Do physiological measures predict selected CrossFit® benchmark performance?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scotty J Butcher,1,2 Tyler J Neyedly,3 Karla J Horvey,1 Chad R Benko2,41Physical Therapy, University of Saskatchewan, 2BOSS Strength Institute, 3Physiology, University of Saskatchewan, 4Synergy Strength and Conditioning, Saskatoon, SK, CanadaPurpose: CrossFit® is a new but extremely popular method of exercise training and competition that involves constantly varied functional movements performed at high intensity. Despite the popularity of this training method, the physiological determinants of CrossFit performance have not yet been reported. The purpose of this study was to determine whether physiological and/or muscle strength measures could predict performance on three common CrossFit "Workouts of the Day" (WODs).Materials and methods: Fourteen CrossFit Open or Regional athletes completed, on separate days, the WODs "Grace" (30 clean and jerks for time), "Fran" (three rounds of thrusters and pull-ups for 21, 15, and nine repetitions), and "Cindy" (20 minutes of rounds of five pull-ups, ten push-ups, and 15 bodyweight squats), as well as the "CrossFit Total" (1 repetition max [1RM] back squat, overhead press, and deadlift), maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max), and Wingate anaerobic power/capacity testing.Results: Performance of Grace and Fran was related to whole-body strength (CrossFit Total) (r=-0.88 and -0.65, respectively) and anaerobic threshold (r=-0.61 and -0.53, respectively); however, whole-body strength was the only variable to survive the prediction regression for both of these WODs (R2=0.77 and 0.42, respectively). There were no significant associations or predictors for Cindy.Conclusion: CrossFit benchmark WOD performance cannot be predicted by VO2max, Wingate power/capacity, or either respiratory compensation or anaerobic thresholds. Of the data measured, only whole-body strength can partially explain performance on Grace and Fran, although anaerobic threshold also exhibited association with performance. Along with their typical training, CrossFit athletes should likely ensure an adequate level of strength and aerobic endurance to optimize performance on at least some benchmark WODs.Keywords: strength, aerobic, anaerobic, high-intensity, training, exercise, functional
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".