September 28, 2007

Friday 070928

Rest Day

ChicksJerkHeavyN175-th.jpg

Enlarge image

Girls go Overhead - video [wmv] [mov]


"Freedom Fetishists" by Kay Hymowitz - Opinion Journal

Post thoughts to comments.

Posted by lauren at September 28, 2007 7:59 PM
Comments

I just read that Saddham offered to go into exile for $1 Billion, but that the Bush administration refused.

As a good solider, should I just take this in stride, or should I mourn the loss of all of our soliders whose lives were spent unnecessarily?

Comment #1 - Posted by: louc4r at September 27, 2007 8:17 PM

Possibly, but wouldn't that be considered some kind of weak moral/ethical compromise? I'm all for saving lives but it would have saved lives to keep us out of WWII as well.

Comment #2 - Posted by: NickR at September 27, 2007 8:22 PM

That video is why I adore Nicole. I miss once or twice and decide, okay, that's enough. But she just won't stop trying. 1.5 x BW? Awesome.

Comment #3 - Posted by: Dale Saran at September 27, 2007 8:32 PM

Incredible lifting Girls!

Wow is right.
185 lbs overhead - that's amazing. Nicole's misses at 195lbs overhead have a high wince factor watching from this angle.

One can definitely see how lifting shoes would help in Jamie's lifts.

Good work Nicole and Jamie. Awesome.

Comment #4 - Posted by: jon h at September 27, 2007 8:38 PM

Rest day? It's been more of a "rest week" for me. Part of that's been to recover from injuries sustained in a couple of soccer games, part of it has just been...laziness, I'm sorry to say. I've wondered about this a lot: is it OK to take off a week every now and then? Assuming proper diet while not training, what's the worst that can happen?

Comment #5 - Posted by: Brad Gutting at September 27, 2007 8:39 PM

good work on the jerks, girls!

and great work on dodging that barbell, nicole! : D

Comment #6 - Posted by: David Aguasca at September 27, 2007 8:39 PM

OK, Dale I really didn't see your post before I sent mine up.

Awesome is the right word though.

Comment #7 - Posted by: jon h at September 27, 2007 8:41 PM

Isn't it unethical to choose war and loss of innocent lives, plus the loss of our brave and noble warriors, over the political costs of regime change in Iraq?

Is it unethical to spend hundreds of billions of taxpayer money pursuing an unnecessary war, rather than spend that money on things like health care, education and infrastructure?

Imagine what just $30 Billion in each of these areas would do vs. the $12 Billion this administration spends each month on Iraq.

Comment #8 - Posted by: louc4r at September 27, 2007 8:42 PM

Nicole's poses and the faces she makes after missing at 195... priceless.

Comment #9 - Posted by: Brent at September 27, 2007 8:48 PM

Nic, your hardcore girl. Love it!!

Comment #10 - Posted by: Jenika at September 27, 2007 8:52 PM

hindsight is 20/20. I supported the invasion of Iraq but I advocate the most efficient withdrawl. I think the war was conducted poorly through the Rumsfeld Doctrine (just enough troops to lose) instead of the Powell Doctrine (an overwhelming number of troops to win). I agree that there are more important things that we could have spent money on, but only because the war was conducted poorly. Noble cause, poor leadership.

Comment #11 - Posted by: NickR at September 27, 2007 8:52 PM

hindsight is 20/20. I supported the invasion of Iraq but I advocate the most efficient withdrawl. I think the war was conducted poorly through the Rumsfeld Doctrine (just enough troops to lose) instead of the Powell Doctrine (an overwhelming number of troops to win). I agree that there are more important things that we could have spent money on, but only because the war was conducted poorly. Noble cause, poor leadership.

Comment #12 - Posted by: NickR at September 27, 2007 8:53 PM

I knew it! I'm telling you, I knew it all along...HQ women aren't human. Don't believe me-check for yourself. When Nicole goes overhead in the slow motion take, you can hear the Computer Chip or whatever starting to wear out. Yeah, she’s a Bionic Woman.
Only one question, how can we get one? Probably have to develop our own, huh?
Great work ladies.

Comment #13 - Posted by: Chuck-Sonz Decatur at September 27, 2007 8:56 PM

you know something...nicole might be the hottest girl on the face of the planet....anyone else agree? haha

Comment #14 - Posted by: cletus at September 27, 2007 9:01 PM

Holy She-Ra; Princess of Power! Kicking -ss, knocking heads with the bar; I love it. Total fitness libertarian, lol. Lift free or die. (aka: free markets, free minds, and free weights.)

Comment #15 - Posted by: John Seiler at September 27, 2007 9:05 PM

RE: Today's article

The idea of a truly libertarian society is a bit like Monty Python's village of hermits sketch - humorous because the idea is absurd.

Comment #16 - Posted by: Marlin Schmidt at September 27, 2007 9:06 PM

Nice work on the lift, ladies, that was impressive. I loved how Nicole just threw the weight down in disgust when she made the lift. Those were some insanely close calls on the misses!

Comment #17 - Posted by: gaucoin at September 27, 2007 9:07 PM

I agree with NickR on this one. I usaully don't post, but I think somethings are missing from all arguements presented thus far. I have a couple of points.

1) Is paying off a dictator to do what we want a principle that we as Americans are willing to set? I feel that this is a dangerous approach for long term stability in this region and elsewhere.

2) If people truely ask themselves as freedom loving Americans, "should Sadaam have been put out of power?" the answer, comming from most people that I have talked to military and non-military, is generally yes with conditions.

3) If we accept that a man in power is evil and it is our obligation to oust him from power, then we must find an effective plan for doing so, and execute it.

4) If we accept that buying this evil dictator off, applying economic/diplomatic pressure, and/or ignoring the problem are not viable options, then I suggest that military action is the next logical step.

4) It is obvious now, and after some light reading it seems that it should have been obvious to the decision-makers at the time, that the way in which the war has been conducted, until recently, has been subpar.

5) It seems that with a new strategy we are moving in the right direction for Iraq and our soldiers there.

I feel that keeping Iraq stable, after we invaded the country, is a worthwhile and noble enterprise. That might not be a popular stance anymore, but it is mine. I think that it has been mishandled very badly, but that does not change the fact that we have an obligation to help this nation back on its feet, and send it on its way to stability.

Comment #18 - Posted by: dcron at September 27, 2007 9:21 PM

dcron,
thanks for elaborating. I appreciate the vocabulary that I lack on this lazy night after a "tabata this" type type workout I made up for myself. I'm a Marine so I don't feel like so much of an outsider on these feelings. I'll do what is required of me but I'm not required to subscribe to any train of thought. Thanks for your expansion on what I attempted to convey through fewer words.

Comment #19 - Posted by: NickR at September 27, 2007 9:27 PM

i am adopting both jaime and nichole. jaime got better as time went on. nichole i can make a olympian!!!! if i can get jaime away from tony long enough....maybe her as well!!! seriously, outstanding tony!!! ladies.....outstanding job!!! very very, little problems.....nichole get down here and i promise you if you do not make 200 by the time you leave i will buy you a big, big, big steak dinner!!!! you are for sure stong enough. watch the feet, feet, feet!!! tony....great job again!!!

Comment #20 - Posted by: mike burgener at September 27, 2007 9:29 PM

Um..... Isn't Saddham dead? Unless this is a different Saddham. Just kinda confused. good ol' rest days.

Comment #21 - Posted by: Mark at September 27, 2007 9:34 PM

For God's sake, Woman, drop the bar behind yourself! Tough to jerk as a paraplegic. But nice work all the same.

Comment #22 - Posted by: Greg Everett at September 27, 2007 10:05 PM

That's my favorite Crossfit video ever! haha

Way to go, Nicole! If you can't lock it out...KICK IT!

Mike in L.A.
www.valleycrossfit.com

Comment #23 - Posted by: Mike in L.A. at September 27, 2007 10:07 PM

Ask for more Nicole, and you will recieve! Love it girl. Awesome job Jamie too!

Comment #24 - Posted by: freddy c. at September 27, 2007 10:26 PM

NICOLE - ummmmm... you are freaking amazing. Your efforts and accomplishments change peoples lives.

Comment #25 - Posted by: sevan at September 27, 2007 10:43 PM

43/6'1"/190

late post on Nicole workout. just got back from the Velvet Revolver concert...in the mosh about 10 feet from the stage! BAD ASS!! can't hear myself type right now but it was worth it!

7 rounds plus 200m

25 12 10 9 9 8 8 = 81

really thought i would be over 100 so disappointed. don't know what acconts for the steep drop off from 25 to 12. anybody got any ideas?

Comment #26 - Posted by: ken c at September 27, 2007 11:03 PM

M 23/171/5'10"

Six and a half rounds stopped at the PU bar.
20/10/6/10/10/7

Comment #27 - Posted by: CushmanAK at September 27, 2007 11:41 PM

Well if you don't want to pay them off you could just do what we do with the Family Saud, Qaddafi, and countless other pissant dictators, and have them pay us off in exchange for their continued existence. Int'l politics involves deals with lot of Sulphur smelling subterranian types. I only wish our leaders could would at least try to be as noble as a lot of folks who actually do the fighting, but hey we elect them!

smokin' video!

Comment #28 - Posted by: randy at September 28, 2007 12:21 AM

I love CrossFit!

I'm a 45 year old military contractor working in Afghanistan. Here's an email I wrote home to my wife today:

Well my racquetball partners didn't show, but I had a good workout and I need to tell this to somebody!

Today was supposed to be a rest day, but when I go to Phoenix I like to do some of the crossfit exercises I can't do at the Eggers gym.

I went to the squat rack. Right next to the squat rack is a Smith machine. I know you've seen one before--it works like a squat rack only the weight bar is supported and guided with cables and rails. There were three soldiers doing squats with the Smith machine. They were doing bench squats--bending their knees until their butts touched a bench underneath them. That makes it easy to measure how deep you're squatting, but you can only go about halfway down.

So here's three young soldiers doing Smith machine squats with 115 to 135 lbs., bar on the back, guided by rails and supported with cables, going about halfway down and touching a bench. I walked up to the squat rack and after a few warmups, pressed 135 lbs. overhead and did 10 deep overhead squats. After my second set they left.

Cool.

Comment #29 - Posted by: Rick at September 28, 2007 1:26 AM

Nicole is absolutely amazing, for sure.
Always smiling even as she misses, truly shows that she never lets the bar defeat her.
Strong work girls!

Thanks for the article Coach, I'm still processing it and forming my thoughts to be more coherant before commenting.

Kate

Comment #30 - Posted by: jknl at September 28, 2007 2:33 AM

Wow - extremely impressive - both of you!

No doubt you have 200+ Nicole, I'd take Coach B up on his offer and come back with another vid in the near future!

Comment #31 - Posted by: Anthony Bainbridge & Jodi Arbeau at September 28, 2007 2:48 AM

Rest day my as*, I am heading to the gym to work on some OLY lifts. Thanks for the motivation ladies, you are amazing.

Comment #32 - Posted by: SethBD at September 28, 2007 2:48 AM

I agree, Nicole IS amazing, incredibly strong, solid as a rock and one of the most beautiful women I have ever seen in my life! I am absolutely going to Cali in the spring and hope to get my butt kicked by her, as well as everyone else! If I wasn't married, I propose to the girl while I was out there too! LOL! Great job!
Train hard or go the blank home!

Comment #33 - Posted by: JUSTINT at September 28, 2007 2:58 AM

#13 Chuck: You have your Bionic Woman in the making. Laura D will be jerking at least her body weight by the end of October.

Comment #34 - Posted by: Dana PBG Sonz at September 28, 2007 3:16 AM

Is there a women's Rx weight for Fight Gone Bad? Is there such a thing?

Nicole, WOW! And Jamie's no slouch either, way more than I can do.

Pilar

Comment #35 - Posted by: Pilar 32yof/134#/5'7" at September 28, 2007 3:45 AM

That video was excellent. But I have a question. Which landing stance enables you to lift more weight? The split stance or legs together? It seems to me like legs together is more conducive to dropping down lower than the split stance. Watching Nicole's 195 attempts one frame at a time, it looks to me like she could have made it if she just had been able to get lower. I'm wondering if that's why Burgener is convinced she can get to 200. I don't have much experience with these lifts, so someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Comment #36 - Posted by: MB at September 28, 2007 3:46 AM

"I feel that keeping Iraq stable, after we invaded the country, is a worthwhile and noble enterprise. That might not be a popular stance anymore, but it is mine."

DCRON - I will tell you that if you talk to the soldiers here, a large percentage of them will tell you that it IS a worthwhile and noble enterprise. Debating the merits of the invasion is a waste of time now that we are there and have an obligation to help the people who Saddam and we put into this situation.

Comment #37 - Posted by: jon at September 28, 2007 3:58 AM

Wow! Amazing! Nicole and Jamie, you are both so damn impressive. Nicole vs. 195 was scary. Next time you'll get 200 for sure. I think the barbell is afraid of you now. :)

Comment #38 - Posted by: Keith W. at September 28, 2007 4:03 AM

I wonder what she is on?

Comment #39 - Posted by: Edlanz at September 28, 2007 4:17 AM

Wonderwoman juice!

Comment #40 - Posted by: JUSTINT at September 28, 2007 4:25 AM

#34 - Dana,

I would say you might make the BW overhead jerk first; you weigh less than me! ;)

Comment #41 - Posted by: Laura, Sonz Decatur at September 28, 2007 4:26 AM

I wonder what she is on? Crossfit! Nice work ladies! Awesome!

Comment #42 - Posted by: k9thatbites at September 28, 2007 4:30 AM

#29 Randy AT CAMP EGGERS... EMAIL ME PLEASE! I have a workout partner for you.

karen.douglas@wpafb.af.mil

I am totally in awe of Nicole. Simply beautiful. Her value is priceless to me. And as always, she's got a Hollywood red carpet smile.

Comment #43 - Posted by: Spider Chick at September 28, 2007 4:34 AM

yup, bionic woman! holy cow! nicole, you are amazing, Jamie too! what role models for young girls. awesome!

Comment #44 - Posted by: Shannon at September 28, 2007 4:46 AM

louc4r,

Yes, to both your questions. Take the report in stride and mourn the loss of all of our soldiers. In fact, why not mourn the loss of everyone whose life was spent unnecessarily?

Meanwhile as a citizen, too, check the validity and accuracy of the story. Is it a valid transcript? Or is it another CBS fabricated paper? Is it another Downing Street memo, a third hand report about a meeting with an unnamed person (could it have been Ambassador Wilson?), decorated with dubious security markings? Or another Bush lied story, such as the reason for the Iraq campaign, or what British intelligence reported?

Next, did the report you read accurately report what Bush did? What you report, “that the Bush administration refused” doesn't agree with the following:

“At the Crawford meeting, Bush told Aznar: 'The Egyptians are speaking to Saddam Hussein. It seems he's indicated he would be prepared to go into exile if he's allowed to take $1 billion and all the information he wants about weapons of mass destruction. [Libyan dictator Muammar al-]Gaddafi has told Berlusconi that Saddam Hussein wants to go. [Egyptian President Hosni] Mubarak tells us that, in these circumstances, there exist many possibilities that he could be assassinated.'” http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=15&entry_id=20648

There was nothing at the time of the meeting for Bush to have refused. Nothing in the transcript indicates that what the Egyptians reportedly were negotiating ever came to fruition to be refused. The odds are it didn't, unless you think the transcript proves your prior conclusion that Bush is an evil maniac.

Like MB's suggestion for Nicole (#36), when doing heavy lifting, you might want to have both feet under you.

Comment #45 - Posted by: Jeff Glassman at September 28, 2007 5:11 AM

For those getting into a snit over the Saddam payola story, be adivsed that the original story from Spain's El Pais newspaper was put through a machine translator by The Editor and Publisher. As a result, several facts, now being touted in the MSM, are mistranslated. A complete translation of the Bush, Anzar, Rice meeting notes can be found at http://pajamasmedia.com/2007/09/bush_aznar_memo.php A careful read reveals that the exactly the opposite of the E and P story is true!

Counting the minutes 'til FGB!

Comment #46 - Posted by: momentum at September 28, 2007 5:13 AM

Nicole and Jamie: great effort! 1.5 BW: 330lbs-I can start to imagine...

What is the thought behind going behind the head as opposed to the front rack?

Comment #47 - Posted by: Michael Pommerening at September 28, 2007 5:15 AM

Nicole, Jaime & Tony...I wonder if you are flying high after that video and Coach B's comment! It would be sooo cool to see a commercial for CF,
"CF it does the body good!"
Congrats ladies and gents on your jerks!
Very motivating!

Comment #48 - Posted by: lisaq at September 28, 2007 5:21 AM

Nicole and Jamie. Way to go. Good work. 185 lbs Nicole? Wicked!

Comment #49 - Posted by: Andy W. at September 28, 2007 5:39 AM

Nice work in the video, ladies. You both put up some awesome numbers! Nicole, those were some nasty looking bail outs!

Comment #50 - Posted by: Ian Carver at September 28, 2007 5:42 AM

Jaime and Nicole - WOW! You ladies are amazing. Very motivating video.

I've been doing CF since July. Before then, I never would have even entertained the idea of pressing weights like that over my head. Now, I see it as a worthy challenge...funny how your perspective can change. Thank you Coach!

Comment #51 - Posted by: Gayle at September 28, 2007 5:51 AM

Ursa Major
Just did the "BEAR" as shown in the Tues video working pu to only 100#
Was that ever hunbling.BUT...
It's as if the WOD is the MAGNET & I am steel
It would be easier being copper.
Those dudes it the last two videos of OVERHEAD work are made of mcsh stronger steel than most of us.

Comment #52 - Posted by: dave k at September 28, 2007 6:04 AM

Nice video, I will take it as a challenge to get 1.5 BW over my head. But I think I will make extra sure to get out of the way realllly fast if I don't lol!

After reading the article, I have to agree with most of the values that makes one "libertarian".

Comment #53 - Posted by: Angry G at September 28, 2007 6:07 AM

Kreiki! Nice work Ladies!

Comment #54 - Posted by: Robb Wolf at September 28, 2007 6:10 AM

#47, David,

The NYC recycling program loses money. The article you linked to does not refute that fact. If you are a New Yorker, you may recall that early in his administration, Mayor Bloomberg suspended parts of the recycling program that were the biggest money losers. The program is politically popular and was therefore restored when the budget improved. I have seen no argument that the program makes sense on a purely economic basis.

From an economic standpoint, there is nothing inconsistent about the possibilities that (1) NYC loses money by recycling; (2) NYC loses money when third parties pilfer recyclables before the City picks them up; and (3) Those pilfering make a profit doing so.

The City is obligated to pick up everything that is recycled; it cannot pick and choose. So, when the City goes down a given block, it may spend, say, $20 to pick up $10 worth of recyclables. When someone pilfers the most valuable of the recyclables, say, a single item having a value of $5, that person may spend only $2 retrieving the one $5 item. This leaves the City spending the same $20 to pick up recyclables that are now worth only $5. So, as a result of the theft, the City's losses increase from $10 per block to $15 per block.

Comment #55 - Posted by: Hari at September 28, 2007 6:11 AM

Uhhhhhh....I think I have a new crush! Great job on the 185#! Whats the word.....a fitness demon!

Comment #56 - Posted by: Brandon H at September 28, 2007 6:24 AM

#37 Jon - Debating the merits of the invasion is not a waste of time. This was not a 3 day excursion. The invasion and its aftermath will impact our country for decades. As Santayana said, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Comment #57 - Posted by: MikeC at September 28, 2007 6:45 AM

What's really impressive about Nicole's performance is that she was up vomiting the night before. Any time you can tie your PR (1.5x bw) after a sleepless night of booting, you fall into some kind of non-mortal category. NC is legit!

JV is damn close to bodyweight overhead in just a few attempts. That, is simply not fair.

You guys are, like, badass.

kstar

Comment #58 - Posted by: Kelly Starrett at September 28, 2007 7:08 AM

#56, David,

"The point being, of course, that someone can make a profit picking up recyclables. Not that NY City is that someone. Interesting contrast with the point of view in the original article."

In an economically irrational system, someone can always arbitrage a profit. Under the model I describe in #55, the only way for someone to make a $3 profit is for the City to increase its loses by $5, from $10 to $15. And recall that this entire system depends on the residents providing their own labor to sort this stuff, worth, say, $10 per bock. So, the residents lose $10 worth of their time, the City loses $15 worth of its money and someone makes (steals) $3.

Comment #59 - Posted by: Hari at September 28, 2007 7:08 AM

Great work on those jerks! Way to push it to the end, I love seeing people determined to meet their goal or die in the process...motivating.

Side note* Anyone on Camp Pendleton? I keep hoping to see someone doing OHS or burpees or anything crossfit.

Comment #60 - Posted by: B Tribble at September 28, 2007 7:12 AM

Wow...that is some impressive lifts..dang!! Hey, I'm curious, though. Why are they jerking from the back of their shoulders rather than the front racked position? It seems it would be more difficult, especially if they missed a lift? Regardless, it makes it even more impressive that they're jerking those weights from that position!!

Comment #61 - Posted by: pop at September 28, 2007 7:14 AM

Great videos the past two days. I've a question, for Tony B, or Coach Rip: As the loads increased, Tony and KStar switched to a behind the head position. I tried that position when I did the Bear and found it uncomfortable. It seems to me that in the front rack position, the dip/drive can be more powerful than from behind the head. Or is the power generated by the back held in alignment, as if you were starting a back squat? Any insights or thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Comment #62 - Posted by: john wopat at September 28, 2007 7:31 AM

Impressive work in the videos!

I wish I had a bumper plate setup as I'm reluctant to 'go heavy' using steel plates and no ground protection.

Some of those failed lifts looked pretty scary. I can see how easy it is to get hurt if you don't push the weights away.

Comment #63 - Posted by: W. Geoffrey Miller at September 28, 2007 7:35 AM

I am glad today is a rest day. My wife is having our baby boy today. I am writing this from the labor room. Wish us luck.

Comment #64 - Posted by: Brad at September 28, 2007 7:47 AM

I'm still amazed by those girls in the video, you are amazing, keep up that good work ./cheers

23/M/162

dynamic stretch
3 rounds of
15 back extension
15 sit up
5 HSPU
10 knees2elbow

Today was a benchmark day!

Fran as Rx'd (at least im hitting it as Rx now =) )

16:57.22'

I keep cutting minutes and minutes each time

May the force be with yall

wou'ha

Comment #65 - Posted by: Fredastere at September 28, 2007 7:53 AM

Nicole is a goddess! If we don't see her on the big screen soon, I'll be surprised. :)

Comment #66 - Posted by: Rick at September 28, 2007 7:56 AM

great video with some impressive lifting but more impressive was the determination and aggressiveness. Something I'm striving to improve. Inspirational.

Comment #67 - Posted by: Intent at September 28, 2007 7:57 AM

Yea, but how much can she bench ? :^)

Comment #68 - Posted by: Bob at September 28, 2007 7:59 AM

Nicole is bad!

Comment #69 - Posted by: Michael Gregory - CF Central at September 28, 2007 8:02 AM

comment #5 Brad,
It's not only okay to take a week off now and then, it's vital to do so. No professional athlete trains all out year round. The body needs down time for complete recovery. Let me put it this way: If you DON'T get some rest, your body will do it for you eventually, through injury, and then you'll be forced to rest. There are a variety of strategies you can employ for this purpose. One method is to progressively step up workload and intensity from one week to the next, for 3-4 weeks. The idea being to build up to a peak of intensity, then perhaps cut the load in half for a week, for recovery. It has been my experience that athletes will thrive on that kind of pattern.

Or you could simply do all the WOD's as rx'd for 3-5 weeks and then do a 1/2 intensity week. Many people who do crossfit are highly motivated and highly competitive, and loath resting. More is not always better, however. I forget who said it, but "do as much as you can while you're as fresh as you can be" is a good rule of thumb. While somewhat ambiguous, that statement sums it up well.

The bottom line is, are you getting stronger? Is your work capacity increasing? If it is, then you're on the right track. If you're times are getting slower, or you're loads are heading in the wrong direction, then it's time to re-evaluate and perhaps get fully rested and then hit it again. Sorry for being too wordy!
Cheers!

Comment #70 - Posted by: Tim Hamilton at September 28, 2007 8:03 AM

Thoughts about the article-
It did have good definitions in it as to what a Libertarian is and I believe it demonstrated a well rounded picture of the pros and cons of the movement.

I agree with this statement, "...libertarianism is a quintessentially American philosophy."
I think that we can all find ourselves having a few traits of libertarianism in us, no mater what our political leanings.

Kate

Comment #71 - Posted by: jknl at September 28, 2007 8:05 AM

John,
I've found that I can do a LOT more weight in the jerk from the behind the head starting position. The alignment is conducive to more power and acceleration being applied to the bar. Also you don't have to move your head and shoulders as far as you would from the front rack position. It's just a dip and drive directly upward. Work on it for awhile and I'll bet you'll end up moving more weight from behind the neck. The closer you get to 1rm the more clear it will be.

Comment #72 - Posted by: Tim Hamilton at September 28, 2007 8:15 AM

#64, David,

I think 30 seconds is not accurate. Sorting involves multiple trips, multiple bags, and in large buildings, a significant amount of work by the in-house staff. How about 2 minutes? Using an average value of a New Yorker's time of $20 per hour ($40,000 per year), about 2 million households devote about 12 hours per year to sorting. That comes to 24 million hours, or about $480 million dollars worth of time. Even if we use your estimate of 30 seconds per day, the value of time (whether you get paid for it or not) is about $120 million.

The article says that NYC is losing to theft (an additional) $150,000, about 1/800 of the value of the 30 seconds per day that you estimate New Yorkers' are forced to spend recycling. This is hardly an argument in defense of the economics of recycling, particularly since it also ignores the hundreds of millions of dollars the City loses in the process.

Comment #73 - Posted by: Hari at September 28, 2007 8:17 AM

Nicole and Jamie, you girls are AWESOME!

Comment #74 - Posted by: Mike G_CFATL at September 28, 2007 8:28 AM

41/yo/f/163#
spin class 63min/24 miles/lots of hills
OHS
45# 15x
55# 10x
65# 5x
75# 5X

Comment #75 - Posted by: lisaq at September 28, 2007 8:29 AM

Nicole, Jamie
That was beautiful. You are beautiful. Thanks.

For those intent on hijacking the dicussion into debate about Iraq, Bush, etc., I have a question: what does that have to do with an article on the history and current state of libertarianism?

As for the article, I agree with the author that what might be called the libertine wing of libertarian philosophy is misguided. The very qualities of character in individuals that are necessary to the existence of a free society are not cultivated in a libertine society. This was the view of Hayek, but his reasoning was not based in religion, the way much in the way of moral codes comes to us. His reasoning was based in cultural evolution: History has shown that some cultures adapt, change and prosper in competition caused by contact with other cultures and some cultures decay and die when brought into contact with other cultures. Survival of the fittest. Some moral/cultural values have correlated with successful societies throughout the ages while others have correlated with failure and decline, viz: the rise and subsequent decline and fall of the Roman Empire. Strong families, strong work ethic, honesty, loyalty all correlate with success for a culture. Libertine cultural values correlate with failed cultures.

Comment #76 - Posted by: Dan MacDougald at September 28, 2007 8:32 AM

27yo/87kg

a little behind: completed Nicole for the first time:
21-17-14-13-11-10-9
Total: 95

Nicole - you rock!! Love the vid

Comment #77 - Posted by: Owen at September 28, 2007 9:07 AM

The phrase "free market" always amuses me. We don't have free markets. Our markets are all governed by rules. One reason we need rules is because markets don't properly value social goods, like the commons. Until we established rules about water and air quality, for example, market participants degraded those significantly and the cost of that degradation was not paid for either by producers or consumers as part of the commercial transaction. Society has a strong interest in establishing rules to ensure external costs are recognized in the price of goods and services.

Comment #78 - Posted by: TomR at September 28, 2007 9:17 AM

Wow, I am very impressed impressed!! Not surprised though. Like I have said before...You Girls Rock!!! Way to go Jamie and Nicole. That is a lot of weight. Guess I have something else that I get to work on now. I am looking forward to it.

Comment #79 - Posted by: Jelli at September 28, 2007 9:24 AM

inspiring performances! had to search the floor for my lower jaw after watchin that :-D

Comment #80 - Posted by: cleverhandz at September 28, 2007 9:24 AM

Nicole: Hallelujah! ;)

Jerking: Jerking from behind the neck tends to be difficult to those with shoulder flexibility issues. Get more comfortable with that range of motion and you will get more comfortable with the lift.


Saddam: Just for argument's sake, if Saddam did leave for money, who is to say that there still wouldn't be a sectarian revolution that requires external intervention? And the US would be blamed for that as well. Also, wouldn't a pay off also just encourage other would-be dictators to excel at tyranny to earn their 'golden handshake' retirement pay from the US?


Recycling: I agree with Hari. Recycling as a whole is a form of moral and spiritual cleansing, it does not make very much economical sense. To me, arguing that it is financially profitable is like saying that 'Goodwill' company is on it's way to tackling Microsoft and Starbucks combined because they get their stuff for free (just for the record, I usually end up recycling... to feel less guilty).


Article: I agree that the extreme libertarian freedom of youth freedom is misguided, and forgetting this fact is a quick way create a political inheritance that skips at least one generation (Basically what Dan MacD said above #77). It seems to me that everyone should start with a Parental Dictatorship/Monarchy at home, moving through some kind of Democracy as we approach adulthood (and get frustrated with it), before finally ending with the realization that living libertine trumps them all (because of what a PITA the others were). Everyone always respects freedom more when they have lived without it for a while.

-jj

Comment #81 - Posted by: J Jones at September 28, 2007 9:33 AM

I personally feel that Salma Hayek is much more culturally important than Friedrich Hayek.

and the Crossfit ladies were impressive in their overhead lifts... good job ladies!!!

Comment #82 - Posted by: Ron at September 28, 2007 9:34 AM

Nicole and Jamie rock. Hands down. I'm just glad to see Nicole didn't get hurt trying for 195lbs. I winced a couple of times watching those tries where she came close to kissing the bar in a not so good way.

Comment #83 - Posted by: TripMN at September 28, 2007 9:40 AM

I've been getting my wife to try a few scaled crossfit workouts, so she checks out the video of Nicole this morning to see some CF women work. Afterwads, she turns around and says, "That's crazy! She almost killed herself. I'm not doing that, and I hope you aren't either." I just say, "Of course not. We don't have bumper plates." Guess I'll have to start the sales job at square one again. :- )

Comment #84 - Posted by: PatrickH at September 28, 2007 9:45 AM

#14
Agreed. Mindblowing.

Comment #85 - Posted by: john32 at September 28, 2007 9:48 AM

I'm a little relieved to see that Nicole can't quite lift me, at 196#, OH... yet!

My wife would kill me if I didn't ask... Is there anyone out there looking to save some $ by splitting the cost of hotel/car rental with a fellow crossfitter during the 1/19-1/20 Fort Worth level 1 seminar?

Comment #86 - Posted by: Buretto at September 28, 2007 9:58 AM

loucr4,

Since you say you're a good soldier then it is your duty to take "this in stride" and on a personal note I don't believe any of the lives were spent unnecessarily in Iraq.

Ryan

Comment #87 - Posted by: RTC at September 28, 2007 9:58 AM

#25 stole my comment. Her efforts do inspire and change others, me for one.

There's the shallow level of inspiration that goes something like this for me: "Gotta get out there under a bar and make sure I can lift more than a 135 woman!"

Then there's the deeper level which is knowing the satisfaction that will come from giving my body a chance to grow past its present limitations.

One the road today, will enjoy the article I'm sure. Likely won't be able to comment but here's my offering for today - http://www.reason.com/news/printer/122019.html - it could be called an intro to econ 101, but I find even those that had Econ 101 don't seem to get these fundamental points about how freedom leads to better outcomes than govt organization of economic transactions.

I know I can't workout tomorrow - going to do the 75 ovhd squats (95#) that I missed from way back. I want to hit 50 in one set.

Paul

Comment #88 - Posted by: Apolloswabbie at September 28, 2007 10:05 AM

hey Crossfitters,

I have a question: I'm training for the USMC PFT and am concerned that crossfit, while amping up my ability to maximize pull-ups/sit-ups, has made the 3 mile run a more difficult event to perfect. I feel more powerful but not as confident in sustaining the aerobic levels of fitness required for middle distance. Since I'm a 3 month-old crossfitter (and loving it), what's the best way to manage run workouts along with the high intensity workouts crossfit offers? Maybe I'm just fatigued and need a rest week but I thought it was worth asking. Thanks.

Comment #89 - Posted by: Brendan at September 28, 2007 10:10 AM

Anyone know a good sub for swimming other than running and row? I'm looking to sub a 500 yard swim seeing as there is no water in the desert. Any suggestions would be fantasitic.

Comment #90 - Posted by: Jes at September 28, 2007 10:13 AM

I dont know about the rest of you but my hammies are still worked from Tuesday!

Comment #91 - Posted by: BONE at September 28, 2007 10:19 AM

On Saddam, it's an interesting idea, but not one that flies very far for me. Saddam had vast wealth as head of Iraq. Anyone besides me see the pictures of the lavish palaces, the golden faucets and all the extravagance? I'm pretty sure 1 billion dollars wasn't all that much to him, especially since he had a second thing worth more than that, he had POWER. Do you think he would willingly give up absolute power over a country unless there was more than just a few extra dollars on the table? I don't. I think it's a silly hypothetical situation that doesn't matter because we are well past that point now.

The article was interesting. I was glad to see the pros and cons pointed out about all of the different off-shoots of the libertarian movement as well as the main thrust of the movement itself. One point that I think gets overlooked by much of the "personal liberty fanatics" is the necessity of the development of a child into someone who can be a part of this society. Children aren't born able to take part in a society like that, it is a learned thing. The Family Unit and Schools are the age old way of developing such children, but with the current movement (both toward single parent families and schools that aren't allowed to teach morality of any kind) we are left with the only thing I see being taught kids these days is the old mantra "Do what ever you want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else." Problem is, it is being stressed, and they are getting the, "do whatever you want" but little stress is being put upon, and they aren't worrying about, "as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else".

Comment #92 - Posted by: TripMN at September 28, 2007 10:20 AM

#82, David,

You write: "To repeat: the article that Greg posted took the position that our recyclables have no value, and that this was demonstrated because you have to pay someone to take them away."

Actually, the argument as I recall was that the recyclables in aggregate were not worth more than the costs of picking them up. The argument was not that they were worthless. The article you posted doesn't contradict the original premise that it is unprofitable to recycle. This does not mean that we should not recycle, only that net, we lose money doing it. The fact that someone is making money on this economically innefficient operation does not validate the program from an economic standpoint.

To make an extreme example, suppose the NYC government coerced each of its 2 million households into putting a $1 bill into a large canister. Suppose that the City then decided spend $1 billion to send the canister to Mars. Clearly both the residents and the City would lose money on this program. The fact that someone might manage to stick his hands into the canister, steal some of the money, and thus make a profit, would not change the fact that the program is economically irrational. No one will send valuable $1 bills to Mars unless you pay them a premium, but plenty of people will gladly steal $ bills.


Comment #93 - Posted by: Hari at September 28, 2007 10:34 AM

28/f/109

made up nicole today

6 rounds, runs on TM

20-12-14-13-12-20

pre: modified CFWUx2 + TGU's
post: stretching

re video: HOLY SMOKES. Fantastic work Jamie and Nicole! Very impressive stuff. You two have inspired me, now I wanna try. I'd be happy to get just 75% of my bodyweight! Keep up the great work ladies!

Comment #94 - Posted by: nadia shatila at September 28, 2007 10:42 AM

I could see myself becoming a familibertarian. My kids and I live under a strong matriarch. It's family first, then free markets, then open-source fitness.

Comment #95 - Posted by: gwhealth at September 28, 2007 10:55 AM

"As long as it doesn't hurt anyone else" can be a pretty subjective idea. To leave a child to develop on their own obviously can do more harm than good. To weaken many laws concerning divorce proceedings ushers in a "survival of the fittest" institution where many who are socially valuable would be overwhelmed by those who are physically or economically stronger. There are many other examples.

Many of the "victimless crimes" that libertarianism advocates are nothing of the sort. I'd love to argue with anyone who feels my brother-in-law's drug use hasn't victimzed my family (though not nearly as much as it has his).

That said, many of the ideals that have made the properity of the U.S. possible should not be regulated upon society. Only when people choose to regulate their own behavior is progres made. Laws must obviously come into play when the cost to society is too large and too immediate to ignore, but that is not progress - that is just protection.

There are many things I consider to be wrong that I still would not want to see regulated in the U.S. It's good to know that those who choose what is valuable do so of their own free will - they will still choose the same under pressure or oppression. Those who choose what is valuable only if under compulsion will not.

Comment #96 - Posted by: bylam at September 28, 2007 11:02 AM

Wow! Nicole is my new "desktop wallpaper" for a little inspiration.

cletus #14 I agree!

I'm going to register crossfitNicole.com and be a groupie! ha!

Back to the grind....

Comment #97 - Posted by: CaneFF at September 28, 2007 11:34 AM

I think one needs to differentiate Aluminum recycling from all other kinds of recycling.

In the real world, details like this matter. In the realm of ideology, one example of value counter-acts all other examples--and the balance of evidence--that weigh heavily in another direction.

The aluminum cans are worth something because recycling aluminum apparently makes sense.

Someone should point out this nontopical discussion is also recycled. I'm not sure that adds to its' value.

Congrats to Crossfit Atlanta, and CrossFit Philly!

Doug,

If you keep at it, you just may make something of yourself someday.

Kidding, I'm kidding.

Actually, I've told several people you're one of the shrewdest folks I've met. Keep at it, you'll get it next year, and 2nd ain't no bad shakes.

Comment #98 - Posted by: barry cooper at September 28, 2007 11:38 AM

On the recycling discussion - The present direct costs don't always accurately reflect the total costs (both monetary and societal/environmental) over an extended or future period of time. Look at London in the 1800's. It was far cheaper for the factories to dump their effluent straight into the rivers and to use the cheaper, dirtier burning coal and vent straight into the air through their smokestacks. It made London almost unliveable. Or, consider Lake Erie in the 1960's. All the waste dumped into it caught on fire. A burning lake - imagine that. Sure, it was cheaper at the moment to just dump the waste into the lake. We are still paying billions to clean it up. Not considering the future costs and effects of our actions can be very expensive and dangerous to life.

Comment #99 - Posted by: MikeC at September 28, 2007 11:45 AM

jamie - bw at second attempt? ridiculous!

nicole - wow!

Comment #100 - Posted by: eva claire (ec) at September 28, 2007 11:51 AM

26 yom 6'2" 160#

WOD: Nicole

500m row and max pullups in 20 min.

4 sets in 19:22 (26, 17, 15, 15 for pullups)
I had a 45 second walk from the downstairs pullup bar to the upstairs c2 rower..that ate up some time.

Excellent vid Nicole and Jamie!!! It's good to see some ladies/guys competition going on.

Comment #101 - Posted by: Skeletor at September 28, 2007 12:06 PM

People tend to overly complicate libertarianism.

libertarianism 101

- Rights: You only have one right. The right not to have your life, or a piece of it taken from you without your consent.

- Property: The conversion of energy into mass (life is exchanged for tangible, or in the questionable case of intellectual property, intangible property)

- Crime: Taking a piece of someone without their consent.

- Immorality: All crimes are immoral. Not all immoral acts are crimes.

- Non-Criminal Immorality: The wasting of one's own life (my definition)

- libertarians refuse to be criminals or the victims of crime. Enlightened libertarians refuse to be immoral.

Hope that clarifies things.

Comment #102 - Posted by: one at September 28, 2007 12:22 PM

Wow, Crackpot. Way to raise the bar.

David, I didn't read the article. Who are they selling this material to? If they are turning it in for government sponsored refunds, you are capable of doing the math, right? If not, how are they turning a profit?

If they are selling the materials for something other than recycling, you likewise understand that undermines the case for recycling, per se, right?

Or am I a crackpot too? If your case is clear, lay it on the table so even an intellectually challenged oaf like me gets it.

Comment #103 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at September 28, 2007 1:00 PM

MikeC,

The question of appropriate disposal can include recycling as an option, but need not. If recycling creates more waste in other areas--hidden costs--then it is not efficient to the purpose of saving energy, helping the environment, or generally being a good thing. Aluminum recycling appears to make sense. Glass and paper, much less so.

The point is not to feel good. It is to do what is systemically sustainable. I'm not so doctrinaire that I don't think government intervention is never needed, but I think it is a last case recourse, after all attempts at persuasion and incentivization are tried, and the case is clear. The case here is far from clear.

Comment #104 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at September 28, 2007 1:04 PM

cfwu x 2
15,12,9 of
20" Box jumps
BWT SQ
Elevated Foot Push Ups (20" box)
3:20

DL x 5
135 Warm up
225 ''''' = no break
275 '''''
305 '''''
315 '-''-'' = single, break, 2, break single
355 '-'-''

Took about 2 minutes between each set and 40-50 sec. breaks during last 2 sets

Comment #105 - Posted by: Rick Ihrie at September 28, 2007 1:05 PM

Neil & Ellie

Ellie

5 Rounds

15 Burpees
15 Box jumps

Plus 1 x 1000 mtrs row

17.45

Neil

40 mins of cycle alternated with x/trainer. 5 min intervals
Transitions as fast as possible.
Total of 500 Kcals.

Have a good one.

Neilfit


Comment #106 - Posted by: neilfit at September 28, 2007 1:09 PM

#92 Brendan - Rest Day runs! My last PFT run (March) was 18:01 compared to 19:06 8 months earlier (July '06). I started Crossfit in January and pretty much run only on rest days now.

#62 B Tribble - Try 41 area gym. There are lots of Crossfitters there and the gym has bumper plates, kettlebells, wall balls, tires to drag and flip, etc. Unfortunately, I moved to Pt Mugu three months ago and I think I am the only crossfitter here. The gym manager refused to buy a C2 rower, wall ball and especially bumper plates. I miss camp Pendleton for many reasons. Actually, the only thing better here is the surf. Oh yeah, and I won't deploy for the next three years.

-JP

Comment #107 - Posted by: JPW at September 28, 2007 1:09 PM

awesome video, interesting article, even if it does not completely compare to our european situation. I can go along with many of his ideas.

About taking a break. I found that my times and motivation where getting lower. I've taken a 'active' rest this week. Just stretching and doing an ocasional handstand or a few squats, pull-ups. Started doing this on sunday, and I can feel the fire building again.

Just did a small training: 21-15-9 of baby-burpees (without the push-up or the jump) with oly-bar snatches. time 11:38 min.
I am going to do more workouts just focussing on my weaknesses. God know I have more then enough of those.
Have fun, Johan

Comment #108 - Posted by: Johan Nederhof/Rotterdam at September 28, 2007 1:12 PM

36/M/64kg

Back Squat
40kgx5
50kgx3
60kgx2
70kgx1
80kgx1
85kgx1
90kgx1(f)
90kgx1(f)

Comment #109 - Posted by: mrjling at September 28, 2007 1:24 PM

Hey Massachusetts Crossfitters....

Word on the street is that Crossfit South Shore (maybe in Norwell???) is on the way soon.

If anyone has heard anything, please drop me a line.

Chip

Comment #110 - Posted by: Clippa at September 28, 2007 1:31 PM

Great work Ladies.

On another note, there are three things that cause an unending argument: Workout philosophies, Religion, and War Time issues. Can we please keep this site concentrated on the First? Not meaning to sound disrespectful but I think about 90% of the people I know doing Cross Fit are in or around Law Enforcement and the Military. I for one come here to forget or maybe delay the bombardment of knowledge I get on Post

Comment #111 - Posted by: Mike (Clarksville) at September 28, 2007 1:33 PM

Rest days are for debate about the topic posted by Coach. If you want to only debate about "workout philosophies" then only read and post on work out days. Part of the point of rest days is argument and debate about politics, war and religion.

Comment #112 - Posted by: k9thatbites at September 28, 2007 1:41 PM

To paraphrase Coach, "What good is a really fit body if you have a weak mind?"

3 days we work on CrossFitting the body, day 4 we work on CrossFitting the mind. The point is to get a different perspective and debate the merits (demerits too) of the article posted and each others comments in a civilized forum. It may not be perfect, but it can surely give everyone a workout some days.

Comment #113 - Posted by: TripMN at September 28, 2007 1:49 PM

WOW! Amazing work Jamie and Nicole! Strong, smart and sexy - now that's a dangerous combination!

Comment #114 - Posted by: Carmen at September 28, 2007 1:53 PM

David,

If the restaurant you did the books for was losing money, the fact that some dishonest employee could make a profit by sticking his hands into the register would not change the fact that the restaurant was unprofitable.


Comment #115 - Posted by: Hari at September 28, 2007 3:32 PM

I don't have time to do this properly. I will comment that the article, posted some time ago, which Coach put up was simply questioning the sacrality of recycling. It, like any other human activity, is in a free society up for debate. Maybe it makes sense, maybe it doesn't. If it makes sense, let's do it, but let's not mandate it.

The crackpot part of that notion is apparently letting people make their own decisions as to value, when everyone should already "know" that anyone who doesn't recycle doesn't care about their grandkids or the future of the Earth.

I have things to do, deadlines to keep, people to see etc, etc., but I'll look for intelligent commentary from you on the topic that was actually chosen today, tomorrow.

Ladies: nice lifting. I liked the dinosaur overdub. That was funny.

Comment #116 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at September 28, 2007 3:44 PM

44/M/180

THE 300 MOTIVATED ME. I'V NEVER TRIED FOR A MAX CLEAN SO I GOT UP TO A 275 POUND CLEAN TODAY.
MY FORM WAS GOOD TO 250 THEN GOT SLOPPY. STOPPED FOR SAFETY.

RURAL/METRO FIRE DEPT.
TUCSON, AZ.

Comment #117 - Posted by: ROBERT SUTHERLAND at September 28, 2007 4:05 PM

AAARRRRGH! some MF driving an asphalt truck just rear ended my beautiful convertible as I was stopped at a red light. Yes, the hot silver convertible Solara with "Crosfit" as the license plate.

Scared and Murderous. I'm so mad. My neck shoulder are feeling it.

ANY SUGGESTIONS?

If I were a big "kitty" I'd be in tears. Now just sucked down a glass of Chardonny and wondering what to do.

Couldn't get Coach Young on the phone for suggestions.

Anybody got an idea for something I can do to head off being too sore to WOD tomorrow? Oh boy, big girls DO cry... gotta go.

Comment #118 - Posted by: Spider Chick at September 28, 2007 4:07 PM

Somewhat surprisingly, libertarianism and communism are of one genre: utopian. For that, they are laughable.

Libertarianism contains a few notions that make good guidelines to bias legislation one way or the other. “Smaller Government … Lower taxes … More Freedom”. http://www.lp.org/issues/platform_all.shtml. But libertarianism takes them to absolutes. “Our goal is nothing more nor less than a world set free in our lifetime, and it is to this end that we take these stands.” “[W]e oppose all taxation.” “All publicly owned infrastructures including dams and parks shall be returned to private ownership and all taxing authority for such public improvements shall sunset.” [Subdivide Yosemite. For sale: New Orleans dikes.] “We … oppose any government use of search warrants to examine or seize materials belonging to innocent third parties.” [First you find ‘em guilty, then you search ‘em.] “If a private employer screens prospective or current employees via questionnaires, polygraph tests, urine tests for drugs, blood tests for AIDS, or other means, this is a condition of that employer's labor contracts.” [Have you ever performed an unnatural act with your spouse?] “We support repeal of all gun control laws.” [For sale to private party: surface to air missile.] Id.

Some libertarian tenets it shares with conservatism, some it shares with anarchy, and some it shares with pacifists. It would be interesting to hear a libertarian spokesman differentiate its position with respect to each of these idealized systems.

Where do the libertarians stand on the U.S. federal principle? Do they wish to create one ideal superstate, abolishing state governments? If not, what in the libertarian model are allowable state to state differences on taxes, marriage, education, land development, etc.? Fifty little utopias under one big utopia?

What capitalism requires is a particular kind of free market: one in which an auction exists to allow supply and demand and price setting to operate. What libertarians want is an unfettered market – in one sense, licentious. Libertarian is structured lawlessness. In its utopia, it has no defense against the multitude of noncriminal excesses of capitalism, such as monopoly formation, price fixing, price gouging.

No system is superior to capitalism for providing wealth to everyone. The left concentrates on equality of wealth (operatives excepted), which mature communism provides. The left concentrates on the disparity in wealth, ignoring that under capitalism everyone is better off than under socialism. Libertarians support capitalism the way the left supports the troops.

On the defense axis, the position shared by Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich would put their utopias on the road to slave state status. It would never happen, but by the time the ship of state could be turned around, the economic and humanitarian costs would be catastrophic -- the big lesson from World War II.

Libertarians are tough to take seriously.

Comment #119 - Posted by: Jeff Glassman at September 28, 2007 4:26 PM

Nicole is my make-believe girlfriend - move over Salma Hayek.

Brad congrats to you & your wife on the baby.

Comment #120 - Posted by: InfidelSix at September 28, 2007 4:27 PM

ROWER: 15:30 min 300Cal or 4115meters
Guantlet Stepper 20min
LifeCylce 20min 8.4miles

4 Sets to Failure on each "HammerStrength" Machine
20 Pull-Ups Between Each Set+ Total 100 Pull-ups
Leg Ext.
Leg Curls
Toe Raise
Calf Raise
Back Extensions

5 Sets of 20X 24"Box Jumps alternating with
5 Set of 1min jump rope.

Comment #121 - Posted by: Matt Durham.-IAFF 2950 at September 28, 2007 5:33 PM

Re: #128

Jeff:

I suspect you missed my libertarianism 101 post above (#111).

A discussion between a non-libertarian and a libertarian is inherently difficult, because the non-libertarian wants to talk issues and the libertarian wants to talk principles.

In the case of the libertarian, only one principle really matters. The right to enjoy access to 100% of one's life, whatever that may be, and to exchange that life with others voluntarily (again see #111 above).

This fundamental libertarian principle is applied to every single interaction, discussion and decision that a libertarian makes.

Utopian it may be, but it doesn't make it wrong. To call libertarianism utopian is akin to calling the fight against crime utopian. I'm sure you agree that murder is wrong, and yet murders continue to happen every minute of every day.

By your definition, the desire to put an end to murder is utopian. It's unrealistic. No matter what we do, people will continue to murder one another. Does that mean we should stop striving for that utopian dream of stopping murder?

BTW, you quote the Libertarian Party's platform. In the event you are not aware of this, there is a decided difference between the Libertarian Party and a libertarian. A libertarian (note the lower case "l") may be a member and supporter of the Libertarian party (in which case he would be a "L"ibertarian), or he may not.

I am far from being a spokesman for libertarianism. I can tell you that I personally don't put much stock in centralized government, no matter what label it places on itself. In my view, the utopian view is the one that holds that government still matters.

Government is fundamentally a protection racket. What happens when the racketeer can no longer protect or intimidate? People are starting to wake up to the fact that government can no longer deliver on the promise of protection or prosperity.

Katrina was a wake up call to the impotence of government in the face of natural disaster.

Iraq and Lebanon pointed out the impotence of armed government. Pipelines being blown up in Iraq, Mexico, Nigeria? Welcome to 4th generation warfare.

More and more government functions are being privatized. Think the US could continue to conduct operations in Iraq without mercenaries? (aka, contractors or private military companies). It used to be that the Army Corps of Engineers did a lot of their own work. Today, most of the work they are responsible for is contracted to private entities. Our infrastructure is built, developed and managed by private companies.

Ever hear of the anarcho-capitalist saying that there is nothing government can do that can't be done better and more efficiently by private entities? The libertarian utopia is slowly establishing itself.

Capital and labor are more fluid than ever. The internet and globalization are here to stay. Encryption allows people to communicate and conduct business without the prying eyes and ears of government knowing any better.

If I don't like the business environment here, I can go to Thailand. Thailand doesn't work out? There's always India or Uruguay, waiting with open arms.

The utopia is the idea that all we need to do is build a triple fence along our border, cavity search all travelers, and that government will protect us.

All our paranoia has done is allowed London to take the lead from New York as the global financial capital; many of the world's brightest are now attending foreign universities. They would have come here and developed a life in the US, if not for restrictive visa requirements. And the list goes on.

Yes, libertarians support free-markets. Where people come together peacefully, enter into contracts voluntarily, and where everyone benefits. Whether you like it or not, libertarianism is winning and the restrictive, coercive culture of the protection racket known as government is slowly deteriorating.

No, the dinosaur won't go without a fight. You can expect some significant death throes over the next couple of decades. But make no mistake about it, centralized control based on FUD and violence is a 300 baud modem in a Gigabit world.

Comment #122 - Posted by: one at September 28, 2007 5:41 PM

Spiderchick - 15 mins icepack 15mins low heating pad alternate for an hour or so, lots of advil and you will be sore no matter what. If you feel numbness in your arms or hands or the pain is really sharp you should see your doctor. Maybe should see a doc first in any case. Take care!

Comment #123 - Posted by: randy at September 28, 2007 6:02 PM

34yo m 192lb

we watched th video of the guys at the fire house and all said the same thing..."I hope the girls do that soon!" Great job

playing catch up...
Five rounds for time of:
95 pound Sumo deadlift high-pull, 15 reps
95 pound Thruster, 15 reps

goal was: good form, lots of explosion and all unbroken sets. Goal reached. 15min(ish)

Comment #124 - Posted by: BCastilloAZ at September 28, 2007 6:07 PM

google search obsession the movie......crazy....might be on youtube full length.....

Comment #125 - Posted by: billy bonedog at September 28, 2007 6:25 PM

#129, David,

"your comparisons are just terrible. Garbage is implicitly a money-losing proposition, so any profit pulled out of it is a good thing. Comparing this to a restaurant makes no sense, as a business is by definition a money-producing proposition (or it ceases to exist). Your dollar-bills-to-Mars comparison didn't make any sense either."

You are making distinctions that don't make a difference.

Yes, garbage is a money-losing proposition. So what? Recycling increases the loss. The only way anyone pulls a profit out of recycling is by increasing someone else's loss by an even greater amount.

Yes, people want to hold onto their dollar bills. They also want to hold onto their time.

The restaurant analogy makes perfect sense. I am comparing recycling to a money-losing business. And I am pointing out that the fact that someone can make money on a money-losing business does not change the fact that business itself doesn't make economic sense.

Even using your claim that New Yorker's spend 30 seconds per household per day recycling. And even using the absurdly low value of peoples' time of $10 per hour, that means that New Yorkers are forced to put $60 million per year of their time into recycling. How can you possibly point to your article and conclude that the fact that someone is able to steal $150,000 per year worth of recyclables somehow indicates that recycling itself is profitable?

Comment #126 - Posted by: Hari at September 28, 2007 6:45 PM

ok here is the deal: i am inviting nichole, jaime, annie, carrie, eva, tess (crossfit san diego) carla mac, and any other strong, tough, dedicated females that want to lift heavy weights to mikes gym to train. these 2 ladies and i know the others are tough as nails!!!! get this: they listen too!!!! well...at least when it comes to the oly lifts!!!!

Comment #127 - Posted by: mike burgener at September 28, 2007 6:49 PM

"What's the cost of brushing your teeth by your calculations, Hari. Sounds like we could solve our national debt problems if we all just gave up those 60 seconds, 3 times a day. Your economics are wack."

A complete economic analysis would require that I consider the cost of the alternative: Having my teeth rot. That is a cost sufficiently high as to justify my investment in time spent brushing my teeth.

What exactly is your point?

Comment #128 - Posted by: Hari at September 28, 2007 6:59 PM

Hey All,
I'm new to the crossfit deal, but we here in FOB Apache, Afghanistan are putting our cross fit freindly gym together. The vids of Nicole are motivational to say the least. I showed everyone who thought they were in good shape the ring push-up vid and they all headed to the gym to see just how tough they really are. The elevation here is almost 6,000 feet so cardio kicks our butts. Keep posting the awesome vids. Motivation sometimes wanes here in the stan..

Later,
Tex

Comment #129 - Posted by: Tex at September 28, 2007 7:31 PM

Well... Nicole and Jaime, what strong work, Wow. But, I'm a little diappointed at all you unmarried male crossfitters out there. I expected to see at least two marriage proposals for the principles of that video. There was only one "if I weren't married" deal and that doesn't count. What's wrong with you guys? Step up...

Comment #130 - Posted by: Dave and Belinda at September 28, 2007 10:15 PM

46/F/125 Row 5K 23:46

Comment #131 - Posted by: Dave and Belinda at September 28, 2007 10:16 PM

"Hari, David! (Dad voice) Sit on your hands, if I have to stop this car..." Sorry guys, I know I should stay out of it, but I keep getting this image of my two brothers and I as kids, crammed into the backseat of the family truckster on some sixteen hour trip to see the world's largest ball of twine, in August, with no air conditioning, while scratchy BeeGees and Neil Diamond tunes blare on the 8-track. Ah, wistful childhood memories. Teehee.
Have a great weekend everybody, John

Comment #132 - Posted by: john32 at September 28, 2007 10:37 PM

Oh yeah, rested yesterday so I did the "Bear" complex today:
75#
85#
95#
105#
115#
Strange, muscle-wise I didn't feel that taxed, but mentally, very much so. Was literally yelling at myself on the last round, and was still sweating profusely a half hour later. Good stuff.
John 32/5'11"/170

Comment #133 - Posted by: john32 at September 28, 2007 11:02 PM

30y/M/205/6'/USAF

5mile run: 38min

Good op-ed. I've often wondered why Libertarians never seem to be able to get a foothold in American politics. This piece goes at least part of the way in explaining that inability to jumpstart the movement. Then again the best parts of Libertarianism seem to get co-opted by one of the mainstream parties.

Comment #134 - Posted by: Tobias at September 29, 2007 5:55 AM

Cindy:
rx'ed: 11 rounds in 20 mins.
I did ring push ups instead of
regular push ups.
male/6'1"/27/185lbs

Comment #135 - Posted by: John Myers at September 29, 2007 9:03 AM

27 yom

194#

66

15-12-12-12-15

Ran around Olney Post Office.

Comment #136 - Posted by: BP at September 29, 2007 9:22 AM

David,

Just realized that you're the same troll who has been posting on the Black Box site. With comments like the one quoted below (Black Box blog, September 22), it's clear that (1) you have no real interest in CrossFit; and (2) have a personal agenda:

"Man, I don't plan to be a gadfly around here, but to quote navyseals.com, "We are a private organization with no formal affiliation with the United States Navy." So, Kurt, if you're still reading, be aware that a private organization with no formal affiliation with the United States Navy is willing to take your money. Hope that makes you feel better."

"Crossfit contains some great ideas, but there's so much bullshit gathered around it that it's often very hard to take. It's going to be fun when Glassman faces a Curves-like scandal as people realize where their money is going."

Comment #137 - Posted by: Hari at September 29, 2007 10:32 AM

Coach Burgener,

Thx for a great cert last wknd. it was a fantastic experience.

I6, (originally from Illinios, residing in L.A.)

:-)

Comment #138 - Posted by: InfidelSix at September 29, 2007 1:46 PM

David,

You are being silly. You are wanting to debate an article that is not on the site any more. If you read it then, you should have commented then. The article never stated that recycling of all items was bad. And since this is the axe you want to grind, you should know this.

It made a pretty clear case that glass recycling makes no sense. I will note that the article did not talk about glass bottles being stolen, so I think we can both conclude that per the terms of your argument recycling glass is currently not a reasonable thing to do.

This leaves paper and aluminum. What I would need to know to be able to assess this argument--the fact I would need--is who is buying the paper and why. I did some basic research, and some companies appear to pay cash for paper, but I have to wonder if they are being subsidized by the government, creating a false positive of market viability. I don't know, and you don't strike me as the sort to do the work of research either.

If recycling paper makes economic sense, then companies everywhere will pay for it. If they will pay for it--if it is that valuable--then we can all start doing school newspaper drives to raise money for the school play. We collect a bunch of papers, and some profit minded capitalist, who reduces their production costs in this manner, will pay us money. When that happens, I will admit unambiguously that recycling paper makes sense.

According to the couple of sites I visited, recycling aluminum does make economic sense. Apparently not so much sense though that the recyclers are paying money for it. Again, I would like to know who, in New York, is buying these cans. If you can't answer this question, your argument is weak to the point of being non-existent. I am telling you I think the City is paying for them. I don't know.

Maybe you can find out, since you are the one who decided to insult the owner of the site in the course of making a factually and logically weak argument, based on a faulty recollection of a Rest Day article posted several months ago. That would be the responsible, big boy thing to do. I'll check in tomorrow.

With respect to the actual topic of the day, I have a lot of thoughts, but in general I agree with Jeff's post. I thought it comical that one of the folks responding to him wanted to differentiate issues from principles.

Principles are heuristics for generating results in the real world. They have the effect, in aggregate, of facilitating a non-judicial but expansive order in a society, that Hayek called the Extended Order.

Useful principles are self similar across scales. By this I mean that the basic principles of international relations are not that different than those that govern local relations with people you know.

Libertarian principles do not solve any problems. They reject government, but do not have anything other than a naive faith in human goodness with which to replace it. From what I can tell, in its' extreme formulation it is no different than Lefism in that its' "principles" express nothing other than a childish desire to be free of adult authority of all sorts, and everything past that point is just a little fuzzy. Like what if we dissolve our military--which as we all "know" is just an instrument for the concentration of federal power, and corporate corruption--and we get invaded?

When choosing a principle, you choose the consequence. Bush invaded Iraq based on the principle that treating problems when they are small is better than when they are large. I agree with that. Then they chose the principle that Iraqs government should look structurally much like that of the United States, with a strong central government. This was a mistake. We now have the opposite principle, that of localizing our dealings to be more congruent with local realities, and that is working.

Principles--ideals--are not intended as death warrants. Their point is to increase personal and social order, not to decrease them, and any principle--like Communism--that does that, is bad.

What all nations really want, I would argue, are sustainable personal liberty, wealth, and a sense of meaning. The point of heuristics is to help secure those things, and useful truth is nothing more or less than an idea that moves in those directions. And anything that manifestly does not work in those directions is wrong.

In some places, in some times, libertarianism could be the right philosophy. I don't think it is now. I think Conservatism is best, and this is obscured by the fact that we don't have any or many real Conservatives left. Bush isn't one. He's a "Compassionate Conservative", which is basically a Democrat when it comes to social spending--and associated deficits--and a Republican when it comes to national defense.

I think one of the reasons the Left hates him so much is they can't use many of their traditional issues, because he's much more centrist than anybody on the right or the left wants to admit.

This is why Hillary has been driven to making medical coverage a campaign issue, when everyone knows we can't afford the entitlements we already have. It's a non-starter, and both parties should be focussing on how to avert the crisis we already know is coming, not making it worse, and even harder to deal with.

Comment #139 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at September 30, 2007 7:48 PM

David,

So if I hear you correctly, you are hereby acknowledging publicly your own inability to support your case factually, and are conceding that I have raised a point--a relevant and important point, not a random thing, which any rational and disinterested person will rapidly see--for which you have no answer?

Surely you have minions of your own who can help you in this endeavor?

Comment #140 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at October 1, 2007 9:06 AM

Here is an example of a community paying people to recycle: http://www.courierpostonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070919/NEWS01/70919018/1004/LIVING

I've been to RecycleBanks website, and it's not clear how they make money. They pay communities to recycle, and presumably sell the stuff to recycling facilities, but I can't see how the economics of it works.

Actually, here it is explained: http://www.recyclebank.com/resources/vedit/Forbes_article_12_19_06.pdf

They charge cities to track their recycling, and the cities decrease their costs to get stuff out to landfills. However, what is not clear is if those costs offset.

I am not opposed to recycling. If it makes sense, then we should do it. I am simply arguing--as the article that Coach posted did--that if it costs more energy to recycle than to produce new, the purpose has been defeated, and that it is not only possible, but necessary to look at the whole thing rationally, as something intended to accomplish a concrete goal other than making people feel good.

Comment #141 - Posted by: barry cooper at October 1, 2007 9:23 AM

Barry-
I think people only feel good about recycling because they have been told it is the "right" thing to do to save the planet.
To me, it kind of falls under the same heading as it is ok to bash people for driving SUV's, however, you never hear people bashing 18 wheelers for their air pollution and gas usage.

Kate

Comment #142 - Posted by: jknl at October 1, 2007 9:40 AM

David,

Is your intent to provide useful information or to antagonize? I used that as one example, but it doesn't effect one way or another the much more important point you have ignored that neither you nor I really understand the underlying economics. You are wanting to argue that these waste products must have value since they are being stolen, and I am arguing that it is quite possible that these garbage products have value the same way that empty corn fields have value because farmers are paid not to grow anything.

We are both lacking facts, but the difference is that I'm not trying to call anyone a crackpot, or pretending that one link to one article is such a substantive contribution that I shouldn't be required to address the factual gaps in my argument, or that anyone asking for such a contribution is being anything other than thorough.

Kate,

I'm not willing to say that all recycling is bad. But I will say that zealots like David do make me feel much less guilty about tossing paper in the garbage can. If it makes a difference, it is not a huge difference one way or the other, and self righteous people tend to make me do the opposite of whatever they are calling for.

You do have a good point too about 18 wheelers. Ultimately, the sorts of kids who hate SUV's--who have the time to worry about things like that--tend to be the same ones' whose parents can afford to drive them. Mine couldn't, and I doubt yours could either.

Comment #143 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at October 1, 2007 10:36 AM

Barry,
I agree that some recycling is good (like for example, steel, motor oil, or water). I have a friend that tries to recycle everything, and I ask her what sense does it make for her to run her soup cans and tin foil through the dishwasher to recycle them when we are in the midst of a drought. She doesn't really have any answer other than she is trying to help save the planet. Oh boy, that's when it gets fun!

I think that you and I have the same mind set about self righteous people. It generally begs for me to be rebellious to their face. ;-)

Kate

Comment #144 - Posted by: jknl at October 1, 2007 11:01 AM

You're right: there wasn't much there. Should I then ignore both your subsequent comments, and the fact that you are in effect conceding your inability to further argue your case? If you've been here in the months between now and that post, you should know that that's not going to happen.

And if in fact you are "very rational until know-it-alls start sending dollar bills via rocket to Mars.", does that mean that you stop being rational at that point?

Hari's basic point was the same as mine. It's not clear that even though someone somewhere is evidently paying for paper and aluminum cans, that that money is not ultimately being paid by taxpayers as a feel good gesture rather than rational business owners seizing an opportunity to reduce costs.

I can't say that isn't happening. I don't know, but you haven't made your case, and you have not even come close to justifying calling Coach Glassman's articles--in the plural--crackpotted.

Insult, of course, is the last recourse of the exhausted mind. It is a form of interpersonal violence, and it is interesting that it is most often practiced by supposed pacifists on the left. The presumption is that insult is justified not by the inferiority of their arguments, but rather that their intellects are so superior, and their positions so clear that only imbeciles would fail to grasp them. Yet, strangely enough, when asked to define their positions in detail, these same people are invariably unable to do so.

They aren't in the habit, you see, having foregone that element of intellectual posture in favor of the slumped shoulders of universal agreement in the form of Political Correctness.

Raise your game or admit that your condescension is not equalled by your command of facts or intellectual prowess. Not even close, I'm afraid.

Comment #145 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at October 1, 2007 3:42 PM

Then shut up. Simple enough.

Comment #146 - Posted by: barry cooper at October 1, 2007 6:20 PM

I wrote a number of paragraphs on the topic, paragraphs that if I may say so were in my view quite intelligent, and which you have ignored entirely.

You came on here insulting people, then crawled back under a rock when you got called out. You can't make your case, but you want everyone to have the impression that you made your case. You didn't, you failed, and you should be ashamed of yourself, not for making the argument, but for the manner in which you conducted it.

You are apparently now trying to claim that was your intent. No, your intent was to make what you thought was an airtight case. You failed. You failed because you quit. You didn't want to do the work of actually trying to understand the topic. I didn't raise the topic, and I have no need to prove anything on that score. You do, and lapsing into sullen petulance does not change that fact.

Comment #147 - Posted by: barry cooper at October 1, 2007 6:35 PM

You're right. We're not in the 6th Grade. That's why you need to grow up and stop using words like silly and crackpotted and then failing to nut up and defend your case. Keep it up and your IP will be banned.

You argue the case against your case with your attitude much better than I ever could.

Comment #148 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at October 2, 2007 9:28 AM

Ok, I think its pretty ridiculous you guys let Nicole keep trying to attempt 195. It was obvious after the the second attempt that it wasn't happening. Maybe next time you'll wait till she hurts herself.

Comment #149 - Posted by: Jason Brown at October 2, 2007 12:19 PM

David,

At what point do you realize I just spanked you and shut up? Do you think if you keep up the blather that people will so dumb they fail to see that you not only failed, but that you continue to underscore this failure through distraction and insult.

The case has been made convincingly that you are a troll. The case has never been made that I have seen that any of Coach's articles are crackpotted.

This right here was your chance, and you failed. Given that you manifestly lack the character and initiative to find a line and hold it, I don't expect anything different in the future, but if you want to try I'm not going anywhere.

Comment #150 - Posted by: barry cooper at October 2, 2007 1:05 PM

David,

You don't understand that I am patient, and that from this moment forward I will continue the process we have hereby initiated in which you make unsustantiable comments, and I call you on it.

If you want to speak in the abstract, like a crackpotted leftist with no perceived need to reconcile what ought to be true with what they can actually document, then you need to understand that you are playing the fool, and it is abundantly obvious to everyone.

I have met many of the people on here, and email and speak to them regularly. This is not speculation.

If you think childish tirades, sarcasm, or whatever other flatulence you want to put out there will slow me down in the slightest, I would rethink that.

Comment #151 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at October 2, 2007 1:22 PM

You are an experiment in psychology to me, David. Nothing more.

If you haven't already, please watch the video for the current Rest Day, and do what you can to contribute rather than detract.

If you choose not to, that's another input for me, something to note on my mental notepad. It's how I learn things. Human vanity is something I never tire of observing in all its' infinite manifestations.

Comment #152 - Posted by: Barry Cooper at October 2, 2007 4:35 PM
Post a comment






Remember personal info?