Forum Discussion

mickoo

Colm_OReilly wrote: »

Sadly no. I wouldn't have much faith in them to be able to show you much.

Rubbish-Colm you have a terrible attitude to fitness, any qualified trainer knows there is no right or wrong way and variety is the key but you just harp on about your way of training(your business interest) canned programs,

These days should be gone and individuals should be treated as individuals, any decent trainer can teach a squat, its the lads who skip been taught that do it with poor technique-Colm{my way is the only way} o reilly.

ps, your not exactly in the best shape yourself. maybe you do nt practise what you preach.

Colm_OReilly

any qualified trainer knows there is no right or wrong way

Proper movement is based on antropometry and biomechanics.

variety is the key but you just harp on about your way of training(your business interest) canned programs

I was asked for a beginner program. I don't receive any monetary compensation when someone does SS or simplefit.

any decent trainer can teach a squat

True. I'm going on my observations of trainers in the gyms I've seen and those I've seen from other courses. Just my observations.

its the lads who skip been taught that do it with poor technique-Colm{my way is the only way} o reilly

I'll presume this is a personal attack. So I won't respond directly.

ps, your not exactly in the best shape yourself. maybe you do nt practise what you preach.

This is a personal attack. However I will respond. I do workout, as I "preach", my times are recorded, my flaws and failings are not hidden.

Lots of love,
Colm

The FitnessDock

mickoo wrote: »

Any qualified trainer knows there is no right or wrong way

If there is no right or wrong way, how could a qualified trainer show you what's "right"?

g'em

Attack the post and not the poster please. And if you have any personal grievances against a member of the board, keep it off the board.

Hanley

The FitnessDock wrote: »

If there is no right or wrong way, how could a qualified trainer show you what's "right"?

How pedantic...

He said the above quoted in reference to how to squat, not on training systems. While there will be variation in how people squat due to limb lengths and other fancy words, there basically is a RIGHT, that is to say "safe" way to squat (I'm not bothered using words like biomechanics since I don't see the need to try and impress my knowledge by way of verbal jousting...).

mickoo

Colm_OReilly wrote: »

Proper movement is based on antropometry and biomechanics.
Colm

You misquoted me, i did not say right or wrong way of doing the squat, i meant right or wrong system of training-meaning crossfit is not the be all and end all of exercise as you seem to make out.

The FitnessDock

Hanley wrote: »

How pedantic...He said the above quoted in reference to how to squat, not on training systems.

Hanley - he was talking about training systems.

Mickoo - Colm was giving very helpful advice to How Strange, going into a lot of detail in his recommendations. Obviously, he believes in Crossfit and the advice he gives is influenced by their teachings. If you disagree with the advice he gives, why not explain why you disagree and give your own personal suggestions? That'd be a lot more constructive than making personal attacks.

If I remember correctly, you're a qualified personal trainer yourself so I'm sure you have a lot to offer in terms of useful advice on exercise and nutrition.

PAUL

Jimmy Bottlehead

Hanley wrote: »

How pedantic...

... since I don't see the need to try and impress my knowledge by way of verbal jousting...)

I'm sorry, I just found that funny

mickoo

The FitnessDock wrote: »

why not explain why you disagree and give your own personal suggestions? That'd be a lot more constructive than making personal attacks.

If I remember correctly, you're a qualified personal trainer yourself so I'm sure you have a lot to offer in terms of useful advice on exercise and nutrition.

PAUL

Thats the whole point,
my problem is not with crossfit but with people who make out that everyone needs to do crossfit and the rest of the fitness world is not needed, colm just goes on and on about crossfit and knocks other systems just because its in his business interest to promote it.
i dont tell everyone that personal training is for them, its great for some and unnecessary for others-try crossfit but also try loads of other systems and some good will come out of all them, plus you'll have a better understanding what works for you..

Hanley

mickoo wrote: »

Thats the whole point,
my problem is not with crossfit but with people who make out that everyone needs to do crossfit and the rest of the fitness world is not needed, colm just goes on and on about crossfit and knocks other systems just because its in his business interest to promote it.
i dont tell everyone that personal training is for them, its great for some and unnecessary for others-try crossfit but also try loads of other systems and some good will come out of all them, plus you'll have a better understanding what works for you..

And don't forget how steady state cardio is worthless and intervals on a C2 is the way to go. Sure what would those bodybuilders whose job it is to lose fat and make muscle know about dieting...

mickoo

Hanley wrote: »

And don't forget how steady state cardio is worthless and intervals on a C2 is the way to go. Sure what would those bodybuilders whose job it is to lose fat and make muscle know about dieting...

What?? i dont know if your agreeing or disagreeing here!! im saying that there is many ways of getting in shape, i reccommend a balance of everything-weights, cardio and good diet..

Hanley

mickoo wrote: »

What?? i dont know if your agreeing or disagreeing here!! im saying that there is many ways of getting in shape, i reccommend a balance of everything-weights, cardio and good diet..

I'm agreeing... Alot of posts on this board would have you believe that HIIT is the only effective way to do cardio for fat loss and anything else will throw you into a catabolic state that you might never recover from...

mickoo

Cool-and just to let you know where i stand-i believe bodybuilders brought the fitness industry into the future and should be credited for this-but as always, variety is the key..

BossArky

Hanley wrote: »

...anything else will throw you into a catabolic state that you might never recover from...

lol!

Hanley

mickoo wrote: »

Cool-and just to let you know where i stand-i believe bodybuilders brought the fitness industry into the future and should be credited for this-but as always, variety is the key..

Yeah, but the problem with bodybuilding is that alll of their stuff works, but it isn't neccesarily backed up by science. And it's not all that "fun". So like it's worthless. Obviously.

It constantly amazes me when people are dismissive of bodybuilders for being "unfunctional" when they're probably 50-100% stronger than the average guy on the street, evidently it counts for nothing when it comes to "function". They'd be screwed if they had to climb walls and scale ropes to avoid wild animals 'n' sh!t.

FWIW, if you're looking to build muscle and lose bodyfat then a bodybuilding inspired routine should be one of your first ports of call, since it what those guys dedicate their lives to doing.

The FitnessDock

Hanley wrote: »

FWIW, if you're looking to build muscle and lose bodyfat then a bodybuilding inspired routine should be one of your first ports of call, since it what those guys dedicate their lives to doing.

I'd actually recommend a powerlifting program ahead of a bodybuilding routine for building muscle. I see so many beginners get so bogged down in creating the "ideal program" (always talking more about what split they're doing than actually training!) that they lose focus.

Concentraining on getting stronger in the basic lifts (bench, squat and deadlift) would focus their attention and they'd soon forget about getting a "good pump"!

Nearly all of the bodybuilding mags consist of 6 days a week split routines ghost-written by journalists and endorsed by huge bodybuilders who take "supplements" which you're unlikely to find in any shop. Not useful for a drug-free novice IMHO.

I always recommend "Brawn" by Stuart McRobert as a great place to start.

celestial

mickoo wrote: »

Thats the whole point,
my problem is not with crossfit but with people who make out that everyone needs to do crossfit and the rest of the fitness world is not needed, colm just goes on and on about crossfit and knocks other systems just because its in his business interest to promote it.
i dont tell everyone that personal training is for them, its great for some and unnecessary for others-try crossfit but also try loads of other systems and some good will come out of all them, plus you'll have a better understanding what works for you..

Great point in bringing some balance to this forum, I do notice that moderate or low intensity appears to be getting run into the ground on all counts over the past while - the more I learn about fitness the more I am feeling that everyone is different and you just have to experiment with different approaches to find out what works best for you..

Edwardius

mickoo wrote: »

Thats the whole point,
my problem is not with crossfit but with people who make out that everyone needs to do crossfit and the rest of the fitness world is not needed, colm just goes on and on about crossfit and knocks other systems just because its in his business interest to promote it.

Just a quick word on "promoting" crossfit. It should be mentioned that it's possible to do a lot of the workouts with negligible equipment, demo videos for exercises are available (for free) on the main website and to this day crossfit hasn't made a cent off of me, apart from cost of a t-shirt! You can crossfit in a college gym, or a crunch gym, in your garage or back garden. All of this can be done with a barbell, a set of rings and somewhere to do pull ups. How would Crossfit or Colm profit from that, especially given that you can try the system for free, with one on one assistance on the open days? Now you might not like the system or disagree with it, but maybe it'd be more constructive for all if you were to present a critique of crossfit and express in detail why you feel it's not suitable rather than whining at somebody that's trying to offer constructive advice to someone.

The FitnessDock

Dead Ed wrote: »

Now you might not like the system or disagree with it, but maybe it'd be more constructive for all if you were to present a critique of crossfit and express in detail why you feel it's not suitable rather than whining at somebody that's trying to offer constructive advice to someone.

Good point - some constructive debate would be great. There are many knowledgeable forum members, who train in different ways so it's great to hear what they've learned from their experiences over the years. For example, I have no background in powerlifting so I'm always keen to hear what Hanley has to say on the matter.

Racing Flat

Dead Ed wrote: »

Just a quick word on "promoting" crossfit.

Something I've wondered about...new to the boards so not too familiar with all rules, but there are often posts here where someone is asking about an injury. And occasionally some therapist replies - 'we deal with this in my clinic, pm me for details' and they get banned, presumably for free advertising/soliciting business. But when someone posts that they want to get fit or start some exercise and someone replies 'pop in to my gym and we'll have a look' it gets ignored. Surely this is the same thing?

While I don't agree with the manner in which Colm was attacked on page 3 of this thread (particularly commenting on his own state of fitness - have you not heard 'do as I say, not as I do'?), I'm not too surprised it happened, he has been very quick (and you might say insulting) to rubbish anybody's view if it involves aerobic exercise. The argument put forward usually is that you use more energy doing high intensity exercise rather than aerobic, but the counter to that is that you can only do the high intensity for short time periods. So aerobic exercise has its place...

IMO this forum can get frustrating - someone can post in looking for advice on losing weight, getting fit, putting on muscle, running a race, body building, weight lifting and the replies are often the same in each case - do Cross Fit and eat protein. The idea of doing aerobic work or eating carbohydrates is usually met with derision. Beware the exercise/diet fad I say.

Fianlly I liked Hanley's point on not caring for words like biomechanics. I've no problem with people using such words if it's done appropriately. For someone to say something along the lines of 'Squats involve knowledge of anthropometrics and biomechanics' doesn't tell us anything. If this was followed by 'And I have trained extensively in this area' or 'CrossFit is based on these principles' a point supporting an argument may be made. But on this forum people seem to use these words to win an argument. If it sounds scientific it must be true.....BS in most of these cases the exercises are merely based on theory. Anyone can have a theory. This is not evidence. And while I don't expect all exercises to be evidence-based - these things take time, in the meantime personal experience may vouch for these exercises, hence the value of these boards. But without the evidence you can only put forwrad your theory and respect other theories. You can't rubbish anyone else's theory till you have the evidence...

My two cents.
Off for a run and some carbs now .

Scottty2Hottty

'I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is that I know nothing.' Socrates

rubadub

celestial wrote: »

Great point in bringing some balance to this forum, I do notice that moderate or low intensity appears to be getting run into the ground on all counts over the past while

I see it as people just blue in the teeth dispelling myths and misunderstood/misinterperated facts, so it might come across as abrupt since many dont bother to search for info, there are often threads with detailed answers on the same page a few days old, and someone else will come along and ask the exact same thing, "bloke in the pub told me about ideal fat burning zone" , "how do I tone" etc. I enjoy some posters styles, Hanleys comments on the guy toning at 13+reps etc were funny, esp. when he came back for more, oblivious. I like his eat, lift, sleep- "get lifting and stop talking about it" mentality.

Colm has great advice and patience for beginners, and some experienced lifters might get put off, yet he is not advising them, and probably would so differently (e.g. the whole "dont bother with bicep curls" thing.) Many seem ready to pounce on any advice, ignoring who it was for originally, and wanting to object rather than add or give alternatives with good reason.

everyone is different and you just have to experiment with different approaches to find out what works best for you..

That is it. I have said before I do not eat anything I do not like, as I would not keep it up. People should not do exercise they do not like, they should find something that suits them and they will keep up for the rest of their days.

Hanley

Scottty2Hottty wrote: »

'I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is that I know nothing.' Socrates

Very nice choice there.

Racing Flat wrote: »

Something I've wondered about...new to the boards so not too familiar with all rules, but there are often posts here where someone is asking about an injury. And occasionally some therapist replies - 'we deal with this in my clinic, pm me for details' and they get banned, presumably for free advertising/soliciting business. But when someone posts that they want to get fit or start some exercise and someone replies 'pop in to my gym and we'll have a look' it gets ignored. Surely this is the same thing?

While I don't agree with the manner in which Colm was attacked on page 3 of this thread (particularly commenting on his own state of fitness - have you not heard 'do as I say, not as I do'?), I'm not too surprised it happened, he has been very quick (and you might say insulting) to rubbish anybody's view if it involves aerobic exercise. The argument put forward usually is that you use more energy doing high intensity exercise rather than aerobic, but the counter to that is that you can only do the high intensity for short time periods. So aerobic exercise has its place...

IMO this forum can get frustrating - someone can post in looking for advice on losing weight, getting fit, putting on muscle, running a race, body building, weight lifting and the replies are often the same in each case - do Cross Fit and eat protein. The idea of doing aerobic work or eating carbohydrates is usually met with derision. Beware the exercise/diet fad I say.

Fianlly I liked Hanley's point on not caring for words like biomechanics. I've no problem with people using such words if it's done appropriately. For someone to say something along the lines of 'Squats involve knowledge of anthropometrics and biomechanics' doesn't tell us anything. If this was followed by 'And I have trained extensively in this area' or 'CrossFit is based on these principles' a point supporting an argument may be made. But on this forum people seem to use these words to win an argument. If it sounds scientific it must be true.....BS in most of these cases the exercises are merely based on theory. Anyone can have a theory. This is not evidence. And while I don't expect all exercises to be evidence-based - these things take time, in the meantime personal experience may vouch for these exercises, hence the value of these boards. But without the evidence you can only put forwrad your theory and respect other theories. You can't rubbish anyone else's theory till you have the evidence...

My two cents.
Off for a run and some carbs now .

In fairness to Colm, he doesn't just say "pay me for crossfit", he does give advice and free links. BUT a skeptic could say ad revenue and such is earned from it, as is the chance of some possible new recruits. Good thing I'm not a skeptic so!!

I've said it time and time again, HIIT is not the only answer. Sure it's something that could work, but I don't know if anyone's tried to do HIIT with bad DOMS. Suffice to say, it's not very nice. And tbh, basing this off nothing more than my own personal feelings, the chance of injury is probably higher than with steady state too. Also, telling a newb to do HIIT may or may not be a good idea. Like I wouldn't suggest someone with a few weeks of training starts working with 3 rep maxes, so why should they do it with "cardio" (or is it metcon these days?).

I laughed my a$$ off at the bolded part above, it's one of my major grievances here too. The typical reply would seem to be read the stickies, lift some weights, do some crossfit and avoid supplements at all costs. Half the time it's regardless of a persons goals. That being said, they are steps that will probably help. The thing that I see happening more and more is that people see more experienced posters giving advice and just parrot the same stuff on other threads when they might have been asking the very same question 3 months ago. It really develops into a case of the blind leading the blind. I've gotten into a lot of arguments here because I post on what I've done and what has worked for me. And also those I train with. The problem is it's not what's in vogue on t-nation, or it doesn't have studies to support it, so alot of the time it's treated with contempt. That's an argument for another day tho.

But yeah.... I'm just rambling at this stage. It's funny tho that someone like Racing Flat who is only new to the forum, but is more knowledgable than many here has spotted the culture already, and recently we've seen the return of Mairt who citied similar problems for not posting here in the past (and I don't know if anyone has seen pictures of, but if they have youd agree he knows his stuff).

James
-Theory and whatnot is good, but I'd rather do something that I know will give results.

Racing Flat

What's the saying (in relation to medical interventions I've heard it)?
'Practice without theory is potentially dangerous, theory without practice is a waste of time'

Racing Flat

Hanley wrote: »

The typical reply would seem to be read the stickies, lift some weights, do some crossfit and avoid supplements at all costs. Half the time it's regardless of a persons goals.

What gets my goat is when someone posts advice and they are asked - 'What are your goals' but I wonder why bother asking them that if the answer is the same for everyone anyway. I expect the advice to be individually tailored based on the individual goals, but the advice is more often than not the same regardless of goals, so I repeat, Why bother asking them their goals if there's only one way to do things anyway? In the medical world it's known as 'recipe' treatment.

g'em

“He has a right to criticize, who has a heart to help.” - Abraham Lincoln.

This topic of the state of the board arises time after time after time, and the fact that it does proves to me what a succesful forum this is. The ability for posters to engage in discourse and healthy debate and constantly challenge what we think means that we haven't lost the ability to look forward. It would be a very, very dull place altogether if we just accepted everything on sight.

Racing Flat - we have a number of people on the board who offer a variety of services to the members. Techinically, yes, it can be validly argued that there is free advertisement involved and Dragan and myself have had lengthy discussions about this very recently with the Admins and other Mods about whether or not these posters should be allowed "tout" their wares, be it exercise assistance or supplements or various physiological treaments. Each "advertiser" is allowed to post on a case-by-case basis. Those people who sign up and whose first 5 posts are pure shills or blatant adverts get banned. Those who sign up with the primary purpose of engaging in the forum's discussions and introduce a product/ service as an addition to their contribution (perhaps as a Sig Link for example) will generally be given some leeway. While supplements/ PTs/ treatments/ classes are not an inextricable part of Fitness, they are an important addition to it, and we believe that the fairest way to offer the full spectrum of health and exercise advice to posters is to give them option to explore information from people who are "in the business" as it were.

Medical advice is just a pure no-no though - a legal nightmare as far as we're concerned. This is a privately owned board after all, and the notion of "Freedom of Speech" doesn't actually exist.

There are a lot of ego's on this board, some bigger, more obnoxious and more stubborn than others. I'm sure that not everyone agrees with what I say all the time, just as I know I don't agree with everything else that's said. But so what? There's room for everyone. If someone has issues with CrossFit, suggest an alternative. In all fairness to Colm, while I don't think that CrossFit is the be-all and end-all of Fitness, he's one poster who absolutely goes out of his way to answer queries. Criticise to your hearts content (just don't get personal and keep it civil) but why not make it productive and suggest an alternative? Some of the most important things I've learnt have been when people challenge the doctrines I believe in and I'm forced to question them myself - sometimes it turns out I was right all along, other times I make modifications and see what happens.

So, Hanley, much like you I tend to post about experiences that I've been through and lessons I've learned - I guess we all do. That doesn't make them right or wrong, simply that they've worked for me. My opinions on certain things have changed dramatically over the years but I don't see anything wrong with that, it's a natural progression. And if other posters choose to parrot what you or I or Dragan or Roper Or Boru. or Colm or t-ha or rubadub or wasabi or Vegeta or amazingemmet or hunnymonster or hardtrainer or Transform or tribulus advise then so the hell what? All of these people are speaking from experience - powerlifting, bodybuilding, acrobatic, marathon-running, personal-training experience. And at the end of the day when it comes down to it, we're all singing from the same hymn sheet - eat well, get moving, enjoy exercise i.e. we really do keep it simple. Arguing and debating over the 10% that's different from person to person is what keeps the forum alive.

We can only tell someone so much - it's up to them to read a bit more and put a plan into action. Of course there are the people who come, ask questions, leech the forum dry with those questions and disappear into oblivion never to be heard of again, but there are also the people who stick around and decide to learn a bit more. I've noticed too that the "next generation" of Fitness posters have begun to echo the addvice they were given three months ago, but again so what? they, too, will begin to ask questions of their own and challenege their doctrines.

Racing Flat wrote:

Hanley wrote:

The typical reply would seem to be read the stickies, lift some weights, do some crossfit and avoid supplements at all costs. Half the time it's regardless of a persons goals.

What gets my goat is when someone posts advice and they are asked - 'What are your goals' but I wonder why bother asking them that if the answer is the same for everyone anyway. I expect the advice to be individually tailored based on the individual goals, but the advice is more often than not the same regardless of goals, so I repeat, Why bother asking them their goals if there's only one way to do things anyway? In the medical world it's known as 'recipe' treatment.

Is it not fair to say that the vast majority of people who come here to ask questions fall under the same broad categories: they want to 'tone up', lose fat and get fit, or in other words they all have the same goals? While there are "typical replies" for sure, doing crossfit and avoiding supplements is only something that has cropped up recently. CrossFit crops up primarily because, as I said before, very often Colm is the only person to reply to a poster. And avoiding supplements? I'd argue that there's a 50:50 opinion on that one, both sidees making great arguments.

Individual, tailored porgrams are by and large not necessary for the average poster. Merely getting off their arse, moving more and eating less sugar will go a long way towards improving their situation. For the more advanced lifter or for someone who wants very, very specific questions answered they'll probably go to a specialised forum or source of information. Hanely would you come to this forum to find out information about how solve a problem you were having with your bench shirt? Or would a National-level athelete come here to find out how to knock another half a second off their 200m sprint time? God no, becuase the pool of people on this board who are capable of answering those kinds of questions with good knowledge are far and few between, even if they exist at all.

But what we do have is (in my very humble opinion) a very friendly, welcoming and warm environment where people af all levels can shoot the sh!t a little bit and talk about Fitness strategies. And if you don't like the way the forum is, make changes otherwise - if the posters like it, they'll make it known, if not they'll make it known even louder. That certainly isn't a call for the Mods to make - all we do is keep things tidy and safe. And if you don't want to make good changes... then frankly go away - complaining and whining without doing anything about it is just annoying.

Gill
- really can't understand why people do this thing under their name

Roper

That's some good posting folks. At the end of the bull****:

This topic of the state of the board arises time after time after time, and the fact that it does proves to me what a succesful forum this is. The ability for posters to engage in discourse and healthy debate and constantly challenge what we think means that we haven't lost the ability to look forward. It would be a very, very dull place altogether if we just accepted everything on sight.

I'd write more but my son tore off my spacebar on my laptop while "fixing the computer" so this is taking ages to type so I'll be brief.

Mickoo,
I see where you're coming from with your constructive posts (the ones after the personal attack) but why not post your concerns about Crossfit on the thread where myself, Hanley and Racingflat were asking Colm about the basis of Crossfit and our legitimate queries? Why wait until a thread where he was dispensing advice?

Hanley,
I agree with you. Some people dispense advice here and they're just passing on what they heard a few weeks before. That can be dangerous but it's very public so other more experienced posters can keep them on the right track I think.

Lastly, I'm in the "stay away from supplements brigade" alledgedly, except I'm not. Anyone who actually reads my posts instead of glancing at the bits that irritate them will know I'm pro- supplements for athletic use. I'm also probably lumped in with the "no-carbs" brigade but the truth is I'm not in that one. Wasabi saw me complain about my love handles the other day she'll testify! (I'm bulking at the mo!)

Anyway, Peace, love, Debate.All good.

Colm_OReilly

I really shouldn't reply to this at all, but g-chat has been disabled so I've to find another way to reduce productivity.

Fristly, this isn't a thread about CF, it's very much about me and my zealous promotion of CF as a system (and by extension, CF Ireland) as evidenced by Roper pointing to the actual discussion on CF.

Now, to begin the process of clearing up which will no doubt lead to further arguments.

This spin off came about as a result of How Strange asking if someone in a Corpo gym could show her "these movements", (she was referring to deads and squats et al at the time). Note how she asked about the movements, not the programming. Given my experience of trainers in most gyms, I don't believe she would get decent instruction, so I said no. Mickoo then said this:

Rubbish-Colm you have a terrible attitude to fitness, any qualified trainer knows there is no right or wrong way and variety is the key but you just harp on about your way of training(your business interest) canned programs

Which is why I responded using words like "biomechanics" and "anthropometry". My response was in relationtion to the movement of the squat, which isn't based on opinion. Mickoo claimed I misquoted him on this, as evidenced here.

You misquoted me, i did not say right or wrong way of doing the squat, i meant right or wrong system of training-meaning crossfit is not the be all and end all of exercise as you seem to make out.

So it was the case of misinterpretation and misinterpretation.

As regards my "rubbishing" of steady state cardio. if a person posts on this board looking for the most effective and efficient means I can't recommend steady state running, so I recommend more intense work.

As an interesting observation, this debate (in a larger context) which I'll bluntly express as "Why is it all about CF!!!???" is almost a direct parallel of what happened 4 years ago on the SD/MA board, when I was one of the first to talk about MMA, and it's methodologies. (Essentially skill vs technique/movement, timing, resistence as a means of training). I've found that the arguments for CF put forth by Glassman and those for Aliveness put forth by Thornton almost directly transferrable (i.e. speaking to measurable, observable, repeatable data).

G'em, taglines are a phenomena explained in a bebo blog post of mine. My bebo page is little more than a tabloid rag, so if you want to look at it, go ahead but prepare to be upset/offended by some postings/comments.

Hopefully I've answered any question put forth since Mickoo's first post.

But then again, this isn't about CF, it's about me.

Lots of love,
Colm

g'em

new thread made...

wasabi

Roper wrote: »

Lastly, I'm in the "stay away from supplements brigade" alledgedly, except I'm not. Anyone who actually reads my posts instead of glancing at the bits that irritate them will know I'm pro- supplements for athletic use. I'm also probably lumped in with the "no-carbs" brigade but the truth is I'm not in that one. Wasabi saw me complain about my love handles the other day she'll testify! (I'm bulking at the mo!)

Yeah I did, and I saw you eating Jaffa Cakes while training the week before as well. Do Jaffa Cakes count as a supplement?

And since I'm here I may as well chuck in my two cents on the rest of the discussion. For my sins I have one of the commoner gym instructor certifications that are knocking around. When I did that course, did I learn how to squat and deadlift properly? Definitely not (the resistance training instructor was usually hanging and so lateral raises and curls were the order of the day).

I learned how to squat and deadlift from reading Starting Strength by Mark Rippetoe, getting into the gym, and getting people to criticise my form. If you find a trainer in an average gym that can teach you to squat and deadlift properly, you've done well.

As for people (Colm) recommending XFit a lot here, well as g'em says 90% of the posters here are after the same thing - better general fitness and better body composition. Simplefit or appropriately scaled XFit is indeed a good and efficient way of getting there. I did it myself.

Colm_OReilly

Yeah I did, and I saw you eating Jaffa Cakes while training the week before as well. Do Jaffa Cakes count as a supplement?

You should ask him about his weight cutting and muffins, now there's a skill I've yet to master!

arybvtcw0eolkf

Good thread, and good to see people keep it civil.

Alot has been said about Colm's mesage re. Crossfit. I'll admit it wobbles my tits too, but behind it all he's giving very good basic advice, its just the way its delivered is a pi$$er and gets people's goat.

Squats, dips, DL's, chin's etc should be the bread and butter for anyone lifting weights but if I was a newbie coming here looking for advice I think I'd be left with the impression that if I'm not 'crossfit' I'm wasting my time.

But no one is giving an alternative. Whether its marketing hype or a genuine interest in helping other's (and I think its a little of both) its just a little annoying how the message is put accross. However none of it is bad/dangerous advice, and its so easy for someone to give bad/dangerous advice.

I'd consider myself a very advanced lifter, I know my goals and I believe in getting there I have to keep everything simple. From my diet to training and eating, I don't make a science of lifting weights/getting bigger & stronger.

From the old days (yea I'm probably older than most here as Dragan like's to info ) two saying's were thrown around the gym's re. the basics and I was glad to see Colm throw one out here a few times 'Strenght, Speed, Stamina' - this is what nature intended us to have and what most of us lack in our daily lives work on those three S's and T.R.E. - Train, Rest, Eat to grow.

Guys thats a simple message and one that only a few people here put accross, ie Colm, Hanley, Dragan and probably one of two other's whose name's escape me right now

Colm I don't think anyone is directing anything at you personally or your knowledge, but at your arrogance. Your an exceptionally arrogant young man & it appear's as though you find it hard to hide it, or should you hide it even?.

Its obvious you have a lot of confidence in both yourself and your Crossfit system. Personally I think the basics of it are sound and hard to knock, the message however comes accross like something from a famous gentleman in Eccles St.

So there ya go. Anyone mentioned or not mentioned shouldn't take offence either way. Its a good thread and clear's the air and lets us all know where we stand.

Mods, this is a good forum. I rarely post but its giving me the appetite to get my ass back to the gym after a major personal up set 18 months ago (I've spoken to Hanley about it).

Apart from tipping away at Judo, in the last 18 months I've basically walked away from the gym while my head & emotions were elsewhere. You've all, each and every one of you went some way in the last while to motivating myself again.

wasabi

Colm_OReilly wrote: »

You should ask him about his weight cutting and muffins, now there's a skill I've yet to master!

I should, it would be a lot better than doing feckin circuits on low carbs like I've been doing!

Roper

You ain't seen nothing until you've seen the walnut brownie diet. Lost weight on that too.

justsomebloke

ok I have be skipping this forum for the last while but hey I might as well drop in and give my 2c on the topic.


Ok this is a public forum. There is nobody here being paid to give advise so the level of advise is dependent on the posters who actually take the time out of their lives to post. Also if you check the majority of the posts the vast majority of them follow the exact same trend "Hi, can you help me lose some weight and get toned." The problem with this is that there is very little substance left on the board where experienced trainers can actually debate themselves thus giving them less reason to stay here and actually offer advise, as generally they will tend to move to other forums, which specialise in their field, where they can actually debate the smaller points of programmes that would be of little use to the majority of posters here.

So after that we are left with only a small hand full of posters answering the vast majority of question, and they will generally offer advise from their perspective and what encourages them to keep fit. So generally the advise that they offer is skewed towards their spiecalised field. Hence when Colm posts he posts about crossfit and the benefits of crossfit as that is what he knows, why would he want to post about anything else? Do I think he has a slightly alternative motive in doing this to try and steer people towards crossfit and his gym? Well the answer is Yes I do, however do I hold it against him no, not at all. Why? you may ask, well he takes a serious amount of time of his day to help people on here and post slightly individual responses to each of them and does he look for anything out of it. Not really. Or no more then Jon would pimp his store or the rest of us pimp Mickk's empire.

If people don't like the that crossfit seems to dominate in the fitness forum then answers the threads and give alternative advice or would you just prefer for questions to go unanswered?

Anyway I might as well give my opinion on things here. Do I feel crossfit is the be all and end all of things? God no
Do I think that weight training in general is the answer to alot of people's questions? well for the most yes as that what's interests me at the mo but I suppose a little cardio never killed anyone
However Do I think weight training plays to big a part in the answers on this forum? yes by a lot.

For me it is not a question of whether the crossfit answer is the be all and end all it's more that weights training full stop seems to be the answer for everyone in some shape and form and this is what I have always found to be a problem with this forum, but is there anything that we can do about that no not really as it harks back to my original point. The advise given is skewed by the people giving it and for the most part it is people who have an interest in weights that seem to give advise on this forum. We simply don't have the people who are interested in other forms of exercise replying to balance things out

WHIP IT!

For what it's worth, something I kind of admire about the fitness forum compared to others on boards, is the patience of the regular posters (incl Colm 'Crossfit' O'Reilly, g'em, Hanley and several others) considering they're forced to answer the same or similar questions on a weekly, almost daily, basis.

I think this is why RacingFlat, for example, may get the impression that "the answer is the same for everybody." One thing that must be tedious for the regular advisors is the apparent inability of a lot of people to think a little for themselves... It's simple, work hard at the right things and you should get results. Instead there is sometimes alot of "What exactly to I need to do to get X result?"

Reminds me of this guy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7GnOyd_z1w

Dragan

The answer will be the same as long as the question remains the same.

What we get here is a lot of replication and slight alteration of a theme. People don't want to do a sub 3:30 Fran. The don't want a 3x bodyweight deadlift. They don't want 20 inch arms.

They just want to feel a little better, maybe cut out some **** from their diet and be a little leaner.

The simple fact is that there is a very small group of consistantly active posters and because this is the way the Multiverse works they will normally be the ones who are deepest into their own version of "the life".

Colm digs on Crossfit. Good for him. People see him promoting it a lot, but they tend to forget about his investment in it as well.

Do you think Crossfit paid for Colm's affiliation fee? Do you think they paid for his L1 Cert and Seminar, or his flights to get there, or his hotels rooms and accomadation while he was over there? Nope.

Colm has invested time, effort, money, energy and thought into what it is that he wants to do.

Sounds like pretty much everone else on this forum, and the majority of the people in the world.

I see this division between training styles as being very similar to the division between religions.....i see them argued with the same faith and fervour.

What people tend to forget about both is that at best we are working off shakey facts, at worst we are working off blind faith.

Jimmy Bottlehead

Dragan wrote: »

The answer will be the same as long as the question remains the same.

What we get here is a lot of replication and slight alteration of a theme. People don't want to do a sub 3:30 Fran. The don't want a 3x bodyweight deadlift. They don't want 20 inch arms.

They just want to feel a little better, maybe cut out some **** from their diet and be a little leaner.

The simple fact is that there is a very small group of consistantly active posters and because this is the way the Multiverse works they will normally be the ones who are deepest into their own version of "the life".

Colm digs on Crossfit. Good for him. People see him promoting it a lot, but they tend to forget about his investment in it as well.

Do you think Crossfit paid for Colm's affiliation fee? Do you think they paid for his L1 Cert and Seminar, or his flights to get there, or his hotels rooms and accomadation while he was over there? Nope.

Colm has invested time, effort, money, energy and thought into what it is that he wants to do.

Sounds like pretty much everone else on this forum, and the majority of the people in the world.

I see this division between training styles as being very similar to the division between religions.....i see them argued with the same faith and fervour.

What people tend to forget about both is that at best we are working off shakey facts, at worst we are working off blind faith.

Amen!

I'll keep this short - this forum is and has been FANTASTIC for me. I've learned so much, even if some of the advice is not to learn TOO much

The main peeps on here (looking at you G'em, Hanley, Dragan, Celestial, Transform, Colm and others) have given me great advice, and even encouragement. I've just met a goal I genuinely thought I never would, and I wish to thank you all for it. Dragan said it best, whether Colm is promoting CrossFit, or Hanley heavy lifting, or even rubadub with his rings (not that one!), it's all working for someone and is worth mentioning.

Colm
- Love the unneccessary comment, I do.

mickoo

Just to clarify my stance on crossfit, i never knocked the system, i just wanted people to be aware that it is just 1 of many systems and just because someone who makes there living from it says to everyone its for them that its not, tony quinn would lead you to believe that his supplements are the best! why? money, as i said before-use variety and eat well to suit your goal and remember that no 1 system is for everyone for numerous reasons including fitness, goals, injury's, and if its sustainable plus more..

Anyway, Colm sorry for been personal, that was unproffesional, my point is that just because you like crossfit that its not for everyone and its not the BEST thing there is for the majority of people.

Hanley

Dragan wrote: »

Colm digs on Crossfit. Good for him. People see him promoting it a lot, but they tend to forget about his investment in it as well.

Do you think Crossfit paid for Colm's affiliation fee? Do you think they paid for his L1 Cert and Seminar, or his flights to get there, or his hotels rooms and accomadation while he was over there? Nope.

Colm has invested time, effort, money, energy and thought into what it is that he wants to do.

Ummmm so are you saying Colm should be allowed to promote crossfit because he has spent so much on it? Because it's a business (even tho it's a fitness business) he should be allowed promote it?

I don't know Colm, but I imagine he's looking for a return on his investment and isn't just throwing his money down the can. He gets that return by creating interest in the system and picking up members. No doubt one of the ways he does that is by posting here.

EDIT: While we're on the topic of paying money and having to jump thru hoops to be certified, I may as well ruffle some feathers.
The funniest thing about Crossfit is how it's really similiar to some of the Tony Quinn scenarios (but ssssh, don't tell anyone!!). Like think about it, it has a central leader figure, Greg Glassman, who's word is to be taken as gospel, they post workouts on their site that you have to follow (from what I can see being a good "instructor" is printing it off and shouting at your trainees to get em thru it) AND you have to fly half was around the world and pay money to become "certified". Hmmm.... Nobody else think that's kinda funny??

Dragan

Hanley wrote: »

Ummmm so are you saying Colm should be allowed to promote crossfit because he has spent so much on it? Because it's a business (even tho it's a fitness business) he should be allowed promote it?

I don't know Colm, but I imagine he's looking for a return on his investment and isn't just throwing his money down the can. He gets that return by creating interest in the system and picking up members. No doubt one of the ways he does that is by posting here.

EDIT: While we're on the topic of paying money and having to jump thru hoops to be certified, I may as well ruffle some feathers.
The funniest thing about Crossfit is how it's really similiar to some of the Tony Quinn scenarios (but ssssh, don't tell anyone!!). Like think about it, it has a central leader figure, Greg Glassman, who's word is to be taken as gospel, they post workouts on their site that you have to follow (from what I can see being a good "instructor" is printing it off and shouting at your trainees to get em thru it) AND you have to fly half was around the world and pay money to become "certified". Hmmm.... Nobody else think that's kinda funny??

*sighs* No, my implication was that maybe, just maybe Colm believes enough in the system he is promoting to put a lot of money into what is effectively a shakey venture.

The implication was that Colm's own faith in the system is maybe the main reason why he touts it?

And i don't find paying Crossfit to do their Certs to be any stanger than me paying the NTC to do theirs. Chances are, if you go back far enough you'll find at some point everyone paid someone to teach them somethings.

Who knew.

Often times it just has to be done as well. You can't train clients in Ireland without insurance, you can't get the insurance without a recognised cert.

Lets look at yourself Hanley, lots of strength, determination, good to train with, plenty of under the bar and comp experience...... but if you want to actually legally teach anyone what you know then you'll have to do the same thing.

celestial

Dragan wrote: »

The answer will be the same as long as the question remains the same.

What we get here is a lot of replication and slight alteration of a theme. People don't want to do a sub 3:30 Fran. The don't want a 3x bodyweight deadlift. They don't want 20 inch arms.

They just want to feel a little better, maybe cut out some **** from their diet and be a little leaner.

The simple fact is that there is a very small group of consistantly active posters and because this is the way the Multiverse works they will normally be the ones who are deepest into their own version of "the life".

Colm digs on Crossfit. Good for him. People see him promoting it a lot, but they tend to forget about his investment in it as well.

Do you think Crossfit paid for Colm's affiliation fee? Do you think they paid for his L1 Cert and Seminar, or his flights to get there, or his hotels rooms and accomadation while he was over there? Nope.

Colm has invested time, effort, money, energy and thought into what it is that he wants to do.

Sounds like pretty much everone else on this forum, and the majority of the people in the world.

I see this division between training styles as being very similar to the division between religions.....i see them argued with the same faith and fervour.

What people tend to forget about both is that at best we are working off shakey facts, at worst we are working off blind faith.

Interesting discussion, and Dragan has echoed something that gave me pause for thought last night.

The problem of late does seem that we are giving advice to new posters based on absolutes. Someone will come on and say 'I used to go out running three or four times a week for an hour each time and lost a load of fat, that was two years ago and I've piled it on since. I was thinking of going back to that routine and seeing if I can lose the flab again. What do you guys think?'. And then someone, inevitably, will come on and say 'you don't want to do that, steady state cardio for that length of time will have a catabolic effect on the body, breaking down muscle tissue and slowing your metabolism, making it harder for you to lose fat. You may lose weight, but most of it will be muscle, giving you a 'skinny-fat' look'.

Now. Any Joe or Josephine Soap could come to the conclusion that running is not a good way to burn fat, and that they could suddenly, overnight, turn into some sort of long-distance shrinking skeleton. Which is really just BS. OK, let's say they do a LOT of running over quite some time, they will probably lean towards looking like that. But maybe they don't mind! Maybe they are female, and don't have much muscle to lose. Maybe they are just not too bothered about muscle and just want to lose the gut. But, the point is that we really are just complicating the issue - making it sound like running steady state is detrimental and not going to burn fat - which is just plain madness.

And Dragan is right - we are just going on flimsy theories. To take an example, sure, studies have shown that HIIT can be more beneficial than steady-state at fat burning - but these are just studies! You're using the results of some study with about a million different variables as the basis of your approach. For instance, over the weekend I read a very comprehensive and impressive study carried out by some exercise science student on steady state cardio vs HIIT. He had two groups of overweight people and had one doing HIIT for 6 weeks, the other on steady state for 6 weeks. The concluding results were that HIIT resulted in more fat loss. But, wait for it - he didn't put them on any sort of eating plan whatsoever! He had no insight into their food and drink habits over the same period!

They really are just theories.

Lets say, by the prevailing wisdom of this board, HIIT is more effective at burning fat than steady state. If I did 6 hours of steady-state running every week over the next 4 weeks, would I lose more fat than if I did 3 hours of HIIT every week over the next 4 weeks?

Can anyone give me a yes or no answer? Any of the HIIT advocates/general cardio-rubbishers around? Nobody can give me a yes or no answer because the only way to find out would be for me to do the experiment myself, and even then the results could be somewhat skewed by different factors. So, to come on and say HIIT is better than steady state for fat loss, and to beware the slow cardio, as if it is an absolute truth, is to perhaps lose sight of the big picture altogether.

Hanley

celestial wrote: »

Interesting discussion, and Dragan has echoed something that gave me pause for thought last night.

The problem of late does seem that we are giving advice to new posters based on absolutes. Someone will come on and say 'I used to go out running three or four times a week for an hour each time and lost a load of fat, that was two years ago and I've piled it on since. I was thinking of going back to that routine and seeing if I can lose the flab again. What do you guys think?'. And then someone, inevitably, will come on and say 'you don't want to do that, steady state cardio for that length of time will have a catabolic effect on the body, breaking down muscle tissue and slowing your metabolism, making it harder for you to lose fat. You may lose weight, but most of it will be muscle, giving you a 'skinny-fat' look'.

Now. Any Joe or Josephine Soap could come to the conclusion that running is not a good way to burn fat, and that they could suddenly, overnight, turn into some sort of long-distance shrinking skeleton. Which is really just BS. OK, let's say they do a LOT of running over quite some time, they will probably lean towards looking like that. But maybe they don't mind! Maybe they are female, and don't have much muscle to lose. Maybe they are just not too bothered about muscle and just want to lose the gut. But, the point is that we really are just complicating the issue - making it sound like running steady state is detrimental and not going to burn fat - which is just plain madness.

And Dragan is right - we are just going on flimsy theories. To take an example, sure, studies have shown that HIIT can be more beneficial than steady-state at fat burning - but these are just studies! You're using the results of some study with about a million different variables as the basis of your approach. For instance, over the weekend I read a very comprehensive and impressive study carried out by some exercise science student on steady state cardio vs HIIT. He had two groups of overweight people and had one doing HIIT for 6 weeks, the other on steady state for 6 weeks. The concluding results were that HIIT resulted in more fat loss. But, wait for it - he didn't put them on any sort of eating plan whatsoever! He had no insight into their food and drink habits over the same period!

They really are just theories.

Lets say, by the prevailing wisdom of this board, HIIT is more effective at burning fat than steady state. If I did 6 hours of steady-state running every week over the next 4 weeks, would I lose more fat than if I did 3 hours of HIIT every week over the next 4 weeks?

Can anyone give me a yes or no answer? Any of the HIIT advocates/general cardio-rubbishers around? Nobody can give me a yes or no answer because the only way to find out would be for me to do the experiment myself, and even then the results could be somewhat skewed by different factors. So, to come on and say HIIT is better than steady state for fat loss, and to beware the slow cardio, as if it is an absolute truth, is to perhaps lose sight of the big picture altogether.

I fully completley agree with the bolded bit. In addition, one of the things that REALLY rags me off is people talking absolutes about things like HIIT being the definitive answer when it clearly is not. Especially when they take issue with something said by someoone else and attempt to rubbish it by quoting studies.

James
-more to come later, but right now I've got bigger fish to fry.

Dragan

Hanley wrote: »

I fully completley agree with the bolded bit. In addition, one of the things that REALLY rags me off is people talking absolutes about things like HIIT being the definitive answer when it clearly is not. Especially when they take issue with something said by someoone else and attempt to rubbish it by quoting studies.

Hanley,

at the risk of sounding like a dick there was a time when i seem to recall you believing that Westside Principles were the way to go? I even remember you saying it was a dream to go and train with them?

I might be wrong but i believe for a time you showed a similar faith in something which you later moved on from?

Opinions and ascertations change with knowledge. The simple fact is that whatever we all have faith in now will change in a few years, and again a few years after that.

Hanley

Dragan wrote: »

Hanley,

at the risk of sounding like a dick there was a time when i seem to recall you believing that Westside Principles were the way to go? I even remember you saying it was a dream to go and train with them?

I might be wrong but i believe for a time you showed a similar faith in something which you later moved on from?

Opinions and ascertations change with knowledge. The simple fact is that whatever we all have faith in now will change in a few years, and again a few years after that.

It still is a dream to train there. And I don't know if you follow my journal but it's very similar to the westside system. My "max effort" work just isn't in the 90% range all the time but I am rotating the main lifts, at least on bench days.

I'm not sure how familiar you are with westside but at it's heart westside is no more than a heavy day where you strain and a light day where you move medium weight fast. VERY basically. It's a template. That's all it is. The idea of the conjugate system is to develop various different strength attributes simutaneously (that is maxiumu strength, rate of force development and hypertrophy) which is exactly what my training is geared for. So to that end, my training is still reminiscent of a "westside" system. In truth it's a hell of a lot closer than "westside for skinny bast@rds".

My problem with WSFSB and people trying to use the traditional WSBB template is that they generally don't have a clue what they're doing. Hell you've beginners pressing < bodyweight attempting to do "speed" work when they don't even have good form. On the deadlift side I've seen people writing down that they're doing "speed" work with sets of 8 reps. That alone is enoguh to convince me they have absolutely no idea what they're doing.

The Westside system is something that takes ALOT of learning and trial and error to make work for any individual. But there in lies the beauty. It can be made work for nearly everyone. If they actually think for themselves and try to apply the basic principals to suit their own goals. Which is exactly what I've done.

Dragan

So basically what your saying is very similar to what Colm says about Crossfit.....what with the whole "it can work for nearly everyone, regardless of goals" thing?

Once again not putting words in your mouth, and sorry for leading the conversation the way i did i just wanted to see what correlations would arise when someone else got passionate about another system.

BossArky

You have to remember that this fitness forum is just one of many many fora on boards.ie. Many posters stumble in from After Hours or the likes and are not informed enough to avoid the ritual flamings for asking innocent questions.

Is this forum a truely balanced fitness forum? Not really. There is an obvious emphasis on weight training, not that this is a bad thing for many of the queries raised. The forum could potentially benefit from a name change, or at least change the tagline to "You must have a combined 3 lift total of 3 tonnes before entering this forum". Forums such as Marathon/Triathlon, Running, and Cycling would have more information on getting aerobically fit, which is what most people think of when the term "fitness" pops up.

Many a poster starts their thread with "I want to get fit, but I don't want to turn into Arnie...". Why? Well, the lurker could be forgiven for taking this as a predominatly weight lifting forum, hence the caveat. These anti Arnie (tm) newbie posts bring on the ridicule from experienced lifters and frighten away further anti Arnie (tm) newbs who just want a bit of direction. It may be hard to believe, but some people don't care about shifting massive amounts of weight. They may well have other areas of expertise which don't revolve around fitness or weights. If you went to them asking for their guidance on their specialist topic and they were as ignorant or arrogant in dispensing advice as some posters are here, then you would more than likely avoid them in future. So, is this forum welcoming to newbies? Not really.

If this forum existed as a standalone such as teamtest it would attract a niche audience. Howver, it doesn't which means that the posting quality will always be diluted by riff raff (for want of a better word) drifting in from other forums. Is this a bad thing? No.

This forum makes boards.ie in total better, providing a wide and varied forum list. However, for the same reason boards.ie brings this fitness forum down by giving non fitness gurus from neighbouring boards quick and easy visibility and access to this hallowed turf.

justsomebloke

Hanley wrote: »

I don't know Colm, but I imagine he's looking for a return on his investment and isn't just throwing his money down the can. He gets that return by creating interest in the system and picking up members. No doubt one of the ways he does that is by posting here.

But in all honesty quite a few of the regular posters here are in it for the money. Jon of course is probably the stand out one as he has probably been the most blantant one on the board. But you also have Paul from the fitness dock, Boru. and Mickk just to name a few so it is not like Colm is the first to exploit the link between giving advise and trying to build up the custom for his own business game and truthfully he won't be the last either.

Hanley

Dragan wrote: »

So basically what your saying is very similar to what Colm says about Crossfit.....what with the whole "it can work for nearly everyone, regardless of goals" thing?

Once again not putting words in your mouth, and sorry for leading the conversation the way i did i just wanted to see what correlations would arise when someone else got passionate about another system.

You do realise there's absolutely no similarities between the two systems right? And there's no point in comparing them since they're so different?

Edit: Another differrence is I give advice across a broad range of spectrums. The majority of which is from a traditional western periodisation stand point, since it's more suitable for beginners. I'm not trying to promote vested interests just because I believe in them, even tho they might be no good for the person asking the question.

arybvtcw0eolkf

I still don't know what antropometry is?.. (Tracker mortage voice)




-Martin
Confused. Dragan makes me feel old.

justsomebloke

BossArky wrote: »

So, is this forum welcoming to newbies? Not really.

should it have to be though? There are many forums on boards that are similar to this that as such wouldn't be welcoming to Noobs (I actually didn't think this forum was that bad to be truthful though).

All forums are created on boards due to the demand of a group of like minded individuals with similar interests who want to discuss the topic. So do you think the forum was created due to a group of people who wanted to just lose a few pounds or people who had a common interest in training and wanted to further their knowledge? So why now should it be changed to cater for the first market who will just piss of after a couple of posts?