I strongly disagree with Hyperfit's assertion. What evidence (i.e. performance data) do we have that the olympic lifts are disproportionately more important than other aspects of CrossFit, from sprints, to gymnastics, to the slow lifts, to distance running?

There is no doubt that the clean and jerk and snatch are very effective movements for improving fitness. But do those who focus on olympic lifting consistently outperform those who train generally, or those who focus on other aspects of training? I haven't seen the data that supports that assertion.

I would say that the cornerstone to building fit athletes (perhaps this is different from running a successful affiliate, perhaps not) is a commitment to developing the fundamental movements of Crossfit, not just the olympic lifts. Why prioritize the snatch over the 200m or 400m sprints? Or over ring training and handstands?

It is to be noted that Josh Everett was by far the best olympic lifter at the 2009 games. He was much better at low rep clean and jerks and snatches than Mikko Salo, for example. Yet Josh finished 35th out of 74. Josh is a phenomenal athlete, to be sure, but his performance in my opinion is insufficient to justify olympic-lifting biases.

It is ironic to me that a program that began as the antithesis of specialization has morphed into a specialized barbell strength or power training program at many affiliates, without nearly sufficient performance data to support their methods. (I am not talking about those who focus on heavy lifting for a specific sport, but about those who prescribe barbell-strength focused training for the goal of increased work capacity across broad time and modal domains.)

Women make up the majority at many CrossFit gyms and most of them are looking for results first and foremost. Second I think to that is the sense of community. O lifting a cornerstone of a successful affiliate? I disagree. I believe it is vital to a strength and conditioning program and building a better athlete but not the cornerstone of my business. Giving people results that they see in the mirror is what keeps people in your box and brings in new people. Especially women. How you get to those results is irrelevant. Just my 2 cents.

Also disagree at least by the definition of Cornerstone (the piece in which everything else is built around). In reference to training then, I would have to say our cornerstone is bodyweight control/strength/proficiency. When we get this, we move on to other things. I don't think a "strength and conditioning" program needs O-lifting, but this is all so subjective. In our program, this is the LAST thing clients learn. Why? It's so technical. I didn't start teaching O-lifting until I felt comfortable doing them myself ( a process of about a year). The positional elements are preceded by proficiency in the deadlift, front squat, press, push press, etc. We have a totally seperate O-lifting class and we don't rush anything. The cornerstone of running a successful affiliate? Tough one. I think there is more than one and my definition of success may differ from someone else's. I would have to say "Training excellence." Bottom line we are trying to make people fit, strong, and healthy. A program is only as good as the people teaching it.

By the way, great post Lis!

Would be curious to understand HyperFit's explanation of an "O-Lifting Program". I would doubt that he means that his Weightlifting Classes are the cornerstone of his overall fitness program. However, having a current that moves both newbies and advanced athletes towards the Clean and Jerk and Snatch would be useful. Doug is a thoughtful fellow...looking forward to his input.

I would define a cornerstone of a successful affiliate as the most simple and uncompromising element of your training/business/community. Maybe the most telling thing is having one at all. I confess that I could state a bunch of popular cliches...but I have yet to identify our true cornerstone. To be fair, we are also not the most successful affiliate that I know.

For me, searching for that single unyielding element (cornerstone) is more important than proclaiming one on faith and sticking with it. My proclamation would change every week, but finding our true cornerstone should be a grounding experience and provide a bearing point for the future.

I agree, we strive for proficiency in O-lifts daily at CFNE up here in MA. Our members gain immeasurably from it. We begin to teach the clean, and the Jerk (separately) in our elements class. Being efficient and proficient at the clean is only necessary but imperative for performance AND safety in a VAST number of WODs. We realize that NO ONE will master any of these lifts in 1 hour or even 1yr, but we strive for virtuosity regardless. We also have a highly competitive gym, and because of that the O-lifts are even more important. If you want to show up and compete at a high level in competitions of any kind, nevermind sectionals, regionals, or the games...you had best be very capable in the O-lifts. That's what works for top-tier athletes, and is necessary in their training to develop not only those skills, but powerful hip extension in general. One of CrossFit's tenets is that the needs of the elite athlete and grandmother differ by degree, not by kind.

I was actually thinking about this yesterday. I feel that CrossFit is a mixture of everything and therefore nothing should have more emphasis than another training modality.

My one-person debate was actually about the benefits of the slow lifts and the O-lifts in regard to real world applications. While raw brutal strength is important to someone that needs to push against an object in an isometric contraction, where does this leave the person if they lack speed and power? And vice versa. I can think of plenty of real world applications where both are needed. I personally feel there is a delicate balance between the two. We can discuss gymnastics/endurance at a later time. However, I do feel that all of these are key to a Cross training Fitness program.

I feel O-lifting while important may or may not be the cornerstone of a successful strength and conditioning program. However, as the name "strength and conditioning" suggests your program must contain some focus on "Strength" and some focus on "Conditioning."

As far as strength is concerned various people feel strongly about what are the most important lifts or exercises to make you strong: the squat, the deadlift, the clean. They're all good and should probably be in your strength program. Westside Barbell manages to have a pretty badass strength and conditioning program and O-lifting is not the cornerstone of their program. I wouldn't say O-lifting is the cornerstone of CrossFit as a whole. Then of course you have Burgener and Greg Everett who have made O-lifting the cornerstone of their programs and are kicking ass.

So...my answer is maybe. :)

Oly lifts can be considered a cornerstone because they stimulate the CNS unlike anything else. We try to do the Oly lifts when they come up.
We've been to an Oly seminar, but beleive that the skill set needs to be used more often.
I was wondering if anyone has something like a once a week Oly class?

I think that you guys need to re-read what Doug said. He said that the Oly lifts were the cornerstone of a a good strength and conditioning program, and in this regard I agree with him whole heartedly. The nod to CNS development is a good one, but let's take a look at the rest of why they are a great cornerstone.
Cardio endurance (at reps maybe)
Stamina (at reps again, although heavy singles hit the mark here)
Strength (to a large degree, maybe not as much as a heavy dead)
Speed (very few things better)
Flexibility (very few things better in building a functional capacity)
Power (I shouldn't have to go there)
Accuracy (can be seen as timing, in which case... yes)
Agility (nothing better)
Coordination (nothing better)
Balance (very few things better)

Coach Glassman has said that one of the things that separates CF from most strength and conditioning programs is that we have our feet firmly planted in the neurological development and adaptation side of things. Doing the oly lifts would tend to support that, which is why they make a great cornerstone of the S&C part of CrossFit.

The cornerstone of CrossFit, however I think is much harder to nail down than that. I think that it is left to individual interpretation. For me, it would be community and empowerment.

John, I think you said what I was thinking even better than I did by listing the 10 General Physical Skills.

What is a cornerstone? It is a starting point or foundational element that other things are build off of.

Let me define how I term and use Olympic weightlifting movements for our purposes (at HyperFit). The Snatch and Clean and Jerk (Not the power movements). The ten aspects of fitness are certainly trained in the movements (See John Brown above, and thanks for writing it) The movements are very athletic and should be developed as part of a GPP program as well as their sport. The coordination of being able to fully open the hip, change direction and receive a load, then stand up with it - Speed, power, agility, accuracy? Yes. The power movements - which we use regularly - are not in my definition - but of value because of faster cycle times and higher average power output. The SN/CL&J has higher max power per cycle and I differentiate because of the single rep profile versus the Grace/Isabel modes. All are of value and we use all of them. The sequencing of core to extremity movement - they are truly functional.

In terms of CrossFit - I don't presume to speak for CrossFit. My application in my box (sounds dirty) - large loads, long distance, quickly - teaching people to move better and be more well rounded as athletes are items of value to us. The coaching skill development to be able see - understand and correct these movements at speed also develops trainers to become coaches.

CrossFit - I think Coach speaks well enough on Olympic Weightlifting where it is a cornerstone for them.

The real questions we have center around how much time to develop the lifts - the lifts are VERY time intensive to coach and develop vs other training modalities. To be "good" at the lifts - a disproportionate about of training time needs to be allocated. How to balance the need for high metcon/max power/skill work with training time intensive lifting?

The cornerstone of running a successful affiliate comes from how the owner defines success. Making a decision on what success is to you and what you will need to give in order to get is a cornerstone.

John Brown,

You are right, I misread strength and conditioning as CrossFit. There is a difference. Still, I don't see why sprinting, jumping, the slow lifts, or gymnastics would be any less important to developing strength and conditioning than the olympic lifts.

Great topic. I would have to refer to the pyramid and say that nutrition is the cornerstone. Coach talks about this and you can't progress in to met cond or strength or gymnastics unless nutrition is where it needs to be. With that being said, I could not build my affiliate on people who are only interested in eating to fuel top performance, I couldn't even pay my insurance:) I do feel though if you can teach a lady to c & j and do it right, you have a lifer!

Russ - Those items are all valuable too. There was no implication in our class description of Olympic Weightlifting Class to diminish other modalities. We have a special class because the skills required for Olympic Lifting is greater. Relatively speaking, there is no need for a deadlift class (which we do regularly) because of the low skill requirement and narrower focus of general physical skills. The need for a specialty class is questionable. Our programing includes lifts and skill transfer exercises to a point where we really don't "need" an o-lifting class. Olympic weightlifting skills are more perishable than push press skills where there is a lot less going on. The specific training is of benefit for the reasons listed above. Our clients like it because the relative intensity is lower (20-30 singles in an hour vs. Isabel) and it give them an escape from the harder training - kind of a rest day.

I certainly do not agree with Oly-Samas - where their religion is Olympic Weightlifting - praying to the the Eleiko God and paying penance on the platform is... questionable. I reason that the benefits of a specialty class is that when people really need a rest from higher intensity program, it is a good forum and the skills transfer back to our main program.

It really comes down to this - if our clients see us for 3-4 hours a week - where are they going to get the most value for their strength and conditioning program? It is up to the local coach to decide. How much exposure you give your clients to higher skill vs lower skill is a choice of the coach. How many times you sprint, deadlift, pull up, etc is on the judgement and experience of the coach. How much exposure to 80-85% reps vs singles vs high reps at 50% is determined by the needs of the trainee.

John Brown Comment #10,

“Coach Glassman has said that one of the things that separates CF from most strength and conditioning programs is that we have our feet firmly planted in the neurological development and adaptation side of things. Doing the oly lifts would tend to support that, which is why they make a great cornerstone of the S&C part of CrossFit.”

And Doug Chapman Comment #12

“The real questions we have center around how much time to develop the lifts - the lifts are VERY time intensive to coach and develop vs other training modalities. To be "good" at the lifts - a disproportionate about of training time needs to be allocated. How to balance the need for high metcon/max power/skill work with training time intensive lifting?”

Why is it assumed that the Olympic lifts are harder/more time intensive to develop than other modalities? In my experience, which is considerable enough to be significant, though perhaps not conclusive, this is entirely down to the individual. I’ve been doing CrossFit for 4 years. My clean & jerk and snatch are both significantly better than my running, particularly at long distance, both in terms of performance and technique. I never did any Olympic lifting before CrossFit, and I’ve spent much more time trying to additionally develop my running than my Olympic lifts. I’m only just starting to get my handstands down. And no, I am NOT a natural by any means. In fact, I’m the worst athlete I’ve ever trained.

Doug, I’m assuming that the goal of your strength & conditioning program is increased work capacity across broad time and modal domains – i.e., I know you don’t speak for CrossFit HQ, but I am guessing your stated goal is the same, as far as developing athletes. Forgive me if I’m incorrect.

I think Russ Greene Comment #1 brings up the most relevant point (I know, it’s shocking that Russ and I are in agreement): Where is the data? If we assume that the CrossFit Games is the best source of data to determine who the fittest people on earth are, then we have to look at the methodologies used by the best performers in the CrossFit Games.

Mikko Salo does an incredible amount of work, including heavy lifting every day, as well as endurance running or rowing and 1-2 CrossFit style metcons. Interestingly, one day of his training looks very, very similar to a 3 day cycle of the programming on crossfit.com, with some extra work thrown in.

Moe Kelsey regularly participates in triathlons.

No one in the top 16, to the best of my knowledge, does any sort of strength specialization. They’re programming is constantly varied.

If the top 16 athletes in the 2010 CrossFit Games say they’ve been doing barbell strength or Olympic lifting focused training, then we’ll have data worth scrutinizing. If the trend continues, I will happily change my tune, because I would definitely like to spend more time lifting heavy things and doing short metcons. I hate running a lot. But as of now, the data has all pointed towards an equal balance of modalities and time domains, and that’s how I’ll continue to train myself and my athletes.

Interesting points. Keep them coming!

What is also interesting is that we seem to have three questions that have emerged:

1.) What is the cornerstone of an effective S+C program?

2.) What is the cornerstone of an effective CF affiliate?

3.) What is the cornerstone of CrossFit?

Jacob,

No one hates running more then me. Seriously.

It all comes down to the goal of the S & C program - We do broad general and inclusive. A goal is to make someone more athletic, increase work capacity and help with live a life that is not limited.

Where is are the training logs for the athletes from the games posted? I think it would be a great read. If it were documented, verified and analyzed it may be very telling.

To answer Lisbeth in IMHO:

1. Consistency
2. Being nice.
3. Open discussion.

This is a great and relevant topic. In my relatively short time being involved with CrossFit I have narrowed down my personal successes to three main points.

First, seeing people get over the "hump" by the members acclimating themselves to the intensity of the training.

Second, positive feedback from members regarding the long term benefits.

Third, watching ladies and men successfully develop and perform Oly lifts because of the athletic prowess it demands. You can see their confidence skyrocket. Nothing sexier than a woman performing a clean and jerk with speed, power and balance.

Big thanks to CROSSFIT for turning the fitness world upside down and accurately defining general fitness.

Doug...Thank you.

From Jacob "Bullfrog" Tsypkin:

"No one in the top 16, to the best of my knowledge, does any sort of strength specialization. They’re programming is constantly varied."

Maybe this is because their strength is already to a level where said programming would do nothing but hinder or overtrain them.

I've always hated the argument that all you need to do to be competitive at the CF Games is the main site WOD. If some of the athletes there are doing well at the Games while following the main site WOD, they are doing so because they already had a base of strength/power. If you think Khalipa or Salo got to where they are now with nothing but main site, you'd be sorely mistaken.

Now that is a bit off topic from your statement, Jacob, but I felt it was relevant to where I thought you were going.

As for my thoughts on the cornerstone of a S&C program...strength. I think strength gains in a linear fashion will take someone further in their capacity than any other bias. O-lifting is right there though. And as I think was stated previously, a lot of a S&C program comes down to the athlete's goals, time, and work ethic.

I feel the same for CF...strength is the cornerstone. I do feel that O-lifting is right there with it though in its ability to confer progress in all of the stated fitness categories.

The Olympic Lifts are the foundation of all CF movement. If you can become proficient at the lifts everything else comes easy. I would recommend everyone attend a CF Olift or USA weightlifting cert prior to a CF level I. Once hip extension is understood then CF movements become easy(ier). The understanding of force and momentum applied by the hips rather than individual limbs is learned through the lifts. This is the first thing I learned and this is the first thing I taught my wife, which moves better than anyone I've seen- and I've judged the games. I attribute this to the lifts. Also, if you want to gain proficiency in all 10 general physical skills, practice the clean and jerk, and the snatch-in different weight and rep schemes. Invaluable skills, and you are wrong if you're affiliated and not teaching these to your clients. I'm not preaching specialize just profeciency. Specialize in both or you'll have O Lifters that suck at CF or CFitters that suck at Olifting. The lifts are a cornerstone.

Grant,

Jacob didn't make the argument that all you need to be competitive at the CF Games is the main page WOD. I don't know where you got that from.

Salo and Khalipa do extra lifting, but they also do extra metabolic conditioning and running. I don't see where you concluded from Salo's or Khalipa's training that they have specialized in barbell strength. Adding extra work beyond what the WOD calls for does not imply strength specialization.

Furthermore, being strong and powerful does not necessarily imply a history of barbell strength specialization. Nor has Mikko or Jason Khalipa reached a level of barbell strength or power that necessitates specialization to achieve.

"I think strength gains in a linear fashion will take someone further in their capacity than any other bias."

Do you have any data to indicate that the top male or female athletes at the games trained this way? I haven't seen any.

Hey Russ,
I did not say Jacob made such an argument. I could, however, see how that could be construed from my post. I am merely stating the fact that I have heard such an argument many times before, and I loathe it.

I concluded that Khalipa had specialized in strength training prior to CF from his interview with Tony Budding after the 2008 Games. On the other hand, I have no source for Mikko specializing in barbell strength training. However, were you to find the ratio of strength work to metabolic conditioning over the past 2 years of main site WODs and compare that to the extrapolated ratio of strength work Mikko says he does in his interview, I feel that it would be disproportionate.

I am with you on being strong and powerful does not always mean barbell specialization (strong and powerful are very relative terms though). However, I find it hard to believe that our best athletes came to CrossFit with no strength specialization. What did they specialize in before CF? Or did they already do some varied programming? These are fair questions that would be great to ask them.

“Nor has Mikko or Jason Khalipa reached a level of barbell strength or power that necessitates specialization to achieve.” Spot on. It also doesn’t mean they haven’t specialized in some degree or manner though.

As for your question…the only data I have is anecdotal from my years of coaching (a mere seven). But I believe it was you or Jacob who said something along the lines of needing to consult our personal experiences as athletes and coaches. I have used a linear strength program and/or strength bias CF program with great results in many of my clients. We’ll never know for sure, but it looks to me that this programming has brought them to higher orders of work capacity across all times and domains. I hope that my coaching has evolved and will continue to evolve. This is where I currently stand in my coaching evolution though.

I am curious though, how would such data present itself and how would you go about collecting it?

Good discussion, Russ.

Brandon Millsaps #23

"The Olympic Lifts are the foundation of all CF movement. If you can become proficient at the lifts everything else comes easy. I would recommend everyone attend a CF Olift or USA weightlifting cert prior to a CF level I. Once hip extension is understood then CF movements become easy(ier). The understanding of force and momentum applied by the hips rather than individual limbs is learned through the lifts. This is the first thing I learned and this is the first thing I taught my wife, which moves better than anyone I've seen- and I've judged the games. I attribute this to the lifts. Also, if you want to gain proficiency in all 10 general physical skills, practice the clean and jerk, and the snatch-in different weight and rep schemes. Invaluable skills, and you are wrong if you're affiliated and not teaching these to your clients. I'm not preaching specialize just profeciency. Specialize in both or you'll have O Lifters that suck at CF or CFitters that suck at Olifting. The lifts are a cornerstone."

So, if Olympic lifters started training for it, they'd be the best gymnasts, sprinters, jumpers, and throwers in the world?