In Powerlifting, Sports Applications, Videos

December 26, 2009

Video Article

Louie Simmons of Westside Barbell has produced a host of world- and national-champion powerlifters, and the top lifters at his gym in Columbus, Ohio rival the top lifters in any country. He’s one of the world’s foremost authorities on strength training, and at CrossFit Powerlifting Certs he’ll share his knowledge with our community.

Despite the fact that he’s looking to produce specialists, Simmons has a training philosophy that’s very similar to the CrossFit methodology: he forsakes linear progression for constantly varied, high-intensity movement. Simmons has his athletes train both for absolute strength and for speed, and he avoids the overtraining usually associated with regular maximum-effort sessions by constantly rotating exercises to keep his athletes fresh.

“Everybody’s got a method of training, right?” Simmons asks. “I use all methods of training. There’s not one method I don’t use. I take full advantage of everything ... .”

The key to Westside training is max-effort days and dynamic-effort days. On max-effort days the athlete tries to break a PR for a single on a particular movement, while on dynamic-effort day the athlete works on speed by training with a low percentage of his or her 1RM for a movement. Simmons also integrates other methods as needed, and anyone looking for proof of his success just needs to look at the records posted on the wall of Westside Barbell.

6min 49sec

Additional reading: Squatting Outside the Box by Russell Berger, published Apr. 11, 2009.

Download

Comment

44 Comments on “Programming for Strength and Power”

1

wrote …

CrossFit is genius for bringing Louie Simmons on board. He is the "CrossFit" of powerlifting and has so much to offer. Can't wait to attend the cert. Thank you CrossFit!

2

wrote …

This guy seems like a great resource. This video gives me the impression that he could talk forever about this stuff if you'd let him.

3

wrote …

Louis Simmons is the man. Crossfit is lucky to have him, although alot of what he does is the opposite of Rips philosophy. Someone mentioned a long time ago that Crossfitters are fortunate that now they can attend Rip's Starting Strength certs and Louis Simmons powerlifting certs. I couldn't agree more. The more tools in the toolbox, the better everyone is in the end.

4

wrote …

I get the impression that he is good, very good; but I don't get much else from his video. Need something actionable. What does he think about 1-10-1-20-1-30? What is his mathematical formula and how do we use it? The video is fun, portentious but without substance.

5

replied to comment from Nicholas Carcerano

Yes it would have to be the opposite since louie trains powerlifters who are advanced strength athletes, and Rip trains novices for general strength.

6

wrote …

I would say CF is fortunate to have Louis. I would be very interested in hearing more or reading more of his thoughts. The video seemed short but the principles do make sense to me. I've plateau for years with injuries that kept coming back and then switch to CF this fall. The gains I'm making in strength are like the gains I made the first year I was lifting weights. In fact, in some cases a lot more.

7

wrote …

Im very interested...i want some PFD articles with charts and...offical looking...stuff lol great vid.

M/17/5'11"/182

8

wrote …

His box squats are really wide stance, aren't they?

Can you use that stance and technique in a squat clean?

Or can you box squat with the orthodox stance that is traditional Crossfit?

9

replied to comment from Kieran Barry

Kieran,

My understanding is that the box squats are about as wide as you can go. The two main reasons are that a wider squats puts more emphasis on your hips (vs the knees). And squatting with a wide stance reduces the range of motion, and a few extra inches can be critical in powerlifting.

They teach the box squat with putting as much emphasis as possible on the posterior chain(eg hamstrings). To do this, they want your butt to go back then down, and have no forward movement (none whatsoever...it's tricky) of the knees. Rip argues that the benefit of moving the barbell to the 'low bar' position has a similar effect (more posterior chain involvement) compared to the high bar backsquat.

I think you could box squat with any stance. The box is used primarily for two reasons. The first is that, in order to maximize the posterior chain, as mentioned above, you need to get your butt back as far as possible. Training to get your butt this far back often leads to people falling over. It would be impossible to get 'that far back' without a seat behind you. The other, and this is more significant, is that sitting on the box eliminates the stretch reflex. The concentric and eccentric portions of the lift become separated. In a normal squat (or any exercise) this reflex helps generate elastic energy which is then used to stand back up.


Anyone feel free to correct/refute/whatever anything I said....

I don't really want to comment about the stance in the clean but my guess is that going that wide would be time consuming and difficult, thus making it ineffective.

10

wrote …

In response to Kieran,

The box squat does not actually eliminate the stretch reflex. The stretch reflex lasts approximately 2 seconds after hitting the box (you will be sitting on the box for less than 2 seconds). This also creates kinetic energy which then can be transfered into the concentric part of the lift. Box squatting also ensures that every squat is at or bellow parallel. People have the tendency to squat higher and higher as the weight gets heavier. The box eliminates this.

You can learn all about Louie Simmons program/methods by reading, "Westside Barbell Book of Methods." It is by far the best book I've read on weight training. He discusses in great detail his "Conjugate System," including both "Dynamic Day" and "Maximal Effort Day" plus the weight percentages on these days. It is not as complicated as it may seem.

CrossFit was destined to meet Louie Simmons.

Thank you CrossFit!

11

replied to comment from Thatcher Cardon

"but I don't get much else from his video. Need something actionable. What does he think about 1-10-1-20-1-30? What is his mathematical formula and how do we use it? The video is fun, portentious but without substance."

I would encourage you to watch it again after you do some reading. He is talking about a lot of different concepts, and it is hard to follow, unless you have a background in his training methodology and the language he is using. But there is loads to learn here. As far as your question regarding "1-10-1-20-1-30" I would say that he probably thinks that that rep scheme is useless. It combines two different things, max effort work and hytrophy. At Westside they only do high-rep work for assistance exercises. To my knowledge they probably never do a set of 10 squats unless it is to warm up. Why would you combine two different rep schemes that are trying to accomplish two different things? The singles are for strength, the higher stuff is to fatigue the individual muscles. It is like purposefully undermining your strength work. It may make for a difficult workout, but it will not get you stronger.

I highly recommend reading this article. This will help with understanding the basic Westside program.
http://www.tmuscle.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance/eight_keys_part_ii

12

wrote …

I feel the 1-10-1-20-1-30 is the epitome of functionality and while it may not be a "powerlifting"
rep scheme, it is 100% crossfit. Who hasn't had to help a buddy move? Carry a 200lb
dresser followed by 10 smaller boxes of dishes, a 200lb couch and then 20 boxes of toys, etc?
I like it. It's varied, it's intense, it's functional.

13

wrote …

I think you guys are forgetting, Louis Simmons is a powerlifting specialist. His method is designed for absolute stregnth in the form of powerlifting, but can be used to help other athletes. He has worked with football players, olympic track althletes, and marathoners. His method isn't going to be pure crossfit no more than Rips was. He is the SME for the powerlifting aspect of Crossfit, and I think his knowledge will be invaluable for that.

I agree, if you want to find out more about the westside method, read up on his book, read the acticles on his website, and watch his dvd's. You'll be shocked on how close his philosophy is to Crossfits, from a powerlifting perspective.

14

wrote …

Interesting section about steroids. "Non-steroid users are a lot like weekend athletes...they work out way heavier than us by percentage..." Some interesting things came to mind after hearing that a few times:

What does that mean? Participants in the CF games are weekend athletes? What do we tell a kid at a CrossFit kids facility?

According to one written source (FAQs on main site) and Tony, we are a community that does not embrace steroid use. Should we have other communities that do use steroids contribute to ours? Is that appropriate for our overall message?

Here is a link from an interview with Mr. Simmons. http://www.tmuscle.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance_interviews/the_mad_monk_of_power_lifting_an_interview_with_louie_simmons

As a devoted CrossFit trainer and affiliate, I am not a 100% on board the Louie Simmons love fest. His methods are proven, documented as effective and I agree will/can benefit a CrossFit program. I just want the community/HQ to address the steroid issue. We count almonds for crying out loud.

15

replied to comment from Kelley White

This is were I would disagree with you Kelly. I don't think Louie is talking about powerlifting at all! He is talking about producing strength and speed. Those two qualities are applicable to every sport, including Crossfit (Nicholas Carcerano understands this). What I mean is, if you are going to do max effort work, why fatigue yourself with essentially a bodybuilding workout so that you are not able to set a PR? Training for strength is about training the body, the mind, technique and the CNS. If you are interfering with those components by throwing in useless work that undermines your efforts, then why do it? And I can guarantee you that anyone who has to choose between a 165# man with a 350# DL and a 300# man with a 750# DL will chose the bigger guy to move his furniture because he is going to be able to move more loads for a greater time. Think about how small a percentage of his max work capacity he will be using. I agree that it is varied, it is intense, I disagree that it is functional. Just because your workout does not mimic what you would be doing in a real world situation does not mean it will not prepare you for it. Remember, the guy who DL's 350# will not be able to lift anything over that, his options are cut in half compared to the man who DL's 700#. The point is that strength is strength, it goes and does whatever you want it to. It is just one component, but if you want to get stronger, which I happen to think is a good thing, than you need to train that differently than you would other things.

My thoughts on what Chris Bonner wrote: "Non-steroid users are a lot like weekend athletes...they work out way heavier than us by percentage..." Some interesting things came to mind after hearing that a few times: What does that mean?

I thought Louie was saying that most people at the gym who do not use steroids are weekend warrior types. I think we can all agree with that. They come in for a week, blast themselves and then do not come in for a week. They train too hard and heavy and do too much. That leaves them unable to recover, and thus they don't train. Crossfitters tend to be extremely devoted people. I don't think Louie was referencing the Crossfit community at all.

Should we have other communities that do use steroids contribute to ours? Is that appropriate for our overall message?

Do you think there were people at the games who were using steroids? Because I do, in fact I would be willing to bet on it. That does not mean the community has to use them, or should. I just think steroids are a reality in sports. I do not know what the problem would be if he uses them. He is an adult, is steroid use a moral issue? If so, on what grounds would it be wrong? I think Louie states in Bigger, Faster, Stronger that it is non of his business what other people do, and he does what he thinks is right. I think that philosophy works particularly well when it comes to steroids.

16

Jeff Martin wrote …

I believe my athletes are intelligent and sophisticated enough to understand that there are benefits to wide stance squatting and sumo stance deadlifting. Squatting and deadlifting in different stances are important to overall strength development, period. I also believe my kids are intelligent enough to understand that I use the techniques and programming from successful trainers without endorsing or approving methods such as steroid use.

17

wrote …

Morgan, I thought I agreed with you until a read that interview. He openly admits to using an illegal drug and is now the featured powerlifting SME in CF. I am concerned with that. Last year's games tested for steroids so at least CF has taken a stance against them. I don't know any CF games elite performer personally and I have no reason to believe they use ILLEGAL drugs. Steroids can be a moral issue to each individual person; sure it's a choice. The fact is: they are illegal regardless of the morality of cheating attached to them.

CrossFit is about bettering yourself, competing with yourself and being the fittest, healthiest person you can be. For the average CrossFitter, it's not about records or 1000lb squats. I just can't agree steroids belongs anywhere near CF, morally or not.

Jeff, there are many people in this world that have been successful that I would not want my kids to look to for advice. If kids were truly capable of making those distinctions on their own, we would stop guiding them in the right direction all the time as parents and teachers. I don't discount the methods (many that go back longer than Mr. Simmons), I am not fully comfortable with the relationship.

I have been involved with sports at the K-12 level most of my adult life and I have seen the damaging effects of steroids and and the mindset of success at any cost. It's simply not worth it. A good discussion and I thank you both for the conversation.

Chris

18

wrote …

Book me a flight to Ohio on the Concorde--window seat preferred.

19

wrote …

Lifting heavy weight is awesome and I'm excited for Mr. Simmons' contributions to CrossFit.

To the CrossFit "Powers That Be": Please keep testing for steroids and performance enhancement drug abuse at the Games, and keep iterating your anti-steroid stance. To do otherwise will turn off a lot of CrossFit blue collar folks (like me).

Steroids are tempting, and it would be tragic for CrossFit athletes to fall prey to that temptation.

20

replied to comment from morgan mcpherson

1-10-1-20-1-30 is useless, or just not good for powerlifting? I think Coach has a rationale for most of what he does. I just don't know what it is for this rep scheme. I like doing it. I'm just curious, especially given the controversy.

21

replied to comment from Ben Schill

Agree wholeheartedly. Say it with me "NO 'ROIDS!!!"

22

replied to comment from Chris Bonner

Chris, first and foremost I want you to know that I am really enjoying this discussion and I appreciate the fact that although you do not support Crossfit using Louie, I appreciate your respectful tone. Now on to the debate!

"The fact is: they are illegal regardless of the morality of cheating attached to them."

One thing that needs to be made clear is that Steroids are not illegal drugs, they are prescription drugs. Steroids, can be prescribed and are created by the pharmaceutical laboratories; not backyard chemists. Testosterone production begins to decrees in males somewhere around the age of 30. You do not know that Louie Simmons is taking them illegally. The man is in his 60's for goodness sake, any endocrinologist would prescribe him test. "Last year's games tested for steroids so at least CF has taken a stance against them." From what I understand some of the athletes said they could not piss, due to dehydration, and thus there was no testing on them. But to be fair, drugs tests do not test who is taking drugs, they are testing who does not know how to beat a drug test! Olympic weightlifting was founded on steroids and their use is still abundant today, should people cease olympic lifting because of the rampant drug use? http://www.nowpublic.com/sports/greek-olympic-weightlifting-team-doping-scandal I would recommend checking out the movie Bigger, Faster, Stronger. It really opened my eyes to some new ideas.

"I have seen the damaging effects of steroids and and the mindset of success at any cost. It's simply not worth it. A good discussion and I thank you both for the conversation."

I agree! I have seen guys blow up at the gym taking stuff that they really don't need, they already have tons of test at their disposal! But, I think it is a whole different argument when we look at men who are aging and loosing their edge. And thank you for the intelligent conversation, I love this stuff.

Morgan

23

replied to comment from morgan mcpherson

Good discussion and I too appreciate the professionalism. Yes, they are pharmaceuticals but used for any other purpose than as prescribed is also illegal. Sure steroids are used to treat arthritis and asthma. I doubt any MDs are prescribing anabolics so patients can squat 1000 lbs. If you know of one, I would be interested in seeing the evidence. Just because those guys at the CF games could not pee or have ways to trick the system does not make it OK or something our community should be associated with.

My allegations about Mr. Simmons are presumptuous and not based on solid facts so you might be right about the aging thing but using your words, I would not bet $ on it. As you assume their are CF gamers that use steroids, I assume Mr Simmons is using illegal steroids. That is a wrong assumption.

I have seen B, F, S and it has a lot if interesting points. MLB, NFL, NBA even the PGA have policies banning perfromance enhancing drugs, specifically steroids, as does the Olympic community. If their members us them, that does not make the policy irrelevant. It helps keep those organizations brand image in a positive light and set the example and the standard most people desire to have them uphold, especially when they they are taking their kids to watch the games. CrossFit should be no different. CrossFit could use some help with this, well at least that's what my marketer wife says.

I am not trying to throw the baby out with the bathwater here. I just think we should have an honest look at it. It is all abou the image and association, not right or wrong. Just like all those sponsors dropped Tiger even if he broke no laws. Nice to loosen up the mind a bit and have a good discussion.

24

wrote …

Oh, by the way, Tony Budding brought up the subject of steroids. Why? Did he run out of questions and needed a filler? I seriously doubt it!

25

wrote …

If contastants were not tested because they could not provide a sample then they should not compete. For goodness sake the competition was two days long. They did urinate during that time. Also dehydration is so detrimental to performance that I sincerely doubt that any serious competitor was chronically or excessively dehydrated. If they didn't get a sample, HQ was duped by the most basic, unsophisticated lie. I would guess the pretest probability of illegal drugs in those who didn't provide a sample is better than 50% probably close to 100%. If what is posted above is true I am very disappointed, AND I volunteer my services as an MD to supervise the testing next year.

NO 'ROIDS! (anabolic steroids)

26

replied to comment from Thatcher Cardon

Whoa, whoa, whoa. A casual misstatement is quickly becoming another false rumor. Every athlete was tested. What was reported was that several athletes were so dehydrated from the 7k run that they had trouble urinating for the test in the morning. By the end of the day, they all were successfully tested.

Louie Simmons has so many things to offer us as a community. He is here to show us tools, drills, and systems that we can experiment with. Same as with any/all SMEs. Louie's stance on steroids is famous but irrelevant to the tools, drills, and systems. Physics is physics. And with everything presented in CrossFit, experiment with it or not, keep it or not, debate it or not. But I, for one, think it would be a huge mistake to not consider the incredible array just because you disagree with him about the use of steroids.

And, in terms of the 1-10-1-20-1-30 rep scheme, there are several ways to think about it. Kelley White (#12) has one. Another is to compare your performance on the various sets with others' performance. For example, if your sets of 20 and 30 are well below others who have similar single sets, you may have discovered a weakness.

Also, you know what your single sets are like from other workouts. What does the set of 10 do compared another heavy single? How about the set of 20? 30? How's your recovery? Is it the same? Did the folks with the highest singles sets always have the highest totals for all six lifts?

Use it as a discovery tool. It's not meant to replace other strength training protocols.

27

replied to comment from Chris Bonner

Round 3, *ding

"I doubt any MDs are prescribing anabolics so patients can squat 1000 lbs. If you know of one, I would be interested in seeing the evidence."

It is called hormone replacement. And it is for men who have low testosterone, what they do with their new found testosterone is not asked about. Notice the doctors arms :) http://www.anabolicdoc.com/servicesVideo.html (there is more, but I figured this would suffice)

"If their members use them, that does not make the policy irrelevant. It helps keep those organizations brand image in a positive light and set the example and the standard most people desire to have them uphold, especially when they they are taking their kids to watch the games. CrossFit should be no different."

Now we are talking about image, and I think that is a shame. Crossfit is looking for the best trainers, well they found one. But because people don't agree with his stance on steroids he is somehow a bad teacher? That seems like some skewed logic to me. People do Crossfit because it works, period. The sense of community and the results that they see are enough to keep people motivated. And the same thing is true with the Westside methodology. I have employed Westside and seen absolutely fantastic results. It is hands down the best program that I have ever done for building strength. It is amazing!

"Just like all those sponsors dropped Tiger even if he broke no laws."

I think this fails to be an accurate comparison. No one is "sponsoring" Westside barbell, it is its own entity. It is a juggernaut in the strength and conditioning universe. Crossfit is wisely asking for Louie to open up his knowledge to Crossfit, very smart move. Very different relationship. You should remember that Louie and Westside was around long before anyone had heard of Crossfit, that is just a historical fact.

"Oh, by the way, Tony Budding brought up the subject of steroids. Why? Did he run out of questions and needed a filler? I seriously doubt it!"

My guess is that he wanted to know if Westside would work with athletes who are not using steroids. And Louie's answer is YES, just follow the program and you will see results. I think when people see the Westside program they will see a lot of commonality between Crossfit and Westside philosophies. But let it be made clear, Westside has been around a lot longer, and Louie says he got his stuff from the Russians. But I think both programs have taped into something in their respective fields, and those ideas have produced results that are hard to match by anyone else. I guarantee that if you would spend some time reading and practicing Westside you will have a different perspective.

Morgan

28

replied to comment from Tony Budding

"Whoa, whoa, whoa. A casual misstatement is quickly becoming another false rumor. Every athlete was tested. What was reported was that several athletes were so dehydrated from the 7k run that they had trouble urinating for the test in the morning. By the end of the day, they all were successfully tested."

I sincerely apologize if I gave the impression that I knew anything about this, I had heard something. That was all I said, and it appears that I did not receive a complete picture; which always seems to be the case with these sort of things, haha.

"Louie Simmons has so many things to offer us as a community. He is here to show us tools, drills, and systems that we can experiment with. Same as with any/all SMEs. Louie's stance on steroids is famous but irrelevant to the tools, drills, and systems. Physics is physics. And with everything presented in CrossFit, experiment with it or not, keep it or not, debate it or not. But I, for one, think it would be a huge mistake to not consider the incredible array just because you disagree with him about the use of steroids."

I couldn't agree more, a truly mature and wise perspective.

29

replied to comment from morgan mcpherson

We'll never agree because our differences are philosophical, not factual. I have never questioned the methodology of Mr. Simmons and Westside. Its obvious it works as it does not take to long to figure that out. I too agree we should consider every angle - this is one of our strengths for sure.

My last statement: CrossFit is a brand and has an image it should protect. In my eyes, it lost some luster; not a game changer. Every successful organization on the planet manages their image relentlessly. I think CrossFit should do the same.

30

replied to comment from Tony Budding

Thanks Tony for clearing that up. Really glad that everyone was tested, the rumor didn't sound true. Glad to hear from HQ. Really pleased with this discussion thread. These are important issues and I'm glad they're getting attention.


I agree with several posters about the fact that the actions and philosophy of people or groups we associate with do color us as well. It is only a matter of degree. (It's not hard to imagine some horrible act that would preclude our association, even if he remained as smart as he is.) We decide if it's acceptable or not. Illegal drug use like his is marginally acceptable and we just gave it a (little) boost with our own association with him. It's true that almost everyone can see their own way through and have made their own decisions and that Simmons has a lot to offer. I do also believe that there will be some non-zero number of people who use steroids where they would not have otherwise due to this association. Even if solely due to the exposure that we give him.

31

replied to comment from morgan mcpherson

I'm amazed that I'm the first to oppose your furniture moving guarantee. I pick the 165# guy or girl with the 350lb DL. I don't have any furniture that weighs 700lbs and the 165lb person will work like an ant while a guy that DL's 700lbs will spend most of the day eating anything I have not packed! 2x350lbs=frig on truck.

32

replied to comment from Chris Bonner

Well Chris I have truly enjoyed our discussion. We may not agree, but it was a pleasure disagreeing :)

As per Chad's argument. You are totally right, those fatties will eat you out of house and home! LMAO! But when there is a piano involved, you gotta call out the big boys :)

33

wrote …

I think Dave Tate put it best with regards to Steroids: they work but not for CrossFit. The training routine is just too varied to get benefits in the way it works for other sports.

Also, what's with all the hate for the 1-10-1-20-1-30 scheme? It's one scheme among dozens if not hundreds. Look at the CrossFit games: You had guys and gals setting PR's after a 4.5 mile hill run. Not only that, they're doing it with a 1 lift every 30 seconds, 10 pounds increase each time. If anything, that tells you conventional wisdom does not apply to what you can and cannot do.

As for that one rep scheme, I approached it as if each was a max effort, but I used a percentage for the non 1rm of what the weight would be for my 1rm that round (yeah, a throw back to my weight lifting days). That means 1 (100%), 10 (75%), 20 (60%), and 30 (50%) determine the weight I'm increasing. So if I started at 375 lbs then it's 375 x1, 280 x10, 395 x1, 240 x20, 415 x1, 210 x30 assuming I don't fail sets. I was getting PR's with this so there's merit to it even if I can't explain why.

34

wrote …

"I think Dave Tate put it best with regards to Steroids: they work but not for CrossFit. The training routine is just too varied to get benefits in the way it works for other sports."

I love Dave Tate, but this comment is incorrect. Steroids are such a powerful tool because they allow you to recover faster, hence you can work out more. They have nothing to do with what kind of workouts you do or how varied you are. If you are recovering quicker, you are getting stronger, developing more endurance, getting faster, etc... in a fraction of the time of a natural athlete. This would benefit a Crossfit athlete just as well as a Decathalete, Football Player, Cyclist, or any gym rat for that matter.

35

Zach Even - Esh wrote …

CF brought Louie in NOT so we can begin deadlifting 700 and benching 500, BUT, so we can learn and use some, or as much of his information as we want, in order to become stronger, plain & simple.

Lou has done some kick ass things for athletes, not just powerlifters.

I used to speak w/Louie often on training wrestlers and fighters and the info was priceless.

--Z--

36

wrote …

What makes Crossfit great is that they bring in different people who are successful in their specialty and then use what is applicable. I may not agree with everything the say but I remember that I can always learn something I did not know and can use in my own training.

37

wrote …

"People do CrossFit because it works, period."

People do steroids, because they work, period.

It's great to see some open discussion about this controversial, and opinion-provoking topic. What our community needs is for those who use them to openly come forward, and share their experience with sheer honesty for the better of us all. The topic needs to be addressed in the open forum. People want to know. The people with the extremely judgmental attitudes toward steroid use make this more difficult than it needs to be.

The benefits of anti-aging hormone therapy are undeniable, as well as the benefits of using steroids for massive strength gains and to speed recovery/healing which in turn facilitates higher training intensity. The side-effects are less obvious, given that the people who use them are typically secretive about it. I see the timbre of many women CF athlete's voices, in conjunction with their unnaturally muscular physiques, and it seems obvious that there is prevalent use in our community. I just don't get the people who want to believe that this isn't the reality, simply because the users haven't gotten caught, and deny using. People want to know the truth, and it needs to be safe for people to come out and share their experience.


38

wrote …

I do not care about a personal choice such as using gear or not? I do care about hearing what was actually said in the interview. Have you noticed how it is always cut and spliced when Louis is speaking. I do not care if he is rambling, the man deserves the lenience. Show the community what the, though arguably, best powerlifting coach is saying unedited. We are smart enough and patient enough to hear the interview in it's entirety.

I would really enjoy hearing Louis ask some questions and make Crossfit be healed accountable for their programming. In the message board well based dissent is encouraged. If we cannot learn from this man who can we learn from?*

39

wrote …

* my apologies. Louie.

40

replied to comment from Ian Tilp

For the sheer better of us all? If someone's interested, he or she should go find the information they want. Steroids are illegal, no one should have to step forward and admit to using them just so those that have already have formed opinions may have their minds changed.


There's plenty of information available on the net for anyone wishing to educate themselves on steroids and their effects, risks, positives, and drawbacks.

41

replied to comment from Joseph Baker

Joseph,
The videos with Louie are edited thematically for clarity, not for limiting what is said. Think about it. We go visit Louie to learn from him and allow his wisdom to educate our community. Louie is generously taking time to work with us and explain what he does day in and day out. There is no motive to restrict what is released.

Really, the issue is that Louie and I both have jumpy minds, and this was the first time we ever met. If you notice the background of this video, we are all over the gym. We talk about one topic, then switch to a different one, and then another one. We end up coming back to the thought a half hour later in the middle of a different conversation.

You might think the unedited version would be more educational, but I can assure you the substance related to this topic from these conversations is all there. In fact, it's tighter and easier to understand like this. Also, this was a series of casual conversations, not a structured lesson. When we show footage from the actual seminar (many of them will be coming soon), you'll get more complete presentations.

42

wrote …

Popping my comment cherry here so to speak because this subject is just way to interesting not too. My thoughts on the whole "steriod use" bit has changed overtime due to the amount of information thats out and very recently the Bigger, Faster, Stronger doc. that i watched while oversea's. Let me make one thing clear right here. I do not take STERIODS. I do take supplements to an extent but there isn't any needle poking in this house. I've been doing Crossfit for about a year now and have seen some amazing gains as well as increased bendy ability. OFF THE CHARTS!!!

I do not beleive that steriods should be against the law or banned from any sport. If someone wants to take them then fine your choice your decision. They take the risks and may or may not reap the rewards. Someone will always push the limits of there body internally and externally and someone will always come out of nowhere and beat the crud out of them (crossfit games 09 anyone?). Steriods don't make your mind any stronger or give you a I will never quit attitude if you can't deadlift properly they won't magically teach you form or function. You don't take steriods and then automatically have the ability to run a 7K in 40 minutes. You complete Fran cause you steriods will not help you suck it up and finish your last set of pullups or wallballs in a gnarly medcon.

Now the abuse of steriods is where the danger/body breakdown begins. That's where everyone starts passing judgement because some guy who started being a jerkoff takes steriods then becomes and even bigger jerkoff because he can't control himself. In the end i wouldn't start taking them because i still a young guy and produce enough test for myself and the next guy. I'm just not thoroughly convinced that if a steriod user and i go head-to-head in a few medcon's that he could beat me because of the drug. He or she could dope up all they want and still not be able to touch chest to bar. Just an outside the box thought.

43

replied to comment from scott andrews

The issue is that all else being equal, the guy on the hard stuff wins. My mind is split on the issue.

44

wrote …

As long as steroid use remains illegal, people will continue to entertain the possibility that they are valuable, because any steroid use will need to be kept secret. As long as it's illegal, people -- comments above provide examples -- will suspect the winners are using and hiding it.

It only makes sense to make the steroids illegal if you truly believe they would contribute to superior performance. CrossFit's position, therefore, seems to endorse the efficacy of steroids: "We have to play the game of testing and trying not to get caught, because if we allowed open use, we would see that the steroid users are winning."

If you believe that steroids are NOT useful for CrossFit, you would expect to be vindicated by allowing them. A few steroid users MIGHT win by coincidence, but we'd also see non-users triumphing -- and, we believe, at a higher rate. In the end, we could put the controversy to rest and demonstrate that steroids do NOT contribute to CrossFit's "work capacity across broad time and modal domains."


I don't believe that steroids are useful, so I prefer to see them legalized so that the question can be resolved, and fewer people will be hurt by using, and fewer athletes will be tempted to experiment.

But of course I wonder if CrossFit knows something I don't, because of their anti-steroid stance. Apparently, they're afraid that the fittest person on earth could be aided by steroids. It will be a sad day for CrossFit and for fitness if that is true. But we can't escape the logical implications of CrossFit's position.

The truth -- if I am right, and steroids do not contribute -- will have to wait for an organization that has the balls to let steroid users compete against non-users, and let the greater overall work capacity win.

I don't think Mikko Salo, Jason Khalipa, or Chris Spealler are using, and I don't think a user can beat them. I think it would be a victory for the science of human performance, and for the art of maximal fitness, to demonstrate this.

I'm sorry CrossFit seems to think otherwise, and thus colludes in the myth of superior-performance-through-drugs. The opportunity to prove what really comprises elite fitness will have to wait for braver minds.


* * *

Maybe I am omitting something crucial: the illegality. It might be that those responsible for CrossFit's position face responsibilities that I can't appreciate just because I lack their perspective, the requirements of their leadership of this organization. In this case, we should mourn -- and fight -- the laws that keep us ignorant. They've got enough work on their hands without having to take on philosophy of law, and federal regulation, battles.

Leave a comment

Comments (You may use HTML tags for style)