CrossFit Discussion Board

CrossFit Discussion Board (http://board.crossfit.com/index.php)
-   Community (http://board.crossfit.com/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   T-Nation, Shugart and the Truth About CrossFit (http://board.crossfit.com/showthread.php?t=38880)

John C. Brown 11-16-2008 11:37 PM

Re: T-Nation, Shugart and the Truth About CrossFit
 
You are correct Donald, personal attacks are childish.

You are incorrect in what Phillip is saying. He is saying that having a high VO2 makes someone a good firefighter. I am saying it has nothing to do with it. Does CrossFit improve your VO2? Absolutely. Are we CrossFitting to gain a higher VO2? No. Why? Because it is a by-product, a correlate and doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. What good is a high VO2 max if I am too feeble to pick up my children? Does it help me all that much if I am incapable of pushing, pulling or in any functional way moving my body? No. Therefore, is it a reasonable means of measuring someone's fitness? No.

Joey Powell 11-17-2008 04:50 AM

Re: T-Nation, Shugart and the Truth About CrossFit
 
Actually, VO2 max is not a good indicator at all. At the Fire Fighter Challenges the CrossFitters have been known to use LESS air than their counter-parts for the same amount of work completed even when time in the mask is settled out.

A big VO2 max is big engine and big Fuel/oxygen mix... this is being turned on it's head with the amount of air left in the bottles by CF'ers.

VO2 max may indeed be a by-product of fitness, but evidence supports that it maybe not even that, wnen you train to make the engine more efficient using CF protocols.

So is it a good way of measuring fitness?? Only if you think the CF'ers who win the Fire-fighter challenges are LESS fit than their losing competetors...

Robert D Taylor Jr 11-17-2008 06:34 AM

Re: T-Nation, Shugart and the Truth About CrossFit
 
Tim,
I don't know that "everything is CF", but strength training is. Is the GG hybrid different than mainpage? Yes obviously, but so is MEBB and it is still CF, I truly (no sarcasm) do not understand your point about the theoretical template, please help me to.

David Stout 11-17-2008 07:02 AM

Re: T-Nation, Shugart and the Truth About CrossFit
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert D Taylor Jr (Post 448314)
Tim,
I don't know that "everything is CF", but strength training is. Is the GG hybrid different than mainpage? Yes obviously, but so is MEBB and it is still CF, I truly (no sarcasm) do not understand your point about the theoretical template, please help me to.


Heavy lifting is definitely part of CF. Even w/in the context of the theorectical template.

HOWEVER, Hybrid programs such as Gant's and Coach Rutherford's specifically combine CF metcon training with Strength Training Methodologies of OTHER systems.

See the difference? Go back and read Gant's original thread and the original MEBB article of April 2005. Note how both writers credit methodologies from different camps for the strength training portions of their programs. Edit - Hence, for example, the suggested nomenclature by Coach Rut in his article that his permutation be called Maximum Effort Crossfit or ME CrossFit. Which is a tribute to his source material of sorts.

Darrell E. White 11-17-2008 07:07 AM

Re: T-Nation, Shugart and the Truth About CrossFit
 
David:

True, but at least in Gant's program there is insufficient attribution of the Crossfit contribution to the Hybrid, and insufficient acknowledgement of the need/desire for more fitness than that provided from strength programs alone, or that Crossfit principles are the superior route to "the rest of the story".

Robert D Taylor Jr 11-17-2008 10:50 AM

Re: T-Nation, Shugart and the Truth About CrossFit
 
The theoretical template has nothing to do, as I see it, with how the GG hybrid is or is not CF. As I understand it CF borrowed from other protocols (Tabata jumps to mind) So how is the hybrid less CF? (whether Gant accredited it sufficiently not withstanding, as I recall he posted it in the CF discussion board as a CF hybrid)

Tim Donahey 11-17-2008 11:09 AM

Re: T-Nation, Shugart and the Truth About CrossFit
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert D Taylor Jr (Post 448500)
The theoretical template has nothing to do, as I see it, with how the GG hybrid is or is not CF. As I understand it CF borrowed from other protocols (Tabata jumps to mind) So how is the hybrid less CF? (whether Gant accredited it sufficiently not withstanding, as I recall he posted it in the CF discussion board as a CF hybrid)

If I came up with a Crossfit/Yoga hybrid would that still be Crossfit just because we Samson Stretch?

To put a clearer point on it, the GG Hybrid has less to do with Crossfit than it has to do with strength. Yes Crossfit and GG Hybrid both use sets of 1/3/5 in the major lifts, but GG didn't borrow that from Crossfit, Crossfit borrowed that from the same place GG did. Not Crossfit. Yes both Crossfit and the GG Hybrid use gymnastics and bodyweight movements, but GG didn't borrow that from CF either, CF borrowed it from the same place GG did. Again, not Crossfit. The only singular aspect that Crossfit and the GG Hybrid share are the met-cons, which are significantly shorter and heavier than most anything on the front page. In fact the metcons are so different that they necessitated that new ones be made up altogether.

Phillip Garrison 11-17-2008 12:09 PM

Re: T-Nation, Shugart and the Truth About CrossFit
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by John C. Brown (Post 448226)
You are correct Donald, personal attacks are childish.

You are incorrect in what Phillip is saying. He is saying that having a high VO2 makes someone a good firefighter. I am saying it has nothing to do with it. Does CrossFit improve your VO2? Absolutely. Are we CrossFitting to gain a higher VO2? No. Why? Because it is a by-product, a correlate and doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. What good is a high VO2 max if I am too feeble to pick up my children? Does it help me all that much if I am incapable of pushing, pulling or in any functional way moving my body? No. Therefore, is it a reasonable means of measuring someone's fitness? No.

What I'm saying is an above average VO2 according to research is one of the predictors of succes as a firefighter. Not the only predictor

Phillip Garrison 11-17-2008 12:11 PM

Re: T-Nation, Shugart and the Truth About CrossFit
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by John C. Brown (Post 448193)
Wow! did someone pee in your maple syrup?

I had posted a pithy reply but my judgment caught up to me about 10 minutes later... You are waste of time.

There is nothing mean or ****y about my response. I simply stated that VO2 is a predictor of success based on research I've helped conduct. I'm asking you from what basis you're making your opinion, is based off being a firefighter, training them, or hypothesis based on your opinion of thwt you think firefighters need fitness wise.

Nick Cummings 11-17-2008 12:11 PM

Re: T-Nation, Shugart and the Truth About CrossFit
 
I have been doing CrossFit for about 3 years now. My deadlift went from about 250lbs to 495lbs. I know there are people who much fitter and more dedicated than me practicing CrossFit.

I think the interesting point is that while VO2 max, and whatever else is being discussed here, Greg is out there expanding CrossFit exponentially. Something must be working right.

This is why I like the BlackBox method. If its stupid and it works then its not that stupid. =)


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

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CrossFit is a registered trademark of CrossFit Inc.