Crossfit FAQ

[Thremp]

So I'm talking to Smiley the other day about what to do after my current EDT mesocycle (I might do 2-3 months depending on how I feel. I am a little over half done with the intro phase. I'll see how long I like it... but I digress...) He suggests that I look at crossfit and do a couple of the WOD. I think Crossfit is mostly ghey, but whatev some of the stuff works and I can't really fault anyone who just wants to go into the gym and max hang cleans one day so I decide to look. I got lost looking for a gym in my area (Do they let you do your own workout at these places?) and was not really about to find just a generic breakdown of all their girly named workouts so that I could pick and choose a cycle to do... So I started reading the FAQ. I found a few really sweat gems in there that I think should be up for discussion. All the following are direct quotes:

1)9. Optimizing physical capacity requires training at unsustainable intensities.
10. The world's most successful athletes and coaches rely on exercise science the way deer hunters rely on the accordion." (NB: This was taken from 10 Observations by "Coach")

2)Here is a hierarchy of training for mass from greater to lesser efficacy:
1. Bodybuilding on steroids
2. CrossFitting on steroids
3. CrossFitting without steroids
4. Bodybuilding without steroids

3)Natural bodybuilders (the natural ones that are not on steroids) never approach the mass that our ahtletes do. They don't come close.

NB: I remembered why I don't like Crossfit. Pull-ups are the new all-body squat with leg drive, spasming, and then pulling up. Since obviously thats what we do in real life, climb walls. Not like I actually sit at a computer all day gambling on the internet and lift for looks and my ego which are inter-related.

[maniacut]

I like Crossfit. I think the program is really good at what it's supposed to do, which is improve athletic performance. Only thing I disagree with is [ QUOTE ]
10. The world's most successful athletes and coaches rely on exercise science the way deer hunters rely on the accordion." (NB: This was taken from 10 Observations by "Coach")

[/ QUOTE ]

Successful athletes and coaches would be really dumb to not be looking at exercise science all the time. So I don't see how they could ignore it like a deer hunter would ignore an accordion.

The hierarchy of training for mass is most likely correct and backed by their own observations.

I like kipping pullups even though my form sucks right now. The science behind them is pretty solid, basically because time is decreased and mass and distance stasy the same, your power output goes up.

And you're right we do sit at our computers most of the day so why go to the gym anyway? To see positive results in whatever our goals may be. Crossfit is good at producing positive results.

[Thremp]

[ QUOTE ]
The hierarchy of training for mass is most likely correct and backed by their own observations.

I like kipping pullups even though my form sucks right now. The science behind them is pretty solid, basically because time is decreased and mass and distance stasy the same, your power output goes up.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) I have no clue where this comes from with their "observations" most of the very elite crossfitters like military special forces guys are rather small. I'd like to see some that compete and how they do before they just say you can become huge.

2) No one disputes this, but its the same as saying cheat curls are better than regular curls or cheat anything. Its just a cheat movement to bring in the rest of your body which increases power. It's a great way to increase your rep range if you aren't strong enough to do a ton, but trying to push it as "real life practical". Ew.

[SmileyEH]

I think Coach is exaggerating somewhat when he says crossfit is better for putting on mass than bodybuilding workouts. I'm sure a properly designed program by Thibedeau or similar would put on mass faster than the WOD (especially the WOD's of a year ago and older). But mostly he's just attacking the isolation centric/only nature of mainstream bodybuilding. You'll probably agree that most effective bodybuilding (or any type of training) regimes starts with squats/deads/presses. But at that point they're not far off from Crossfit anyway.

His other arguement stems from the "neuroendecrine respone" brought about by all the full body high intensity workouts. I'm not sure exactly what that means - maybe J. Brown or others more heavily into crossfit can elaborate. Glassman claims that it mimics the effect of steroids on the body.

Also, I'd take issue that elite crossfiters are all smallish. Granted none of them are going to be hooge (especially considering they are probably eating strict zone and never have bulking/cutting cycles), but I'm sure there are many 6' 200lb crossfiters with <10% bf. Video of "Crossfit Games" Some of these guys are pretty big imo.

Additionally crossfit doesn't mean only the WOD. I used to read the forums a lot, and many guys do strength/size focused programs with 3 powerlifting/o-lifting days a week, and 2-3 crossfit girls type workouts a week. One member AnthonyB is I think well over 200lbs and < 6', but he can still do Fran in 4 minutes or something.

As for it's claim to produce high performance I think the results from their competition this summer are pretty convincing. The guy that won had these results:

"Hopper Workout" - 13:39:
row 1000m
5 rounds of:
25 pullups
7 135lb push jerks

5k trail run - 20:45

Crossfit Total (sum of back squat, deadlift, standing shoulder press): 905lbs - probably broken down something like squat: 325, dl: 425, press: 160.

There are very very few people that could get anywhere close to all three results.

Josh Everett (Olympic lifter) did the hopper in 14:14, but had a total of 1133lbs - at a bw of < 190lbs that is strong no matter what your background.

[Thremp]

Smiley,

I don't doubt that it's an "athletic" type program that mixes and matches all aspects, but I doubt the results are better than anything put together by other coaches for similar programs. Its the "one size fits all" approach that I detest about crossfit.

There are definitely some huge dudes out there. But I can't speculate why they are that big, if its due to crossfit or whatnot. Also its completely a performance oriented program since there are very elite crossfitters who look terrible.

Out of curiosity, when they say standing shoulder press... Do they mean a push press or just a regular standing shoulder press with strict form? I wonder why they wouldn't say that push presses >>>> regular presses since power output is so much higher.

[SmileyEH]

It's a standing press - no leg drive allowed. I don't know why they chose it - probably because it's a little more functional than bench press.

[J.Brown]

my 2 cents on this (surprisingly not that pro crossfit)

i don't think it will make you bigger/more mass then a dedicated bodybuilding program (all encompassing one, diet included), but it probably works better than what most people apply as "their" bodybuilding program.

hope that makes sense....my meaning is crossfit>bodybuiling programs that most people do.

the overall neuroendocrine response theory falls under the same area in my mind. the extreme response that your body undergoes when put under the stress of some of these full out metcon wods is brutal and causes immediate and drastic changes to a person's body. this is 100% true 100% of the time for everyone imho.

again much more effective than the average bodybuiling routine of lifting that is used by the average lifter.

would it be best for thremp and his goals, no.
there are much better systems available including what he is doing now to gain size/look better....give the illusion of total fitness [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] crossfit seems to provide actual fitness across a great scope of modalities.

there are some crossfit monsters when it comes to size and these guys are awesome scary, but they could maybe even bigger given a diff. training regimen, who knows??

does crossfit and its faq have some holes in it?
probably, i will be better able to answer this question after i return from a crossfit certification in sept.
i don't agree with everything they say, but maybe i will return brainwashed.

the standing press was chosen as not only more functionality than bench press and having a more direct test of core strength in a pressing movement and having to use more stablizers than laying on anything. It can be done with less equipment and is easier to judge a correct and safe lift and has less to do with body physiology than bench does. much tougher to have a huge advantage in a strict standing press from short arms and a huge rib cage.

last thought is that a kipping pu has nothing to do with a cheat curl imo. a dead hang pu and a kip pu are two different movements done for diff. reasons. a cure and cheat curl are both done to gain strengh/size in your bi.
it seems vastly diff. to me.

good points by both of you. i have missed both thremp and smiley. gotta get back to this forum.

cheers. J.

[Thremp]

J. Brown,

What is the exact purpose of kipping pullups? I've always understood that kipping is a good thing in the sense that it can enable you to increase rep ranges by taking the load off of your back and arms and use momentum generated by your whole body instead. Much like chopping the ROM would do for the activity.

I find it somewhat ironic that they use a movement with huge body english for a large part of their training, but eschew a commonly accepted variant for their total calculation.

[J.Brown]

ahh kipping how i long to understand thee.........

this is a tough one for me, or was, but here is my vague understanding (and i will try to avoid the climbing over walls/functionality part, but it is a bit of a factor) besides the more power through kipping part because crossfit is trying to equally build all 10 of their specified fitness modalities the kipping integrates using body control, greater coordination, a chain of movements that is more "athletic" and total body than dead hand pu's, and most importantly a hip snap action that is a critical chain all oly. lifts. more applicaple even if you aren't climbing walls.

oh and the real reason they default to is that is the building block of the crossfit holy grail movement. the muscle up on the rings. you can def. find fault with the muscle up because it is largely based on a learned technique, but you have to have a REAL base of strength to do one or more. like 20 kipping pu's and 40 or so dips unbroken i think is what they say. just bought rings, so we will see if this is true.

as far as using very very strict way of measuring for the crossfit total that is their way for sure. see they don't view kipping as cheating or helping. they view it is a diff. movement all together. i sort of understand it, but i also see how i causes MASS confusion and questioning of the system.

i am still drinking the kool aid, but it is making me into a bit of a fitness monster compared to 4 months ago, so damn it i am results oriented. later. J.

[Rootabager]

I dont know if i understand everything that you are saying in this post, but you can learn to do a muscle up on the rings. I had to take a gymnastics class in college and I learned to do one pretty easy. But I can do 20 regular pullups( dont know about kipping) and I can do 40 dips also.

Learning to do a muscle up is easy if you have a good instructor teach you.

I like all the crossfit stuff. I have never done a program or anything but it looks pretty neat. Seems like it would get you in pretty good shape.