Jul 21, 2026 · 35 min · 10 segments
-Someone on Reddit asked the question, “Is Intensity a Lie?” \-They said that it seems Intensity is the defining characteristic of what makes CrossFit truly CrossFit. \-They also said it seems…
"Glassman defined CrossFit as constantly varied functional movement executed at high intensity.
But is intensity actually the non-negotiable, or is it just the part that's the easiest to measure? We've been told that...
But Glassman's own definition has three pillars: constant variation, functional movement, and high intensity.
However, intensity seems to be the one most people obsess over because of its direct cor- uh, connection to a score." Score on the whiteboard.
"Is that because it's the only one we can actually put on a whiteboard, or because suffering is easier to sell than movement quality or programming? An athlete who moves beautifully, varies constantly, but trains at moderate intensity for longevity looks a lot like a CrossFitter.
Someone grinding the RX weights with broken mechanics, no real programming, also calls themselves one.
Boy, uh, there's a lot to unpack there, and I think that there's a few things that are assumed in that statement or paragraphs, whatever.
Um, and I think there's a few things that are being conflated that don't actually line up.
And so I think when we start talking in a niche capacity about CrossFit on its own, independent of anything else, the conversation that is meant by what does, uh, what importance does intensity have, is if I don't do my workout at absolutely 100% effort, am I not going to see progress? And the answer to that is like, no.
It, it's not required to go 100% all out every single day to continue to make progress.
What we have to do is zoom out and take a look at the broader fitness landscape and say, okay, given the alternative of choosing a movement that by its very nature puts you in a higher output situation because of what it is-
... will that create a bigger impact than some of these other choices? And the a- answer is absolutely yes.
So for example, am I going to create a general greater intensity by just doing something like air squats versus an adductor or abductor machine in the, uh, you know, commercial gym? The answer is for sure.
Now, is that set of air squats gonna lay me out and make me feel like I just got, like, absolutely wrecked? Maybe not, but objectively it's still a more powerful stimulus and therefore will be a, a better outcome when we're talking about overall fitness.
"Glassman defined CrossFit as constantly varied functional movement executed at high intensity.
But is intensity actually the non-negotiable, or is it just the part that's the easiest to measure? We've been told that...
But Glassman's own definition has three pillars: constant variation, functional movement, and high intensity.
However, intensity seems to be the one most people obsess over because of its direct cor- uh, connection to a score." Score on the whiteboard.
"Is that because it's the only one we can actually put on a whiteboard, or because suffering is easier to sell than movement quality or programming? An athlete who moves beautifully, varies constantly, but trains at moderate intensity for longevity looks a lot like a CrossFitter.
Someone grinding the RX weights with broken mechanics, no real programming, also calls themselves one.
Boy, uh, there's a lot to unpack there, and I think that there's a few things that are assumed in that statement or paragraphs, whatever.
Um, and I think there's a few things that are being conflated that don't actually line up.
And so I think when we start talking in a niche capacity about CrossFit on its own, independent of anything else, the conversation that is meant by what does, uh, what importance does intensity have, is if I don't do my workout at absolutely 100% effort, am I not going to see progress? And the answer to that is like, no.
It, it's not required to go 100% all out every single day to continue to make progress.
What we have to do is zoom out and take a look at the broader fitness landscape and say, okay, given the alternative of choosing a movement that by its very nature puts you in a higher output situation because of what it is-
... will that create a bigger impact than some of these other choices? And the a- answer is absolutely yes.
So for example, am I going to create a general greater intensity by just doing something like air squats versus an adductor or abductor machine in the, uh, you know, commercial gym? The answer is for sure.
Now, is that set of air squats gonna lay me out and make me feel like I just got, like, absolutely wrecked? Maybe not, but objectively it's still a more powerful stimulus and therefore will be a, a better outcome when we're talking about overall fitness.
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.
