Catalyst Athletics Forums

Catalyst Athletics Forums (http://www.catalystathletics.com/forum/index.php)
-   Fitness, Strength & CrossFit (http://www.catalystathletics.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   CFJ article on "CF Strength Bias" (http://www.catalystathletics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3827)

Arien Malec 02-07-2009 10:59 PM

CFJ article on "CF Strength Bias"
 
http://library.crossfit.com/premium/...rengthBias.pdf

(requires subscription to CFJ)

Overview: Jeff Martin proposes an "intermediate/advanced" variant of CF that combines a daily ME BB lift, with the lift rotated daily among BSQ, DL, FS, and SP in a 2-1-3-1 weekly pattern of work/rest, combined with shorter heavy metcons and gymnastics skill work

Comment #1: Good to see "official" blessing for combining strength work with metabolic conditioning, as well as acknowledgment that strength is important to overall performance.

Comment #2: How the f*** do you publish an article on combining heavy lifts + gymnastic skill work + shorter metcons and not give props to Gant?

Comment #3: the proposed template has gymnastic skill work after heavy lifting and metcons, for no good reason.

Kevin Perry 02-07-2009 11:15 PM

Hmm, I want to hear Gant's view on this. This looks a lot like his program...

But seriously? IS this stuff really any different then what has already been selected in the past? ME, one lift a day in addition to metcon, etc.

Hell i've been doing something similar lately but maybe I'll slap my name on it and post it in the CFJ.

Steven Low 02-07-2009 11:46 PM

If those comments are true Arien I would agree with you there. And to be honest, if it IS that similar to Gant's hybrid then why was Darrell and Jeff busting on Gant's program on the CF forum. That seems.. kinda counterproductive. -_-

ALL skill work... before heavy lifting/power work... before metabolic/endurance work. Common sense.

I would just recommend 1-2 strength lifts + normal CF to be honest. Cut the strength maybe second or third day of 3/1 if it's too much. Take extra rest days when needed.

Mike ODonnell 02-07-2009 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arien Malec (Post 49912)
[Comment #2: How the f*** do you publish an article on combining heavy lifts + gymnastic skill work + shorter metcons and not give props to Gant?

Would't be the first time ideas were "borrowed"....but in the end, who really cares...just do you own damn workout and get results....let those that want credit battle it out to be the coolest kid on the block....the rest of us just go on with living a life.

Emily Mattes 02-08-2009 09:27 AM

I dunno Mike . . . I don't know what Gant's aspirations are, but if I designed a program that was pretty successful for athletic development I would not appreciate it at all if a trainer swooped in and claimed my ideas as their own. If you are a trainer trying to establish a reputation for excellent programming and a solid knowledge base this kind of behavior can really undercut your ability to progress.

Glassman certainly did not take a "live and let live" attitude when he felt Mark Twight was claiming Glassman's ideas as his own--so if Jeff Martin's program really is that close to Gant's hybrid I am surprised this kind of behavior is countenanced.

Mike ODonnell 02-08-2009 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily Mattes (Post 49931)
I dunno Mike . . . I don't know what Gant's aspirations are, but if I designed a program that was pretty successful for athletic development I would not appreciate it at all if a trainer swooped in and claimed my ideas as their own. If you are a trainer trying to establish a reputation for excellent programming and a solid knowledge base this kind of behavior can really undercut your ability to progress.

Glassman certainly did not take a "live and let live" attitude when he felt Mark Twight was claiming Glassman's ideas as his own--so if Jeff Martin's program really is that close to Gant's hybrid I am surprised this kind of behavior is countenanced.

I would support Gant (or anyone else) starting up their own site and daily WODs. Otherwise someone else will come along and go with their idea, tweak it and call it their own.....just the way the fitness industry has always been. But it is great to see his work and ideas having a positive influence somewhere.

So Gant.....go start your own site, WODs and take all the traffic away from someone else claiming it as their idea. I think it is time....as you have outgrown those forums. Just don't use the words "muscle confusion"...I think someone else already claimed that. We are all behind you! :)

Emily Mattes 02-08-2009 09:58 AM

Mike, like I said, I don't know if those are Gant's aspirations. It could be he doesn't care. He hasn't even replied to any of this yet. I was just saying if I were him, I'd have a problem.

And I do think it does shows a lack of character to claim someone else's ideas as your own--especially if you spent time denigrating those ideas. Ultimately, it is Gant's thing to fight (or not fight, or whatever), but if what Arien says is true then Martin has done something pretty sad and dishonorable.

Chris H Laing 02-08-2009 10:21 AM

The only thing I really see in the article that is copying Gants program is the concept of "heavy metcons". Lots of people have been doing heavy lifting before wods (MEBB) long before either Gant or CFSB. Also the CFSB has more work tailored to getting better at the CF wods, such as the 21,15,9 rep schemes and the 15-20 rep sets.

Also, i think it says somewhere in Gants original thread about his program that he consulted with Jeff Martin, among others, when making his program.

I think that it is a good thing that we keep seeing reoccurring trends in the new workout programs, because that means the things that keep getting repeated work. No one should be mad at each other, but instead learn and keep advancing the knowledge that people have built off of others ideas.

Aaron Austin 02-08-2009 10:50 AM

Emily, saw your post in the Hybrid program thread on CF and figured it would be best to reply here.
I've been doing Gant's program since the beginning of Janaury - with the exception of one week at the of January where I did straight, but scaled CF.com WOD's. I have just finished reading Jeff Martin's article in the CFJ and come to the conclusion that the programs are very similar - like most here also have. The differences main differences in my opinion are that Jeff's program lacks the Olympic lifts and dedicates a day to a 20 minute Metcon.
Prior to my hybrid program I was BrandX Crossfitting for about 2 1/2 months. Before that excercise was not part of my regular life for many years. I had done weightlifting in my teen years so the movements came back relatively quick and as a result I didn't have any aprehension to lifting heavy (relative :) ). I have seen linear gains in all my lifts and continue to improve my handstand and body composition. I am sold on Gant's hybrid template for me and have no intentions of making any changes after reading the article.
I do plan to do CF.com or Kettlebell training for a week or two when I feel a little stale on the hybrid - to recharge my batteries so to speak. In addition I am running a 5K race in May so I may change the balance before 4-6 weeks out to help prepare.
Who knows, this article might just get more people exposed to Gant's protocol.

Garrett Smith 02-08-2009 11:37 AM

Quote:

All truth passes through three stages: First it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. Schopenhauer
CF has never tried to hide the fact that they will "take" ideas that work from others.

Most people are happy to say that they learned things by being exposed to CF's "metcon" and give credit.

The problem here is that proper credit will likely never be given by CF to anyone other than the author of that article--ie. Coach Rut, Robb Wolf, Gant, Brandon Oto, myself, etc.

I had a good time the other day customizing a CF Regional prep program for a gifted athlete--utilizing many concepts from all of the above-mentioned folks. The mainsite WOD was never really mentioned except as maybe being part of the prep for "ideas" to use towards choosing a metcon setup.

Getting good at CF is a game in itself, and a cookie-cutter setup is not the way to do it.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:51 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 3
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.