Come join HBomb and Scoots for the team wods today! Hope you don’t have to run in the snow 🙂
Today’s Workout:
Buy-in: select teams of 3, make cool names!
WOD: Team Helen Mashup
3 rounds (each) for time of –
400m run
21 kettlebell swings (35/55)
12 pullups
All 3 team members run at the same time and all must get back to gym
before the swings and pullups can start.
Once full team is back, person 1 can start the swings, others rest
Once swings are done, the first person moves to pullups, second person to
swings, etc
All pullups and swings must be done before team goes on next run, they
must leave at the same time and same rules apply for the next 2 rounds.
Cash-out: Group FTL stretch
Open gym today?
How about that open gym? Anyone with the key gonna let the masses in?
On another note here is an interesting/informative article on scaling. Have a read. Disseminate.
http://www.againfaster.com/articles/zatsiorsky-scaling-and-power.html?currentPage=2#comments
Great find on that article, Paul! Thanks for sharing.
Awesome article. Definitely made me think. Thanks!
Got a few thoughts regarding the article on scaling.
As an intro, one of my major pet peeves about the “scientific” aspects of Crossfit is grabbing a part of an idea or concept and presenting it as the whole. Case in point, Jon didn’t get past page 6 in the book he is discussing and therefore doesn’t fully understand (or doesn’t discuss) the context of the numbers presented.
The whole idea of CrossFit as a “power sport” is really baseless in my opinion. When was the last time we recorded peak or average power from a workout? What is peak power and why is it never discussed? Is metabolic power different than mechanical power?
Last time I checked, there weren’t answers to these questions from people at HQ – I believe that this is because they only understand PART of the information and not all of it.
Crossfit is about performance, and performance for us means ramping up to RX weights/movements so that we can be compared against our own prior scores and the scores of others who are doing the same WOD. Our Zones of scaling allow for people to compete/measure performance at various levels also but we really aren’t all that interested in measuring their “power”.
I agree with what the author is saying in other parts of the article and that going Rx’d is only advisable if it is within the athlete’s capacity. I think the equation is too simplistic though as someone with a 220 thruster may gas out faster than an individual with a 155 thruster who has a crazy engine.
If we were looking at true, mechanical, peak power output geared towards the development of those same qualities, then I think Zatsiorsky’s info is of merit in our setting. Otherwise, we are measuring performance and we base it on pounds, reps, and distance, not peak or average Watts.
Turts
Hey Cam.
Ill retort because that is what I do. Im not entirely sure I understand your meaning that Crossfit is not a power sport. I will assume it to mean that Crossfit is not just about improving/monitoring power output. If this is your statement I disagree. Crossfit’s very definition is improving work capacity across broad time and modal domains ( I know I dont need to tell you this). Work capacity is defined by Glassman as Power which is Force X Distance/Time. Most people dont measure the power they put out during Fran, although it can be done. Instead they measure their time, which is easier to do and accomplishes the same objective. Fran has the same amount of work demand each time you do it unless the weight changes on the bar or you get taller or lose/gain weight. When you compare your two Fran times the work side of the equation cancels out and you have a ratio of T2/T1. If your time got faster you put out more power. The increase of power output is your change in fitness. That is the entire operational definition of Crossfit when applied to broad time. Yeah we just say I got faster at Fran but we are really talking about work capacity. Average power is often simply called power. There are papers that looked at the actual power increase from training Crossfit. Here is a link to the journal article:
http://journal.crossfit.com/2010/09/us-army-crossfit-study-may-2010.tpl
Not perfect experimental design but they measure work in the exact mechanical terms were talking about. All the Metabolic “power” changes are considered correlates to Crossfit s definition of health like Triglycerides, LDL and everything else. Just what is the Part of the information HQ doesnt understand? I can see that when people compete in a 5km run it is a different amount of work for someone that is 250lbs from someone that is 125lbs and the two will end up comparing for just time but each individual should be focused on improving their own capacities in all domains.
“performance means ramping up to Rx weights/movements so that we can be compared against our own prior scores and the score of others”. Well there are lots of people who do Crossfit who will never be able to do a WOD as RX. If you keep the same scaling options each time you do a workout you can just compare the times. If you change load, time or distance the calculations get a little more complex but the idea is increase what work you can do and get it done in a faster time. If you accomplish more work in the same time or do the same work faster you have improved fitness. So is it more beneficial for someone to do Fran with 95lbs and have it take 20mins or should they scale to 45lbs and only compare themselves to the last time they did it? Crossfit is You Versus You. It also gives the elite a way to compare themselves but for the average Crossfitter it is about increasing their own work capacity to make life easier. You only have to worry about improving your own fitness not beating someone else by standardized tests.
I think the article gives a decent starting point (<50% max weight) to make your own scaling options so you can maintain a high average power output. Otherwise your doing 20minute Fran, which you agree is counterproductive. Just where exactly do we disagree? If you can thruster 220 and Gas on Fran at 95lbs you dont have a big engine and need to work on the conditioning (speed) to maximize power and dont have to focus on absolute strength. If you can only thruster 155 but are fast at Fran maybe more work should be done to increase absolute strength so your average work load can increase. Like the author said its a balance of strength and speed but its all ultimately about work capacity.
Hi Paul,
I’ve responded to some of your points/quetions below. Keep in mind that I believe entirely in the effectiveness of a well-designed Crossfit program, that’s why I train/live Crossfit and own a Crossfit gym! I just take issue with some of the statements that are made by people at HQ. A lot of the terms used by (and defined by) Crossfit HQ (intensity, speed, power) aren’t supported by any other sports science areas. This is primarily because they are inaccurate and/or poorly applied.
“Ill retort because that is what I do. Im not entirely sure I understand your meaning that Crossfit is not a power sport.”
The measurement of performance in Crossfit can in “theory” be described by a very basic average power approach. However the daily “practice” of crossfit is measured in performance. Performance in repetitions, weight, and time can be converted to power but that is not what we are directly measuring. There are work/average power calculators online for certain crossfit wods but they are rudimentary at best.
“There are papers that looked at the actual power increase from training Crossfit. Here is a link to the journal article:
http://journal.crossfit.com/2010/09/us-army-crossfit-study-may-2010.tpl”
I only see one paper here and it is biased, displays no statistical significance information and has no control groups to compare against. It utilizes mostly crossfit (Greg Glassman) references, which further calls into question the integrity of the study. Sure the improvements in the chosen WODs was impressive, but when it came to the actual Army fitness test, the improvements were not nearly so convincing (i.e. perhaps a group training in a different method would have fared better?). Even the definition of power that they use doesn’t make sense in the context of the article. Furthermore, did I miss the calculation of power output for the Total? Didn’t see it in there – how does that factor into the “power sport” issue?
“All the Metabolic “power” changes are considered correlates to Crossfit s definition of health like Triglycerides, LDL and everything else.”
Considered correlates by who? Keep in mind also that metabolic power and mechanical power are two different things. What was measured in the study? If it is stated that an increase in average power is correlated with measures of cardiovascular health, it have been included in the study. Are these subjects healthier than when they started from a medical/scientific perspective? (by the way my guess is “yes” but such statements just can’t be made without support).
“Just what is the Part of the information HQ doesnt understand? I can see that when people compete in a 5km run it is a different amount of work for someone that is 250lbs from someone that is 125lbs and the two will end up comparing for just time but each individual should be focused on improving their own capacities in all domains.”
What is the average power output in a 5k run? An increase in performance over that distance would most likely indicate an increase in aerobic (i.e. metabolic) power, lactate tolerance, and specific muscular endurance but for our general fitness purposes it was simply an increase in performance. To call it an increase in average power would just be asinine since we don’t have a great way to measure the Crossfit definition of average power in a run like that – it’s impractical and likely pretty inaccurate (unless of course we used some high tech equipment).
“Well there are lots of people who do Crossfit who will never be able to do a WOD as RX. If you keep the same scaling options each time you do a workout you can just compare the times. If you change load, time or distance the calculations get a little more complex but the idea is increase what work you can do and get it done in a faster time. If you accomplish more work in the same time or do the same work faster you have improved fitness. So is it more beneficial for someone to do Fran with 95lbs and have it take 20mins or should they scale to 45lbs and only compare themselves to the last time they did it? Crossfit is You Versus You. It also gives the elite a way to compare themselves but for the average Crossfitter it is about increasing their own work capacity to make life easier. You only have to worry about improving your own fitness not beating someone else by standardized tests.”
I like this paragraph – you didn’t mention “power” once 🙂 You’re bang on – we know the task to complete and we have an accurate measure – time. Let’s leave it at that. In the Fran example you give, both individuals are putting out “Crossfit average power”, regardless of their time. I would scale based on the time domain I want them to be working in as opposed to what average power I wanted them to aim for.
“I think the article gives a decent starting point (<50% max weight) to make your own scaling options so you can maintain a high average power output. Otherwise your doing 20minute Fran, which you agree is counterproductive. Just where exactly do we disagree?”
The article assumes that this is an appropriate starting point for Fran and Grace which actually doesn’t make sense in the context that Zatsiorsky was writing about. Zatsiorsky made those recommendations on the basis of (likely) 1-3 repetitions per set for the development of peak mechanical power output. Why should we apply that message to Fran (45 repetitions) or Grace (30 repetitions)? This argument extends even more for longer and more multimodal wods. “Velocity” in the Zatsiorsky equation applies to the movement of the barbell in a single repetition, whereas “speed” in Crossfit definition is how fast we finish the workout. Do you see now why they can’t exist in the same equation? What about other WODs? There is no universal scaling equation for Crossfit since there are so many different time domains that the scaling for “high average power output” would be different in each case. Or how about Helen – running, kbs, pull-ups? Or Christine… remembering that this is a performance workout based on lifting a bodyweight bar?
In the end, it is about performance – performance either compared to yourself or against others if you so choose. “power” as defined and used by Crossfit is poorly supported in my opinion and overcomplicates things. I understand WHY it is used – primarily to create a “scientific” aura around Crossfit training – but I don’t support it’s use and don’t personally buy into the portrayal of Crossfit as a power sport.
I try not to get into too many internet discussions as I find I don’t have the time to follow up as much as I would like and often it is a futile endeavour. That being said, this conversation did get me to think a bit more critically about why I dislike the power – Crossfit connection so much, so thanks for that!
See you in the gym,
Cam
Cool. Thanks for taking the time to respond in depth like that. You raise valid points and if you believe HQ is on the wrong track I think it should be pointed out. Fact of the matter I really dont see much science applied to Crossfit at all and you mentioned the faults of the article (which is some of the best attempts ive seen so far of applying scientific method to Crossfit). Crossfit just gets results. So scale how you want to and we ll compete it out like we always do – either against each other or against ourselves.
Peace
Agreed Paul. Good conversation and thought process here – you’re right, in the end, it’s about improving ourselves and there really isn’t a need to get complicated with it!