We're probably going to extend the the thread now, but care to qualify the above with facts and context?
I'm enjoying it so far, coaching is like having a personal training session, albeit in a small group, form and technique are stressed every session in the group I train with
I trained at Southern Crossfit first. They had about 30 people every session and had no way of tracking peoples progress, helping them scale exercises to peoples own level, and seemed to program the daily works on a completely random basis.
I then trained at Cell, which was much better than the above since they limited classes to 7 people and they attempt to put people on a strength program.
Despite the above, it's a fallacy to believe it can take a novice to great levels of fitness. None of the Games competitors follow it. Sure it works for novices, but then again so would basically anything.
It's a fallacy to believe that:
1) All people at the gym should be following the same program despite having different goals and different starting points.
2) That circus tricks, as I call them, are worthwhile in the gym - namely high rep box jumps, handstand-pushups, ring dips, ropeclimbs, etc
3) That gym work should ever be 'for time'. Especially barbell lifts, and even moreso the case with oly lifts, as these should be concentrated upon to ensure good technique and effectiveness. Form wouldn't have to be stressed every session if there was a linear progression in weight used.
4) That all facets of fitness (eg strength, cardio, coordination, power, etc) should all be developed simultaneously, I believe this to be the road to mediocre in all of them. Look up the training of NBA or NFL players - they have separate strength, speed/power, conditioning sessions.
What I believe to be better, regardless of age or gender, is to establish a strength base first by following a simple strength progression program first and then, depending on goals, add in conditioning/fitness work or whatever suits ones fancy.
