The angle of the torso determines the bunching of the sleeves.

Surley this is a far more complex equasion - centre of gravity, momentum, intertia, timing, etc.

In the photos, her COG is over her feet in all cases - so no matter what she did (in this one-dimensional example), she'd be going straight up irrespective of her torso angle.

If you reverse the sequence of shots, it looks like she is driving hard into a backflip.

Or have I missed the point.

Rest day activities:)
Ride Bike
Read back issues of CrossFit Journal. Hey, I think I'll start now. Goodnight all.

Yep, Pete, I think you've missed the point entirely.

These are not three moments in a single movement but three distinct moments in three different movements.

I think the accompanying text supports this. No?

I love the Pirates ~ Global Warming one. My present diet, however, excludes spaghetti :(

WOD
Subbed 55lbs clsq, bar dips 3-1

17:43
0530L KAF

Excellent, I've always said that Logic should be a required course to graduate both HS and what would generally be termed College. That and calculating loan interest and other time value of money stuff and nonsense and maybe some of the other basics of life, videlicte, auto maintenance. . .and Tactical Driving. . .and some rudimentary demolition, but I digress. . .

Needing. . .new. . . Eva. . . handstand . . . photo

Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc.
Kelly made me sick
Diane threw my back out
Elizabeth made my hands bleed
Ergo, All girls kick my ass.

I think I will go join the "Bear Patrol". Maybe the bears can save me from women.

I can't get away from causation/correlation. I hear about it everyday in either my research methods class or social psych class

Everything I needed to know I had learned by grade 7. HS didn't really add much, more good rest time. Would have been more beneficial period if was instructed in Tactical Driving, Demolition 101, Navigation, House clearing, and other skills one needs to survive on the streets today.

If one were doing a standing leap for max vertical height, pic 3 will yeild the best result for the jumper, by far.

I guess you are saying that if the torso angle is fairly static throughout, this observation lends it self to efficiency in each plane of movement - which does make sense in that the COG needs to move further forward in each respective case, but the generated unballance must be recoverable in terms of bringing the feet under the COG and landing the movement.

I'm ranting...sorry.

Pete. You really ought to watch some athletes perform a verticle leap or watch oly lifting. #3 would create the worst verticle leap and the greates horizontal vector component. As far as the physics goes - I think your confusing statics and dynamics. If you assume that she is static (not moving) in each photo, then of course all moments created about her center of gravity create a zero sum. However, I believe these photos are meant to represent snapshots in time during a dynamic movement sequence. (as Coach pointed out) This renders your initial analysis irrelevant and flawed. How the force is applied (muscle contraction) by her body with respect to her center of gravity (which changes with body position) defines her subsequent movement.

I would suggest that an analysis of the physics yields little value to the lesson that was meant to be imparted to the athletes on the site. Try it yourself and see.

Pete In Oz-

I would have to disagree with your assessment that picture #3 would produce the greatest vertical jump. Now I am only what I would describe myself as a biomechanical "buffoon", but if Anne were to start her jump from that position, she would not generate enough force to lift her body very far from the ground. With her trunk extended far over feet, her hips come up. There is less recruitment of muscles and joints to forcefully drive her up into the air.

Now, going back to picture #1, Anne is in a position to utilize her hips along with her quads, hamstrings, and lower leg muscles to efficiently apply force straight into the ground and get a return staight into the air. Think of high jumping in track and field, those jumpers never get their trunks extended away from their center line at take-off.

Anne's shadows really tell the story...

Best class I ever took in college - "Logic and Language". A semester exploration of the logical fallacies people use in everyday conversations. What a wake-up, too! I was a senior and thought, "Damn. Most of my college years have been spent arguing like a fool with other fools, with no sense of what I was saying." I still read the rhetoricians and some of the other Greeks from time to time. Those guys were pretty damn good.
Should absolutely be required for Freshman or Sophomores in high school and then again in college.

OK, first impression; let's see if I have this right:
Doctors want to find out why people die of heart disease, particularly women.
Doctors find out that most of the women who died had high triglyceride levels.
Doctors figure the fat must have come from their diets.
Doctors conclude a diet low in all fats will reduce the chance of heart disease.
In other words, people who have heart attacks must eat loads of fat. Reduce all fats, reduce heart attacks.

Too bad they were wrong.

By the way, today's picture sequence reminds me;
The annual meeting of the Annie Sakimoto Fan Club will be held just as soon as John Hackleman, President, wants it to be held.

I call dibs on being treasuerer.

Oh, the sequence (actually 3 distinct photos) reminds me of what we tell young athletes all the time:
Your body goes where your head goes. Head goes vertical; body goes verticle.
Caveat canium ipsa loquitor. Or something like that.

Chuck Norris kicks ass.
Chuck Norris uses the Total Gym.
Therefore, Total Gym users kick ass.

Say, this stuff works.

I have a mental image of an Olympic long jumper being perfectly erect at take-off. I don't think this invalidates the hypothesis embodied in the photos of Annie, though, as the long jumper is using horizontal speed coupled with a vertical component to create hang-time, resulting in a long horizontal travel.

Scott

“If one were doing a standing leap for max vertical height, pic 3 will yeild the best result for the jumper, by far.”

Pete, if one were doing a standing leap for max vertical height, AND they were any good at it, they’d NEVER have been in the posture of pic 3 once during the jump, or concentric, phase. Jumping for height, the athlete should jump as though they were in a tube (thanks to Coach Burgener for the coaching cue) of minimum diameter. …

Instead, they’d start in a squat like posture and end up in the posture of pic 1 immediately before taking off. Their torso would rotate to vertical (“double knee bend” or “scoop”) immediately before maximum acceleration and lift off. The posture of pic 1 is a dead giveaway as to what type of jump is occurring. (As are pic’s 2 and 3.)

From the posture in pic 3 the athlete leans forward, falling off balance, and launches forward for a forward-horizontal leap from which the generated unbalance must be recovered (to use your language).

Pic 2 represents a compromise in trajectory and posture (naturally) between the vertical jump and broad jump technique.

Scott,

Bingo!!

Just started - have done 2 wod's so far, but need to do Elizabeth on Thur. as I took today off. Question - is there a difference between "cleans" and "squat cleans"? I see different videos on the site, but when I watch they seem like the same move.

Jeff,

I asked the same question last week. The answer: make the squat clean your default clean. If Coach doesn't want a full squat, he'll specify "power clean".

In this day of public speaking by the likes of public figures, I wonder what happened to the art. I wish we could have Sir Winston Churchill here today. It would be an informative lesson in the art of public speaking.

Now there was something to hear. Even going after his enemy he would craft it to be to the point yet not insulting.

Coach-

As a college student of Psychology and Philosophy, I appreciate the correlation/causation links enormously. I wish I had a dime for every time a classmate forgot fundamentals such as this. An important way that I tie this to fitness is the ol' sport-makes-the-athlete example: just because NFL players eat and train the way they do, does not mean that this is the best way to become big and strong. Recruiters favor those who thrive on football training, so that's who you see on the field. The best sprinters I ran with in HS all feasted on junk food and womanized; obviously this does not mean this helped their performance.

For the "jump" photos, I think of it this way:

1) Torso location: #3 would spend too much energy getting the torso up to ever get a decent vertical jump, but it's perfect to get that part of the body forward.

2) Hip angle (as a function of torso attitude): all things being equal, #1's legs would end up extended below, and #3's would end up behind. Newton would say this is the correct direction of force to make the mass move in the opposite direction.

3) Arm angle (ditto): cleans aside, Annie would use her arms in each of these examples, and throwing them above (in line with the torso) would get the most "tug" on the shoulder (maybe not the best description). For sprint training, good sprinters (IMO) will start the first step exploding the leg back and arm forward, so hard that if the other leg didn't catch up, you'd end up in a nice track-flop/smear.

I dont disagree with most of the responses. My initial point about all the other variables: intertia, timing, centre of gravity etc - is one I stand by.

I have been involved in plenty of sports and athletic pursuits over the years. Enough to know that photo 3 represents the starting point of a higher jump (presuming it is a standing start). Again, due to inertia, timing etc. If you dont believe me step up to the wall and have a crack at it yourself.

Its a "no-brainer".... drop your COG as low as possible, swinging arms back as far as possible, then explode upward off toes, arms accellerate under and up, shoulders driven up over hips and legs finish vertical thrust.

In Pic 1, she is flat footed and there would be minimal height achieved. Try jumping from there off your heels.

This is turning into a flaming session...not my intention at all. Those pics just seem open to interpretation.

No offence intended - and I reckon i should close my cake hole before I upset lots of angry CF'ers :)

BTW, the shots are beautifully composed and the words flow like silk.

Pete

Alex,

I follow you on all counts.

Pete,

I don’t think you are in any danger of angering anyone. You have, though, inspired a few more points:

1. I’m in agreement with you that inertia, timing, and center of gravity are important. Though how has yet to be offered.
2. Pic three fails your own requirement to “drop you COG as low as possible”.
3. In pic 1 she is flat footed indeed. Were her heels to lift before the finish of the hip/leg extension we’d have a core to extremity interruption that would drastically limit the jump.
4. You’re not going to anger anyone - it’s rest day, for Pete’s sake.
5. Thanks on the composition and silky language part!
6. I’m open to the possibility that physics and therefore jumping are different in Oz due to your being upside down and all. You don’t want to come up here for any b’ball though.

This is all good-natured.

Howdy all,

Have not posted in a while, school in the way (bad excuse).

Just back from my buddy's "back to the desert" party. Wishing him and those like him the absolute best.

Today's reading reminds me of a paper I wrote last semester. The gist of it was that steppe nomads are steppe nomads because they are steppe nomads.

My judgement may be impaired, but that's OK.

I'm posting because I want to throw out some college words too. :) Chris (#26), what you are describing is a tautology (circular reasoning), not a fallacy of "cum hoc." The fallacy coach is describing regards confusing correlation (going together, or varying in unison) with causality (a cause is something that produces an effect). Although correlation is neccessary for causation it is not sufficient. To establish causation one must establish Time Order, Correlation, and control for Spuriousness. We're actually covering this material in my Social Research Methods class right now, so it's all fresh on my brain.

haha...mate...I like your style...:)

1. upside down?....that would explain all the hand walking going on over there...you like us aussies huh?
2. b'ball?? How about a real sport like rugby union. We do actually have a thing here called netball that is very much like basketball....no contact, shiny pants, prancing around etc

I think Alex touched on it in his third point (cheers mate) - in his reference to a track sprinter.

The potos to me look posed, in that in each case she is grounded and stationary - that means there is no forward momentum in each case, and her weight appears to be focussed on/over her feet.

This in my head would prevent the centre of gravity moving outside the base of stability in the 2nd and third pic - there must be momentum for this to occur. Forward momentum, centre of gravity moving off the base of stablilty, and cumulative force generated in leg drive etc, will ballance out and produce a forward leap. Hence my comment on intertia, timing etc

Put another way, if she drove hard with her legs in pic 3, it would be very ugly.

All my other comments about humping, sorry jumping, for height, backflips etc are just my weird way of saying those pics can be read heaps of different ways.

If they are all stage 1 pics, then I still say max height will be achieved from pic 3.

But I'm with ya on the underlying message. It makes perfect sense.

Even though I may not

Since I started crossfit a couple of months ago, I cut 30 seconds off my mile run and increased my deadlift 50%, so am I wrong to conclude cold weather increases your level of fitness?

The belief popular belief that correlation implies causation makes me believe we haven't advanced much beyond caveman era.

New Poll Shows Correlation is Causation:

" 'It is really a mandate from the people.' commented one pundit who wished
to remain anonymous. 'It says that The American People are sick and tired
of the scientific mumbo-jumbo that they keep trying to shove down our
throats, and want some clear rules about what to believe. Now that
correlation implies causation, not only is everything easier to
understand, it also shows that even Science must answer to the will of
John and Jane Q. Public.'"

This kind of stuff makes me want to read up on Oswald Spengler, with side dishes of Daniel and the Revelation of John.

Does anyone think the West is headed for Dark Ages II?

A nice page to bookmark...

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/

Coach,

Just to make sure, those photos are of the ammorization phase? Just before the concentric starts?

I think I'm with Pete on this.

I've worked with a lot of Volleyball players and they usually drop down into a position more similar to #3. Same thing when testing athletes for their max vert.

Pete #28,
Try jumping from all three starting positions and post results. You've got me curious. :-)

I notice the NBA player often approach the hoop in the position shown the picture #1. They are the very good jumper too.

#32: I'm pretty sure that article was satirical.

This stuff reminds me of my Intro to Logic course in college. Good stuff.

"Are you reading the dictionary?"
"Oh...you caught me! I like to break a mental sweat too."

I'm surprised no one has brought this up: http://media.crossfit.com/cf-video/051116.wmv
Just watch the first minute in slow motion (if you can), and see Greg's 30degree board-shorts-to-shiny-head angle from vertical. Also note that if he were trying to high jump, he would have an awkward time throwing his arms vertical.

By the way, yesterday was my first Beth. My anterior deltoids would be holding up a white flag right now if they could.

I thought this was a test: You assert upper body angle as the cause of direction then point us to the fallicy of correlation equals causation.

Coach sounds serious/sincere in his assertions. I'm still not convinced the upper body doesn't point toward our target to improve the jump and keep the center of gravity 'above' the thrust, but that it is the hip/knee/feet alignment that determines direction.

-Mark

Chuck Norris can jump high
Chuck Norris watches Monty Python
Ergo, watching Monty Python will make you jump high.

Time to hit Blockbuster!

I'd have to agree with Pete. Not saying I'm right, but in my experience somewhere between 2 and 3. Could be I've just seen wierd, but good jumpers. This is for just pure vertical, it gets messy in sports, as often your going against someone for something....

See also related concepts: Faulty generalization; ecological fallacy; anecdotal evidence.

Good accessible primer on causality and research design: Babbie, Earl. "The Practice of Social Research, 10th ed." Wadsworth. ISBN 0534620299.

I liked the end of the Wikipedia article:

Homer: Not a bear in sight. The "Bear Patrol" is working like a charm!
Lisa: That's specious reasoning, Dad.
Homer: [uncomprehendingly] Thanks, honey.
Lisa: By your logic, I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.
Homer: Hmm. How does it work?
Lisa: It doesn't work; it's just a stupid rock!
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: But I don't see any tigers around, do you?
Homer: (pause) Lisa, I want to buy your rock.

Bad technique is more common than good, virtuosity is rare. Too few volleyball players have good hops, many in the NBA do not.

The pic's are postures that uniquely identify the resultant jump (1-up, 2-up and out, 3-out) if done correctly. Anyone, I repeat, anyone attempting vertical from pic 3 sucks as a jumper. Is it common? Very. Is it wrong? Very.

You'll draw more and better inferences from working to improve vertical leap in athletes, and watching the best vertical leapers (broad, long, box, depth) etc. than you would drawing consensus data on athletes. Few athletes know how to fully, functionally, engage the posterior chain. It takes 3-5 years to teach an athlete to fully, optimally, engage the posterior chain for functional movement. (To make the point on an even simpler movement: How long would you have to hang out in a Gold's Gym to learn how to squat? 400 years? There are guys selling O lifting DVD's who don't know how to squat or do the lifts. Be careful.)

The first photo is at about the 85-90% of the concentric phase before take off. The second 75-80%, and the third about 30%, but...these have worked beautifully, as evidenced by the confusion over jumping basics that we've beaten from the bushes with the post.

Coach,

I don't see how #1 can recruit the posterior chain more than the others. Not with that degree of knee and hip flexion.

The stretch reflex would also be greater in #3 than in #1. At least where the PC is concerned.

Would you agree that #1 is quad dominant?

Jason,

In pic 1. the vertical leap is 85-90% completed. Core to extremity! The hip's role is nearly completed and the quads are working more, yes! As they should be. In a fraction of a second (less than .1) she'll be on her toes and there'll be no hip or leg component.

Minor point: We might have better worded the post "is essential" to rather than "determines".

Ask yourself for each pic., "where would her center of mass (between belly button and pubis, mid way from front to back) travel were she to straighten hips and legs from the current posture?" Answers: 1. Up. 2. Up and Out. 3. Forward. Train the eye to look at the base and the center of mass. BTW, you're all getting schooled in weightlifting simultaneously. This is a very productive line of inquiry. I'd thought we might be beating a dead horse sneaking in one more example of center of mass travel relative to base, etc.

I think that some of your are interpreting the pic's to be points of maximum cocking or loading, i.e., the beginning of the concentric phase.

The photos depict different phases of concentric action for each jump because the goal was to depict the defining/deteriming posture that singularly demonstrates the mechanics of the action. What is missing, and deliberately, is the falling forward required for pic's two and three because that part is never tough to teach and catching those dynamics digitally and at high resolution requires enormous time committment and luck on what was already a 2 hour effort, a camera we've not yet been able to afford, and would contribute nothing to the postural point critical to the jumps.

Comment #15, John Seiler:

For your argument to be valid (as opposed to true) it has to take the folowing form:

All Total Gym users kick ass.
Chuck Norris uses the Total Gym.
Therefore, Chuck Norris kicks ass.

(I got a kick out of your post, BTW!)

Question: Are there any Olympic athletes on the forum? What are there names, sport and country so I can watch for them on TV...

PS Very sore from the last two days - two weeks off can be a very bad thing!

Coach,

Clear. Thanks.

I read therefore I comment.

Enjoying the workouts the last few days, had to modify parts but I have been recovering quickly without much soreness the next day.

Clay,
Exactly! Besides, we all know it's the beard...
(It's a little known fact that Total Gyms are made entirely from glue and Chuck's beard trimmings, hence the confusion.)

Seriously, I have GOT to get a life.

Ice cream causes Murder!
Fact: When ice cream sales rise so do murder rates.
Fallacy- Ice Cream causes Murder. This is a correlation only.

Fact: Hot weather causes ice cream sales to rise. Hot weather also causes Murder rates to rise.
Hot weather is the cause of both, they are only correlated by the coincidence.
Great photos, great topic, and, thankfully related to GPP, although I am a big fan of doggies as well as GPP even on rest days.

Re: Comment 38
The young man in the video is jumping up and out. His terminus is at the top of the box, therefore the jump is foreshortened.
IMO Coach is right, the subject in picture 3 would have to bring torso verticle immediately after crouch completed and before take off to jump high. Where the head goes the body has to follow.

Football commentators who say that team X will win if they run the ball a certain amount of times.

That has to be the most common example of this fallacy.

One-year anniversary with CrossFit today!!! 50lbs lighter, stronger, and healthier. Thanks Coach and thanks CF community for the great ass-kicking! Love you all.

The pics,coupled with the in depth analysis by coach during further discussion,add to my understanding of the fundamentals of olympic lifts.
I dont think these points can be over emphasised or that you're flogging a dead horse.Keep it up:)

About causes. True enough that a correlation does not necessarily yield a justifiable causal conclusion; but it is a necessary condition for one. Asserting a cause without a correlation would also be an error. After correlation comes inference, and there are no hard and fast rules on when they can be applied.

I may be imagining things, but I am troubled by the assumption that if we just got our logic straight we would avoid error. This is wrong in general about logic and in particular about causal reasoning.

Logic only tells us how certain categories match or don't. It does not tell us whether the categories are correct in the first place. In mathematics and formal logic this isn't a problem because the categories used are pure abstractions. Thus, 1+1=2 because 1+1 is 2 expressed another way. The truths of math and formal logic are tautologies, statements of identity.

Once we try to say something about the real world rather than abstractions we confront what A.N. Whitehead called the "fallacy of the perfect dictionary." Words only approximate reality because they are themselves correlations between our experience, what we find useful, and so on. Follow the argument far enough and you get the triumph of 20th Century logic, and I am not making this up, "Snow is white, if, and only if, snow is white." That won't start your car. Spock was one of the great characters ever, but the idea that desire could be replaced by logic is absurd -- logic cannot tell you what to want.

In particular, causal statements are about the real world, and are, therefore probable, and not absolute. And probability is based on accumulated correlation and its cousin, inference. Even Newton ran aground of overbroad inference when really fast things were included in our understanding of physics.

Having made myself totally obscure, I conclude with the hope that all of us who are not Newton's betters will be humble in judging the causal conclusions of others based on the patterns of correlation available. I too am amazed by how wrong they've been about dietary fat, but the doctors who missed on fat were doing the best they could with the data we had so they could save some lives. The cost in having folks eat less fat seemed minor compared to the risk, so they went with it. And I'm not sure we are in the clear on saturated fat, but I do plan on more steak with less concern.

Having re-read my note, let me say that I'm not trying to be pompous, however much I may have succeeded at it. I've seen the trap of false hope in "logic" for a long time and it prevents folks from getting to the real issues.

Hi all,
Walk 9 miles.
Until tomorrow...

Gregg:

What competitive jumpers do you have coming out of Crossfit HQ? Any work on preparing athletes for any collegiate or professional football combines? Or for any other sport that might have jumping as a primary skill?

It's interesting to keep an eye on what Joe DeFranco and the guys at Parisi speed school are doing during those times of the year.

Regards

Steve Shafley

Actually, the common "If Team X runs the ball 30 times, they win" fallacy is more of a flat our reversal of cause and effect, rather than simply a causation falacy. Anyone know the latin?

Rounds of 10=>1 of
Pull ups
Ring Dips
Burpee Box Jumps
10:55

I think the cause effect reversal is "post hoc ergo propter hoc" but I don't hold myself out as any kind of expert on these things.

Tom R (# 57) (and everyone who enjoyed that post):

You would really enjoy the book "Causality : Models, Reasoning, and Inference" by Judea Pearl. Very challenging, but worth the effort.

Amazon link here: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0521773628/ref=ord_1cl_log_ydet/103-0261251-1747860?n=283155

Judea Pearl is a professor in the Computer Science department at UCLA, and is probably one of the best in the world at the intersection of math, technology, and epistemology. I had the pleasure of having him teach me in a too-advanced seminar many, many years ago when I was young and even stupider than I am today. He was then, and is now, simply brilliant. I only wish I could have been smarter to get more out of it.

(He's also the father of Danny Pearl.)

Coach comment 44 (Anyone, I repeat, anyone attempting vertical from pic 3 sucks as a jumper. Is it common? Very. Is it wrong? Very.) and 46 (Minor point: We might have better worded the post "is essential" to rather than "determines".)

Thank you. That was why I thought you were presenting a fallacy when you were actually trying to convey a concept. I agree each position determines the direction (of an effectively executed) jump.

Now to go read about the posterior chain.

-Mark

Any ideas on where I can buy kettlebells (without having to pay twice the price of the thing in shipping costs)? I'm in Orange County, CA. Thanks!

Started CF on Monday and completed 3rd wod today. Like it so far, but too early to be an advocate. Elizabeth was much easier for me than Kelly.

bw 195
cleans 95#
dips on handles hanging by chains - I know now why rings come with staps, those chains were murder on my arms.

24:30. Looking forward to more weight and faster time next chance.

Thanks to John Seiler for the answer on the cleans versus squat cleans.

Thanks to Tom R. in post #57 for confirming my suspicion that I was on the right track. I don't blame the docs who recommended a low-fat diet for their actions; I was just using their flawed chain of causation as an illustration of my understanding, which is limited by my lack of intelligence.

Cogito ergo sum.

Oh, and to follow up on my obvious Latin phraseology:
"Rene Descartes was a drunken old fart;
I drink, therefore I am!"

Name that tune.

Coach,

I had a question for you and I was hoping it might clear up something for me. Would you say that someone who is the process of performing a clean or a vertical jump would be in the position of #2 at a certain point during the performance but at the moment just prior to the completion they would be at #1 or would it be better to never be in postion #2 at all during a clean or a vertical jump? I do agree that when performing a vert one should not go into the position in #3. I have listened to a few people speak on jumping and some actually teach people who are testing their vert to perform a vertical jump with one arm up when they load for their jump to make sure that they do not dip into the picture #3 position. I guess that brings me back to my question regarding picture #2 and if one should be in that postion for a period of time or not at all. If you could shed some light on how you feel about that it would be great.

"Emanuel Kant was a real pissant,
who was very rarely stable.."

Primo Beer sponsored an endurance event.
The Ironman was created at Primo Gardens
Endurance athletes drink beer
Therefore Ironman athletes are drunks.

Skipp,

Your first question: Yes, absolutely, positively. They'll migrate from 2 to 1 and go. From 2 the torso rotates to perpendicular/vertical (this is the "scoop" or "double-knee bend") a la pic 1, and then, BOOM!, the afterburners kick in. Absent that rotation they're most efficiently launching up and forward as in a box jump. For the box jump they'd lean forward at the ankle, falling off balance and launch. The torso's angle relative to the ground would actually be diminishing in the box jump and increasing in the vertical leap.

Steve,

I know of programs and coaches but not athlete's by name. We hear from vendors and coaches about CF adoption. For instance, Jim @ Dynamax gets calls from pro and D1 sport S&C guys calling looking for "wall-balls" and "wall-ball targets". That's pretty much a giveaway. I spoke with the marketing director at C2 yesterday and she knew of pro-ball CFers. We're last to hear, often. (I hope the family's well!)

Ron in #67 gets my apology -- I didn't mean to use your observation as an example of bad reasoning, and I even thought to point that out in my note but didn't do it. Actually, it's my wife who's pissed at the doctors, engaging in ad hominem errors. And she doesn't like steak as much as I do.

Makes more since after, Coaches comment #72. The pics had me confused.....

wanted to see how fast I could run a mile - 7:53. Not bad, since I didn't think breaking 8 was possible yet for me. Now, I hope in a month I can get the mile down to 7:30. I have noticed I recover much more quickly since starting Crossfit a few weeks ago.

Run:Alki-Fairmont Canyon: 47min

13X 25lbs Weighted Dips
5X 25lbs Weighted Pull-ups
50X Push-ups
5X 25lbs Weighted Pull-ups
10X 25lbs Weighted Dips
5X 25lbs Weighted Pull-ups
50X Push-ups
50X Sit-ups (Fitness Ball)
5X 25lbs Weighted Pull-ups
10X 25lbs Weighted Dips
5X 25lbs Weighted Pull-ups
50X Push-ups
50X Sit-ups (Fitness Ball)
5X 25lbs Weighted Pull-ups
10X 25lbs Weighted Dips
50X Sit-ups (Fitness Ball)
5X 25lbs Weighted Pull-ups
10X 25lbs Weighted Dips
5X 25lbs Weighted Pull-ups

25lbs Weighted Pull-ups TTL=40
25lbs Weighted Dips TTL= 53
Sit-ups (Fitness Ball) TTL= 100

Coach-

You forgot that you do have one Big 12 Conference track and field program that is applying Crossfit to their training protocol........

So....am I right in saying...

The angle of the torso in relation to the ground (base of stability), and the intended direction of movement (goal), at 'launch' phase will largely determine efficient maximal flight path.

Synchronicity in skill (use of inertia, timing etc), application (type of activity), and body type is varied.

However this principle is not.

These 3 examples are being used to illustrate the principle in an isolated way. The consistent in all forms of jumping is torso angle at the apex of the release point. It is however clear and important to say that body movement pre-release and post-release will determine the type of jump performed.

Bloody beautiful day here in OZ.

"Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed,A lovely little thinker but a bugger when he's pissed."

Thanks Bruce.

I knew the world was flat. This is why I don't sail. Might fall off.

Jonsey and Matt M.,
Well played.

Tom R.,
No worries. I was just glad my understanding of the whole "cum hoc" thing was correct.
Steak is good. Lots of steak is great.
I wish grass-fed steak was cheaper.

There's nothing Nietzche couldn't teach ya
'Bout the raising of the wrist
Socrates, himself, was permanently pissed. . .

I'm done now. Off to tackle Lizzy.

OK. This is a bit of a paradigm shift for me. I started a thread on this, but will carry on here. The thing I don't get is the short range of motion. I understand how keeping the back aligned upward is a good thing. I just don't understand how the force is generated over such a short distance. Based on this, I have likely been doing it wrong, but when I do, say, a Push Press, my butt goes out slightly to get me lower, then comes back in as I'm pushing. I understand launching from a shortened knee, but I don't understand how you can get a lot of power if you start standing, lower the knees to the extent Annie has in Picture One, and then explode back up. I only looks like she has about a 4" range of motion, where it seems to me, based on fiddling around (and I have played with this) that you need more like 6-8".

Now, I don't go as far as Annie in Picture Two; I just kind of stick my butt out, and keep my torso relatively straight, I'm pretty sure. I'd fall over otherwise.

If I'm being a dumbass somehow, please point it out. Thanks!!

#37: It WAS an early morning. My deconstructor is 42 years old and runs on vacuum tubes. It wasn't warmed up when I stepped off in the poo. Being the class idiot is an ugly job, but, hey, somebody gotta do it.

For your viewing pleasure, check this out:

http://www.zombietime.com

It ain't satire, it's the real deal, baby.

I'm still going to brush up on my Spengler.

Missed yesterday D/T work. Shoulder injury prevents a date with Elizabeth. Makeup WOD...

21,18,15,12,9,6,3&1 of:
135# Front Squat
Abmat Situps

BTW=150. 21:37. Legs were jelly at the end.

-D.

My own little workout:

5 Rounds for time:
200 Jump Rope
30 Wall Ball
20 SitUps
10 Burpees

Dan
t-18.36
hr-161
6k ball

Monique
t-18.56
4kg ball

Good fun!

No rest. Trying to catch up. See tomorrow's w/o for today.

Did the 21/15/9 deadlift 225lb/HSPU WOD from 2 days ago. 23 minutes, using 100kg.