When does 1 ≠ 1?
I wrote x5: 5 Snatch 65%, 15 Calorie Row and 60 Double Unders seven different ways, with each having a slightly different feel and intention.
Let’s dive in…
Fixed Rest Intervals
5 Sets: (rest 60s b/w)
-5 Snatch 65%
-15 Calorie Row
-60 Double Unders
This is probably my favorite way to write intervals for an athlete when I don’t know their capacity super well.
Because the rest is fixed, it doesn’t matter if the athlete gets the work done in 1:45 or 2:17, their recovery period will always be the same.
I would write this for an athlete if I’m slightly unsure if they will “blow up” on the double unders.
It doesn’t matter if they do all the movements fast and unbroken or if they trip 11 times on the double unders, either way they are going to do all the work.
Fixed Density Intervals
E3M x 5 Sets:
-5 Snatch 65%
-15 Calorie Row
-60 Double Unders
I really like these intervals because it’s easy to do the math on how long a set took you.
If you’re in your third set and the clock is at 7:42, you know it took you 1:42. Simple.
However, if you just finished set 3 of 5 with a 1:1 work to rest ratio, and you started a set at 6:11 and finished at 7:42, it starts getting really fuzzy as to when you’re supposed to begin your next interval.
So if I want clearly defined reps / minute (density) and I know the athlete’s movement-specific capacity well, this is a great option.
Rotating EMOM
EMOM 15
1) 5 Snatch 65%
2) 15 Calorie Row
3) 60 Double Unders
For the sake of simplicity, EMOMs are great.
And you can get really creative with how you write them and get a variety of stimuli.
EMOMs are also fixed density.
…unless you write them as internal AMRAPs (e.g. EMOM 10: 20s AMRAP of Double Unders).
The difference between this and work written Every 3 Minutes is this encourages the athlete to spread out the work more evenly, rather than rushing to get it done and then taking a longer rest before the next set.
The downside is that there is less “wiggle room” for judging capacity correctly. If the Double Unders take the athlete 65 seconds, it’s no big deal in work that’s performed Every 3 Minutes, where it means failing an EMOM.
However, when dosed appropriately, it’s a simple & effective programming tool.
AMRAP; Resting Between Rounds
AMRAP 15:00
-5 Snatch 65%
-15 Calorie Row
-60 Double Unders
-Rest 60s-
If 5 sets of this work with 60s of rest between takes the athlete 15 minutes, then it should be exactly the same results to perform it as a 15 minute AMRAP with a minute of rest between rounds.
So why use this versus just writing it as sets?
Well, it comes down to how you want to progress this. If it’s just a stand alone training piece and not attached to a larger progression, it probably doesn’t matter much, besides impacting how the athlete thinks about the piece.
If you’re considering building a progression and using this piece as your “week 1” then it really depends what direction you want to go with it.
If you want to sub / add other movements or move to continuous work bouts, then this AMRAP format makes sense.
For Time; Resting Between Rounds
5 Rounds for Time
-5 Snatch 65%
-15 Calorie Row
-60 Double Unders
-Rest 60s-
For most athletes, this will -in mind & body- feel very similar to 5 Rounds for Time.
However, the rest time will allow for movement quality to stay higher and overall it will require less grit and “digging.”
The CNS fatigue from sustaining exercise a few percentages over your “red line” is way higher than work a few percentages under that threshold.
To be clear, a 5% difference in a 15 minute workout is 45 seconds.
The point is, this isn’t a lot…until it is.
AMRAP; Resting Between Movements
AMRAP 15:00
-5 Snatch 65%
-Rest 15-20s-
-15 Calorie Row
-Rest 15-20s-
-60 Double Unders
-Rest 15-20s-
This is one of my favorite ways to teach pacing. The mindset required for success in a piece like this is much different than a straight 15 minute AMRAP.
The athlete knows they will essentially be working for 15 minutes straight, but that they will have the opportunity for “relaxed transitions.”
This allows the athlete to focus on quality, sustainable movement each time they start a new exercise, knowing they will have an opportunity to catch their breath, just a little, before the next set of work.
For Time; Resting Between Movements
5 Rounds for Time
-5 Snatch 65%
-Rest 15-20s-
-15 Calorie Row
-Rest 15-20s-
-60 Double Unders
-Rest 15-20s-
The For Time mentality is a real thing.
Basically, it’s easier to sprint your way through work if you know “when you’re done you’re done.”
This is true even if it takes you the same amount of time to do the work For Time as it would in an AMRAP setting.
However for a coach, it’s more than this. Knowing the difference between a work priority and a time priority is the difference between knowing the exact volume and having an educated guess.
What Do I Do with This?
My point is two-fold.
First, there’s more than one way to skin a cat. If you’re just looking for a dose of “CrossFit chaos” then maybe there’s not a wrong way to do it.
Second, sometimes the way in which a piece is written matters a lot. It may be the difference between an athlete completing all the work as prescribed with it being appropriately challenging, and them failing early and only accumulating half the desired volume.
It just depends…
Do you want to experiment on yourself, or do you want a Sherpa who already knows the path?
