The 2010 CrossFit Games

1. schactler wrote...

Its Tim Tolliver for #3 :)

02 March 2010 / 1:39 p.m.

2. Andrew Bueno wrote...

Good catch Scott.

Also, didn't Tom Nugent (#21) make the Top 20 since Jordan Holland was pre-qualified?

02 March 2010 / 3:02 p.m.

3. Cameron wrote...

Any chance the full, *correct* official results from the weekend will be posted in full for those who didn't make the Top 20?

I know that it's not essential for determining the list of those who advance to regionals, but there are multiple discrepancies between the results that are posted on scores2010.crossfit.com and those that were posted throughout the weekend at the event.

They wouldn't affect the outcome of the top 20, but would still be appreciated by those of us that missed the cut. Even those that missed it by a whole lot.

02 March 2010 / 3:16 p.m.

4. Matt wrote...

Todd!!!! Congrats - I know that HSPU wod wasn't fun.

02 March 2010 / 3:33 p.m.

5. Skip Chase wrote...

The women's 5th place finisher is SAMANTHA Petersen.

02 March 2010 / 4:08 p.m.

6. Cameron wrote...

Also, I believe the woman at #5 has the first name "Samantha".

There's only one "Kiersten" on the list of competitors, and she's at #4.

02 March 2010 / 4:15 p.m.

7. Pat Sherwood wrote...

Nadia & Todd, you guys rock!

Congrats to every person that showed up to compete, regardless of where you finished.

02 March 2010 / 4:26 p.m.

8. Steph wrote...

Congrats Ben and Noah!!!!! So Awesome that all 3 of us made it! We have some work to do...what an experience! Greatest weekend of my life so far!

02 March 2010 / 4:34 p.m.

9. Ashleigh wrote...

Will there be a highlight video coming out?

02 March 2010 / 4:44 p.m.

10. Matt Swift wrote...

Todd & Nadia well done!!!!!!

02 March 2010 / 5:13 p.m.

11. michael towne wrote...

the two files are mislabeled (wmv mov)

02 March 2010 / 5:56 p.m.

12. Corey wrote...

Congratulations Todd! :)

02 March 2010 / 6:43 p.m.

13. Brian wrote...

KC and Ubus... you guys rocked it! Amazing work over there. Way to represent Spokane!

02 March 2010 / 7:29 p.m.

14. Emily R wrote...

Awesome Job Jesse!!! YOUR A BEAST! Miss WA state....I'm competing at the Carolina sectionals this weekend!!! Way to represent Woodinville Fire!

02 March 2010 / 7:30 p.m.

15. David Loverich wrote...

Way to represent Crossfit Tacoma Morgan, Brianne, and Leon! Can't wait for the affiliate

02 March 2010 / 7:44 p.m.

16. Casey Stein wrote...

Excellent job, Jeff Vale!

02 March 2010 / 8:05 p.m.

17. Jason Khalipa wrote...

NICE WORK GUYS!!!!!!!!

I was checking the results every hour, so happy you guys qualified!

Congrats!

Jason

02 March 2010 / 8:15 p.m.

18. Gavin McBride wrote...

Todd- you are one of my idols, had fun judging your first wod and watching the whole event!

to Nadia, love it and everyone at CFBT congrats on all the pr's and new goals for the rest of this year!! cant wait

02 March 2010 / 8:47 p.m.

19. Tom wrote...

Thanks for lookin' out Andrew! I was told I was in at 21st as Jordan H. was already qualified for Regionals so please let me know if I should plan on getting my a$$ kicked in May! Great weekend and an amazing experience. Props to Jesse and company for hosting.

02 March 2010 / 9:30 p.m.

20. sammeijo wrote...

well first thing is first number is samantha petersen not kristen :) and also we are tied acorrding to the points so i am still fourth :) love it though exciting stuff sense i didnt even think i was going to place i was just going there to have fun...

02 March 2010 / 9:41 p.m.

21. Matt Swift wrote...

Kate Suna ... you rockstar, I am so proud of you!! Well Done!!! Big hugs from Aussieland.

03 March 2010 / 4:10 a.m.

22. Andy Hendel wrote...

Strong work Todd. I wish you the best at regionals!

03 March 2010 / 4:43 a.m.

23. Justin Key wrote...

HELL YEAH TODD.... Great job man. After seeing you crush "Girls Gone Wild" at my level 1 in Cherry Point, I knew you would make it. (P.S. send me your time cause I think I beat you) :-)
But Seriously man, CONGRATS!!!!!
Justin

03 March 2010 / 5:33 a.m.

24. Miranda 801 wrote...

Yay Todd and Nadia! I love you both! Great job!

03 March 2010 / 6:30 a.m.

25. Craig wrote...

The way the women's scores were calculated doesn't make any sense, and resulted in a handful of women qualifying for the regionals just because they could do muscle-ups. If you look specifically at the women who placed 12th through 16th, they placed poorly in all the events of the weekend, but because they could do muscle-ups, they got to qualify. Not to discredit these lady's performances, but they are certainly not representative of the type of athlete who is ready for Games competition.

Furthermore, the rationale for the scoring of the last workout was not consistent throughout the weekend. Women who couldn't do handstand push-ups, for example, were not automatically placed behind those who could in the overall standings; there was no asterisk beside their time. Instead, there was time added to their score, which placed them lower for that workout ONLY.

I'm hoping that someone who took part in the planning/programming/scoring of the weekend can explain these inconsistencies, and provide some insight into why a handful of seemingly one-dimensional athletes were pushed through to the regionals just because they could perform muscle-ups.

03 March 2010 / 6:53 a.m.

26. OHS wrote...

is it me or does his OHS still have issue: with right leg going inward at the squat position and there is a lot of forward lean?

03 March 2010 / 6:57 a.m.

27. Bulldog wrote...

Here's a video on the the sectional for those who didn't get to go...
(http://www.vimeo.com/9876672)

03 March 2010 / 7:18 a.m.

28. Wheeler wrote...

What if regionals or the games has MU in the WOD's? There's no scaling. If you cant do the workout as prescribed, you will suffer. I think that's pretty fair....

03 March 2010 / 8:24 a.m.

29. Jonathan wrote...

They were not automatically placed behind just because they could not do muscle-ups, that's just how the points ended up working out. The women who scaled that workout (and placed 17th and above in the wod) were at no more of a disadvantage scoring wise than someone who placed 17th or above on any of the other wods.

Someone could have placed well if the other four events, and then not been able to do muscle-ups, and still come in the top 20 if they had done well enough in the previous 4 (and this exact thing happened). Remember, all FIVE of the events were weighted equally. I believe Jesse went out of his way to ensure no single movement would eliminate someone from contention entirely, and he did a good job at that.

And finally, calling the women who finished in 12-16th "one-dimensional" is extremely rude, and extremely wrong. I'm not going to go into the score sheet and figure it out, but I can guarantee that had the final event never happened, and their placement had been determined by 1-4, most of those athletes would have finished in the top 20 anyways, or been close to it. And if someone was "close" to the top 20 after 4 events, shouldn't they be rewarded for having the ability to muscle-up?

03 March 2010 / 8:50 a.m.

30. Craig wrote...

Jonathan,

It would have helped if you had actually looked at the score sheet before writing your response. If you had, you would have seen that all of the events WEREN'T weighed equally, which was my complaint. In the last event, if you couldn't do a muscle-up, you were automatically placed lower OVERALL then someone who could, not just for that workout, hence the huge discrepancies in the overall scores vs. overall placements. If all the events were weighed equally, the girl who placed 16th would have actually placed 32nd, the girl who placed 15th would have actually placed 30th, and the girl who placed 14th would have actually placed 24th.

03 March 2010 / 9:10 a.m.

31. Jonathan wrote...

Okay, okay, I can admit when I'm wrong. Regardless of that though, there were still 4 women who placed in the top 20 that did not do the muscle-ups. And obviously, if only 16 women were able to do them, then it is a sought after skill, and thus the "reward" of placing higher might be appropriate.

It really is kind of up to each individual as to whether they think that is fair or not. I apologize for not doing more "research" before making my comment - but I stand by my statement that it very false to say that those women do not deserve to be representing Washington. I suppose the proof will be in the pudding come Regionals : )

03 March 2010 / 9:31 a.m.

32. sammeijo wrote...

yeah i agree about some of the things you have written, i also didnt like how on the handstand push ups if you were short you still had 2 ab mats and only had to go down like 2 inches but if you were tall you had to go down to almost a 90 degree. so i dont know, but they mixed up the workouts up pretty good so that if you sucked at hspu you could succeed at the other wods.

03 March 2010 / 9:45 a.m.

33. DL69 wrote...

Congrats A.Moe on your successful weekend you nailed it!start focusing on your Oly. Lifts and you'll come out of regionals just fine!!!

03 March 2010 / 10:13 a.m.

34. Craig wrote...

Jonathan,

Kudos to you for doing your research and realizing you were wrong. Yes, the proof will be in the pudding at the regionals :)

03 March 2010 / 10:22 a.m.

35. Ashleigh wrote...

Thanks!!! I thought the weekend went great! I definitely NEED to work on the lifts. I will be ready though and am excited!! :)

03 March 2010 / 12:23 p.m.

36. Kim wrote...

I definitly agree with the handstand pushup not being as fair as it could of because I was taller and had to go down 90 degrees while others didn't. Then I did really well on the front squats but that didn't make any difference in my score since I couldn't complete the handstand pushups. I thought the scoring on the muscle ups was better then the hspu wod. Other then that it was a great event and I can't wait until next years. Thank you for everybody who worked really hard planning it. I am sure it was hard to figure out how to score the hspu wod in the first place.

03 March 2010 / 1:23 p.m.

37. Seattle Chris wrote...

Is there a list of the results for the event? Reps completed, times, etc?

03 March 2010 / 3:55 p.m.

38. Jesse Ward wrote...

Everyone,

Thanks for such a fantastic weekend!! From the bottom of my heart I cannot thank our volunteers, judges and scorers enough. Athletes I am still amazed at the guts and determination, awesome to be a part of it.

Scoring. 100% the hardest part of a contest. I failed in implementing our scoring system to include the second workout, the result, confusion, internet babble, problems.

Our heads were/are in the right place, the system for advancing past the final workout should have stood for after the second workout as well. I'm returning from an amazing Military Cert (Nadia destroyed me in the squat demo FYI, payback is rough...) and the scoring will be audited and adjusted.

I don't feel inconsistent in this because that's what we planned for the final workout all along, we failed to see how that also applied to the second workout.

Sorry for this - Jesse

03 March 2010 / 7:24 p.m.

39. Rookie wrote...

Ninja & Todd - congrats on qualifiying. well done

03 March 2010 / 9:15 p.m.

40. Sarah J wrote...

I'm confused.

Didn't scaling for workout #2 consist of moving to an extra AbMat? And anyone that took that scale was given an asterisk. I agree that it makes since that someone with zero handstand push-ups should probably also be given an asterisk, otherwise it would be like those without muscle-ups in the last workout standing at their rings until the 17-minutes expired, instead of doing pull-ups, in order to avoid "scaling."

But were there any girls in the top twenty that performed zero handstand push-ups? The requirement to avoid scaling for muscle-ups wasn't to do the full 10, it was to do 2. So perhaps there just needed to be a minimum requirement for hspu's as well?

So then the argument becomes, what should matter more, an athlete fairly good at a lot of things, with no full on holes in their armor, or an athlete very good at a few things but with a significant hole in their armor? It seems that even last year's Games put more emphasis on the complete lack of a skill vs. simply showing weaknesses in certain areas. ie: the girls that couldn't pull off a single hspu were disqualified during the triplet and those without muscle-ups took a dnf for the chipper. The same was true for last year's Northwest Qualifier, the deadlift & press scores were irrelevant if you didn't have a muscle-up.

It seems, then, that the way the Washington Sectional was scored was consistent with the '09 Games and '09 NW Qualifier. And I think it makes a strong point in saying, "You can come with some weaknesses, but you better not come with any holes."

04 March 2010 / 12:09 a.m.

41. PWalsh wrote...

I competed this last weekend and had a great time. 1 of 2 competitors from Crossfit Spokane (different from Spokane Valley).

As someone who just missed the Top 20 and could be found complaining Saturday and Sunday night to his wife about the events, I think that the 40 athletes who qualified for regionals are all well rounded atheletes who are much better than merely "good" at everything. The variety of events was not only sufficiently varied so as not to allow mere specialists to qualify in the Top 20, but was also appropriate to essentially eliminate those athletes with "holes" in their fitness (Thanks Sarah J... really like the weaknesses/holes quote).

My take away from both this event and last year's Regional event is that if I want to qualify, I've got some work to put in and that I have to be prepared for ANYTHING (HSPUs, MUs, chalk, slick floors etc.). One of the foundational ideas behind crossfit is seemingly to be prepared and trained for anything. If you are complaining about the events (like I was) suck it up, figure out where your training deficiencies are, and do something this coming year to fix them.

Jesse et al., great event, the variety of WODs were a great equalizer resulting in 40 deserving and impressive athletes who qualified for regionals.

Finally, I didn't wear board shorts this year, but maybe a pair of those will help my performance next year...

04 March 2010 / 8:12 a.m.

42. Randy wrote...

Way to go Jeff Vale! He is a beast and we wish him the best at Regionals! It would be great to see both Jeff and Charity rule at the Crossfit Games this summer.

04 March 2010 / 9 a.m.

43. Randy wrote...

Way to go Jeff! Good luck at regionals. We can't wait to see both you and Charity rock the Games this summer.

04 March 2010 / 9:06 a.m.

44. Kim wrote...

I like your post a lot and definitly agree. It was a great event. My first time competing. I know now and knew before the event where my holes are and have a whole year to fix them and kick butt next year. It was a great experience. No more complaining....time to start training and cheer on the ones who moved onto the next competition.

04 March 2010 / 12:17 p.m.

45. Ben wrote...

I think the way it all ended up was pretty reasonable. Yeah, some athletes jumped way up in the standings after the last WOD, and an athlete should not advance "just because they can do a muscle up", but I don't think this was the case. Yeah, having the ability to do muscle ups helped a ton, but how many of these athletes had to scale the other WODs? I think that the athletes that were able to do all of the WODs prescribed should have placed above all those who had to scale a WOD. I think that those athletes are the most well rounded and the fittest that Washington has to offer. To call an athlete one dimensional because they were not top twenty before the last WOD and jumped way up because of their ability to do muscle ups is I think extremely unjustified...these athletes were able to handle any task thrown at them last weekend.

Congratulations to the qualifiers, and awesome work to everyone who competed and all those who made last weekend possible. One of the best weekends of my life so far for sure. And of course thanks to everyone who came out to support!

05 March 2010 / 5:13 p.m.

46. Zach wrote...

Just my two cents on the matter. I believe the muscle up standard for the men was good. But as far as it went for the ladies I feel it knocked some really good athletes out of the top 20, who really would have represented us. I feel the scoring was done well, but the way the last WOD turned things around so much and was a little screwy. As far as who can "do more work faster" I dont think throwing that muscle up WOD in at the end for the ladies was a good way to show that. The regionals is like two months away and thats a lot of time for athletes to patch holes in their game as far as skill work. It is Crossfit though and you never know what your going to have to do. I'm pretty sure Tanya Wagner didnt get her first muscle up until right before the last games. And she took second the year before and is the defending champ. Weighing so much on one movement just seems off. I do know all that aside that our ladies who are going will do washington proud! Thanks again to Jesse for a great event.

06 March 2010 / 9:05 a.m.

47. Cameron wrote...

If the final event for the women was weighted equally, despite scaling (i.e. the scalers only finished after the non-scalers in the results for that particular workout, rather than overall), it would only affect 3 qualifying positions. Not half the field.

06 March 2010 / 9:21 a.m.