IGX

WildGorillaMan wrote:She needs to break loose and start her own enduro guru thing. People would follow her. The fact that she doesn't want to be a guru only further qualifies her for the role.

WildGorillaMan wrote:I'd like to take this moment to point out that Dirt Diva just ran some insane ultra race and finished 2nd among ladies and 11th overall, and she did it while flirting with hypothermia.

She's a goddamn savage and even when she's hurting she not only finishes races, she places in them.



She needs to break loose and start her own enduro guru thing. People would follow her. The fact that she doesn't want to be a guru only further qualifies her for the role.

Ash Uber Alles wrote:no, but when people are constantly giving mainsite and HQ money for certs, affiliation, etc that is the problem.

the problem isn't the people working out, its the hypocrites who hate HQ and mainsite yet still renew their affiliation, still host certs, still HELP with certs (do you have any idea how many HQ trainers think HQ is a joke yet still work with them?).

WildGorillaMan wrote:I'd like to take this moment to point out that Dirt Diva just ran some insane ultra race and finished 2nd among ladies and 11th overall, and she did it while flirting with hypothermia.

She's a goddamn savage and even when she's hurting she not only finishes races, she places in them.



She needs to break loose and start her own enduro guru thing. People would follow her. The fact that she doesn't want to be a guru only further qualifies her for the role.

#	Runner	        Age	Laps	Distance (miles)	
1	Suzanna Bon	46	110	116.71	
2	Kermit Cuff  	52	105	111.405	
3	Walter Edwards	35	102	108.222	
4	Noe Castanon	40	91	97.051	
5	Andy Kumeda	43	91	96.551	
6	Daniel Fabun	36	84	89.124	
7	Erik Priedkalns	39	84	89.124	
8	Kai Huang   	42	84	89.124	
9	William McCarty	63	79	84.819	
10	John Koester	61	78	83.558	
11	Catra Corbett	45	76	80.636	

MarcoFP wrote:Diva > MayorMcCheese

FACT!

TheCoug wrote: This is a true story. Should I have quit martial arts because the assholes that top were Neanderthals? Maybe spend the rest of my days spouting foulmouthed ignorance on websites about them? Or get over it and enjoy what I could and say FUCK the guys at the top?

Hm...

TheCoug wrote:PL54 and Ash, you two are my favorites here. you know that.

It's true. I found xfit to be intoxicating. Fact. However, nobody pushed me to hurt my knee. I tore that ACL doing martial arts in 1991 and it was my stupidity that allowed me to do xfit 20+ years later without thinking twice. Once I had my surgery, EVERY trainer who saw me enter the box slowed me down and wanted me to take it easy.

Thoughts on the Kipping Pull-up

The kipping pull-up has been a point of vehement contention since its popularization by CrossFit; one camp tells the world it’s the only way to create complete elite athletic dominance and will possibly cure all known disease, and the other claims they will fail to develop much of anything athletic but will completely destroy your shoulders. It seems unlikely that any of these is entirely true.

I’ve never spoken up much either way before, except to express my distaste for the “butterfly” kip, and even that wasn’t too enthusiastic, and discuss the pull-up in general terms in this article. Recently the heat seems to have been turned up a bit and I’m seeing more and more discussion on the topic, focused primarily on the injury potential of the exercise. I’ve avoided getting involved for a few reasons, not the least of which is that I feel it’s an unwinnable war and any opinions I share on the topic will piss at least a few people off. I don’t mind this exactly, but I have a hard time not then engaging in stupid internet arguments, so I prefer to avoid setting them up in the first place. But I’ll give this one a shot anyway.

First, I will reiterate my dislike of the butterfly kip. Its sole purpose is to serve as a competitive pull-up style (whether or not this is recognized or admitted), and this alone is enough to dissuade me from ever using it, teaching it or endorsing it. The idea of modifying an exercise to reduce effort and increase speed for the sake of beating a clock or another exerciser doesn’t make much sense to me. Exercises should have purpose and rationale; for example, a pull-up is a great way to develop upper body pulling strength, scapular stability and even muscular and cardiorespiratory endurance if performed in higher volumes. The butterfly kip minimizes the demands on the very things that the exercise should be used to develop. Additionally, it brings an element of stress to the shoulders and elbows of which the potential for injury is far greater than a more traditional kipping movement. Were I a CrossFit Gamer or some other type of competitive exerciser, I would use the butterfly kip. But again, that very notion tells me it’s not a good choice for training, other than periodic practice for impending competition.

The pull-up is such a fundamental, foundational exercise that it belongs, in some form, in the training of just about everyone. Note that this might mean extreme modifications for some individuals—it doesn’t necessarily mean that grandma is swinging around on a pull-up bar after her shoulder surgery.

The strict pull-up should be considered the standard from which all variations stem, and it should be the standard to which everyone strives. That is, if you’re going to do pull-ups of any kind, one of your ultimate goals should be being capable of multiple strict pull-ups. Variations have their places, but never are they replacements for the pull-up itself.

The more traditional kipping style that was originally endorsed by CrossFit before the advent of the butterfly kip and the CrossFit Games should be considered a totally different exercise and discussed accordingly. That is, if we’re talking about injury potential, we can’t confuse the butterfly and traditional kip variations—the movements are too dissimilar, and I’m of the opinion that much of the increasing rate of pull-up-related shoulder injury is directly related to the increasing rate of butterfly kipping rather than traditional kipping.

In a properly performed traditional kipping pull-up, after locking out over the bar, the athlete pushes back from the bar into an arc that loads the forward push of the chest through the arms prior to the following rep. This is a smooth, controlled movement; by no means is it jarring or ballistic unless done improperly. There is continuous tension throughout the descent, and the force is fluidly transitioned between horizontal and vertical planes. The loading of the shoulders is neither abrupt nor directed in a way that subjects the shoulder joint to anything it shouldn’t be more than capable of withstanding.

The butterfly kip, on the other hand, sends the athlete forward under the bar into the bottom. There is an unavoidable moment of slack and freefall, followed by the shoulders being opened completely in a relatively jarring manner—being pulled closer to straight up from the body rather than stretched progressively with more horizontal movement. In theory this could be controlled more than it typically is, and the movement better guided, but the fact is that anyone doing a butterfly kip has clearly prioritized other things (or in many cases is simply unaware of any of this and is simply emulating CF superstars).

In any case of kipping pull-ups, adequate preparation is necessary for safety. This is not unique to the kipping pull-up; it’s true for any physical activity. Where this becomes problematic often is situations in which inadequate progression exists due to impatience or ignorance. Another great example of this that I’ve seen many times are middle-aged individuals with no athletic background and extremely brief training histories being instructed to perform huge volumes of plyometric movements. Like kipping pull-ups, plyometrics aren’t unavoidably injurious—they just require smart implementation, which involves proper progression, execution and programming.

With regard to kipping pull-ups, if an individual can barely string together a couple of ring rows at a high angle, jumping them into kipping pull-ups is ill-advised to say the least, yet this happens all the time. There is such a rush to get people doing pull-ups (or loose interpretations thereof) that simple, seemingly obvious things like this are often overlooked or ignored.

With new clients at Catalyst, the body row on rings is the initial introduction to the pull-up. This does a few things. First, it provides an opportunity for us to assess a client—it’s stunning how weak many are, both in terms of the ability to pull themselves to the rings and to maintain trunk rigidity. The body row is a chance for clients to feel what it’s like to really engage the upper back—to retract the scapulae powerfully, feel the lats extend the spine, and feel the shoulders engage to bring the arms back. These things are frequently missing from pull-ups, particularly kipping pull-ups, and even more so when kipping pull-ups are a client’s first introduction to upper body pulling exercises. The exercise also begins strengthening the shoulders and elbows and preparing them to withstand greater stresses like what they’ll need to manage with pull-ups of any kind.

The next thing our new clients are exposed to is strict pull-ups with whatever assistance is necessary. We use elastic bands at times, but I actually prefer leg assistance. The problem with bands is that the tension is exactly the opposite of what’s needed—that is, it’s greatest the bottom when the client needs it least, and it’s greatly reduced at the top when the client needs it the most. This exacerbates the problem of clients not engaging their upper backs as much as they should, and prevents them from ever developing the strength to do so. Instead, they finish the movement with all arm flexors, a forward roll of the shoulders and a reach of the chin. With leg assistance, the client can instantly adjust to provide exactly as much assistance as is needed. It’s impossible to measure progress in this manner, but bands aren’t exactly great for this either—the jumps between band sizes are way too large. As long as you keep an eye on your clients, they’ll be using less and less assistance. It’s quite obvious when watching when they’re using more leg assistance than necessary.

Only after three weeks of body rows and leg assisted strict pull-up work do our new clients even get introduced to the idea of a kipping pull-up. This initial introduction involves teaching the basic kipping movement, which more than being movement instruction, begins to help stretch the shoulder girdle in a safe and controlled manner to prepare for the necessary range of motion for a safe and controlled kipping pull-up. The strict pull-up remains the target even after this.

To wrap up what was supposed to be a brief newsletter article, I don’t believe the traditional kipping pull-up is any more dangerous than many other useful exercises. Like any of these other exercises, though, it demands smart progression and implementation. Kipping pull-ups of any variety are also not substitutes for strict pull-ups and rowing-type exercises. They are a unique exercise that can have a place in many individuals’ training—just not the strict pull-up’s place.

Greg Everett
Catalyst Athletics
The Performance Menu



Catalyst Athletics | 1257 Tasman Dr. Suite A | Sunnyvale, CA 94089 | 408-400-0067 | [email protected] | www.cathletics.com

Thoughts on the Kipping Pull-up

The kipping pull-up has been a point of vehement contention since its popularization by CrossFit; one camp tells the world it’s the only way to create complete elite athletic dominance and will possibly cure all known disease, and the other claims they will fail to develop much of anything athletic but will completely destroy your shoulders. It seems unlikely that any of these is entirely true.

I’ve never spoken up much either way before, except to express my distaste for the “butterfly” kip, and even that wasn’t too enthusiastic, and discuss the pull-up in general terms in this article. Recently the heat seems to have been turned up a bit and I’m seeing more and more discussion on the topic, focused primarily on the injury potential of the exercise. I’ve avoided getting involved for a few reasons, not the least of which is that I feel it’s an unwinnable war and any opinions I share on the topic will piss at least a few people off. I don’t mind this exactly, but I have a hard time not then engaging in stupid internet arguments, so I prefer to avoid setting them up in the first place. But I’ll give this one a shot anyway.

First, I will reiterate my dislike of the butterfly kip. Its sole purpose is to serve as a competitive pull-up style (whether or not this is recognized or admitted), and this alone is enough to dissuade me from ever using it, teaching it or endorsing it. The idea of modifying an exercise to reduce effort and increase speed for the sake of beating a clock or another exerciser doesn’t make much sense to me. Exercises should have purpose and rationale; for example, a pull-up is a great way to develop upper body pulling strength, scapular stability and even muscular and cardiorespiratory endurance if performed in higher volumes. The butterfly kip minimizes the demands on the very things that the exercise should be used to develop. Additionally, it brings an element of stress to the shoulders and elbows of which the potential for injury is far greater than a more traditional kipping movement. Were I a CrossFit Gamer or some other type of competitive exerciser, I would use the butterfly kip. But again, that very notion tells me it’s not a good choice for training, other than periodic practice for impending competition.

The pull-up is such a fundamental, foundational exercise that it belongs, in some form, in the training of just about everyone. Note that this might mean extreme modifications for some individuals—it doesn’t necessarily mean that grandma is swinging around on a pull-up bar after her shoulder surgery.

The strict pull-up should be considered the standard from which all variations stem, and it should be the standard to which everyone strives. That is, if you’re going to do pull-ups of any kind, one of your ultimate goals should be being capable of multiple strict pull-ups. Variations have their places, but never are they replacements for the pull-up itself.

The more traditional kipping style that was originally endorsed by CrossFit before the advent of the butterfly kip and the CrossFit Games should be considered a totally different exercise and discussed accordingly. That is, if we’re talking about injury potential, we can’t confuse the butterfly and traditional kip variations—the movements are too dissimilar, and I’m of the opinion that much of the increasing rate of pull-up-related shoulder injury is directly related to the increasing rate of butterfly kipping rather than traditional kipping.

In a properly performed traditional kipping pull-up, after locking out over the bar, the athlete pushes back from the bar into an arc that loads the forward push of the chest through the arms prior to the following rep. This is a smooth, controlled movement; by no means is it jarring or ballistic unless done improperly. There is continuous tension throughout the descent, and the force is fluidly transitioned between horizontal and vertical planes. The loading of the shoulders is neither abrupt nor directed in a way that subjects the shoulder joint to anything it shouldn’t be more than capable of withstanding.

The butterfly kip, on the other hand, sends the athlete forward under the bar into the bottom. There is an unavoidable moment of slack and freefall, followed by the shoulders being opened completely in a relatively jarring manner—being pulled closer to straight up from the body rather than stretched progressively with more horizontal movement. In theory this could be controlled more than it typically is, and the movement better guided, but the fact is that anyone doing a butterfly kip has clearly prioritized other things (or in many cases is simply unaware of any of this and is simply emulating CF superstars).

In any case of kipping pull-ups, adequate preparation is necessary for safety. This is not unique to the kipping pull-up; it’s true for any physical activity. Where this becomes problematic often is situations in which inadequate progression exists due to impatience or ignorance. Another great example of this that I’ve seen many times are middle-aged individuals with no athletic background and extremely brief training histories being instructed to perform huge volumes of plyometric movements. Like kipping pull-ups, plyometrics aren’t unavoidably injurious—they just require smart implementation, which involves proper progression, execution and programming.

With regard to kipping pull-ups, if an individual can barely string together a couple of ring rows at a high angle, jumping them into kipping pull-ups is ill-advised to say the least, yet this happens all the time. There is such a rush to get people doing pull-ups (or loose interpretations thereof) that simple, seemingly obvious things like this are often overlooked or ignored.

With new clients at Catalyst, the body row on rings is the initial introduction to the pull-up. This does a few things. First, it provides an opportunity for us to assess a client—it’s stunning how weak many are, both in terms of the ability to pull themselves to the rings and to maintain trunk rigidity. The body row is a chance for clients to feel what it’s like to really engage the upper back—to retract the scapulae powerfully, feel the lats extend the spine, and feel the shoulders engage to bring the arms back. These things are frequently missing from pull-ups, particularly kipping pull-ups, and even more so when kipping pull-ups are a client’s first introduction to upper body pulling exercises. The exercise also begins strengthening the shoulders and elbows and preparing them to withstand greater stresses like what they’ll need to manage with pull-ups of any kind.

The next thing our new clients are exposed to is strict pull-ups with whatever assistance is necessary. We use elastic bands at times, but I actually prefer leg assistance. The problem with bands is that the tension is exactly the opposite of what’s needed—that is, it’s greatest the bottom when the client needs it least, and it’s greatly reduced at the top when the client needs it the most. This exacerbates the problem of clients not engaging their upper backs as much as they should, and prevents them from ever developing the strength to do so. Instead, they finish the movement with all arm flexors, a forward roll of the shoulders and a reach of the chin. With leg assistance, the client can instantly adjust to provide exactly as much assistance as is needed. It’s impossible to measure progress in this manner, but bands aren’t exactly great for this either—the jumps between band sizes are way too large. As long as you keep an eye on your clients, they’ll be using less and less assistance. It’s quite obvious when watching when they’re using more leg assistance than necessary.

Only after three weeks of body rows and leg assisted strict pull-up work do our new clients even get introduced to the idea of a kipping pull-up. This initial introduction involves teaching the basic kipping movement, which more than being movement instruction, begins to help stretch the shoulder girdle in a safe and controlled manner to prepare for the necessary range of motion for a safe and controlled kipping pull-up. The strict pull-up remains the target even after this.

To wrap up what was supposed to be a brief newsletter article, I don’t believe the traditional kipping pull-up is any more dangerous than many other useful exercises. Like any of these other exercises, though, it demands smart progression and implementation. Kipping pull-ups of any variety are also not substitutes for strict pull-ups and rowing-type exercises. They are a unique exercise that can have a place in many individuals’ training—just not the strict pull-up’s place.

Greg Everett
Catalyst Athletics
The Performance Menu



Catalyst Athletics | 1257 Tasman Dr. Suite A | Sunnyvale, CA 94089 | 408-400-0067 | [email protected] | www.cathletics.com

lesser_rebelangel wrote:

TheCoug wrote:PL54 and Ash, you two are my favorites here. you know that.

It's true. I found xfit to be intoxicating. Fact. However, nobody pushed me to hurt my knee. I tore that ACL doing martial arts in 1991 and it was my stupidity that allowed me to do xfit 20+ years later without thinking twice. Once I had my surgery, EVERY trainer who saw me enter the box slowed me down and wanted me to take it easy.

Intoxicating. It got you high, admit it. And you found out firsthand what happens when you work out mainly just to feel good, and the performance gains (or the lack thereof) take a back seat to how you feel. Go to your therapist to work on your psychological problems, and train to get better relative to some concrete goal. Because doing it the other way leads to unreasonable training practices, even dangerous ones, mental and physical burnout and probably injury. I'm speaking from experience BTW.

Yeah, I have gripes with HQ, Glassman, etc. but my biggest beef is with the asinine programming, both at the mainpage and affiliate levels. And given CrossFit's demographic (i.e. exercise addicts w/little to no understanding themselves of exercise science, physiology, or proper programming), it's not surprising how many people get injured or utterly wrecked. And it's irresponsible. Not to mention all the groupthink and delusional thinking (no, you're not elite by any measure that counts, folks).

Ed Zachary wrote:I don't care how much any @fit asshole claims to hate HQ. If they are calling their training @fit they are feeding the machine. There are douchebags doing 5-3-1 and hill sprints and calling it fucking @fit.

Keep defending it Cougie if it makes you feel better. It won't make it any less of a lie.

The box owners toe the line for the easy money the rest are just sheep.

TheCoug wrote:I think the heart of the problem is that Glassman did... others didn't. If it were any other, he'd be raked through the coals too because no business like this grows by being liked and accepted by every fucking asshole with an opinion.

Quackmire wrote: POP QUIZ! Second pull or max deadlift?!?!

climber511 wrote:The reverse grip makes cleans a little tough as well.

Jezebel Jones wrote:

Quackmire wrote: POP QUIZ! Second pull or max deadlift?!?!

Shoulders behind the bar, shitty back angle, absense of shoes... also the fact that no @fitter in the history of anything has ever cleaned that much.

Survey says: Shitty hitched deadlift.

Gin Master wrote:
Never seen anyone lap a bar before. The Atlas DL is probably more functional than what you insects are doing.

toddmr wrote:Over at the CFE forum, some dude asked about Boston Qualifiers and surprisingly, CFE apparently hasn't produced one yet.

cfefailboston.jpg