Nov 4, 2013

Tuesday 11.05.13

Main WOD
13 minutes AMRAP of:
     1 Squat Clean (115/75)
     2 Hang Squat Cleans
     3 Front Squats
     4 Thrusters
     5 Shoulder to Overhead
   10 Walking Lunges (barbell in front rack) 

Skill Work
Broad Jump Box Jumps
5 minutes to establish a max distance box jump

Optional Strength Work
Split Jerk--Foot Work
5 x 3 Jerks from Behind the Neck (70 to 75% of 1RM)

Post main WOD rounds to the whiteboard and to comments.

Coach's Notes. (standard start times of 0545 and 0630, warm up prior and be ready to "3, 2, 1...Go" at these times)

Main WOD
This WOD is a full-body barbell workout. If the prescribed weight will cause you to drop the barbell more than twice per round, then select a lighter weight for the entire workout.
For safety purposes, keep the walking lunges static, i.e. do not wander around the gym with your barbell.

Skill Work
Working with the plyo boxes, perform box jumps, increasing your launch distance after each successful attempt. Do not attempt this drill on the wood boxes or metal stands!

Optional Strength Work
A common struggle with the split jerk is failing to place the feet in the proper split position. Spare yourself some frustration by practicing jerks from behind the neck, which allows you to focus on foot placement without worrying about moving the barbell around your face. Practice 5 sets of 3 split jerks, starting with the barbell on the shoulders behind the neck.

For additional guidance on foot placement, consider the Burgener setup.


Allan Jackman said...

Holy squats!!!

Susan Friend said...

You know you love them, Allan!

Jimmy Chen said...

Oh, yeah... DEFINITELY an elevator day tomorrow...LOL!

But seriously, though, I'm looking forward to working on these since I'm weak in the strength arena.

Can't wait!!

Jared said...

Hmm looks like I might get two rounds.

Russ Ames said...

Leave Ego at the door? I'll just leave mine at home in the bed.

Jodie Kunkel said...

I look forward to this, except it'll have to be after the CGSC Iron Major Competition tomorrow afternoon. I actually prefer the WOD to the competition events, maybe I'm biased.

Allan Jackman said...

IMCF Bragg
4 + 6 Rx
Good WOD to get some weighted movements with my goat - squats. Something I'll keep in the kit bag. I did keep to the WOD description of not letting the drop more than 2 times during each round.

Followed by the split jerk (the 5x3 is always confusing, can it be written as 3-3-3-3-3 for those less competent like myself? I get it confused with 5-5-5.)
PVC pipe-45-95-115-135-155
I never split, so this is good practice.

Sam Friend said...

5+4 (115 for 2 rds, then 95)
I dropped weight because I was dropping the bar more than the 2 times allowed by the coaches notes.
I saw good form today. That is what this month is about... Improving our technique. I always focus on technique in barbell workouts, since I am prone to back problems. Also, the CrossFit community has a reputation for allowing poor technique in the name of intensity. As was reinforced at the Level 1 course recently, that is not acceptable. Of course, you can always improve technique, but should not disregard it. I'm glad you did not disregard it this morning.

Jimmy Chen said...

3 rounds and barely 1 thruster. Not a great attempt, but I was glad that I kept the weight at 115. Oly strength WODs were never my strong points, so I was going for intensity rather than rounds.

Thanks again to Susan, who came up with this WOD!

Adam Thompson said...

5+15 Rx

For me the hardest part was not dropping the bar during the lunges. Great WOD. Really enjoy doing barbell WODs

split jerk

Susan Friend said...

6 + 21 Rx

I can't take credit for this WOD. I borrowed it from Will, the programmer at Black Hills CrossFit. He is a mastermind at constructing barbell workouts. I struggled on the lunges in this workout! As Adam pointed out, I took small steps, which inhibited my ability to take my knee all the way to the ground. Gotta work those lunges!
A big thanks to Adam for yelling at me during the WOD and giving me encouragement to keep moving. I did some box jumps with Jared, Kevin and Dustin afterward, working up to a launch distance of 4 feet from the 24-inch box. I finished with some split jerk footwork, using the grid drawn by Sam.

Ross said...


Walking lunges had it in for me today - way to many rest breaks, definitely room to improve on this one.
WOD RX - 5rds + 10 reps.

Behind the head Push Jerk - (behind the head prssing always worries me)
3 reps @ 135, 145, 155, 165, 175, 185

Jared said...

4+9 @ 115. The lunges were the death of me. Had to continuously talk myself out of dropping weight or outright stopping. Internal drive was tough this morning. Did some jumps and managed 7ft to a 24in box. Could not get one more inch.

Andy said...

4 + 7 Rx. Great beard of Zeus, those lunges were brutal. Almost quit in Rd 1 because the ankle flexion on lunges was a little painful. Able to work around it, but spent too much time resting. RGR, Jared - definitely a "gut check" WOD.

Great points, Sam. Encourage new athletes (or anyone that wants it) to ASK QUESTIONS and review movements before "Go". Saw some creative clean and thruster form this AM, and it's hard to make corrections mid-WOD. We're all there to help eachother out!

Jimmy -- solid effort and nothing wrong with going heavy if you're targeting strength and technique remains solid. Just remember intensity isn't load, it's power output.

Dan R. said...

6+10 @ #95. Started at 115 but knew I was going to drop the bar multiple times after attempting first thruster. Dropped weight and focused on good form. 6' broad jump. Used Sam's floor diagram to work split jerks but did not go beyond #75.

IronJake78 said...

To banter with Andy - Load is a part of intensity brother, try squatting 315 for reps and tell me that's doesn't get your heart-rate up and it ain't intense ;-)

Iron Works Today (speak of the devil):

Had more in me, but my knee has been popping since I did Scott's box jump WOD and didn't want to push my luck. This weight was a proud moment for me too! I've never done 315 for reps, it was as impressive to look at as it was to do.

Bench Press

For some reason my left side was heavier today, so I stopped at 5, but I think I had about 7 had I kept going. I was very conservative, live to fight another day.

Did some Boring But Big specialty work with 3x10 of deadlifts at 190, and will do some push-ups later.


P.S. Also thanks Susan for showing me some split jerk techniques, I appreciated it!

Scott S said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Scott S said...

Ugh. Not a great performance on one that I thought I'd do better on. The lunges, as everyone has pointed out, really snuck up on me. Not so much in the legs, but the strain on the core and shoulders to support the weight.

4 rds plus cleans.

Time got away from me for the extra skill work.

Spent the time training with Jay' and his new group for the WOD and then on Jerks. Note of support and agreement with Sam and Andy. We went through the whole rep scheme with PVC, then with unloaded bars as a group before beginning. But only once. We really should have done that a few more times to feel out the weight.

To expand with Andy's comments with you Jimmy. I (and seems like you) would have gotten more 'intensity' by dropping the weight, and being able to not rest and push the pace, (with good technique). I was too stubborn to scale, would have been better off to do as Sam did and adhere to coaches notes. As learned at my Level 1, it's easy to make a WOD 'hard,' you can just lift heavier than you should, or do an extreme amount of reps and a WOD is hard. But finding that right mix, scaled approriately to each athletes level where they can execute the reps with decent (not always perfect) form, and keep a pace just below their redline, makes that WOD Intense, now that's hard to do. It's on us trainers and individuals to evaluate that better, and make a WOD more intense, rather than just hard to do.

Ross said...

Good discussion today.

By chance was reading a couple of articles on Scaling and ended up reading the IMCF Blog again over lunch, many of you probably have this, but for some of the new ones out there and to help promote the discussion.

hardest thing for me when I started was dropping weights to work on form. It takes stubborn people, like me, a couple of strained backs to get the point. One thing i really miss being separate from the IMCF Bubble is having a community that will help correct my form and adjust my scaling, some days I get it right, some days I hit the red-line 45 sec into a workout. have gotten a lot better - still have a long way to go.

Andy said...

You're making my argument for me, Jake:) Load is a key component of the (admittedly Crossfitty) definition of "intensity". If you are knocking out reps at 315, hell yeah it's "intense". Why? Well a) it's really freaking heavy, and b) you are moving large loads over long distances quickly = generating power. Albeit over a span of seconds.

Now translate that into a WOD like today's requiring hard work for 13 continuous minutes. AMRAP back squats -- you squat 315, I'll squat 185. Who's going to move more total weight and have a higher power output? Which load is more appropriate for that style of WOD? So load is a huge part of the equation, but bigger ain't always better. Ross's article shows a classic example.

There are no absolutes. But F*d/t and average power output are pretty solid theoretical models for gauging intensity as a training objective. And, the reason scaling is such an important part of training. Just trying to cement some concepts recently imparted on our young Jedis! Too much thinking over lunch...

IronJake78 said...

Thinking over lunch is awesome!

Perhaps I misunderstood you then - I was very much making the point that large loads long distances quickly is intensity (yup very crossfitty). Think of underscoring the "large" portion - understanding that large is relative to the lifter too!

I thought you were saying that light loads long distances quickly was intensity with your comment, "remember intensity isn't load, it's power output." Meaning that the load is not a factor.

Scaling down to light loads to work on form, which I would say is not intense, but absolutely necessary so you can eventually be intense. Working on your form during a METCON implies you aren't being intense. That's different than maintaining good form during the METCON which is the right answer, and likely what you were driving towards.

Lunch Thought!!

Allan Jackman said...

This is how I think of it:

At 115 lbs on the bar, with 25 reps per round, 2,875 lbs is moved.
At 95 lbs on the bar, with 25 reps per round, 2,375 lbs is moved.

I completed 4 rounds at 115lbs, which equals 11,500lbs.
Suppose I was able to complete 6 rounds at 95lbs, I'd move 14,250lbs. Even if I only completed 5 rounds, I still moved more weight - 11,875lbs.

So should I have scaled to 95lbs? Who really knows. I could complete the WOD again tonight at 95 to see what happens, maybe I will.

Ross said...

yes good point, it takes a lot of experience to know when you are keeping the intensity right.

Yes I probably didn't say it right, during a WOD I don't work on form, I try to maintain form / technique.

But I think its a balancing act; if you are pushing intensity correctly, you are always going to get to that thin line where either a.) form will start to break down or b.) you will reach failure / have to rest.

"If you aren’t doing a WOD Rx then you shouldn't be able to do all the reps in a given set or round unbroken. If this is the case then you scaled yourself too much."

The trick is being able to push your intensity to that point, recognize when you reach the point and then attempt to maintain an intensity level just below failure. Us here at IMCF being mostly (not all) from a military background too often are afraid to drop the bar or rest so we sacrifice form; therefore "load" definitely becomes a factor in intensity because first - if you break the equation down (F*d/t)load is a key component of force (F=ma = mass*acceleration)so you cannot say load is not a factor in intensity and next we have to be able to identify the correct loads scaled down, RX or scaled up to allow ourselves and our young "padawans" to perform at an intensity level that doesn't sacrifice form for load.

Ross said...

day stuck in office behind a computer screen = too many posts / thoughts on discussion blog...

as you can tell, I am not paying a lot of attention to my mandatory online ARMY TRAINING today..

Jimmy Chen said...

Yikes! As CGSC is teaching me that 'words have meaning,' I retract my original use of the word, "intensity." What I meant to say was that I wanted to keep the load heavy to challenge myself. I feel fairly confident as a reps/form guy but as a heavy guy, I am SORELY lacking.

Thanks Andy, for the correct definition of intensity. As we learned from the L1 class not too long ago, yes, intensity = power output.

I hope my (non-Freudian) slip serves as a teaching point to those out there who're keeping up with the blog!

Andy said...

Good discussion all. One more of many sources on the topic here:

Great quote from Russell Berger -- "I would say that scaling, like programming, is part science and art. Should you go lighter and complete the workout faster, or should you go Rx'ed and take as long as you have to? The answer, as I've heard Coach say, is yes."

Ross said...

so are you saying the art of intensity really falls into the realm of design?

Andy said...

Uh-oh, I'm out of my element. Time for a SAMSter to take over the conversation!

scottnkelly9901 said...

IMCF Hohenfels:

3-3-3-3-3 @ 145lb
modified to "front rack" to save me spine and shoulders

5rds + 13reps scaled to 95lbs


Sam Friend said...

I'm looking back at this discussion and realized I started it...
So... Sorry...
Here is all I meant. They taught us this at the level1. From Glassman: "Technique--like its cousins mechanics, form, and style--is not at odds with intensity but is in fact essential to maximizing power and thus fitness. Proper technique is the mechanism by which potential human energy and strength are translated into real work capacity."

Scott S said...


that just happened.

Next non-controversial subject:

- APFT uniform

- Headgear

- Primary Assault rifle

- Religion

- Tabbed Females in the Infantry

- First gay couple married in Westpoints chapel

step back and watch it burn!