Workout Thread II

[renaissance]

Here's an interesting criticism on Crossfit and its limitations. Some of Crossfit's advocates have made some silly claims about it being universally the best training regime. Reebok is really marketing it, but just like anyone claiming to have "the secret", it's overhyped.

I don't admit to knowing much about the science of crossfit, but if you want some entertainment, check out some of the bodybuilding.com threads on the topic.

From what I have seen, some of the workouts look beneficial, but when you have people doing advanced lifts without necessarily focusing on proper form, then I take issue.

[Corcaigh]

I don't admit to knowing much about the science of crossfit, but if you want some entertainment, check out some of the bodybuilding.com threads on the topic.

From what I have seen, some of the workouts look beneficial, but when you have people doing advanced lifts without necessarily focusing on proper form, then I take issue.

It's the same from the "other side" ... running. Intervals certainly have their place in fitness and running but the answer is not the exclusion of other types of aerobic training. Advocates of interval training often create strawmen and say they don't want to run a marathon. If you want to improve your effectiveness at running for longer than than two minutes you will benefit significantly from aerobic training.

[Elessar78]

It's the same from the "other side" ... running. Intervals certainly have their place in fitness and running but the answer is not the exclusion of other types of aerobic training. Advocates of interval training often create strawmen and say they don't want to run a marathon. If you want to improve your effectiveness at running for longer than than two minutes you will benefit significantly from aerobic training.

I enjoy watching crossfit. I have no opinion on it's value as a training tool but from a superficial standpoint, it seems more functional than lifting weights. As in, if I wanted functional strength for every day life I'd think that this would be a good workout. Not the whole workout every day, maybe.

I read through a short bit of the bodybuilding.com threads on CF and the posters talking about plateaus, but isn't that true with all fitness regimens if you don't modify them? Secondly, they act like CrossFit "athletes" are inferior. Looking at them you can't say that they're not working out or don't have strength gains. For me, there isn't a desire to see my 1-rep max go up and up. I can't remember the last time, I did a 1-rep max. And there's certainly nothing wrong with that—it's just not the end all be all for me. Additionally, if these CF athletes want to run I don't think they'll be the poorest examples out there. They're fit and they've acclimated to their sport, what more can you ask?

[GibbsFactor]

Can you describe what a 20 minute HIIT run is?

Easiest one ever... find a baseball diamond, jog it, sprint it, walk it. Rinse. Repeat.

[MattFancy]

Can you describe what a 20 minute HIIT run is?

When I do mine, here's what I do:

Run at 6 on the treadmill for 8 minutes
Then alternate between 7 and 9 for 30 second intervals for 8 minutes
Run at 5 for 4 minutes

[Corcaigh]

Additionally, if these CF athletes want to run I don't think they'll be the poorest examples out there.

No, but they shouldn't claim their training approach is optimum either. Some of the leading advocates of Crossfit are even claiming that the best distance runners would be faster if they switched to Crossfit.

On the subject of plateaus, this is well known in many sports and not just strength training. It's particularly true in distance running. Taking someone with a good general base you WILL see sharpening and improvement through the addition of intensity and intervals. This is part of every well designed training regime with periodization. But the continued application and increase of intensity will lead to staleness, burnout and injury if done for too long.

If people find Crossfit to be an great way for them to improve their health and they enjoy it, then that's awesome. If they claim they've found the universal secret to training for every sport, they're delusional.

Another sign that some Crossfit advocates are delusional is the number who have switched to a 'Paleo' diet as some magical secret. Again, it's no surprise that cutting out processed crap from our diets is going to be good for you, and some people do better without grains or dairy. Big duh.

[renaissance]

No, but they shouldn't claim their training approach is optimum either. Some of the leading advocates of Crossfit are even claiming that the best distance runners would be faster if they switched to Crossfit.

On the subject of plateaus, this is well known in many sports and not just strength training. It's particularly true in distance running. Taking someone with a good general base you WILL see sharpening and improvement through the addition of intensity and intervals. This is part of every well designed training regime with periodization. But the continued application and increase of intensity will lead to staleness, burnout and injury if done for too long.

If people find Crossfit to be an great way for them to improve their health and they enjoy it, then that's awesome. If they claim they've found the universal secret to training for every sport, they're delusional.

Another sign that some Crossfit advocates are delusional is the number who have switched to a 'Paleo' diet as some magical secret. Again, it's no surprise that cutting out processed crap from our diets is going to be good for you, and some people do better without grains or dairy. Big duh.

Crossfit resembles P90X in a lot of ways. A workout program that's not really using any particularly ingenious ideas, but by developing and marketing the program into more of a lifestyle, they get so many people to buy in to it and swear by it.

Are they both good workout programs? Yes. But neither is the penultimate, one-size-fits all solution to everything fitness-related. Both have their benefits and drawbacks. And both are making tons of money these days

[Elessar78]

Easiest one ever... find a baseball diamond, jog it, sprint it, walk it. Rinse. Repeat.

Are you talking base to base jog, sprint, walk or round the bases in each speed setting?

[Pick6]

I enjoy watching crossfit. I have no opinion on it's value as a training tool but from a superficial standpoint, it seems more functional than lifting weights. As in, if I wanted functional strength for every day life I'd think that this would be a good workout. Not the whole workout every day, maybe.

I read through a short bit of the bodybuilding.com threads on CF and the posters talking about plateaus, but isn't that true with all fitness regimens if you don't modify them? Secondly, they act like CrossFit "athletes" are inferior. Looking at them you can't say that they're not working out or don't have strength gains. For me, there isn't a desire to see my 1-rep max go up and up. I can't remember the last time, I did a 1-rep max. And there's certainly nothing wrong with that—it's just not the end all be all for me. Additionally, if these CF athletes want to run I don't think they'll be the poorest examples out there. They're fit and they've acclimated to their sport, what more can you ask?

I would probably say for functional strength your best bet will always be squat, deadlift, and bench press. Crossfit is probably better for sustained muscle endurance.

[Corcaigh]

Are you talking base to base jog, sprint, walk or round the bases in each speed setting?

Intervals can be done in many different ways - dependent on the objective, it's a balance of quality and quantity and duration, and the length and level of recovery between each effort.

For general fitness, either of the following would be good.

Going flat out with good form between bases and then walking as recovery is one approach.

Running smooth but fast for a whole circuit and then slow jog recovery for a whole lap is another way.

To further sharpen your general aerobic fitness for sports like soccer or basketball or for a 5k, you could do two laps on, one lap off etc.

[Samuels]

I would probably say for functional strength your best bet will always be squat, deadlift, and bench press. Crossfit is probably better for sustained muscle endurance.

The local crossfit gym here they do the big 3 and olympic lifts, kettlebells etc lots of variety with little break. In a way its alot like complexes they just put together a string of movements and do them in a huge giant set with no break for rounds.

[Pick6]

The local crossfit gym here they do the big 3 and olympic lifts, kettlebells etc lots of variety with little break. In a way its alot like complexes they just put together a string of movements and do them in a huge giant set with no break for rounds.

Yes, I know that, but not for power more for muscle endurance. I could do a 135lb deadlift for 50 reps in a row, but I would be better off increasing the weight over time.

[Dr. Do Itch Big]

Technically isn't all strength functional? Isn't just the applicability of said strength?

[Enter Apotheosis]

I enjoy watching crossfit. I have no opinion on it's value as a training tool but from a superficial standpoint, it seems more functional than lifting weights. As in, if I wanted functional strength for every day life I'd think that this would be a good workout. Not the whole workout every day, maybe.

It depends on what you mean by "lifting weights" and "functional".

The amount of strength that you need for every day life is, invariably, the amount of strength that you already have without any training. You are essentially functional in your daily life just by virtue of doing the same things every day. By that token, if there's an activity that you cannot do but would like to perform then the simplest way to become functional at it is to go out and try to do it until you can do it. Anything along the lines of Crossfit or conventional resistance training is going to put you beyond the initial threshold for functionality. At that point which is the "more" functional between the two depends entirely on what you, personally, believe you should be able to do.

I also feel obligated to point out that, as a term, "lifting weights" is like saying "playing sports" in that it is incredibly nonspecific. Many NFL TEs have benefited by playing hoops, I don't think any would benefit from taking up curling. That same kind of discrepancy in terms of cross-training can also apply to different weight room routines.

I read through a short bit of the bodybuilding.com threads on CF and the posters talking about plateaus, but isn't that true with all fitness regimens if you don't modify them?

Technically, yes. Some regimens do a better job at addressing plateaus than others and the nature of the plateaus themselves can be radically different, though. P90X, for example, changes phases every 4-ish weeks in an effort to keep the progress rolling (this is especially necessary because weight progression isn't a major emphasis of the program). If you were to do a heavy lifting, linear progression routine you wouldn't hit that same wall at 4 weeks despite sticking to the same basic routine. The constant weight increases would continue to challenge you until you reached an inevitable point where you'd be moving so much weight in a single workout that your body would be unable to fully recover fast enough for your next workout. That point will manifest itself as a plateau and will require you to change your routine to decrease volume but it's a wholly different animal from that P90X plateau.

To put it another way, in P90X (and, really, any training with more of an aerobic element) you plateau because your body is approaching peak adaptation and efficiency at the exercises. In a linear progression program you plateau because you hit a biological wall where your body isn't efficient enough to keep pace with your training. If you're starting from scratch, then the latter will take months if not years as opposed to the former's 4 weeks.

Technically isn't all strength functional? Isn't just the applicability of said strength?

Technically, sure. Usually people use the term functional strength to refer to strength that can be applied to practical uses. If your strength background consists of nothing but machine-based upper body lifts, you might be able to push or pull a ton of weight on those specific machines but a relatively low percentage of that strength will carry over to other activities compared to a full-body free weight routine. The strength you gain is still functional to some degree and is still better than if you didn't work out at all but it doesn't appear to be very functional at all when pitted against any number of alternatives.

I would probably say for functional strength your best bet will always be squat, deadlift, and bench press. Crossfit is probably better for sustained muscle endurance.

This has been my take on Crossfit and also, to some extent, P90X. It's always made more sense to me to train for functional strength and develop that endurance separately according to what you want to do specifically.

[TheDoyler23]

Errrybody get their Saturday "maintenance" in?