Tuesday, 23 August, 2011

YAY! I think this pic would look great out in the lobby on the wall to the right of the door when you first walk in. The blue bracelets go so well w/the color of the walls, and the concept of the pic is so abstract (if I do say so myself). It's kinda like a sick and twisted version of a flower; if you hold your head just so, you can see it. Just sayin.

I've either had far too much, or far too little coffee this morning to see that flower. But it's still a cool photo in a cultish Crossfit sort of way, moreso when you know the story behind it. It's one we shouldn't lose track of.

I like it, too, Kristi! Brady and I have also been playing with it in photoshop. Our plan is to make it black and white and leave the bracelets blue. Love this pic. :) Props to you and Kerri for your creative genius!

3:44 @ 65# today.
I keep going back and forth thinking I should've done more weight, but I was having problems with pressing the weight when I went up to 75#...not sure.
Great workout.

5:34 scaled to 115.

A lot of you have asked for a full write up on how to predict your max 400m time based on your 70%, 80%, and 90% time. I am working on a full write up and will post later. (ok, nobody asked for it, but I'm posting anyway).

8:48
Scaled to 115

Great coaching from Jake today and Sunday on the C&J. Together combined with the coaching and the lifts so close together, several things have started clicking.

Isabel
3:47 Rx'd

Really like the picture of the hands and bands!

2:52 scaled to 115

It was ALL Kristi "Rx'ed" Simmons!! And, def a hang-worthy picture!!

Squat Snatch or Muscle Snatch?

3:30 scaled to 105#
good cues on "pulling under the bar" jake

Power snatch.
Unfortunately, that means it doesn't count for the white board, but it changes the dynamic of the workout for sure.

While I love watching the math in action this morning, I do think that the logic is flawed. There are all sorts of running calculators out there (google mcmillan run calculator.) Your "max" is your "max." Predicted max doesn't really seem to matter unless you can back it up:) Just sayin'....

3:28 scaled to 65#. Really felt like my form is improving. Great coaching, Jake!

I enjoy Larry's CF math version of "Picture Pages". I definitely learn something and I can use all the help I can get. We just need to find a Mortimer Ichabod Marker for him.

I don't fully understand the logic to figure out what a max or fastest time should be based on a perceived effort, it seems like reverse engineering. I've always used a known and recent best time to figure what my goal pace should be for a given effort. Here's a formula from CF Endurance to figure out your goal pace, given you already know your fastest time over a distance.

Kaitlin’s Percentage Converter for Tempo Efforts
P + (P x (1 – E)) = G
P = fastest time for the distance. Convert to seconds.
E = Desired effort level in decimal form (90% = .90)
G = Goal time in seconds

Example: 90% of 10k TT Pace
So, if your fastest 10K is 48 minutes and your desired effort is 90% then your goal time should be:

2,880 + (2,880 x .10) = G
3,168 seconds= 52.8 minute 10K

3:35 at 115#

What about teaching a Crossfit-based math class? The students who have completed this course will be able to translate each WOD into the appropriate mathematical equation, providing each individual with the simplest and most efficient way to approach Crossfit.

Seriously...I'll sign up for it.

Short Intervals Day 2 Week 5
Run: 6 x 400m, rest 2:00, hold within 3-5 seconds
wu: 1 mile easy
cd: 1 mile easy

Splits: 1:19; 1:19; 1:20; 1:19; 1:16; 1:16

4:28 rx'd

2:40 @ 115# First time at "Isabel" I should have tried 135#. Maybe next time.

2:58 as rx

4:41 @ 95#