Originally Posted by Chad Cilli
Thanks for the link, I bookmarked it. If you don't mind me asking, why don't you like CFE? I've never trained for a marathon, but I used to CFE to lower my 3 mile run for the USMC PFT, and my 5K went from 22:33 to 18:53. Certainly nothing spectacular, but I took nearly 4 minutes in about 3 months. I realize that's a comparatively short distance, but what is the shortcoming of CFE for longer distances?
Like Joe said, CFE tends to = DNF. People that do CFE and excel were usually successful athletes to begin with. As is usually the case with CF of any "form".
It's been said all over this board on numerous occasions but: "Work capacity across broad time and modal domains" means that you'll probably not suck at anything, except whatever actually matters to your sport. Unless your sport is thrusters, overhead kettlebell swings, vomiting and rhabdo. Even that's questionable.
It's pretty out there to believe that one could be good at long distance endurance events while never running anything more than a 10k. And rarely at that.
If someone wants to be good at 10k and up races, they need a deep bank of work capacity in the actual "modal domain" required from which to draw and build. Not saying that every training run is going to be a marathon... that's stupid too. Keep the marathon for race day. But nobody became a world champion marathoner by doing Heavy Fran and 100m repeats with the occasional 5k or 10k thrown in.
I think I saw something by Joel Jamieson on his site noting that even in fighters, who have a serious anaerobic requirement, they need to do more longer distance, lower intensity work. Boxers have done this for ages. Sprint/speed work is important, but low intensity work is the goods for any sport requiring a sustained effort.
If a fighter needs that kind of base to build on, why wouldn't an endurance athlete?