Vellner not holding back on Event 6/7 programming
- Thread starter anonymous258
- Start date
-
- Tags
- crossfit
@elahopes
Annie said that she wouldn't be on it when she returns to competition. Hobart also competed this year.
I haven't heard anything since the initial announcement. I'm pretty sure it's non-functioning or weightless. Especially since CF HQ is OK with not disclosing important details about the season and the programming in advance there's no time to give and take feedback and negotiate anything.
So basically that should be the first demand of an athletes 'union': give us important details at least 6 months in advance.
Annie said that she wouldn't be on it when she returns to competition. Hobart also competed this year.
I haven't heard anything since the initial announcement. I'm pretty sure it's non-functioning or weightless. Especially since CF HQ is OK with not disclosing important details about the season and the programming in advance there's no time to give and take feedback and negotiate anything.
So basically that should be the first demand of an athletes 'union': give us important details at least 6 months in advance.
@grace4nan
I mean, to me that defeats the whole purpose of the Games (ideally) being a showcase of GPP though.
I mean, to me that defeats the whole purpose of the Games (ideally) being a showcase of GPP though.
sarahjamison19
New member
@praynmama i think there are some arguments to be made that athletes ought to know ahead of time what novel implements there may be or if they are going to be required to swim in water that would make them ill. i would probably prefer that they not program novel implements that tip the scales further towards specificity/familiarity than fitness - that would sort of eliminate the need to disclose ahead of time. but as an athlete i'd want to have the opportunity to lobby the Games team not to host an event in water that might take me out of the competition because of incidental ingestion.
i think a balance can be found between fitness always being the deciding factor and also disclosing ahead of time certain aspects of the Games that affect the athletes ability to compete on a more level field.
i think a balance can be found between fitness always being the deciding factor and also disclosing ahead of time certain aspects of the Games that affect the athletes ability to compete on a more level field.
@sarahjamison19
Totally fair, sure. I acknowledge my opinion leans pretty far on one end of the spectrum between "no information ahead of time" and "everything is detailed for athletes xxx months out from competition".
The only nit-pick I'd have about this is that the athletes already know they're 99% likely to have at least one water event at this point.
So to me, the failure here was not "the athletes weren't notified they'd have to swim" or "the athletes weren't told ahead of time that they'd be required to swim in this lake" but rather "the Games organizers did not do their due diligence to ensure the lake was an appropriate (in this case, healthy-to-be-in) site".
It isn't an event programming issue, I guess is what I'm getting at.
Totally fair, sure. I acknowledge my opinion leans pretty far on one end of the spectrum between "no information ahead of time" and "everything is detailed for athletes xxx months out from competition".
The only nit-pick I'd have about this is that the athletes already know they're 99% likely to have at least one water event at this point.
So to me, the failure here was not "the athletes weren't notified they'd have to swim" or "the athletes weren't told ahead of time that they'd be required to swim in this lake" but rather "the Games organizers did not do their due diligence to ensure the lake was an appropriate (in this case, healthy-to-be-in) site".
It isn't an event programming issue, I guess is what I'm getting at.
sarahjamison19
New member
@praynmama completely agreed that it's not really a programming issue, just an athlete advocacy issue. who is arguing on behalf of the athletes to have a contingency plan to swim in pools if there's a high likelihood that the water quality is going to be poor? in terms of protecting the athletes or protecting the event, the balance is definitely in favor of the event. Dave needs to realize that this ain't BUD/S no matter how badly he wants it to be and the sport will never be legitimized so long as he treats it like it is.
@praynmama First of all, I did not say that every single programming detail should be released.
Second of all, when you have 13-15 events GPP will be tested and needed even if you know what the events are.
What I meant is:
So for example the athletes rep would learn in advance that "yes guy, we'll have a swim event in Lake Monona again". Then they could say that's unacceptable because most of the athletes get the shits on the second day and it takes away from their performance, their earning potential (they get cut or have to WD) and the show.
Second of all, when you have 13-15 events GPP will be tested and needed even if you know what the events are.
What I meant is:
- season dates
- cuts at different competitions
- costs, minimum prizes
So for example the athletes rep would learn in advance that "yes guy, we'll have a swim event in Lake Monona again". Then they could say that's unacceptable because most of the athletes get the shits on the second day and it takes away from their performance, their earning potential (they get cut or have to WD) and the show.
@grace4nan
I disagree. If, for example, a few Games ago they knew there was going to be a peg board event six months ahead of time, then everyone would have worked their butts off training peg boards. That doesn't speak to GPP in my mind... That's specificity.
I'm fine with those types of things, sure. Thank you for clarifying a bit more. I just don't think the events should be announced in time for athletes to be able to practice them.
I disagree. If, for example, a few Games ago they knew there was going to be a peg board event six months ahead of time, then everyone would have worked their butts off training peg boards. That doesn't speak to GPP in my mind... That's specificity.
I'm fine with those types of things, sure. Thank you for clarifying a bit more. I just don't think the events should be announced in time for athletes to be able to practice them.
@praynmama I think we are looking at the same thing differently.
Let's say if you compete in bench pressing only you can be elite without having GPP (let's assume it's true).
I'm saying that if you compete in a crossfit type sport in which a huge portfolio of specific skills and capacites are needed then you also have GPP!
I don't think you can truly have zero specificity in any kind of sport. So especially if the programming is good and you have over a dozen events at the Games, it's almost better to know the events. It elevates everyones performance and the show.
The concept of GPP only exits because in most sports and in life you can be very one dimensional. Not in CrossFit.
Let's say if you compete in bench pressing only you can be elite without having GPP (let's assume it's true).
I'm saying that if you compete in a crossfit type sport in which a huge portfolio of specific skills and capacites are needed then you also have GPP!
I don't think you can truly have zero specificity in any kind of sport. So especially if the programming is good and you have over a dozen events at the Games, it's almost better to know the events. It elevates everyones performance and the show.
The concept of GPP only exits because in most sports and in life you can be very one dimensional. Not in CrossFit.
@grace4nan
My only issue with your comment is that if the athletes have GPP then they don't need to know the events ahead of time. Otherwise they start training specifically for the events/implements/skills rather than for "general physical preparedness".
This is treating the Games as entertainment (you literally call it a "show") rather than as a series of tests. Which is fine, by the way. A great argument could be made that that is what the Games became many years ago and/or that that's what the Games should be. But if you're trying to stay more true to the core CrossFit concepts, then you shouldn't be announcing events in advance in my opinion.
I mean... all the CrossFit weightlifters threw a massive tantrum about last year's Games starting with more endurance-based events because they did so poorly... You had the "fittest athletes in the world" being reduced to walking on a ruck run because they weren't ready for it.
My only issue with your comment is that if the athletes have GPP then they don't need to know the events ahead of time. Otherwise they start training specifically for the events/implements/skills rather than for "general physical preparedness".
This is treating the Games as entertainment (you literally call it a "show") rather than as a series of tests. Which is fine, by the way. A great argument could be made that that is what the Games became many years ago and/or that that's what the Games should be. But if you're trying to stay more true to the core CrossFit concepts, then you shouldn't be announcing events in advance in my opinion.
I mean... all the CrossFit weightlifters threw a massive tantrum about last year's Games starting with more endurance-based events because they did so poorly... You had the "fittest athletes in the world" being reduced to walking on a ruck run because they weren't ready for it.
mastermulti
New member
@anonymous258 On paper this workout looked great, had the potential to be awesome. Time cap was awful.
Then that weird event 7 to where the distance was shortened, but the event on the website said "200 to 300 ish" meters. Just didn't seem well thought out.
Would have been perfect if it was tested correctly. Side note, I love his recaps, he is a good writer.
Then that weird event 7 to where the distance was shortened, but the event on the website said "200 to 300 ish" meters. Just didn't seem well thought out.
Would have been perfect if it was tested correctly. Side note, I love his recaps, he is a good writer.
johndowling
New member
@anonymous258 I enjoyed his comments about Fikowski using the giant bollards to his advantage - I noticed that at the time, more so in the female heats - I think it was Horvath who was doing it each and every time she passed one and I’m sure it took folk out several times. A little bit naughty but also, pretty clever at the same time 
@anonymous258 Uh-oh Dave gets butt-hurt over any criticism to his "artistic vision". I actually think Dave does good programming but he's not infallible and god forbid someone calls a spade a spade.
orthodoxlady1994
New member
@anonymous258 I completely agree with him that this was the same event twice. One of the beauties of the CF Games programming is that it attempts to not benefit athletes who are specialists at one event, or punish those who suck at another event (comparatively to other Games athletes).
Having the same events back-to-back, for double points, seems to go against that.
Having the same events back-to-back, for double points, seems to go against that.
@orthodoxlady1994 You know, Castro had to squeeze in 15 events only because it was the 15th Games. But the human elements and logistics are limitations so how 'elegantly' solved the problem.
lookalikakiwi
New member
@anonymous258 Great workouts, just needed a bit different time domain. maybe longer distance on IE7 also
anonymous258
New member
@lookalikakiwi I think a lighter ladder with 3 power clean and jerks for each bar on event 6, and then single squat cleans on event 7 with the weights they had.
@anonymous258 Would have loved to see C&J for sure.