mywrite: Merrill, thanks for sending this piece. It's really great, well-researched and written, and hits the journalism climax of a perfectly balanced story. Which also makes it incredibly annoying (damn you, journalism standards). The first thing I wanted to bring up was this idea of "sports specificity," which a lot of critics talk about. You wouldn't only lift weights to get better at baseball - you have to hit the baseball. I completely agree. And for a person like me, who sorta likes running, but never ran all that much, CFE is sports specific. i.e. this is a shit-ton of running. For me. You don't think it's enough though?
Merrill: It is fair but left open the question on whether CFE is for completing or competing. Other than the one triathlete that you and every other CFE continues to reference who won a short sprint tri, no one seems to be excelling in endurance sports following CFE. And Brian McKenzie doesn't seem to differentiate between competing versus being competitive. He criticizes traditional training as a flawed approach period. But there is scant little evidence (at least none that I have seen) that anyone has tried to win races using CFE.
The article, while well written, didn't really help answer the debate. The author ran the marathon at about the same pace using CFE as he did on normal training. So it's as good? That's not a satisfying conclusion.
mywrite: Well, I'm competing with you, and I'm also guessing (and hoping) that we'll come to nearly the same conclusion Outside did. And if by some miracle I follow this all the way through and hit 3:30 in the marathon, which you consider a "stud" time, is that completing or competing?
It is funny that there is essentially one pro and one critic for all of us writers to quote and use as "evidence," but I think that's also the product of being a relatively recent phenomenon. I guess for me if the answer is "yes, it's as good as marathon training without logging 30-mile weeks, while maintaining some semblance of Crossfit strength," then that would also be better than traditional training. For me.
But that wouldn't be better for people like the author and you, who enjoy the long slog and make it such a big part of your lives. I mean, you have to really like what you're doing if you want to stay fit.
Merrill: Here's the rub (it's not really a rub - I just like quoting Swingers whenever I can). 30 miles a week training for a marathon is so low, even for a wannabe 3.30 marathoner. I'm very far from being a typical marathoner - I lift weights three times a week, I am about 20 pounds heavier than I should be for a typical six foot marathoner (probably because I treat Creatine like a condiment), and as you will see over the next seven months, I despise runs over two hours.
Yet CFE considers me this extreme distance-obsessed person who is wasting hours on the road when I could be sprinting my head off. That I am wasting too much time on empty miles. Where is my life? What about having the time to do two workouts a day on which CFE is based ? You have your morning Xfit WOD followed three hours later by a CFE workout. Isn't that a little time intensive? Do I really need to shower twice a day? Am I supposed to do 10 X 400 in my office hallway (shades of indoor track practice in high school)? Double workouts adds about an hour of prep time to your day. And don't get me started on membership fees at CrossFit gyms.
That's a rant for another time.
And yes. we are competing, but we certainly aren't going to be competitive with the winners of the marathon we do in the fall. And that's my question. If I really trained like I should for a marathon - 70+ miles a week, 20 mile long runs, stopped lifting, lost 20 pounds, etc) I could probably do 3 hours (this will never happen by the way). I don't think that's true if I did CFE. And I have yet to find an article that says otherwise.
mywrite: If it will "never happen" either way, why all the criticism? Why is CFE a threat to you? And wait, you're the one who created the CFE vs. Old School site! So it's you who is claiming the "old school" mantle, and I would guess that MacKenzie wouldn't actually be all that freaked out about your training, simply because of the weight you are lifting. So it begs the question, why does this blog exist? Also for another time, I suppose.
I'll break down my training schedule in another blog post (it's 3+ hours, not 3 exactly and I work from home, so I don't need two showers), but I would be interested in the time you spend versus my CFE, because what you lay out looks like it could be similar in time commitment to what I'm doing - the only difference is my 6-7 workouts is limited to 3-4 days, whereas yours are every day of the week.
OK, let's get back to the article... I know the science puts you to sleep - who wants science to get in the way of a good long run? - but all that stuff absolutely intrigues me. Even the science that says you need to run long to develop into a good distance runner: "your body starts creating new capillaries around the muscle fibers in your thighs. That increases blood flow to the muscles and allows for better delivery of oxygen and metabolic substrates like fat." How fucking cool is that!?!
Merrill: You are only finally determining that my approach is contradictory and not backed by any science? I totally get that weight lifting or any kind of strength training makes you a better runner and any other kind of athlete. Strength and a balanced body is ideal for preventing injuries and overdeveloping certain areas of your body. It also provides emotional and mental balance since you aren't always getting up in the morning to do the same 10 mile slog. Running every other day makes me look forward to the runs a lot more (although this morning's 8-9 miler isn't high on my list of weekend treats).
However, no way do I see scientifically that a 13 miler is ample preparation for a 100 miler, no matter what MacKenzie says. He will be on Oprah shortly confessing his lies.
mywrite: Just so readers know what I'm up against, I saw on Facebook you've broken out your Livestrong bracelet again, leading the charge in Lance's redemption. Great.
Both you and the author hit I think what is the best point in all of this: enjoyment. Your every-other-day thing keeps you interested in the running, my Crossfit WODs keep me interested in the running so that it remains a bit of a novelty. At least here for these first two weeks. We'll see in May how I'm feeling about all of this. And maybe that is the "satisfying conclusion" we actually need - if it's good enough, and you like it, you should do that thing that gets you out on the road or in the gym everyday.
No comments:
Post a Comment