Endurance only training can break you (Page 2)

Time to join the fun...

Here's my question for Crossfit and/or weight training for triathlon training.  Which sport does it help?  

Is it swimming?  The sport where a 15 yrd old girl can beat a grown man, because technique is so important?  I would think swimming more while practicing technique would be way more beneficial.

Is it cycling?  I can see how it would help with raw power, but then you're neglecting the aerobic fitness you would gain by riding a bike, which would help you gain power and aerobic fitness.

Is it running?  A sport where adding weight hurts you, especially when that weight is upper body.

I'm just not sure where Crossfit can apply directly to triathlon, let alone be optimal.

This is what BT needs to do sometimes. Snake oil peddlers should be tarred, feathered, and thrown out of the forum. ST does this well. If you coddle BAD ideas, you lead beginners to think they might be good ideas, and that is how people get hurt doing things like crossfit.

Wow, this thread has epitomized what the decline of BT thread was talking about.  The OP posts his opinion and cites something that he feels supports it without being disrespectful or implying that his way is the only way.  

And everyone jumps in with the "oh my gosh golly goodness, there's that opinion no one agrees with again.  I won't say a word!  I'll just post that I'm not saying a word to show I clearly don't approve!  Let's get the popcorn everyone!"

THIS is a good example of why some people don't post here anymore.

Meh, maybe, but that doesn't mean we can't still have an interesting, intelligent, and informative discussion.  See my post above as an example.

Your question demonstrates the misunderstanding that many people have about ST for triathletes.  The prevailing school of thought among coaches who advocate ST isn't that it will make the average AGer faster directly, but rather that a program custom designed for an individual to correct imbalances, ROM issues, movement dysfunctions, improve their sense of balance, etc. provides the potential to perform better.  It doesn't make them faster directly.  Instead, the logic is that it enables them to get more out of their s/b/r training because they move more efficiently, and are less likely to develop overuse injuries.

The standard example that I give is someone who sits all the time in an office job who develops tight hip flexors and weak glutes that they have trouble activating.  As a result, they have trouble extending their hips to achieve a good balanced body position for front crawl swimming without extending their spine into an arch and limited stride length running.  The application of the right strength training program can correct this imbalance/movement dysfunction enabling them to swim and run better.

No, I just think they're not necessarily the right intensity and focus for S/B/R - and they require additional equipment that athletes may not have. I do prefer to provide them with comprehensive routines that can be done at home without any additional equipment.

Wow, this thread has epitomized what the decline of BT thread was talking about.  The OP posts his opinion and cites something that he feels supports it without being disrespectful or implying that his way is the only way.  

And everyone jumps in with the "oh my gosh golly goodness, there's that opinion no one agrees with again.  I won't say a word!  I'll just post that I'm not saying a word to show I clearly don't approve!  Let's get the popcorn everyone!"

THIS is a good example of why some people don't post here anymore.

Your question demonstrates the misunderstanding that many people have about ST for triathletes.  The prevailing school of thought among coaches who advocate ST isn't that it will make the average AGer faster directly, but rather that a program custom designed for an individual to correct imbalances, ROM issues, movement dysfunctions, improve their sense of balance, etc. provides the potential to perform better.  It doesn't make them faster directly.  Instead, the logic is that it enables them to get more out of their s/b/r training because they move more efficiently, and are less likely to develop overuse injuries.

The standard example that I give is someone who sits all the time in an office job who develops tight hip flexors and weak glutes that they have trouble activating.  As a result, they have trouble extending their hips to achieve a good balanced body position for front crawl swimming without extending their spine into an arch and limited stride length running.  The application of the right strength training program can correct this imbalance/movement dysfunction enabling them to swim and run better.

Your question demonstrates the misunderstanding that many people have about ST for triathletes.  The prevailing school of thought among coaches who advocate ST isn't that it will make the average AGer faster directly, but rather that a program custom designed for an individual to correct imbalances, ROM issues, movement dysfunctions, improve their sense of balance, etc. provides the potential to perform better.  It doesn't make them faster directly.  Instead, the logic is that it enables them to get more out of their s/b/r training because they move more efficiently, and are less likely to develop overuse injuries.

The standard example that I give is someone who sits all the time in an office job who develops tight hip flexors and weak glutes that they have trouble activating.  As a result, they have trouble extending their hips to achieve a good balanced body position for front crawl swimming without extending their spine into an arch and limited stride length running.  The application of the right strength training program can correct this imbalance/movement dysfunction enabling them to swim and run better.

But not everyone has muscle imbalances, and even if they have some imbalances, then their economy can be developed through specificity.  

It's also an example of how different people can read the exact same post and form different opinions about motive, tone, etc.  The OP started the 'conversation' and has not been heard from since.  I know the OP posts with some frequency and feels strongly about this topic.  But it certainly can give the impression of 'trolling' if one doesn't have that background.  I'm not saying you may not have a valid assessment of some of the posts in this thread.  But with your reply, you basically did the same thing back at them.  And despite the 'noise' there is some legitimite information in this thread.  If people can't get past a bit of noise (remember, one person's 'noise' is another person's 'signal'), then most open internet forums simply aren't for them.

But not everyone has muscle imbalances, and even if they have some imbalances, then their economy can be developed through specificity.  In the case you listed, I'll concede that for some cases ST can be beneficial, but a lot (dare I say most) people would benefit from more S/B/R.

Your question demonstrates the misunderstanding that many people have about ST for triathletes.  The prevailing school of thought among coaches who advocate ST isn't that it will make the average AGer faster directly, but rather that a program custom designed for an individual to correct imbalances, ROM issues, movement dysfunctions, improve their sense of balance, etc. provides the potential to perform better.  It doesn't make them faster directly.  Instead, the logic is that it enables them to get more out of their s/b/r training because they move more efficiently, and are less likely to develop overuse injuries.

The standard example that I give is someone who sits all the time in an office job who develops tight hip flexors and weak glutes that they have trouble activating.  As a result, they have trouble extending their hips to achieve a good balanced body position for front crawl swimming without extending their spine into an arch and limited stride length running.  The application of the right strength training program can correct this imbalance/movement dysfunction enabling them to swim and run better.

This is by far one of the best arguments for ST (notice nobody said CF) that I've seen yet and I'd honestly agree.  I would never forgo a s/b/r session for strength training but when I have a few days a week where my lunch hour is free and I've hit all my sessions (or will) then why not add in some ST, especially given I do sit at a desk the majority of the work day.  

The OP said "I'm a big proponent of cross training with weights to stay healthy and injury free." What's bad about that?

Yes, the video was about crossfit - but I see nothing inherently wrong with cross training with weights, even though I tend to lean more towards ST with body weight.

It's also an example of how different people can read the exact same post and form different opinions about motive, tone, etc.  The OP started the 'conversation' and has not been heard from since.  I know the OP posts with some frequency and feels strongly about this topic.  But it certainly can give the impression of 'trolling' if one doesn't have that background.  I'm not saying you may not have a valid assessment of some of the posts in this thread.  But with your reply, you basically did the same thing back at them.  And despite the 'noise' there is some legitimite information in this thread.  If people can't get past a bit of noise (remember, one person's 'noise' is another person's 'signal'), then most open internet forums simply aren't for them.

When you post a crossfit video, and say you like cross training with weights, that means you think crossfit is good cross training with weights. I'm in agreement that strength training to address weaknesses is a good thing. Crossfit  on the other hand is 100% bad for triathlon training.

I don't think my reply was doing the same thing back at them.  I felt my reply was respectful and constructive.  I don't think that a reply that says, boy I'm NOT going to reply to THIS one is constructive as it just shows disdain for the topic without sharing any valid or helpful information.  By replying, I was hoping maybe the thread could take a more constructive tone, and it did.

As far as the OP itself goes, there has been talk of crossfit or ST for correction of overuse injuries; however, many biomechanical issues go much further back than that and stem from how a person's body developed from birth.  I think sometimes that very successful endurance athletes forget that not everyone's bodies were made with good symmetry, or with every joint and connective tissue optimally functional, or with feet that will provide necessary stability, etc.  Some issues just aren't fully correctable and will create big hurdles when adding mileage, especially with running and riding.

I think for those of us in that category, endurance athletics or really, repetitive motion will always leave us feeling more beat up than something like ST or crossfit just because of the simple fact that those activities are not as repetitive by nature.  So in that regard I can relate to the OP.