A New Sport of Strength: An Interview with Mark Rippetoe on the CrossFit Total

By Myles Kantor

For www.EliteFTS.com

Mark Rippetoe knows a thing or two about lifting heavy stuff. The owner of Wichita Falls Athletic Club in Texas, Rippetoe is the author of Starting Strength: A Simple and Practical Guide for Coaching Beginners with Lon Kilgore and Practical Programming for Strength Training. In addition to being a USA weightlifting senior coach and part of the first group to sit for the CSCS exam in 1985, Rippetoe has extensive experience under the bar as a powerlifter.
In the December 2006 issue of CrossFit Journal, Rippetoe proposed the CrossFit Total, which is “the sum of the best of three attempts at the squat, the press, and the deadlift—the three most effective lifts in existence for developing and testing functional strength.” The CrossFit Total allows only a belt and wraps for equipment, and its first meet will be at Wichita Falls Athletic Club on May 12.

MK: As a context for your development of the CrossFit Total, I would like to begin by discussing your background as a strength athlete. You wrote, “I have great respect for powerlifting having competed, coached, and announced in power meets for 20 years.” When were your competition years? What weight class/classes did you compete in and what federation/federations did you compete in?

MR: I started competing in 1978 in the 90-kg class at a meet in Houston. No one but me will remember that I was there, I assure you. I retired in 1988 from formal competition in the 100-kg class and continued announcing Texas powerlifting meets until 1997. In fact, I announced the APF nationals in 1995 I think. I was never a terribly memorable lifter with PRs of 611 lbs in the squat, 396 lbs in the bench press, 633 lbs in the deadlift, and a 1643-lb total. However, I did actually win in the 198-lb class in the Greater Texas Classic in 1981. I missed a master total on two occasions by a third attempt deadlift. I usually competed in the USPF, which was at the time the primary organization. It was a good organization, one that owes a huge debt of gratitude to my late friend John Pettit, who formed the backbone of the federation for many years. I miss him quite a bit. He was a maniac and a helluva guy.

MK: How much did equipment figure in powerlifting when you competed, and what equipment did you use?

MR: Equipment was at a rather primitive level at the time. I still have my one ply Frantz suit with the double crotch cut out to satisfy the USPF inspection. I’ve never worn a bench shirt because I look foolish enough in normal clothing, and I didn’t have the money. My 396-lb bench was done in a T-shirt. Things were heading toward more and better equipment at the time, and as the manufacturers became more involved with the federations, the trend was codified. I never liked to squat in my suit because it pulled my back out of extension and made my positions harder to maintain. However, I did use it at meets along with my Superwrap 10s. One of my problems was that I hated it so much that I wouldn’t practice using it. So that aspect of training you could say I neglected. My bias against equipment was solidified through the next decade of watching squats and benches go up while deadlifts pretty much stayed the same.

MK: All three lifts in the CFT are done standing, which you link to functionality. Taking the lift used in place of the bench press, why is the press a better indicator of functional strength than the bench?

MR: It’s a better indicator because any use of upper body strength that doesn’t involve a pressing bench always starts at the ground where the feet go. This is the way bipeds interact with their environment. The bench is obviously the best exercise for developing raw pressing strength, but for sports and physical tasks involving the arms, the kinetic chain always starts at the ground. A strength test that duplicates this functional approach is useful. Weightlifting eliminated the clean and press in 1972, and we’re putting the pressing part back in competition where it belongs only without the more technically demanding (and therefore somewhat exclusionary) clean. The press from the rack is the perfect way to test absolute strength in a functional way.
I’m grateful for the support we’ve received from Greg Glassman and the people at CrossFit for the idea of another test of absolute strength. I hope that the strength community sees the application and that we get some participation from people already competing in the other two barbell sports.

MK: Leverage is a major theme in powerlifting. Does the press favor a certain biomechanical profile?

MR: Thick shoulders, thick arms, and a heavy trunk musculature with better shoulder flexibility than mine are essential for a big press. Because the lift is performed standing, a big seated press won’t necessarily convert. The press tests not only shoulder and arm strength but the ability to stabilize the force against the floor. It tests “core” (I really hate this term, especially when it’s associated with large, brightly colored rubber balls) strength as well as any other movement in the gym.

 
MK: On a related note, weight gain is often recommended to improve leverage in powerlifting and decrease range of motion. Would added body weight tend to improve one’s press and decrease range of motion?

MR: Weight gain would have no effect on the presser’s range of motion because the starting position of the press is unaffected by most normal weight gain situations.

MK: Two of the three lifts are concentric only movements. Was this concentric predominance intentional?

 
MR: Not really. It’s just a function of using the press as the upper body test.

 
MK: Does the order of the lifts have any significance?

MR: Only insofar as it has with the power lifts. It serves to separate the two lower body tests. The snatch functioned that way when weightlifting had three lifts.

MK: Should there be a hierarchy of strength for the CFT? Specifically, should one squat more than one pulls or vice versa?

 
MR: For an athlete who isn’t a competitive lifter, I think that a 200-lb press, 300-lb bench, 400-lb squat, and 500-lb deadlift is a good distribution. Virtually everyone I have coached has pulled more than they squatted until they put on the suit. Now, that may be a function of the fact that I’m a shitty squat coach or it may be that I’m a brilliant deadlift coach, but I suspect that neither is true. Until you become an advanced powerlifter specializing in the sport, you can usually pull more than you squat because the deadlift is just easier to get strong at for several reasons. This means that if you’re a strong athlete who uses a balanced, functional approach to training, you should probably press about two-thirds of your bench, squat more than you bench, and pull a little more than you squat.

MK: How would assistance training for the press differ from assistance training for the bench?

MR: It’s really just a matter of direction. Partials, rack work, and other assistance exercises for the bench can be adapted for the press by rotating them up overhead. That and lots of heavy abdominal work. And quite honestly, this all has to be generated pretty much from scratch because the lift hasn’t been contested in 35 years, or actually, never from the rack. Of course, people still press, but as a competitive lift—with all the emphasis and attention that this entails—the press is quite new to most people training today. When it’s all said and done, I probably won’t be the one who has the most valid opinion on how to train the press to a high level. Current Strongman competitors and old Olympic lifters like my buddy, Tommy Suggs, are far more qualified to voice an opinion about this than I am.

MK: On the heavy abdominal work, I’m guessing this doesn’t consist of crunches on a large, brightly colored ball with one’s feet against a wall?

MR: I was thinking more along the lines of weighted sit-ups and Roman chairs for heavy sets of five.

MK: Last year in an article praising the overhead press, Charles Poliquin recommended the following: “Whether you’re doing front or behind-the-neck presses, your dominant leg is about 10 to 12 inches forward to the other foot. This diminishes pressure on the lower back compared to the standard feet-aligned technique.” Is this stance allowed for the CFT?

MR: How does it do that? The press, the jerk, and the snatch have all been contested for decades with feet parallel to the bar at lockout, and it seems that the pressure goes all the way to the ground—right through the lower back—any time a load is held overhead. A split stance will place the pelvis in an asymmetrical position right in the middle of this kinetic chain, and I don’t really see that anything is protected by doing so.
He also says that if the trunk is unstable during a heavy press, it’s low back strength. It sure seems to me that it’s anterior trunk strength—abs and other anterior stabilizers. The trip from shoulders to lockout will involve some posterior trunk movement due to the necessity of keeping the bar over the mid-foot and the leaning slightly back that this will entail. That movement must be countered with anterior strength and that means abs, not low back. So we’ll be doing the press with feet in line with the bar.

MK: What do you think of a 1RM weighted chin-up or dip test for assessing functional strength?

MR: We considered it for a few seconds. It’s a functional movement, but it isn’t a barbell movement. The equipment necessary to do it at a meet as well as the profound difficulty inherent in judging the damn thing caused it to be rapidly canned.

MK: Out of the squat, press, and deadlift, is there a best test of functional and absolute strength?

MR: I really hate questions like that. The deadlift is more functional in that it’s very hard to imagine a more useful application of strength than picking heavy shit up off the ground. But the squat is more useful in terms of an exercise because it produces such a profound hormonal response due to the range of motion and the muscle mass involved. The press is a useful test of functional strength because it mimics the way the upper body is actually used. However, if I had to pick one of the three, I suppose it would have to be the deadlift as a test of functional and absolute strength.

MK: Would the decreased range of motion with sumo deadlifting conflict with the purpose of the CFT?

MR: Yes, it would. We’ll be doing the conventional style in the CFT because we’re trying to assess functional strength as opposed to merely seeing how much weight we can get off of the ground. Prior to the early eighties, no one performed sumo. With the advent of suits, sumo was a good way to use the thing twice in the meet instead of once. This may seem arbitrary, but I have never known a good sumo deadlifter who didn’t train conventional at least part of the time anyways. So we’re not going to shock anybody with that rule.

MK: This doesn’t apply to the CFT because it is barbell based, but what do you think of trap bar deadlifting?

MR: I think it’s an excellent way to hurt your low back. A 500-lb deadlift at lockout is stable against your thighs while a 400-lb trap bar “deadlift” is an unstable mess at the top. The stupid thing is designed so that you don’t have to learn how to deadlift to pull something off of the floor. It’s more like a leg press with the weight in your hands. And I don’t really see the value in not learning something.

MK: The squat component of the CFT refers to walking out the bar. No love for the monolift?

MR: I firmly believe that the monolift is an invention of Satan. The day the squat ceased being a lift that required the bar to be walked back, stabilized, squatted, walked back in, and replaced in the rack was a black day indeed. It was one of the factors that helped me decide to leave the sport. Chip McCain could literally squat anything he could set up, but for him, the hike was the limiting factor. I think that chipping away at the skills and abilities needed to perform a test diminishes the value of the test.

MK: I’ve seen the monolift defended as the equivalent of a bench hand off. That is, it enables optimal squat strength to be displayed without the limiting factor of a walkout because a hand off enables optimal bench strength to be displayed without the limiting factor of unracking the bar oneself. What’s wrong with this comparison?

MR: Nothing. That’s one reason we’re not doing the bench. Limiting factors are part of the test or at least they should be. Getting in a position to apply absolute strength is an integral part of using that strength, and it makes perfect sense to include that in the test.
However, these limiting factors shouldn’t include the judges. It’s also why there are no interactions between our judges and lifters in terms of “rack,” “squat.” or “press” commands. The CFT is supposed to be a test of the lifter, not the lifter/spotter/judge system.
For example, I’ve seen many times a bencher get the press signal *before* the bar touched the chest. In this situation, what does the side judge do? The lifter got the signal in time to do a touch and go, but the pause rule wasn’t followed. I understand that some federations have begun to eliminate the press signal, and this fixes that problem. However, any time the judge is required to perform an action before the lifter can perform an action, the judge is involved in the lift. To lift in the meet, you’re supposed to know the rules, and lifting according to them should be your responsibility. In the CFT, we will judge the lift according to the rules as it is performed by the lifter and only the lifter.

MK: The CFT allows knee and wrist wraps. You note in Starting Strength, “The mechanism is the same with wraps as with squat suits. In the absence of an injury, knee wraps must be considered aids used to lift more weights and should not be worn.” So why allow wraps?

MR: I also say that “…in the event of certain knee injuries, wraps can be helpful if used correctly.” There are lots and lots and lots of athletes with some level of knee injury. Most of them benefit from the pressure and warmth provided by a light wrap or knee sleeve. For example, most masters lifters don’t even get out of bed in the morning without a wrap of some sort. If the wrap is loose enough to leave on for the whole session, it can’t provide anything more than warmth, light pressure, some proprioceptive input, and enough tightness to allow an injured knee the luxury of enough support to do the movement. However, we’re just getting started with the CFT, and if they become a problem, they will go.
Speaking of leaving wraps on for the whole session, what prompted this rule—“Knee wraps or sleeves are permitted, but if they are used, they must be left on for the entire duration of the session in which the lift is performed. They must be put on before the squat is warmed up and left in place until the last squat attempt is completed.”
The only way to ensure that wraps are not tight, and therefore supportive, is to prevent their removal during the session. A conventionally tight wrap obviously has to be loosened or removed so the “no removal/no adjustment” rule prevents this.

MK: Why aren’t singlets allowed for the CFT?

 
MR: On the other hand, nobody’s squat suit is anything but an aid in lifting more weight. Because a singlet serves merely as clothing and because a shirt and shorts serve the same purpose, there’s no reason to wear anything that could serve as an aid if worn tight enough. And the expense of a singlet could be better saved for weightlifting shoes.

When he’s not writing about places like Cuba and Israel, Myles Kantor (myles.kantor@gmail.com) competes in the USAPL and is a CFT with the International Sports Sciences Association.

Elite Fitness Systems strives to be a recognized leader in the strength training industry by providing the highest quality strength training products and services while providing the highest level of customer service in the industry. For the best training equipment, information, and accessories, visit us at www.EliteFTS.com.