Exodus Strength

thejosef wrote: ↑Sun Sep 16, 2018 9:28 pm

OrderInChaos wrote: ↑Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:41 am You're probably right, you think 405 dead to sub-6:00 is a more balanced aim? Something arbitrary like 530-5:30 seems to be very tough for both but is far more attainable than my silly number above.

I guess I'm around the wrong population but 25 seems like a really generic, oft attained number to me, where 45 is what the top 5% or so achieve in my cohort. But yeah that run was stupid.

"adamklink" on Instagram is going for 500 lb back squat with sub 5:00 mile and 50 unbroken pull-ups. He has the squat already, and he says the run is almost there. That's some crazy "all-around" numbers.

Damn

psmith wrote: ↑Fri Jul 17, 2020 9:14 am

thejosef wrote: ↑Sun Sep 16, 2018 9:28 pm

OrderInChaos wrote: ↑Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:41 am You're probably right, you think 405 dead to sub-6:00 is a more balanced aim? Something arbitrary like 530-5:30 seems to be very tough for both but is far more attainable than my silly number above.

I guess I'm around the wrong population but 25 seems like a really generic, oft attained number to me, where 45 is what the top 5% or so achieve in my cohort. But yeah that run was stupid.

"adamklink" on Instagram is going for 500 lb back squat with sub 5:00 mile and 50 unbroken pull-ups. He has the squat already, and he says the run is almost there. That's some crazy "all-around" numbers.

Damn

The guy in the video around the 9:30 mark kind of looks like the sub-5 minute beer mile guy:



1:57 in the Klink video, says he's Brent Nieter. Same last name.

Couple days early - figured I’d do it today and recover over the weekend for deadlift Monday
01:11:48
Seriously interested to know if anyone has heard of a slower time.
In junior peewee football, my nickname was slo-mo.

^Well done!

And yes, I've definitely seen slower times. When it first appeared on CrossFit's main page (in 2005), there were several people who posted times in excess of 90 minutes. It's a grind. Just completing the workout is an accomplishment.

Yeah, @augeleven, completing the workout should be seen as a victory.

My wife and I were just talking about all the unofficial benchmarks for named CrossFit wods. They list pretty impressive times for “beginner.” We thought just finishing a named workout and performing the movements as Rx’d should be an “intermediate” accomplishment- taking 6 months to a year of CF training.

I’m hitting Murph weighted this year, aiming for less than hour. Might die.

48:09 - no vest, Cindy-style partitioning

Intended to do a long trail run today and Murph on Monday, but woke up to rain, so decided to do Murph on a track rather than contend with mud on the trails.

Not bad, given that I've been focusing on weightlifting. Hit a snatch PR in a recent comp, and am cutting weight to drop into a lower class.

56:00 with a 20# pack, reps partitioned. Plus an additional unweighted mile to go fetch and encourage my wife.

48:21. No vest. Used 3-6-9 partitioning.

asdf wrote: ↑Mon May 30, 2022 3:35 pm 48:21. No vest. Used 3-6-9 partitioning.

Nice. Were you able to pretty much stay moving with that partition?

I was slower than last year despite no vest; 59:23 and I ended up walking parts of the last mile. (first mile was 12:00 lol)
I use-
5 pull-ups
8 squats
10 pushups
7 squats

Because I feel like the squats are most metabolically taxing. And my heart and lungs are always the limiters for me.

@broseph

I still needed to take short rests after each cycle, but I got the Cindy work done faster than I typically do.

I've used your partitioning as well, and like it better than 5-10-15, because squats have always been the crux for me.

This year my legs were smoked coming into the workout. I did a 7-mile trail run with a lot of climbing the day prior, plus a 6-mile hike with a lot of climbing in the morning before doing Murph about four hours later.

So I wanted to keep the squat sets short and get max rest between them.

Towards the end, I was still having to break the set of 9 into a 6-pause-3 because of leg pain. I thought about moving 6 squats before the push-ups and then doing just 3 after (similar to your scheme), but was worried I'd get confused and lose count. But I think that hybrid scheme might work really well for me, and I'm going to try it next time, regardless of the state of my legs:

3 pull-ups / 6 squats / 6 push-ups / 3 squats

** I never do pull-ups, actually. Always strict chin-ups.

Apparently, last year some guy did 19 Murphs in less than 24 hours. Insane if true.

https://news.yahoo.com/student-just-sma ... 00685.html

asdf wrote: ↑Wed Jun 01, 2022 7:33 am Apparently, last year some guy did 19 Murphs in less than 24 hours. Insane if true.

https://news.yahoo.com/student-just-sma ... 00685.html

I sometimes wonder if there is any benefit to be gained from doing this stuff other than torturing yourself for the hell of it.

49:07. No vest. 3-6-9 partitioning. Strict chin-ups. No kipping pull-ups.

asdf wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 1:25 pm 49:07. No vest. 3-6-9 partitioning. Strict chin-ups. No kipping pull-ups.

Nice. You’ve done that partition before, right?

Edit: lol we talked about this very thing 3 posts (but 1 year) ago.

I wasn’t going to do it this year, but my 9 year old wanted to do a half Murph, so I did that with him to help keep pace.

We did 5-10-15. He did jumping pull-ups, knee pushups, and eventually stripper squats (holding onto the rig). 36:04.

broseph wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 5:09 am my 9 year old wanted to do a half Murph, so I did that with him to help keep pace.

9 years old. That's amazing!