Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have been kipping on pull-ups--usually just those last two or three of a set--for four months now in CF and have never sustained the slightest injury. And I don't wear gloves. And have never heard of anyone at my box getting hurt doing this either. Of course I have only CF'd about 35 times so far, so....who knows?
Just sayin'.
(Oh..I consider myself pretty educated in Sports Science, having been a college athlete and practicing athlete for over 20 years.) You know, experience; college classes; NASM Cert, dozens of books, etc.
So let's be careful with the name-calling, shall we?
Thanks!
Crossfitters post it online all of the time. Doing 50 kipping pullups in a row as fast as possible, then putting their disgusting, bloody, torn up hands in the camera as if they're proud of being purposely injured. What sport did you play in college?
LOL--Are ya sure you want to get an olde track guy talking about his times? We are notorious for going on at length on that subject, and it's usually the other way around: people want to muzzle us instead of encouraging us. But, so be it!
I used to be a pretty decent runner as well, just in high school, not college. I drew some interest from colleges, but wanted to join the military.
My fastest mile was a 4:41. I ran that at 6,000+ feet elevation. My two mile time was a 10:37 on the same track as my fastest mile. After joining the Marines and completing all the initial training my first PFT (3 mile run) was a 15:40. I used to be pretty quick. Not so much any more, but then again I'm 34 and with two knee surgeries and a few pretty severe ankle injuries to my accomplishments I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. Despite this, I still get under 20 on that 3 mile run and always finish in front of a lot of guys several years younger than me.
If you still run under 20 on a 5K you are still a "decent runner" amigo.
In fact, an excellent one.
I can't get below 22 mins anymore on a 5K.
Thank you for your kind words. I believe you may be overstating my abilities, but I will not be ingenuously humble. I am in very capable physical shape across the board. And that sort of raises a point. I am pretty conventional in my approach to fitness. I lift weights, I run, do pullups, pushups, etc. I don't do crossfit, and yet I consider myself extremely functionally capable.
Greg Glassman once touted being a "jack of all trades, a master of none" and claimed that "nature will punish the specialist." He gave an example of a runner that could run a 4 minute mile and a power lifter who can squat 900 lbs. He went on to explain the runner, in order to be able to run a 4 minute mile, would not carry a lot of muscle mass. The power lifter, in order to be able to squat 900 pounds, would have an abnormal volume of bulk. Glassman argues these examples are not functionally fit. He is probably right, but his story does not illustrate the value of crossfit. Here's why: Few can run a 4 minute mile OR squat 900 pounds.
I don't know Glassman's academic background, but I do know you don't frame your argument through outliers. It's a bit of a strawman to do so. The truth is there is a large group of people out there like me. I'm not the biggest guy in the weight room or the fastest runner on the track. But I can transition from one to the other and be turn in pretty solid performances in both arenas. And I do it without crossfit.
And this is why I've argued multiple times that one not need do a "functional fitness" regimen such as crossfit to be functionally fit.
The idea of "functional" exercise is a bit amiss to begin with, considering that the vast majority of us work in offices and drive cars. We aren't chasing beasts for food or carrying stones for shelter. Even "functional" fitness is really just gym fitness for most people. The actual goal, of course, should be health, and that's very attainable from a multitude of exercise approaches.
I think when the term "functional" is is usually meant to describe the type of good, overall fitness that would enable someone to perform moderate to maybe even intensive "real life" activities or jobs. Maybe like, well, having to jog three miles into town if your car broke down.
Or dig some ditches in your front yard to install a sprinkler system; plant a few trees. Climb some stairs and help a friend move some furniture all day long; play basketball with your kids for an hour; spend a day up and down on a ladder installing XMAS lights on your house; scrub a floor on your hands and knees; help your buddy build a deck.
Does that make sense?
And: Iknowftbl... Yeah, I am totally in agreement with Glassman and for most of my adult life I have strove to achieve a sort of "happy medium" or compromise between the two ends of the fitness spectrum: the power-lifter and the 4-minute miler that he used as an example.
For example: when it comes to pure, one- or two-rep max strength, I would bet I am probably one of the weakest guys who post on this fitness forum. I can maybe bench my weight (170) with free weights two or three times. I doubt I could squat more than 200. I couldn't curl more than, say, 40 lbs. with a dumbell.
But I can do 50 push-ups; and as many sit-ups; run stairs all day; run 5 miles in under 45 minutes; and curl 40 lbs. with a barbell maybe 30 times. Or a 20-lb dumbell with one arm 25 times. Or do 20 each 8o lb. lat pull-downs. And this is the type of weight I do: low weight, high rep, and combine it with a lot of cardio. This is what I dog about CrossFit: it's a good "mix" for me. I am of the opinion that, especially as we get older it is more important for us to have great cardio fitness and only "good" muscle tone, with moderate weight-lifting ability, rather than bein' the guy who can bench press a Subaru but can't run from here to there without elevating his HR to 180.
And this is the point I have been trying to make with my CrossFit cheerleading (LOL) and my admonition to be wary of some of the more risky heavy-weight, low-rep resistance training that so many younger guys seem obsessed with excelling at.
I think when the term "functional" is is usually meant to describe the type of good, overall fitness that would enable someone to perform moderate to maybe even intensive "real life" activities or jobs. Maybe like, well, having to jog three miles into town if your car broke down.
Or dig some ditches in your front yard to install a sprinkler system; plant a few trees. Climb some stairs and help a friend move some furniture all day long; play basketball with your kids for an hour; spend a day up and down on a ladder installing XMAS lights on your house; scrub a floor on your hands and knees; help your buddy build a deck.
Does that make sense?
It makes perfect sense. But it isn't like you need crossfit to be able to do all of that stuff. Being able to do all of that is "functional" and I recognize crossfit is a training program designed specifically to train toward "functional" but it is not the only way to be functional. And as some of the detractors have pointed out, slip up a little during one of those WoDs and you'll be anything BUT functional.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Vogel
And: Iknowftbl... Yeah, I am totally in agreement with Glassman and for most of my adult life I have strove to achieve a sort of "happy medium" or compromise between the two ends of the fitness spectrum: the power-lifter and the 4-minute miler that he used as an example.
For example: when it comes to pure, one- or two-rep max strength, I would bet I am probably one of the weakest guys who post on this fitness forum. I can maybe bench my weight (170) with free weights two or three times. I doubt I could squat more than 200. I couldn't curl more than, say, 40 lbs. with a dumbell.
I understand that "happy medium" concept as well as anyone. As I've already shared, I'm never going to be the biggest guy in the weight room or the fastest runner in the race. But based on the extreme examples Glassman gave, you'd think the ONLY people striving for that balance in the middle were crossfitters. Or that nobody looked for that balance until the advent of crossfit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Vogel
But I can do 50 push-ups; and as many sit-ups; run stairs all day; run 5 miles in under 45 minutes; and curl 40 lbs. with a barbell maybe 30 times. Or a 20-lb dumbell with one arm 25 times. Or do 20 each 8o lb. lat pull-downs. And this is the type of weight I do: low weight, high rep, and combine it with a lot of cardio. This is what I dog about CrossFit: it's a good "mix" for me. I am of the opinion that, especially as we get older it is more important for us to have great cardio fitness and only "good" muscle tone, with moderate weight-lifting ability, rather than bein' the guy who can bench press a Subaru but can't run from here to there without elevating his HR to 180.
Ultimately I believe people should pursue what they enjoy doing. I'll not fault you your love of crossfit. I agree with some of the clinical studies that say it has its risks. Some of the atrocious form and coaching I've seen from crossfitters confirms many of my suspicions. But ultimately it is on the individual to recognize his or her limitations and scale to them, slow down, and execute the olympic lifts correctly under fatigue (extremely difficult and not the way these lifts were designed to be executed but I digress). And if one is smart and able to do this (and withstand the group pressure) they should be fine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Vogel
And this is the point I have been trying to make with my CrossFit cheerleading (LOL) and my admonition to be wary of some of the more risky heavy-weight, low-rep resistance training that so many younger guys seem obsessed with excelling at.
It's interesting you mention this. I had my second knee surgery last May. It took me a couple months before I was ready to attempt a squat or a deadlift following the surgery. I think it was late summer by the time I started squats and deadlifts, and at light weight loads (~135 pounds). Through the fall I was ridiculously conservative in adding weight. I was still experiencing a lot of pain where the surgery happened, despite a very close adherence to the physical therapy schedule and programming. Finally I accepted that the pain was something I was just going to have to live with and decided to go for broke. I started adding weight to my deadlifts. Not a lot, but consistently over 225 pounds. Same with squats, but still not as much weight. I've noticed ever since executing these two lifts (often on the same day) in a heavier weight, lower rep manner my knee feels better than it has since before I needed my first surgery. You've got yourself convinced these are back breakers. If not done correctly (like some of the deadlifts I've seen crossfiters do during a Wod), I suppose they are. But doing these lifts with heavier weights and low reps has made me more "functional" than I've been in a long time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
