Ontario Sectional

Ontario Sectional Day 1 Workouts Announced

A look at what the athletes are up against in Canada.

Ontario is one of the two Sectionals happening in Canada this weekend. As final preparations are made, the challenges that the athletes will face have been released. Here's a look at what the athletes are up against.

Schedule
7:30am Final brief for all competitors
8:00am 1st Event, 1st Heat

Event 1
For time:
3k Row

Event 2
3 rounds for time of:
10 Overhead Squats (95/65lbs)
10 Burpees

Event 3
As many rounds and reps as possible in 12 Minutes of:
5 Deadlift (235/150lbs)
10 Pull-ups
5 Ring dips

Comprehensive Layout of Movement Standards PDF

Additional event updates and venue information can be found at CrossFit Colosseum.

Rogue Fitness Again Faster Equipment CrossFit Journal

Proudly supporting the 2010 CrossFit Games

Follow crossfitgames on Twitter

Follow the CrossFit Games on Twitter

The CrossFit/USA Weightlifting Open

The CrossFit/USA Weightlifting Open

63 comments on this entry

1. Jackson wrote...

Looks like the competitors from Ontario will be weeded out at regionals

2. cam birtwell wrote...

Jackson, why do you say that?

3. Jackson wrote...

Look at the other sectionals wods - these ones are by far the least challenging, besides the 3K row

4. Paul E wrote...

"Looks like the competitors from Ontario will be weeded out at regionals"

That's an incredibly dumb thing to say. The cream will always rise to the top. The top athletes will dominate a competition such as this one, just as they will dominate a longer, more grueling competition. Which one will better prepare them for regionals? I say the shorter less brutal one, as it allows the competitors to be more recovered for regionals and nationals.

To posit that a shorter, less grueling competition will yield weaker athletes at the top is simply ridiculous. If you disagree, please give examples of workouts/exercises that a person with lower work capacity would win over a person with higher work capacity.

5. cam birtwell wrote...

You don't think the fittest will still rise to the top? I agree the wods are overall less challenging but that doesn't (necessarily) mean they won't separate the participants.

The 3k row and 12 minute amrap are pretty much in the same time domain which is interesting but could have been dictated by scheduling and equipment limitations...

6. Peter wrote...

Anyone seen WOD#1 from the SoCal sectionals? Ontario's WODs are nowhere close!

7. Z wrote...

More censorship by CrossFit.com... disgusting. Peter, I agree. Here is what I posted earlier:

I agree with Jackson. Unfortunately, this sectional has the poorest programming I have seen yet, both in terms of selecting athletes who have any chance of competing and spectators paying $50 to watch 20 minutes of work they can likely complete with no difficulty, as well.

All 3 WoDs are light metcons without a single strength component mixed in the bunch. A lot of small guys can maintain work capacity when the focus of the WoDs are primarily body weight movements and weightlifting that should be women's Rx'd weights.

Paul E, your cliches are tiresome (e.g. cream rising to the top) and your second paragraph is an enormous strawman, which you then condescendingly knock down. Given the composition and form of last year's Games, this sectionals' programming will not demonstrate that your qualifiers for regionals have what it takes to even complete that type of test.

8. John wrote...

So Jackson you were going to come watch?

How about you step up and compete? But a guy like you would probably dominate this competition with your superior jaw muscles, especially because the events are so "easy".

9. ? wrote...

Someone's always complaining. Just shut the f up, respect that lots of planning went into the workouts and they were designed for a reason, and do the damn workouts!

10. Z wrote...

The wanton censorship on this site is disgusting.

I agree with Jackson. Unfortunately, this sectional has the poorest programming I have seen yet, both in terms of selecting athletes who have any chance of competing and spectators paying $50 to watch 20 minutes of work they can likely complete with no difficulty, as well.

All 3 WoDs are light metcons without a single strength component mixed in the bunch. A lot of small guys can maintain work capacity when the focus of the WoDs are primarily body weight movements and weightlifting that should be women's Rx'd weights.

Given the composition and form of last year's Games, this sectionals' programming will not demonstrate that your qualifiers for regionals have what it takes to even complete that type of test.

11. jesse wrote...

Are AMRAP's ever easy??

12. Z wrote...

Peter, I agree.

Unfortunately, this sectional has the poorest programming I have seen yet, both in terms of selecting athletes who have any chance of competing and spectators paying $50 to watch 20 minutes of work they can likely complete with little difficulty, as well.

All 3 WoDs are light metcons without a single strength component mixed in the bunch. A lot of small guys can maintain work capacity when the focus of the WoDs are primarily body weight movements and weightlifting that should be significantly higher weights.

Given the composition and form of last year's Games, this sectional's programming will not demonstrate that your qualifiers for regionals have what it takes to even complete that type of test.

13. Z wrote...

Peter, I agree.

Unfortunately, this sectional has the poorest programming I have seen yet, both in terms of selecting athletes who have any chance of competing and spectators paying $50 to watch 20 minutes of work they can likely complete with little difficulty, as well.

All 3 WoDs are light metcons without a single strength component mixed in the bunch. A lot of small guys can maintain work capacity when the focus of the WoDs are primarily body weight movements and weightlifting that should be significantly higher weights.

Given the composition and form of last year's Games, this sectional's programming will not demonstrate that your qualifiers for regionals have what it takes to even complete that type of test.

14. Z wrote...

Peter, I agree.

Unfortunately, this sectional has the poorest programming I have seen yet, both in terms of selecting athletes who have any chance of competing and spectators paying $50 to watch 20 minutes of work they can likely complete with little difficulty, as well.

All 3 WoDs are light metcons without a single strength component mixed in the bunch. A lot of small guys can maintain work capacity when the focus of the WoDs are primarily body weight movements and weightlifting that should be significantly higher weights.

Given the composition and form of last year's Games, this sectional's programming will not demonstrate that your qualifiers for regionals have what it takes to even complete that type of test.

15. Z wrote...

Peter, I agree.

Unfortunately, this sectional has the poorest programming I have seen yet, both in terms of selecting athletes who have any chance of competing and spectators paying $50 to watch 20 minutes of work they can likely complete with little difficulty, as well.

All 3 WoDs are light metcons without a single strength component mixed in the bunch. A lot of small guys can maintain work capacity when the focus of the WoDs are primarily body weight movements and weightlifting that should be significantly higher weights.

Given the composition and form of last year's Games, this sectional's programming will not demonstrate that your qualifiers for regionals have what it takes to even complete that type of test.

16. Z wrote...

Peter, I agree.

Unfortunately, this sectional has the poorest programming I have seen yet, both in terms of selecting athletes who have any chance of competing and spectators paying $50 to watch 20 minutes of work they can likely complete with little difficulty, as well.

All 3 WoDs are light metcons without a single strength component mixed in the bunch. A lot of small guys can maintain work capacity when the focus of the WoDs are primarily body weight movements and weightlifting that should be significantly higher weights.

Given the composition and form of last year's Games, this sectional's programming will not demonstrate that your qualifiers for regionals have what it takes to even complete that type of test.

17. Jackson wrote...

Hey, one of my comments was deleted, so much for open source.
John, don't feel you have personally attack someone, it's just exercise, not a religion. Or is it? I unfortunately cannot compete due to an injury I recieved while serving our country - please no comments about other people less able doing CrossFit. Good luck to all the competitors!

18. banned wrote...

Hey, one of my comments was deleted, so much for open source.
John, don't feel you have personally attack someone, it's just exercise, not a religion. Or is it? I unfortunately cannot compete due to an injury I recieved while serving our country - please no comments about other people less able doing CrossFit. Good luck to all the competitors!

19. Patrick wrote...

No matter the WODs, the competitors will have to bring their game. Variety and intensity would be nice for spectators, but if you're just gonna nag about it without constructive criticism, I think you're in the wrong sport.

20. Tony Budding wrote...

Open source doesn't mean tolerating graffiti on the walls. Disagree and debate all you want, but if there's no decency in the comment, it will get pulled.

21. jay wrote...

I don't think its fair to say Ontario athletes will be weeded out at Regionals. The cream of the crop will make it through, and that doesn't mean they wont be well equipped to hit a more gruelling set of WOD's.
In looking at all the sectionals I was thinking for sure that there would be at least one WOD that I would be dreading but there isn't.
With that being said, we have no idea what Sunday will be like!

22. Jackson wrote...

Tony, so telling someone to "shut the f up" is considered decent? Why did my comment wishing the competitors good luck get deleted?

23. tim wrote...

I don't think it's fair that any comments get deleted. Unless, they are racist or offensive to others. Stating an opinion which other don't agree with isn't necessarily graffiti. Speaking of decency, I believe someone told another to "shut the fup".

On another note, I look forward to the sectionals this weekend, and the wod's will be exciting to watch! Viva CrossFit!!!

24. Chris P. - CrossFit King of Prussia wrote...

Jackson,

The same argument has been brought up over and over, in particular for the PA/MD/DE wods. I competed and I can tell you, the cream rose to the top and the best men and women are going to regionals. Just because WODs don't include crazy schemes or HSPUs doesn't mean athletes won't be separated. As long as the WODs test abilities across broad time and modal domains (which these do) then they are good WODs. If you go watch (or compete) I bet you won't be disappointed.

25. starchild wrote...

Tony Budding is a twat

26. Chris wrote...

I doubt any competitor will finish a WOD and say it was easy. The fittest will rise to the top and chances are if they dominate these three WODs the rest of their skills are pretty tight. I think it's cool that the people competing for the experience will at least be able to do the WODs. they do seem a little less strength biased than some other sectionals but are more in line with a mainpage Rx WOD. Good luck to whoever is competing.

27. Guillaume wrote...

Event #2 is pretty "easy"!
They should at least put 135/95 on the barbell!

28. Evan wrote...

It upsetting to see a community like CrossFit bash the work being done by other crossfitters....Looking at the comments posted to other sectionals everyone has their opinion what is easy and what is going to be hard. For the People saying that these WOD's are easy: Do you walk into your box and look at the board and say this is going to be easy or do you pick up the intensity and push yourself to the limit like you should be doing? Step up to the task and post some good results then come back and comment.

29. cam birtwell wrote...

All the above being said, the second WOD could be looked upon as being somewhat "easy" - should be well under 3 mins for the top competitors and they shouldn't be that out of breath... of course the less fit and proficient athletes will still have trouble with it and some separation will occur.

30. Lucas P wrote...

No matter the distance, rowing is always BRUTAL.

If you can't control a bar overhead (midline stabilization, anyone?) the OH squats will kill time and you will lose.

I think the AMRAP ring dips will separate the strong from the weak.

Short and sweet, pretty good test of fitness. No max strength lifts though, which is a shame.

31. Xfit Rice Owls wrote...

HA i think we've fallen victim to a troll. In addition: I think the ones that look "easy" are usually the worst.

32. nick w wrote...

Cam,

well under 3 minutes for WOD 2? I'd be surprised. UI'm thinking 3.30 would win that

this part isn't a point to you but in general

just because a WOD is short doesn't make it easy. The sandbag run at last year's Games took the best guys just over a minute and most of the athletes described it as the worst (although that chipper can't have been fun)

I really applaud this programming because it is inclusive but will still separate different levels of fitness.

I also applaud it because it doesn't have a 1RM strength movement. My (humble) opinion is that strength is too dominant a test proportionately across many of the sectionals

33. Tony Leyland wrote...

All the sectionals will be a tough challenge and the better athlete over the combined "challenge" of the WODs will win.

The only issue is whether a set of WODs will really favour one type of athlete. Just because there isn't a max strength WOD in this set doesn't mean it will greatly favour the lighter body-weight exercise specialist.

Rowing has weight categories because the bigger athlete does have an advantage. The deadlifts are pretty heavy for multiple reps. That being said - the other exercises can punish the heavier athlete. The OHS are light for the heavy athlete but they do have to lower their body weight so that evens it out - the real challenge of 95-lbs OHS is to your flexibility, stability and coordination.

All-in-all I think this is a good set of WODs - I do think the slight edge will go to the lighter athlete but that it not a criticism of Ontario. This set of WODs challenges the 10 physical skills - that is what you want.

Would anyone ever agree a set of WODs is a 100% totally even challenge for all types of athletes? Could you design a set we would all agree with even if you had athletes workout over a week balancing all CrossFit movements? That is the beauty of exercise and functional human movements - endless variety - isn't that what CrossFit is all about?

34. Armen Hammer wrote...

Quoting Paul E: "To posit that a shorter, less grueling competition will yield weaker athletes at the top is simply ridiculous. If you disagree, please give examples of workouts/exercises that a person with lower work capacity would win over a person with higher work capacity."

This isn't about people with lower work capacity performing better than people with higher work capacity; this is about how a shorter, less grueling competition is not made to yield the best CrossFitter. It isn't unimaginable that someone can absolutely dominate all three of these events, yet be unable to compete against the best CrossFitters in the world (or even finish the events from last year's Games).

The problem here isn't whether this Sectional will allow the "cream to rise to the top" in Ontario. That sort of separation is inevitable regardless of the events (there will always be athletes fitter than other athletes). The issue is that this will not necessarily produce an athlete who can dominate or even do well at the Regionals.

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying this will not showcase the section's best athletes. What I am saying is that unless Sunday's event(s) are significantly different (read 'harder') than Saturday's events, I wouldn't bet on seeing an athlete from this Sectional making it to the Games.

Quoting Nick W: "I really applaud this programming because it is inclusive but will still separate different levels of fitness."

I'm not sure what you mean when you call the programming "inclusive", but if you mean that it tests broad capacities, I politely disagree. There are no specific cleans. There are no heavy squats. There are no specific snatches. There are no pushups. There are no handstands. There are no gymnastic holds. There is no sprinting. There is no running. All of these things were at the 09 Games. We shouldn't be looking for athletes to compete at the Games without making sure they can excel at each and every one of those.

In short, we're looking at two events that are the same time domain (on the short end of average), and one event that is almost comically short. There is no long time domain event. There are no kettlebells. There are no double unders. There is no wallball. There are no dumbbells. There are no thrusters. If these are domains necessary to an elite athlete, then an athlete lacking in these domains cannot be considered elite.

I'm not saying it'll be easy; our workouts never are. I am saying it's not the best test of elite fitness.

35. Ashley D wrote...

i think this is a great sectional. i do agree with tony about the strength segment, but that would be my only critique. for me it got a little bit annoying looking at some of the wods from the other sectionals. it was like some of them were trying their hardest to come up with the most random stuff for the athletes to perform. wods that consists of functional, simple movements are often the hardest. just think of sweet fran. plain and simple, yet destroys everyone.

36. OllieS wrote...

"Don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying this will not showcase the section's best athletes. What I am saying is that unless Sunday's event(s) are significantly different (read 'harder') than Saturday's events, I wouldn't bet on seeing an athlete from this Sectional making it to the Games."

This really doesnt make any sense. Making the events harder will not improve the fitness of the competitors! The athletes will all be trying their best regardless of the events and as you agreed yourself the fittest athletes will still be 'showcased'. If Ontario doesnt have athletes that could make it to the final then so be it, if they do then they will! The events dont produce athletes they just test them!

37. John wrote...

I'm guessing that WOD 2 times will be sub 2 minutes for the best. 95 pounds is a feather for an OH squat. We played with this one yesterday at the box. A couple of us could finish the OHS in approx 20 seconds, the burpees in about the same. We finished the 3 rounds at just under 3 minutes total. With the croud cheering I bet someone kills this in under 2 minutes.

My constructive comment would be that the weights are way too light. All the Canadian athletes struggled in California last year because we were not strong enough.. period.

BTW have you seen the sort of beasts they are growing out west with OPT??

I sure hope we get the best of the best from Ontario to represent

38. Jeff Chester wrote...

I love WOD #2. It is going to be a sprint. You're going to have to go balls to the wall to win it and I like that you can't pace it out or try and game it. If you are weak then round 3 is going to kill you. There is a big difference between doing rounds of burpees in a 20 min timeframe and doing them as fast as humanly possible. I'm gonna do this one tonight.

39. Joe wrote...

Seriously people, to all of you that are complaining about the WOD's please shut up!
You sound like a bunch of babies!
And here's the thing, Ollie S to say because of these WOD aren't really heavy or anything so far, that as you put it you dont bet on seeing an athlete from this Sectional making it to the Games." how can you say that?
I mean really people, lets say Miko lived in Toronto, your saying that he wouldnt win the qualifiers and then the regionals?
I know i'm being a little over the top but here's the thing, everyone is saying "oh the rowing is going to won by a taller person and the next 2 wod's a shorter person blah blah blah.."
You know what, i'm a short person and i'm going into this thing to win all 3 wod's on sat and the one on sunday!
I'm not complaining about shit!
Nobody should have a problem with anything, if YOU are prepared for these WOD's then you'll do well and if at the regionals they throw something heavier then YOU will already be ready for them NOT because of the qualifiers but because YOU've been training heavy for some time now...
Here's another thing if you want to look at last year's games or any games in fact...guys like Pat Barber, Chris Speal, Josh Everett, do you think for at any time they are going to "complain" about any WOD they had on their way to the games and say "oh because of the WOD's I had at the sectionals is the reason I didnt win the games? NO..so same thing here..
My personal opinion is either all the people who are complaining about these WOD's are crossfitters that aren't maybe good at these types of WOD's and instead of geting excited about the competition they would rather come on here and say that they arent' heavy enough and we won't be ready for regionals....BECAUSE if YOU are ready for these OR any wod then you should not complain about anything.
See you all on sat or whoever is going to be there, i'll be the guy who's not complaining!

And to the organizers, THANK YOU for all your hard work, the WOD's are GREAT WOD's and look forward to a great weekend! Thanks again.

40. Watcher wrote...

NO ONE has considered that these Wods are just day one! There will be another WoD on Sunday, a "mystery" WoD, one that could go heavy or otherwise...I am sure the combination of all four WoDs will select out Ontario's fittest. Kudos to the organizers - without your hard work and efforts - none of this would happen - THANK YOU!

41. Sean wrote...

I am very confused by all this talk about light weight and how it will not bring the best to the Regionals, and therefore no one from Ontario could do well at the Games. I don't think a weekend competition makes much of a difference on how well you do beyond a sectional. It is in the months and months of training hard before the sectional which will determine how far you can go. If you truly believe you can make it to the games and perform well, your training will reflect that. And similarly to what has already been mentioned a dozen times on this forum, those elite athletes will always rise to the top. Let's not forget, we still have no idea what Sunday will bring.

42. CONFUSED wrote...

Just wondering ???

Are these the WODs for CROSSFIT KIDS Games? Seriously!!!!! What are you thinking. These wods make us look like idiots! This is suppose to be "advanced crossfit". Let's face it, these wods are for beginners. I'm not buying the above comments of... just go faster then! How bout - get original and throw some weight in there! That way the best competitors would have a chance.

43. Jason wrote...

As I recall unlike last year where if you won you went to Aromas, this year was to be set up with the sectionals being more of an everyman/woman thing and the regionals set up that only the strong survive to go to Aromas. :)

And besides Confused, what makes you think that the best still wont win? What's that saying again "the cream rises to the top".

44. Tony wrote...

This is in defense of the WODs for the Ontario Sectional WODs. If you look at the East/West Canadian Regionals WODs from last year, most of them were not hard as well, but the results showed in Aromas. CrossFit Calgary finished fourth in the Affiliate Cup, and CFC athletes James and Michael Fitzgerald, Lauren Pryor and D.J. Wickham all made the top 16. Its not what you do to get to Aromas, its what you do when you get to Aromas.

45. Sidney wrote...

Jason, do these sectionals look like an every woman/man thing?? I think not!

Norcal Sectionals

Workout A
Against a 6-minute running clock:
Run 800m
Max rep overhead squats (115/75lbs)

Scored by total number of overhead squats.

Workout B
Max rounds plus reps in 10 minutes of:
7 Thrusters (115/75lbs)
12 Kettlebell Swings (53/35lbs)
7 Pull-ups

New England
Workout 1 (Saturday) "Pullin"

For time:
800 meter run
30 Snatches, 115/75
800 meter run

Workout 2 (Saturday) "Fast and Furious"

3 rounds for time of:
20 Box Jumps (24/20 inches)
20 Chest-to-bar Pull-ups
20 Wall Balls (20/14lbs, w/10 foot target)

46. SoWhat wrote...

To all the haters...put your real name with your comments so we can confirm your opinion as you win every "easy" event. Is it easy to run 100 meters...of course... Now do it sub 10 seconds... Get the point?

47. Andy P wrote...

I think this debate is healthy and good. I don't read any of it as complaining... I don't think that Armen Hammer is saying that this sectional will make any of the athletes fitter. IMHO, he is asking the question that I believe bears asking, "Will these WODs select the athletes that are the best and most prepared for regionals and the Games?" If ALL I had to go on were the results of these WODS (yes, I know there is another WOD that is a mystery on Sunday), I don't believe I would be able to make that determination... since so many elements that WILL be tested at Regionals & the Games are not tested here at these sectionals.

48. jeremy wrote...

Andy P. Thank you. You are 100% accurate. These posts are not complaining about the ability of the Sat WODS to prepare an athlete for Calgary or Aromas. The issue is simply:

Will these WOD's determine the fittest athelete in Ontario.

The bottom line is they will not. They do not test enough of the aspects of fitness.

The difference between #1 and #5 will be determined by how quickly the judges click their stop watches. I just don't believe there is enough weight here to seperate the great from the very good.

With that being said, I also feel that is is necessary to point out that the organizers of the event (Paul and the folks at Crossfit Colossuem) did not select the WODS. So, as an advance thank you to their and the other volunteers. Thank you!

49. Lincoln wrote...

I agree with Andy P.

Let's clear one thing up: The Games are not trying to measure pain tolerance. They are supposed to be measuring fitness. How hard or easy an event is has little to do with its suitability as a test of fitness. Taking a point of view that an event is great/terrible because it is hard/easy completely misses the point. The events should not be chosen for their entertainment value either.

I am concerned that the trend is to pre-fatigue the athletes for every test. Usually tests of strength, power, speed, and coordination are not performed in a state of adrenal exhaustion. Occasionally yes, but not usually. Yes, I get it that performance under a state of fatigue has some value. It is not the end-all-be-all to performance testing however.

I am also concerned about the heavy focus many of the sectionals have on 5-15 minute metcons. How many events does it take to figure out who is the best athlete in that time domain? This duplication only adds to the fatigue factor, which then makes every subsequent event yet another test of how well an athlete can perform under a state fatigue. Surely there is more to fitness than that?

I predict that the athlete placements from WOD #1 will be quite similar to the results from WOD #2. A well-planned test of broad fitness should be characterized by significant differences in athlete placement from event to event. See the decathlon for an example - even the "cream of the crop" decathletes can't be top 5 in every event. For example Brian Clay won the Beijing Olympics decathlon by a huge margin and yet he finished something like 13th in the 1,500 meters.

50. Jesse Gray wrote...

The WODs are too easy and the weight is too light? OK, so who thinks they could compete against Mikko Salo or Jason Khalipa in these WODs and come out ahead?

51. Lincoln wrote...

Sorry, meant to say that "the athlete placements from WOD #1 will be quite similar to the results from WOD #3".

The time domain is the same, 11-12 minutes. The load per rep is a little higher in WOD #3 and they've added a pushing movement. That's about it. Considering the huge range of fitness parameters that could be tested, this is only a subtle difference.

52. Andy P wrote...

Jesse - that completely misses the point. Of course I would expect Mikko or Khalipa to kick ass in these events. The point is that if you didn't know who they were and ALL you had to judge them on were the events of this sectional, would you know that they were the right athletes to send to the Games? I think not.

53. Kris wrote...

I think there will be all kinds of guys who can complete that workout in a very similar time domain then Jason or Mikko...and most of those same athletes have absolutely no business being on the same floor as Mikko and Jason....There are all kinds of guys out there with Fran times at or better then both of these guys...are they fitter athletes??? Probably not.... but in that time domain with with those simple "light" moves they compare well....now make it 135 lbs and Jason and Mikko's times increase..but not that much whereas 15 of the other 18 guys times double. The problem is not that the workout is too easy it is that is does not provide the neccesary requirements to seperate who is average from who is good from who is Mikko....
Also in the 2 minute time domainn which is what this will be for the top guys you end up with 20 guys all with the same score.....Good luck to those judges running their stopwatches where 1 second could make the difference between 3 rd and 13 th.

54. karlmeyer wrote...

I think also the point is is that there aren't any truly "challenging" movements put on here. You could be a rower with very basic CF conditioning and excel in this competition. No muscle-ups, OLY lifts, HSPU, etc. Ring dips are the most challenging thing here, and you only have to do five at a clip. Really not tough.

55. Dave S wrote...

Are the results going to be posted somewhere? If so, a link would be greatly appreciated.

Good luck to all and I hope everyone competes at peak performance.

Just a side note, as a non-crossfiter, IMO you guys all kinda sound like a bunch of nannies bickering back and forth. Very few well thought out, meaningful posts.

56. nick w wrote...

OK, I've just done WODs 1 and 2 in the gym, although I did WOD 2 first. Had a 10 minute gap in between.

WOD 2 - 3.40 but I had to break up the third set as I lost balance. I think people will definitely go sub 2.30 but doubt there will be a sub 2 min.

The toughest part was the transition from burpees back to OHS.

WOD 1 - 10.54

this is an OK time but guys doing it fresh will kill it. WUOld think the best guys should go just under 10 minutes

57. Chris Woods wrote...

I tried out WOD 2, just for the fun of it. I got it in 1:49 (got the video to prove it). I'm not sure if that time would be possible in competition, though. At the Sectionals, competitors will need to display the bar in a locked out and supported position for the judges at the top of the overhead squat. That's not to say that I wasn't locking out every rep, but there's a big difference between having the bar in a locked out position and having it there long enough to register in the brain of another human being. That extra pause at the top would probably add an extra 15-20 seconds, maybe even more, depending upon the judge.

58. Jesse Gray wrote...

I totally understand what you're saying but I still disagree. For one thing, I don't think there are a lot of people out there with Fran times better than what those guys can do. In a journal video not too long ago, Mikko did a 2:19 Fran at a cert after he had already worked out. I guarantee there are some but not a lot of guys who are going to be able to consistently throw down like that.

In any case, the argument that a 2 minute time domain will group competitors too close or that it allows people with poor met-con to sneak in is wrong. There are all kinds of competitive sports with much shorter time domains and margins of victory than we will see here. In the 100m, the race last around 9 or 10 seconds. The margin of victory is often measured in hundredths of a second yet the same people always win. Coincidence, luck or are the winners just better? Well, Crossfit in theory, is supposed to be fitness across broad time and modal domains, I'm pretty sure 2 minutes falls under that definition and that the most fit person will win that event every time.

In any case, the "2 minute" WOD is only one of three on the first day. The row is certainly no walk in the park and the final AMRAP workout is quite well balanced.

Could this sectional be better? Probably but I don't think it will let any unfit people slip through at the expense of the more fit.

59. Kev wrote...

I did it in 2:22 yesterday, bud, winning time for wod #2 will be sub 2 for sure.

60. lucas wrote...

i don't understand why people think the "toughness" of the wods dictates how good the athletes are! there will great athletes here, just like any other sectional and those great athletes will make these wods look epic, just like all the other sectionals. if you put enough intensity (which i am positive these athletes will) into anything whether it be Fran or one of these so called "easy" wods, it is a damn hard workout. just saying..

61. Justin wrote...

First WOD - Fastest Time - 10:03 for men, ladies 11:38
Second WOD - Fastest Time - 2:05 for men, ladies

62. Jeremy wrote...

BOY OH BOY did you ever say the perfect thing to get people riled up!
Though the WODs are a little easier than some I think they are still a solid test of "fitness". Though maybe some competitors that may not have made it through might on acount of light weights and more of a tendancy to metcon style training the best Ontario has to offer will be at the regional qualifiers. This you can count on.

63. deejay wrote...

just did WOD 2 - 2:04, no warm up, 2008 crossfit games standard on burpees... Sub 1:45 for the best I think...

-->

The 2010 CrossFit Games Official Sponsors

For more information on how to sponsor the CrossFit Games, see the sponsorship page.

  • PROGENEX
  • Under Armour
  • Rogue Fitness
  • Again Faster Equipment
  • MiR Pro Weighted Vest
  • Concept 2
  • WeightVest.com
  • Vibram Five Fingers
  • OMG*Omega3
  • Stud Bar
  • Regupol America
  • Mindbody Online
  • Forged Clothing
  • GarageGym
  • Gymboss Interval Timer
  • Inov-8
  • At Large Nutrition
  • LifeAsRx
  • LifeAsRx
  • Undefeated Sports Nutrition
  • SEAL FIT: Powered by NAVYSEALS.COM
  • Rage Fitness Supply: Leader in Functional Fitness Equipment
  • Stronger Faster Healthier
  • Watermans Applied Science
  • Rocktape
  • DeFeet
  • AquaHydrate