Running, fitness, and CrossFit
I’ve written two stories now for CrossFit Journal, a subscription-only internet publication for followers of the strength and conditioning program (movement?) called CrossFit.
The joke of those outside the program is that CrossFit is really a cult, and its practictioners encourage this by referring to people who follow the program as having “drunk the Kool-Aid.” (My editor was recently accused of “buying a Kool-Aid franchise.”) And after a few months keeping half an eye on them, I have to admit there’s a lot of allure there.
The important concept to consider, however, is how CrossFit defines “fitness.” The “What is CrossFit” page says,
Our program delivers a fitness that is, by design, broad, general, and inclusive. Our specialty is not specializing. Combat, survival, many sports, and life reward this kind of fitness and, on average, punish the specialist.
That’s a great idea, in general, but it’s exactly where CrossFit and I part ways. I have a sport–distance running–which I enjoy tremendously, and on average, it rewards the specialist. I might have a laughable vertical leap, but that’s not what I’m training for. I’m training to cover distances for which most people require a car, and do it faster than the other guy. I’m aware of the compromises that requires, and I’ve accepted them because I love what I do. If I was training for combat or survival, you can bet I’d be asking for a cup of the CrossFit Kool-Aid.
Tags: crossfit, specialization
July 19th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
I agree with you on a basic level, but for most people, they’re training for life, rather than for something specific. Training for one thing does make you better at that one thing, but also opens you up to injuries and weakness when you try to do another (and sometimes injuries from physical imbalances when you just do that one thing.) Since starting to do triathlons, and since incorporating one class of a yoga a week, I’ve felt better and had less pain when running than I ever did when all I was doing was running and rowing.
August 7th, 2009 at 6:43 am
I would love to comment but I can’t find any definitions for “reward,” so I don’t even know where to begin. Do the Cross Fit people define “reward”? With most sports, it’s pretty clear the primary “reward” is a faster time, lower score, heavier lift or longer-higher jump, etc. Even sports like gymnastics and figure skating impose scores that aren’t as immediately clear to the novice as a yardstick measurement. If Cross-Fit has its own measurable triathlon or decathlon, then it becomes a sport, and I would expect the training to “reward” the participant. If C-F doesn’t use any measurement systems at all, then I’m not sure how we can gauge its effectiveness, which could be a way of saying they have a very smart marketing platform. Anyway, I don’t want to be a specialist and get punished, so I’m currently aiming to improve in darts, figure skating, and sumo. Do you think C-F will reward me?
August 14th, 2009 at 8:04 am
CrossFit does have its annual “Games” which are ranked, but they change the events every year, so the scores aren’t comparable from year to year. Part of the idea, as I understand it, is that a truly “fit” individual will excel no matter what the challenge, and that an individual who suffers disproportionately in a given event or two (like a decathlete who couldn’t pole vault) aren’t truly fit.
Darts rewards accuracy, figure skating agility and power, sumo strength, right? If I understand CrossFit, if it didn’t help you with all three of those sports, CrossFit would need to improve its development of those areas.