jomike

:-)

This is clearly the subject of my post:

“Whether or not his methodology or offshoots of it generate sub 2:10s or sub 14 5ks remains to be seen…”

Yes, in much the same way it remains to be seen whether doing 20 miles a day on a pogo stick produces the next Tour de France winner. Brian was perhaps caught in the moment at TJ’s question about elite-level marathoning and felt compelled to make a bold statement that belies his true understanding reflects.

I am not denying that CrossFit (which is far from revolutionary save for the packaging) is not of tremendous benefit from a strength perspective. But you’re confusing, or conflating, the difficulty of something with with its potential benefits. If I busted my ass doing 10 x 400 at mile race pace four days a week and did an insanely long run every week, I wouldn’t come within ten or fifteen minutes of my best marathon time.

Also, not to bag on ultras, but they are more about survival and tenacity than attributes such as, well, speed and running fitness. 95% of ultrarunners would be midpackers at conventional distances. It’s a different world. I ran one ultra (granted, only a 50K) and placed second in a national championship. I was never nat-class material. But had a CrossFitted my way into the race, I would have been considerably further back.

“Remember, only those people crazy enough to think they can change the system actually do.”

I think a Carl Sagan quote is perfect here: “But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.”

Whether or not his methodology or offshoots of it generate sub 2:10s or sub 14 5ks remains to be seen, but for the average and sub-elite runner, he actually has some ideas that certainly merit further exploration. This type of training is the reason why elite decathletes can run 4:30 in the mile when they don’t actually do any mileage running.

Traditional running training emphasizes volume then some intensity and form is a complete after thought.

CFE is about form and strength, then lots of intensity with the thinking that strength will support the form which keeps up the speed derived from the intensity.

I have been trying CFE for 8 months for ultra trail running after many years of traditional training. I have done two 50k runs on an average of 10 miles of running a week and had the same relative performances (mid pack) that I had when logging 40-70 miles per week. On both occasions, I was not remotely sore the day after the race. The program requires a large up front commitment. I am really only on the cusp of handling the minimum workout load but I think after another full year, I will be top 25% in ultras and also be comfortable with a sub 5-minute mile which are two pretty different disciplines.

Remember, only those people crazy enough to think they can change the system actually do. When a full crop of high school kids move on with a different form/strength/speed foundation, they may do some surprising things

[...]How the mammals rose to prominence « Dr. Joan Bushwell's Chimpanzee Refuge[...]…

I couldn’t decide; I thought that because in the main clause he was speaking in the past tense, about an event with a known outcome (i.e., Obama was in fact elected), the subjunctive wasn’t correct and “was” would be right. I think this is one of those areas that grammarians love to quibble about anyway, so I should have left it alone. But seven or more other errors in a single paragraph weren’t enough for me.

In Gribbit’s Rick Perry is The Shit post, he employs multiple spellings of the name of Herman Cain, the candidate he liked the most before Perry jumped in.

Good point about Bostonese — I’ve lost some of my fluency in that dialect since moving away.

As for ‘America’s whoas’ – isn’t that how they pronounce it in Boston? ‘Gawdamn, these heah Asian women chawgin’ fie dollas foah a blowjob is a real t’ret to the income of America’s whoas!’