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)

Phillip Garrison 11-19-2008 03:24 PM

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

Originally Posted by Sean Dunston (Post 450828)
Are these measurements going to tell my whether isolation movements on machines at the Local Globo are more or less effective at increasing my 1RM lifts vs multi-joint movements as used in CF Affiliates?

Yes. If you have two groups of people in a study

Group A does leg extensions

Group B does barbell step ups

After 6 weeks, both groups will have increased leg extension strength on a dynanometer, but only the steup up group will have increase RFP, FP, and increased ability to climb stairs.

Phillip Garrison 11-19-2008 03:33 PM

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

Originally Posted by Robert D Taylor Jr (Post 450834)
Wouldn't measureable increases in speed strength power and endurance be just as valid as increased VO2? It seems that you're stuck on the science and everyone is trying to say but look over here, this stuff is working. Most FF that you train are going to care about the science more than the result I'll bet.
Those results show up in workout logs and the comments section all over this site. I recognise there are limits to this as a research tool, but every other method suggested has been as limited, so here we are.


Results is what it's all about. The science is done to fine tune the results and figure out exactly where the results are coming from and why. This is how sports performance works.

Protocols and theories are tried in the gym, results are recorded, studies are then done to find out who, how, where, and when. From this research the protocols are modified as the data shows what works best, what doesn't and why. Then the practioners use the new model, results are recorded, and then studied again. It's an ongoing never ending "fine tuning" process that leads to greater improvement and achievement. If you don't think this model works, ask anyone who cometed against the Soviet Union in athletics

Chris Walls 11-19-2008 03:36 PM

Re: T-Nation, Shugart and the Truth About CrossFit
 
But it's that type of nitpicking that got us into the whole nautilus/isolation/machine world we live in now. It's also what took us away from whole foods and into isolated nutrient supplements to make it possible to survive on fake crappy food. By finding something that seems the be the "it" on why it's effective, extracting it in a lab and banking on "it" being all we need.

Robert D Taylor Jr 11-19-2008 03:36 PM

Re: T-Nation, Shugart and the Truth About CrossFit
 
So all we need to do is get a scientist or two to check out the results that are available and we're good. Who do you suggest?

Phillip Garrison 11-19-2008 03:36 PM

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

Originally Posted by Chris Walls (Post 450835)
The whole heart rate thing doesn't really sit well with me as it's not a hard and fast rule, hence the whole BS "fat burning" zone for heart rate. It's so individual for what your max HR etc actually is...

But lets just say I strap an HR monitor on my athletes here, put the mask on them, have them pee on the sticks and do the blood strip test (like a fingerprick diabetic test?)

How many people would we need? What types of age groups? Trained, or untrained? new to CF or been at it a while? How long does this go on and do we test every workout or just at specific intervals?

There is nothing BS about the "fat burning zone" at certain percentages of MHR your primary fuel source will be fat, then a combo of fat and carbs, than almost purely carbs. What happened is people confused highest percentage of fuel consumption from lipids with most total calories burned, which isn't the same thing.

No you wouldn't need to do it every workout, or for every person who works out. But for those seeking a serious performance edge in whatever they do, tests like these can be valuable.

Phillip Garrison 11-19-2008 03:38 PM

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

Originally Posted by Robert D Taylor Jr (Post 450858)
So all we need to do is get a scientist or two to check out the results that are available and we're good. Who do you suggest?

Not a scientist or two, but many who come from different places who are neither for or against CF. Would you rather guess that CF is currently doing the best it can, or explore it through rigorous testing?

Chris Walls 11-19-2008 03:39 PM

Re: T-Nation, Shugart and the Truth About CrossFit
 
SO you're not saying we need to run these test for CF as a whole, but to optimize training protocols on an athlete by athlete basis?

I guess what I meant by the BS "fat burning zone" is what you see on "cardio" equipment, with a blanket zone for everyone, but MHR varies so much from individual to individual that it is inaccurate at best but most likely RTFO'er.

Phillip Garrison 11-19-2008 03:40 PM

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

Originally Posted by Chris Walls (Post 450856)
But it's that type of nitpicking that got us into the whole nautilus/isolation/machine world we live in now. It's also what took us away from whole foods and into isolated nutrient supplements to make it possible to survive on fake crappy food. By finding something that seems the be the "it" on why it's effective, extracting it in a lab and banking on "it" being all we need.

Thats not the nitpicking that got us there. Sales and marketing and the desire to do whats easy go us into nautilus and fast foods. It was sports scientists and strength coaches that brough people back to whole foods and whole body movements.

Seriously why this inherent distrust of science, and the scientific process?

Phillip Garrison 11-19-2008 03:41 PM

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

Originally Posted by Chris Walls (Post 450863)
SO you're not saying we need to run these test for CF as a whole, but to optimize training protocols on an athlete by athlete basis?

I guess what I meant by the BS "fat burning zone" is what you see on "cardio" equipment, with a blanket zone for everyone, but MHR varies so much from individual to individual that it is inaccurate at best but most likely RTFO'er.

I'm saying that the only way to improve anything is through rigorous study of it to find it's strengths and weaknesses.

Chris Walls 11-19-2008 03:42 PM

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

Originally Posted by Phillip Garrisonq (Post 450862)
Not a scientist or two, but many who come from different places who are neither for or against CF. Would you rather guess that CF is currently doing the best it can, or explore it through rigorous testing?

But most of us consider the WOD (and not necessarily the posted one) as the rigorous testing. I don't care if lab tests tell me that my performance is improving. I know if I'm improving, or if my athletes are improving based on their performance. I don't care if he's switching from anaerobic to aerobic when science tells me is the right time, or if his VO2 max is measuring a certain score... if he drops 2 minutes of a 5k then we're doing good. If he adds 20lbs to a deadlift we're doing good, knocks 2 minutes of any given WOD, again, doing good. Don't particularly care why.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:32 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CrossFit is a registered trademark of CrossFit Inc.