 |
| NL |
Questions:
1. How do you test to find the fittest person?
2. What characteristics define the fittest?
3. Where do your biases come from in determining who is and how to become the fittest?
4. Are you open to different definitions / different perspectives on achieving this "fit" standard?
post answers to comments
23 comments:
1. That is a tough question, but it depends on your personal definition of what fit is. I personally think many multi-faceted events are needed, but it is pretty much the fittest person on that particular day who comes out on top. Multi-day stuff would be good, to maybe dull the impact if someone has a particularly bad day. Eitherway it is tricky, and you can never really take that luck of the draw element out of it. I don't think that just by one competition you can claim someone is the fittest though.
2. Of course a great strength to BW ratio, awesome endurance, really knowing their body and recovery capabilities,and you just have to have a certian fire and love for what your doing.
3. I know my definition of fit has changed drastically in the past year and a half. It used to be from TV and crazy fitness magazines, but now I think I agree more with the CrossFit definition. I also really think the games every year redefines what everyone considers "good programming" and those athletes that do really well also shape our perceptions majorly.
4.Since everyone does need to specialize a little to achieve a top fit standard, I don't think being closed to different methods is smart at all. Even if one thing does not work for you, you will learn a little bit about yourself with everything you try. So I am open!
1. i think that a physical test would have to happen over a number of days. how many days...i don't know?
i have a problem with saying that lifting more weight is fitter. but, a smaller person should be able to lift relative their body weight and still considered fit, even though a larger person could be able to lift more. as long as they did the same reps. does that sound wrong?
2. i think you have to take in consideration different aspects, not just physical, but also mental, emotional, spiritual, relational. are they sustaining those areas and improving in those areas.
3. my biases probably come from not being able to snatch 175#.......ha!
and my love for chocolate......
4. yes, but, i have to hear them and be convinced of their legitimacy.
"wed,jan 12,2011"
1st amrap: 7rds + 2hc
2nd amrap: 5trips + 2wb
Thanks Big Dawg Laura for pushing me to make this up. Fun one! Good luck Sunday everyone
1. you use a serious of events testing all domains of fitness. I actually think many of these competitions have done a excellent job determining the fittest with only a few WODS.
2. I'm fine with Crossfit's 3 standards of fitness. Testing the ten physical skills, athletic tasks and the different metabolic pathways certainly would define the fittest in my view.
3. biases? influences maybe. Certainly my experience with college athletics, Crossfit and this blog are biases or influences into what I believe is fittest.
4. surely open to it.
1) Closed, controlled environment over a course of x amount of weeks/months. Standardized tests across multiple domains and specialty areas.
2) I think the 10 traits that crossfit preaches covers it.
3) I dont feel I am bias in any one direction. Im not one to say "soccer players are the fittest" because i played soccer. The world of fitness and insane work capacity has been taken to a whole new level in the last few years, and its JUST starting. Fitness is its own sport.
4) YES. I think you are going to see in the future the crossfit games become just ONE of the competitions/tests that claim they crown the fittest human being. But i have a crazy feeling what Coach is working on in regards to his "training center" where they test the worlds fittest, that is going to become the worlds staple testing environment. They will study human subjects, how they eat, sleep, train and monitor results, take a shit load of notes and continue testing other subjects until they find what it takes to become the fittest...its gonna become very scientific and INSANE. can we say monsters?
1 - Intelligent deign, that will significantly test all major energy systems in more than one modality. Test all major body movements in more than one modality. Testing skill, such that it lends itself to an accurate assessment of a given major energy system (skill vs. fitness...this is a good question).
2 - Consistency. Being the fittest on average, like rankings for the whole year, not one weekend!
3 - How I try to coach people to become the fittest possible for their life or their sport.
4 - Always open.
Good questions.
Yesterday at this time I was just finishing to train at OPT facility in the country side of Calgary. First of all THANKS for letting me, you didn't have to. Also, I do believe that you have a great place and a good crew (Trevor & Mike). All the best and I'll keep checking your site for my personal improvement.
Thanks again James.
from Jan 8th
15RM OHS: 85kg (pr)
* Doing a 24 hour rowing challenge tomorrow so I skipped the mecton part to save my legs for tomorrow
build up to single OHS: 125kg (#20)
Good luck to all the BD's hitting the challenge this weekend I'll be attacking the wods next week.
From Wed Jan 12th
10min AMRAP: 10 rounds
5min AMRAP: 4 rounds
You are welcome Jared, anytime and thanks for being a team player :)
Good luck to everyone on Sunday
1. Put everyone in the jungle and see who comes out alive. Jokes aside - test several domains and energy pathways in a multiple day event. weight classes are an important factor. Regardless of the argument of gymnastics movements negate strength movements. I think a weight class is important - if the olympics does it, why shouldn't we? (which also goes the other way)
2. Moving body weight efficiently, power/strength to weight ratio, endurance in various time frames.
3. I just ran a marathon and those guys who won, finished when I was halfway through. To run one and understand what that takes - shit, it's insane. But then again, can they deadlift more than 2x their BW? Doubt it. So I guess I don't have any biases, just give them an adequate test.
4. Always open. You never know what you might discover listening to others
Nik
Good luck dawgs!
these questions lead to a whole other series of questions which Michael touched on:
such as can the fittest be determined in one weekend? and where is the line for skills and useful fitness exercises?
maybe these would be good questions for the next rest day.
1. How do you test to find the fittest person?
A Series of tests that combine multiple time and modal domains. Closest competition we've seen is the Crossfit Games.
2. What characteristics define the fittest?
I like the Crossfit definition of whomever has the largest capacity to produce work in a range of time and modal domains.
3. Where do your biases come from in determining who is and how to become the fittest?
Obviously biased towards Crossfit's definition. But they are the first organization to attempt a thorough definition of Crossfit. I remember my university textbooks defining fitness as "the ability to carry out a task." That definition is too simple and incomplete.
Having said that, despite Crossfit claiming to "specialize in not specializing," I argue that Crossfit is indeed specific because if you are everything, than what are you not. And if you're not some things, than you're not everything. Certain Crossfit movements are unique to its sport. Just as stick handling is unique to hockey, dribbling is unique to basketball, double unders, kettlebell swings, overhead squats, and box jumps are unique to Crossfit.
Now if someone has the most work capacity in various time domains in the primal movements like running, jumping, climbing, crawling, leaping, lifting, swimming but not have the same work capacity in double unders, hand stand push ups, and pistols as Graham Holmberg, is he less fit?
Crossfit IS sport specific. This is the skill vs. metabolic engine argument
4. Are you open to different definitions / different perspectives on achieving this "fit" standard?
HELL YES.
Short mash-up of a couple wods:
CGDL (3x3@80%): 286/330/330
PC: 200/222(fx2)
Tech work on ring hspu
Amrap DUs in 30 secs x 5 sets: 57/57/61/53/57
Notes: should've skipped PC. hips and quads smoked from yesterdays met-con. power lacking. 200 was easy. I pulled 222 to upper chest but dumped it on the catch.
learned how to kick up into ring hspu (so stoked). Bailed a couple of times, but worth it. Much easier then starting from head on floor.
Used a speed rope tonight on DUs and they were significantly less taxing on the shoulders and wrists then when I use my aerospeed rope, which I've been using almost exclusively. Can't wait to try an amrap attempt. Wanna break 200.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_records_in_weightlifting
These OLY Weightlifting records are pretty telling. Strength to bodyweight ratios are dependent on your size...at least at the at the elite level. In every case, the higher weight class had a lower ratio. 305/56=5.4464 325/62=5.24 357.5/69=5.18 etc......
As it relates to this sport, it makes sense that guys within a certain weight range fare the best. You have to be big enough to move the given load (a relatively powerful 100 lb dude aint gonna cut it) but if you're too big (say over 225lbs), the ability to move the load isn't enough of an advantage to negate some of the disadvantages with all the bodyweight stuff/running. The big dudes strength to weight ratio is generally lower. As it relates to this question of defining/testing fitness, it seems as if the fairest way to test fitness would be to include weight classes at these events. The movements at most of these events seem fair enough, but big guys should test against big guys. Seriously, how can you compare Rory and Spealler given such different bodytypes? Seems ridiculous to try.
1. I don't think this is possible with our current technology as every test will have a bias towards a certain domain of "fitness". Unless every single aspect of the body can be numerically analyzed (down to the molecular level which would require complete understanding of human anatomy as well as immense computing power) and genetic profiles of the athletes are known, I think that it is impossible to standardize the test.
2. The term "fittest" is used too loosely within the physical training environment. An olympic lifter will not be able to execute Isabel faster than a top level crossfitter just as a top level crossfitter will not be able to perform a 137.5kg snatch. No one form of "fitness" is better than another in my opinion, although one maybe more functionally appropriate for lack of a better term...
3. I study and support evolution so I think that the crossfit standard of "fit" contributes better to the survival of the individual in a paleolithic setting. Deadlifting 1000lbs is not going to be that useful when you need to chase and hunt bushmeat. But in that sense, human beings have never relied on our physical strength to survive, our primary attribute has always been intellect so...
4. I think my answers to the previous questions answer this question
137.5kg snatch at 56kg bodyweight... sorry I forgot to add that
or a 212.5kg snatch @ Hossein Rezazadeh's weight
Hi all,
Took some time off after having a string of poor performances. I've done 3 sessions in the past 10 days, and hopefully I've recharged a bit..
Anyway, I'm really looking forward to tomorrow's competition!!
registered as Jeff Kalpakis
1. determine and disclose the pool of skills which could be used in the test (vs. lower skill "capacities" which could be "unknown" going into the test - for example handstand walk or snatch should be disclosed vs broad jump which i consider more of a capacity).
Once we have a huge pool of skills/capacities, creating a series of physical tasks which combine the movements in novel yet intelligent ways that also test the person's mental capacity. this would necessarily include multi-event days but the number of tests needed means spreading them out over more than one weekend.
2. i may be brainwashed by early CFJ stuff but i like the 10 physical skills, bearing in mind that to be the fittest one must not merely have superhuman work capacity but have the mental game down too (perhaps some tests with some choice/more cerebral stuff in them?)
3. see answer #2; also never liked to run so endurance is low on my list... most people i read are strength/power/evolutionary biased so that colours my outlook.
4. yes please!
1. To test the fittest you have to determine what fit is. I personally like the Crossfit definition of ten general skills. You are only as fit as you are skilled in each area. So to test it....why not a ten day event. Each day focuses on one of the skills. Scoring has to be weighted equally for all events.
Also, how about adding blood tests. Lets have a look at some general health markers. If you have a 1 minute Fran but your A1C is 7.0, are you really fit? Extreme I know, but I hope you get my point.
2. Answered in 1.
3. My biases obviously come from Crossfit. But before I found Crossfit, I never agreed that the ironman winner was the fittest person in the world. Fittest at endurance , yes, but at strength? We don't know. However, until Crossfit tests a true endurance event along with the other events, and sort out the scoring so that each event is equally weighted, are they really finding the fittest on earth? Are they even finding the fittest in the Crossfit world?
4. I'm open to ideas. But if you are going to tell me that the guy that won the NY marathon is the fittest person on earth, I'm gonna call bullshit.
Hey, looking at following OPT blog for my training. Should i start following the blog after this round of testing? or should i start for a certain point a while back.
Ive been doing my own programming with a pairly big emphasis on o-lifting and want am happy with that side of things for the time being.
And i am use to two a days.
Any advice???
1. I'm not sure that it can ever be truely tested until everyone agrees on what 'fit' is. Crossfit definition helped make it more clear but their method of testing has gotten too extreme. If anyone can find it, though, James can.
2. All the characteristics we've covered help define 'fittest' but I think there are sub-categories for those who can show up and get it done when it counts in competition and those who have balance in their lives (can crush the WODs but are real folks with jobs, families, etc).
3. My biases are based on all things. I played every sport I could growing up so I definitely lean towards the multi-faceted jack-of-all-trades.
4. Whatever gets you fit is good with me, unless you are an overweight spin class instructor who starts the day with low-fat yogurt and bagels and you think you are fit.
Good discussion
1+2.
Not really sure here. There are so many factors that come into play. At this moment I see two things that stand out the most -Strength to BW ratio and the introduction of skill based movements. Having greater skill in squat cleans and double unders is going to get you a higher score assuming person A and B are doing the same programming etc. Person A is more skilled and might be a better athlete..but does that make him fitter? When I started my dbu's sucked so I had to work 3 times harder.Now I finish them faster with less energy - am I fitter? Not really - I have more skill.
2. My biases come from the sports that I have been involved with for a long time. I am biased towards strength and power sports that require good strength to BW ratios that also tax numerous energy pathways.
3. I am very open to all perspectives. My understanding of training grows everyday along with " I have no idea" factor that occurs the moment I learn something new. Keep growing.
تعد شركات تصنيع العبوات الزجاجية فى مصر من أكبر الشركات المصرية المتخصصة في هذا المجال، حيث تعمل هذه الشركات على توفير العديد من الوظائف للشباب المصري، بالإضافة إلى دعمها للاقتصاد المصري من خلال زيادة الصادرات وتحسين الإيرادات.
Post a Comment