Addressing CF Injuries

[Todd Rehm]

Shaf and Sara made great suggestions, and like Steven Low, I would kill the SDHPs.

John Sheaffer has a pretty good write up on his suggestions over at strengthvillain.com (not wfs, ugly design but some good content).

[Patrick Donnelly]

Originally Posted by Arien Malec

If the goal is a good fitness program aimed at "ordinary folks" who want to get "fit" (feel stronger, better looking, better CV for health and performance), you'd want to change a lot more. (It would probably look like: weight training program with decent programming + programmed finisher + good mobility work).

This. CrossFit is complete and total overkill for normal people.


Dave had some good points too.

[James Evans]

Excellent thread.

A tempering of the no surrender culture. You have to get a balance between manning (or indeed womaning) up and backing off.

Don't be afraid to pull a client from a workout. Don't be afraid to kill a workout if it's going to shit. Drop stuff that clearly isn't appropriate.

I had a conversation with Andrew Stemler (first UK affiliate) several years ago where I said that CF hustled participants into biting off more than they could chew - Be Brave, Grab that Bigger Kettlebell, direct quote from the front page - and he fully agreed. Check ego in at the door.

I really like the stuff Rutman programmes.

[Tom Rawls]

Suggestions to remedy crossfit?

What's next--redesign the Edsel? The Tacoma Narrows Bridge?

[Stephen Flamm]

Regarding injury avoidance:

1. Screen all clients in basic movement assessment and structural balance.
2. Address unbalance first, particularly in the shoulder/scapula.
3. Teach the basics and require steps. If you cannot perform a strict pull-up, do not perform kipping pull-ups. If you cannot properly rack a front squat, do not perform thrusters.
4. Balance in programming, particularly between strict vs. kipping volume, as well as horizontal pushing vs. horizontal pulling.
5. Accept that some isolation movements - even those moving small loads very slowly over a small distance - have a place in a sound training program.
6. Do not exceed 60 minutes of high-intensity conditioning in any given week.
7. Demand full range of motion at all times.

[Kyle Redinger]

Jake showed me a few threads which weren't too positive on CrossFit and I was a little disheartened. I've owned and run a CF affiliate for 2 years. We are doing a PM cycle right now in our gym, have done Wichita Falls programming and our own in past months. We seek out the best for our clients, put safety before intensity and eliminate egos in the gym environment.

There is a large difference between affiliates, but there are many good affiliates out there that incorporate proper warm up/mobility programs, are aware of client issues, properly instruct and teach movements, scale to intelligent levels and program generally pretty good stuff.

If we are taking a scientific approach to the program, then we should know that taking a few examples from some message boards and comparing them to a general CF population is a problematic endeavor. Yes there are problems and everyone needs to improve, but most of the coaches I've met honestly care about the best interest of their clients over a dangerous attempt of some WOD. Most are aware of injury prone movements, weights that are too heavy and issues with over-programming.

[Justin Arnold]

Open question to affiliate owners/trainers that do care and program intelligently:

Do you feel that mainsite programming should continue on it's current course? (taking into consideration both CF's policy on scaling WODs and the user group that follows mainsite)

[Garrett Smith]

I was an affiliate co-owner at one time, in the early days.

Mainpage is on a course to oblivion, and I'm guessing that you already know this Justin...your question was really just to get confirmation of your gut feeling.

Mainpage programming, as is evidenced in the Budding "programming" videos, has no direction, rhyme, nor reason behind it.

[Kyle Redinger]

Originally Posted by Justin Arnold

Open question to affiliate owners/trainers that do care and program intelligently:

Do you feel that mainsite programming should continue on it's current course? (taking into consideration both CF's policy on scaling WODs and the user group that follows mainsite)

We don't use mainsite programming for our clients as the WODs are too long and too advanced for us to best benefit our clients. I know BrandX does a good job with scaling ideas, but we generally like shorter time domains, focus on strength and higher intensity levels.

For our competitive athletes, we think they are necessary part of training for the games. It would be nice to put more emphasis on scaling for general population. As an affiliate it's our responsibility to take care of our clients. For individuals on their own... well.. they do so at their own risk, but that's not unlike following PM programming or anything else out there.

[Jacob Rowell]

For better or worse, most affiliates that I have run in to operate in a completely different realm than mainsite when it comes to programming. Hell, some of my members have no idea that there is a crossfit.com, strangely enough.

Again, from the affiliates I have had close work with, they program based on many of the general principles coming from HQ, but adapt to the needs of their membership.

Long story short, outside of internet discussions and those that follow the mainsite every day, I don't imagine many affiliates will care either way what the crossfit.com workouts are. Sorry for the less than straightforward answer, but all I can say is we've done a lot of experimentation with our own programming, and we've had some good and bad runs in there, but I know that we're moving in a good direction, and can see clear improvements in how the membership as a whole is progressing.