We've been having a bit of a discussion among CF friends and such, regarding where the line might be drawn on the pursuit of quality movement patterns.
There must be a rule of deminishing returns here, surely?
The way I view it is this.
There are three levels of movement priorities
- Priority 1 - Immediate safety. (avoiding acute injuries i.e. learning to set the back during Deadlift)
- Priority 2 - Long-term safety. (mitigating poor movement patterns that may cause chronic injury over time)
- Priority 3 - Economy of movement. (Movement patterns that if not optimal, do not pose any injury risk, but if worked on merely improve economy of movement.)
It goes without saying that Group 1 must be dialled in immediately for any new athlete
Whereas group 2 a coach may have a little time to really dial these correct movement patterns in, but of course it shouldn’t be left too long.
For me the real debate comes to group 3.
If we assume that a specific group of athlete have no, and never will have, and desire to compete, and who's goals are simply health and wellness. At what point is pushing super high quality movement that has no injury / safety aspect a poor return on investment.
CrossFit seems to push a quality of movement that is perhaps higher than necessary, at least for non-competitive-goal types?
What am I missing here? Perhaps I'm looking at this incorrectly?