Gillian Mounsey Article

[John McCord]

If Crossfit is open sourced and evidence based, then why is the programming the athletes actually do not posted on the main page?

Because they all have different programming, and for the most part, their own webpage.

[S.S.]

Originally Posted by Mauricio Leal

Ah, so injuring clients is dandy as long as one does it slowly and chronically?

No, injuring clients is never okay.
But comparing a fitness activity to one that shows an alarmingly high rate of the rarest form of muscle tissue breakdown and acute injuries that require immediate surgery to a fitness activity that results in some chronic but non-surgical/non-life threatening injuries isn't really valid.

Originally Posted by Mauricio Leal

Well, Romanov has his POSE site, but it's not very well known yet, as far as I can tell anyway. And he knows what he's talking about. But even if he didn't, that doesn't mean I get to sue him for anonymous advice he wrote on the internet.

That's true. I don't like the concept of suing anyway.
But when there's a central authority that essentially controls everything about certain activity, it's pretty reasonable to petition them to change stuff. Not really possible with the activities of "running" or "soccer."

[Eric A. Brown]

Originally Posted by Emily Mattes

Someone contact the Russians and Chinese. They're doing "Advanced Crossfit", hope they've paid their affiliate fees!

And spent hundreds of dollars on the spiffy new apparel.

[John McCord]

Originally Posted by Evan Jackson

Normally I'm getting ****ed at people for shirking their responsibility. This is a change. I'm getting ****ed at people for putting responsibility where it does not belong.

This board is ****ed up.

*cough* Troll *cough*

[Andrew Roden]

Originally Posted by John McCord

Because they all have different programming, and for the most part, their own webpage.

right but there was a coach video a few years ago where he said if someone showed up to the games and did well, they would find out what their programming was and copy it. But no followup...

I thank Crossfit for introducing me to the rings and Olympic lifting, and getting my garage setup. I just want more science and data and less crap posted by Pukie. Whoever's freakin idea it was to post programming by pukie needs to be fired. They would have been better off using HQ as a moniker.

[Wayne Riddle]

Originally Posted by Tamara Cohen

However, if you are paying a certified coach $200 a month, then that $200 a month is paying for something, right?

Their affiliation fee.

But good point, and the one that makes me not go to a CF gym (well the original reason at least). If I'm paying $100+ a month to workout I expect that person to really know their stuff. And knowing their stuff means more then spending one weekend at a seminar.

[Wayne Riddle]

Originally Posted by Andrew Roden

If Crossfit is open sourced and evidence based, then why is the programming the athletes actually do not posted on the main page?

I would actually like to see the methodology used to determine what workouts should be done and when. You know, actual programming theory.

[Andrew Roden]

Originally Posted by Wayne Riddle

I would actually like to see the methodology used to determine what workouts should be done and when. You know, actual programming theory.

Right, show me the data.

[Paulo Santos]

Originally Posted by Emily Mattes

So doing things that directly oppose how Greg Glassman suggests people work out (focusing specifically on weaknesses, periodizing, not randomizing things) is now "Advanced Crossfit"?

Training the way successful athletes have been training for decades and decades is now "Advanced Crossfit"?

Someone contact the Russians and Chinese. They're doing "Advanced Crossfit", hope they've paid their affiliate fees!

CrossFit.com programming doesn't even follow what Mr. Glassman himself wrote in the CrossFit Journal (I think the article was called Theoretical CtossFit Templates or something like that.). So does that mean that CrossFit.com isn't really programming true CrossFit workouts? I think CrossFit.com is just a generic CrossFit program. It is hard to come up with a program that is 100% for everyone, so the elite crossfitters are doing their own programming or other programs. Isn't Chris Spealler doing Conjugate CrossFit? I call that an advanced CrossFit program. You may think it is funny, but I couldn't come up with a better term for it.

On another note, I don't particularly care for the randomness of CrossFit and it is one of the main reasons I did the 70's Big Program for about a month before I switched to Conjugate CrossFit because I needed to get stronger and I feel I wasn't getting it with doing regular CrossFit WOD's. Even the Conjugate CrossFit that I'm doing is slightly different from the Chris Mason template, which I did follow for a while. I still consider 70's Big and Conjugate CrossFit programs a variation of CrossFit. If you don't, that is your opinion and I respect that.

[Mauricio Leal]

Originally Posted by Shane Skowron

No, injuring clients is never okay.
But comparing a fitness activity to one that shows an alarmingly high rate of the rarest form of muscle tissue breakdown and acute injuries that require immediate surgery to a fitness activity that results in some chronic but non-surgical/non-life threatening injuries isn't really valid.

Actually, chronic knee injuries often do result in surgery, especially when people are specifically told to practice the wrong technique over and over, buy magic shoes that reinforce said technique, avoid squatting below parallel (bad for the knees), and measure their progress in mileage. This advice often comes from people with "MD" after their name. I don't have any numbers, just a bunch of heart-felt and undoubtedly true but unquantifiable stories that I share without prejudice about runners' passions and functionality grinding to a halt.

Personally, I do think the buck stops somewhere, and doctors -- AKA people who go to school with the intent to dispense medical advice, and are revered as experts and compensated nicely for their trouble -- are capable of negligence and malpractice, and should be held accountable when such can be proven (debatable). And I think CrossFit trainers, however distinctly less qualified despite their paper credential, are also capable of negligence and should be held accountable in specific instances. I know of gyms that I would say are borderline negligent in their lack of coaching. I'm not disagreeing that this is a problem, especially in the context of a by definition high-intensity program. "I got this workout off a website and hurt myself because they didn't give enough information to meet every probable contingency" is not one of those instances.