IGX

Ash Uber Alles wrote:

Dan Martin wrote:First, it was the so-called after school learning centers because the little shitheads weren't getting enough math and reading in school. Now, you have to send your kid somewhere to get physical education. WTF?

the schools do a shit job with PE classes now. In order to really be involved in physical activity you have to do it on your own, ie sports, camps, outside group classes, etc. Its a shame. Even when I was in school (I'm 36) we had some PE teachers that all they did was make the kids run for 30 minutes each class... that's not PE, that is lazy.

syaigh wrote:When I coached at an affiliate, sometimes kids would join in the workouts. And I did NOT like seeing kids younger than 12 or 13 (depending on their development) doing timed workouts. They can generally move faster than adults and are very flexible so even if you get full range of motion, they are all over the place (as you can see by some of the squats in the videos). When we did CF kids, it was all about playing games and having fun. If we did a race or anything timed, it was an obstacle course or a foot race. Having them race through a regular WOD is just scary to behold. I've pulled kids out of WODs, even when their parents were cheering them on and gave them something else to do. The parents don't know that what the kids are doing is bad. The trainers should know better and act accordingly.

There are lots of ways to implement this stuff without it being a race and still make it fun. I understand this may have been an occasional competition, but I would not have had those young kids racing to do squats and situps and the kettlebell swings were a bit scary as well. The rowing machine was horrible to watch. Young kids repeatly jerking their shoulders and elbows against resistance is just bad. I'd rather see them play on the monkey bars, but that's just me.

I also have a real problem with parents who have their young kids playing 2-3 different sports at the same time. I run into the "he wants to do it" excuse a lot and it makes me wonder who the parent is. My son would eat sugar all day and stay up all night if he could. Doesn't mean I should let him.

I work with a lot of kids now, and I even teach the basics of weightlifting to kids as young as 6 or 8, but we use appropriate weight and focus primarily on form. Joints are precious, we should treat them as such.

Regarding PE, my kids have it once a week, but every day after school, they spend at least an hour outside playing and if they have no friends to play with, my husband or I play tag, baseball, kickball, or go for a bike ride. Sometimes, we just race each other around the house.

Back in my yoot, elementary and jr high phys ed was like friggin' sports camp: a different sport/unit every month with shitloads of skill work and general conditioning.

syaigh wrote:I also have a real problem with parents who have their young kids playing 2-3 different sports at the same time. I run into the "he wants to do it" excuse a lot and it makes me wonder who the parent is. My son would eat sugar all day and stay up all night if he could. Doesn't mean I should let him.

I work with a lot of kids now, and I even teach the basics of weightlifting to kids as young as 6 or 8, but we use appropriate weight and focus primarily on form. Joints are precious, we should treat them as such.

Regarding PE, my kids have it once a week, but every day after school, they spend at least an hour outside playing and if they have no friends to play with, my husband or I play tag, baseball, kickball, or go for a bike ride. Sometimes, we just race each other around the house.

WildGorillaMan wrote:Biggest problem with hockey these days is that the emphasis is on playing games, travel team or not. As a result of the number of teams, and the high demand for ice time (seriously, that means 3am game times for 7 year olds, I shit you not) that team practice barely exists at all. Kids are basically on their own when it comes to skills development, which is ass-backwards.

Rant! wrote:Those little girls are going to turn out like this trollop just riddled with sexual and emotional baggage. Woe to the lucky guy that marries this one and has to deal with her various "I gotta be me" episodes. I mean really. WTF the fuck is wrong with this girl?

Anon wrote:Picture why?

Part of the (cult) conditioning process, is obviously.

OTOH, it would come in handy during the trial after your pre-teen busts a vessel during the WOD.

MAJ Damon Wells wrote:The recent surge in the quest for a “well-rounded” and/or “functional” training program (and
visible abs) has become the greatest inhibitor to effective training programming. The current trend
in “fitness” training involves a complex array of what most perceive as balance of fitness parameters:
strength, flexibility, skill specific, and high or low intensity endurance training. Becoming proficient
in many skills or modalities is an attractive proposition and has become the fashionable gold standard
for flashy, trendy workouts. Often, these techniques are applied haphazardly or in a method that
emphasizes variety over consistency and progress. Terms like “muscle confusion” and “broad time and
modal domains” are common and many will tell you that these are sound exercise principles. In fact,
they are useless techniques that are the opposite of progress and are often gimmicks promoted by greedy
entrepreneurs. These training methods can even be used to hide the fact that paying clients are making
zero improvements following the routine. If you are always doing something different, how can you
know if you are improving?
In reality, most of the new fads like CrossFit, P90X, Insanity, etc. are simply glorified and well
marketed versions of circuit training. Circuit training is the sequential performance of exercises with
little to no rest between sets. This type of training has been around since the 1950’s and certainly isn’t
original to any of the programs that are cleverly marketing it today. To the layman, this is seen as a
quick way to get multiple training methods into one workout, and thus introduce variety. Typically,
a sequence of moderately difficult exercises is chosen at random and strung together to form a circuit.
The workout seems “hard” because at some point your performance is going to suffer due to fatigue.
This, in itself, does not comprise a legitimate method of training. Hard does not equal good. This
type of training, while not completely useless, usually boils down to some form of flopping around
for 10-30 minutes. There is no magic in this. There are also compromises that must be made if one
attempts to integrate strength, conditioning, and endurance into the same circuit (which is common).
Unfortunately – circuit training or not – if one tries to conduct strength and endurance training in the
same program, neither will be realized to their optimum potential. This has been shown in numerous
studies; attempts to combine strength and endurance training concurrently lead to diminished (or
zero) gains in both. Thus, the training is ineffective. Although these methods do induce a calorie
burning state for the first month or two, they are not designed for longevity and long term progress
(see The Novice Effect). They inhibit it. The combination of modalities and the trend towards variety
leads to a weaker workout program.

richardpotato wrote:I am thankful for all the extra time I had on my hands today.

Ash Uber Alles wrote:

WildGorillaMan wrote:Biggest problem with hockey these days is that the emphasis is on playing games, travel team or not. As a result of the number of teams, and the high demand for ice time (seriously, that means 3am game times for 7 year olds, I shit you not) that team practice barely exists at all. Kids are basically on their own when it comes to skills development, which is ass-backwards.

yes, same here... I've referred games at 3AM for 12 year olds... crazy

chi wrote:

Ash Uber Alles wrote:

WildGorillaMan wrote:Biggest problem with hockey these days is that the emphasis is on playing games, travel team or not. As a result of the number of teams, and the high demand for ice time (seriously, that means 3am game times for 7 year olds, I shit you not) that team practice barely exists at all. Kids are basically on their own when it comes to skills development, which is ass-backwards.

yes, same here... I've referred games at 3AM for 12 year olds... crazy

That's just fucking retarded.

richardpotato wrote:I am thankful for all the extra time I had on my hands today.

Quackmire wrote:Nothing new here, but presented well IMO. I would hate for @F lurkers to miss it. Just an excerpt:
Adaptation: Period, Persistence, and Prioritization

MAJ Damon Wells wrote:The recent surge in the quest for a “well-rounded” and/or “functional” training program (and
visible abs) has become the greatest inhibitor to effective training programming. The current trend
in “fitness” training involves a complex array of what most perceive as balance of fitness parameters:
strength, flexibility, skill specific, and high or low intensity endurance training. Becoming proficient
in many skills or modalities is an attractive proposition and has become the fashionable gold standard
for flashy, trendy workouts. Often, these techniques are applied haphazardly or in a method that
emphasizes variety over consistency and progress. Terms like “muscle confusion” and “broad time and
modal domains” are common and many will tell you that these are sound exercise principles. In fact,
they are useless techniques that are the opposite of progress and are often gimmicks promoted by greedy
entrepreneurs. These training methods can even be used to hide the fact that paying clients are making
zero improvements following the routine. If you are always doing something different, how can you
know if you are improving?
In reality, most of the new fads like CrossFit, P90X, Insanity, etc. are simply glorified and well
marketed versions of circuit training. Circuit training is the sequential performance of exercises with
little to no rest between sets. This type of training has been around since the 1950’s and certainly isn’t
original to any of the programs that are cleverly marketing it today. To the layman, this is seen as a
quick way to get multiple training methods into one workout, and thus introduce variety. Typically,
a sequence of moderately difficult exercises is chosen at random and strung together to form a circuit.
The workout seems “hard” because at some point your performance is going to suffer due to fatigue.
This, in itself, does not comprise a legitimate method of training. Hard does not equal good. This
type of training, while not completely useless, usually boils down to some form of flopping around
for 10-30 minutes. There is no magic in this. There are also compromises that must be made if one
attempts to integrate strength, conditioning, and endurance into the same circuit (which is common).
Unfortunately – circuit training or not – if one tries to conduct strength and endurance training in the
same program, neither will be realized to their optimum potential. This has been shown in numerous
studies; attempts to combine strength and endurance training concurrently lead to diminished (or
zero) gains in both. Thus, the training is ineffective. Although these methods do induce a calorie
burning state for the first month or two, they are not designed for longevity and long term progress
(see The Novice Effect). They inhibit it. The combination of modalities and the trend towards variety
leads to a weaker workout program.

Rant! wrote:

Quackmire wrote:Nothing new here, but presented well IMO. I would hate for @F lurkers to miss it. Just an excerpt:
Adaptation: Period, Persistence, and Prioritization

MAJ Damon Wells wrote:The recent surge in the quest for a “well-rounded” and/or “functional” training program (and
visible abs) has become the greatest inhibitor to effective training programming. The current trend
in “fitness” training involves a complex array of what most perceive as balance of fitness parameters:
strength, flexibility, skill specific, and high or low intensity endurance training. Becoming proficient
in many skills or modalities is an attractive proposition and has become the fashionable gold standard
for flashy, trendy workouts. Often, these techniques are applied haphazardly or in a method that
emphasizes variety over consistency and progress. Terms like “muscle confusion” and “broad time and
modal domains” are common and many will tell you that these are sound exercise principles. In fact,
they are useless techniques that are the opposite of progress and are often gimmicks promoted by greedy
entrepreneurs. These training methods can even be used to hide the fact that paying clients are making
zero improvements following the routine. If you are always doing something different, how can you
know if you are improving?
In reality, most of the new fads like CrossFit, P90X, Insanity, etc. are simply glorified and well
marketed versions of circuit training. Circuit training is the sequential performance of exercises with
little to no rest between sets. This type of training has been around since the 1950’s and certainly isn’t
original to any of the programs that are cleverly marketing it today. To the layman, this is seen as a
quick way to get multiple training methods into one workout, and thus introduce variety. Typically,
a sequence of moderately difficult exercises is chosen at random and strung together to form a circuit.
The workout seems “hard” because at some point your performance is going to suffer due to fatigue.
This, in itself, does not comprise a legitimate method of training. Hard does not equal good. This
type of training, while not completely useless, usually boils down to some form of flopping around
for 10-30 minutes. There is no magic in this. There are also compromises that must be made if one
attempts to integrate strength, conditioning, and endurance into the same circuit (which is common).
Unfortunately – circuit training or not – if one tries to conduct strength and endurance training in the
same program, neither will be realized to their optimum potential. This has been shown in numerous
studies; attempts to combine strength and endurance training concurrently lead to diminished (or
zero) gains in both. Thus, the training is ineffective. Although these methods do induce a calorie
burning state for the first month or two, they are not designed for longevity and long term progress
(see The Novice Effect). They inhibit it. The combination of modalities and the trend towards variety
leads to a weaker workout program.

This is the last word right here. We should lock down the thread with this article and call it quits. There really is nothing left to say on the subject.

Rant! wrote:

Rant! wrote:

Quackmire wrote:Nothing new here, but presented well IMO. I would hate for @F lurkers to miss it. Just an excerpt:
Adaptation: Period, Persistence, and Prioritization

MAJ Damon Wells wrote:The recent surge in the quest for a “well-rounded” and/or “functional” training program (and
visible abs) has become the greatest inhibitor to effective training programming. The current trend
in “fitness” training involves a complex array of what most perceive as balance of fitness parameters:
strength, flexibility, skill specific, and high or low intensity endurance training. Becoming proficient
in many skills or modalities is an attractive proposition and has become the fashionable gold standard
for flashy, trendy workouts. Often, these techniques are applied haphazardly or in a method that
emphasizes variety over consistency and progress. Terms like “muscle confusion” and “broad time and
modal domains” are common and many will tell you that these are sound exercise principles. In fact,
they are useless techniques that are the opposite of progress and are often gimmicks promoted by greedy
entrepreneurs. These training methods can even be used to hide the fact that paying clients are making
zero improvements following the routine. If you are always doing something different, how can you
know if you are improving?
In reality, most of the new fads like CrossFit, P90X, Insanity, etc. are simply glorified and well
marketed versions of circuit training. Circuit training is the sequential performance of exercises with
little to no rest between sets. This type of training has been around since the 1950’s and certainly isn’t
original to any of the programs that are cleverly marketing it today. To the layman, this is seen as a
quick way to get multiple training methods into one workout, and thus introduce variety. Typically,
a sequence of moderately difficult exercises is chosen at random and strung together to form a circuit.
The workout seems “hard” because at some point your performance is going to suffer due to fatigue.
This, in itself, does not comprise a legitimate method of training. Hard does not equal good. This
type of training, while not completely useless, usually boils down to some form of flopping around
for 10-30 minutes. There is no magic in this. There are also compromises that must be made if one
attempts to integrate strength, conditioning, and endurance into the same circuit (which is common).
Unfortunately – circuit training or not – if one tries to conduct strength and endurance training in the
same program, neither will be realized to their optimum potential. This has been shown in numerous
studies; attempts to combine strength and endurance training concurrently lead to diminished (or
zero) gains in both. Thus, the training is ineffective. Although these methods do induce a calorie
burning state for the first month or two, they are not designed for longevity and long term progress
(see The Novice Effect). They inhibit it. The combination of modalities and the trend towards variety
leads to a weaker workout program.

This is the last word right here. We should lock down the thread with this article and call it quits. There really is nothing left to say on the subject.

$1,000 says this will never get mentioned on the message boards at @fit.