Canadian athlete Brent Fikowski has decided to share his thoughts on event 2 "Shuttle to Overhead" on social media, stating that, according to him, this test was not suitable for the 2022 CrossFit® Games.
Fikowski finished 16th overall this year and many expected him to rank higher (last year came 3°).
As he usually does, Fikowski shared his point of view on the Games with a number of points, but this time he decided to be "biting".
"My opinion is that double scoring workouts like this are not good," he wrote.
Brent Fikowski refers to Shuttle to Overhead training, an event that required athletes to run and perform a maximum number of jerks in the remaining time.
So if you run faster, you get more time to do the reps. Although one event was linked to the other, the scores were assigned separately: the fastest person in the race received 100 points and the person who performed the most jerks also received 100 points, for a total of 200 points maximum.
Visualizza questo post on Instagram
The problem with the event, according to Fikowski, is precisely that the scores are assigned separately for each part of the workout.
“In my opinion, double scoring workouts are only logical when the effort in one 100pt section doesn't really affect the other,” he wrote.
He also stated that this training, in particular, did not test the ability to recovery compared to the Rinse 'N' repeat swimming event.
He reiterated that he wasn't complaining just because he placed badly (28th and 21st respectively for running and jerks), but that the fact that it's an exciting event to watch doesn't mean it's a good workout designed to test athletes' fitness level.
It is good to remember that Fikowski is a member of the Professional Fitness Athletes' Association (PFAA), a non-profit association that acts on behalf of all athletes participating in functional fitness competitions.
Brent Fikowski's full post on the Shuttle to Overhead event
Shuttle to Overhead
I was arguing with myself to figure out whether or not to publish this post, but man, today I feel a little too "saucy" ... so let's shake things up a bit!
Feel free to answer me in the comments. In recent years, I have always publicly kept my views on programming silent because I know that nothing will change and for many it will seem that I am complaining.
But for hardcore fitness fans, perhaps this is a unique perspective on programming that you have never considered!
* I am of the opinion that double scoring workouts like this are no good.
In my opinion, double scoring workouts are only logical when the effort in one 100pt section doesn't really affect the other.
Some good examples are “The Skills 1” in 2011 or the Hang combo Snatch + HS Walk at Regionals 2014. These formats allowed the competitions to pack multiple tests into one weekend.
But Brent, double-scoring workouts test your resilience! Well my little fool, check out these excellent 100pt recovery testing workouts:
- 2017: 2223 Intervals
- 2019: Open 19.4
- 2020: Swim 'N' Stuff
- 2021: Event 13
- 2022: Rinse 'N' Repeat.
I believe Shuttle to Overhead training should have been modified to fit one of these formats. I also think that the 2223 interval workouts would be worse if you received 100 points for the time it took to complete the buy-in couplet and if you got another 100 points for completed AMRAPs in the remaining time.
I also think that all five workouts I've listed would make MUCH less sense if each working time window were rated separately with 100 points.
We have become so concerned about whether or not we can do it, that we have not stopped to think about whether we should do it!
Brent! You're complaining because you did badly in this workout! Well, if it means anything, I have done very well in workouts that I thought were badly designed, and I got bad results in workouts that I thought were designed great.
Brent was thrilling! Well, fencing is too!
Brent, a super fit person, scored a lot of points, so it must be a good test! Well, I'm super fit and I could probably even win an event that was a classic rock quiz!
There are some funny logical extremes I mentioned:
The 2018 BiCouplet: These two workouts were pretty similar and were worth 100 points each. Wouldn't it make more sense to combine finish times to get a single 100pt score like in 19.4?
Maybe instead we add a 3min tHiRd of even lighter snatches and Toes-to-Bar for a total of 300pt next time. 😅
Or explain to me another similar 3min couplet like the 2020 Toes-To-Bar / Lunge ... why didn't they ask us to rest and perform another similar couplet of lighter lunges and toes-to-rings for another 100pt ?!
🙄 Anyway, here is the summary of my performance: I need to improve in running / I'm good in jerks, but I made them too slow, even if at the time they seemed pretty fast.