May 26, 2011

Thursday 110526

Rest Day


Enlarge image

Kabul, Afghanistan.

"Working the Olympic Lifts at CrossFit Longevity" with John Van Every, CrossFit Journal preview video [wmv] [mov]

The Update: Week 9.

Mikko Salo at SEALFIT and the Arnold by Rogue Fitness - video [wmv] [mov]

Edward Elgar, Nimrod from Enigma Variations

William Blake - A Poison Tree.

CHAMP and ACSM discuss high intensity fitness programs for military application.

Post thoughts to comments.

Posted by lauren at May 26, 2011 5:00 PM

Mikko you're a bad man! I dig it!

Comment #1 - Posted by: Cody at May 25, 2011 5:05 PM

Really a rest day? What does everyone rest on the same day? What if my schedule only allows me to rest on Fridays cause I work 16 hours, what do I do then?


Comment #2 - Posted by: Jason D at May 25, 2011 5:16 PM

Run 5K 25:38

rest 20 min then

110525 as Rx'ed

6 rounds

Comment #3 - Posted by: Quinn McCutchen M/41/149/5'10" at May 25, 2011 5:24 PM

run, lift, swim, climb, ride ...
work on weaknesses ...
work on strengths ...
murph, angie, cindy, filthy fifty, grace ...

Comment #4 - Posted by: tim at May 25, 2011 5:27 PM

Thanks for posting the executive summary that Champs published in April, which has lead to the announcement of the new USN NOFFS.
I'm interested in other's comments specifically how the summary of this workshop is that DOD shouldn't work to train our sailors/marines/soldiers/airman in proper CrossFIt, but instead create an entirely new system that would be mediocre at best.
CrossFit SWFFT

Comment #5 - Posted by: AJ at May 25, 2011 5:34 PM

Jason, its 3 on 1 off...get used to it. We stay one day behind, and if we need an off day on a work day, we take it and just keep going.

Comment #6 - Posted by: ScottyMack at May 25, 2011 5:38 PM

My hands are ripped and bloody from Wednesday's workout. Does anyone have any suggestions for that.
5 rounds could not pull any more due to blood running down my arm

Comment #7 - Posted by: keith at May 25, 2011 5:48 PM

CHAMP/ACSM - Two interesting phrases from the reading:
"ECPs appear to violate recognized accepted standards for developing muscular fitness."
-So did Einstein’s work, initially.
"Anyone with a clinical condition...should not be allowed to participate until medically cleared"
-If the other branches are like the USAF, this means do nothing until you don't hurt, then get back to the same old p/u s/u and run - the safe stuff.

Comment #8 - Posted by: chuck at May 25, 2011 6:09 PM

I like how the ACSM/CHAMP article was posted on a "Rest Day."

Really, Extreme Conditioning Programs? I think they could have been more clever than that. That's like renaming iron chef to extreme culinary and bashing them for the occasional burned piece of broccoli.

Comment #9 - Posted by: Andrew Breyer at May 25, 2011 6:16 PM


When your manager asks you to check the fry bin but you were planning on flipping the burgers, what do you do?

You probably tweet how impossible and unfair life is.

Comment #10 - Posted by: Prolix at May 25, 2011 6:20 PM

Love what the side of that 48" box says.
"Its a long way to the top"

Comment #11 - Posted by: Aaron C at May 25, 2011 6:25 PM

#10 Prolix-
I'm sure that Jason was not serious. That doesn't sound like crossfitter mentality at all.

Comment #12 - Posted by: Todd at May 25, 2011 6:27 PM

Why would you do the right thing by growing a beard, and then shave you armpits? (Reffering to guy in pic)

Comment #13 - Posted by: BurgundyActual at May 25, 2011 6:27 PM

Extreme conditioning program? it seems very oxymoronic. I mean are you suppose to subscribe a mundane conditioning program, a submaximal conditioning program that doesn't create an oxygen debt or reach the threshold to achieve specific adaptation to imposed demadns. Okay enough of the sarcasm.

The spealer programming video in the journal hit on this but I think it is a misnomer that all crossfit wods are these 30-60 minute grueling body beaters. I work with a group of high school kids and I went back and examined the average wod times and broke them down into under 5, under 10. under 15 and over 15. The stats came back that 2/3 of the workouts were under 10 minutes. Obviously the ability of guaging proper scaling is a huge component and one of the top qualities of a competent instructor.

The one thing I have against the piece is the idea that only fit and healthy individuals should be allowed to participate in ECPs. I know this may be me wearing rose colored glasses and naive but are not our armed forces fit and healthy? (feel free to correct me, I don't mean it as a slight in anyway but i assume you have to pass a physical and fitness test) but even if they are not fit and healthy this comes back to proper instruction and scaling because honestly sqautting to a 15 inch box and walking 200 meters may be extreme to someone out of shape and it revolves around the rate of perceived exertion concept.

Comment #14 - Posted by: brian t at May 25, 2011 6:30 PM

hey there dude in the picture, how about a shave? Hearts and Minds.....

Comment #15 - Posted by: Blanco at May 25, 2011 6:35 PM

As an Army physical therapist and avid proponent, coach and practicer of CrossFit this statement by CHAMP/ACSM is more of the same old arguments ive been hearing for a while from the "experts". If the "experts" actually took the time to learn the difference between these very different methodologies of training then at least their arguments would make sense. Grouping CrossFit or Gym Jones with P-90X just demonstrates that the writers have never actually 1. learned the theory behind the workouts or 2. tried it themselves. The sad truth is that the majority of our military force (other than Marines and Special Ops) are fat, lazy and entitled just like the society they are recruited from. We give incentives in the form "disability pay" if a Soldier is broken at the time they leave the service - the perfect out for fat, lazy, entitled service members. These are the ones who will make implementing a physical fitness program like crossfit a reality is because the SECOND they are asked to put forth effort, learn something new and give actual effort they will be in my clinic looking for a profile, hydrocodone and a profile to get out of training until they are no longer in pain. This can result in "injured" Soldiers being deemed non deployable and commanders wont have it.
@AJ there already is a new Army program called PRT (physical readiness training) and yes it is mediocre at best
Sorry for the rant

Comment #16 - Posted by: kyle at May 25, 2011 6:36 PM

Is that a 5" spacer under the 48" box? It really is a long way to the top.

Comment #17 - Posted by: heath at May 25, 2011 6:47 PM

Bring back natrual selection;

If your not smart enough to climb a tree or fast enough to out run the lion you deserve to be eaten!!!

Comment #18 - Posted by: AKE at May 25, 2011 6:52 PM

The CHAMP/ACSM article seems to be making two general points, both easily refuted:

1. High Intensity Training is not effective at achieving results. Response: Scoreboard, look at the athletes that do Crossfit.

2. High Intensity Training risks injury. Response: Scale.

Comment #19 - Posted by: Gabe at May 25, 2011 7:06 PM

As an USAF PT leader for my squadron, I read that CHAMP/ACSM paper that came across my email and laughed. This lack of full understanding by leadership is exactly the kind of thing that is wrong with the USAF today.

Comment #20 - Posted by: Brett at May 25, 2011 7:07 PM

@ #18


The Mikko vid is pretty baller too.

Comment #21 - Posted by: Bill Gibson at May 25, 2011 7:09 PM

At #13 BurgundyActual: While I am not the guy in the pic, I have a much larger beard and have a lot more hair on my torso, still shave the pits though. Deodorant won't work otherwise. =/

Comment #22 - Posted by: Kerry at May 25, 2011 7:21 PM

As a former Marine infantry officer, I can only read the ACSM letter and laugh. High intensity exercises with little rest are dangerous? Whoever wrote this has never been near a combat unit, and if they have, they are either blind or stupid.

And musculoskeletal injuries? Really? Have they checked their stats recently on the number of overuse injuries due to the "run until you drop" training mentality prevalent in so many military units?

Comment #23 - Posted by: Gyrene at May 25, 2011 7:28 PM

Awesome photo...what's the tatt'? Looks like some kind of firearm tucked into the back of his boardies. If so, way cool.

Comment #24 - Posted by: CUZ at May 25, 2011 7:34 PM

stop being such a re-re. Rest on the friday, and do whatever old WOD you want during this place rest day. Is that so difficult? Come on... This is a free website you know and we all have different schedule. Try to adapt a little bit.

Comment #25 - Posted by: Greg at May 25, 2011 7:51 PM

if ya wanna rock n' roll!

Comment #26 - Posted by: chazkez at May 25, 2011 8:09 PM

I don't get poetry...

Comment #27 - Posted by: Matt DeMinico at May 25, 2011 8:25 PM

its ok matt....poetry is not for everyone....

Comment #28 - Posted by: shakespeare at May 25, 2011 9:29 PM

I wonder if the ACSM realizes how far behind they are...

Comment #29 - Posted by: MAJ Michael Perkins at May 25, 2011 11:32 PM

I think it would be cool to make some of the actual military tests WOD's. Would that be sacrilegious? I am not in the military.

Comment #30 - Posted by: mikey the fat crossfitter at May 26, 2011 2:25 AM

I’m disappointed that so many of you are rejecting the CHAMP and ACSM article as a whole. The article shines light on the positive aspect of ECPS (Crossfit) but for all you who believe it’s perfect are mistaken. The letter discussed how injury rates can be high for novice crossfitters and the last thing we need is a bunch of soldiers, sailors and airmen sitting around with injuries because they were too ignorant or proper instruction wasn’t available. Some may see this article in negative light, but I believe it’s a good sign that the DoD is recognizing ECP’s and they’re benefits. Is it so bad they want us to practice it safely?

Comment #31 - Posted by: KML/m/6'/190 at May 26, 2011 3:02 AM

48 + 5 = 53 inches. Begs the question, did he make it?

Comment #32 - Posted by: Darrell at May 26, 2011 3:18 AM

Mac, made the main page bro! Awesome! To the last poster, yes he made it. 53 3/8 inches, new PR for him, so he said.

Comment #33 - Posted by: Rooster at May 26, 2011 4:02 AM

This morning at Crossfit Franklin Lakes:

60 Thrusters @ 95 lbs.

Every odd minute: 3 pull-ups
Every even minute: 3 burpees


Go heavier next time.

Comment #34 - Posted by: Gerard Dawson at May 26, 2011 4:05 AM


5K: 28:50

Comment #35 - Posted by: mom to five at May 26, 2011 4:32 AM

Saw this article when it first came out. The conventional bias is evident within the first sentence when they lump a bunch of different programs with different goals into one lump. Add the labels, "extreme", "aggressive", and "demanding" right up front and you know exactly how this article is going to end.
Para 1: "Emerging problems" Emerging where? CrossFit induced injuries are actually hard to find at least at our box which happens to be located on a military base.
End of Para 2: "terms used by such programs" When has CrossFit described itself as "extreme"?
Para 4: high reps w/o adequate rest intervals "fails to adhere to appropriate and safe training guidelines" Soooo, when does the the glycolytic pathway get worked in safe training guidelines?
"not sufficiently inclusive of all conditioning and training needs" Which needs are these? The fat, the old, the skinny, the young, the sick? With proper scaling seems to hit them all.
Para 5: "regular monitoring" By whom? The same risk averse clowns that label the programs as extreme? We're already being "monitored" by fitness "experts" in our base box and its not going so well.
I'd really love to see a response by Coach G to this. Seems like we were on a good path back when he was addressing the National War College or whatever that was a year or two back, but this is somewhere between a setback and a full watering down of the goodness of functional fitness as it pertains to the military. If he "has the data", now's the time to pull it out.

Comment #36 - Posted by: steve at May 26, 2011 5:32 AM

I'm a white guy, so I'm in no way averse to measuring, but if the military is going to measure injury rates and efficacy of ECPs they certainly need to compare them to the traditional programs that are currently in use. The programs also need to be measured individually and not collectively.

Comment #37 - Posted by: Dane Thomas at May 26, 2011 5:58 AM

@ klm comment 31
I wouldn't say it is a negative light, just a different viewpoint. That letter seems if it was written by a novice, someone that hasn't any experience in implementing a so-called extreme conditioning program. I believe the program is a small fraction of the problem (i'm sure long rucksack marches may seem like extreme conditioning programs to people outside the military and anyone that embarked on one without proper scaling would feel it the next day). I believe the majority of the problem falls on the instruction and/or instructors. First, is there any scaling going on? if the answer is no then I think that should be addressed first and foremost. Second, is the proper technique being taught and if not is it because of lack of qaulity instruction because of poor instructor knowledge or because the ratio of athlete to instructor is high? If the article addressed just these two issues there would be more clarity.

Comment #38 - Posted by: brian t at May 26, 2011 6:09 AM

I particularly enjoyed the "problems" associated with ECP!
I'll share this with my 50+ year old clients who've been crossfitting for over a year, have an average weight loss of 20lbs, an average Fran time of sub 7:00, and an average deadlift of 225lbs....

It's odd the elite ranks of the military suffer all those problems but the "average" people can thrive under these conditions!

Comment #39 - Posted by: Rob Barrese at May 26, 2011 6:46 AM

Go Mikko! All the best to ya' this year!

Comment #40 - Posted by: Brian at May 26, 2011 6:58 AM

RE to Steve #36:

Have you thought about writing an article about your box for the base paper? I'd bet senior leaders would be interested in hearing about a no-injury high-results fitness program taking place within their fence line.

Comment #41 - Posted by: J.T. at May 26, 2011 7:07 AM

the ONLY rational argument against crossfit at the military level is the amount of resources (as in good, knowledgable coaches) needed to implement the program safely and effectively. To remedy this would take unbelievable time and money...but worth it

Comment #42 - Posted by: kyle at May 26, 2011 7:39 AM

This is a great article from CHAMP/ACSM. As someone with a b.s. in kinesiology who is also a L1 Crossfit trainer (own a gym and primarily use Crossfit method with clients) this brings up some concerns that I have with some of the Crossfit trainers I have met. A weekend seminar with an easy test at the end does not make someone capable of safely working with clients. Although the information given at the L1 is great, there is a lot more needed before doing this as a career! The same problem has been around in the fitness industry forever, it's too easy to become a trainer without enough knowledge and education to do it safely and effectively.

Comment #43 - Posted by: K. D. at May 26, 2011 8:14 AM

"performing a high number of exercise repetitions without adequate rest intervals between sets fails to adhere to appropriate and safe training guidelines."

Because all situations in life allow for adequate rest intervals I assume. Sounds more like they are trying to remain relevant in the fitness world and less concerned with actual fitness. However it is understandable because probably everyone that does CrossFit came from another style of training, the difference is we all (Crossfitters) can easily admit the old way was close to being a waste of time.

Comment #44 - Posted by: dan colson at May 26, 2011 8:25 AM

Ok seriously why does most people here seemed not to understand the point in the ACSM letter. And it's not because they did make mistakes like grouping P90x and crossfit and stuff like that in the same box that they can't express the view they had.

#31 good job btw i think youre the one who understands it the most so far

ACSM is there to protect individuals and professionnals towards injuries related to mediocre trainers and law suits for professionnals... So they give safe guidelines that represent low risks of injuries so that everyone is happy.

And also sorry to announce you but having completed a lvl 1 crossfit certification doesn't give you an appropriate qualification to call yourself a professionnal. I have a BSc and MSc in Kinesiology and I have done the crossfit cert in 08 and yes it was very interesting and also gives great advices and the basics for the starters. However, to my opinion, it doesn't give you the ability to help your diabetic friend next to you, cause some people doing crossfit may be diabetic ( I know of at least 2 in the box where I go, oh and guess what, those people often end in the hypoglycaemic or hyperglycaemic zone where they need to take breaks and take care of that situation). Also you can ask yourself other questions such has: how many dynamic/explosive reps for the shoulder have i done this week? Well doing 300-400 reps of these kind of movement do finish by causing injuries and some box don't have the proper programmation that might lead to these injuries. So basically the point in the ACSM is that people actually running a crossfit box should have proper education and should be able to consider and scale workouts not only depending on the strenght and initial fitness of the individual but also considering actual conditions/injuries, just like they said concerning the medical clearance.

Before bashing their letter, you should also remind yourself that they are not against the training in itself and they are also aware of the benefits linked to this training and that all they want is safer gym environments so that people can keep getting benefits from these kind of training.

so, sorry if you have felt insulted by the comment, i was not looking to insult anyone and thx for letting me give my opinion and feel free to answer, i'm just looking to discuss over that paper...

PS Sorry for any english related mistakes i might have made in the comment, as it is not my first language

PPS #36 did you know that all energetic pathways actually work what ever the intensity is? the only difference is the importance they occupy to provide the energy... so you WILL be using glycolysis even if you are running at a 50%intensity, you don't necessarily need to go at 95%... And you wouldn't give a 95% intensity to a beginner, so that's where you gotta scale when they call for safe intensity...

Comment #45 - Posted by: MH at May 26, 2011 8:31 AM

Not a frequent poster, but gotta vent on this topic. As a Senior enlisted Marine, I've seen alot of this crap before. There is one thing that has gone unsaid in this forum so far that needs to be recognized and adressed. Crossfit, Mil Athlete, SealFit, Gym Jones and to a lesser extent P90X and "INSANITY" take people out of the base gyms and make MWR (Morale, Welfare and Recreation) lose money. Units are buying a bunch of kettlebells, some medballs and Barbells, constructing what boils down to there own "Garage Gyms" and training guys in Functional Fitness. There are less meatheads and fat kids on the treadmills and hammer strenght Machines that they have invested alot of money in and they hate it, they dont understand it and they try to cut it off at every turn. The local MWR on my base filed a complaint against our military affiliate a few years back, and it boiled down to us taking business from them. Thats really what alot of this is in my humble opinion. The Fat 20 something lady that works at the fitness center that try to teach our Marines how to lose weight and get in shape are much more dangerous than a battle hardened Sergeant who may not have a certification of any kind, making his Marines lift heavy stuff and move as fast as they can for as long as they can.
Last year they opened the HIT (High INtensity Training) gym on base. The "Trainers" there have no idea about any sort of functional training, but try and take a group in there and coach them a bit and you are ran out with the old "only our qualified trainiers our authorized to coach".
GRRRRRRR. Rant Complete!

Comment #46 - Posted by: Ryan at May 26, 2011 9:10 AM

Interesting that I find this article on the CrossFit website, but have not seen it posted anywhere on my base or even sent out electronically. I have been a Marine for 21 years and have been doing CrossFit for a couple of years. The military is trying to incorporate "functional fitness" into their workout programs and facilities, but there really isn't any monitoring being performed unless you specifically ask someone to do it. One of my workout partners and I attended Level I training and monitor each other and those that work out with us. I have been injured during CrossFit workouts, but that was due to improper warm up, stretching and hydration. And of course there were times that I thought that I could do more than what my body would allow me to do.
The current training program for military members is not sufficient for wartime or peacetime fitness. A majority of units feel that doing a 4 mile run every once in awhile will suffice. The chow halls are allowing personnel to "all you can eat" buffets. The health and readiness of the military is on a decline and personnel should regulate themselves. Body composition programs do not work unless there is strict monitoring and a desire to fix yourself.
The article does shed some light on the hazards of starting out and doing px'd WODs. Scaling is necessary. Too bad my base won't allow CrossFit.

Comment #47 - Posted by: Trent at May 26, 2011 9:20 AM

I love how they rename it to ECP's and they act like they accomplished something.

And we're paying their salaries.

Comment #48 - Posted by: Brian S m/23/5'11"/175 at May 26, 2011 9:20 AM


Comment #49 - Posted by: danlau at May 26, 2011 9:24 AM

#43 I couldn't agree more!

Comment #50 - Posted by: MH at May 26, 2011 9:31 AM

In reading this letter, you need to read between the lines and take the statements objectively, and not focus on semantics. The article was published by an author nieve to the scope of CrossFit, and the semantic arguments are null.

With respect to our group, I believe most people don't understand the problem some military branches are having with "ECP" programing. For years military leadership (until this article posted) has been dealing with how to safely and fairly manage "ECP". The reason it's taken so long in this recognition is that this resposibility encompasses input from; large group safety, training, funding, current jobs, current fitness programs, equipment, and so on, and so on. Objectively looking outside in, I believe Department of Defense (federal government) cannot suddenly disenfranchise a number of health promotion programs alreay established in the military. It's going to take some time.

However, this is a great step in the right direction, they are getting the picture finally. I believe the work Coach Glassman has done so far and is going to do will have an immeasurable impact in the direction of military fitness once data is published. I think the change will have to be accepted by the U.S. Health Organization first before the military will follow.

Hope this helps.

E6 Navy, 15.5 yrs, Medical Rep, Unit Fitness Leader

Comment #51 - Posted by: Ryan at May 26, 2011 10:34 AM

Several of you have brought up great points about having the right instructors / trainers to run the "ECPs." As a person who runs a box on a military base, I completely agree. I'll even agree to the point where it would be nice to have a person with a medical or personal trainer background as the CrossFit trainer. With that being said, there is currently no support for that from the Morale, Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) or Marine Corps Community Services (MCCS) personnel. They see CrossFit and other programs that don't comply to the "same ole" training routines as a threat to them and their current trainers. At my base, I have gotten a ton of questions about CrossFit from both the military members stationed here and the civilians that work on the base. I even get questions from the trainers employed by MCCS. Wouldn't it be nice if these same trainers (the ones who are at the gym all day and can field questions about CrossFit - a program they admittedly know very little about) were funded to go to a Level 1 cert to at least receive the basic knowledge about the program so they could speak intelligently about it when queried? This almost happened where I'm at, but the funding got pulled at the last minute by MCCS. This is the place where I think we as a military community are missing opportunities to educate our members regarding scaling and how not to get hurt when doing CrossFit or another program. This is the place where we could implement the mechanics, consistency, intensity model. This is the place where we are missing the mark.

Comment #52 - Posted by: C.L. at May 26, 2011 10:35 AM

This is long and I apologize.

I'm a Command Fitness Leader in the Navy. I've been doing that for 6 years. I attended the USN NOFFS intstructor course at Athletics Performance in Pensacola FL with the heads of the Navy Physical Readiness Program while it was in its test phase. I have several points to make.

AJ#5 Irt NOFFS when I asked the officer in charge of the Big Navy Physical Readiness Program if this was an actual test or a done deal to be implemented, she (a dietician by the way who is not in shape at all) replied it was a test. I asked her what other programs the Navy was looking at iot compare results and got a blank look and no answer. When I pressed her she replied that we were NOT doing CrossFit. (I never brought up CrossFit by the way. I never do when in official discussion of the Navy's physical readiness I just talk about the principles) NOFFS is better then the old pushup, situp, and run all day routine but extremely hard to implement and you would need rubber bands for everybody so logistically its worse then CrossFit and the workouts themselves are mediocre at best and boring its the same thing over and over and will never stick (I am a fan of the pillar and movement preps though and do those before my WOD). Bottom line the military as a whole is more concerned with injury prevention then atual fitness ignoring the fact that a real fitness program will help to reduce injury. While there is an inherent risk with any PT program no one, in the Navy at least, has done a study side by side of any two programs over a period of time to measure increased fitness vs injury.
The last three years at Chief's Induction I watched an average of at least 2 out of 10 people every year get injured due to repetative use doing push ups sit ups and 5 mile formation runs at a slow pace.. The second year and this year I have tried to convice the majority (without invoking the name CrossFit) that sprint and squat intervals and other "out of the box" pt routines were better for increased fitness and reduced injury. Using the fact that I never do long runs and out ran everybody on last years 10 mile endurance run and have never had any injuries even after going through Basic Airborne at 31 as an example and was met with resistance. A lot of people just don't want to do the hard work and a lot of people are set in their ways. It will take time for that to die out but advocates of HIT w/in the military need to be pushing it by keeping records and showing proof up and down your chain of command.

#14 Brian unfortunaly their is a problem with physical fitness in the military. That is being addressed (finally) but at a slow pace.

#31 KMC after 14 years in the military I can tell you that after that article very few Commanding Officer will take the risk of endorsing any HIT not specifically endorsed by the Navy. Which means none. I have been at one command where I've seen the command spend the money and time to get people trained on Olympic Lifts and a CrossFit L1 cert iot come back and train the command and run a real PT program. So while the article does point out highlites to HIT it also says "increase the rest time between sets" that one remark will ensure that COs will focus more on rest time then performance negating any high intensity and scaling the workout to a standard 3 sets of 12 workout.

#36 You should collect your data get testimonials and send it out the various military times magazines and throughout DOD.

Last most military are type A people and do not like to scale back which does lead to injury but what is not being said is that its not just HIT Command endorsed sports and traditional weightlifters have a higher injury rate.

Comment #53 - Posted by: HLCIV at May 26, 2011 11:07 AM

Some of you guys missed the boat on the article. It's not negative.

There recommendations are pretty much like any newbie to a crossfit box. You usually under go an intro/assessment at an affiliate before you can hit a WOD right?

Same here.

Comment #54 - Posted by: Crossfit Chris at May 26, 2011 12:01 PM

#52 you have an interesting point of view and agree with you and most of all good luck with the funding.

However, I think the example you just mentionned with the trainers shows little "professionnalism" if I can say from their part, considering the need for functionnal training in the military and those kind of jobs. I think it should be for the trainers to try and go attend a certification on their own to learn new methods and get better at their job and after try to get reimbursed for the certification they attended, if they didn't have the funding for it, since it's in their best interest to keep their job and get better at it. After all, for them to be better, they already need to attend continuous formations. And you can't always have everything paid by someone else to learn new things...

Comment #55 - Posted by: MH at May 26, 2011 12:13 PM

To summarize the CrossFit community, movement, and program into a sentence or two is ignorant.

It's unfortunate that I read a combination of politics, arrogance, and ignorance in this letter. It could be seen as a grudging movement towards a middle ground for detractors considering CrossFit's international appeal. Although the authors still wants to marginalize the CrossFit movement by lumping it in with fitness fads and designating it as an "ECP".

Also, the "recommendations" could be truncated to read what CrossFit already espouses for any fitness program: "Demonstrate Mechanics and consistency before intensity", "provide competent instruction", and "use common sense".

Comment #56 - Posted by: Paul at May 26, 2011 1:44 PM

To summarize the CrossFit community, movement, and program into a sentence or two is ignorant.

It's unfortunate that I read a combination of politics, arrogance, and ignorance in this letter. It could be seen as a grudging movement towards a middle ground for detractors considering CrossFit's international appeal. Although the authors still wants to marginalize the CrossFit movement by lumping it in with fitness fads and designating it as an "ECP".

Also, the "recommendations" could be truncated to read what CrossFit already espouses for any fitness program: "Demonstrate Mechanics and consistency before intensity", "provide competent instruction", and "use common sense".

Comment #57 - Posted by: Paul at May 26, 2011 1:44 PM


There are plenty of CF WODs you can do on off days if you arent following the website strictly, or make up your own, or lift that day etc. Or work a week behine the website and then you will always have something to do.

Comment #58 - Posted by: Jim at May 26, 2011 2:57 PM

"not sufficiently inclusive of all conditioning and training needs."

"without adequate rest intervals"

"fails to adhere to appropriate and safe training guidelines"


Is it me, or do some folk just not get it?

And for recommendations: straight out of the CF Level I Manual.


Comment #59 - Posted by: james.patrick [M/49/66"/135] at May 26, 2011 3:10 PM

Easy Fix. Free level 1 Cert's for all active duty. Train the trainer if you will. We want Crossfit on our bases? Let's educate them through certification. Lets say first 20 Active duty members to register for a cert are free? Before you know it you will have boxes everywhere on base!

Comment #60 - Posted by: USMC0369 at May 26, 2011 3:11 PM

Thanks for great comments. CrossFit SWFFT will continue to explore similar DOD fitness projects while dissecting the USN NOFFS.

Comment #61 - Posted by: AJ at May 26, 2011 3:39 PM

I immediately read the article and knew what it was going to impart before reading word one. I am an active duty Marine and have been Xfitting since 2007. No significant injury other than the obligatory ripped callous or pulled muscle. They tell you to respect this program/methodology before you even get started. If you dont check your ego at the are done. I use this for PTing (physical training) my Marines and they are always better for it. This is nothing more than beurocratic BS. Ignorance kills at many levels. The military has changed in many ways and not for the better in a lot of ways. In short open your mind, educate yourself and respect the potentcy of this system. The Marines are for the most part all about XFit and I feel they should send and pay for Marines to get certified and impart this program. Broad spectrum fitness utilizing functional brainer.

Comment #62 - Posted by: Hoplite at May 26, 2011 3:47 PM

mikko salo = the transporter

Comment #63 - Posted by: chris r at May 26, 2011 5:09 PM

It seemed to the article was primarily calling for appropriate scaling scientific analysis to determine the legitimacy of an ECP. Both points are valuable. We all know scaling is necessary and what harm could come from the military verifying the legitimacy of such a program?

Comment #64 - Posted by: markb at May 26, 2011 5:17 PM

Did 5/21 mile-run WOD, subbed 2000m row -- time over there in 5/21 comments.

Comment #65 - Posted by: Matt H - 49m - 5'11" - 185bwt at May 26, 2011 5:20 PM

For those defending the ACSM article, you're missing the point. Look up the backgrounds and resumes of the authors. Neal Baumgartner, for instance, designed a PT test for the Air Force that gives a 1.5 mile run 60% of the total points available. These are professionals with a vested interest in eliminating functional, effective fitness from the military.

Comment #66 - Posted by: Gyrene at May 26, 2011 5:35 PM

Since it was a rest day on the main site, but I was still scheduled for a workout I assembled the following workout. I called it "Elise" after my daughter:

Three rounds for Time:
5 pull ups
5 walking lunges (w/dumbbells)
5 squats (w/ dumbbells)
25 Double unders
5 burpees

Use twice the weight in dumbells for each successive round. (i.e., 20,40,80#)

Obviously, there are infinite variations on this workout, here are a few I thought of:
+Do 5, 10, and then 15 reps for each movement in each sucessive round. (keeping 25 double unders)
+Do five rounds for time
+Do the WOD with a weight vest on.

Comment #67 - Posted by: csb1 at May 27, 2011 5:05 AM

to Keith/#7, get a bicycle innertube that is beyond repair. cut a couple of segments about 4" long and cut them up the center (on the short side). they make great grips yet don't prevent the necessary calluses. Plus you get to repurpose the tube, and since it makes about 8 pairs, you can give them to your CF friends!


Comment #68 - Posted by: Tine Neff at May 27, 2011 12:16 PM

whoops, just posted results on yesterday's board!

Comment #69 - Posted by: Tine Neff at May 27, 2011 12:17 PM

Is Mikko single? wow.

Comment #70 - Posted by: Tine Neff at May 27, 2011 12:36 PM

The ACSM was instrumental in developing much of the curriculum of the U.S. Army Soldier Fitness Academy "Master Fitness Trainer Course" back in the early 80's. I was a M.F.T. from 1985 to 1992.

It was a huge and necessary shift in the Army's understanding of fitness, which was not initially well-received by commanders who championed traditional conditioning drills (squat-bender, high jumper, knee bender, in cadence. . .exercise!!!). This summary is evidence of yet, another shift.

It's important to understand that the DoD and (GloboGym)Fitness Industry have a cozy relationship and CrossFit threatens it through it's sheer ability to appeal to warfighters and stamp-out GloboGym culture.

Globo Gym culture was first installed as an adjunct to PT Programs. Now, it's a "Sacred Cow" within the Defense Budget, due to phenominal equpiment sales. It's ability to take taxpayer dollars to infuse the economies of some heavyweight congressional districts is also a political winner.

Comment #71 - Posted by: GP at May 28, 2011 1:54 PM

The guy in the pic has a beard because he is most likely an operator on an ODA. You did notice that the caption under the pics said Afghanistan, right? And if you have ever worn a chest rig or plates, shaving your pits prevents a lot of chafing, and deodorant works a lot better if you don't have "wookie in a headlock" hairy pits. Of course, this is just $0.02 from someone who knows.

Comment #72 - Posted by: R.J. at May 29, 2011 4:31 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?