I was just alerted me to this video from Crossfit Endurance. I could hardly control my laughter and was about to forward it to all my friends with the subject line ROTFLMAO, when I realized that it wasn't a joke. For those of you who can't be bothered to click through to watch and read, here's a summary of what you're missing.
The website shows three elite endurance athletes - Haile Gebrselassie (the greatest distance runner ever), Paula Newby Fraser (the most accomplished female triathlete ever) and Pam Reed (winner of the Badwater Ultra, and multiple world record holder) - and contrasts their appearance with that of a single Cross Fit athlete who is apparently their senior, but looks younger and healthier. They blame the appearance of the world class athletes on "oxidative stress", ignoring a couple of minor technicalities. Geb was born and raised in Ethiopia - a country at altitude with a tropical climate. Pam Reed lives in Tucson and refuses to wear sunblock. Newby Fraser also spent countless hours training in the sun, and presumably didn't always take good care of her skin. Despite all this, CFE claims that all the training and the associated oxidative stress is why these athletes look the way they do. Are the geniuses at Cross Fit aware of the concept of a confounding variable? Let's make it simple for them. Over the last few weeks I've lost some weight, and the stock market has dipped. That doesn't mean that there's a causal relationship. If I make a few extra visits to Krispy Kreme does Crossfit think that our economy will rebound? (I'm happy to try it as a public service.)
The video gets even funnier. The speaker says "Ryan Hall is doing 100-110 mile weeks, last I've heard on a report.... I would never in a million years have an athlete doing that. Not anymore." Considering that Hall is an Olympian, a sub 60:00 half marathoner and 2:06 marathoner, it seems odd that anyone would hold him up as an example of what not to do, yet this comedian CFE spokesman does.
There's no doubt that Cross Fit workouts are hard. There is doubt that they're safe. There is doubt that they're effective. (CF and CFE have no peer reviewed science to support any of their claims that their methods are any more effective than more conventional means, and it's important to note that just because a workout is hard, it does not mean that it's good at anything other than making you better at doing the workouts.) More to the point, it's interesting that CFE would take four of the world's greatest athletes and hold them up as an example of what not to aspire to. Apparently Cross Fit is only concerned with aesthetics, and performance is irrelevant. Winning a race isn't important. Setting a world record or winning a gold medal isn't important. Having show muscles and smooth skin when you finally cross the line - that's important. Hilarious.





Nike Women's Marathon - Pt. 2
While I thought my recent commentary about Cross Fit would generate some conversation, it was actually the post about the Nike Women's Marathon controversy that got everyone talking. That topic elicited more reader comments than my posts about cheaters, race victories, or hookers and blow. Since the race and is still a topic of discussion, I thought I'd post the response from USA Track & Field.
Perhaps the quality about competitive running that people most love is its purity: the first person to the finish wins. Normally, the first to the finish has the fastest time. Simple enough - right?
On October 19 at the Nike Women's Marathon in San Francisco, that purity was muddled a bit when it was determined that the first person to the finish line wasn't actually the fastest person in the race: a woman who had started with the "pack", in an official gun start 20 minutes later, ran a time 11 minutes faster than the person who had won the "elite" race. Race officials didn't know it until the "chip times" - the times as recorded by electronic chips in each competitors' shoes - revealed it to be the case.
This raises an important philosophical question: In any given race, who should be considered the winner? Is it the first person across the line, or the fastest person in the race? How do you define victory?
Continue reading "Nike Women's Marathon - Pt. 2" »
Posted at 10:14 AM in Coach's Comments | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)