The 2010 CrossFit Games

1. Tom Brose wrote...

Classic CrossFit! Way to go Jeff T.

25 March 2010 / 5:22 p.m.

2. Lame wrote...

These suck, this is a sectional for who is best at overhead exercises. Very disappointing. Way to get creative. Also, way to wait until the very last second to post your lame workouts.

By the way, go check out the crossfit fairfax's website. They have a preparing for the games video that they are doing max reps in 3 minutes of 185# thrusters, way to give you gym an unfair advantage.

25 March 2010 / 5:24 p.m.

3. Doug wrote...

Is the final placing based on these arbitrarily weighted points? What is the thought process behind this? Why not use the place point system? I was hoping that past scoring mistakes could have been improved on by now. Who is to say that 2 clean and jerks is worth more than an entire round of weighted Cindy? Stop trying to reinvent the wheel and stand out from other sectionals. This is ridiculous.

25 March 2010 / 5:25 p.m.

4. Emily M. wrote...

I think it's a well balanced competition for anyone from the fire breather to the competent novice. Everyone has something to bring to the table. There is no movement on there that shouldn't be mastered by even the most basic CrossFitter.

25 March 2010 / 5:28 p.m.

5. Jon wrote...

I have to agree with Doug and say that I am disappointed in the scoring system but be that it may it is the system in place and everybody is subject to it. The WODs themselves are VERY vanilla but again everyone has to do them. We shall see....

25 March 2010 / 5:33 p.m.

6. steve wrote...

On the box jumps, do your heels have to be completely on the box?

25 March 2010 / 5:38 p.m.

7. Esteban wrote...

Doug,

Just wait and see how the events go. Under this system, a 20-round weighted "Cindy" is equal to 30 clean & jerks at 185 in 3:00. Which do you think is more likely?

25 March 2010 / 5:44 p.m.

8. Ben Smith wrote...

These Wod's look Awesome!! Nice job programming Jeff and Maggie!! See you guys this weekend!

25 March 2010 / 5:45 p.m.

9. D wrote...

water and bars? what kind of bars?

25 March 2010 / 5:46 p.m.

10. arjuna wrote...

Sounds good. Do you think the heats are going to be done alphabetically?

25 March 2010 / 5:47 p.m.

11. Kyle wrote...

Anyone know the distance on that run?

25 March 2010 / 5:53 p.m.

12. Dan H wrote...

Looks awesome, any heat information available?

25 March 2010 / 5:58 p.m.

13. Douglas wrote...

I'd say to Doug one that the Cindy is still weighted heavier than all the other workout though four comes closes. Two reps of the clean and jerk are weighted more than a round but those cjs will dry up fast. There are certain to be a few people crush the cindy and get only a few reps in the cj. I think the same is true of the opposite though certainly not as extreme. Event three seems low compared to the others but I'd call it fair. It's the most skill oriented of all four. It's about as even as you could ask for for subjective scoring. Regardless, I'd wager you could guess the winner after Saturday wraps up. Classic crossfit Jeff, though I think some people will be bummed about having no slug-fest chipper.

25 March 2010 / 6:11 p.m.

14. Ricky wrote...

Kyle - The Gym is listed as 106ft x 98ft with the bleachers extended. Assuming we'll be running pretty close to the walls, we'll call it 100 x 90. So, 2 times around works out to a little over 225 meters. That's just an estimate, but it ought to be in the ballpark.

25 March 2010 / 6:15 p.m.

15. Julie H wrote...

Great workouts. I can't wait to see the competitors this weekend

25 March 2010 / 6:24 p.m.

16. ADub wrote...

In re to LAME's comments... From my understanding, the video you speak of was never programmed as a WOD for CFFX, It was a training video of the athlete who programmed this sectional in preparation for regionals who isn't even competing this weekend. You're sitting there bitching about the wod and you can't even tell the difference between a clean and jerk and a thruster. Get your facts straight before you start accusing someone of receiving an unfair advantage in what appears to be a weak attempt to cover your own weaknesses.

25 March 2010 / 6:27 p.m.

17. G wrote...

It looks like VA, WV, DC is A,M,R,A,P ready to go!

25 March 2010 / 6:28 p.m.

18. Steve wrote...

This is what CrossFit is! These are movements we all do, the things you see in affiliates every day all over the globe. I like this, it is classic CrossFit not some pseudo Strongman event.

I guess I just really like Vanilla... Nice work on the programming, keep it simple and keep it CrossFit!

25 March 2010 / 6:32 p.m.

19. objective wrote...

No test of strength? No test of speed? I guess we can arbitrarily omit some of those ten fundamental principles that crossfit is supposed to test and encompass. What about the 14# vest for women? Is this really equal to a 20# vest for men? Where is the quality control?

25 March 2010 / 6:41 p.m.

20. JeffT wrote...

Competitors - heats will be posted Saturday when you arrive and they are not alphabetical

D-balance bars

25 March 2010 / 6:43 p.m.

21. Doug wrote...

Douglas, I agree with most of what you are saying. A solid analysis of the events. I have to stress that I don't think the planners are dishonest in any way, just that a bad choice was made. You highlight my point though when you say, "It's about as even as you could ask for for subjective scoring". That may be true but it absolutely does not cut it. It doesn't. You've got a few hundred athletes that really put a lot of time and energy and emotion into training. These people deserve more than "subjective scoring" decided upon by a few individuals. You can have four balanced workouts that everyone agrees on, then have a scoring system that takes away that balance. It is unfair. It has already screwed up other sectionals. Can you honestly make an argument as to why one round of box jumps and sumos in Wod4 can be equal to TWO rounds of weighted Cindy? Scoring can ruin programming. Some will say that it doesn't matter since so many people get to move on or "the cream will rise to the top". Tell the men and women who finish just out of qualifying that it doesn't matter. As for "the cream". That statement just isn't true. Another sectional that used arbitrary scoring had vastly different standings when the place point system was applied to it.

That being said, I do think that the events are great. All time domains across many movements. Awesome.

25 March 2010 / 6:50 p.m.

22. W^3 wrote...

Nice job JeffT, CrossFit wods, not that any of these play to my strengths but I feel it is more then fair to all competitors
OBJECTIVE reference weakness bias article in the journal, how concentric is your circle?
185# CJ not a test of strength? and speed at 3min AMRAP?
as well as the OHS and run? seems speed would be required to me, to do well at this?

25 March 2010 / 7:02 p.m.

23. Rudy @ Outlaw wrote...

Jeff, amongst all the negativity & ridiculous, poorly thought out comments, great job. The Clean & Jerk event will be great theatre. 20 points per rep will make it gut wrenching to miss reps & will certainly bring out some seriously ballsy efforts. The WODs are basic & brutal, & like Steve said - this is the stuff we do every day. Team Outlaw cannot wait.

25 March 2010 / 7:02 p.m.

24. Esteban wrote...

Doug,

I'll make the arguement - event 4 is only 7:00 long, while the weighted "Cindy" is 20:00. Look at the math closely before you think scoring is unfair - a 20 round "Cindy" is worth the exact same as 10 rounds in event 4. So, again, which do you think is more likely to occur?

25 March 2010 / 7:05 p.m.

25. Brian PCF wrote...

"O God, that men should put an enemy in their mouths to steal away their brains!"

Thanks for putting this together Jeff, looks like fun. Will see you guys this weekend!

25 March 2010 / 7:15 p.m.

26. BenG wrote...

I dig the programming. Will be fun. Anyone who could possibly crack the top four at regionals will certainly make it through in the top 20 of this.

I just really think that HQ's decision to make the cost for entry of spectators at $50 is absolutely absurd. They should have left it to those in charge of the sectionals to set the price. Tickets for the Redskins, Wizards, Caps and Nats are cheaper (scalped)!

25 March 2010 / 7:19 p.m.

27. Matt @ CrossFit 1776 wrote...

Jeff great WOD's.

That 185#clean and jerk is going to be part of my training tomorrow!

Good luck to all competitors.

You better bring your A game!

25 March 2010 / 7:22 p.m.

28. Jerry Hill wrote...

Love it!
Nice work Jeff and Maggie, thanks for your time and effort on this.

Big X factor will be Pushup Standards, we are ready!

25 March 2010 / 7:51 p.m.

29. Mike wrote...

Look, if you don't like the WODs don't show up, that simple. Stop bitching and complaining. I'm sure a lot of thought has gone into the WODs and scoring.

So suck it up and come tear it up.

25 March 2010 / 7:55 p.m.

30. Bo wrote...

I think they're pretty decent WOD's. I really dislike super long chippers that some of the other sectionals have been putting on their final days. When only 9 of the top 15 can finish a workout, and you still need to send 15 to the regionals... you screwed up the programming.

On a separate note... I wonder if there is going to be spectators tickets sold on the day of the event. The site says that registration is closed.

25 March 2010 / 7:56 p.m.

31. Doug wrote...

Esteban, obviously I've looked at the math but thanks for the suggestion. You didn't really lay out any argument, you just pointed out that one event is longer than another. I'll grant you that. The simple fact that someone has to decide which outcomes in their mind are "equally" likely to determine points is the exact problem. This shouldn't be left up to someone's opinion. You ask which is more likely, 20 rounds of Cindy or 10 rounds of event 4. You ask 20 people, you'll get 20 different opinions. We aren't having this argument with place point scoring, why not use it?

25 March 2010 / 8:06 p.m.

32. Naps wrote...

Thanks, Jeff.

To all the competetors, Good Luck and see you Saturday!

25 March 2010 / 8:14 p.m.

33. wsl wrote...

Doug, your point that what each movement is worth "shouldn't be left up to someone's opinion" and that point placing is somehow fairer is silly.

Every sectional that uses point scoring is implicitly placing arbitrary worth to every movement involved in every movement involved in that sectional.

Let's use the Mountain Sectional, which uses the point scoring system like you suggest, for example. Placing 1st in the row/swing/run wod is worth exactly the same as placing 1st in the snatch/mu wod. Who is to say that being good at row/swing/run should be equivalent to being good at snatch/mu? Why didn't you raise a ruckus about that arbitrary injustice?

The point is, arbitrary scoring will happen no matter what scoring system you use. In our case they just get it out of the way and tell you right from the get go. Be thankful.

25 March 2010 / 8:26 p.m.

34. Doug wrote...

Wsl, I think you may have missed my point. Your argument about the mountain sectional doesn't work for you. Giving the winner of each event one point doesn't mean that the movements are all weighted equally, it means that placing is awarded equally. I think it makes sense that winning one event should count as much as winning another event. This arbitrary point per rep system means that, if the wods don't play out as the scoring czar predicts, winning one wod may count twice as much as winning another wod. Think about that. Do you think that's fair? It happened in another sectional. I'm not arguing that this specific point alotment is horrible but that it could be. Who knows. By opening this up to a judgement call we just invite problems. Esteban suggested letting it play out. By then it's too late.

25 March 2010 / 8:54 p.m.

35. Tony Budding wrote...

Doug,
I'm sorry that at first glance you can't understand the logic behind the scoring. Believe it or not, this was not an arbitrary decision of some scoring czar. The workouts have been tested and it is reasonable to expect that top athletes should be able to score about 600 points in any given event. Now, in the heat of competition and with the accumulation of workouts, it's hard to predict precisely, but they're close.

And really, though, it doesn't matter how exact they are. They are not grossly off, and the folks that finish on top will get more points. Add that up from the four events and you have your winner. I have little doubt that the fittest men and women will be standing on the podium and traveling to Ohio for the Regionals.

This is a good set of events that reward all ten physical skills, even if some of you fail to see it. To win this Sectional, you will have to demonstrate elite fitness in the true sense of the term.

25 March 2010 / 10:20 p.m.

36. Thomi CFVB wrote...

Solid work Jeff! Good luck to all the competitors this weekend! I look forward to seeing everyone!

26 March 2010 / 4:12 a.m.

37. BenG wrote...

Yeah!

26 March 2010 / 4:38 a.m.

38. Dom A wrote...

Awesome WODs Jeff and Maggie!! Great programming as usual. Can't wait to see you guys.

26 March 2010 / 5:14 a.m.

39. Jimmy wrote...

Doug,

The only way to win is to do more work faster...

26 March 2010 / 5:17 a.m.

40. Tristan wrote...

CLARIFICATION ON SDHP STANDARDS:

Based on the video, the Sumo Deadlift High Pull will be held to three standards:

1. Start from the ground
2. Finish with bar above clavicle
3. Full extension when bar is above clavicle

Am I interpreting this correctly? Does elbow position matter at all? Will rebending the knees and then coming to full extension be allowed?

26 March 2010 / 5:54 a.m.

41. wsl wrote...

Doug, you're right that there is a potential for one wod to dominate in scoring. It's not ideal, but I was just trying to point out the fact that the point scoring system (or any other one, for that matter) isn't either.

The point scoring system does nothing in terms of the margins between places, It doesn't matter if athlete A beats athlete B by 1 second or 10 minutes in this system, it is worth the same. Staying on the topic of the Mountain Sectional, in the snatch/mu wod, each mu adds 2 pounds to your snatch total. No one complained about it, but it is just as arbitrary as the scoring in this sectional.

The scoring for these things will never be perfect, this sectional's scoring is just flawed differently than the others.

26 March 2010 / 5:59 a.m.

42. Dustin wrote...

Can't believe people have been crossfitting for long enough to sign up for a sectional yet still find a way to complain about the events. It's like visiting New England in the winter and complaining cause it's cold.

26 March 2010 / 6:02 a.m.

43. Pete wrote...

Nice Job Jeff and Maggie! Like the WODS...hated the wait time for them :O)

What's with all the complaining. what happened to the crossfit mentality of "any time, any where, any workout".

People should just shut the **** up and do the workouts. If they are so easy then you should have no problem qualifying for regionals.

As for the scoring...its a level playing field with everyone being judged the same way. Some of it will always be subjective...but that's true of any sport.

See you all tomorrow!

26 March 2010 / 6:04 a.m.

44. Garrett wrote...

This looks like it will be an awesome competition. I'm interested in the choice of AMRAP's through and through. It's speed and strength for sure, but what about that single event where the competitor taxes him/herself to get a max lift for any type of lift.

This weekend will definitely see a lot of people curled up in the fetal position. I like it.

26 March 2010 / 6:20 a.m.

45. brian p wrote...

I'll be trying the BJ/SDHP wod Saturday, looks fun!

As for the WOD's and scoring, assuming you can do a 185# C&J then at least you won't DNF any events, so you'll just need to claw your way to the top...point by point, lol.

In the GA sectional we had a large chunk of people DNF events due to time limits and they dropped out of the later WOD's because they were out of contention. Kinda spoils the fun.

later,
b

26 March 2010 / 6:45 a.m.

46. Katie wrote...

I noticed spectator registration is closed. Can spectators still come and pay at the door?

26 March 2010 / 6:54 a.m.

47. Ricky wrote...

re: brian p's comment about DNFs.

It's even less likely that someone will DNF with this setup. In the movement standards video, Jeff states that you can scale the C&J to 135 (men) or 75 (women) and still be in the running. The two caveats are: 1) you get a score of 0 for WOD 2, which you have to overcome somehow, and 2) you have to do at least 12 C&Js in the 3 minutes at the scaled weight.

Personally, I don't plan to scale (I'm a hulking brute), but I think having that option is a good compromise because it doesn't immediately eliminate an athlete who is excellent in the other three events, just because they have a 1RM C&J of 180. You'd have to be freakin' outstanding in the other events to overcome the points deficit, but it's not impossible.

26 March 2010 / 7:03 a.m.

48. CHEETAH wrote...

Honestly, with all the bi%*#( in going on, the SECTIONALS and REGIONALS should not even post the wod until atheletes are there and ready to compete. Just like at any other box on any given day. That is truly unknown or unknowable.

26 March 2010 / 7:33 a.m.

49. Katie wrote...

Does anyone have a +1 or a paid spectator spot that they are not using? If so, I can arrange to pay you for the slot but I have family who I'd love to get to come, but don't have a spot for.

26 March 2010 / 7:39 a.m.

50. Aaron wrote...

Ricky,

I think you are right about that for the guys. But I will bet right now that one of the women who qualifies will get a zero or near zero in one of the WODs and claw her way back.

I like the way this was designed. You should be punished for having a hole, but not disqualified. That a woman's max jerk is 110 does not mean she is not one of the top 20 crossfitters in the region.

I also think you will see a huge delta between the guy that finishes first in the clean and jerk wod and the guy who finishes middle of the pack. It has the greatest likelihood of being the wod that makes someone stand out the most. Yes, the top scores for all events will be about the same, but the spread will be much larger for this one than the others. This is not a bad idea since this is the only true strength event.

I also like this more than a 1RM. Crossfit is about the useful application of strength. I care less about your 1RM than about your ability to translate that strength into other activities that blur different energy pathways physical attributes. An oly lifter (who has never done more than a triple at any weight) would crush this WOD. It tests for strength even if it is not a 1RM.

I would rather find someone who can operate at a high percentage of a GOOD 1RM than someone who cannot operate at a high percentage of their GREAT 1RM

26 March 2010 / 7:43 a.m.

51. Harold Doran wrote...

Jeff and Maggie:

In my opinion, you hit a homerun. These are solid WODs and a crossfitter should be able to execute these movements efficiently.

Last year, the regionals was run *immaculately* and I look forward to being part of this event knowing your professionalism and dedication to this.

Thank you for your time and planning. Let's get it on!

26 March 2010 / 7:56 a.m.

52. Ricky wrote...

Aaron,

It'll be interesting to see what the women do in the clean and jerk. I've seen several of the women at our gym doing C&J 1RM well above 115, and I've also seen them do Grace (95#) in very respectable times. I won't be surprised if someone (man or woman) makes it into the top 20 with a score of 0 in WOD 2, but they'd better bring their A-game. Those same ladies with the heavy C&J also knock out plenty of rounds of Cindy.

I agree with you about the range of scores on WOD 2. I won't be surprised if someone pulls off 30+ reps, and I won't be surprised if lots of people either scale it or get just 1 or 2 reps. I'm with you on the idea that there might be a considerable delta between, say, 5th and 6th place on that particular WOD.

26 March 2010 / 8:07 a.m.

53. Mehdi wrote...

Great WODs Jeff and Maggie! Classic CrossFit!

26 March 2010 / 8:34 a.m.

54. Aaron wrote...

Don't get me wrong. A lot of women can do 115lbs. We're bringing some women with big clean and jerk numbers and 3 minute Grace times. There may even be 20 women who do not have to scale. But I certainly imagine not every woman who can do 115lbs rxd will qualify and not every woman who can't do it won't qualify. Especially because the other WODs set up fairly well for someone who has, for example, a 110lb jerk and is great and bodyweight movements.

Now I am going to contradict what I just wrote. The one interesting wild card is that one would normally expect the weighted Cindy to be the place where the less strong folks make up ground on the big folks. But especially with women, the ability to do weighted pull-ups and push-ups may ALSO be a function of strength more than metcon or gymnastics skills. If you aren't strong enough to jerk 115 are you strong enough to do weighted pull-ups or push-ups? I don't know. At our gym I think the women who are best at the jerks will also be best at Cindy. The same cannot be said for the guys. 20lbs is not so much that a 160lb guy with a 30 round regular Cindy and who only gets 4 clean and jerks can't still bust 20 rounds of weighted Cindy.

That was a very long way of saying I don't think you will see too many women who are bad at jerks do well at Cindy. I do think you will see plenty of guys who are bad at jerks do well at Cindy.

Do I actually have to go compete tomorrow or can I just sit here and think about the WODs some more?

26 March 2010 / 8:41 a.m.

55. Unknownable wrote...

Based on Tony's explanation (#35) the scoring looks fair, and is better than a placement system which can be skewed by competitors who later DNF or quit the competition. However, the only signficant body weight/gymnastic type movements are in the Heavy Cindy wod. No rings, HSPUs, double-unders, longer runs, or bar work. Lots of focus on barbells, so I think this Sectional favors those exercises, and looks boring. Perhaps by design, it is impossible for any competent Crossfitter to DNF at this Sectional. The test of this test will be at the Regionals, where we'll see if this Sectional really selected the best Crossfitters.

26 March 2010 / 8:50 a.m.

56. james wrote...

Can we show up, Pay, and be a spectator the day of the event. I am a fan of crossfit and am looking forward to cheering on other CF'ers.

26 March 2010 / 9:13 a.m.

57. N wrote...

Do your feet have to come completely on top of the box? or is the only thing that matters is the hip extension above the box?

26 March 2010 / 9:23 a.m.

58. michael towne wrote...

Steve wrote:

"This is what CrossFit is! These are movements we all do, the things you see in affiliates every day all over the globe. I like this, it is classic CrossFit not some pseudo Strongman event.

I guess I just really like Vanilla... Nice work on the programming, keep it simple and keep it CrossFit!"

Isn't this what CrossFit is NOT supposed to be... that is a set of pre-defined movements one can master?

Aren't common CrossFit movements and means to an end, not the end itself?

I've always envisioned the perfect CrossFit competetion as some random assortment of obstacle course, dragging heavy objects, lifting stuff over or onto platforms... etc.

I don't learn to snatch (as a CrossFitter) so I can have a great snatch... I learn to snatch so that I can train increase power and muscle fiber recruitment... So should I be advantaged over someone with better muscle recruitment and more power in a competition because Ive mastered a specific skill (the snatch). I dont think so.

Sorry for geeking out. I know this is not totally feasible, especially at a regional qulifier. I think Jeff & Maggie set up a great event... I just take issue with crossfit being defined by certain movements.

26 March 2010 / 9:24 a.m.

59. Katie wrote...

As an addendum to my previous comment #49, I am willing to PAY for the +1 spot or DOUBLE the cost of the spectator spot...

26 March 2010 / 9:25 a.m.

60. n wrote...

Do your feet have to be completely on the box for the BJ's or is the biggest thing they are looking for is hip extension above the box?

26 March 2010 / 9:31 a.m.

61. Aaron wrote...

Michael,

While I think you are theoretically correct. What you are basically describing is strong man. You run into the exact same problem of someone having practiced the movements crushing the people who have not, even if their relative fitness is lower.

I think there are sufficient time domains and combination of movements that you get from "standard" crossfit to test unknown and unknowable. It would be a bigger problem if your WODs at sectionals were bench marks. But for the most part that has not happened. Add 20 lbs and a squat into Grace and you may as well have them lifting atlas stones it is so different! Add chest to bar on Fran and you have something totally different. In this case, add a 20lb vest to Cindy and see if it lines up with who has the best regular Cindy. I'll bet it doesn't line as smoothly as you might think.

You mix in VERY odd events and you will have people advance out of luck or practice. Do strong man and Rob Orlando wins. Drive a steak into the ground and you have a bunch of firefighters and farm boys win.

There is no perfect system. Doesn't mean we shouldn't keep looking but also doesn't mean we should throw it out and start over.

26 March 2010 / 9:46 a.m.

62. JoeyG wrote...

I get that 185 pound clean and jerks require strength, but it is not a true test of strength due to the met-con component.

Damn, I wish I was competing.

26 March 2010 / 9:55 a.m.

63. Michael Towne wrote...

Aaron,

When I say obstacle course... I envision something with lots of agility and sprinting... the kind of thing that someone with ungodly murph times do good on... not strongman contestants.

I agree that the stake driving event was a little bit of a stretch... but i dont think making someone drag a giant sandbag and then set it on a shelf would reward anyone but the more fit person (in that domain).

And I was talking theory to a point... and I agree there is no perfect event... but my original point i stand by about crossfit not being boiled down to a certain set of exercises.

Cheers!

26 March 2010 / 10:09 a.m.

64. Dave wrote...

I signed up the family to be spectators. Do they have to be there at 8am or can they show up when the sectional starts? Good luck to everyone competeing.

26 March 2010 / 10:14 a.m.

65. Aaron wrote...

Joey, that's the point. It works better than a 1RM for two reasons.

1. It correlates well to whoever has the best 1RM, so you still have the advantage of a strength test. Tell me I'm wrong after we see the results and compare to what the winner's 1RM is. Casey Burgner did Grace for the first time in under 3 minutes. Another lifter whose name escapes me did it after the Arnold a couple years back in 1:50. These are people who haven't trained metcon since their PE teacher made them run lines in gym class.

2. So, given that it will do a pretty good job of telling you who has the strongest 1RM (not perfect, but close) why wouldn't you want an event that tests another metabolic pathway at least a little? If there were some theoretical freak out there who had a 1RM of 200kilos and who couldn't walk up a flight of stairs without getting tired or who couldn't lift 185lbs a bunch of times because he is SO specialized, would we want to devise a test that rewarded that specialization?

Tests should bias strength without testing it to the exclusion of anything else. What you are saying is the equivalent of saying there is no true test of metcon because there is SOME weight involved in every WOD.

26 March 2010 / 10:22 a.m.

66. Outlaw Doug wrote...

Nice one Ham, I use "stationary obstacle course" to describe crossfit to the uninitiated, coworkers, etc and couldn't agree more that crossfit is a means to an end more than it's a sport. However, I think this is pretty "classic" crossfit programming and I'm happy to see it. Def thumbs up on the program.

Jeff, Maggie, anyone who can help: Is equipment used in the event for sale afterwards? Please email me if that's the case. I need a few things for the home. Thanks

26 March 2010 / 10:26 a.m.

67. NR wrote...

Any predictions on top rounds/reps on WOD 1 and 2?

26 March 2010 / 10:45 a.m.

68. Steve wrote...

Michael,
I disagree, a huge part of CrossFit is mastering those like the Snatch. Plus they already have sports to do what you state as what you would like to see they are Obstacle Course Races and Strongman Competitions. I do CrossFit so I am a better hockey player, I do Snatches so my stride is more explosive, by your logic that is like me saying the Sectional should include a hockey game.

At every Level I Cert they teach you 9 Foundational movements of CrossFit:
Squat- Check as part of WOD 1
Clean- Check as part of WOD 2
Jerk- Check as part of WOD 2 (also encompasses Press and Push Press which are taught)
OH Squat- Check as part of WOD 3
SDHP- Check as part of WOD 4

On Day 2 they teach the kipping pull up- Check as part of WOD 1. So based on the 9 Foundational Movements taught at every Level I these WOD's include 7 of the 9. That is CrossFit.

If you want to use CrossFit to supplement Strongman and Obstacle Course racing, great... But that does not mean Strongman and Obstacle Races are CrossFit.

26 March 2010 / 10:52 a.m.

69. Unknownable wrote...

How do any of these wods qualify as unknown or unknowable? All these movements and combinations are well-known. The only thing unknowable is that the selection would be so predictable. It was unknowable that the unknown would be so well known.

26 March 2010 / 10:55 a.m.

70. Kristin wrote...

Looking forward to watching this one. Ought to be interesting. I do like the rep points better than the time element from last year. Should make for a better competition and end result, especially for those in the middle of the pack.

If the box jump does require full feet on the box, it will frustrate people on missed reps, but it does make it a bit more of a measurable movement (and harder, i think, esp for shorties like me). I've been warning people at my box for months, so I hope everyone practiced correctly!

A little plug here since so many of you have time to blog today -- (aaron - that's you! ) -- Some of you may have heard that the First Lady has started a Task Force against Childhood Obesity called “Lets Move.” They’re currently accepting comments for the record on the issue. If you go to the www dot regulations dot gov website there is a link in the lower left hand corner where you can offer comment. All of you, as CrossFiters who have experienced fitness success are qualified to comment.

The deadline for comment is, I believe, today – so act fast. Obviously the obesity issue in America is huge (pun intended) – so taking a few minutes to offer comment could help

26 March 2010 / 12:09 p.m.

71. Michael Towne wrote...

Steve,

HQ is not looking for the best CrossFitter. They are looking for the "fittest person in the world". The person who is highest performing and most balanced in the 10 physical fitness skills.

I brought up obstacle courses and creative strength events because they test many of the 10 physical fitness skills at one time and in a raw manner that isn't easily prepared for specifically . I would not use JUST an obstacle course in a contest.

Your critique of obstacle courses is that you dont want to do something that is already competed on somewhere else... but then you defend the snatch movement. This is already competed on in the sport of weightlifting.

My thought is that the fittest person in the world would dust everyone on an obstacle course with no coaching... but the same might not be true about a snatch or muscle up event.

CrossFit is about the general physical preparedness it provides... not the movements it uses to get there.

That's how i see it anyways :)

Cheers

26 March 2010 / 1 p.m.

72. NR wrote...

Nobody knows if the box jump is full feet on top or just extending the hips above? Thevideo did not say anything about it, only that hips cannot extend below the box. Anyone know?

26 March 2010 / 1:51 p.m.

73. Jennifer wrote...

***CAN SOMEONE PLEASE ANSWER THIS FOR ME. IF YOU ARE A SPECTATOR, IS IT MANDATORY TO BE AT THE REGISTRATION AT 8AM?? I MAY ARRIVE AT 9AM...I'M JUST WONDERING, THIS IS MY FIRST TIME SPECTATING. THANKS!!!

26 March 2010 / 2:46 p.m.

74. arjuna wrote...

i cant imagine them not letting you in if you came at 9am

26 March 2010 / 3:08 p.m.

75. Graham King wrote...

First of all good luck to all, especially those from CrossFit DC and CrossFit Balance! Hope to see you there Sunday.

Second, chill with the negative vibes. is it perfect? No, but what is? If you can't handle it or just want to be negative, go whine somewhere else. Last time I checked the motto was "Forging Elite Fitness", not "We love to bitch".

26 March 2010 / 3:59 p.m.

76. Maggie Dabe wrote...

Jennifer,
We need spectators to check-in between 8 and 9. If you can't make it by 9, we'll still have someone by the entrance during the day to help you check-in.

26 March 2010 / 4:22 p.m.

77. NR wrote...

Maggie,
Do your feet have to come completely on top of the box? or is the only thing that matters is the hip extension above the box?

26 March 2010 / 4:34 p.m.

78. james wrote...

HELP??? can we get tickets at the door. will someone be available to sell spectator tickets.

26 March 2010 / 5:43 p.m.

79. Jennifer wrote...

Thank you, Maggie Dabe!

26 March 2010 / 6:24 p.m.

80. Outlaw Ross wrote...

See you all tomorrow... I will be the 270lber in the corner not bitching about the WODs or the scoring.

26 March 2010 / 6:25 p.m.

81. Zach wrote...

To all of the naysayers: If you don't like it, start your own box and work up to the point where HQ respects you enough to host a sectional. Then you can program it.

26 March 2010 / 9:48 p.m.

82. only fat musle wins wrote...

yah you ppl only think you can lit til you drop your pregant wife on the ground hahah

26 March 2010 / 11:45 p.m.

83. Matt wrote...

Is it really $50 to spectate? My buddies and I were all set to bring our children up to NOVA to support our local guys when I saw a post about 'registering' to spectate. Then I see:

Spectator »
Space is limited! Sign up now to see all the action live. $50.

Kinda goes against the spirit of CrossFit in my opinion.

27 March 2010 / 4:26 a.m.

84. Lynn wrote...

Go Courtney, "Q"..... We are amazed anyone can even do this...... far beyond us!

Kaya, Lynn, Joe

27 March 2010 / 1:32 p.m.

85. James Brown wrote...

Jeff,

You guys put on a great day one today. Unfortunately, when I came home my daughter's little dog had died so I will not be at day two in order to spend time with my daughter. I am looking forward to next year.

James Robert Brown #141

27 March 2010 / 2:49 p.m.

86. Mike wrote...

I can't believe the $50.00. I thought you could just come by and see it all. What a bummer. I totally agree with you Matt #83. I was going to come by with my daughter.

27 March 2010 / 4:48 p.m.

87. Kevin wrote...

Does anyone know if they are going to post the heat times for tomorrow anywhere?? Or does anyone know what time the people in heats 9 and 10 are staring tomorrow?

27 March 2010 / 4:59 p.m.

88. JeffT wrote...

James, sorry to hear that. I have been there. See you next year. Keep training hard.

Box jumps= no the whole foot doesn't have to bee on the box, but some part of the foot does ( no corner of the box only allowed).

Jeff

27 March 2010 / 5:12 p.m.

89. JeffT wrote...

Kevin - heats 9 and 10 start at 10:40 and 11:00 respectfully

Jeff

27 March 2010 / 5:44 p.m.

90. NR wrote...

JeffT,
Are the heats for Sundays WODs going to stay the same? If changed, when and where are they posted? Thank you.
Awesome job on the event!

27 March 2010 / 5:46 p.m.

91. Marsha wrote...

Where can I find the results from today's (Saturdays) WODs?? Am anxious to learn about CrossFit Blacksburg participants!!

27 March 2010 / 5:47 p.m.

92. JeffT wrote...

NR - thanks - you are in the same heat and they were posted before you left. The first heat starts at 08:00, and the last heat in the morning starts at 11:00.

Marsha - scroll back up to the top of this page and there is a link to view the sectional results on the right hand side.

Jeff

27 March 2010 / 6:21 p.m.

93. Maggie Dabe wrote...

FIRST HEAT - SUNDAY
3rd WOD - 08:00
4th WOD - 12:45

400 Feldman Melody F
401 Braff Kelli F
402 McNally Meghan F
403 Kittelberger Gretchen F
404 Berrier Brooke F
405 Janko Shannon F
406 france jessica F
407 Ellis Sarah F
408 Schick Erika F
409 Potter Jamie F
410 Navarro Jennifer F
411 Korbich Liz F
412 Wood Rise F
413 DiChiara Sharon F
414 Wooldridge Aspasia F
415 Modecki Courtney F
416 Campbell Kristen F
417 Conzelman Becky F
418 Kresge Kimberly F
419 Maisannes Emily F
420 Matney Valerie F
421 Baum Kaja F
422 Finkenstadt Ivy F
423 Smith Sarah F
424 Fischer Alison F

SECOND HEAT - SUNDAY
3rd WOD - 08:20
4th WOD - 13:00

425 Wasalaski Katie F
426 Angeles Karen F
427 Reinert Shanyn F
428 Armstrong Danya F
429 Itnyre MK F
430 Katz Sara F
431 Fairman Kathryn F
432 Snyder Margaret F
433 Mullen Kelly F
434 cianciolo erin F
435 Wise Dana F
436 Starkey Jennifer F
437 Dziak Laura F
438 Adkins Lindsey F
439 Cuellar Stephanie F
440 Alexander Domoni F
441 MCCONNELL ALISON F
442 Scarborough Stacey F
443 Bishop Allison F
444 Conklin Laura F
445 Lawrence Emily F
446 Barnett Alicia F
447 Doran Lanette F
448 Sprague Sherry F
449 Steckbeck Leslie F

THIRD HEAT - SUNDAY
3rd WOD - 08:40
4th WOD - 13:15

450 Chung Grace F
451 Wasko Laurie F
452 Owens Krista F
453 Edwards Jessica "Shay" F
454 Gallego Gillian F
455 Bigot Danielle F
456 Klingaman Leslie F
457 hawley sarah F
458 Perry Mary F
459 Gordon Nicole F
460 Salb Tes F
461 Butler Jennifer F
462 Rudy Mary F
100 Levine Mark M
101 Heyer Vaughn M
102 McQuilkin Christopher M
103 Opiyo Steve M
104 Moburg-Jones Aaron M
105 AREND TOM M
106 Scheidt Johann M
107 Nurse Jeremy M
108 Staley Richard M
109 Crisci Michael M
110 Joy Richard M
111 Sloss Steven M

FOURTH HEAT - SUNDAY
3rd WOD - 09:00
4th WOD - 13:30

112 Lang Tristan M
113 Sheppard Chris M
114 Powell Ryan M
115 Blanchard Paul M
116 Murphy Adam M
117 Hagelberger Matt M
118 Lee Michael M
119 Olson David M
120 Sohn Alex M
121 Miller Donald 'Mark' M
122 Kettering Jason M
123 Lehman Kyle M
124 Luhowy Peter M
125 thomas james M
126 Furneisen Caig M
127 Gallego Andrew M
128 Hoar Richard M
129 colby conrad M
130 throckmorton carl M
131 Velez Ken M
132 Rothgeb Michael M
133 Hoggan Jason M
134 Liebler Jason M
135 Leonard Charles M
136 Wilson Brian M

FIFTH HEAT - SUNDAY
3rd WOD - 09:20
4th WOD - 13:45

137 Keeling Robert M
138 Olson Hans M
139 Grabham Timothy M
140 green ben M
141 Brown James M
142 Parsons Joel M
143 Elder Justin M
144 Dill John M
145 Ross Brian M
146 Rosenthal Sacha M
147 Low Brian M
148 Towne Michael M
149 Staples Andrew M
150 Pierce Chad M
151 Black Brandon M
152 Thomas Cody M
153 Samarov Daniel M
154 Willis Justin M
155 Riordan Sean M
156 Quinlan Scott M
157 Cadle Scott M
158 Hurndon Nicholas M
159 DUMAINE steve M
160 Simpson Josh M
161 Perry Corey M

27 March 2010 / 6:22 p.m.

94. Maggie Dabe wrote...

FIRST HEAT - SUNDAY
3rd WOD - 08:00
4th WOD - 12:45

400 Feldman Melody F
401 Braff Kelli F
402 McNally Meghan F
403 Kittelberger Gretchen F
404 Berrier Brooke F
405 Janko Shannon F
406 france jessica F
407 Ellis Sarah F
408 Schick Erika F
409 Potter Jamie F
410 Navarro Jennifer F
411 Korbich Liz F
412 Wood Rise F
413 DiChiara Sharon F
414 Wooldridge Aspasia F
415 Modecki Courtney F
416 Campbell Kristen F
417 Conzelman Becky F
418 Kresge Kimberly F
419 Maisannes Emily F
420 Matney Valerie F
421 Baum Kaja F
422 Finkenstadt Ivy F
423 Smith Sarah F
424 Fischer Alison F

SECOND HEAT - SUNDAY
3rd WOD - 08:20
4th WOD - 13:00

425 Wasalaski Katie F
426 Angeles Karen F
427 Reinert Shanyn F
428 Armstrong Danya F
429 Itnyre MK F
430 Katz Sara F
431 Fairman Kathryn F
432 Snyder Margaret F
433 Mullen Kelly F
434 cianciolo erin F
435 Wise Dana F
436 Starkey Jennifer F
437 Dziak Laura F
438 Adkins Lindsey F
439 Cuellar Stephanie F
440 Alexander Domoni F
441 MCCONNELL ALISON F
442 Scarborough Stacey F
443 Bishop Allison F
444 Conklin Laura F
445 Lawrence Emily F
446 Barnett Alicia F
447 Doran Lanette F
448 Sprague Sherry F
449 Steckbeck Leslie F

THIRD HEAT - SUNDAY
3rd WOD - 08:40
4th WOD - 13:15

450 Chung Grace F
451 Wasko Laurie F
452 Owens Krista F
453 Edwards Jessica "Shay" F
454 Gallego Gillian F
455 Bigot Danielle F
456 Klingaman Leslie F
457 hawley sarah F
458 Perry Mary F
459 Gordon Nicole F
460 Salb Tes F
461 Butler Jennifer F
462 Rudy Mary F
100 Levine Mark M
101 Heyer Vaughn M
102 McQuilkin Christopher M
103 Opiyo Steve M
104 Moburg-Jones Aaron M
105 AREND TOM M
106 Scheidt Johann M
107 Nurse Jeremy M
108 Staley Richard M
109 Crisci Michael M
110 Joy Richard M
111 Sloss Steven M

FOURTH HEAT - SUNDAY
3rd WOD - 09:00
4th WOD - 13:30

112 Lang Tristan M
113 Sheppard Chris M
114 Powell Ryan M
115 Blanchard Paul M
116 Murphy Adam M
117 Hagelberger Matt M
118 Lee Michael M
119 Olson David M
120 Sohn Alex M
121 Miller Donald 'Mark' M
122 Kettering Jason M
123 Lehman Kyle M
124 Luhowy Peter M
125 thomas james M
126 Furneisen Caig M
127 Gallego Andrew M
128 Hoar Richard M
129 colby conrad M
130 throckmorton carl M
131 Velez Ken M
132 Rothgeb Michael M
133 Hoggan Jason M
134 Liebler Jason M
135 Leonard Charles M
136 Wilson Brian M

FIFTH HEAT - SUNDAY
3rd WOD - 09:20
4th WOD - 13:45

137 Keeling Robert M
138 Olson Hans M
139 Grabham Timothy M
140 green ben M
141 Brown James M
142 Parsons Joel M
143 Elder Justin M
144 Dill John M
145 Ross Brian M
146 Rosenthal Sacha M
147 Low Brian M
148 Towne Michael M
149 Staples Andrew M
150 Pierce Chad M
151 Black Brandon M
152 Thomas Cody M
153 Samarov Daniel M
154 Willis Justin M
155 Riordan Sean M
156 Quinlan Scott M
157 Cadle Scott M
158 Hurndon Nicholas M
159 DUMAINE steve M
160 Simpson Josh M
161 Perry Corey M

27 March 2010 / 6:23 p.m.

95. Gail wrote...

something wrong with your link posted about the DC/WV/VA day one.

27 March 2010 / 7:23 p.m.

96. Doug wrote...

Tony Budding wrote:

"The workouts have been tested and it is reasonable to expect that top athletes should be able to score about 600 points in any given event. Now, in the heat of competition and with the accumulation of workouts, it's hard to predict precisely, but they're close."

Also:

"And really, though, it doesn't matter how exact they are. They are not grossly off, and the folks that finish on top will get more points. "

Tony, I think that day one of the sectional has shown your "logic" to be a little off. As I argued several times before, human error is an inherent part of arbitrary point scoring. All along I asserted that this system has to potential to create a gross imbalance in scoring. I believe you claimed that at first glance I "couldn't understand the logic". The results of day one haven't helped. If you take the time to average the top ten men in the first two Wods you will find the scoring system to be exactly what you claimed it wouldn't be..."grossly off".

Men's top ten WOD1 avg. 593 points
Men's top ten WOD2 avg. 354 points

So now we have WOD2 counting for 60% of WOD1. 60%!!
I'm not sure who you tested to get your 600 points per workout Tony, but they aren't competing in this Sectional. And there are some big names in the Section including Mike G and Ken Gall.

This section has four workouts which by almost all accounts are extremely balanced and which constitute a true test of broad time and modal domains. The planners nailed the programming. Now, due to the scoring, we are left with Wods that are completely unbalanced. 60% is not even close to the balance that was predicted by several people on this page early on. I hope you all do not hide behind the "cream rises to the top" arguments, or even worse say "the scoring system applies to everyone". That ignores the problem and the argument itself. This scoring system isn't what the planners wanted. In fact, it's not even approaching what was predicted by informed people including Tony Budding.

Now it is out there again for everyone to see. This isn't the first Sectional hurt by scoring. There are hundreds of athletes at this sectional giving every ounce of effort they have. Leaving it all out there. These people deserve to be judged more fairly. There may be no perfect system, but there are surely scoring systems much much better than this one.

You say the Games are the "crucible" to test different methods of training. Arbitrary points assigned to reps has once again failed the test. It clearly did not do what the scoring czars wanted. Can we finally retire this scoring method before it ruins yet another sectional, regional, or God forbid the Games.

27 March 2010 / 8:50 p.m.

97. Jerry Hill wrote...

@Doug,
Wod#2 did not count for 60% of wod #1
You are looking at total points the cl&j was a huge separator and weighed much heavier then the 'total points' showed.

You crunched those numbers and did not;
1. see the wods in person
2. take into factor the huge separator that the cl&J was.

The scoring system rewards the studs who can hammer a wod then punishes the ones who have had a weakness exposed.

It was an amazing first day and it's going to be an even better day 2!

Awesome work Jeff, Maggie, judges, and all support team!!

jh

28 March 2010 / 4:17 a.m.

98. Ed Alder wrote...

The programming looks awesome. There appears to be universal agreement there. The quality and character of Jeff and his team is above reproach.
That said, WOD2 did indeed count for ~60%. Furthermore, WOD2 produced about 15% separation among the T10 men, vs 21% separation among the T10 for WOD1. That gap narrows if you expand to the T20 but in no way corrects the imbalance.
The programming is not arbitrary. It is hardly controversial to desire the same from the scoring system.
Good luck to all the athletes today!

28 March 2010 / 7:14 a.m.

99. Rob wrote...

Being there and competing, I have to say that the scoring system was way less important that you're making it out to be.

Here's what's actually important from my perspective: this was a professionally run event. Everything started exactly on time. Everything ran flawlessly. The results were posted immediately. When you're actually there, these things are EXTREMELY important to the overall event.

Congratulations for a great event! You're hard work is very much appreciated by many, many people.

28 March 2010 / 5:29 p.m.

100. lisaq wrote...

Great first sectional Jeff and Maggie!

29 March 2010 / 5:44 a.m.

101. Chris G. wrote...

Jeff and Maggie-

Fantastic event this weekend. I had a blast competing and feel that the events are definitely sending the best 20 men and women on to represent this section in Logan. Anyone doubting the difficult of these events ought to go give them a shot and see how "vanilla" they are. Very impressed with how the events all started exactly when they were supposed to and the results were posted incredibly fast. I, and everyone else from The Compound, had a great time. Ryan and I look forward to seeing you in Ohio. Great job guys!

29 March 2010 / 6:30 a.m.

102. Amber Karnes wrote...

My photos from day one are up:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ambernussbaum/sets/72157623726880262/

29 March 2010 / 7:02 a.m.

103. Mark wrote...

Hi-Do you base the lifts on a percentage of one's bodyweight?

Also, do you need to be affiliated with Crossfit to register for the 2011 games? Can I register @Crossfit.com?

Thanks again!!!

24 August 2010 / 7:49 a.m.