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)

Tim Donahey 11-18-2008 10:01 AM

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

Originally Posted by Frederic Giraud (Post 449313)
-Best bodybuilding routine? Wrong. Crossfit wont make you win a bodybuilding contest, it will help you put on more mass than bad no-compound exercise routine. That's all that the quote says.

No, GG actually says that the only thing better than Crossfit for adding mass is taking steroids. Any other conclusions that you've drawn from his statements from the FAQ you've extrapolated on your own:

"The bodybuilding model is designed around, requires, steroids for significant hypertrophy... Natural bodybuilders (the natural ones that are not on steroids) never approach the mass that our athletes do. They don't come close."

Nowhere does he mention split routines nor compound routines, he lumps them all together as the "bodybuilding model," and he lumps all "natural bodybuilders," into one category as well. It doesn't even imply that a different mass building program (ie. westside, starting strength, full body compound routines) exists, let alone that it could work better. If you took this claim at face value value, you'd come to two conclusions: 1) There are only two kinds of bodybuilders; those on steroids and those not on steroids, and, 2) Only bodybuilders on steroids can build more mass than your typical Xfitter. Everyone agrees this claim is, at best, misleading, and at worst, fraudulent.

Shane Skowron 11-18-2008 10:06 AM

Re: T-Nation, Shugart and the Truth About CrossFit
 
Regarding the deadlift claim, Greg never said what sort of athlete he was talking about starting out with. Surely I don't think he meant people like me, 5'8" 145#. Perhaps a guy who is 5'10" 200# to start with and has good genes to boot, it is certainly possible to pull 500#+ in two years. Some people are genetically predisposed for elite performance at certain athletic events, like running the mile or the deadlift.

Frederic Giraud 11-18-2008 10:19 AM

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

Originally Posted by Tim Donahey (Post 449372)
No, GG actually says that the only thing better than Crossfit for adding mass is taking steroids. Any other conclusions that you've drawn from his statements from the FAQ you've extrapolated on your own:

"The bodybuilding model is designed around, requires, steroids for significant hypertrophy... Natural bodybuilders (the natural ones that are not on steroids) never approach the mass that our athletes do. They don't come close."

Nowhere does he mention split routines nor compound routines, he lumps them all together as the "bodybuilding model," and he lumps all "natural bodybuilders," into one category as well. It doesn't even imply that a different mass building program (ie. westside, starting strength, full body compound routines) exists, let alone that it could work better. If you took this claim at face value value, you'd come to two conclusions: 1) There are only two kinds of bodybuilders; those on steroids and those not on steroids, and, 2) Only bodybuilders on steroids can build more mass than your typical Xfitter. Everyone agrees this claim is, at best, misleading, and at worst, fraudulent.

We are still talking about mass gains routine and not bodybuilding routines, if you want to be that strict . Mass gain is only 1 part of any bodybuilding routine, thus you can't say crossfit is a better bodybuilding program....but a better mass gain program.

And about what did he really means when using bodybuilding well who knows? Only him. But I'm still someone able to draw my own conclusions. And with all the taught he puts into fitness/crossfit, I think saying that he doesn't and wouldn't agree on the fact that there is different "kind" of bodybuilding routine, is an attakc to his intelligence more than anything. Come on guys stop with the non-sense... This has been debated more than enough and this is the general conclusion, that yes if we could get more precision regarding his claims, everyone would be happy, but what he said is still true, just because of the hormonal response of the exercise, period.

Frederic Giraud 11-18-2008 10:28 AM

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

Well I still don't have much problem with what he's saying. I mean it is 2 years. It is a lot of time. And keep training hard and following good nutrion and sleeping paterns during those 2 years, I don't see why not.

The thing is that now, keep the same good efforts of following a "program" for 2 years, let's say a pure strentgh program, eat clean, sleep a lot, but only do some kind of SS and then Westside type training for the WHOLE 2 years. Deadlift will be higher, by definition.

I can't see why is it so hard for people to understand. No. Crossfit won't give you a better deadlift than a powerlifter who's been specializing in such lifts for the last 2 years while you were speacializing not specializing...........

As for the raw numbers he pulled ( 500 - 700 ) I'm sure we could get him to precise what kind of frame he had in mind at the moment ( by the way this article is close to 6'ish years old), but please stop being so close minded and that since he said that then any guy in the world will get there without taking into consideration bodies physical limits....

Tim Donahey 11-18-2008 10:39 AM

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

Originally Posted by Frederic Giraud (Post 449396)
We are still talking about mass gains routine and not bodybuilding routines, if you want to be that strict . Mass gain is only 1 part of any bodybuilding routine, thus you can't say crossfit is a better bodybuilding program....but a better mass gain program.

Actually you can't say that Crossfit is a better mass gain program, because it isn't.

Quote:

And about what did he really means when using bodybuilding well who knows? Only him. But I'm still someone able to draw my own conclusions. And with all the taught he puts into fitness/crossfit, I think saying that he doesn't and wouldn't agree on the fact that there is different "kind" of bodybuilding routine, is an attakc to his intelligence more than anything.
I'm not talking about what Coach knows, I'm talking about what he says, because a newbie, who has no fitness experience, coming to the FAQ for the first time won't be privy to what Coach knows, only to what he says. And what he says is, "Crossfit is the best program for bodybuilding." Newbie reader thinks, "Crossfit will make me the best bodybuilder." Only later would he come to realize Coach actually thought and meant something entirely different. It's a bait and switch.

Quote:

Come on guys stop with the non-sense... This has been debated more than enough and this is the general conclusion, that yes if we could get more precision regarding his claims, everyone would be happy, but what he said is still true, just because of the hormonal response of the exercise, period.
What he said isn't honest. Period.

Robert Callahan 11-18-2008 10:39 AM

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

Originally Posted by David Stout (Post 449350)
We can take you from a 200 pound max deadlift to a 500-750 pound max deadlift in two years

So it sounds like this has actually happened, many times over. Maybe the upper bound he cited is not achieved but that is why there is a range! Jesus guys maybe he got a little zealous and made the upper bound a little too high, is it really that big of a deal?!? Maybe the range should have been 400-600 pounds, but honestly when you are trying to sell something that goes against most of the current thought you have to say things that turn heads. By using a range he could say something that isn't untrue, but still have an upper bound that would catch peoples attention.

The upper bound is a bit high. Okay can we move on now?

David Stout 11-18-2008 10:49 AM

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

Originally Posted by Frederic Giraud (Post 449405)
@ David:

Well I still don't have much problem with what he's saying. I mean it is 2 years. It is a lot of time. And keep training hard and following good nutrion and sleeping paterns during those 2 years, I don't see why not.

The thing is that now, keep the same good efforts of following a "program" for 2 years, let's say a pure strentgh program, eat clean, sleep a lot, but only do some kind of SS and then Westside type training for the WHOLE 2 years. Deadlift will be higher, by definition.

I can't see why is it so hard for people to understand. No. Crossfit won't give you a better deadlift than a powerlifter who's been specializing in such lifts for the last 2 years while you were speacializing not specializing...........

As for the raw numbers he pulled ( 500 - 700 ) I'm sure we could get him to precise what kind of frame he had in mind at the moment ( by the way this article is close to 6'ish years old), but please stop being so close minded and that since he said that then any guy in the world will get there without taking into consideration bodies physical limits....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Callahan (Post 449414)
So it sounds like this has actually happened, many times over. Maybe the upper bound he cited is not achieved but that is why there is a range! Jesus guys maybe he got a little zealous and made the upper bound a little too high, is it really that big of a deal?!? Maybe the range should have been 400-600 pounds, but honestly when you are trying to sell something that goes against most of the current thought you have to say things that turn heads. By using a range he could say something that isn't untrue, but still have an upper bound that would catch peoples attention.

The upper bound is a bit high. Okay can we move on now?

Frederic -

I've posted no opinions on the matter. Only posted links to the referenced material (with respect to the DL side discussion). Please don't presume to know where I stand on the issue.

Robert -

Some additional information that might help (maybe/maybe not) - I took a look at (WFS) logsitall.com and pulled this performance data from the site: http://www.logsitall.com/stats-embed...&ag=20&mmx=max

The metrics show a 166 records with this query. 1 RM Deadlifts range from 123# - 565# with an average of 343.94#. The top 10 are the 1 RM that reach the bottom the cited range (ranging from 505#-565#). This is obviously limited data but what's available readily for discussion here.

Again - I am just presenting this here with no conclusions.

Pat McElhone 11-18-2008 10:50 AM

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

Originally Posted by Mike Prevost (Post 448930)
Hi David

I learned pretty early on as a grad student in exercise physiology that the science lags behind the coaches. The usual order of things is that coaches figure out what works and then much later (years and sometimes decades) scientists prove that it works. If coaches wait around for science, they will be way behind the cutting edge. Coaches should never ignore the science, but they must forge ahead if they want to gain an advantage. The same is true for athletes. If you wait for the science, you will be behind the power curve. Sometimes you have to experiment or look around at what other athletes are doing successfully. Successful athletes have always been ahead of the scientists from glycogen loading, to periodization to tapering etc...

The other big issue is that there are lots of good studies to be done but nobody to pay for them. Research is not free. This is particularly problematic for strength training research. There is alot more research out there on endurance training due to it's connection to cardiovascular health. There isn't much money out there to fund strength training research. I can't imagine who would pay for a Crossfit study except maybe Coach and I can't see what he would gain by doing so. The study you lay out would be good but expensive....

Then there are all of the issues you mentioned. Having done some human subjects research myself I can tell you that rats make MUCH better research subjects. Humans don't follow the protocol, they fail to show up for testing, they don't follow instructions, they drop out of your study without telling you and figure out many ways to mess up your study. If you want 10 good tests, you need to recruit 20 subjects. It is a tough business. Gives me a headache just thinking about it.

Mike

Mike and David are both correct. David, those are good points, but that will never happen because of what Mike said.

I have not seen one study quoted in exercise physiology that I thought was designed well, not one. This is huge and the excuse that is given by the exercise physiologist is always the same, not enough money to do a good study. Well, if that is the case, do not do any studies. I really, really mean this. If a study is not done extremely well, it is garbage.

The fact that exercise physiologists (read ACSM or whomever) put out such garbage influences me to almost disregard anything they say. Really, it does. In fact, everytime an "exercise physiologists" mentions studies this thought comes to mind.

So, for all you exercise physiologists out there, before you say you need evidence, meaning a study, before you will believe something, know I will read you post and think by "evidence" you mean some silly, poorly designed study, where a convience sample of subjects was taken from college kids looking for extra credit, no power analysis was done to determine sample size, nominal data was collected, but analyzed with an ANOVA and the result was probably something I knew anyway...like leg extensions activate the quadriceps better then preacher curls.

Brandon Oto 11-18-2008 10:52 AM

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

Originally Posted by Robert Callahan (Post 449414)
The upper bound is a bit high. Okay can we move on now?

Why would we move on? The possible existence of deceptive, exaggerated, or misleading claims by CrossFit HQ are one of the core issues in this discussion. If we can all agree that Glassman seems to make some stuff up (whether for marketing reasons or who knows why), that would be huge progress in the debate.

Tim Donahey 11-18-2008 11:01 AM

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

Originally Posted by Robert Callahan (Post 449414)
So it sounds like this has actually happened, many times over. Maybe the upper bound he cited is not achieved but that is why there is a range! Jesus guys maybe he got a little zealous and made the upper bound a little too high, is it really that big of a deal?!? Maybe the range should have been 400-600 pounds, but honestly when you are trying to sell something that goes against most of the current thought you have to say things that turn heads. By using a range he could say something that isn't untrue, but still have an upper bound that would catch peoples attention.

The upper bound is a bit high. Okay can we move on now?

I agree with you... it was an off-the-cuff remark, made during an interview, spoken in the more-or-less hypothetical, over 6 years ago. If there are newbies who can get their deadlift up to 500# on a strict Crossfit program that's good enough for me.

Were his remarks printed in the FAQ, however, I would feel differently.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:19 PM.

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