because you say “cross fit” instead of high intensity resistance exercise I immediately assume that you are the janitor in the human performance lab you claim to work at.
stop it, just stop. people were doing that shit long before Crossfit came along. Except back then, much like the “I’m an Ironman” idjits of today, they didn’t talk about it all the time they just lifted weights.
Crossfit ™ is a brand, not something to be researched. So, unless you are the PhD economist/business/marketing of your HPL, please stop.
BREAKING: crossfit coach praises crossfit in crossfit advertorial.
wow, fantastic topic which has never ever been debated here before.
It’s a funny circle…
CrossFit coaches who work in the gym each day and are exposed to the environment praise it
Outsiders who look from the outside in and have yet to actually be in a gym and experience it first hand bash it
More along the lines of: outsiders who actually read the exercise physiology literature know that training has to be specific, and that weights of all sorts, do not provide performance benefits (aside from very few very specific sets).
If you have an hour to spare, swim, bike or run. Don’t go do crossfit.
I am one of those outsiders you mention. I am also lucky enough to work in a human performance lab every day so I get to measure this stuff all the time. I don’t disagree with what you have said, but what you said is not cemented as the only option to provide performance benefits.
Little research has been done on CrossFit, but it’s starting to go out under the scope a bit. Maybe think study will open your mind a bit. One study is hard to make a strong case, but the people (Namely Carl Foster) involved with putting this study together give me full confidence in their results.