19.3 thoughts/Strict HSPU testing alternatives

[little_sparrow]

OK this got way long as I typed it up. If anyone even freaking reads it, good for you. I feel much better after this, so if anything this will function as an exercise in partial public therapy.

1. I'm not surprised that the S.HSPU has come out, but with the varying judging standards + internal norms within gyms, I'd say that the 19.3 portion of the leaderboard is all but useless but for the top 20-25 qualifying athletes;
   1. For the top athletes: I'm guessing 19.3 will almost certainly be the video that will be requested by HQ for the video review for the top qualifying athletes, so the standards are actually even more important for those guys and gals than the reps themselves. The true picture might not even be clearer until after 19.5 is over, in which video review of 19.3 might subsequently knock some people down significantly and not others. So again, for 99% of us doesn't matter.
   2. For average schmoes: when comparing scores across average people, don't think it really doesn't mean much I think if anyone "beats you" by 5-10 reps (insofar as you care about this at all), allowing for like a 10-20% differential. It's probably more useful to think in terms of 'tiers' of athletes, e.g., did you get between 1-10, or 10-20, HSPU and so on; beyond that, I'd say the standards are way too subjective for any meaningful comparison. When you are THAT fatigued, not even sure what it is we are testing here with respect to HSPU.
2. I don't know what Castro's true "intentions" are behind this workout, but from the outside clearly given further Crossfit HQ programming changes, one aim is to get people to "go back" to strict movements. I wholeheartedly endorse this goal.
   1. But for starters, kipping is effectively "built into" the very definition of Crossfit as work capacity across broad time and modal domains: kipping just is a natural development of the course of figuring out how to do more "work" defined as such. Even Glassman effectively defines the kipping pull up in these terms. So it's not clear to me how enforcing a strict movement sits within this philosophy.
   2. Moreover, the way that 19.3 is set up ends up demonstrating precisely why strict movements basically don't belong in the Crossfit context. For starters, think of the times during which strict movements are most practiced; namely, standalone, within non-fatigue contexts, precisely because they're foundational or "base-building" movements. Most of any good "strict" practice takes place within non-aerobic and non-fatigue settings. But now, we see them put into a situation where you do them after breathing heavily/fatigued? Totally counter to the reason why we do them even at all, and is probably why they don't belong in an "open" situation in the first place.
3. So it is possible, if not probable, that someone could have in fact worked on S.HSPU all year largely in non-fatigue contexts (where they belong), and then lo and behold still do "poorly" in 19.3.
   1. If they really wanted to test 'strict' HSPU, they really should have been at the beginning of the workout. Honestly, in my opinion a better version of the test would have been something like:
      1. 50 Strict HSPU; 100ft DB walking Lunge; 25 Box Step Ups; 75 Kipping HSPU; 25 Box Step Ups; 100ft DB Walking Lunge; then 100ft HSW. [X time cap]
      2. This test (a) would actually reward those athletes who worked on strict all year. Moreover, by putting the Strict HSPU as the first movement, like putting a RMU first in 14.3, this test says: (b) strict is important. Work on them. If you want to do more work you have to do the work. Fresh S.HSPU in the beginning also relieves some of the burden on the judge, because the athlete will be fresher, and so will probably be more likely to have the body awareness to be able to conform to whatever standard that HQ will deem. Sure, it won't remove the problem entirely, and in fact for the top athletes might actually make it a bit worse, because they'll be able to fly. But that's OK - making a further standard like "the judge must yell the number to confirm lockout or rep before the athlete proceeds with the next rep" might be good enough to slow things down. Again, not perfect, but doable. Moreover, by putting the kipping portion as the "2nd tier" of the workout, this test also says: (b) if you want to kip, you have to earn the right to kip. Strict first, then kip. That would actually make people work on kipping if they care. And then ending with the HSW allows us to distinguish the most accomplished of athletes.
4. People online were saying the S. HSPU box standard is much better than the K.HSPU standards we've seen recently. Jokes on them, I think the K.HSPU standards will return. And they'll be probably be different again, and we'll gripe and moan about yet another different awful standard. But they miss the point: HQ is not trying to 'capture' a good K.HSPU standard; has more to do with trying to change the standard every year so that it can't be 'practiced.'
5. I'm curious as to what could be a better way to test S.HSPU capacity with the means available in the Open, a workout combination or movement feature that would correlate but be easier to judge. For example:
   1. 100 Shoulder to Overhead @ 95/65, and then 100 K.HSPU + some other movements within some time cap?
   2. 100 Half Kneeling or tall kneeling DB Presses?
   3. I have no idea. These tests aren't definitive or exhaustive, just suggestions. Judging them would be easier. It would still remain 'open,' especially something like 100 Shoulder to Overheads. And the best can shine by being the best by going fast. Obviously there are empirical claims to be made here, in that what sorts of things correlate with good strict capacity. Then it just becomes a matter of thinking and finding those things and testing that, rather than something like S.HSPU. If you can do 100 K.HSPU in, e.g., 5 minutes after blasting your shoulders with 100 Shoulder to Overhead, chances are your strict capacity is pretty OK.

 

[labryan]

@little_sparrow Very interesting write up. I'll ponder more on this and reply in greater detail.

One thing to note, however, is that I fundamentally believe you (and those who have said this in years past) are wrong in your assumption that they change the HSPU standard in order so that it can't be practiced.

Why would Castro specifically change the standard of this one movement all the time, whilst continually maintaining standards of most other movements unless specific mistakes/elements of potential fine tuning are noticed (Or, alternatively, simply abandoning movements - eg. strict pull up, box jumps and push-ups at most levels of competition). That to me is a very weak position based solely on guess work, and flies in the face of both how Castro has build up an extremely comprehensive and consistent movement standard portfolio across the Open, Regionals and Games that have established movement standards based on two foundations a foundation of judgeability (this matters progressively less as the judges are more proficient at Games vs. Regionals and is likely one of the most important factors in Open movement decisions and standard designs).

Another guess, but which isn't directly in opposition to the data at hand, is simply that Castro WANTs the HSPU in the Open, but neither he nor his team has figured out a GOOD standard for it.

What we do agree on, is that this S.HSPU standard is absolutely terrible and no better than K.HSPU. Which is ridiculous given how much easier the S.HSPU is to judge.

 

[nondchristian]

@little_sparrow Since athletes are directly qualifying for the games from the open, and also knowing that people have already had requests from HQ for their 19.2 videos, I think all national champions and top 20 athletes will have all their open workout videos requested by HQ.