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?

Closed Thread
Thread Tools
Old 10-08-2008, 12:13 PM   #21
Dennis Marshall
Member Dennis Marshall is offline
Dennis Marshall's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Huntington  NY
Posts: 168
Re: Charles Poliquin on Crossfit

Originally Posted by David Wood View Post
If it had come with some thought, or he had been a member for a while and had actually contributed something along the way, I might think he was more than a troll . . . but right now, that's what I'm assuming he is . . . sort of like you and Steve . . . CrossFit hangers-on who enjoy our tolerance but somehow think you're superior because you hang back and criticize.
THIS bears repeating.
Old 10-08-2008, 01:04 PM   #22
Kevin Hughes
Member Kevin Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver  BC
Posts: 332
Re: Charles Poliquin on Crossfit

Poliquin is a Strength and Conditioning coach, and CrossFit is a Strength and Conditioning program. If he doesn't know about CrossFit now, he will soon. Whether or not he admits it is a different story.
M, 52 , 5'10 185 lbs.
Old 10-08-2008, 01:20 PM   #23
Jason David
Affiliate Jason David is offline
Jason David's Avatar
Join Date: May 2008
Location: St. Clair Shores  MI
Posts: 3,037
Re: Charles Poliquin on Crossfit

I read it as an emotional response to a threat. Some people react that way when you tell them there is something new/innovative.

I remember when I was a kid and I told my Dad a better way to do something...didn't really matter if I was right.
Old 10-08-2008, 02:08 PM   #24
Marc Doucette
Member Marc Doucette is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Lodi  CA
Posts: 49
Re: Charles Poliquin on Crossfit

Being decent at GPP to the point where you can start a sport specific training is one thing. Crossfit takes this to a whole new level.

When broken down in this way, Crossfit needs to be viewed as two separate things. First it is a training methodology... i.e., you either do 'strength training' 'endurance training' 'p90x' 'crossfit' etc. This is seeing the word crossfit as a mean to an end.

The second way it needs to be seen is as the end itself. To be good at Crossfit is the goal. Just as one might lift weights to improve his swimming... One can crossfit to improve his Crossfit. Of course you can also just strength train to increase your Crossfit, or swim to increase your Crossfit or whatever... The point is it can be seen as a "means to an end" or the "end" itself.

The article simply referenced the "means to an end" part in relation to other sports. He fails to see that Crossfit can be a goal in and of itself. Whether or not using 'crossfit' to train for Crossfit is the best possible program is another discussion... some people seem to think maybe SS is the best initial method to train for Crossfit before switching over to 'crossfit' to train for more advanced levels of Crossfit.

Old 10-08-2008, 03:13 PM   #25
Phillip Garrison
Banned Phillip Garrison is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mesa  AZ
Posts: 1,382
Re: Charles Poliquin on Crossfit

Charles isn't a big fan of anything that isn't what he's doing.
Old 10-08-2008, 03:20 PM   #26
Darrell E. White
Member Darrell E. White is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: bay village  OH
Posts: 955
Re: Charles Poliquin on Crossfit

Hey, this is actually a pretty decent line of discussion. If we take Mr. Poliquin's presentation out of the comment stylistically I think it's necessary to listen to what he is saying. Pure strength athletes train SPP. It is what it is. Would they be more fit if they built their strength on a GPP/CF foundation? Sure. But if all you are looking for is strength, and you really have no interest in other areas of fitness, well in that case Mr. Poliquin is correct I believe.

Re-read Marc's post. He pretty much gets it, doesn't he? If GPP is your goal CF is the highest level of evolution in this area. If GPP is your goal and being better at CF is your metric of your success in building GPP then addressing areas of weakness as a means to improve your CF performance, by whatever means, makes sense. Reasonable people can disagree on the specific means, but the line of thought is valid.

After all of the BS threads we've suffered through beating this issue to an ugly death how ironic is it that a very clear, succinct, and correct conclusion should arise from this particular opening, eh?
Old 10-08-2008, 05:00 PM   #27
Andrew Cattermole
Affiliate Andrew Cattermole is offline
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sydney  NSW
Posts: 418
Re: Charles Poliquin on Crossfit

I think its a note to CF that its the 2nd question they ask a BB and S&C coach such as Pop. CF is continuing to make its presence felt in the Sports Science community whether they want to pay attention or not.

As usual his answer without authority of trying, applying or even understanding CF focus or methodology.
Old 10-08-2008, 10:06 PM   #28
Derek Weaver
Departed Derek Weaver is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 881
Re: Charles Poliquin on Crossfit

People should check out the discussion thread going over at T-Nation about this article. I only read the first page, but most of what I've seen is pretty interesting.

Not nearly as many CF haters and bashers as the editors and writers on that site would make you think.
Old 10-09-2008, 06:32 AM   #29
Tim Luby
Member Tim Luby is offline
Tim Luby's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norwood  NJ
Posts: 972
Re: Charles Poliquin on Crossfit

Originally Posted by Ryan Hagenbuch View Post
Actually, it's not. I was a member a few years ago, but deleted my account because I didn't post here anymore.

If you're not willing to look at an opposing view, then how is your system suppose to grow? Some of the guys here got it right. Crossfit is good for GPP, but not if you're an athlete with a certain goal. It goes against the main principal of exercise physiology- Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demand or in simpler terms, jack of all trades, master of none.
To your point, perhaps crossfit should offer more for the specialists out there. Crossfit Endurance is a good example of how this goal could be a reality. So maybe it's not up to HQ to program for specialists, but rather the affiliates and partners (e.g. a partnership in the vein of the one Rippetoe has forged w/CF)
Old 10-09-2008, 07:14 AM   #30
Eric Lepine
Member Eric Lepine is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal  Quebec
Posts: 4
Re: Charles Poliquin on Crossfit

This was my post on T-Nation with regards to Sir Charles's comment on Crossfit:

I love the majority of the stuff that Sir Charles writes about, usually. But sometimes, he has the surprising ability to poke himself in the eye, really deep!!! Sad... Granted, he may not have the luxury nor the time to look into all the "programs" he is asked to comment on, but a little dose of humility would sometimes prove to be, well, a good thing...

"I have no clue what the hell that is."

Well, at least he pointed that out from the beginning alas, he then proceeds to decorticate something based on third party info and self-admitted lack of knowledge...

"Wait, I saw an article on that in Muscle & Fatness."

Yes, very good source of info there Charles!!!

"Looked like a bunch of cachexic fitness-model wannabes searching for their souls in the weight room."

I'd like to see Sir Poliquin attempt 10 muscle-ups... Or a 1RM chin-up with 165 lbs strapped to his waist. Or a "Barbara" or... You get the picture! Hey, I know Charles is a very strong dude, but there are other athletic feats accomplished by Crossfitters that are also very noteworthy!

"It reminds me of a Hungarian proverb: "If you only have one ***, you can't sit on two horses." If you try to do everything in your workout, you get nothing."

OK, first off, "riding more than one horse", that IS Crossfit's purpose, which they clearly state on their website: overall general physical ability (i.e. extreme "general physical preparedness"), combining all 10 defined aspects of fitness. So yes, they are trying (and again, that's the goal) to ride more than one horse... MMA training also involves similar needs... Nothing wrong with that either...

And as for the second part of this comment, well yes, some workouts are geared towards doing many things in one workout; it's a somewhat modified way of doing metabolic work, not unlike complexes used by many T-Nation authors such as Cosgrove and others (even Sir Charles uses a somewhat similar approach with German Body Comp)... I msut ask: Something wrong with that? Also, there are many workouts which are geared exlusively towards strenght and power (7x1, 5x5), and others towards skill improvement... Heck, there are even long energy system training days (5-10k runs, 2k rows...).

"Another way to look at it is to think of Tim Ferris's example of wearing your underwear over your pants. It's different, and maybe even fun for some people, but it's not very effective."

Not very effective, FOR WHAT? For becoming a world-class sprinter? An Olympic weightlifting champ? No, of course not! And that's not what Crossfit claims to be.

Their aim is to improve physical work capacity accross multi-modal domains... Improve general physical preparedness! Improve "overall" fitness! To look good nekkid even :-) It works also for sports which can benefit from this type of training (namely BJJ and MMA athletes). One must be careful of defining goals related to a program before dissing its capacity/efficiency in improving certain physical attributes... And yes, it does make training fun for many, thus a useful tool that can be used to train many, even "fitness-model wannabes"...

"No athlete has ever gotten good training like that."

Well, some have actually done very well with this type of training but again, in sports whose metabolic demands are similar to the Crossfit prescription. Crossfit's claim to fame isn't and was never that it aims at producing the next Usain Bolt, or the world's strongest powerlifter!!!

Regardless of opinion and personal feelings, Crossfit remains very applicable for a very large proportion of the population.
Closed Thread

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

vB 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
Charles Staley 's Gym Rules John Walsh Stuff and Nonsense 13 06-11-2009 05:56 PM
Charles Poliquin: A question of strength Kristofer Shamloo Fitness 21 04-24-2008 07:04 PM
Poliquin Thinks DB Cleans & Snatches "stupid and dangerous" Becca Borawski Exercises 9 03-02-2007 03:40 AM
Charles Staley copies CrossFit? Neal Winkler Community 16 11-12-2006 07:06 PM
Bryce Lane and Charles Staley Gary Wetherholt Workout of the Day 4 04-18-2006 02:25 PM

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:43 PM.

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