Define "functional movement" in your own words?

[Pär Larsson]

Was just interested in hearing other Crossfitters' opinion on this, preferably in a single, reasonably simple sentence.

I've made the mistake in prior threads like this to post my own opinion in the OP, which just seemed to derail the thread immediately. If you need to go look up the "official" CF definition in a manual and post saying you agree with it, feel free, that's a legitimate opinion as well.

Thank you.

[Pearse Shields]

In terms of training, something that strengthens and conditions my body to be able to produce strength suited to what I do.

For me, functional strength means having good power behind my striking, strong hips to resist takedowns, and good old-fashioned brute strength to be able to manhandle other guys in my weight class.

The term "functional strength" means nothing if it is without context.

[Jonathan Vechet]

Something is functional if it performs its intended purpose, or at least what you want it to do.

People constantly say doing "isolation" movements, ala bodybuilding, are nonfunctional. But they are functional in the sense that those movements function in the manner that the bodybuilder wants them to.

One man's trash is another man's treasure.

[Chris Hede]

Is not all movement inherently functional?

[Dave Traeger]

Using the definition of meeting it's intended purpose, yes all movements are inherently functional. In a crossfit context however, functional movements are those that are somehow replicated in real life. Eg deadlift for picking up luggage or muscleups for jumping a wall. Only movement that doesn't fit this is double unders imo

[Steven Low]

Functional for....?

I would say it is a movement that enhances everyday activities, not replicates them.

[Eric Montgomery]

Originally Posted by Bill M. Hesse

I would say it is a movement that enhances everyday activities, not replicates them.

I'd add on to that and say that a functional movement is one that is very efficient for getting you to your goals, whatever they may be. If your goals are powerful and explosive hips/hamstrings/quads/glutes for sports purposes, a squat or a clean and jerk is more functional than a leg press or a leg extension. But for a bodybuilder who wants to isolate a particular portion of his quads for aesthetic reasons, a leg press or extension may be more functional.

"Functional" will vary greatly depending on the goal and the sport/activity, as someone said earlier. An OLer would have a much different opinion of functional than a PLer or strongman or Highland Games competitor would even though those are all strength sports--when you consider the full spectrum of sports and activities you have to open things up even further.

[Andrew N. Casey]

what about form following function? why, then, do crossfitters worry so much more about the form.

[Joe DeAngelo]

Originally Posted by Andrew N. Casey

what about form following function? why, then, do crossfitters worry so much more about the form.

At the macro level, yes. At the micro level though bad form means higher risk of injury. Heck, even on the macro level over long duration small instances of bad form can add up, (ie repetitive stress injuries, arthritis, etc).