CrossFit Discussion Board  

Go Back   CrossFit Discussion Board > CrossFit Forum > Competitions
CrossFit Home Forum Site Rules CrossFit FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Competitions Competitions, contests & challenges

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-05-2015, 09:30 AM   #141
Shawn M Wilson
Member Shawn M Wilson is offline
 
Shawn M Wilson's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Tyler  TX
Posts: 1,118
Re: Is Rich Froning the next Lance Armstrong?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke Sirakos View Post
No.

Top level powerlifters, bodybuilders, sprinters, endurance athletes, etc (assumed natural for this) will not improve by adding CrossFit to their training. Athletes at this level need to train much smarter and doing CrossFit workouts would be wasting their energy when it could be put towards things that specifically help to attain their goals.
I'm not sure I would agree with this 100%

The great thing about crossfit is it has opened the eyes of many individuals in sports training to look at adding other domains to help athletes improve.

As a guy who ran track for 12 years competitively, running got old. I reached a point where doing the same old same old wasn't showing much Results.

I got a new coaching and training guy in college who made drastic improvements by adding different weight schemes and some "crossfit" like workouts (different movements in time) back in the mid 90s. This made training less dull and helped push past a few barriers.

Now a 100% crossfit program isn't going to help most elite athletes improve but a few crossfit thigs can. Look at the story of "fight gone bad". Endurance training for a fighter which helped mix up their old style that they were good at and put them on the floor and exposed some weakness and possible gains from different movements/programming.
__________________
Pastor - Saved by Grace - Building the Body & Soul one day at a time!
My Log ****Open 12.1 (94) 12.2 (60) 12.3 (196) 12.4 (172) 12.5 (80)
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2015, 09:42 AM   #142
Luke Sirakos
Member Luke Sirakos is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Dallas  TX
Posts: 858
Re: Is Rich Froning the next Lance Armstrong?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Wingo View Post
What "smarter" training should they do? Just add more swimming, riding, running, powerlifting, sprinting, etc. to their training regimen without incorporating core strength and conditioning?
They should train specifically to address whatever it is they want to/need to improve, not just Crossfit wods.
__________________
Deadlift: 475 | Back Squat: 405 | Front Squat: 320
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2015, 09:54 AM   #143
Steven Wingo
Member Steven Wingo is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Ocala  FL
Posts: 506
Re: Is Rich Froning the next Lance Armstrong?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke Sirakos View Post
They should train specifically to address whatever it is they want to/need to improve, not just Crossfit wods.
I don't really view that as a substantive answer.

Just sticking to training your specific discipline--swimming for swimmers; riding bikes for cyclists; running for runners; doing deadlifts, squats, and bench for power lifters; running sprints for sprinters, pole vaulting for pole vaulters, and so on is not the best way to train. As your volume of training increases, the relative returns diminish. Going from 25 to 30 hours a week on a bike, or 100 miles to 110 miles running, gives rise to small marginal gains.

All athletes can improve through a solid core strength and conditioning program, whether a pure strength athlete, an endurance athlete, or a team sport type athlete. Do you disagree with that statement? No reasonable person could disagree with that statement.

The question then becomes--what type of core strength and conditioning program/cross training program is best?

I say it is now absolutely clear the best program is the one which elicits a natural neuroendocrine response through constantly variable functional movements performed at high intensity. If you try to follow a "routine" core strength and conditioning program, your body hits plateaus and quits adapting, quits producing the neuroendocrine response. You must use the type of movements which elicit that response (functional movements at high intensity). You must keep switching it up so you do not hit plateaus. When you do that, what are you doing? CrossFit.

Show me an athlete who does nothing but their own sport and I will show you an athlete who has not reached their full potential.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2015, 11:14 AM   #144
Luke Sirakos
Member Luke Sirakos is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Dallas  TX
Posts: 858
Re: Is Rich Froning the next Lance Armstrong?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Wingo View Post
I don't really view that as a substantive answer.

Just sticking to training your specific discipline--swimming for swimmers; riding bikes for cyclists; running for runners; doing deadlifts, squats, and bench for power lifters; running sprints for sprinters, pole vaulting for pole vaulters, and so on is not the best way to train. As your volume of training increases, the relative returns diminish. Going from 25 to 30 hours a week on a bike, or 100 miles to 110 miles running, gives rise to small marginal gains.

All athletes can improve through a solid core strength and conditioning program, whether a pure strength athlete, an endurance athlete, or a team sport type athlete. Do you disagree with that statement? No reasonable person could disagree with that statement.

The question then becomes--what type of core strength and conditioning program/cross training program is best?

I say it is now absolutely clear the best program is the one which elicits a natural neuroendocrine response through constantly variable functional movements performed at high intensity. If you try to follow a "routine" core strength and conditioning program, your body hits plateaus and quits adapting, quits producing the neuroendocrine response. You must use the type of movements which elicit that response (functional movements at high intensity). You must keep switching it up so you do not hit plateaus. When you do that, what are you doing? CrossFit.

Show me an athlete who does nothing but their own sport and I will show you an athlete who has not reached their full potential.
You don't just do your sport, I never said that, you train to address whatever weakness you have, not just random exercises strung together for whatever reason. Powerlifting, you need to increase your deadlift and maybe your hamstrings are your weak link so you start hitting hard good mornings. Bodybuilding, your delts are lacking so you start prioritizing overhead press and raises instead of bench press. Maybe include some pre-exhaustion work.

Re the bolded part - you keep saying this but you have zero proof of it at all. CrossFit is not the best methodology to follow if you are looking for pure strength gains and it is not the best methodology if you are looking for pure conditioning. It is good at both but not great, if it was great then high level powerlifters, bodybuilders, endurance athletes, sprinters, etc would all be doing it. You don't need to "shock your system" or whatever you want to call needing constant variation, you need things like progressive overload and to address your weaknesses.

And once again this has ZERO to do with the topic of steroids. Just because you think that Crossfit training induces a super special neuroendocrine response that renders the need for steroids useless doesn't mean it is true. Even if it was the be all end all people at the top would still probably be taking performance enhancing drugs so they could train even harder, get even stronger, get even faster, and finish higher. That doesn't mean that all of those at the top use steroids but there is nothing about Crossfit that makes it immune to that type of issue. Believing otherwise is completely delusional.
__________________
Deadlift: 475 | Back Squat: 405 | Front Squat: 320
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2015, 11:38 AM   #145
Andrew Bell
Member Andrew Bell is offline
 
Andrew Bell's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Houston  TX
Posts: 4,019
Re: Is Rich Froning the next Lance Armstrong?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Wingo View Post
All athletes can improve through a solid core strength and conditioning program, whether a pure strength athlete, an endurance athlete, or a team sport type athlete. Do you disagree with that statement? No reasonable person could disagree with that statement.
I guess Luke and I are unreasonable.

I would choose a sport specific strength and conditioning program if I was an athlete.

Just like Luke gave you examples I will also. If I had a client who was a pitcher, I would give him rotational work to improve his core strength. I would also have him do some shoulder work to increase strength and stability within that region of his arm, as well as other parts of the arm. No amount of wall balls/bupees/rowing/muscle ups/sdhp's will help more than target specific work to focus on key areas of the athlete's needed muscles. Now, will this work sometimes be put together in a HIIT format? It could be. Would that be considered Crossfit? Cross Training? HIIT? Circuit Training? To me these are ALL different ways of saying MOSTLY the same thing, however, Crossfit is the newest of these buzz words.

Crossfit is a great tool, but it should not be the base of any athlete's program. General conditioning that does not have a high risk/reward is the best route for professionals. Most people who train VERY high level atheletes do no have these clients do 1RM, or even 2 or 3RM's because the risk to injury is simply too high. Your programing CAN NOT be responsible for an injury to a professional athlete.

As for implementing crossfit into a professional sports team/enviroment, let's see how the Saints did last season, and more importantly, how they will do this year.

I think on the non-professional/high school level, crossfit is miles ahead of MOST high school strength and conditioning programs, and we have seen MUCH success in high school programs that have implemented this type of training for good reason. The knowledgeable resources for high schools simply don't exist. We hear stories all the time from players who after coming home their freshman year talk about how they had to relearn ALL the lifts their first year in college. Many guys who try crossfit for the first time that played high school football make the comparission to that type of training all the time, and it's a fair one for many. While there were some key differences, the high school training program I went through in the lat 90's had some crossfit-ish theme's to it.

In the end, for the general population, scaled crossfit is a perfect choice for getting in shape, and their life together. But for a true athlete, I would disagree.
__________________
| Log (wfs) |
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2015, 01:42 PM   #146
Pearse Shields
Member Pearse Shields is offline
 
Pearse Shields's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Palmerston  New Zealand
Posts: 1,798
Re: Is Rich Froning the next Lance Armstrong?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Wingo View Post
I don't really view that as a substantive answer.

Just sticking to training your specific discipline--swimming for swimmers; riding bikes for cyclists; running for runners; doing deadlifts, squats, and bench for power lifters; running sprints for sprinters, pole vaulting for pole vaulters, and so on is not the best way to train. As your volume of training increases, the relative returns diminish. Going from 25 to 30 hours a week on a bike, or 100 miles to 110 miles running, gives rise to small marginal gains.

All athletes can improve through a solid core strength and conditioning program, whether a pure strength athlete, an endurance athlete, or a team sport type athlete. Do you disagree with that statement? No reasonable person could disagree with that statement.

The question then becomes--what type of core strength and conditioning program/cross training program is best?

I say it is now absolutely clear the best program is the one which elicits a natural neuroendocrine response through constantly variable functional movements performed at high intensity. If you try to follow a "routine" core strength and conditioning program, your body hits plateaus and quits adapting, quits producing the neuroendocrine response. You must use the type of movements which elicit that response (functional movements at high intensity). You must keep switching it up so you do not hit plateaus. When you do that, what are you doing? CrossFit.

Show me an athlete who does nothing but their own sport and I will show you an athlete who has not reached their full potential.
I haven't logged in for years now, but I just wanted to tell you that you're a bell-end.

The best lifters lift more for their GPP. The best sprinters introduce a bit of lifting and more varied running. The best of any athletes will do GPP work that, oddly enough, is actually still specific to their sport. They periodise their training in order to achieve a greater cumulative training effect. Moving from aerobic/endurance-based training towards anaerobic/power- based training is common among fighters in a fight camp.

None of this is CrossFit. This has all been around for longer than Glassman himself has been alive.

Which type of core S&C programme is best? A specific one, for specific athletes- which is the antithesis of CrossFit, according to many things published by HQ.

PS, the book "Wrestling Physical Conditioning Encyclopedia" described CrossFit-type training long before CrossFit was ever established as well- there's your public, easily accessible source.
__________________
If it had parents, eat it till you're full My YouTube
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2015, 02:34 AM   #147
Zac Metz
Member Zac Metz is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Honolulu  HI
Posts: 34
Re: Is Rich Froning the next Lance Armstrong?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Wingo View Post
I don't really view that as a substantive answer.

Just sticking to training your specific discipline--swimming for swimmers; riding bikes for cyclists; running for runners; doing deadlifts, squats, and bench for power lifters; running sprints for sprinters, pole vaulting for pole vaulters, and so on is not the best way to train. As your volume of training increases, the relative returns diminish. Going from 25 to 30 hours a week on a bike, or 100 miles to 110 miles running, gives rise to small marginal gains.

All athletes can improve through a solid core strength and conditioning program, whether a pure strength athlete, an endurance athlete, or a team sport type athlete. Do you disagree with that statement? No reasonable person could disagree with that statement.

The question then becomes--what type of core strength and conditioning program/cross training program is best?

I say it is now absolutely clear the best program is the one which elicits a natural neuroendocrine response through constantly variable functional movements performed at high intensity. If you try to follow a "routine" core strength and conditioning program, your body hits plateaus and quits adapting, quits producing the neuroendocrine response. You must use the type of movements which elicit that response (functional movements at high intensity). You must keep switching it up so you do not hit plateaus. When you do that, what are you doing? CrossFit.

Show me an athlete who does nothing but their own sport and I will show you an athlete who has not reached their full potential.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pearse Shields View Post
I haven't logged in for years now, but I just wanted to tell you that you're a bell-end.

The best lifters lift more for their GPP. The best sprinters introduce a bit of lifting and more varied running. The best of any athletes will do GPP work that, oddly enough, is actually still specific to their sport. They periodise their training in order to achieve a greater cumulative training effect. Moving from aerobic/endurance-based training towards anaerobic/power- based training is common among fighters in a fight camp.

None of this is CrossFit. This has all been around for longer than Glassman himself has been alive.

Which type of core S&C programme is best? A specific one, for specific athletes- which is the antithesis of CrossFit, according to many things published by HQ.

PS, the book "Wrestling Physical Conditioning Encyclopedia" described CrossFit-type training long before CrossFit was ever established as well- there's your public, easily accessible source.
Aww I was going to use the book "Infinite Intensity" to say the same thing. I dont know the EXACT dates of Crossfit and its "invention", but that book was written in 2005 and I think that probably pre-dates Crossfit. And spoiler alert, it has programming in which the athlete does a group of exercises, for time, and then tries to improve later to improve conditioning. Sound like something we've heard of?

And, for the athlete who "hasn't reached his potential" by doing nothing but their own sport, I'll go with Phelps. I dont recall him being a crossfitter, so I'm curious where he has not reached his potential.

Crossfit is a good way to train the masses, and it will definitely improve their overall level of fitness, sure. But there is no way you will improve people who are PROFESSIONALS in their sport with general circuit training. If there was, they would have been doing it well before Crossfit became a word. They train specific to their sports and it works, and thats why they are the best at them. Same reason why Froning is the best at Crossfit, and wont ever beat a champion from a different sport in their own game.

Side note, because I'm curious, you say "Just sticking to training your specific discipline--swimming for swimmers; riding bikes for cyclists; running for runners; doing deadlifts, squats, and bench for power lifters; running sprints for sprinters, pole vaulting for pole vaulters, and so on is not the best way to train". So are you saying you could be a better trainer to athletes in those fields (at the highest levels) by telling them to do Crossfit? I'm just curious how you would vary their programs to improve them.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2015, 04:29 AM   #148
Steven Wingo
Member Steven Wingo is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Ocala  FL
Posts: 506
Re: Is Rich Froning the next Lance Armstrong?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Bell View Post
I guess Luke and I are unreasonable.
So you are saying you don't agree with me that all athletes can improve through a solid core strength and conditioning program?
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2015, 04:55 AM   #149
Steven Wingo
Member Steven Wingo is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Ocala  FL
Posts: 506
Re: Is Rich Froning the next Lance Armstrong?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zac Metz View Post

And, for the athlete who "hasn't reached his potential" by doing nothing but their own sport, I'll go with Phelps. I dont recall him being a crossfitter, so I'm curious where he has not reached his potential.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6z9wYrBVFg

http://www.yourswimlog.com/michael-p...raining-video/

Phelps was probably not the best example since he is such a high profile athlete and there are quite a few videos of his training. Take a look at the 2nd one, in which his trainer specifically talks about reducing the amount of his aerobic training because it suppresses testosterone. There is also discussion about increasing power. He is shown pushing sleds, pulling sleds, working to "connect his shoulders to hips" through core strength work in the rings, and doing weighted knee pulls hanging from a bar and from rings. There is also reference in the discussion by his trainer to using the olympic lifts in his training for explosiveness.

Even from these short clips, you can see that Phelps' "dryland training" is strikingly similar to what you seeing going on in CrossFit boxes throughout the world.

Is Phelps a CrossFitter? This video suggests absolutely. Is he working out in a CrossFit affiliate doing the same exact workouts programmed for working stiffs and soccer moms just trying to stay in shape? No. But he is engaging in a core strength and conditioning program other than swimming. He is performing functional movements. The movements are being performed are obviously high intensity. Is there variety in there over time? Well you can't tell that from the video but his trainer seems to know what he is doing and it is extremely likely he is incorporating variety into his "out of the pool" workouts.

Last edited by Steven Wingo : 06-06-2015 at 05:19 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2015, 05:00 AM   #150
Steven Wingo
Member Steven Wingo is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Ocala  FL
Posts: 506
Re: Is Rich Froning the next Lance Armstrong?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zac Metz View Post

Side note, because I'm curious, you say "Just sticking to training your specific discipline--swimming for swimmers; riding bikes for cyclists; running for runners; doing deadlifts, squats, and bench for power lifters; running sprints for sprinters, pole vaulting for pole vaulters, and so on is not the best way to train". So are you saying you could be a better trainer to athletes in those fields (at the highest levels) by telling them to do Crossfit? I'm just curious how you would vary their programs to improve them.
If they are only training within their specific discipline, without a core strength and conditioning program, then yes I could do a better job training them or at least improve their training by taking over that portion of it (adding it in there). The mistake you make, however, is in assuming trainers for professional and olympic athletes are not doing so. They are doing so. They increasingly recognize the benefits of the CrossFit prescription--constantly variable functional movements performed at high intensity--and incorporate them into training the very best athletes on the planet.

In terms of what would I do to improve their programs, a specific question you pose, well nobody can answer that question for any athlete without studying exactly what they are doing for their cross training. Most of them these days are likely getting high quality core strength and conditioning training already in addition to their sport specific training. If they are doing sport specific training only, I would add a core strength and conditioning program. It would follow the basic CrossFit prescription. It would be tailored to that athlete--so a core strength and conditioning program for a Tour de France cyclist would look different than one for an elite Power Lifter. In fact it would look different for a Tour de France cyclists who is a hill climbing specialist than it would for one who is a sprinting specialist. But varying their programs to fit their needs does not mean you get away from the fundamentals that Glassman popularized and brought to the masses--constantly variable functional movements at high intensity.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How Do You Beat Rich Froning? James Gist Community 1 09-02-2013 11:50 AM
Live Q&A w/Rich Froning TODAY! Jake L Baker Community 0 12-04-2012 12:54 AM
rich froning jr's diet? Grant Taylor Nutrition 50 05-01-2012 02:32 PM
Rich Froning Mauricio Leal Competitions 22 03-10-2012 10:05 PM
Lance Armstrong - NYC marathon Jason Smith Fitness 12 11-14-2006 11:33 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CrossFit is a registered trademark of CrossFit Inc.