CrossFit Discussion Board  

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

Fitness Theory and Practice. CrossFit's rationale & foundations. Who is fit? What is fitness?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-23-2010, 03:59 AM   #131
Sam Walker
Member Sam Walker is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: London  Surrey UK
Posts: 88
Re: Is Crossfit right about fitness?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Europa View Post
I still don't understand your point. Our point is that focusing in the shorter time domains increases work capacity in the longer duration events.
IN TRAINING, "apparently". But this doesn't mean endurance fitness shouldn't be tested in the Games, almost the opposite because our claim needs to be proven.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Europa View Post
This is evident in that a 500 lbs deadlifting CrossFitter can complete a ultra-endurance event in a "reasonable" amount of time.
This wasn't evidenced at all. I'm not saying thee needs to be an ultra-endurance event in the Gmaes, just that either the focus needs to move away from the shorter end of the "broad time" spectrum, or the CrossFit definition of fitness needs to be changed.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2010, 05:27 AM   #132
Alex Europa
Affiliate Alex Europa is offline
 
Alex Europa's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waialua  HI
Posts: 1,016
Re: Is Crossfit right about fitness?

The point of the Games is to find the most fit person on the planet, not to prove the efficacy of CrossFit. That gets done in various events around the world during the other 51 weekends of the year. Maybe someday, people from various training modalities will start showing up to compete in our little competition, but until then, we aren't testing the effectiveness of CrossFit against other programs.

Since the point of the Games is to find the most fit person, then a longer event is of course a valid test. But just because it wasn't included does not mean that the definition of fitness needs to be changed.

IWCABTAMD is part of Greg Glassman's definition of fitness. It is separate from CrossFit. CrossFit's claim (and goal) is that it does a better job of doing this than any other fitness program. The definition doesn't need to be changed. What we do as CrossFitters can't change the definition of fitness. All that we can do is constantly tweak the programming to work towards refining the process of developing IWCABTAMD.

EDIT: Let's not forget that the entire event probably does a better job covering the "broad time" aspect than a singular endurance event: 8 events in 2 days is pretty hellacious.

EDIT #2: Also, the ability of short duration training to improve work capacity in longer duration events has been proven. In real world competitions. There's no "apparently" about it.

- Alex
__________________
CrossFit Barbarian Fitness / Flickr
"Every man dies. Not every man truly lives."

Last edited by Alex Europa; 01-23-2010 at 05:34 AM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2010, 05:39 AM   #133
Wayne Riddle
Member Wayne Riddle is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Lewiston  ME
Posts: 1,779
Re: Is Crossfit right about fitness?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Europa View Post
The point of the Games is to find the most fit person on the planet, not to prove the efficacy of CrossFit.
I would say the point of the Games is to find the most fit person at the games that does Crossfit.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2010, 05:46 AM   #134
Alex Europa
Affiliate Alex Europa is offline
 
Alex Europa's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waialua  HI
Posts: 1,016
Re: Is Crossfit right about fitness?



__________________
CrossFit Barbarian Fitness / Flickr
"Every man dies. Not every man truly lives."

Last edited by Alex Europa; 01-23-2010 at 05:54 AM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2010, 06:06 AM   #135
Sam Walker
Member Sam Walker is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: London  Surrey UK
Posts: 88
Re: Is Crossfit right about fitness?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Europa View Post
the ability of short duration training to improve work capacity in longer duration events has been proven. In real world competitions. There's no "apparently" about it.
I know what you're saying. The "apparently" was to highlight that this wasn't proven through the Games.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Europa View Post
The point of the Games is to not to prove the efficacy of CrossFit.
You say the role of the games isn't to prove this. I think it IS, but I can see your point. I'm not sure whether it is or it isn't. There was a big banner up at the Games that said something like "This is a truth derived through competition" and in the interviews I saw on the Journal Glassman seems to be saying the games are where other athletes should come and contest CrossFit's claims.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Europa View Post
Since the point of the Games is to find the most fit person, then a longer event is of course a valid test. But just because it wasn't included does not mean that the definition of fitness needs to be changed.

IWCABTAMD is part of Greg Glassman's definition of fitness. It is separate from CrossFit. CrossFit's claim (and goal) is that it does a better job of doing this than any other fitness program. The definition doesn't need to be changed. What we do as CrossFitters can't change the definition of fitness. All that we can do is constantly tweak the programming to work towards refining the process of developing IWCABTAMD.
When you claim to produce the fittest people, how you define fitness is fundamental, and a central tenet of your system.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2010, 07:01 AM   #136
Alex Europa
Affiliate Alex Europa is offline
 
Alex Europa's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waialua  HI
Posts: 1,016
Re: Is Crossfit right about fitness?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Walker View Post
I know what you're saying. The "apparently" was to highlight that this wasn't proven through the Games.
Something doesn't need to be tested at the Games for it to be true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Walker View Post
You say the role of the games isn't to prove this. I think it IS, but I can see your point. I'm not sure whether it is or it isn't. There was a big banner up at the Games that said something like "This is a truth derived through competition" and in the interviews I saw on the Journal Glassman seems to be saying the games are where other athletes should come and contest CrossFit's claims.
Rewatching the Men's 7K/Intro video (w/f/s), Tony Budding says, "The CrossFit Games are a two day test, that is designed to establish the fittest. The world's fittest. Some people are taking objection to that statement..."

Conversely, Greg Glassman does say "these are the proving grounds for best practices." So clearly I was wrong. I guess my take on it, however, is that since no one has actually come out to do that (test another training system versus CrossFit), then we are limited to simply test those that come out and call the winner the fittest.

Even still, if a non-CrossFitter showed up and won, would he not be considered the fittest on earth? Yes, he would be. That would mean that we would have to modify our programming to look more like that of the winner's, since he demonstrated the most WCABTAMD (read: the most fit).

I guess that it's a mixture of both: to prove the efficacy of CrossFit (assuming that a non-CrossFitter someday comes out) and to do that by finding the fittest (on earth, on that day, whatever) as it relates to the definintion posited by Glassman. Which leads me to...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Walker View Post
When you claim to produce the fittest people, how you define fitness is fundamental, and a central tenet of your system.
Indeed, but the definition has been set. You can't change it constantly to suit your needs, you can only adapt and improve the programming to bring you closer to the goal.

EDIT: Bringing this semi-back on topic - If you feel that the current definition of fitness isn't accurate, then you should formulate a new one and share it with the world. But I don't think that's what you're really saying in your OP. I think you're saying (in a round-about sort of way) that CrossFit, in it's current form, doesn't do a great job of increasing work capacity in long(er) duration events. If this is the case, then I challenge you to come up with a solution. (This isn't being intentionally standoff-ish, BTW. I just feel like the conversation has run it's useful course).

- Alex
__________________
CrossFit Barbarian Fitness / Flickr
"Every man dies. Not every man truly lives."

Last edited by Alex Europa; 01-23-2010 at 07:15 AM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2010, 07:17 AM   #137
Dale F. Saran
Member Dale F. Saran is offline
 
Dale F. Saran's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Westerly  RI
Posts: 559
Re: Is Crossfit right about fitness?

Coach has always said if someone comes out and wins the Games and we look at their programming and it consists of earting twinkies and watching Jersey Shore, we'll start eating twinkies and watching Jersey Shore. But I really don't get these objections.

1 - There was one "pure" endurance event (the OP's original point). My response to this is - "so what?" Would another endurance event have proved something else? And the final chipper (btw) - I suggest you try it and then tell me if it's not an "endurance" event in some respect.

2 - Does anyone expect that if some guy (not a CF'er) just shows up at the Games and wins, that when we look at his programing, we'll find that it's drasticaly different from what our top CF'ers are doing? Will he eat crappy? Nope. Will he be a pretty good runner? Probably, but not elite because the demands of elite running take a crushing toll on muscular strength - that's been a known fact in running circles since the 80's. Will he have to be strong as an ox? Yep. And when we consider how he got to that level of fitness, does anybody think that he got there by doing bicep curls, or long monostructural workouts? I doubt that.

These always turn into "how many angels dance on the head of a pin" type discussions - which is why I should probably even refrain from participating. :-(
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2010, 07:17 AM   #138
Mark E. Wallace
Member Mark E. Wallace is offline
 
Mark E. Wallace's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cedar Park  TX
Posts: 3,869
Re: Is Crossfit right about fitness?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Europa View Post
Something doesn't need to be tested at the Games for it to be true.
Everything must be tested at some point if it is to be accepted as true.
__________________
"Ima champ Still pushin Strong, Remember You only get what you train FOR>"
Snarky answers -- Free of charge.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2010, 07:30 AM   #139
Alex Europa
Affiliate Alex Europa is offline
 
Alex Europa's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waialua  HI
Posts: 1,016
Re: Is Crossfit right about fitness?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark E. Wallace View Post
Everything must be tested at some point if it is to be accepted as true.
Agreed.

But this HAS been tested. And not just with CrossFit.

Zatopek did it in the 40s and 50s.

CrossFit and CrossFit Endurance are proving it now.

- Alex
__________________
CrossFit Barbarian Fitness / Flickr
"Every man dies. Not every man truly lives."
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2010, 01:11 PM   #140
Wayne Riddle
Member Wayne Riddle is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Lewiston  ME
Posts: 1,779
Re: Is Crossfit right about fitness?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Europa View Post
Something doesn't need to be tested at the Games for it to be true.
Repeating it over and over doesn't make it true either.

Quote:
Even still, if a non-CrossFitter showed up and won, would he not be considered the fittest on earth? Yes, he would be.
It means they were the one that performed the best on that day under those given set of circumstances.

Quote:
EDIT: Bringing this semi-back on topic - If you feel that the current definition of fitness isn't accurate, then you should formulate a new one and share it with the world.
The problem with attempting to define fitness is coming up with one that is universal. My opinion is that can't be done. Crossfit can define fitness as it fits into their program, others can define it as it fits into theirs. Crossfit has their definition and if someone doesn't like it they can take it up with CFHQ.
  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

BB 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
New to CrossFit. Looking for functional fitness. Brent Mattis Starting 21 03-24-2009 08:26 PM
Crossfit changed my fitness for good! Fareed Majeed Starting 4 12-12-2008 06:10 PM
Can CrossFit get me to my fitness goals? Evan Cauble-Johnson Starting 15 09-18-2008 12:57 PM
Crossfit on the road(or any fitness really) Ben Chapman Community 1 12-13-2007 07:45 AM
Crossfit vs. Fitness Center Don King Community 17 10-28-2006 05:55 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:12 AM.


CrossFit is a registered trademark of CrossFit Inc.