Where did you get the term "cross fit endurance" (CFE) from? I can't find a reference to it on his website. So, I don't know why you included it in the thread title????
Except from his "about us" page:
"By prioritizing and emphasizing skill development over volume (quality over quantity) Power Speed Endurance incorporates the fundamental principles of movement to every sport. This exposes movement inefficiencies early on so you don’t have to learn technique the old school way through pain and repetition, which ultimately impacts your long-term performance and health. There is another path up the mountain.
With skill development prioritized we gradually increase intensity, establishing your ability to maintain skill under stress though improvements in strength, stability, speed, and power. Only once skill can be performed at higher intensity do we add volume. Volume must be earned by maintaining the skill under stress. We train for position. More is not better. Better is better. It all starts with mastering the fundamental skills; Position is King."
I don't know that the ST philosophy is exactly "at odds" with this verbiage. However, I think that the general opinion around here is that there are differing degrees of skill and technique required for each of SBR. The above citing almost exactly follows the swim video reviews around here and advise from "the fishes"...for exactly the reasons cited: swimming is technique driven.
Running a little less so, but dengerate movement patterns can certainly lead to injury. But, making quick significant changes to running form is likewise a recipe for injury.
But, biking almost zero tehnique (except perhaps for holding a good TT position).
Further, there is an interplay between fitness and technique that isn't isolatable. So, I think that reality is somewhat more subtle...than the false-dichotomy being presented.
Except from his "about us" page:
"By prioritizing and emphasizing skill development over volume (quality over quantity) Power Speed Endurance incorporates the fundamental principles of movement to every sport. This exposes movement inefficiencies early on so you don’t have to learn technique the old school way through pain and repetition, which ultimately impacts your long-term performance and health. There is another path up the mountain.
With skill development prioritized we gradually increase intensity, establishing your ability to maintain skill under stress though improvements in strength, stability, speed, and power. Only once skill can be performed at higher intensity do we add volume. Volume must be earned by maintaining the skill under stress. We train for position. More is not better. Better is better. It all starts with mastering the fundamental skills; Position is King."
I don't know that the ST philosophy is exactly "at odds" with this verbiage. However, I think that the general opinion around here is that there are differing degrees of skill and technique required for each of SBR. The above citing almost exactly follows the swim video reviews around here and advise from "the fishes"...for exactly the reasons cited: swimming is technique driven.
Running a little less so, but dengerate movement patterns can certainly lead to injury. But, making quick significant changes to running form is likewise a recipe for injury.
But, biking almost zero tehnique (except perhaps for holding a good TT position).
Further, there is an interplay between fitness and technique that isn't isolatable. So, I think that reality is somewhat more subtle...than the false-dichotomy being presented.
Last edited by:
Tom_hampton: Nov 8, 19 12:50