LincolnB - 05 March 2010 02:05 PM
Yes, the question is this: Should a serious deficiency in one area amount to a DQ or merely a penalty? How big of a penalty? In Khalipa’s case his flexibility problems resulted in neither a DQ nor a penalty, but his endurance deficiency cost him the championship. On the other hand, finishing 3rd to last in the endurance event did not prevent him from finishing 5th overall. Annie’s lack of skill also ultimately cost her—the question is was the penalty appropriate? It would seem so in her case.
I’m a bit late to this party, but here’s my $0.02
Khalipa’s deficiency could be categorized in the “knowable” domain, the same is true of Annie. An extended event in the oxidative domain can and does come up on the main page, even if infrequently. Remember the “Run 15k” wod? (Personally, I thought it was a typo.) If Annie would have been able to do muscle ups, she might have won the games. The fact that Annie couldn’t do them cost her an appropriate penalty. Muscle ups are something that every serious CrossFitter seeks. Winning the games without the ability to do a muscle up would have brought up some serious questions.
A serious deficiency in one of the ten physical skills, specifically coordination, cost me a DNF at the GSQ. This was exposed by a twist on a movement which I have done at least a hundred times. Mike G programmed wall balls with a ball that can (and does) change its center of gravity from rep to rep. I couldn’t adapt. I am basically uncoordinated and he found a way to expose it, whether by design or accident. I can learn skills with practice, but in the end, my natural athletic ability is/was lacking.
The GSQ had as close to Olympic standard snatch (no press out) as I’ve seen in a metcon. (or any CrossFit contest fot that matter) Anyway, having this standard in a metcon probably merits its own discussion since it eliminated quite a few people, but it was “knowable” since snatch comes up periodically. It can and should be a skill that a serious CrossFitter has. Those who couldn’t properly snatch a relatively light weight (115#) were eliminated, justifiably so.
I identified my weaknesses before sectionals based on my results in what I called a ‘qual wod challenge’ which I did for few months before I started training for the games. I identified weaknesses that the qual wods exposed and then worked with the most qualified coach I could ever hope to find, and made significant progress in every area that I’d identified, but it was the ‘unknowable’ that ultimately cost me.
Mike G said that he didn’t want to program anyone out of his competition and announced that he would exclude certain movements:
“The overall goal of this event is to qualify the best 30 athletes for the SE CrossFit Regionals. In doing so, we have decided to exclude certain movements and loads from our event (e.g., the muscle up). This does not mean that you will not come across these at Regionals, so it is important that you keep training these movements. So, get back on those rings and lift some heavy weights”
Given that, if we don’t see muscle ups, heavy loads and handstand press ups at the Dirty South regional, I think the qual process will have failed.
I think that the GSQ was a complete success and could easily answer the question “What is CrossFit?” It clearly adressed “broad time and modal domains” and the ten elements of fitness:
The first event was highly oxidative - 1000m row + a 1.2 mile run up a ~900 vertical feet transition. About as close as you could get expect to get to the Aromas hill run in ATL, GA. It taxed the legs and the lungs heavily. I would say that it effectively tested the cardio endurance, coordination, agility and balance. Running up the hill sucked. it was steep, uneven, rocky and unforgiving.
The second event tested the ability to recover from the first event and tested your hip capacity in a very clever longish metcon (17:00 cap) where nearly every element required that you generate power from the hips. It had a couple elements that significantly thinned the pack. I mentioned both already - wallballs with a ball whose CG changed and “strict” snatches. It tested stamina, flexibility, power and coordination.
The third event was complementary to the others. In 10:00, establish a 1RM ground to overhead, any way. This required both skill and strength, but it was completely in the ATP (ME) domain. it did a great job of testing strength, power and coordination (if you think C&J addresses these)
The last event was a “WG” couplet of pain in the familiar 21-15-9 format. A short painful metcon of thrusters and burpees. I can’t think of a more painful pair right now. Don’t believe me? Try it. Then add a muscular endurance test immediately following it. 30 DL @ 225
Given the 4 eventss, I think that the GSQ did a pretty good job of answering yes to:
Do they meet Crossfit’s 1st standard of fitness, the 10 generally recognized physical skills of cardiovascular/respiratory endurance, stamina, strength, flexibility, power, coordination, agility, balance, and accuracy? Are any being missed? Are some being given more weight than others? Are any being skipped?
How about Crossfit’s 2nd standard of fitness, performing well at any and every task imaginable? (i.e. the hopper model) For example, is the GHD event a good “task” to measure?
How about the 3rd standard of fitness, the three metabolic pathways?
