crossfit

[ZDL]

Subscribers bitch about the WOD here.

www.crossfit.com


rest day............................ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[WillBrink]

Well hell, if I had known there was gonna be a fitness/health section I would have put into such as this info on injury rates in SF I just posted:

https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=26534

In this forum. If the mods want to move any of health/fitness related I have already put up, please do so. Anyway, here's my addition to this section:

The Mistake of Linear Program Design

I find most people will design a program for themselves and follow it in a linear fashion, that is they run X times per week for Y distance, lift X times per week doing Y number of sets, etc. with little change over time. A result oriented program looks like a wave form where volume and intensity peaks, say over a 6-8 week period (as an example, but programs vary widely), with volume and or loading reduced 40-60% for a week or two, then either repeated, or onto some other program. Some programs will call for taking a week off totally between programs.

Increasing intensity and or volume improves the response up to a point, then falls off sharply as you hit over training syndromes (OTS) and or injuries or both. So, periods of planned increases in volume and or intensity to reach a personal mile stone, followed by a detraining period, is best to optimizing training, reaching new personal bests, and avoiding OTS. The study listed below gives some insight into that also.

A linear program where you do the same thing each week, such as run X miles and lift X weights will be limiting. Athletes left to their own, will generally follow a “more is better” linear approach, where as a good coach will follow the “smart is better” approach, which follows a wave form pattern. Within that wave form pattern may be micro cycles and other stuff too, but that depends on the program.

There have been some interesting studies where they have taken runners and swimmers, cut their volume in half, and their times improved! Why? Because they were over training.

I find that is often the case with strength athletes also.

Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise:

Volume 39(8)August 2007pp 1358-1365

Effects of Tapering on Performance: A Meta-Analysis

ABSTRACT

Purpose: The purpose of this investigation was to assess the effects of alterations in taper components on performance in competitive athletes, through a meta-analysis.

Methods: Six databases were searched using relevant terms and strategies. Criteria for study inclusion were that participants must be competitive athletes, a tapering intervention must be employed providing details about the procedures used to decrease the training load, use of actual competition or field-based criterion performance, and inclusion of all necessary data to calculate effect sizes. Datasets reported in more than one published study were only included once in the present analyses. Twenty-seven of 182 potential studies met these criteria and were included in the analysis. The dependent variable was performance, and the independent variables were the decrease in training intensity, volume, and frequency, as well as the pattern of the taper and its duration. Pre-post taper standardized mean differences in performance were calculated and weighted according to the within-group heterogeneity to develop an overall effect.

Results: The optimal strategy to optimize performance is a tapering intervention of 2-wk duration (overall effect = 0.59 ± 0.33, P < 0.001), where the training volume is exponentially decreased by 41-60% (overall effect = 0.72 ± 0.36, P < 0.001), without any modification of either training intensity (overall effect = 0.33 ± 0.14, P < 0.001) or frequency (overall effect = 0.35 ± 0.17, P < 0.001).

Conclusion: A 2-wk taper during which training volume is exponentially reduced by 41-60% seems to be the most efficient strategy to maximize performance gains. This meta-analysis provides a framework that can be useful for athletes, coaches, and sport scientists to optimize their tapering strategy.

The Bottom Line:

People should understand that designing effective, efficient, programs is not nearly as simple as it might appear. Unless you have long term experience with concepts such loading, volume, TUT, etc, etc, pick a program by a trusted coach and follow it. The haphazard routines I see people self invent are often responsible for a lack of steady progress in the gym.

[WillBrink]

Mods, please remove. posted in the wrong thread.

[ZDL]

Do you know anything about crossfit? It is the farthest thing from a linear program there is. It prides itself on, rather loudly, being dynamic. The site is enormous and information is bountiful. It's also free. Take a few days and sift through it. You'll find it's definitive in it's research. Good luck.

[WillBrink]

Do you know anything about crossfit?

Yes, I do. However, I wrote above "Mods, please remove. posted in the wrong thread."

[ZDL]

Yes, I do. However, I wrote above "Mods, please remove. posted in the wrong thread."

Didn't see that at the time. No worries. I was just curious as the words linear and crossfit can't exist in the same zip code due to their nature.

BTW you can delete your own posts.... I think.

[WillBrink]

Didn't see that at the time. No worries. I was just curious as the words linear and crossfit can't exist in the same zip code due to their nature.

Personally, I think, like any program, it has its pros and its cons. A lengthy review by Chris Shugart here:

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_...about_crossfit

A shorter critique by Coach Poliquin here:

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_...trength_vol_47

BTW you can delete your own posts.... I think.

I couldn't find the option myself.

[ZDL]

Personally, I think, like any program, it has its pros and its cons. A lengthy review by Chris Shugart here:

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_...about_crossfit

A shorter critique by Coach Poliquin here:

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_...trength_vol_47





I couldn't find the option myself.

I've read those before and the logic is flawed due to a lack of education about crossfit on the part of the author. It's normal. I've gotten over the fact people don't understand it. At first I couldn't fathom how it didn't make sense to individuals9 but I understand now that just part of the game. I've been in this game a while and I never use my personal results as an advertising pitch. I point to the many people I have turned onto crossfit and their results. From my mother to the swat guy, to the 19 year old baseball player to my 70 year old grandma. All of them, and more, have excelled in this program due to its scalability and dynamic nature. Now, without nutrition, the plateau, or wall, will invariably be smacked head on. That's another discussion and another thread. I have had people quit crossfit because they felt it was too demanding (they didn't understand scalability) only to continue their failing injury prone streak at their local globo gym.

The needs of our terrorist hunters are the exact same as the soccer mom. Simply at different levels. They both need to get up, get down, push, pull, jump, etc. Crossfit hits all of those areas at their respective levels. Trust me, my grandma isn't doing the full Murph......... yet.

Crossfit is broad and general. Nature punishes the specialist. So, inside the specialty of the specialist (specific), yes they should perform better than the crossfitter. No one has argued that ever. However, outside the specialty of the specialist,(general) the crossfiter by design will come out on top.

A shorter way of explaining, We do the thing you specialize at, almost as good and everything else a whole lot better. That's the idea anyway.

The pyramid of fitness is as follows from most important to least important:

Nutrition-metabolic conditioning-gymnastics-weightlifting and throwing-sport

The specialist v. crossfitter debate gets settled with the above.

Crossfit hits the following 10 general physical skills- Cardiovascular/respiratory endurance-stamina-strength-flexibility-power-speed-coordination-agility-balance-accuracy.

I've yet, in many years, heard a legitimate gripe/concern/negative to crossfit that stands. I'm not saying it's not out there... Just haven't heard it yet. Education, research, and the fact that the results of crossfit are measurable, observable, and repeatable across broad time and modal domains, makes it tough to develop one.

The best part about all of this: It sounds as if I'm giving a sales pitch but its all free.

[WillBrink]

The best part about all of this: It sounds as if I'm giving a sales pitch but its all free.

Nah, I think you made fair comments, some of which I agree with and some I don't, but you didn't foam at the mouth as some seem to if there is even a hint of criticism about the system. I think Poliquin, being perhaps the most successful coaches on the planet, who I know well, makes some legit points. You will also note Sugart finishes his article with:

"Is CrossFit the only training system you'll ever need, as its founder and its most enthusiastic members claim? No. And most CrossFitters I've communicated with will acknowledge that. Is CrossFit a fun, challenging, effective training method? Yes ... but only if the benefits it offers are the ones you seek. As long as its goals match your goals, I recommend it."

So, he too is clearly not anti crossfit per se. Anyway, I didn't intend to start a crossfit debate and ended up here due to my thread posting mistake.

Carry on!

[ZDL]

Nah, I think you made fair comments, some of which I agree with and some I don't, but you didn't foam at the mouth as some seem to if there is even a hint of criticism about the system. I think Poliquin, being perhaps the most successful coaches on the planet, who I know well, makes some legit points. You will also note Sugart finishes his article with:

"Is CrossFit the only training system you'll ever need, as its founder and its most enthusiastic members claim? No. And most CrossFitters I've communicated with will acknowledge that. Is CrossFit a fun, challenging, effective training method? Yes ... but only if the benefits it offers are the ones you seek. As long as its goals match your goals, I recommend it."

So, he too is clearly not anti crossfit per se. Anyway, I didn't intend to start a crossfit debate and ended up here due to my thread posting mistake.

Carry on!

Crossfiters will never (should never) point to it as the end all of everything. (we maybe an arrogant bunch but I like to believe a sampling size will show we are educated and willing to learn more) It's the bridge, or foundation if you will, to the specialty you desire.. If you desire or need one. Being LE a broad and general form of fitness is exactly what I need. Climbing over fences, up ropes, jumping over a car, crawling under a car, fighting for 2 minutes, etc. All of these things demand differently on my body. The neuro-endocrine response crossfit illicits is the same as in these real life scenarios. Training how I live sorta thing. It's scary how well the training simulates the physical and emotional stress of my real world demands.

I definitely wouldn't tell the PGA pro to stop doing golf specific exercises all together or the cyclist to stop riding.

In the case of the 19 y/o baseball player, he had some skills in areas but was unable to grow beyond a certain point. A familiar state for anyone who has set foot in a gym. When I tuned him on to crossfit he said it broke down everything and planted him solidly in a broad idea of fitness. Once he had this foundation he went back to his specialty (sport) skills and found they were even MORE effective now that he had a fitness base. He was amazed the coloration between climbing a rope and throwing a baseball or C&J and exploding off the mound. etc.

I bounce everything off the "is it measurable, observable and repeatable over broad time and modal domains" filter. If it works, it's in my life.