addition to typical crossfit WODs. It was my impression that he has greatly developed thru his work with Glassman. Was he strong coming into crossfit?

Sorry i don't know how to use the quote mode you guys use. Mongo just lifts wts, Mongo not know computers!

Josh from my observations Greg is somewhat of a periah. His lifts are not significant for his size and weight. In fact I know of some way stronger lighter people who perform nowhere near his level of ability. Frankly I just think he's been doing it so long that he is good at doing whatever they throw at him. Greg is just tough and willing to punish himself... These are my observations - I've had a few opportunities to do so for weeks or at least several days at a time, Robb having spent plenty of time around there, I will defer to you.

Robb Wolf
06-02-2007, 07:41 AM
"When an analysis of Greg Amundsons performance demonstrates he is capable of 3/4 horsepower output that is testament to his mental toughness, his strength base and his strength-endurance development. He arrived on the scene a BIG strong guy...glazing over that fact does not serve the community of folks who are trying to reach higher levels of performance. "

Robb, I don't know Amundson extremely well and maybe I'm not remembering correctly but... I'm pretty sure when I met him 3-4 years ago he had some very ordinary to low numbers in the DL & oly-lifts. I know he has practiced & improved on the strength lifts over the years and has done this with some supplemental training in addition to typical crossfit WODs. It was my impression that he has greatly developed thru his work with Glassman. Was he strong coming into crossfit?

Sorry i don't know how to use the quote mode you guys use. Mongo just lifts wts, Mongo not know computers!

He had quite good numbers on squt, DL and Bench...things like cleans and snatches were quite low by comparison and largely a skill issue. He had won a few of the toughest cops alive events prior to CF exposure if I recall correctly. I'll shoot him an email on this thread and get his thoughts.

And, yes, he has improved all of those numbers in the past few years through work at CFHQ.

Pierre Auge
06-02-2007, 07:54 AM
What I like about Greg is he is an extremely consistent hard charging guy and a genuinely nice person.

Derek Simonds
06-02-2007, 01:00 PM
Essentially I've seen the best results with my people with short sub 10-15 minute WOD's Monday to Friday preceded by heavy ME work. Saturday's and Sunday's are reserved for long drawn out 20-40 minute efforts but anything past 40 minutes is stupid and not productive in my opinion.

I am down with the how Pierre laid it out above. Unfortunately with my level of ability on P/U's there were a lot of WOD's that took me into that 40 minute land. I think my personal favorite of the long ones was the filthy 50. For some reason I always felt really good about motoring through that one. Dead tired but mentally it made me feel good!

Jane Michel
06-03-2007, 08:13 AM
Issue 33, May 2005

Thanks for that Chris!


Don't scale any lower than your ability to perform a movement safely for 5-10 consecutive repetitions. Why because if you can do 5-10 at a time then you can do a hundred, it just might take you an hour. And I'm ok with that! Actually I will stop a person at 25 - 30 minutes but thats because we do heavy lifting before most of our WODs anyways.

Do I make sense?
By smart WOD's I mean intensity and brevity...with some not insignificant power and strength demands. Build GPP but leave a little in the tank for other activities. About 3 years ago the WOD's were just becoming more and more volume. Kelly is a perfect example: 5 rounds of 400M run, 30 box jumps, 30 Wall ball.

That is just a shit load of work...great for a gut check and mental toughness but you really need to monitor how and when you drop those in. A few WOD's like that and there is not much left for strength development IMO. I'll likely be called a pussy for that sentiment but from my own experience of coaching folks and trying to maintain/improve my own athleticism and CF numbers those gigantic scorchers take a bunch.


Thanks for explaining that Pierre and Robb.. now I have a rough idea of how to scale and how to choose WODs. I am logging the strength workouts and WODs done (will probably be mostly Fran and Helen).. this is going to be an interesting experiment!


I've bene doing a weighed measure Zoen because we are really pushng our clients to do ti and I felt like if I could nto nut-up an ddo it I had no business recomendign it to others. Lead by example perhaps? I'm adapting...I'm very lean, performance is good but it is a daily struggle. I hate the weighing amdn measurign...always feel a little hungry even at 5x fat...oh well! I just tweak things such that I do ~50% of my carb blocks as fruit in the post WO period and then it makes the later meals easier to manage.
Robb, about the Zone, do you find yourself doing better on it as compared to the Anabolic Diet? Have any of your clients done both?