Research Says: CrossFit vs. Bodybuilding, Apples to oranges or two sides to the same coin?

Recently workout fads have been popping up all over mainstream media and in different fitness centers. Everyone seems to have the ultimate plan to burn fat and build muscle, these routines have become more intricate and choreographed, often requiring a coach or instructor to oversee the work out. Older workout conventions have had to adapt to meet the changing needs and desires from society. We are here to figure out, is CrossFit the ‘glow up’ of Body building or are these two style of exercise completely unique?

First, what are CrossFit and bodybuilding?

Example of a typical CrossFit exercise

CrossFit is recognized as one of the fastest growing high intensity functional training regimens to date, popping up in 142 countries worldwide. But what is this mysterious new fad and does it actually work?  The purpose of CrossFit training is to get as ‘fit as personally possible’, but is not specifically focused on just one fitness area. CrossFit aims to optimize physical ability not only in strength, but in cardiovascular endurance, flexibility, power, speed, coordination, agility, balance, and accuracy as well [1]. This lead trainers to develop a plan that incorporates multiple training theories into one ‘Workout Of the Day’ to keep a variety of fitness elements working.These workouts involve elements from gymnastics, weightlifting, and cardiovascular exercises which are performed quickly with little rest between sets.

The goal of Bodybuilding (muscle specific) training is so lose as much fat content as possible while maximizing your bodies muscle mass. This kind of training is where terms like ‘leg day’ and ‘back day’ came from, it is devoting an entire workout to a few muscle groups and working them to exhaustion. When you undergo this type of training your body experiences hypertrophy of all muscle fiber types.[2] A bodybuilding workout focuses on keeping the heart rate steady and high weight low rep exercises to slowly break down and rebuild one’s muscle fiber. This is proven to be an effective method if one is only worried about shear size and growth of muscles [3].

Expected muscle growth of Bodybuilders

After hearing this do you believe they are the same? Here’s what science said.

The approaches of these two exercise styles are most definitely unique, but are the fitness results actually all that different? In one research study called “Functional vs. Strength Training in Adults” 101 subjects, averaging an age of about 55, were separated into two groups that each performed 24 sessions of (functional or strength) training protocol twice per week. Each subject was assessed before and after the study using a quantitative Y-balance test and a qualitative Functional Movement Screen test. The changes between pretest and post test were analyzed and results showed that there were no significant differences in improvement between the training protocols as a whole. However, functional training was less effective for women compared to men in the same group [4]. The variability in prior athletic training must be taken into consideration when interpreting these results. Some participants may have needed additional training to better their basic skills before partaking in these specific training protocols. 

Another study looked at ‘The effects of high-intensity intermittent exercise(HIIE) training on fat loss and fasting insulin levels of young women”[5] comparing the effects of CrossFit(HIIE) training to steady state weight lifting over the course of 15 weeks(exercising three times a week). While this study focused on insulin levels they reported a variety of information on lean body mass, fat content, and weight loss that can be used to draw conclusions about the exercise types as well, see that diet was not changed between the groups. This study showed that women who underwent the CrossFit style training showed a significant decrease in total body mass(they lost more weight) 3.5kg weight loss, compared to  the steady state weight lifters who showed a 0.5kg increase in body mass. Demonstrating that while CrossFit participants and bodybuilders may both be used for strenuous high demand exercise, CrossFit is a more effective method of losing weight whereas bodybuilding promotes the act of ‘bulking up.’ While this study was full of information, it does not completely validate the idea that Crossfit and Bodybuilding are the same results with a different method it does help share some information that can point future studies in the right direction.

Based on what we have found we can draw a similar conclusion to previous posts about these training styles. We concur with the groups from previous years that current studies show that while the methods of achieving a lower fat content are different, the overall outcomes of the training types are very similar. In order to better compare these two very different approaches to fitness, there needs to be more extensive research done. The current scientific literature related to CrossFit specifically is lacking. Few studies with high level of evidence at low risk of bias have been widely recognized [1]. As of now we cannot truly compare this new workout fad to the traditional bodybuilding without more extensive studies with conclusive evidence.

By; Ellen Dudzinski and Destiny Neumann

Questions to consider:

  1. Are CrossFit and bodybuilding the only ways to build muscle quickly and effectively?
  2. Is CrossFit or bodybuilding for everyone, why or why not?
  3. What athletes should attempt at least one of these training types?
  4. After reading this, how would you further evaluate the similarities and differences between CrossFit and bodybuilding?
  5. Would supplementation increase the results from either training style?

Suggested Readings:

Karavirta, L., M. P. Tulppo, D. E. Laaksonen, K. Nyman, R. T. Laukkanen, H. Kinnunen, A. Häkkinen, and K. Häkkinen. “Heart rate dynamics after combined endurance and strength training in older men.” Medicine and science in sports and exercise. July 2009. Accessed March 06, 2018. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19516157

Aagaard, P., and J. L. Andersen. “Effects of strength training on endurance capacity in top-level endurance athletes.” Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports. October 2010. Accessed March 06, 2018. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20840561.

Fitts, R. H., and J. J. Widrick. “Muscle mechanics: adaptations with exercise-training.” Exercise and sport sciences reviews. Accessed March 06, 2018. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8744258.

Fitts, R. H., D. R. Riley, and J. J. Widrick. “Functional and structural adaptations of skeletal muscle to microgravity.” The Journal of experimental biology. September 2001. Accessed March 06, 2018. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11581335.

 

Holding Your Stretch is Holding You Back

By: Juliana Gullotta and Laura Sturgill

If you’ve participated in any athletic event, you know that one of the first things you do is to start stretching before any activity takes place. Coaches and trainers emphasize that stretching should occur on a regular basic, and become part of an individual’s workout routine. These stretches are usually static stretches (holding a stretch for 20-30 seconds). The intent of prescribing stretching before exercise, is based on the assumption that by stretching you enhance performance, prevent injuries, and increase flexibility. However, several studies, including one from the Journal of Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism, have shown that stretching before exercise can actually do more harm than good, and increase your risk of injury.

Results from study Conducted by the University of Nevada comparing the effects of static, ballistic, and no stretching (control) on muscle power. Asterisk signifies statistically significant.

While stretching before exercise does activate the muscles and increase blood flow to the areas as a “warm up”, it can be potentially very detrimental to an athlete’s workout. This conclusion is especially pertinent when the sport in question requires maximal force production. In a study conducted at the University of Nevada, researchers determined that leg muscles generate less force after static stretching than if they did not stretch at all. When muscles are subject to the strain of static stretching, they remain in a weakened state, thereby temporarily reducing the force that it can produce. The researchers evaluated two types of stretching, ballistic (bouncing) and static (control is no stretching). After stretching for 3 sets of 30 seconds, subjects performed a vertical jump on a force plate. Power values were compared for each of the conditions (Figure 1). From this graph it is clear to see a significant difference in the power values observed in the control group and static group. The decrease in power after stretching could inhibit a good muscle building workout. For sports that require maximum power (ex. football), static stretching should be limited before activity.

Static stretching intervals should last for no more than 60 seconds, or moderate reduction in maximal muscle performance may be observed. In a study conducted by Behm et. al. the effects of static stretching on power-speed and strength tasks were compared. One of the main components of this study involved investigating the relationship between time spent holding a stretch and subsequent performance in a physical activity. In order to perform these tests, two groups of healthy and active adults were randomly assigned, with one group holding their static stretch for less than 60 seconds and the other for a period of time greater than 60 seconds. On average there was a mean reduction of muscle performance for both test groups, but the group that held the stretch for a longer period of time experienced significantly higher reduction rates in performance. For the individuals that held the stretch for less than 60 seconds, a mean reduction of 1.1% was observed and categorized by the researchers as a small reduction in performance. However, a moderate reduction of 4.6% was noted in the population that held the stretch for longer than 60 seconds, indicating that there is a dose-response relationship between stretching and maximal muscle performance.

To investigate this relationship further, two types of physical activity were studied. Power-speed tasks were given to both groups and the results supported the notion that on average static stretching, especially when held at higher intervals, impaired muscle performance in the test subjects. While only a small mean reduction rate of 1.3% was observed for this type of exercise, this change could be extremely detrimental to an athlete’s performance where maximal speed is critical (i.e. sprinters). Power tasks were also completed, and the negative effects of static stretching on performance became more apparent. On average there was a 4.6% reduction in an individual’s maximum muscle performance, with a higher instance of 5.1% reduction when the activities were completed after a period of stretching lasting longer than 60 seconds. In another study also conducted by Behm et. al, these findings were not only supported by additional trials, but also expanded upon to look at the long term effects of stretching on overall performance. In his initial study that looked at power and speed tasks, maximal muscle performance was calculated minutes after the the stretching was complete. The second study, however, observed the prolonged effects that static stretching would have on an athlete, and concluded that even 2 hours after the last set of static stretching, instances of decreased performance existed.

The results from these studies suggest that time spent holding a stretch and subsequent muscle performance have an inverse relationship. For this reason more and more coaches and athletes are looking to implement a different approach to their warm up routine.

Straight leg march can be used as a dynamic stretch alternative to the static sit-and-reach stretch. Courtesy of the New York Times

Dynamic stretching (Figure 2) is simply the act of stretching your muscles while moving, and it is an effective method to get your blood flowing and increase your power, flexibility, and range of motion prior to working out. This type of stretching is unique in that the activities performed have the ability to target specific muscles necessary for the task at hand. In other words, different forms of dynamic stretching would be used for a sprinter and a volleyball player because each sport requires a different amount and variety of muscle activity. Dynamic stretching allows athletes to engage their bodies’ muscles in a way that static stretching cannot, thereby quickly earning its place as a replacement to static stretching in many pre-workout routines.

While the value of traditional static stretching before exercise may be an outdated concept, the benefit of increased flexibility in athletes should not be ignored. For this reason post workout stretching is recommended as a “cool down”. If necessary, short duration, lasting less than 30 seconds, low intensity static stretches could be implemented before activity to get blood flowing to muscles and reduce stiffness, but this does not offer the best possible results. The ideal warm-up routine for athletes to minimize risk of injury and maximize performance should include aerobic activity, dynamic stretching, and sport specific dynamic exercises.

Questions to consider:

How would the stretching routine you made for football players differ from that of a sprinter?

There is a lot of information about how bad form or technique during exercise can cause injury, should there be attention called to the potential adverse effects of stretching improperly?

References

Samuel, M. N., Holcomb, W. R., Guadagnoli, M. A., Rubley, M. D., & Wallmann, H. (January 01, 2008). Acute effects of static and ballistic stretching on measures of strength and power. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 22, 5, 1422-8. 

Behm, D. G., Blazevich, A. J., Kay, A. D., & McHugh, M. (January 01, 2016). Acute effects of muscle stretching on physical performance, range of motion, and injury incidence in healthy active individuals: a systematic review. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism =, 41, 1, 1-11.

Shrier, I. (October 01, 1999). Stretching Before Exercise Does Not Reduce the Risk of Local Muscle Injury. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine, 9, 4, 221-227.

Behm, D. G., & Chaouachi, A. (November 01, 2011). A review of the acute effects of static and dynamic stretching on performance. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 111, 11, 2633-2651.

Shrier, I. (January 01, 2000). Stretching before exercise: an evidence based approach. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 34, 5, 324-325.

Herbert, R. D., & Gabriel, M. (January 01, 2002). Effects of stretching before and after exercising on muscle soreness and risk of injury: systematic review. Bmj (clinical Research Ed.), 325, 7362.)

Reynolds, Gretchen. (2008) Stretching: The Truth. The New York Times. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/02/sports/playmagazine/112pewarm.html

Reynolds, Gretchen. (2016) The Right Way to Stretch. The New York Times. Retrieved from: https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/stretching-back-to-the-past/

Rest Interval between Sets in Strength Training

This article essentially reflected on how training in certain ways can have certain effects on strength, endurance, hypertrophy and power of muscles. Looking at the exercise specifically they looked at the number of sets, reps, and rest between sets and how this effected the muscle of the athlete performing these movements.  Rest length between sets obviously being the changing variable in this study, the trials looked at acute responses and chronic adaptations of the muscles to note how the muscles were stimulated. Looking at longer rest periods such as 3-5 minutes, it was shown that an athlete could do more reps over the course of more sets, and with repeatedly doing this overall would get stronger than an athlete that had shorter resting periods, not allowing for as many reps between each set.  Similarly, longer rest periods allowed for more explosion and power from the athletes. For example, an NFL player at the combine doing the bench press will want to wait a significant amount of time between warming up, and performing the bench press to allow for optimal power and explosion to get as many reps as possible. When training with shorter rest periods, for example 30-60 seconds, this was shown to lead to more muscle hypertrophy and overall increase muscular endurance. Little rest between sets was proven to show an immediate acute reaction increasing growth hormone. This is shown to be effective in bodybuilders. Bodybuilders lift for the sole purpose of being big, tone, and proportionate. Getting this high intensity, more reps, low rest sets in for a workout will lead to more blood rushing to the muscle and allow for the muscle to grow. However, power lifters would implement the longer rest times with a heavier weight (closer to a 1 rep max, typically about 85%) because this leads overall to increased strength in the long run. Article results and full explanations –> http://rdcu.be/Hmqh

Overall I found this article very interesting. In todays day in age, I feel that so many people preach to lift heavy weight all the time with longer rest periods. I see this in the gym often, Delaware’s powerlifting team has a tendency to do multiple sets with a high weight, however they take a leisure break between sets usually for at least 5 minutes. This makes sense, this will increase strength in the long run however does not necessarily lead the powerlifters to get very big like a bodybuilder. On the other hand, a bodybuilder in the gym that I always see I will see doing lighter weight. He is a very big guy, however I will see him squatting 225 for 20 reps, and taking about a minute break between sets. This allows for him to completely fatigue his legs and allow them to grow, without him necessarily focusing on strength.

Has anyone else had similar experiences in this field? Has anyone else noticed a difference between lower reps, with a higher weight and longer rests, vs. higher reps with a shorter rest period?

Works Cited — de, B F, et al. “Rest interval between sets in strength training.” Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)., U.S. National Library of Medicine, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19691365.

Other related articles —
A brief review: factors affecting the length of the rest interval between resistance exercise sets. –> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17194236
The effect of different rest intervals between sets on volume components and strength gains. –> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18296968

Other Relevant Websites for similar information –>
https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/embase-biomedical-research