Nice work Kris!
I guess there is a little bit of a mental component too…

Good post Dutch, but what about technical weakness? I think the two types of weakness you address fall under what I call “physical capacity.” Technical capacity, the ability to perform a movement safely and efficiently at low load/light intensity, can be a weakness as well.

For example: If I have a 175# athlete with a 1:00 400m run, a 5:30 mile and a 355# back squat, and a 185# press, neither strength nor endurance is the problem. But he’s doing “Nancy” in 25 minutes, because he’s doing the overhead squats as singles. This seems to indicate that the issue is technical, i.e., he does not have a high level of technical capacity in the movement, in this case the overhead squat. This needs to be addressed through practice, not training, since it is a neurological issue.

I just finished writing a post on this for my blog, http://www.evolveyourfitness.blogspot.com, if anyone is interested.

-BullFrog

Dutch,

Going back to the “Nancy” example, say we have Athlete 1 mentioned above (175#, 60 second 400m, 5:30 mile, 355# back squat, 185# press) and Athlete 2(175#, 60 second 400m run, 5:30 mile, 185# back squat, 115# press).

When doing “Nancy,” both athletes have the exact same run times, and break up their overhead squats into the exact same way (that is to say, if we video taped them doing it side-by-side, they would be doing everything at exactly the same time.) They both finish in 25 minutes.

If the only metric by which we measure strength is force production, these two athletes should train in the same way. However, I think you and I both know that this isn’t true. Athlete 1 needs to be drilling overhead squats with light-to-moderate weight and low intensity like there is no friggin’ tomorrow. Athlete 2 just needs to get stronger, and will probably be better served by doing heavy squats, presses, and deadlifts than he would be doing a bunch of overhead squats, be they heavy or light, because the loading is so relatively low.

I see your point but my argument is that each athlete has to work on getting stronger. Because athlete 1 doesn’t have the ability to OHS 95lbs i see them as being weak. Their path to getting stronger is different than that of athlete 2 who is also weak but they both need work. Technique is a huge component of strength in my opinion.

Don’t overthink this. We are saying the same thing. You are just using different words.

You are the man dave!
I agree. In my experience wrestlers and soccer players pick up CF better than anyone. They tend to have a pretty good metabolic capacity as well as a little bit of power. They tend to accept the pain better as well.

Bottom line is strength trumps endurance. Commitment trumps them both.

dutch, i played collegiate soccer, so I would have to agree with both you and Dave. my conditioning has never been a problem, and to take into account compound effort over the last year of actually doing crossfit style workouts, my Crossfit Total has jumped 140 lbs in that span with my conditioning improving as well. And as of today, I repeated the Southwest Qualifier #1 wod 3rds 155c/j x10 400m run and completed it in 11min, Qualifier time was 12:04(500m row instead of run). Point is, I have concentrated on heavy strength lifts because I was WEAK, now not so such now and improving rather quickly.

(I’ve been crossfitting for 4 years with the first 3 be REALLY inconsistent because of my work, but since the games 08′, have not missed many workouts)