IGX

kreator wrote:LOL Mackenzie's book is coming out. Here's the trailer.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJuofB7JL88">YouTube Link</a>

Steggy wrote:I went looking for any Tour De France winners that followed BMACK's program, seems to be a void...

Brett,
Thanks for taking the time to write up your thoughts on the concept of Affiliate quality. This is an issue that pops up from time to time, but we don’t often hear a thorough explanation from CrossFit on the reasons for the Affiliate model...(That’s why I think this is a great video)

First off, I’m going to do you a favor and throw out your statistical analysis of Affiliates and affiliate owners since it’s apparent you’re just guessing based on what you’ve seen in your area. So let’s just try to agree that you think some people aren’t educated enough. From what I can gather in summary, you are saying that the basic trainer licensing agreement CrossFit holds Affiliates to is not enough of a standard, and it’s pretty clear you think an important prerequisite is having a background or education in Exercise physiology.

I couldn’t disagree with you more. And let me use the comparison of diet to illustrate my point.
I imagine that you would expect any good CrossFit Affiliate to promote some version of the CrossFit “fitness in 100 words” nutritional prescription. Now why is it acceptable for coaches and trainers, with no formal training whatsoever, to give potentially life-altering nutritional advice to clients but not coaching? Do you think the Affiliation model should require owner to have a degree in Nutrition? Should they need to be registered Dietitians?

Hopefully you see the problem, not only can a trainer dramatically improve lives via nutritional advice without ever picking up a formal nutrition textbook, but that “formal” education would encourage a prescription you and I would both recognize as harmful. What’s more, it would drastically reduce the ability for good people to spread good information to a society badly in need of common-sense dietary changes.

I am arguing that movement is no different. Many of the best CrossFit trainers I know come from backgrounds that have nothing to do with Fitness. And some of the most backwards, confused, and ineffective fitness programs (like diet) that I’ve seen are written up by Phd’s.

Now don’t get me wrong, I’m a closet fitness geek too, but the idea that the information garnered from a formal education in exercise phys or anatomy is some sort of magical buffer that will prevent anyone from being a “bad” trainer is bogus. There are PLENTY of people who can write out the citric-acid-cycle from memory and can’t see a client’s back round in a squat.

Now you’ve also predicted that these “bad” Affiliates, that Glassman refers to as the “Boogey-man” Affiliate, are going to give CrossFit a bad name. Unless you can give me a statistically significant example, you’re just echoing a claim people have said for years that has never come to fruition. CrossFit has never been bigger, faster growing, or more popular, and I’m saying that from my experience, having taught in hundreds of Affiliates world wide and met thousands of future CrossFit trainers.
Finally, I want to point out that I understand where you’re coming from with your suggestion that we police and standardize CrossFit Affiliates, but I think your idea is both based on an empty threat (as I said above) and would have consequences you and I would both hate. Think about it. As much as our critics love to paint CrossFit as an unbending authority that won’t tolerate differing views, we have the most liberal and tolerant business model I’ve ever seen. There are hundreds of Affiliates in great standing with CrossFit Inc. that all do things very differently. Some hate the zone and love paleo, some hate paleo and love the zone, some do neither. Some use a strength bias, some never lift heavy. Some love the games and send affiliate teams to LA, while some ignore the games and focus their energy on recruiting grandparents and kids.

Anyone who claims we don’t allow different opinions is missing the most obvious piece of evidence against that claim- the Affiliate model. I’d also argue that anyone making that claim is upset because what THEY want is for CrossFit to enforce THEIR specific view as the standard. That’s kind of what your argument would result in. How would you feel if CrossFit showed up at your gym and told you to stop teaching the lifting technique you favor? What if they told you to your beginner’s program was too long or not long enough? What if they told you your rates were too high or too low? That’s called a Franchise, and now were are running right back into problem of creating a barrier that prevents good people from improving the lives of a society who desperately needs it. (not to mention the huge increase to Affiliation fees that would be necessary to pay for this centralized control).

Now you might argue that this would be a good thing- a barrier, slower growth, more exclusiveness, etc. I would call this unwarranted elitism. This is not a real or possible goal, and the effect would only be preventing potentially great trainers from spreading CrossFit to people who can have their lives transformed for the better. Will this mean poor trainers start gyms? Absolutely, but this isn’t even a real threat, it’s just a benign reality. How do I know? I was one of them.
I look back at the workouts, movements, and programming I used when I began training people in CrossFit and I can see how far I’ve come. One of the core beliefs of the CrossFit program is that functional movements are inherently safe. We are training people to do things their bodies are designed to do, and acting like pulling early with your arms on a clean or doing a week of poor programming is a death trap is silly. Even with my inexperience and poor coaching, I transformed my own physical abilities, and my gym changed the lives of hundreds of people in our city and continues to thrive today. I am not alone in this, and anyone who thinks they represent a higher “standard” of CrossFit Affiliates probably needs to sit back, enjoy a slice of humble pie, and think about where and how they started.

So Brett, I’m not trying to tell you you’re being arrogant or you’re a jerk. I really do empathize with a lot of what you’re saying, but I think your perspective is short-sighted and fueled by the mirage of spending too much time reading what people say about CrossFit on the internet, and not enough time touring the Community and seeing what CrossFit is really doing for people. If you still disagree, I’d love to hear why my nutrition analogy isn’t comparable to what you’ve suggested. thanks!

That’s kind of what your argument would result in. How would you feel if CrossFit showed up at your gym and told you to stop teaching the lifting technique you favor? What if they told you to your beginner’s program was too long or not long enough? What if they told you your rates were too high or too low?

WildGorillaMan wrote:Few things rouse me from my slumber anymore, but I'm irritated by the ninny @fitters who've been beaking off about Holley Mangold being "fat."

Fucking nitwits who struggle to TOTAL what she cleans should shut the fuck up. She's going to the OLYMPICS, you aren't.

I thought that strong was supposed to be the new skinny?

That is all. Carry on.

Shafpocalypse Now wrote:Is Rutherford still in the fold?

What a duck says wrote: Yes.
http://www.bootcampfitnesskc.com/about/coaches/

Turdacious wrote:

One of the core beliefs of the CrossFit program is that functional movements are inherently safe.

protobuilder wrote:
What does this even mean?