|
|
Fitness Theory and Practice. CrossFit's rationale & foundations. Who is fit? What is fitness? |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools |
![]() |
#11 |
Member
![]() |
Re: Redefining the relationship between Power and Intensity
|
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Banned
![]() |
Re: Redefining the relationship between Power and Intensity
Want to know the facts as they exist in the strength training world?
Intensity = load percentage of one repetition maximum. Ex. trainee can bench 200 lbs for one repetition as a maximum. That is 100% intensity. Power = the aforementioned physics definition. In strength training taken to indicate the ability to generate a high degree of force quickly. Someone mentioned High Intensity Training (HIT) which was a form of bodybuilding popularized by Arthur Jones, Ellington Darden, and Mike Mentzer in the 70s and 80s and then revitalized by Mr. Olympia competitor Dorian Yates in the 90s (his was a tweaked version with the same underlying concepts). The word intensity was used there in a different way and was a form of expression of effort. It was load related, but the loading permitted multiple reps, not just one. In a nutshell, if you performed 10 repetitions to concentric failure (until you failed attempting to complete a rep), that last rep met and exceeded 100% of your momentary maximum and thus made for high intensity training. |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | |
Member
![]() |
Re: Redefining the relationship between Power and Intensity
Quote:
The reason that bothers me is that in my experience, the other relationships taught in that lecture could easily be brought back into a high school or entry-level college physics or mechanical engineering or exercise physiology course and put directly to use in a homework project without raising many faculty eyebrows. They are on solid enough ground to be useful across broad modal domains scientifically, but if a student tried to claim that Intensity ≣ Power in the same classes it would be very likely to be contested. I agree that part of the confusion is due to the common conflation of the terms "intensity" and "effort" in the realm of physical fitness and training. The relationship between effort and actual, measured power output is complicated by many factors including efficiency and fatigue, as well as structural factors. We can all agree that maximizing results is dependent upon eliciting sufficiently high levels of intensity under the proper conditions. That is not in dispute. I am just questioning whether it might be useful to revisit that specific definition in that specific context to see if it can't be improved. (I can't help but wonder whether the claim that Intensity ≣ Power would raise Dr. Glassman's eyebrows, stickler for scientific accuracy that he is.) |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#14 | |
Banned
![]() |
Re: Redefining the relationship between Power and Intensity
Quote:
I'm confused, are you simply trying to wow us with your brilliance, or did you want an answer? Intensity does not equal power. Intensity is a measure of load vs. force production capacity in a given plane etc., and power is work over time. There is a correlation in that high power normally requires high force production capacity, but they one does not equal the other. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#15 | |
Member
![]() |
Re: Redefining the relationship between Power and Intensity
Quote:
I also want to know if others think that it would be positive to update that section of the article/study material (seen here: http://journal.crossfit.com/2002/04/foundations.tpl) and in the L1 lecture. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#16 | |
Member
![]() |
Re: Redefining the relationship between Power and Intensity
Quote:
Sean |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
Member
![]() |
Re: Redefining the relationship between Power and Intensity
The question I would have is how would changing the currently used definitions within CrossFit be useful for me as an athlete and coach?
We are training athletes, training ourselves, trying to educate our athletes/members, and measuring their performance and progress. The current definitions seem pretty useful to me. How would complicating the discussion improve the utility of the current analysis for us as coaches? |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 | |
Banned
![]() |
Re: Redefining the relationship between Power and Intensity
Quote:
In that sentence you quoted I was just saying the above in a slightly different fashion. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#19 | |
Banned
![]() |
Re: Redefining the relationship between Power and Intensity
Quote:
I don't think noting the differentiation and relationship between intensity and power is over complicating matters. The correct answer in this case is fairly simple and explained in a few sentences. What you might be noting is the convolution of answers in this thread and the attempt to overly complicate matters with verbiage. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#20 | |
Member
![]() |
Re: Redefining the relationship between Power and Intensity
Quote:
Great thread. Sean |
|
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Intensity = Power | Chris Sinagoga | Fitness | 11 | 04-26-2011 07:17 AM |
high intensity vs. low intensity training, continued | Steven Price | Fitness | 4 | 01-13-2010 11:10 AM |
Intensity limiting power output? | Skylar Cook | Workout of the Day | 2 | 03-13-2009 08:35 AM |
Comments on "From load, distance, and time we calculate work, and work-capacity/intensity/power" | Eric Cimrhanzel | Fitness | 17 | 11-19-2006 12:56 PM |
Redefining fitness | Brad Enns | Community | 8 | 10-26-2006 11:37 AM |