Written by Einar Leon
First, let’s be clear that I am not denying the effectiveness of group classes as they relate to general fitness. What I am criticizing is the fact that the quality of fitness has suffer over the quantity of athletes attending a group class. By piling people into a group class, the caliber of coaching is diminished, athletes are getting hurt, and people are not reaching their true fitness goals.
In an effort to meet an-ever increasing demand, the Group X business model was introduced to the CrossFit Community in 2006. The Group X business model is an import of a system widely used by martial arts, and its main goal is to put as many bodies into a group class by any means possible. CrossFit classes morphed from small groups of 4-6 individuals in the late 90s, to classes of up to 15-20 athletes observed today. Although large classes may have increased revenue for the owners, the negative impacts of this practice are still being felt to this day primarily by the athletes.
In a group class environment, it is practically impossible for a coach to address major form issues, or teach technically advanced movements, due to the difference in ability levels within the athletes. When new students show up to class, the trainer is forced to focus all attention and efforts on the newer athletes, while the most seasoned students are totally disregarded. At the end of class, the new student will never learn the complex movement at hand, and the loyal client will always be ignored. In other words, the additional energy invested with the new athletes by the coach is wasted, and any investments made with the veteran clients over time are completely lost. As a result, coaches quickly burn out and lose the desire to achieve excellence in coaching. The athletes in turn, only receive substandard coaching.
The first word generally associated with CrossFit is injury. Make no mistake, this bad reputation was earned by the ever-increasing number of CrossFitters getting hurt, not because of the program itself, but by the substandard coaching described above. Regular people are thrown into classes expected to perform movements that take years to master, combine this with a trainer too busy to pay attention to detail, and the end result will always be injuries.
Now, if a coach is too busy because of the size of the class, then this coach will never have the opportunity to get to know each client individually. The athlete on the other hand, will not be able to explain to the coach the true reason why she or he is there. The opportunity to foster true relationships and rapport in between coaches and athletes is simply lost, and consequently the athlete will most likely never meet her/his fitness goals.
Back in 1996, Greg Glassman started with one-on-one sessions. Soon, as the popularity of his program soared, Greg was forced to shift his sessions, from one-on-one, to small groups. The true reasons behind his success were the effectiveness of the program, and the quality of the service brought on by on-on-one sessions. The program is still the same, however its implementation is different. The quality of the coaching and its results have been diluted by the Group X business model. Moreover, injuries and unmet fitness goals are prevalent issues resulting from this model.
The group model is what gave birth to what we know now as “community.” Camaraderie, friendship, and support are some the terms people use to describe the benefits of community. However, the groups class model can only be effective if every person within the group meets his/her fitness goals. This level of competency can only be achieved by forming strong personal bonds with the athlete, which can only be met by one-on-one coaching. The benefits: increased quality of coaching, reduction of injuries and happier athletes and coaches.
Find out more at: