1. I admit that I do not know EVERYTHING about the CF training systems, methodology, certifications etc. But what I do know is that with the holes left in the CF system, there is no way that it can help an athlete to the top of his or her game. I agree that for me to be taken serious by the followers of Claude’s wonderful blog, I will need to explain the things that you have mentioned.

“explain how he acquired the knowledge of what ALL athletes need”
A: This is actually quite simple, and the mere need to ask the question clearly demonstrates the erroneous mentality of CF adherents. CF folks believe that optimal atheltic development is about certain energy systems, exercises, movement patterns or anything else that is commonly associated with the particular sport. The problem is that proper athletic development only needs to focus on these things after baseline foundations have been met. Let me give an example:

I have worked with easily over 100 athletes (some pro, some not) that have used CF in North America for a significant period of time (more than 1 year). Every single one of these athletes has been through numerous workout sessions to improve their aerobic and anaerobic capacity. NEVER EVER has a single one of these athletes ever been asked to take pulse oxygen levels or a simple blood test by the CF “professionals”. 16 of the 39 professional atheltes were highly anaemic (low iron), with extremely low RBC (red blood cell counts) and extrelely high levels of cortisol. Is anyone going to tell me that you can improve the aerobic capacity of these athletes when they are dangerously anaemic? When they dont have the RBC concentration to supply adequate oxygen levels to the tissues? Give me a break, there is NO CHANCE!
You ask me ” how do I know what every athlete needs?” because every athlete needs the simplest basics from Neuron Theory.
1. Glucose
2. Oxygen
3. Activation
It is quite simple, yet has never been addressed by the CF professionals. They are so busy putting up youtube videos that they have totally neglected basic fundamental science. This is why it is so ineffective.

2. When talking about the exercises, I can refer people to my crossfit part 2 post from my blog for further explanation http://physicalprep.wordpress.com/2011/09/16/crossfit-part-2-2-reasons-to-say-no/
Again, its not about the exercises, many of the exercises are great. It is the reasoning behind implementing these exercises that is crucial.
When we are talking about sport at the highest level, studies, for the most part are useless. Once you feel the quality of the tissue of someone like Usain Bolt, the reaction time of Martin Brodeur or the CNS of Randy Moss, you begin to realize that the studies conducted using power development in university students, is totally useless. We don’t have studies for athletes at this level.

3. When the CF website says “same routines” for mma fighters and the elderly, to me that means, same sets, volume, rest, intensity, etc. The website then says it “scales load and intensity” So you mean to tell me that those are the only variables that need to be changed when your grandfather is training? I highly doubt that. As we age, we lose the ability to have proper cerebellar tone. This can happen as early as 15-20 minutes into a workout program for the elderly. This can improperly affect motor tone either unilaterally or bilaterally. It doesnt matter at this point, how functional the movement pattern is, this is negative information being filtered into the CNS. Again, never heard mention of this at CF.

I just want to leave off tonight by saying again, I don’t hate CF. I like some of the workouts, they are great fun and challenging. I only have a problem in CF being able to address optimum athletic development. Okay, and a bit of a problem with training grandfathers.
thanks
Daniel Gallucci

1. His statement, “Now with that preamble out of the way I must say that if you or anyone you know is an athlete training for a particular sport or competition, stay as far away from crossfit as possible!”, makes the following assumptions:
a. Dan knows what all athletes training for a particular sport or competition require in order to be better prepared for their particular sport or competition.
b. Dan knows the Crossfit , (CF), system and methodologies in great detail, and finds them to be one of the least effective ways of preparing for a sport or competition.
c. Dan implies that CF may actually be detrimental to preparing for a sport or competition due to his particular phrasing, however never states this outright.
Now, if Dan wants a reader to take him seriously, then I would subscribe to the theory that he has the obligation to explain:
a. Explain how he acquired the knowledge of what ALL athletes need.
b. Explain why CF is so ineffective

2. Next statement: “Crossfit in NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM uses modern sport science as a tool to train their members. There is no exercise physiology study anywhere that suggests you can continually kick the shit out of people on a daily basis in order to get “athletic results”.” My comments here would be:

a. Define ‘modern sport science’ and explain how CF fails to implement it. I find this strange as many of the exercises that makeup the CF regimen are also used by professional sports teams of all sorts during the off season. Ie footballers will work power cleans for obvious reason. As do wrestlers. And most obvious of all is that many of the CF exercises are taken from Olympic power lifting, and I can only assume that these are not used in an Olympic weight lifter’s off season training, but rather as direct training for a competition. The natural corollary is that none of these athletes are using sport science either for their training, which O find puzzling.
b. As for the part about the study, I’m not quite sure what is meant by athletic results. Is he looking for a study that shows that an intense workout regimen has never been proven to show any increase in some category of athletic performance? I am sure I could find something like this if it were required. Then again, I don’t think there has ever been a study on the effects of “continually kicking shit out of people”, so perhaps I am going to have to concede on this one.
c. Regardless if there is or isn’t a formal study, both common sense and a surplus of anecdotal evidence suggests that there are athletes out there who use CF to enhance their performance in their respective sport. If you want to get technical, all it takes is one MMA fighter to have used CF to become stronger in the ring, and Dan’s entire premise crumbles, much like an athlete crumbling under the weight of a clean and jerk that simply was never meant to be.
d. Finally, I think this statement begins to reveal its authors lack of subject matter knowledge. CF is not a regime of daily workouts, rather a 3 day cycle with 2 days work and 1 day rest.

3. Regarding the statement: ““ We’ve used our same routines for elderly individuals with heart disease and cage fighters one month out from televised bouts.” that should raise a huge red flag. How on earth does a mixed martial art guy train the same way as a guy with heart disease? This leads in to my biggest pet peeve with the Crossfit system .”

a. This claim is based on the fact that CF takes the same exercises and philosophy that are used to strengthen and prepare high level athletes for competition and scales them down in intensity and load for people who are less fit or non competitive. The reasoning behind this is two fold. First, it is meant to counter the popular trend of ‘health club’ exercises based on generally non-functional movements, such as the arm curl, that are designed to build physique but not athletic performance
b. It exposes the ‘non-athlete’ population to functional exercises that stress function over form, thus providing a better platform to perform basic physiological movements that are required for ever day life, such as lifting things, getting over things, or perhaps sprinting. Think for example how many times you bend over to pick something up, ie your child, vs how many times you perform an arm curl, or a leg extension.

4. Finally: “I have NEVER heard an intelligent backing for any of the program design and or training adaptations.”.
a. I would suggest this as a simple starting point: http://www.4shared.com/preview.jsp?w=840&h=600&s=auto&b=0&l=http://www.4shared.com/folder/4F6L9U4T/_online.html?dirembed=true