The Map of Athletic Performance

[Foobar40]

Wouldn't it be fantastic to have a PP-like book that lays out what intermediate and advanced programming might look like for various angles on the map? <hint> Please keep developing these ideas.

[Rob Miller]

I think it would help if you drew a few sample trajectories on the map, say for a triathlete,

The radius for a triathlete is actually 3 individual trajectories drawn out from the ~center~ towards run, bike & swim. It's the distance of the run-bike-swim that determines how far south of the ~equator~ you are aiming (on the RP side). These are your primary trajectories as a triathlete, and how far they extend from the center is based on how developed you are as a run-bike-swimmer.

After the competitive season of this aspiring triathlete, if they are serious about their training, they could let those run-bike-swim trajectories "go to sleep" for awhile. Learning the five basic barbell movements in that time would show up on the Map as a due North trajectory. This would accomplish two things 1) a thorough recovery of the aerobic system and 2) the tools to build general strength.

We see space around the circle inbetween the sports that are listed only to be able to read what is written. They actually overlay one another because the bioenergetics of some sports are so similar to one another. In the case of CF, there would be trajectories pointing out in every direction from the center. North, south, east and west and everywhere inbetween.... that is the goal. By definition, CFers strive to be 80% of all sports.

The Map is conceptual. For instance, if you had two people and they were expressing their full genetic potential on the exact same trajectory the sum is different based on their genetics (if one were using one Map for two people). One individual could can always lift a kilo more or run a 100th of a second faster based on their limb proportions, neurological connection, the robustness of their endocrine system and even intelligence.

The Map is intended to paint a very broad picture so my clients understand the bigger picture. This way I can talk 'em down when I suggest that they don't need to run-bike-swim for a month or two and their run-bike-swim will still improve.

And yes, I'd like to have sample Maps. I think that would be very helpful.

[Tamara Reynolds]

Iron Gyms like TBone's, Matt's and Mark's don't have to worry about this shit. It's folks like you and me, while talking to our peers, that are saying (over and over again), "You guys might wanna check this out."

Every now and then, someone's actually listening.

But, I do worry about this shit. That's who my members are. Regular people. Moms. Kids. Middle aged men. College students. Preschool teachers. I don't run some sort of intimidating Iron Gym that requires a super secret password for admission. Basically, the only requirement to be a member is the ability to put up with me.

I talk about this shit ALL THE TIME. In person. Online. Everywhere. That's how I get random, otherwise non-athletic people to show up and train. It's because I never shut up. I really don't.

CF has taken off like a storm. A large part of its success has to do with the fact people work out very intensely as a group. This group dynamic somehow makes people work harder and stay with it longer than most people would have on their own.

Except my theory is that you don't actually NEED the group classes to keep people around. If you did, then I wouldn't have so many former CrossFitters training with me. That is fun for a while, but it doesn't keep a lot of people's interest once they actually have a specific strength goal. I mean, none of my members miss doing 30 reps of something for time. We have other stupid ways of amusing ourselves. And, every single person understands how to work HARDER now that they are at my gym. Sorry, but it has always been my argument that it is more difficult to push yourself through a 3x5 set of squats that make you shake and want to piss yourself than it is to jump rope and do pullups really fast while people clap for you and tell you that everyone is a winner.

I do not think that group training is the way to revolutionize the fitness industry. STEP aerobics, SPIN classes, Body Pump... people exercising together in a group is nothing new. So, I don't think that CrossFit is any more special than those things as far as group fitness. They add the barbell, which looks really cool. Of course, I am of the opinion that adding barbell movements for time in a group environment is a big clusterfuck, and that's why I don't do it at my gym.

I don't think that making group classes better is the answer. I think my way is better, and that's why I own my own gym now. Group classes do not teach people to train like grown ups. I believe that people have to take responsibility for their own training. While there are many good CrossFit affiliates, some of whom are members of this forum, for the vast majority of people, I believe that group classes serve to encourage dependency and co-dependency, which are NOT goals of my gym. Community is great and fabulous, but at the end of the day, you have to be able to walk in, load your bar, and get through your squats like a big boy or girl. If no one is there to yell at you that day, then you still have to add weight to the fucking bar. Period.

I find that people come back to my gym because I expect them to train like a grown up. I teach you the lifts, I tell you where shit is, and then at some point very soon after you start, you are on your own. That doesn't mean that I'm not always there. It just means that my newest member came for three private sessions and learned how to squat, press and deadlift, and then on Monday he came in and trained without me holding his hand. I gave him his suggested warmup sets, I gave him his workset numbers, and then I went and sat my fat ass down at my desk and watched what happened. And, holy shit, he was a grown ass man and squatted and pressed 3x5 sets without majorly fucking up or injuring himself.

I agree with TBone. Our gym works the same way. Programs are individualized and gym times are open, no "class" times. Group classes do not hold the monopoly on community if that's what you're afraid of. People are still there to spot, and cheer a PR and what not. And people make actual progress, and excel in chosen activities, and fellow members support them. A large group of diverse people, with diverse goals, who lift together, and get together on weekends for beer and karaoke.

All of this.

I have an amazing community. I really, really do. And, lord knows that we enjoy karaoke on the weekends, although we probably consume more bourbon and vodka than beer.

[Mark Rippetoe]

It's because I never shut up. I really don't.

This is very difficult to believe.

[tertius]

A really interesting read. I think the map is a highly useful little innovation for thinking about how one should approach their training.

I agree that a few sample plots would be useful, however, the mental picture I am getting is not simple "trajectories", but rather something more like a color space map:



Pursuing a particular skill/energy system could develops not a line but a 'lobe' on the map, and pursuing other areas stretches that lobe in another direction (increasing the overall area inside the shape). Elite athletes could develop very long, narrow lobes, but are better served to cover more area. X-fit intends to go in all direction at once, but in doing so they stay within the small inner circle.

If we think about it in terms of area (and since this map is not just of energy systems, but also skill development) we can see that some/most athletes will gain a good bit by training of neighboring skill types (skill sets both more variable and less) as well as their complementary energy system (the dual poles of Strongmen and Ultra-marathoners are good examples of this).

Possibly the ideal competitive athlete would develop something roughly like an isosceles triangle (or irregular oval) with the long axis pointed to their complementary energy system, and the short side centered on their dominant skill? Those who must have highly varied/divergent skill sets suffer in terms of covering the maximum area on the map, as they can't reach towards the outer levels of the map very effectively.

I'm just poking the idea around, as I am in no way qualified as a coach of any kind, but this sort of approach appears to be implied by the article.

It's obviously a well considered and thoughtful system; the only thing I might question is the location of football, due to the fact that individual players perform very different tasks on the team, some of which are highly specialized and repetitive. The current placement appears to be aimed at linemen?

[Jonathon Sullivan]

Tertius, you rock.

[Rob Miller]

Pursuing a particular skill/energy system could develops not a line but a 'lobe' on the map, and pursuing other areas stretches that lobe in another direction (increasing the overall area inside the shape). Elite athletes could develop very long, narrow lobes, but are better served to cover more area. X-fit intends to go in all direction at once, but in doing so they stay within the small inner circle.

Bingo! This is so cool.

I've certainly thought in these terms before; I've considered a due north trajectory as an oblong circle... egg like. The due north radius emanates training carry over in this kind of shape. Even though the bottom of the egg shape emanates in the opposite direction, there is increased potential (due to training carry over) to move in that direction. It may not be actualized, or in use, but it's potential is represented where it is not in the isosceles triangle example.

Exercising neighboring skills definitely increases the volume of the "irregular oval" and does translate into better performance in the strongman and ultra distance categories. Another area that I have seen it work is in some climbers who have worked seriously for a length of time at developing their gymnastic skill set. And we all know it has worked for football players (especially the lineman example you pointed out). I would want to put in more consideration before saying it works all the way around the wheel.

Placement of sports on the outside of the Map is not an exact science, and much less so when trying to accurately represent 11 different players on the field. Sports also overlap one another because the bioenergetics are so similar; it's just that it would be hard to read being too accurate in this way

Did you make this graphic tertius? I like it's potential. A LOT!

So here's something else I was considering... what if it were 3D? The competitive athlete shape we are discussing would be similar to an arrowhead. During heavy training the arrow would actually "thin" in its 3D-ness during suppression of anabolic hormones. Return to homeostasis with an active recovery phase, would be represented on the 3D Map with a "plumping up" or "fattening" of the arrowhead beyond its previous thickness. In this way the arrowhead has the necessary increase in volume to reach further towards one's potential during the next training cycle.

I am so stoked!

[ecj]

Rob, I enjoyed the article and the thoughts you share about juggling the physical demands of exercise and sport. I don't particularly like your map, and I'm going to try to explain why briefly. I only intend this as food for thought, so feel free to "take it or leave it".

My problem with the map is that it starts with a circle.

The problem with the concentric rings is that you have to track your development as starting from the middle and moving outward. In my eyes this implies a few different contradictory things:

1) Moving on a line from the center of the circle towards the edges seems to imply in my eyes that as a beginner transitions towards the elite, development pushes them toward one goal and away from others. It appears that by moving closer to being an elite athlete in one realm (specialization) you are getting further and further away from being good at everything else. The beginner is actually closer to most of the outer edge of the circle than the elite athlete.

...or...

2) The rings themselves imply that as a beginner transitions from the smallest rings of the circle towards the outer, they are inhabiting space closer to the outer rings of the circle and actually approaching elite status in everything. Here the beginner is literally worse at everything than the elite athlete.

Now (1) is obviously bogus, because it's pretty clear that a fit, in-shape person with appreciable athletic development in some fields will tend to be better at picking things up quicker than a rank beginner. But (2) is also questionable, because I think it's probably pretty likely that a rank beginner will be better at something like a 5K than someone who is specializing in powerlifting. Similarly, your average marathoner is probably actually worse at powerlifting than your average beginner in the gym.

I'm not sure what the solution to your problem is, but I think part of it might be the attempt to see everything as unified in some grand scheme. I've totally bought into the SS training system for myself, but having also done a lot of distance running in my past I can accept the fact that my increased squat has not, and will not, improve my 10K time. I'm a faster sprinter, and stronger, but these are really different things.

Furthermore, my ability to handle a 315 squat or a 20 minute 5K really has no bearing on my ability to hoop up in a game of basketball outside of some of the raw physical skillset stuff like jumping or boxing people out. I know this is probably anathema to many members of this site who see barbell training as a solution to every problem. But having spent a lot of time around exceptional athletes who were some of the least motivated people I've ever seen in the gym, I can definitively say that athletic skill and coordination belongs on a different continuum than strength or endurance. And I'm not sure it's reflected accurately in bunching them around the circle in the way you've done.

Just my two cents. I certainly think you have some outstanding ideas about applying the progression model onto sport-skills, I'm just not sure your chart reflects what you are actually arguing.

[AnonymousCoward]

Rob,
You claim that elite Crossfitters are not "Outer Ring" athletes. Please, explain why.

[tertius]

Tertius, you rock.

Thanks Sully. Interesting ideas are easy to play with, though.

Bingo! This is so cool.

I've certainly thought in these terms before; I've considered a due north trajectory as an oblong circle... egg like. The due north radius emanates training carry over in this kind of shape. Even though the bottom of the egg shape emanates in the opposite direction, there is increased potential (due to training carry over) to move in that direction. It may not be actualized, or in use, but it's potential is represented where it is not in the isosceles triangle example.

Right, yes. A 'blob' is a better way of thinking about it than the triangle, for the reasons you've stated there. The example you cite also shows how this is a good tool to demonstrate how useful strength development and high intensity training can be in comparison to a lot of "road work". Someone pursuing a southern training stimulus could actually reduce their area on the northern side of their egg (well displayed in the stereotypical marathoner)!

Exercising neighboring skills definitely increases the volume of the "irregular oval" and does translate into better performance in the strongman and ultra distance categories. Another area that I have seen it work is in some climbers who have worked seriously for a length of time at developing their gymnastic skill set. And we all know it has worked for football players (especially the lineman example you pointed out). I would want to put in more consideration before saying it works all the way around the wheel.

Placement of sports on the outside of the Map is not an exact science, and much less so when trying to accurately represent 11 different players on the field. Sports also overlap one another because the bioenergetics are so similar; it's just that it would be hard to read being too accurate in this way

In some ways, I feel like the sports are a distraction; the horizontal axis is really "variable" to "repetitive" skill development, and a particular athlete is unlikely to need to train to both sides of their sport, I suspect. Those who have very variable sports still need to spend a lot of time drilling fixed skills in a repetitious way, with bouts of high intensity application (as you stated in your article). Those with highly repetitive disciplines need more variability when training to intensify stimulus they can produce (and thus achieve greater adaptation).

In fact, it's probably more accurate to say that each sport occupies an area of a particular shape on the map, rather than it existing somewhere on the periphery. That's what made me think of the color space map (which is from wikipedia, not mine). That's obviously more work to represent, but would be illustrative to develop.

Did you make this graphic tertius? I like it's potential. A LOT!

I suspected you would, as it seemed to show something like what you were getting at.

So here's something else I was considering... what if it were 3D? The competitive athlete shape we are discussing would be similar to an arrowhead. During heavy training the arrow would actually "thin" in its 3D-ness during suppression of anabolic hormones. Return to homeostasis with an active recovery phase, would be represented on the 3D Map with a "plumping up" or "fattening" of the arrowhead beyond its previous thickness. In this way the arrowhead has the necessary increase in volume to reach further towards one's potential during the next training cycle.

I am so stoked!

There's probably a number of possible z axes that could be used: training stress, adaptation, performance, etc. Many of them are implied by the other two axes, to some extent. This is more difficult for most people to visualize, though. Probably a better idea to stick to 2-D for the moment, and refine the idea, produce some sport specific maps, use them as a training tool, etc.

One of the really neat things about this idea is that you could actually plot your progress and training, and see the resultant shape change over time.