I don't understand what you are saying. You find your 1 rep max on week 1 then you retest on week 9 and see if you got stronger.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Cross Fit Gaf.. Why should I pay $200 a month for CrossFit?
- Thread starter Schattenjäger
- Start date
- Status
I don't understand what you are saying. You find your 1 rep max on week 1 then you retest on week 9 and see if you got stronger.
I'd disagree and it looks like they are doing it once every 9 weeks at most which is fine. I do it every 4 weeks and sometimes more.
I just don't think it's something to be scheduled into a workout routine.
All of them around the same age...
Rippetoe is pushing 60 yet he squats 400lb bellow parallel and deadlifts 500lb.
Tony Horton has chicken legs and could probably not squat 200lb bellow parallel.
It totally is. Ever heard of 5/3/1 or the many various other proven strength routines that require it?
mr stroke
Member
LOL
I'd rather do the Air Force pt in the morning (sleep in) then go lift heavy ass weights later.
That is most definitely true. Not that I have anything against them outside of competition but people should know.
Lol oh you chair force guys, trust me we envied you at FT Carson.I'd rather do the Air Force pt in the morning (sleep in) then go lift heavy ass weights later.
One day they made us run up the road to NORAD, and that's a steep ass hill. Plus we had armed guards in jeeps shadowing us the whole way up, makes you run faster lol.
Haha, when I was stationed in Panama, the Army was so salty they'd do their pt run by our houses every morning at 6am sounding off loud as hell.
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
Whoever wins, science loses.
There seem to be two common defences of Crossfit: it gets people exercising and there are good gyms/trainers. "It's better than nothing" isn't really a ringing endorsement, especially when doing nothing has a greatly reduced chance of injury. The second argument is more reasonable but isn't so much an endorsement of Crossfit as it is of gyms that pay to use the name, in which case the person making the argument seems to be emotionally driven to defend the name that the owner of their gym paid a fee to use, which doesn't strike me as the behaviour of a rational person (jk). There are many fine Crossfit gyms and many very intelligent coaches and trainers that run them, but Crossfit itself is indefensible: the programming is non-existent, the basis unscientific, the methods inefficient and dangerous and the dogma unhealthy.
He doesn't. Check the latest Fitness RX issue to see what his routine looks like. Plyometrics, medicine ball cardio, free weights, yoga, medicine ball push-ups and peg-board/rope exercises. Boom.
And you think the guy gives a shit about how much he can bench-press, squat or deadlift with the way he looks and the other things he's able to do? lol
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
Ya know all women should look like those fit competitors.
This is pathetic.
Relax tiger, I was joking.
I suppose you believe in Santa Claus
Due to the way Crossfit gyms work, they will always be fucking expensive.
Due to the way Crossfit works, it will always be over priced.
Due to who works at Crossfit HQ, giving them money is always a piss poor idea.
To avoid going crazy, I'm not going to go to deep into it, you can check my post history for more details, but giving a single cent to most XF boxes is a shit waste of money.
Unless you find a good box. If that's the case, go for it. But, you probably won't and a conventional gym works just fine.
Due to the way Crossfit works, it will always be over priced.
Due to who works at Crossfit HQ, giving them money is always a piss poor idea.
To avoid going crazy, I'm not going to go to deep into it, you can check my post history for more details, but giving a single cent to most XF boxes is a shit waste of money.
Unless you find a good box. If that's the case, go for it. But, you probably won't and a conventional gym works just fine.
About the implants. Definitely not joking about the PEDs.
How much does he squat?
8-10 elves
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
You seem to be very defensive of a home workout DVD. Have you considered that the people in this thread who say it's fine for certain goals but that it's basis is unscientific and that it's not particularly advanced or effective training might not be lying? You say "the other things he's able to do", which suggests to me that you buy into a myth of 'functional fitness/strength' (much like the one espoused by Crossfit). I'll just keep it short and say that if you do, you should consider doing more reading on human physiology and performance training before trying to debate the topic, especially with the zeal you're bringing to it.
perfectchaos007
Member
I'm thinking about trying "insanity". It's similar to cross fit in the sense that you are instructed to perform as many reps as possible of a certain exercise, but without gym equipment. X-fit sounds borderline dangerous and I hope it doesn't expand its demo to children and teens because they could mess up their growing joints for life if they aren't doing it properly.
Insanity focuses more on form and time intervals vs reps completed. I've done it a few times and it is intense but pretty fulfilling if you follow the program gradually and don't just jmp in to an advanced session.
BeautifulMemory
Member
how is functional fitness a myth? Eating healthier, developing stronger core, connecting muscles through balance and coordination, developing strength, and translating all that into athletic performance. That's what Tony is after, not necessarily becoming bigger and bench more weight
And I can't comment on the scientific basis because I lack background, but a lot of people have gotten fit, seeing improvements in their running, etc.
How is it...a myth?
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
Apologies if this gets a bit rambling as I'm quite ill. Fitness is the ability to perform a task. Strength is the ability to move weight through a range of motion. Attaching 'functional' as a qualifier to either term is borderline tautological. What is non-functional strength? Someone who can bench and curl a lot but can't squat their bodyweight? That's just someone who isn't strong, or whose strength is limited to certain movements. You can't serve two masters; things such as balance, proprioception and sport specific skills/endurance aren't best trained by taking moves designed to train other qualities (such as strength) and performing them in a disadvantageous way (such as squatting on a squishy ball).
You mention core strength and muscular co-ordination: you may be surprised to learn that these are qualities best trained with heavy compound lifts, not with circuits such as P90. The co-ordination and core strength required for a heavy bench, squat, deadlift, snatch etc... far exceed anything that training with bodyweight and resistance bands can give you. If you can do a lot of reps along with the DVD that's largely a function of muscular endurance, not strength. By the way, strength is to a large degree a skill developed by adaptation of the central nervous system; you don't have to get big and 'bulky' to be strong.
One of the biggest marketing coups of the guys behind P90 etc... was taking a routine that achieved primarily visual/aesthetic results and selling it as some next-level developer of athletic ability. That other guy earlier in the thread actually said that someone really good at P90 would do better than a pro-crossfitter at a bunch of fitness tasks. Crossfit, for all of its faults, actually requires significant strength at the higher levels. P90 etc.. do not.
They're ok programs that a lot of people enjoy but they're not the vanguard of a fitness revolution; they will improve a beginner's muscular endurance a lot and their strength some and the cardio stuff will kick a lot of people's arses (I did one of them a few years back and I've no doubt it would turn me into a sweaty sobbing heap today) but it's not going to make you anywhere near as strong, stable or explosive as barbell lifting can.
EDIT: As I suspected this is a pretty poorly written post. Read this article - I believe it's been posted earlier in this thread - it does a good job of explaining the basics of human performance. The short of it is, strength is the font from which most other athletic abilities flow: stability, power, muscular endurance etc...
Dr_Boris_Goltz
Banned
I recently bought P90X and the equipment needed (found most of it for free/cheap).
I'm getting ready to start it up soon... Is it easy to screw up the technique and hurt yourself?
This thread scared the shit out of me with all these gifs/videos of Crossfit training.
Edit: I should add I haven't started because I'm going through SSRI discontinuation syndrome, which I had NO IDEA SUCKED THIS MUCH.
I'm getting ready to start it up soon... Is it easy to screw up the technique and hurt yourself?
This thread scared the shit out of me with all these gifs/videos of Crossfit training.
Edit: I should add I haven't started because I'm going through SSRI discontinuation syndrome, which I had NO IDEA SUCKED THIS MUCH.
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
You're unlikely to hurt yourself with P90X because it doesn't use any heavy weights. Bodyweight exercises for time is much safer than barbell lifts for time like crossfit uses. The only worth watching out for is if any of the routines require high numbers of crunches, which will involve repeated flexion of the spine. Replace crunches with planks or ab wheel rollouts if you can, they won't stress your spine (if done correctly) and they train the abdominal muscles' main function: stability.
I went from a 425 lb deadlift to a 485 lb deadlift in 8 weeks doing 1x3's. 1 rep workouts have a purpose and they do work.
The biggest problem with 1 rep workout is that most people can't really do 1RM, they generally don't have the form to perform it safely and the confidence to push themselves that hard.
It's much easier for most people to get closer to 5RM (they're probably going to lift weight which 6RM or so, but that's 20% off, doing 1RM in a 2RM weight is 100% off).
That being said, 1RM can be used very effectively in most routines, and if you're training toward a goal the require 1RM lifting (like a powerlifting meet) I'd say it's almost mandatory to incorporate it in some capacity into your routine.
Edit: ^^^^^ LOLOLOLOLOL, is the entire point of this to get a close look at girls' asses?
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
entremet
Member
Yep. A lot of people are under the false assumption on how a natural physique should look.
P90X is great if you don't have access to (or don't want to go to) a gym, and you mainly just want to get into shape and strengthen up a bit. Part of the effectiveness is the routine aspect of the program and having Tony yelling at you. Ain't no way you're going to put on real muscle mass with P90X though. I feel bad for people who get the program and think if they stick with it long enough they'll end up looking like Tony.
Well no, for them there are other home workout DVDs also provided by BeachBody. Body Beast is the latest, it is supposed to pack on loads of muscle in a couple months using dumbbells and bodyweight. Also underdelivers relative to its marketing, but it'll get you stronger and add some muscle on.
BeautifulMemory
Member
No rambling at all, I appreciate you taking the time to write. I have not thought the way you just described it. I think we might be saying similar thing after all...I can see how "functional" fitness can be tautological, but (I am guessing) isn't that the problem for a lot of people who, for lack of better words, "don't know better"?
When I think of functional fitness I think of what you said, having strength all around and be explosive.
Now, about whether or not a P90Xer can do better or worse in comparison to someone who is doing barbell lifting, I can't say because I don't have personal experience to compare to (I have done only P90X and X2). It wouldn't surprise me to see if P90X sort of pales in comparison because it does lack that heavier weight aspect. But overall I think P90X and P90X2 is about teaching people a strong foundation and well-balanced workouts, rather than just wanting big arms. And I definitely would not sit here and say P90X is the vanguard of fitness revolution. I don't think even Tony Horton would say that. What he has excelled in is putting together the right program for people to work out at home properly and relatively injury-free. That I think speaks volume.
What I like about Tony Horton is he doesn't deny the aesthetic and marketing aspect, because who doesn't want to look good and we all need some kind of buy-in if we are out-of-shape. He emphasizes the "functional" aspect because he wants the exercises to become integral in people's lives. If that's tautological, I don't think it's that bad of a crime at all.
demon said:
Hey that's me! I have been hoping to look like Tony someday but yeah I realized there must be workouts that he does that's probably not included in the P90X(2) DVDs. On the other hand, I have read that people who have seen him in person comment on how relatively small/lean he appears
Nah, it's probably a photoshop, or lighting effects, or something else entirely, right?
I remember reading about this guy when he was doing p90x. His results are ridiculous, based solely on P90X and good nutrition.
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
I strongly recommend you read the linked article, if you haven't already. The problem with functional fitness isn't just that it's a tautology - that's more of a symptom, so to speak - it's that it's a buzzword designed to sell programming and routines that are less than optimal. If the term doesn't mean anything, then what do routines and exercises aimed at developing it achieve? The answer is generally sweet FA. As I mentioned in my previous post, focussing routines on exercises requiring significant stabilisation doesn't promote a different or more functional form of strength development, it simply hamstrings strength development. For example, powerlifters and other athletes will sometimes train with a bamboo bar that requires extreme effort to keep stable during a lift. However, training exclusively with a bar like that would prevent the development of maximal strength or explosivity, as you would be limiting your force output to that of your weakest link. Whilst most gym machines, which stabilise the weight for you and follow a fixed movement path, do not adequately reflect 'real world' situations, free weights do. You don't need to destabilise the trainee to make them more functional.
If you insisted on using the term, I'd put it like this: someone who can leg press several hundred pounds but struggles to squat 200 could be said to be lacking "functional strength". Someone who can squat twice their bodyweight but can't do so on a bosu ball does not. Someone who struggles to squat 200 but can rep out 45lb goblet squats on a bosu ball doesn't have "functional strength", they have no strength but enough balance to do a trick.
If your definition of functional fitness is "all round strength and explosiveness" then I'm sorry to say that by most standards a routine like P90X would be insufficient for getting you there. A 2X bodyweight deadlift is probably a good level to start calling the average male "strong", but you could run P90X 10 times and you'd be barely any closer to that benchmark than when you started. Part of the problem is that from a training design perspective, large chunks of P90 etc... are smoke and mirrors, which leads to nonsense like Steelo claiming that squat, bench, dead numbers somehow "don't matter" in assessing athletic ability. For example, it includes things such as plyometrics for improving power. But what's the point of increasing the rate of force development if the trainee is weak and can't generate much force in the first place? For most beginners, power is most easily improved by improving strength; even if you haven't gotten much quicker at applying your strength, if you go from a 135lb squat to a 315lb squat the amount you can apply in a short time will have drastically increased, all without a single round of Plyo-X.
I'm not blindly hating on the program or its brethren. As far as things you can do in your home go it's pretty good (although I recommend looking into something like Convict Conditioning, which has a programmed progression system for strength development using bodyweight movements) and I agree with many of the positives you highlighted. The main problem I have is that the company behind them achieves greater success by misinforming their customers. It's a tactic used by vast swathes of the fitness industry though so it's nothing out of the ordinary. Once again, I feel I haven't really expressed myself that well and I strongly recommend you read that article. It's more entertaining if nothing else.
That guy really doesn't look to have put on much muscle at all. No-one has said that doing P90 on a calorie deficit won't get you shredded, but so will hill sprints.
- Status