Why does being in shape matter?

[Swanny10]

Swanny, I don't think you understand crossfit as well as you think you do. Sometimes improving something has affects that go beyond what you were trying to improve. You can't say if I have x strength I can run that field course in y....it doesn't work like that. A 230 Fran does not by itself make you a better shooter than someone with a 330 Fran, that is missing the point entirely.

Once again, I clearly stated in the original post that shooting ability will always have the largest impact to your score, what I am primarily talking about is the small amount of time or control you waste doing every action that is less than ideal. There is no better place to teach you how to move your body than the gym. And yes, people of all ages can learn how to move better.

Weightlifting is the most formal expression of human engineering.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I never should have made a crossfit reference. My bad.

However, I've previously participated in Xfit. I have helped conduct university studies looking at crossfit. And I have sat in on multiple thesis defenses of Xfit studies. I think I have a pretty solid understanding. However, if there is some salacious piece of info that I missed in grad school, the crossfit cert, or in the peer reviewed articles I've read about Xfit please enlighten me.

[Magsz]

I also think alot of people have a misconception of what the "gym" actually is.

Gyms are changing as time goes on and the standard LA fitness style gym is losing popularity. I hate to say this as i despise Crossfit but those style of open gyms are becoming far more mainstream.

In these styles of gyms you can do a lot more to condition the total body via different disciplines than you could at LA fitness.

In essence, modern weight lifting programming is becoming very plyometric in nature.

There is a marked difference between body building and conditioning via weight lifting.

[kcobean]

I think all this discussion is sort of ignoring the proof in the pudding. Look at the top shooters. Max, Ben, JJ, Dave, Chris, Ron, Eric, etc. They're all incredibly agile shooters who are without question "athletes". They're "strong". IMO, it's a requirement of the sport to compete at that level and it's the reason (or at least one of the reasons) there aren't a bunch of beer-belly'd office workers winning majors. There's a reason they're doing stages in 10-12 seconds that the rest of us are doing in twice that time, points aside. The ability to enter and exit shooting positions as fast as possible with as little acceleration or deceleration time as possible requires strength.

I can also say from personal experience that "being in shape" (or the opposite thereof) is a huge factor when coping with heat/cold. I shot a match the last weekend of March in blowing snow and 30 degree temps. It was a cold winter here in VA and I was accustomed to that cold. Two weeks later I shot the A6 championship in 95 degree heat. 12 stages and 19 mikes later, I was absolutely exhausted and demoralized. The heat was a major, major factor along with a few other self-imposed environmental variables. Having to lug all my gear around in addition to more pounds of extra body weight than I'd care to admit in that heat really affected my physical stamina and subsequently my mental state.

There's a reason this is called a "sport" and not a "game".

Edited May 20, 2015 by kcobean

[Vlad]

I think all this discussion is sort of ignoring the proof in the pudding. Look at the top shooters. Max, Ben, JJ, Dave, Chris, Ron, Eric, etc. They're all incredibly agile shooters who are without question "athletes". They're "strong". IMO, it's a requirement of the sport to compete at that level and it's the reason (or at least one of the reasons) there aren't a bunch of beer-belly'd office workers winning majors.

That's not entirely correct. There have been and still are a number top level shooters who did not fit the mold of the hyper fit skinny dude. This isn't to say it doesn't help to be fit, I'm just saying that that isn't the entire story.

Edited May 20, 2015 by Vlad

[motosapiens]

I think all this discussion is sort of ignoring the proof in the pudding. Look at the top shooters. Max, Ben, JJ, Dave, Chris, Ron, Eric, etc. They're all incredibly agile shooters who are without question "athletes". They're "strong".

There's a reason this is called a "sport" and not a "game".

Max and JJ both appear to be in excellent shape to me. Ben, not so much. I'm only calling ben out because he has admitted as much, online and in person. Looking at the top 10 of 2014 nats in all 4 divisions, I can find plenty of folks that are carrying significant amounts of extra weight. That doesn't mean they're not 'athletic', in the same way that golfers are athletic, but I wouldn't consider them incredibly agile or strong.

OTOH, if you look at the roster of the last world cup champions, or the last stanley cup winners, or the top 10 overall in motocross, there are exactly zero people who aren't at an elite fitness level. You can't even get started in those 'sports' without being in excellent shape.

For golfers and shooters, being in shape never hurts, but clearly it's not a requirement to compete at the national or world level. There's a certain minimum level of physical athleticism necessary to be competitive, but I'd say it's on the level of beer-league softball players, and slightly above the level of folks who power-walk in the evening while carrying a golf club.

[Makdaddy]

just from my personal experience from what i see at matches, the best shooters are not what i consider to be in the best of shape. i'm guess im average for my height 5'9 180lb but i am in terrible cardio shape. i agree with Moto as well that perhaps this is the beginning of something in the shooting sports in terms of athleticism. i watched it happen in golf over the years where the top players were generally rotund in the late 70's and 80's. Then came what i like to call the "Tiger Effect". In shape, on a training program and ready for anything. Watching "Hot Shots" last night , Max talked about what he sees in the students he trains and says most new students approach the sport as an athletic challenge as well as strategic.

interesting to watch the development, as my own body deteriorates to mush....lol

[Jake Di Vita]

Swanny, I don't think you understand crossfit as well as you think you do. Sometimes improving something has affects that go beyond what you were trying to improve. You can't say if I have x strength I can run that field course in y....it doesn't work like that. A 230 Fran does not by itself make you a better shooter than someone with a 330 Fran, that is missing the point entirely.

Once again, I clearly stated in the original post that shooting ability will always have the largest impact to your score, what I am primarily talking about is the small amount of time or control you waste doing every action that is less than ideal. There is no better place to teach you how to move your body than the gym. And yes, people of all ages can learn how to move better.

Weightlifting is the most formal expression of human engineering.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I never should have made a crossfit reference. My bad.

However, I've previously participated in Xfit. I have helped conduct university studies looking at crossfit. And I have sat in on multiple thesis defenses of Xfit studies. I think I have a pretty solid understanding. However, if there is some salacious piece of info that I missed in grad school, the crossfit cert, or in the peer reviewed articles I've read about Xfit please enlighten me.

There's no "salacious" piece of info or peer reviewed material that I can give you that will give you an understanding like 14 years of coaching thousands of classes and people will. The vast majority of literature and people that bad mouth it don't understand what they are talking about, usually because of poor exposure from a baby sitter or cheerleader that calls himself a coach. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but from reading your responses it seems like you have some misconceptions, but this isn't the place for me to go on a tirade about the general publics misconceptions of crossfit.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jake Di Vita]

I think all this discussion is sort of ignoring the proof in the pudding. Look at the top shooters. Max, Ben, JJ, Dave, Chris, Ron, Eric, etc. They're all incredibly agile shooters who are without question "athletes". They're "strong".

There's a reason this is called a "sport" and not a "game".

Max and JJ both appear to be in excellent shape to me. Ben, not so much. I'm only calling ben out because he has admitted as much, online and in person. Looking at the top 10 of 2014 nats in all 4 divisions, I can find plenty of folks that are carrying significant amounts of extra weight. That doesn't mean they're not 'athletic', in the same way that golfers are athletic, but I wouldn't consider them incredibly agile or strong.

OTOH, if you look at the roster of the last world cup champions, or the last stanley cup winners, or the top 10 overall in motocross, there are exactly zero people who aren't at an elite fitness level. You can't even get started in those 'sports' without being in excellent shape.

For golfers and shooters, being in shape never hurts, but clearly it's not a requirement to compete at the national or world level. There's a certain minimum level of physical athleticism necessary to be competitive, but I'd say it's on the level of beer-league softball players, and slightly above the level of folks who power-walk in the evening while carrying a golf club.

First you need to define what fitness is. In crossfit we define fitness as your work capacity across broad time and modal domains. Your example of Stanley cup winners and motocross champions proves my point. Are those people great athletes in their sport? Absolutely. Would I consider most of them fit? Most likely not. Fitness and sport specific athleticism are vastly different things. I can make a champion cyclist wind almost instantly by making him shovel gravel.

JJ is the only person shooting at an elite level that I can think of that I would consider reasonably fit.

We are once again getting far afield from my original post. Fitness beyond a certain point is not going to aid you in shooting, it is learning how to move and stabilize your body that will make the biggest difference to proficient shooters.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited May 20, 2015 by Jake Di Vita

[Jake Di Vita]

One more thing I want to add because I don't think I'm being totally clear. You can be really fit and still have dog shit motor control. The primary benefit that training gives us shooters after a sufficient level of fitness has been attained is knowing the most efficient way to move and stabilize your body. This is something that is far more complex than it sounds.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[motosapiens]

First you need to define what fitness is. In crossfit we define fitness as your work capacity across broad time and modal domains. Your example of Stanley cup winners and motocross champions proves my point. Are those people great athletes in their sport? Absolutely. Would I consider most of them fit? Most likely not. Fitness and sport specific athleticism are vastly different things. I can make a champion cyclist wind almost instantly by making him shovel gravel.

Use whatever measuring stick you like. VO2 max is fine. I'm sure you can design some sport-specific measure that will make any desired sport appear to score higher. bottom line is that the top athletes in any real sport are at an elite fitness level, whether it's football, basketball, track, soccer, cycling, mx, xc skiing or whatever. Shooting and golfing, not so much.

I'm sure the finest cross-fit 'athlete' would be quickly exhausted by the demands of either sport. I'm also quite sure that nhl hockey players and pro mx-ers would measure extremely fit on your cross-fit specific tests.

Edited May 20, 2015 by motosapiens

[toothandnail]

My ? ?

Who is Fran ?

and

WHY is her weight going up and down so much?

To me it's pretty obvious more fit = better performance in any sport ( that I can think of)

[motosapiens]

To me it's pretty obvious more fit = better performance in any sport ( that I can think of)

Would you consider golf, bowling and uspsa shooting to be sports?

If so, why aren't the top competitors in those sports among the most fit?

[Corey]

Different sports require different levels of athleticism and skill. Bowling is a whole different level of fitness required than USPSA. And as for golf, more and more guys are looking like Rory and Ricky Fowler than John Daly of the past.

Fitness is a part of our sport, period. That's the "speed" of DVC. the faster you can shoot a stage, usually the better (assuming good hits, blah blah blah). Again, just because you go to the gym doesn't mean you'll be a GM. You still need to practice shooting and learn the skills of gun handling, etc. How can anyone argue that being in better physical condition CANT hurt you on the range? Again, two shooters of equal shooting skill, I will bet on the more fit person every time.

As Jake pointed out, maybe the issue is the definition of fitness that we are trying to argue over. I do CrossFit so my understanding aligns with Jake,. People argue that "Elite" level CrossFit athletes don't lift near as much as true Olympic weightlifters, which is 100% true. But can the weightlifter do any pullups? What's their mile run time? Can they run a 400m sprint a few times and do lifts in between? Can they jump on a box? The idea of Crossfit is not necessarily to specialize and be EXCELLENT at one thing (like Olympic weightlifter, 200/400 sprinters, etc). You just can't have any weakness anywhere no matter what the physical challenge may bring. "Fitness" to me is being able to handle just about any type of physical challenge thrown my way.

[Jake Di Vita]

First you need to define what fitness is. In crossfit we define fitness as your work capacity across broad time and modal domains. Your example of Stanley cup winners and motocross champions proves my point. Are those people great athletes in their sport? Absolutely. Would I consider most of them fit? Most likely not. Fitness and sport specific athleticism are vastly different things. I can make a champion cyclist wind almost instantly by making him shovel gravel.

Use whatever measuring stick you like. VO2 max is fine. I'm sure you can design some sport-specific measure that will make any desired sport appear to score higher. bottom line is that the top athletes in any real sport are at an elite fitness level, whether it's football, basketball, track, soccer, cycling, mx, xc skiing or whatever. Shooting and golfing, not so much.

I'm sure the finest cross-fit 'athlete' would be quickly exhausted by the demands of either sport. I'm also quite sure that nhl hockey players and pro mx-ers would measure extremely fit on your cross-fit specific tests.

You are very wrong about literally everything in your post, but nothing I can say will convince you of that, so I won't even try. Think what you want.

[toothandnail]

To me it's pretty obvious more fit = better performance in any sport ( that I can think of)

Would you consider golf, bowling and uspsa shooting to be sports?

If so, why aren't the top competitors in those sports among the most fit?

Nowhere did I, or anybody else say you had to be the "most fit" person , the most fit in that sport will most likely win, given all other skills are similar.

I went to high school with, and on the wrestling team with, a guy who could bench press 490#, yet could not do a pushup.

He dominated in wrestling ( Heavy Wt.) EXCEPT for when he was against a more well rounded athlete( which was rare, until the state champ level) then his strength AND weight worked against him.

[AHI]

Round is a shape.

[motosapiens]

First you need to define what fitness is. In crossfit we define fitness as your work capacity across broad time and modal domains. Your example of Stanley cup winners and motocross champions proves my point. Are those people great athletes in their sport? Absolutely. Would I consider most of them fit? Most likely not. Fitness and sport specific athleticism are vastly different things. I can make a champion cyclist wind almost instantly by making him shovel gravel.

Use whatever measuring stick you like. VO2 max is fine. I'm sure you can design some sport-specific measure that will make any desired sport appear to score higher. bottom line is that the top athletes in any real sport are at an elite fitness level, whether it's football, basketball, track, soccer, cycling, mx, xc skiing or whatever. Shooting and golfing, not so much.

I'm sure the finest cross-fit 'athlete' would be quickly exhausted by the demands of either sport. I'm also quite sure that nhl hockey players and pro mx-ers would measure extremely fit on your cross-fit specific tests.

You are very wrong about literally everything in your post, but nothing I can say will convince you of that, so I won't even try. Think what you want.

Lol, of course I am. I wonder how crossfit fanatics got the reputation they have....

[motosapiens]

To me it's pretty obvious more fit = better performance in any sport ( that I can think of)

Would you consider golf, bowling and uspsa shooting to be sports?

If so, why aren't the top competitors in those sports among the most fit?

Nowhere did I, or anybody else say you had to be the "most fit" person , the most fit in that sport will most likely win, given all other skills are similar.

I'm not sure what that means. In shooting, there doesn't appear to be any significant correlation between any measure of 'fitness' and match performance. The top shooters don't appear to be measurably more fit than the mid pack guys, pretty much the same as in bowling or golf. There are some fit guys at the top and some less fit guys at the top. There are some fit guys in the middle and there are some less fit guys in the middle. There appears to be a minimum level (pretty low) of athleticism that needs to be met, and after that, it's all shooting

That doesn't mean that better fitness won't help your shooting, or help make you more comfortable when shooting in various conditions, or help you improve faster, or help other parts of your life..... It just means that there doesn't appear to be any correlation between fitness and shooting results. If it were actually 'obvious', it seems that there would be some data or even anecdotal evidence supporting a correlation.

Edited May 21, 2015 by motosapiens

[Jake Di Vita]

Lol, of course I am. I wonder how crossfit fanatics got the reputation they have....

You don't need to wonder. It's because of ignorant people that have no frame of reference to even understand what the argument is yet they still talk like they are experts. Maybe next time you should do your own homework on researching the subject before you make yourself look like a fool with your responses.

I know of nfl players, including pretty much the entire roster of the New Orleans Saints, Major League Baseball players, Olympic gold medalists, at least one pro surfer, Olympic skiers, and a shit ton of other professional athletes that aren't even close to qualifying for regionals in crossfit and they have been training with crossfit for years. Yet you tell me hockey players and motocross racers with no crossfit experience would do great in crossfit? Meanwhile you talk about vo2 max like it is some awesome measure of fitness. You can't even define what fitness is. You literally have no clue whatsoever about what you speak of.

I've grown weary of wasting my time responding to you. If you don't agree, fine, I really don't care. Just do yourself and everyone else a favor and keep your thoughts on this subject to yourself. When there is a subject I know nothing about, like brain surgery, I keep my damn mouth shut. I wonder how long it will take you to learn that lesson.

Christ, you still don't even understand that this thread isn't even about fitness primarily.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Edited May 21, 2015 by Jake Di Vita

[motosapiens]

Lol, of course I am. I wonder how crossfit fanatics got the reputation they have....

You don't need to wonder. It's because of ignorant people that have no frame of reference to even understand what the argument is yet they still talk like they are experts. Maybe next time you should do your own homework on researching the subject before you make yourself look like a fool with your responses.

I know of nfl players, including pretty much the entire roster of the New Orleans Saints, Major League Baseball players, Olympic gold medalists, at least one pro surfer, Olympic skiers, and a shit ton of other professional athletes that aren't even close to qualifying for regionals in crossfit and they have been training with crossfit for years. Yet you tell me hockey players and motocross racers with no crossfit experience would do great in crossfit? Meanwhile you talk about vo2 max like it is some awesome measure of fitness. You can't even define what fitness is. You literally have no clue whatsoever about what you speak of.

I've grown weary of wasting my time responding to you. If you don't agree, fine, I really don't care. Just do yourself and everyone else a favor and keep your thoughts on this subject to yourself. When there is a subject I know nothing about, like brain surgery, I keep my damn mouth shut. I wonder how long it will take you to learn that lesson.

Christ, you still don't even understand that this thread isn't even about fitness primarily.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are starting to sound like a cult member. You are simply defining 'fitness' as 'being good at crossfit'. That's fine, but it's a pretty narrow definition that only other cult members care about.

Then instead of discussing the topic, you simply call names and make broad assertions about how ignorant other people are. That's cool, but it doesn't help make your point any more than it helps tom cruise when he talks about scientology.

I think we can agree that being in shape is good for your health and well being and quality of life. Beyond that, you'll have to come up with some actual data to convince me.

I get that you believe in crossfit and probably make money from it but this whole thread sounds more like an advertisement for your professional 'coaching' services than anything else.

Edited May 21, 2015 by motosapiens

[Swanny10]

Swanny, I don't think you understand crossfit as well as you think you do. Sometimes improving something has affects that go beyond what you were trying to improve. You can't say if I have x strength I can run that field course in y....it doesn't work like that. A 230 Fran does not by itself make you a better shooter than someone with a 330 Fran, that is missing the point entirely.

Once again, I clearly stated in the original post that shooting ability will always have the largest impact to your score, what I am primarily talking about is the small amount of time or control you waste doing every action that is less than ideal. There is no better place to teach you how to move your body than the gym. And yes, people of all ages can learn how to move better.

Weightlifting is the most formal expression of human engineering.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I never should have made a crossfit reference. My bad.

However, I've previously participated in Xfit. I have helped conduct university studies looking at crossfit. And I have sat in on multiple thesis defenses of Xfit studies. I think I have a pretty solid understanding. However, if there is some salacious piece of info that I missed in grad school, the crossfit cert, or in the peer reviewed articles I've read about Xfit please enlighten me.

There's no "salacious" piece of info or peer reviewed material that I can give you that will give you an understanding like 14 years of coaching thousands of classes and people will. The vast majority of literature and people that bad mouth it don't understand what they are talking about, usually because of poor exposure from a baby sitter or cheerleader that calls himself a coach. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but from reading your responses it seems like you have some misconceptions, but this isn't the place for me to go on a tirade about the general publics misconceptions of crossfit.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did you even read my post? Unless you believe I am lying about my background how could I not have a proper understanding of crossfit?

[motosapiens]

Swanny, I don't think you understand crossfit as well as you think you do. Sometimes improving something has affects that go beyond what you were trying to improve. You can't say if I have x strength I can run that field course in y....it doesn't work like that. A 230 Fran does not by itself make you a better shooter than someone with a 330 Fran, that is missing the point entirely.

Once again, I clearly stated in the original post that shooting ability will always have the largest impact to your score, what I am primarily talking about is the small amount of time or control you waste doing every action that is less than ideal. There is no better place to teach you how to move your body than the gym. And yes, people of all ages can learn how to move better.

Weightlifting is the most formal expression of human engineering.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I never should have made a crossfit reference. My bad.

However, I've previously participated in Xfit. I have helped conduct university studies looking at crossfit. And I have sat in on multiple thesis defenses of Xfit studies. I think I have a pretty solid understanding. However, if there is some salacious piece of info that I missed in grad school, the crossfit cert, or in the peer reviewed articles I've read about Xfit please enlighten me.

There's no "salacious" piece of info or peer reviewed material that I can give you that will give you an understanding like 14 years of coaching thousands of classes and people will. The vast majority of literature and people that bad mouth it don't understand what they are talking about, usually because of poor exposure from a baby sitter or cheerleader that calls himself a coach. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but from reading your responses it seems like you have some misconceptions, but this isn't the place for me to go on a tirade about the general publics misconceptions of crossfit.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did you even read my post? Unless you believe I am lying about my background how could I not have a proper understanding of crossfit?

Because you don't unquestioningly agree 100% with him?

[Jake Di Vita]

Lol, of course I am. I wonder how crossfit fanatics got the reputation they have....

You don't need to wonder. It's because of ignorant people that have no frame of reference to even understand what the argument is yet they still talk like they are experts. Maybe next time you should do your own homework on researching the subject before you make yourself look like a fool with your responses.

I know of nfl players, including pretty much the entire roster of the New Orleans Saints, Major League Baseball players, Olympic gold medalists, at least one pro surfer, Olympic skiers, and a shit ton of other professional athletes that aren't even close to qualifying for regionals in crossfit and they have been training with crossfit for years. Yet you tell me hockey players and motocross racers with no crossfit experience would do great in crossfit? Meanwhile you talk about vo2 max like it is some awesome measure of fitness. You can't even define what fitness is. You literally have no clue whatsoever about what you speak of.

I've grown weary of wasting my time responding to you. If you don't agree, fine, I really don't care. Just do yourself and everyone else a favor and keep your thoughts on this subject to yourself. When there is a subject I know nothing about, like brain surgery, I keep my damn mouth shut. I wonder how long it will take you to learn that lesson.

Christ, you still don't even understand that this thread isn't even about fitness primarily.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are starting to sound like a cult member. You are simply defining 'fitness' as 'being good at crossfit'. That's fine, but it's a pretty narrow definition that only other cult members care about.

Then instead of discussing the topic, you simply call names and make broad assertions about how ignorant other people are. That's cool, but it doesn't help make your point any more than it helps tom cruise when he talks about scientology.

I think we can agree that being in shape is good for your health and well being and quality of life. Beyond that, you'll have to come up with some actual data to convince me.

I get that you believe in crossfit and probably make money from it but this whole thread sounds more like an advertisement for your professional 'coaching' services than anything else.

Ah the famous old cliche cult assertion of crossfit. Go look up how Websters defines a cult, and get back to me. Funny how you berate me for calling names when you start your post out with an insult. What a joke. By the way, since definitions appear to be difficult for you, ignorance is the state of not knowing something, it isn't an insult.

No. My definition of fitness falls in line with Crossfit's, which as I stated earlier in this thread, is work capacity across broad time and modal domains. If you don't understand what that means, it is your average power output measured in horsepower across a wide range of activities and time durations. VO2 max has literally nothing to do with it. Elite marathon runners have great vo2 max, most also can't jump more than 6 inches off the ground. You going to tell me they are fit? They are amazing at what they do, which is run long distances. They aren't very good at anything else physical.

I don't make any money from crossfit whatsoever, and I'm not currently offering any coaching services, go back to your troll cave with your wild accusations.

What are you even asking for data on? I'm not trying to prove anything, I wrote a post about a way to possibly make the best shooters in the world better, and you used it as your personal soapbox to attack crossfit, which is not something I even mentioned in the original post. It's obvious you like so many others out there have an agenda against it, and you know what? I don't really care, just take it somewhere else.

Did you even read my post? Unless you believe I am lying about my background how could I not have a proper understanding of crossfit?

I've read peer reviewed literature from the NSCA that "proved" that hamstrings aren't involved in squatting. If one of the most respected associations in strength and conditioning can get away with publishing bunk like that, I'm going to take anything else they say with a grain of salt. If you think that sitting in on a couple studies and thesis defenses, an L1 seminar, and grad school gives you a solid understanding of crossfit, you greatly underestimate the amount of material and complexity there actually is to it. I've attended 6 L1's, 4 of them working as an intern, an L2 before it was called the L2, mobility, 4 years of coaching in an affiliate ran by a senior seminar staff member, and 10 years before that coaching and researching on my own, and I still learn things daily. I don't think you're lying, I think you don't have nearly enough experience in methodology that is for the most part not taught in schools.

Edited May 21, 2015 by Jake Di Vita

[motosapiens]

This thread is awesome. It should get moved to doodie.

In the meantime, I have no doubt that top shooters everywhere will be flocking to this thread to see how they can get those last few points to win a national championship.

[motosapiens]

Elite marathon runners have great vo2 max, most also can't jump more than 6 inches off the ground.

You make a lot of pretty outrageous claims. Do you have any data to prove that? I think it's BS.

Perhaps you're just wildly exaggerating (makes one wonder about the rest of your claims), but even if it's true that marathoners can only jump higher than most people, but not as high as as volleyball players, so what? It makes sense that elite athletes would train on the skills that would help them in their field of competition and ignore the ones that won't help, or worse yet will hurt them in compeition. They're still elite athletes at an extremely high level of fitness.

Edited May 21, 2015 by motosapiens