Go Back   Catalyst Athletics Forums > Training > Fitness, Strength & CrossFit

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-10-2009, 11:52 AM   #31
Ken Urakawa
Member
 
Ken Urakawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chandler, AZ
Posts: 206
Default

[QUOTE=Mike ODonnell;50113]at least Gant can copyright his beer and ice cream PWO diet. QUOTE]

Well....I hate to have to rain on anyone's parade there, but I can clearly recall both the "beershake" and just plain old Guinness and ice cream being a part of my recovery strategies back in the in early '90's.

Just saying is all...
Ken Urakawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2009, 11:55 AM   #32
Kevin Perry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,672
Default

Or BBQ diet.

I think most of us here can agree with the more strength shorter metcon approach as showing it's highly effectiveness.
Kevin Perry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2009, 02:00 PM   #33
Brandon Oto
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 299
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garrett Smith View Post
The biggest thing I see with this shift is that the "constantly varied" idea will have to be accepted as being (pretty much) defunct. Putting someone on a routine like in the CFSB is not "constantly varied" at all anymore.
This doesn't kill me either as I'm not convinced that training has to be blizzard-like in its randomness in order to create a body that can do many things.
Brandon Oto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2009, 03:33 PM   #34
Garrett Smith
Senior Member
 
Garrett Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 4,368
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Oto View Post
This doesn't kill me either as I'm not convinced that training has to be blizzard-like in its randomness in order to create a body that can do many things.
I agree, and I think most of us here realize that no one can be fully prepared for everything.

My thing is I simply find hitting PRs in OLs and getting new gymnastics moves to be so much more fulfilling than improving my times on a metcon. That would seem to be the same reason I didn't get much out of competing in triathlons--finishing the first one was cool, then it was simply fighting the clock. I guess I'd rather learn new things than just try to get better and better at the same movement.

What I found even more interesting is that Coach Glassman mentions that there will be non-typical (at least to CF programming) movements utilized in this years CF Games--see the relatively recently posted video on the now-acronymed "MP" (mainpage). This is curious because CF prides itself on using movements that involve the generation of some of the highest work outputs. Since they are looking for the men & women who have the highest "work capacity", will their search really be fruitful using lower-output movements--or are there magical, unknown-to-most-of-us movements out there that generate even more horsepower than the OLs and other "functional" movements?
__________________
Garrett Smith NMD CSCS BS, aka "Dr. G"
RepairRecoverRestore.com - Blood, Saliva, and Stool Testing
My radio show - The Path to Strength and Health
Garrett Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2009, 03:50 PM   #35
Gavin Harrison
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 263
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garrett Smith View Post
What I found even more interesting is that Coach Glassman mentions that there will be non-typical (at least to CF programming) movements utilized in this years CF Games--see the relatively recently posted video on the now-acronymed "MP" (mainpage). This is curious because CF prides itself on using movements that involve the generation of some of the highest work outputs. Since they are looking for the men & women who have the highest "work capacity", will their search really be fruitful using lower-output movements--or are there magical, unknown-to-most-of-us movements out there that generate even more horsepower than the OLs and other "functional" movements?
I think it fits in neatly with the "how do you train for the unknown and the unknowable" aspect of crossfit. If you do things that are too close to normal crossfit wods, you aren't really training for the unknown/unknowable, you're training for crossfit. That's my take on it, at least.
Gavin Harrison is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2009, 04:20 PM   #36
Brandon Oto
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 299
Default

I think it makes complete sense to use weirder, non-trained patterns of movement to TEST GPP since that's the whole point -- everyone knows you're good at what you train, the GPP question is how good you are at everything else -- while not necessarily using anything but the most effective movements to TRAIN GPP.

That's actually how I myself envisioned the Games (something nobody there has trained), so I'm extremely pleased to hear it may be that way.
Brandon Oto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2009, 05:37 PM   #37
Mike ODonnell
Senior Member
 
Mike ODonnell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,596
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Urakawa View Post
Well....I hate to have to rain on anyone's parade there, but I can clearly recall both the "beershake" and just plain old Guinness and ice cream being a part of my recovery strategies back in the in early '90's.

Just saying is all...
Mmmmm....the old Guinness float....Yummy. Seriously....if that kind of pwo eating isn't motivation to go workout....I don't know what is.

Do you think there will ever be the P90X games?
__________________
Fitness Spotlight
The IF Life
Mike ODonnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2009, 06:05 PM   #38
Garrett Smith
Senior Member
 
Garrett Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 4,368
Default

"How to create an injury" aka "men will die for points"

=

Take unfamiliar & untrained movements, get a bunch of highly-trained athletes in a highly competitive atmosphere, and have them go balls-out for extended periods of time.

This could be a recipe for rhabdo in the "specifically unprepared" athlete. Think GHD sit-ups, they can take a world sit-up champion and put him out of commission.

Or just maybe, like prior to last year's Games where I complained about the old CFJ standard of chest-to-bar pullups being ignored for the new record-setting "chin just squeaking above the bar" standard, only to have the chest-to-bar standard being installed days before the Games (note that my post was May 13th, the Games were June 5-6th, coincidence?). Maybe they'll read this and rethink the approach they're currently proposing.

Could be disastrous. Maybe deadly. "Dangerous" (think t-shirt) might take on a whole new meaning there. Keep the medics handy.
__________________
Garrett Smith NMD CSCS BS, aka "Dr. G"
RepairRecoverRestore.com - Blood, Saliva, and Stool Testing
My radio show - The Path to Strength and Health
Garrett Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2009, 04:31 AM   #39
Gant Grimes
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,373
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garrett Smith View Post
I agree, and I think most of us here realize that no one can be fully prepared for everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gavin Harrison View Post
I think it fits in neatly with the "how do you train for the unknown and the unknowable" aspect of crossfit.
And why should we? Between your individual physical characteristics, geography, and demographics, you can forsee 80% of the things (even the really weird ones) that might happen to you.

It's fine to do something because you like it, and a lot of people like CF. For true GPP, it's tough to beat. But how many people need true GPP? Most people tell themselves they're preparing for "everything," when they're really in it for the abz.

Unless you truly need GPP for your job (a small portion of mil/spec ops, some fire, very few LEO) or are one of those people that DON'T need it for anything, you're going to be better off with a programming bias.
__________________
"It should be more like birthday party than physics class." | Log | 70's Big

Last edited by Gant Grimes; 02-11-2009 at 04:52 AM.
Gant Grimes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2009, 10:34 AM   #40
Ben Moskowitz
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 151
Default

Well, most people "need" biased programming like they need GPP. The rub is some people like one more than the other.
Ben Moskowitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:06 PM.

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