4 ms·

CrossFit equipment tends to get wear and tear much faster than a regular gym. I remember my box owners face wince with pain every time someone "dumped" (droppe

by smegel 11y ago

CrossFit equipment tends to get wear and tear much faster than a regular gym. I remember my box owners face wince with pain every time someone "dumped" (dropped from height) a nice Olympic weightlifting bar to the ground. Those things have moving parts and are expensive!

justinator 11y ago
CrossFit people tend to get wear and tear much faster than at a regular gym. I remember my box owners face wince with pain every time someone dropped to the ground. Those bodies have moving parts and are expensive! http://www.outsideonline.com/1928481/crossfit-killing-us http://www.outsideonline.com/1928481/crossfit-killing-us
- smegel 11y ago
  > CrossFit people tend to get wear and tear much faster than at a regular gym. True! I remember a physio (who happened to work closely with a box) say that CrossFit is a great way of finding out all these niggles and problems you never knew you had, and then turning them into ailments or injuries, which of course need more treatment and attention.
- briandear 11y ago
  Outside as a legitimate source of anything is a joke. That publication is the National Enquirer of the outdoor sports world. As far as the 'CrossFit causes more injuries' meme (which incidentally has been promoted by people with a vested interest in CrossFit competitors,) is there any data to support the allegations? Outside is the same publication that declared Manaslu too dangerous for commercial expeditions and promotes a wide range of falsehoods and distortions about Everest. If their track record on mountaineering coverage is any indicator, their CrossFit articles are likely equally biased and inaccurate.
  - ectoplasm 11y ago
    Uncle Rhabdo?
  - justinator 11y ago
    As the article mentions, when you try to do as many reps of say an Olympic lift in a certain amount of time - like the squat, it's very easy to undermine proper form, which is what leads to injuries in CrossFit. Since Crossfit is gaining popularity, a lot of these types of lifts are introduced and learned within a Crossfit gym, so there's little time to be acquainted with the proper way to do the lift. Thus, when someone leaves/quits the gym, they're not leaving with much of value: the strength they gain isn't specific to any one sport (unless that sport is, "CrossFit" which is also a headscratcher), and the exercises they've learned could have been done for years improperly. That's another recipe for injury. That's a lot of strange minuses for a gym that's very expensive to belong to. My comment was a joke, but the problem with injuries due to improper form while lifting is very real. It's not specific to CrossFit, but as I've mentioned, the focus on # reps in a specific amount of time can exasperates that problem. I myself have no investment in any commercial competitors of CrossFit. I'm a very fit person, but not in any way to CrossFit would measure. What I see personally in a CrossFit physique is a lot of muscle and weight that doesn't do a lot of good in the areas of sport that I practice: running, cycling, and climbing - all of which benefit from a strength to weight ratio that would not be attainable utilizing a CrossFit regime. CrossFit ideas have been attempted to be shoehorned into these things (CrossFit Endurance), but it's seemed as somewhat of a joke, if you're anything close to an elite athlete.
  - justinator 11y ago
    Will the New York Times be a better source for information? http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/22/fashion/thursdaystyles/getting-fit-even-if-it-kills-you.html http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/22/fashion/thursdaystyles/get... It is a legitimate question - I'm actually pretty wary of most main stream media outlets - not unlike yourself.
jlockfre 11y ago
I think you'll find that actually the bar will not bend in any way if it's dropped onto the ground with weight on. You won't bend or damage a bar unless it's dropped onto supports on a rack, and if you're doing Crossfit, it's highly likely you're dropping it on the floor, so this isn't an issue. http://www.ivankobarbell.com/press/how_to_bend_an_olympic_bar_part_i.pdf http://www.ivankobarbell.com/press/how_to_bend_an_olympic_ba...
noelwelsh 11y ago
Didn't read the whole article (too many clickthroughs) but I'm fairly familiar with the Crossfit model. The problem with any gym is scaling. You have limited floorspace = limited number of members = limited revenue. To scale out it seems you need to open more gyms, with high fixed cost for each new location---that is, high marginal cost. This is the model most gym chains have taken. The genius of the Crossfit business model is it scales without incurring high marginal cost. It does this by using an affiliate model. Affiliates pay a fee to be able to display the Crossfit branch and take on the risk and overhead of the new location. This is basically what fast-food franchises do, and similar to what companies like Uber are doing to achieve scale. Now it is probably quite difficult to make good money as a Crossfit affiliate, for all the reasons that gyms have difficulty scaling, but Crossfit HQ doesn't have to care about that. There are always more young hopefuls to start a new "box". (O bars are designed to be dropped. I doubt that is a major issue.)
- thaumasiotes 11y ago
  I don't understand how franchising is supposed to solve the problem of "serving more customers means having to rent (or buy) more land". The franchisee still needs just as much land to serve his customers; the fee you can charge him has to take that into account. How does this make scaling any cheaper?
  - girvo 11y ago
    It doesn't. It just makes it not your problem, that's all.
    - chii 11y ago
      so the franchise model is basically just another name for outsourcing your marketing?
      - thaumasiotes 11y ago
        I thought the point of the franchise model was that your franchisees, instead of you, keep any surplus money that they generate, giving them much stronger incentives to succeed under your brand. Compare: 1. Local outpost of a chain store that doesn't franchise. The manager, like everyone under him, is paid a salary, and whatever money is left over after paying the store expenses goes back to corporate. This model is illustrated by a scene from The Sopranos (here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oz0uEzRSWXw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oz0uEzRSWXw ) in which the manager of a Starbucks has to break it to the mafia that he can't pay protection money because he doesn't have any discretionary funding. 2. Local franchise. The owner has no salary. Instead, he keeps whatever money is left over after paying the store expenses. This is likely to have several different benefits: the owner may feel like putting in extra time at his store. If the janitor has an emergency, maybe the McDonald's owner will clean the bathrooms himself. Similarly, the owner may take a different view toward cashiers dipping into the till than a salaried manager would. And the owner's pricing decisions are much more informed, and therefore more likely to be correct, than the pricing decisions corporate would make. So with the distinction I describe, scaling your brand as a franchise rather than a chain boils down to one difference: in a chain your store operators are salaried and you keep all the extra money, whereas in a franchise you are salaried and your store operators keep the extra money (you might take a percentage, or a flat fee up front, or some combination. I don't know). Paying your store operators that much more under the franchise model means you can expect them to do more difficult and demanding work. It's not all about marketing.
JupiterMoon 11y ago
Olympic bars are designed to be dropped as part of their normal usage. People's shoulders and backs are not designed to absorb the force of lowering the bar from overhead after a snatch or clean and jerk.
- smegel 11y ago
  These are the ones with the rotating collars which I believe is the bit that gets damaged (bearing inside and all that), not a bend to the main bar.
  - JupiterMoon 11y ago
    Just watch a video of an olypmic weightlifting competition or training session (there's plenty on youtube). You'll see these bars being dropped -- in fact you'll basically never see them lowered under control after a snatch or clean and jerk. Yes these they are designed to be dropped. Your friend should: ensure they have proper bumper plates, ensure they have a proper lifting platform, factor in the cost of replacing the bars when worn out to their cash flow models. EDIT and like the other guys said actually buy quality branded olympic bars. (Rather than e.g. power lifting bars which will not be intended for dropping.)
z3t4 11y ago
I would recommend ELEIKO, they cost ten times more, but will also hold for fifty years. If you can come over old ELEIKO bars and discs, it will be a bargain!

by smegel 11y ago

justinator 11y ago

CrossFit people tend to get wear and tear much faster than at a regular gym. I remember my box owners face wince with pain every time someone dropped to the ground. Those bodies have moving parts and are expensive! http://www.outsideonline.com/1928481/crossfit-killing-us http://www.outsideonline.com/1928481/crossfit-killing-us

smegel 11y ago
> CrossFit people tend to get wear and tear much faster than at a regular gym. True! I remember a physio (who happened to work closely with a box) say that CrossFit is a great way of finding out all these niggles and problems you never knew you had, and then turning them into ailments or injuries, which of course need more treatment and attention.
briandear 11y ago
Outside as a legitimate source of anything is a joke. That publication is the National Enquirer of the outdoor sports world. As far as the 'CrossFit causes more injuries' meme (which incidentally has been promoted by people with a vested interest in CrossFit competitors,) is there any data to support the allegations? Outside is the same publication that declared Manaslu too dangerous for commercial expeditions and promotes a wide range of falsehoods and distortions about Everest. If their track record on mountaineering coverage is any indicator, their CrossFit articles are likely equally biased and inaccurate.
- ectoplasm 11y ago
  Uncle Rhabdo?
- justinator 11y ago
  As the article mentions, when you try to do as many reps of say an Olympic lift in a certain amount of time - like the squat, it's very easy to undermine proper form, which is what leads to injuries in CrossFit. Since Crossfit is gaining popularity, a lot of these types of lifts are introduced and learned within a Crossfit gym, so there's little time to be acquainted with the proper way to do the lift. Thus, when someone leaves/quits the gym, they're not leaving with much of value: the strength they gain isn't specific to any one sport (unless that sport is, "CrossFit" which is also a headscratcher), and the exercises they've learned could have been done for years improperly. That's another recipe for injury. That's a lot of strange minuses for a gym that's very expensive to belong to. My comment was a joke, but the problem with injuries due to improper form while lifting is very real. It's not specific to CrossFit, but as I've mentioned, the focus on # reps in a specific amount of time can exasperates that problem. I myself have no investment in any commercial competitors of CrossFit. I'm a very fit person, but not in any way to CrossFit would measure. What I see personally in a CrossFit physique is a lot of muscle and weight that doesn't do a lot of good in the areas of sport that I practice: running, cycling, and climbing - all of which benefit from a strength to weight ratio that would not be attainable utilizing a CrossFit regime. CrossFit ideas have been attempted to be shoehorned into these things (CrossFit Endurance), but it's seemed as somewhat of a joke, if you're anything close to an elite athlete.
- justinator 11y ago
  Will the New York Times be a better source for information? http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/22/fashion/thursdaystyles/getting-fit-even-if-it-kills-you.html http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/22/fashion/thursdaystyles/get... It is a legitimate question - I'm actually pretty wary of most main stream media outlets - not unlike yourself.

jlockfre 11y ago

I think you'll find that actually the bar will not bend in any way if it's dropped onto the ground with weight on. You won't bend or damage a bar unless it's dropped onto supports on a rack, and if you're doing Crossfit, it's highly likely you're dropping it on the floor, so this isn't an issue. http://www.ivankobarbell.com/press/how_to_bend_an_olympic_bar_part_i.pdf http://www.ivankobarbell.com/press/how_to_bend_an_olympic_ba...

noelwelsh 11y ago

Didn't read the whole article (too many clickthroughs) but I'm fairly familiar with the Crossfit model. The problem with any gym is scaling. You have limited floorspace = limited number of members = limited revenue. To scale out it seems you need to open more gyms, with high fixed cost for each new location---that is, high marginal cost. This is the model most gym chains have taken. The genius of the Crossfit business model is it scales without incurring high marginal cost. It does this by using an affiliate model. Affiliates pay a fee to be able to display the Crossfit branch and take on the risk and overhead of the new location. This is basically what fast-food franchises do, and similar to what companies like Uber are doing to achieve scale. Now it is probably quite difficult to make good money as a Crossfit affiliate, for all the reasons that gyms have difficulty scaling, but Crossfit HQ doesn't have to care about that. There are always more young hopefuls to start a new "box". (O bars are designed to be dropped. I doubt that is a major issue.)

thaumasiotes 11y ago
I don't understand how franchising is supposed to solve the problem of "serving more customers means having to rent (or buy) more land". The franchisee still needs just as much land to serve his customers; the fee you can charge him has to take that into account. How does this make scaling any cheaper?
- girvo 11y ago
  It doesn't. It just makes it not your problem, that's all.
  - chii 11y ago
    so the franchise model is basically just another name for outsourcing your marketing?
    - thaumasiotes 11y ago
      I thought the point of the franchise model was that your franchisees, instead of you, keep any surplus money that they generate, giving them much stronger incentives to succeed under your brand. Compare: 1. Local outpost of a chain store that doesn't franchise. The manager, like everyone under him, is paid a salary, and whatever money is left over after paying the store expenses goes back to corporate. This model is illustrated by a scene from The Sopranos (here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oz0uEzRSWXw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oz0uEzRSWXw ) in which the manager of a Starbucks has to break it to the mafia that he can't pay protection money because he doesn't have any discretionary funding. 2. Local franchise. The owner has no salary. Instead, he keeps whatever money is left over after paying the store expenses. This is likely to have several different benefits: the owner may feel like putting in extra time at his store. If the janitor has an emergency, maybe the McDonald's owner will clean the bathrooms himself. Similarly, the owner may take a different view toward cashiers dipping into the till than a salaried manager would. And the owner's pricing decisions are much more informed, and therefore more likely to be correct, than the pricing decisions corporate would make. So with the distinction I describe, scaling your brand as a franchise rather than a chain boils down to one difference: in a chain your store operators are salaried and you keep all the extra money, whereas in a franchise you are salaried and your store operators keep the extra money (you might take a percentage, or a flat fee up front, or some combination. I don't know). Paying your store operators that much more under the franchise model means you can expect them to do more difficult and demanding work. It's not all about marketing.

JupiterMoon 11y ago

Olympic bars are designed to be dropped as part of their normal usage. People's shoulders and backs are not designed to absorb the force of lowering the bar from overhead after a snatch or clean and jerk.

smegel 11y ago
These are the ones with the rotating collars which I believe is the bit that gets damaged (bearing inside and all that), not a bend to the main bar.
- JupiterMoon 11y ago
  Just watch a video of an olypmic weightlifting competition or training session (there's plenty on youtube). You'll see these bars being dropped -- in fact you'll basically never see them lowered under control after a snatch or clean and jerk. Yes these they are designed to be dropped. Your friend should: ensure they have proper bumper plates, ensure they have a proper lifting platform, factor in the cost of replacing the bars when worn out to their cash flow models. EDIT and like the other guys said actually buy quality branded olympic bars. (Rather than e.g. power lifting bars which will not be intended for dropping.)

z3t4 11y ago

I would recommend ELEIKO, they cost ten times more, but will also hold for fifty years. If you can come over old ELEIKO bars and discs, it will be a bargain!