Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [bmcmaster11] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
When I signed up, there was no doubt in my mind that I would complete. I think based on my background, as you suggest, quitting is not really an option. In fact, this was probably to my detriment, as I pushed through a serious injury that should have ended my day. Instead I chose to walk the last 15 miles with an ankle the size of a softball. Not my best decision, but due to hubris there was no way I was coming home with a DNF.

Crossfit gave me a great platform to start my sport specific training. It molded me from soft to rock hard in a little over a year, and helped me to do all the things crossfit touts as so great: run faster, jump higher, lift heavier, less body fat, tough attitude etc. Did I complete the race because I can squat? Nope, but it gave me a very fit starting point for my training.

I swam, biked and ran a lot. I wrote most of my workouts based on the CFE model, but generally I was looking at 4 hours of crossfit and 8-12 of sport specific training a week. Sure, this may be on the low side of an Ironman program, but I think any reasonably fit individual would be fine with that amount of time.

Again, and I have researched this heavily, I really think there are more similarities than people think to other training programs. This is partly because CFE choses to market a certain way, as a rogue counter-culture. That is their prerogative and it has been effective for them. And it tends to polarize people.

They believe that you can push your overall performance curve to the right by training heavily in the anaerobic and lactate zones. I think anyone on this forum would probably agree that this is A way to train. They cut out active recovery and long slow distance. A lot of other plans are doing much of the same. Like I mentioned, I am now using a power based plan straight from the book, and it sure doesn't feel much different. The only real difference I see is the ability to quantify when to stop intervals as opposed to just pushing through.

To answer your question, yes, I think my background has a lot to do with why this was effective for me. I like tough workouts, and I couldnt imagine riding around in zone 1 all day. Did it deliver optimum performance for my genetic potential based on hours trained? Who the hell knows. I felt prepared. I'll call that successful.
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [Tri Poseur] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tri Poseur wrote:
Ryan, thanks for the info. The programmatic portion is interesting with the interval/stamina division. As a rough guide, what would be the longest stamina s/b/r be if training for a half or full im. Would you program similar to smugfit (above) or would the stamina workouts include longer sessions?

I can really see using this for short course and still think I could pull of better overall fitness and my same (if not a little faster) half using this protocol, but I am very concerned about recovery/injury/burnout using CFE. What have your seen with longer course athletes?

Thanks for the insight.

Again, I am not advocating never going longer in training. I think training long has its place, to test pacing and nutrition protocols. I was satisfied with both fronts so I didn't go longer. I also completed a 1/2 earlier in the season, and I have run a few long races before (though that was my first marathon). I felt satisfied that I knew what it felt like to run and bike for long periods of time. It hurts. No need to do it every weekend to remind myself.
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [smugfit] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This is a good thread. Usually when someone brings up CrossFit and/or CrossFit Endurance, folks react negatively. Seems like with the article in Triathlete Magazine, and some of the trends in training, minds are open to the theory behind CFE. Personally, I've been a CF'er for nearly 5 years, and a "triathlete" for 2 seasons. CrossFit is my primary focus, but CrossFit Endurance has allowed me to be a part of a sport and do well (relatively speaking) at it, without the massive training volume usually called for with traditional LSD training. There are good points on both sides of the table, like always, but there is no doubt the CF/CFE works.

If there's anyone in the SF Bay Area (East Bay) who is interested in CrossFit Endurance, feel free to contact me. I'm a trainer at a local CF gym and we've started an endurance team (based on CFE principles).

Hope everyone's off-season was good, looking forward to racing in 2011!!!
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [smugfit] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Got it. I missed the 8-12 hours of sport specific training a week and I agree (and hope) that is enough.

Thanks and once again - thanks for serving.

Barry
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [Tri Poseur] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If I may ask a question - why are you spending so much time on a product or service that is so shrouded in mystery?

A product or service should not require you to climb a mountain and decipher what some oracle's incoherent ramblings mean. They should clearly state their philosophy, methodology, and provide clear evidence of specific results.

There is a furniture/appliance warehouse that this reminds me of: they promise all these amazing discounts and people on tv tell you how much money they saved. However, you have to be a member to go the store, or be invited. An invitation comes with a sales pitch, and you have to decide on the spot whether or not to join.

Even if it seems like a good deal on the surface, why would you do business with a person or company that shady?

If you go on Training Peaks, you can preview any of the packaged training programs, and even email the author. In many cases you can read their books to discover their principles.

To put all this another way, would you put up with all this from a person instead of a program?
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [StavrosJK] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
StavrosJK wrote:
There are good points on both sides of the table, like always, but there is no doubt the CF/CFE works

I think you are probably right. It does work. But I think the main issue is 'compared to what'. I was told by a CF'er the other day that it was better than my routine. Problem is he did not know what my routine was.

Don't get me wrong, anything encouraging a couch potato into getting off his ass. Or anything that makes someone physically better than they are must be a good thing. But these cross training principles are not that new. Various armed forces and other sports have used similar principles before. They just have not been 'packaged' quite as nicely as McCrossFit. They also have not been used by the best triathletes to get the fastest times .... even though their coaches must be well aware of them.

Maybe the key is in the 'Train Less'. Who does that appeal to? Those who don't want to train as much. In which case it may work for those people. They will get more out of doing less time at CF than they would out of less time at a slow endurance pace out in the field. Plus the peer pressure may be motivational to them. But are they at an advantage over those of us who love the training and have the time? The coaches of the words best triathletes would argue otherwise I think.

https://www.pbandjcoaching.com
https://www.thisbigroadtrip.com
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [AthletesOnTrack] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
AthletesOnTrack wrote:
If I may ask a question - why are you spending so much time on a product or service that is so shrouded in mystery?

I don't think there is anything shrouded in mystery...the CrossFit.com website is free, as is the CrossFit Endurance site. You can go on either at any time, check the daily workout, and there are links that explain the movements, etc. Seems like about as 'open source' as could be. Any mystery associated would be the lack of exposure and newness of the program. Yes the concepts and ideas have been around for awhile, but CF and CFE are fairly new.

Jaymz wrote:
Maybe the key is in the 'Train Less'. Who does that appeal to? Those who don't want to train as much. In which case it may work for those people. They will get more out of doing less time at CF than they would out of less time at a slow endurance pace out in the field. Plus the peer pressure may be motivational to them. But are they at an advantage over those of us who love the training and have the time? The coaches of the words best triathletes would argue otherwise I think.

Great point, and I think this addresses CFE very well. The majority of triathletes (me included) are not in the top 5% of the field albeit for whatever reason (talent, time, training, or combination of all). So, maybe there are folks who do not need the incredibly high training volume of traditional LSD training to have a PB at a race? Doesn't mean they want to train less, maybe just means don't need to train more.
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [Jaymz] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Total Immersion --> PowerCranks --> Crossfit --> _________?

The ultimate question is which debatable training philosophy are we going to argue about next?


If Ironman changes the distances to .05mi / 3mi / .25mi and requires triathletes to swing kettle bells in transition then I will consider Crossfit. Until then I'll stay with SBR of high-volume and variable intensity with 'conventional' core work every other day (which is what I'm doing now). CF's founder could issue a statement that triathletes are wrong in thinking 2+2=4, and that 4 is best achieved by adding 3 and -12, but that doesn't mean we should debate it endlessly. He'd just be wrong.

Core workout is an extremely important part of triathlon training. CF is one way to accomplish that. Though one would be mistaken in replacing SBR training with it (if that's what CFE is doing), those that do seem to be happy with it and are okay with their performances. Whatever gets people training. A Crossfitter may have a 13 hour Ironman, but they also probably don't have the body of a pre-pubescent Asian girl, so to each their own. . .

<No offense intended to anyone by my post. I've just been following the threads and finally decided to post. For those who are passionate about this issue, best not to take me seriously. Even though I'm being serious.>

-------
http://www.y-rocket.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [Jaymz] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I agree, CFE compared to what kind of SBR workouts. The original article was pretty vague on what people were doing before CF changed their lives. As I read it I was unimpressed by the 1 mile hard 1 mile easy sort of thing. If all I was doing was long slow training, then yes CF could be better. And yes adding a bit of strength work is good. But I don't see how it can be good to replace a real SBR program (i.e one that includes hard work, like a track session or masters swim or hard bike intervals) with lots of CF.

Brian
“Eat and Drink, spin the legs and you’re going to effin push (today).” A Howe
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [Jaymz] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That is what happens to me. Someone who does CF tell me that it will make me better at triathlon and I can train less. They know absolutely zero about my workouts except that I do train a lot compared to most people. Therefore, because some people can be mediocre on less training I should adopt it? No.

If CF/CFE works for you and makes you feel good (or that you've forged elite fitness) about yourself and/or better than people like me, good for you.

I'd be interested in seeing an entire CFE season training plan laid out. Saying that the WOD is published does not make it 100% open. If CFE is so great, it should contribute a FREE training plan over on beginnertriathlete.com and let the people decide what they want to do.

To me, CF/CFE is so much about building brand and brand loyalty and profitability of the special gyms and trainers. Not so much different than other fitness concepts. Convincing the masses to sell it to others for free is a brilliant marketing strategy.

I'll stick with my double top secret training.
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [TriBri00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TriBri00 wrote:
I agree, CFE compared to what kind of SBR workouts. The original article was pretty vague on what people were doing before CF changed their lives. As I read it I was unimpressed by the 1 mile hard 1 mile easy sort of thing. If all I was doing was long slow training, then yes CF could be better. And yes adding a bit of strength work is good. But I don't see how it can be good to replace a real SBR program (i.e one that includes hard work, like a track session or masters swim or hard bike intervals) with lots of CF.

CFE does not replace SBR with CF. It supplements one with the other. 6 hard sessions of Real SBR Work each week, seems thats what many triathletes do already.
.
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [fefe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If you are interested in seeing a free CFE training plan go to www.crossfitendurance .com and collect workouts from the WOD archives. Everything is there. Everything is free. CFE is not a cookie cutter download plan. The program is varied and adapts to what works and what doesn't. New workouts are posted daily. Part of the fun of training in CF and CFE is not knowing what the workout will be tomorrow. CFE is just not a program like you are used to using in that respect.

Ryan Hunt
Owner - CrossFit Monrovia
http://www.crossfitmonrovia.com
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [smugfit] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
my point was that when I train I aim to hit different goals in different workouts through the year. Some days I'll work on the the short hard stuff be it track running, bike sprints, or hill repeats. Other days may be geared towards LT work with 20-30 min intervals. I do very little "just go out for a long day " run or ride. If all I did was long steady work, then any added intensity work would be beneficial. In fact, perhaps a CFe type of only hard 20-30 min work would be better then ONLY long steady SBR. but is CFE better than a well designed SBR plan?

Brian
“Eat and Drink, spin the legs and you’re going to effin push (today).” A Howe
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [TriBri00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TriBri00 wrote:
In fact, perhaps a CFe type of only hard 20-30 min work would be better then ONLY long steady SBR. but is CFE better than a well designed SBR plan?

I still think you misunderstand the program. Where is this 20-30 min limit? One of my favorite CFE workouts is 3x5k repeats (run.) They program from 200m repeats up through 13.1 mile TTs.

I have never said it was better than any other "well-desgined" program. It's the same as what you are describing. Hill repeats, track work, longer intervals, tempo and TT rides or runs. I am always comparing my TT times from week to week, and from one point in the season or another. Measured and repeatable. Like you say, there is no workout with no point. Does anyone still train that way?

I also do longer rides and runs to test nutrition and pacing, say when I am building for a big race. Then I make sure to program proper recovery appropriate to the distance.

I just don't understand how this differs so much from what you are doing? I just do 4 extra crossfit workouts per week. If I called it "core work" would that make everyone calm down?
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [smugfit] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm calm. I'll wander back over to the CFE site again and look further. The w/u's I'd seen on the web and in the article were all pretty short (1 hour). I have an open mind and hit the gym pretty regularly between october and march.

Brian
“Eat and Drink, spin the legs and you’re going to effin push (today).” A Howe
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [TriBri00] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TriBri00 wrote:
I'm calm. I'll wander back over to the CFE site again and look further. The w/u's I'd seen on the web and in the article were all pretty short (1 hour). I have an open mind and hit the gym pretty regularly between october and march.

Calmer than you are, Dude.
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [Tri Poseur] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I follow a weekly cycle like what is described in the article (CF 4 days, CFE 6 days-2 days per sport, 1 Rest day). A 30k TT is the longest distance I have seen but it certainly doesn’t have to be the longest. While preparing for 2010 IMAZ I did 3-5 longer rides to test and refine my fuel, hydration, and salt plans. I had not ridden a 100miles in a few years and did not want figure out on race day I didn’t have enough fuel. Once I was confident in my fuel, hydration, and salt plan I went back to the CFE workouts. Regardless of your training plan its OK to tweak it to meet your concerns. My wife and I are training for St George. She is deathly afraid of the swim and she is an accomplished runner so we swapped a run day for an extra swim day.

It takes some time to get used to going out six days a week and performing max effort workouts. This adjustment period may require extra rest days. I haven’t met anyone yet that hasn’t gone through a period where they seem perpetually sore and performing poorly. Give yourself time for your body to adjust. Once you get used to it, recovery becomes a function of nutrition, hydration, age, post workout maintenance (ice, SMR, stretching, etc.), and sleep.

Performing well is the simplest cure for burnout. If you are committed to recovery you can perform day in and day out.

As for injury, I have found the people who are as committed to recovery as they are to their workouts don’t get injured.

Did i mention recovery is important. haha.



--

Ryan Hunt
Owner - CrossFit Monrovia
http://www.crossfitmonrovia.com
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [Pucknryan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sure sounds like "Crossfit" workout is helping these athletes

http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/...players-illness.html

Seriously, to what benefit is performing 100 squats or 100 bench presses to an athlete, let alone an endurance athlete?
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [eg159] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
First, “Crossfit” isn’t mentioned anywhere in the article. A boatload of squats and bench press does not make it a crossfit workout. Be fair.

Second, crappy programming and coaching can make any training methodology look bad. Blame the strength and conditioning coach for causing the injuries to those athletes not the training methodology.

To an endurance athlete, 100 un-weighted, full depth, squats are good for flexibility, balance, coordination, leg/hip strength and speed. Everyone should be doing squats. 100 bench press are not as useful.

-

Ryan Hunt
Owner - CrossFit Monrovia
http://www.crossfitmonrovia.com
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [eg159] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
eg159 wrote:
Sure sounds like "Crossfit" workout is helping these athletes

http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/...players-illness.html

Seriously, to what benefit is performing 100 squats or 100 bench presses to an athlete, let alone an endurance athlete?

Did you SERIOUSLY just ask why squats and/or bench press would benefit an athlete (a collegiate football player at that!). Maybe it's time to get off the bike and take a look around. For the record, the article never mentioned CF and only talked about squats and sled drags (sounds like the football conditioning I did as a kid).

Who's most susceptible to Rhabdo? I wonder....
http://scholar.google.com/...is=1&oi=scholart
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [StavrosJK] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
No, he seriously asked what the benefit of performing 100 Bench Presses and 100 Squats was and the answer is none. The same benefit of performing 30 snatches for time. Unless the goal is Crossfit's "Metabolic Conditioning", then there is no benefit. But I'm sure Crossfit HQ will say they have the science to prove otherwise, and then in the same breath claim that peer review is pointless (which they have done). And FYI, 100 Bodyweight Squats was a Crossfit workout previously.
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [rareid] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rareid wrote:
No, he seriously asked what the benefit of performing 100 Bench Presses and 100 Squats was and the answer is none. The same benefit of performing 30 snatches for time. Unless the goal is Crossfit's "Metabolic Conditioning", then there is no benefit. But I'm sure Crossfit HQ will say they have the science to prove otherwise, and then in the same breath claim that peer review is pointless (which they have done). And FYI, 100 Bodyweight Squats was a Crossfit workout previously.

Judging by your past posts...you're not a fan of strength training. There's no arguing or evidence that will change your mind, but as far as benefits squats and presses? Do you have a better way for the football players to train? Maybe countless junk hours on the bike? or road running miles until there's no cartilage in your knees? or swim until your shoulder falls off?

As far as your assessment of CF HQ, you've read up a bit. Yes they defend what they believe is a great path to fitness, who doesn't?
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [StavrosJK] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You are 100% correct with your sarcasm , for a football player, countless junk hours on the bike, running road miles until there is no cartilage in your knees and swim until your shoulder falls off is as pointless as a triathlete performing CrossFIT..... it is call sport specific training for a reason!!!

I do agree that strength training for triathletes can be and is beneficial, WHEN it is functional and specifically designed to improve performance.





Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [eg159] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
eg159 wrote:

I do agree that strength training for triathletes can be and is beneficial, WHEN it is functional and specifically designed to improve performance.

This is the crux of our disagreement then...whether or not it can improve performance.
Quote Reply
Re: Crossfit/Crossfit Endurance- Triathlete article = fishy? [Pucknryan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Pucknryan wrote:
To an endurance athlete, 100 un-weighted, full depth, squats are good for flexibility, balance, coordination, leg/hip strength and speed. Everyone should be doing squats. 100 bench press are not as useful.
Says you, a blind-leading-the-blind instructor with one Ironman under your belt in 13:49. Keep up those squats and maybe you can crack 13:30 in your next one.
Quote Reply

Prev Next