Adaptation: Period, Persistence, and Prioritization

[damonwells]

Great points, here. The point of the article (as Rip said) is to steer people away from "well rounded" programs that actually inhibit gains (strength or cardio). It seems reasonable, through my experience, that strength is the cornerstone of any successful physical endeavor.

The only elite athletes that are produced from GPP are already elite. Most would gain from any high intensity (or not) exercise.

Kang, explain how Soccer and Basketball are enhanced by a GPP heavy routine, please.

[damonwells]

A quick note.

At West Point we tested a variety of modalities (strength and cardio) on three groups of athletes: powerlifters, middle distance track, and general population cadets. Powerlifters did little to no cardio, runners did no strength training, and general population did normal PT stuff (combination of methods).

While the majority of the results were predictable, the following is of interest.

5 mile ruck march with 50lbs load; the track runners were slightly faster than the powerlifters, most likely a result of their cardio training.

Simulated Casualty Evacuation Test (SCET); full uniform and weapon, 400m run immediately followed by 100lbs dummy carry for 100m. The powerlifters were the fastest, obviously making up time on the dummy carry. Runners and the gen pop were significantly slower (some unable to carry the dummy in less than 4 minutes). *combat loaded soldier is closer to >200lbs

Should be obvious by the results, but the difference on the 5 mile road march was negligile, and can easily be mitigated with 2-4 weeks cardio training.

Three points: High intensity, focused, specific training is valuable. Any cardio deficit from strength training is easily overcome in most cases in a couple of weeks. If someone has to carry a casualty from the battlefield, a good run time is useless.

[president kang]

Name is Nick. First of all, let me state, I'm in no way associated with CF, for the same reasons you mention at the end of your post (hubris, grandiosity, etc....). The story is unwarrented because like the original poster said, it reeks of "I use to work with these guys, no I don't like them anymore, so I'm going to tweek them on my site." Rip, you may chalk this up to "People just think I'm an Asshole", but it all seems childish, especially when you look at how many people respect you (me included).

Now, for the inaccurate part, I never said Crossfit was where the sports are finding their athletes. The author pretty much looks down on all interval/circuit style training in his article, in favor of a strength based program with some GPP. If you look at the best conditioned athletes in the NBA (Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, etc....), they are doing circuit/interval style training for their conditioning, not strength based training with some GPP thrown in. I know for myself, I'm much better playing sports with my son when I'm doing interval training than I am when I'm lifting heavy - I'm faster, I have more endurance, I can move better. So are we talking Crossfit here or interval training in general. Because if we are talking interval training in general, I think my examples of what I said in my original post hold true. However if we are just talking crossit, then admit this is a way to undercut people you don't get along with anymore and don't use it as a veiled attempt to espouse SS as the superior methodology for all athletic training, regardless of the event. In doing so, you are pushing the same "one size fits all" that crossfit does.

[Mark Rippetoe]

The author's name is Damon. I am not pushing anything. I am not the author of this article, and I did not commission it. Damon makes a point I agree with, he writes a damn good article that you have not refuted, and I stand by what it says even if I didn't write it. He is the guy with direct experience in the battlefield application of this thinking -- where people's asses are on the line and theory is irrelevant bullshit -- not me. During the entire time I was associated with CrossFit I bitched about the strength component, and had you been around you would know this. The thing got too weird and I bailed, and you really don't know a goddamn thing about the particulars because I haven't discussed them. I don't know, your being such a new member of the forum, whether or not your thinking I'm childish actually bothers me very much. I'll pout a while, Nick, and then I'll let you know.

But back to the point: GPP is a very good way to divert resources away from addressing the actual problems most people face -- they're not strong enough. Up until that point, one size DOES fit all. Good GPP requires strength, and if you're not strong the "preparedness" part is not really actually there.

[Mark E. Hurling]

As usual Rip, you make a point better and more succinctly than I have in several longer posts in your last paragraph. For decades (and I do mean decades) I did so much extraneous cardio it left me beat all the time. Extraneous could be defined as 45+ minutes 6-7 times a week. By my late 50's I just didn't have the gas in the tank for it any more. I had to take a hard look at what I wanted, what I needed to do to get there, and what at a minimum it took to get there. Diverting resources (the gas in the tank) for cardio was making me drag ass all day and making it hard to do the jujitsu I enjoy and practice to prepare for the unknowable but more likely to happen in the real world rather than something in a fantasy or science fiction novel. So you analyze, prioritize, and act.

It sounds like the equivalent of L. Ron Hubbard's acolytes have decided to act on an apostate. Expect a stake and a bonfire next.

[Carlos Daniel]

Just a remark: you are probably not going to be very fast or explosive after volume day on TM for instance. It would behoove one to take it easy for a week (maybe less, who knows) to let accumulated fatigue go away in order to say being strong doesn't make you very fast or athletic.

[Matt Reynolds]

Damon,

Excellent article.

"The muscle confusion theory leads to a paradox: training that leads to no significant muscular adaption. The body can only adapt sufficiently to chronic stressors, which are stressors that are applied with enough intensity and regularity to cause a change in the physiology or architecture of the body necessary to the adaptation. If you frequently change the nature of these stressors, your physiology can only adapt to those aspects which are consistent between workouts."

and...

"The idea that a training session should stress a system just enough to require an appropriate adaptation, and just enough so that training can be resumed as soon as possible, is foreign."

Lots of gold in the article.

Well done bud.

[Biggmatt]

There is a bit of a falicy in what you are saying about the best conditioned athletes in the NBA. Part of the reason they are very, very high end pros is because just about anything makes them very good.

Name is Nick. First of all, let me state, I'm in no way associated with CF, for the same reasons you mention at the end of your post (hubris, grandiosity, etc....). The story is unwarrented because like the original poster said, it reeks of "I use to work with these guys, no I don't like them anymore, so I'm going to tweek them on my site." Rip, you may chalk this up to "People just think I'm an Asshole", but it all seems childish, especially when you look at how many people respect you (me included).

Now, for the inaccurate part, I never said Crossfit was where the sports are finding their athletes. The author pretty much looks down on all interval/circuit style training in his article, in favor of a strength based program with some GPP. If you look at the best conditioned athletes in the NBA (Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, etc....), they are doing circuit/interval style training for their conditioning, not strength based training with some GPP thrown in. I know for myself, I'm much better playing sports with my son when I'm doing interval training than I am when I'm lifting heavy - I'm faster, I have more endurance, I can move better. So are we talking Crossfit here or interval training in general. Because if we are talking interval training in general, I think my examples of what I said in my original post hold true. However if we are just talking crossit, then admit this is a way to undercut people you don't get along with anymore and don't use it as a veiled attempt to espouse SS as the superior methodology for all athletic training, regardless of the event. In doing so, you are pushing the same "one size fits all" that crossfit does.

[Mark Rippetoe]

High-end athletes in any professional sport are the genetic cream of the crop, and they are already very good, like Matt Wanat. Training just makes them better. How much better is the question, since the worst training in the world is better than none, and you already have an elite athlete genetically. The University of Michigan program under Mike Gittleson used a Hammer Strength HIT program, and professional sports is littered with strength and conditioning coaches whose primary role is to not get anybody hurt in the weight room.

[gamedog]

But back to the point: GPP is a very good way to divert resources away from addressing the actual problems most people face -- they're not strong enough. Up until that point, one size DOES fit all. Good GPP requires strength, and if you're not strong the "preparedness" part is not really actually there.

I never understood the full gravity of this until I came to the conclusion "I'm a beginner." and got under the bar for a while. I'm still under the bar of course, and plan to be pretty-much for the duration, but the fact remains: Before I got strong, I was in shitty shape. Sure, I could have applied myself and worked my way up to where I could do 100 push-ups followed by 100 burpees for time. But what good would that have done me? I'm afraid it wouldn't have been a whole hell of a lot, at the end of the day. Because whatever bonuses I would have reaped in, say, increased stamina, better VO2 Max, etc. wouldn't have meant jack shit because I still wouldn't have been strong enough to apply myself in any kind of meaningful, useful way.

(please correct me if I'm innaccurate, here)

What I mean to say is, GPP is an important thing. I recognize the importance of GPP, and I include it, albeit conservatively, in my program. BUT, it's just GPP, that's it. My little dumbell complex followed by farmer's walks routine is nothing more than a means by which I can carry my antique dining room table, bookcases, china cabinet, what-have-you out of my house, across the yard to the moving truck without getting winded. THAT'S IT.

And I can carry all that shit, because I squat relatively heavy and dead lift heavy on a regular basis.

If I wasn't strong enough to keep squatting and dead lifting relatively (and Lord willing, heavier, for a long time to come), all the advantages GPP gave me would be useless.

But it appears as though this concept is lost on coaches that get paid way more money than I'll ever see.

And what's more, this concept is lost upon people who, for all intents and purposes, continually lower the afore-mentioned bar.