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?

Thread Tools
Old 07-08-2008, 08:58 AM   #51
Dylan Eddy
Member Dylan Eddy is offline
Dylan Eddy's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Seattle  WA
Posts: 168
Re: No long workouts for the Games

after some thought i have changed my opinion.

i was at first dissappointed to find the games without a longer (as in longer than 5 min. for the fastest) event. but. if we, assume as brandon mentioned, that the intent of the organizers was to test work capacity outright then the format makes alot more sense, IMHO.

if we are looking only at work capacity, as to quote coach "fitness IS work capacity across broad time and modal domains" then i would argue that the shorter duration is necessary.
yes broad time domains are in the definition, but as soon as we move past 2-10 minutes or so (depending on the activity) we are making economy not capacity the primary feild tested. the guys with hi outputs will still do well but the efficient people start gaining a huge advantage and skew the results.

this is why pro 5 and 10k runners cant do crossfit well. once they have a certain amount of capacity they spend most of their time training economy, because it gives a greater benefit for their sport.

so i think we could just as easily argue that the games should NOT have anything beyond, say, 10 minutes. if the goal is to test outright work capacity

this is a funny position for me coming from an endurance background, but...
try not, do or do not, there is no try
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:03 AM   #52
Brandon Oto
Member Brandon Oto is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Santa Cruz  CA
Posts: 3,001
Re: No long workouts for the Games

Nice point from Barry about the excitement/watchability factor of this format. I agree that may have been a major consideration.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 12:36 PM   #53
Blair Robert Lowe
Member Blair Robert Lowe is offline
Blair Robert Lowe's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sacramento  CA
Posts: 7,948
Re: No long workouts for the Games

Joe, I wonder did you have a 720m that was anything like that damn hill. Holy crap, it was disgusting. I can't even that hill being part of last year's run that was 3 or 5k. **** that.

I would echo Anthony's observation that there were probably a lot of athletes going on minimal sleep from Friday and Saturday night. Nerves or logistics/travel time. I didn't see many taking naps during Saturday and I never got around to it due to miscellaneous issues.

Personally, I thought Sunday would have some long WOD to be insult to injury. However, I think it was awesome that it stayed on time and there was only a less than 1% discrepancy error for something like 900 workouts.

I had no idea about a CrossFit movie till recently. Neato. Perhaps I will be in it as the shortest competitor! woohoo.

Given space issues, it would have been real interesting for a WOD that had 4 or 5 exercises with a rower. It could be done with that space. We were trying to envision how to bump up the number of competitors and stay in the same time frame and it included creating more workout areas but not running.

It was really nice that it was over early on Sunday. Important to let people get home and back on planes.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 01:50 PM   #54
Aaron Moburg-Jones
Member Aaron Moburg-Jones is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Arlington  VA
Posts: 101
Re: No long workouts for the Games

I think Barry is right and there are smart people listening and evaluating the input, so these conversations are useful. I have a few thoughts.

There was no event at the games this year that would have been dominated if a specialist showed up. What I mean is that any power lifter could roll in and runaway with a CFT. And 5k runner of moderate ability (for the running world) could roll in and win a 5k. Could you imagine what it would mean in a scoring system based on time? A good highscool runner will do a 5k in 15 minutes. A great crossfit 5k time is 18-19 minutes. Either someone who has no shot elsewhere picks up HUGE time or if it is a ranking system gets a first place in an event. I like that no specialist could win one of these events. An olympic lifter would have trouble with the conditioning required to do 30 reps of C&J. A power lifter would get burried by the burpees. A gymnast would either have trouble with deads or C&J.

In truth, the worst thing they did was make Fran a part of the games because it functionally IS a specialty. People practice it so much that, as someone was saying (Dutch? Speal?), sub 3 becomes more of a skill than a workout. HOWEVER, this was mitigated by adding the chest to bar requirement which I thought was clever.

The events they did choose would punish someone for having a big weakness in a skill that was not tested. What does that mean? I'll bet the guy that can't run a 5k well also did poorly on the hill run. How would he get better so he could run the hill next year? Run a 5k every now and then. It didn't test 5k running times, but it tested endurance running (just a short version of it). Also, notice that the guys that did well on the hill run are the guys that WON the 5k last year. So maybe it is a good measure of endurance without being overly skewed. Same with the C&J weight. I could have done that (will in a few days) but my relative lack of strength would have killed my time. It did a good job testing a skill without making you test the extremes of a skill.

This is long, so I'll try to wrap up, but Bill James (stats guru baseball writer) would love to objevtively tell you who the best baseball player is. He can't. But when he tries to develop a stat that captures it, he does a reality check. He says, "I think this is a good objective formulation." How does he test it? By comparing it to the subjective evaluation we already have. If it largely matches but brings a few guys up and drops a few guys down, the stat is probably right and the guys who moved were probably over/underrated. If it doesn't match at all, it's probably a bad stat. We all subjectively believe OPT, Everett, Speal, Dutch are good athletes. Sure enough, they are near the top. They were last year and this year. We also know they are good because of the scores they post on everything everyday. And sure enough, the games demonstrated it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2008, 09:04 PM   #55
Ben Moskowitz
Member Ben Moskowitz is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: St. Louis  MO
Posts: 756
Re: No long workouts for the Games

Originally Posted by Blair Robert Lowe View Post
I had no idea about a CrossFit movie till recently. Neato. Perhaps I will be in it as the shortest competitor! woohoo.
Pocket Hercules II
  Reply With Quote

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
Running: how long is "long distance"? Rachel Bennett Fitness 17 08-08-2013 07:23 AM
How long between strength workouts before strength loss Howard Wilcox Fitness 12 04-16-2007 02:54 PM
Workouts too Long? Steve Sheffar Fitness 4 01-27-2007 04:45 PM
The pros and cons of Rice Milk as well as snack during long workouts. Blair Robert Lowe Nutrition 1 08-03-2006 09:06 AM
Food for long workouts Cassie Kottke Nutrition 1 08-01-2006 08:37 AM

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:54 PM.

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