Canada East Final Results

May 3, 2009 3:00 PM

Posted in Regionals »
152 Comments » on this entry

CanadaEastFinalResults_th.jpgEnlarge image

The Canada East Final Results are In!

The event was not without controversy. There were several athletes who felt that the programming was unfairly biased toward Anthony and Jodi Bainbridge, who won the overall competition and were primarily responsible for planning the event.

The three events yesterday were a 1RM deadlift (winning loads were 525 / 315lbs), a couplet with muscle-ups and clean and jerks (winning times 6:07 / partial rounds in 10:00), and another couplet with KB swings and burpees (winning times 3:01 / 4:15).

The final event, held today, was a 5K trail run with "bonus" events sprinkled throughout (winning times were 25:24 / 30:06).

In other words, there was an untimed strength event, a sub-5min event, a 5-10min event, and an over 20min event, all using various, standard CrossFit exercises.

Without indulging the controversy, both Bainbridges have withdrawn from the event and will attempt to qualify via the recently announced Last Chance Qualifier. This means that the second, third, and fourth place finishers are awarded spots at the Games in Aromas.

Congratulations to all who competed. The qualifying men are Jason Bird, Chad Furey, and Roch Proteau.
The qualifying women are Danielle Comolli, Alexandra Bergeron, and Megan Maclellan.

Event 4 Results
Final Overall Results

152 comments on this entry.

1. James wrote...

May 3, 2009 3:14 PM

Sounds like a adequate solution. Good to see the organizers step up and admit they were wrong and give up their places.

2. Andrew Burns wrote...

May 3, 2009 3:23 PM

Disappointed that HQ didn't step up and use the original scoring from the 2nd WOD. To the 12 athletes that finished it congratulations! You deserve it!

3. COS wrote...

May 3, 2009 3:26 PM


Good decision by the Bainbridges, it was the right thing to do.


Can anyone explain the "bonus" events. Why were they optional, and if there is no penalty for skipping them why would anyone do them? What was the incentive? Just curious. Thanks!

4. Ryan Kells wrote...

May 3, 2009 3:27 PM

The organizers weren't wrong. They didn't have to admit they were wrong. It seems as though they gracefully gave up their places to pacify people and keep them from complaining.

Judging by the first comment it seems like it didn't work.

5. CrossFitter wrote...

May 3, 2009 3:33 PM

James, based on what is written here, I don't see any evidence that the organizers have "admitted" anything.
They withdrew their names from competition--and, as most attorneys will tell you, withdrawing yourself from a competition is NOT the same thing as an admission of guilt.

Now, if this couple released a statement saying, "We are withdrawing our names from competition to avoid the appearance of favoritism, any future controversy, AND because we realize we gave ourselves a competitive advantage through programming our strengths,"
THAT would be admitting they were wrong.

I can only imagine that the Bainbridges (like all Regional Games coordinators) invested a great deal of time and effort in organizing the event. I do not know this couple and am NOT making any statement about what they did or didn't do here.

My interest is, in the future, dealing with this apparent issue of a conflict of interest.
Let's imagine that, for 2010, we have a rule stating that you CANNOT serve as a Regional Games Coordinator who was (1) planning to compete in the Regional Games or (2) actively training any athlete preparing to go to the Regional Games.

Are we, as a community, ready for the likely consequences of that kind of rule?

6. CrossFitter wrote...

May 3, 2009 3:35 PM

Sorry, I caught an error in my comment. The last bit should read,

"Let's imagine that, for 2010, we have a rule stating that you CANNOT serve as a Regional Games Coordinator if you are (1) planning to compete in the Regional Games or (2) actively training any athlete preparing to go to the Regional Games.

Are we, as a community, ready for the likely consequences of that kind of rule?"

7. James wrote...

May 3, 2009 3:38 PM

"James, based on what is written here, I don't see any evidence that the organizers have "admitted" anything."

If you don't call competing, winning and then withdrawing evidence, perhaps you were an juror in OJ's trial.

8. furry wrote...

May 3, 2009 3:43 PM

Well, as a law student currently studying for an Evidence final tomorrow morning, I can say with a fair amount of confidence that you, James, are completely wrong. As Crossfitter said, withdrawing, or "seeking settlement" as it were, can not be admitted as evidence of guilt in a court of law. Of course that's down here in the good ole USofA, who knows about them thar Canucks.
Or maybe we should wait to see how I do on this final before taking my advice...

9. CrossFitter wrote...

May 3, 2009 3:50 PM

James, you refer to there being withdrawn evidence. You may know more about this than I do--could you tell me more about this?

One more thing, James: we may or may not agree on our perspective on this issue. However, I hope to interact with you (and everyone) on this message board without resorting to cattiness, unsubstantiated name-calling (i.e., "sore loser", "whiner", "cheater"), and unhelpful assumptions about each other. Assuming you are OK with addressing me respectfully, I hope you'll write back and share the facts and opinions you have about this.

10. Damon Stewart wrote...

May 3, 2009 3:57 PM

Anthony & Jodi, good luck with the last chance qualifier. I'll be doing it myself. Sorry to hear about the controversy, I'm sure it sucked the fun out of what was surely a tremendous amount of work.

11. Jeff wrote...

May 3, 2009 3:59 PM

I think James is stating that withdrawing is the evidence and not that there was evidence that was withdrawn...?

12. James wrote...

May 3, 2009 4:01 PM

furry, this isn't "seeking settlement." This is settlement.

Seeking settlement is when you file a suit against someone, they offer to settle and then you refuse to settle and proceed. You can't admit their offer as evidence of misconduct when you proceed.

We're not proceeding here. The matter is done. The situation here is as if someone settles and then they say as they always do that they did nothing wrong. Nobody with a brain believes they did nothing wrong when they settled.

If you're talking about a criminal case, the no contest plea counts as a prior. So with regard to sentencing, it is relevant evidence.

Hope that clears things up for you.

13. GMT wrote...

May 3, 2009 4:02 PM

Interesting, and sad. I've been watching (reading) this drama from down here in BOG. While I have never met the Bainbridges, they appear to be tremendous athletes and from what I've heard stand up individuals. This is a sad day for CrossFit. All the events are within the realm of CrossFit programming, but unfortunately perceptions of impropriety drove a wedge into the heart of this great community, and now the Games (at least for now) has two fewer firebreathers to marvel at come July. I think the decision to withdraw says a lot about the solid character of the Bainbridges, and that a lot of lessons are to be learned here to be applied for the Games in 2010.

And as a competitor myself in the LatAm Regionals, I want the opportunity to compete against the best. Anthony, hope to see you in Aromas!

May 3, 2009 4:06 PM

And where were they wrong James? Please tell me that.

All events were submitted to HQ for approval, any changes by HQ were put into the events. Tony asked about competing and organizing and HQ said it was fine. Tell me where they were wrong here.

The part that's wrong is that OPT felt necessary to withdraw, that Tony and Jodi felt it necessary to withdraw, that Speal etc. etc all because of arm chair quarterbacks.

15. JM wrote...

May 3, 2009 4:17 PM

CONGRATS TO JASON BIRD FROM CROSSFIT CONNECTION BURLINGTON!!!!! GO JASON!!

16. JM wrote...

May 3, 2009 4:25 PM

CONGRATS TO JASON BIRD FROM CROSSFIT CONNECTION IN BURLINGTON!!! GO JASON!!!

May 3, 2009 4:28 PM

"And where were they wrong James? Please tell me that. "

1. In posting an event where one of them holds National Records, and the other is well known for, and putting themselves in the final heat. The counter argument to this is that they are good at everything, and although quite true, I think there is enough evidence to show they are particularly good at the 1RM Deadlift (pick a different lift and nobody would have raised an eyebrow).

2. Changing the scoring system on the fly that ended up benefiting themselves. Many athletes did their event under the impression they were scoring a 0 no matter what they did and found out later their work was actually counting for points.

I think the issues were resolved swiftly and properly by the organizers and HQ and I commend and respect them all for their decision. I hope they make it in the last chance qualifier because the spectators at the games deserve to watch athletes of their quality compete.

May 3, 2009 4:28 PM

"And where were they wrong James? Please tell me that."

There was a complete conflict of interest to serve as an organizer of the very contests to which they were going to qualify.

That anyone approved it or not doesn't take that away.

19. Adam Vander Heyden wrote...

May 3, 2009 4:32 PM

Congratulations Jay, what did I tell you? I knew you would contend and now you're going to California!

Also congratulations to all the competitors who are going to the Games, and those in Fredericton who gave it there all.

Great events and great people.

GO JAY GO!

20. Milk wrote...

May 3, 2009 4:34 PM

Ok, someone needs to explain what happen, and what the big deal here is. Anyone know, that isn't bias to one side or the other?

21. davelaemers replied to comment from Milk...

May 3, 2009 4:41 PM

Unfortunately I think most of us are biased in one way or another. I think I have properly articulated the argument from one side of the fence and Jason has properly articulated the argument from the other side. Both arguments can be taken into consideration for what they are worth.

22. silverback wrote...

May 3, 2009 4:44 PM

Don't know really what is wrong or right here but generally, I think any competitor should not be involved in designing the WOD's. I am in charge of our Affiliate Cup Team and tryouts in May. I won't even know what the workouts will be until the day before. I trusted a very experienced outside Crossfitter to do it just to avoid any situations like this. Good luck to everyone!

23. JV wrote...

May 3, 2009 4:52 PM

A quote from the Coach - didn't anyone, including himself, listen...

"Coach Glassman, in an unexpected aside during a lecture on CrossFit exercise science, spoke briefly about what the 2009 Games will, or perhaps better said, will not look like. None of the competitors will have done any of the workouts. And perhaps more significantly, none of the athletes will have ever competed in several of the movements.

In other words, there can be no gaming of the event. It will be a true test of work capacity across broad time and modal domains, and the CrossFit world will have great interest in knowing who did what to prepare for it. "

You can find this on this site.

24. anonymous replied to comment from Milk...

May 3, 2009 4:53 PM

Milk, the couple that was authorized by CrossFit HQ to coordinate, organize, and plan programming for this Region (Anthony & Jodi Bainbridge) also competed in the event.

Both of them are said to be strong athletes with a history of excellence in weightlifting events--especially the deadlift.

Two issues/questions seem to have come up--

1) Since this couple programmed the workouts AND were participating, is that a conflict of interest? Apparently, some (online and at the event) expressed a concern about this appearance of impropriety and are talking about who should take responsibility for it (HQ? the couple?). Others have suggested that this couple actually DID design workouts/events around their own strengths--giving themselves an unfair advantage.

2) During the weekend, there was a question about whether enough time was allotted for WOD #2. Because of the scheduling problem, the organizers received permission from HQ to change the scoring system used halfway through the weekend. Some people have expressed concern/anger/worry that changing a scoring system in the middle of an event is unfair to the athletes.

That's my I-ain't-got-no-horse-in-this-race two cents on this one.

25. The Pie wrote...

May 3, 2009 5:09 PM

From someone who met both of them at last years games and has got programming advice for my affiliate from Anthony, I can't think of two people more unlikely to setup up this qualifyer with the intention of getting themselves into the games because of it. I think both of them would have represented Eastern Canada no matter what the workouts were and I think its a real dissapointment that their hard work this weekend isn't rewarded.
They give up their valuable time to help organize and put on the qualifying event and they are punished for it?
Also speaking of the Deadlift. I would bet the large majority of games quality CrossFitter are training the deadlift at least once every 7 lifting days, so to see that in here shouldn't be favoring only CrossFit Fredricton.
The Pie
CrossFit Lions

26. RJ wrote...

May 3, 2009 5:38 PM

James,
If you`re going to insinuate cheating, you`ll need to provide some evidence. Show how they changed their training relative to past months or years to accommodate the events planned. If you look at Tony`s log, he`s been training the squat predominantly in the last month or two.

These arguments about Jodi and Tony being strong weightlifters might have more validity if there were 4 lifting-dominant events. There was 1. And the rest were short and long metcon and a long run to finish: one of their weaknesses.

And now that they have backed out to curb the sniveling, people still feel the need to tar them with insinuations as if they were suddenly `busted` in their scheming. They had the full confidence of headquarters and there was no secret as to whether they knew the events or what their roles in them would be.

Poor sports, even after having them exit the competition.

27. furry wrote...

May 3, 2009 5:42 PM

James, thank you for further illustrating your ignorance. BOTH settlements an attempts to settle are barred from being admitted as evidence.
From Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 408:
"The following is not admissible on behalf of any party, when offered as evidence of liability for, invalidity of, or amount of a claim that was disputed as to validity or amount or to impeach through a prior inconsistent statement or contradiction: (1) furnishing or offering or promising to furnish; or accepting or offering or promising to accept a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise the claim and (2) in a civil case, conduct or statements made in compromise negotiations regarding the claim."
You and the general public may pre-judge someone based on such evidence the moment you see their face on the news etc., but that is not how the law works, nor should it.

28. Renea wrote...

May 3, 2009 5:45 PM

CONGRADULATIONS DANIELLE FROM CROSSFIT MISSISSAUGA! YOU DID US PROUD! I'M SO HAPPY FOR YOU!!!
YOU WILLL DO SOOOOOOOOO GREAT IN THE CROSSFIT GAMES!

29. Z wrote...

May 3, 2009 5:57 PM

Wow, some cheese with that whine? There were four different workouts that combined elements of weightlifting, gymnastics, and metabolic conditioning over multiple time domains and the Bainbridges dominated.

I think perhaps the persons who got their asses proverbially handed to them in four varied workouts, which represented CrossFit well and were reviewed and approved by HQ, should be the ones submitting Last Chance WoD vids.

Taking the high road is not an admission of guilt.

30. Adam Stevenson wrote...

May 3, 2009 6:28 PM

Regardless of what has happened, we need to focus on setting standards for the future games in 2010 and beyond. (Sounds like a Buzz Lightyear advertisement.)

If you have suggestions, you may want to read this recent post, although Im sure most of you have probably already done so.

http://www.board.crossfit.com/showthread.php?t=45630

31. Anthony Bainbridge wrote...

May 3, 2009 6:28 PM

Since the event has ended we have received a tremendous amount of support and praise via email and phone calls and text messages. So it's clear to us the negative vibe was overblown by a few overzealous competitors with loud mouths intent on spreading discontent within the community to further their own agenda.

Competitors LOVED the combination of movements. They loved the order of the events. They loved the flow of the schedule. And we have our judges and volunteers to thank for it - they did a tremendous job. Anyone who has

One of my top competitors, and someone I personally wanted to see make it to the Games, sent me a note that was summarized as, "Anyone who complains about this weekend is a moron and a pussy."

We are 100% confident in our choice of events and how things played out. We had a lot of fun, met a lot of cool people, and simply choose focus on the positives and the great learning experience. Negative people generally weed themselves out of this community on their own.

The only reason we withdrew was as a gesture of sportsmanship. Accept or not, your choice.

32. Anthony Bainbridge wrote...

May 3, 2009 6:32 PM

Sorry, I cut myself off midstream. Double post, mods, feel free to delete the first.

ce the event has ended we have received a tremendous amount of support and praise via email and phone calls and text messages. So it's clear to us the negative vibe was overblown by a few overzealous competitors with loud mouths intent on spreading discontent within the community to further their own agenda.

Competitors LOVED the combination of movements. They loved the order of the events. They loved the flow of the schedule. And we have our judges and volunteers to thank for it - they did a tremendous job. Anyone who has ever judged an event and stood on a concrete floor for 8 hours knows how mentally and physically draining it is. I wish I had more energy to show my gratitude properly for our entire event volunteers.

One of my top competitors, and someone I personally wanted to see make it to the Games, sent me a note that was summarized as, "Anyone who complains about this weekend is a moron and a pussy."

We are 100% confident in our choice of events and how things played out. We had a lot of fun, met a lot of cool people, and simply choose focus on the positives and the great learning experience. Negative people generally weed themselves out of this community on their own.

The only reason we withdrew was as a gesture of sportsmanship. Accept or not, your choice.

33. StevieV replied to comment from silverback...

May 3, 2009 6:45 PM

Silverback, Congrats on getting out of the crosshairs prior to hearing the gunshot (you present a sensible solution to grey areas).

"Irresponsible" is the key word here. Didn't the regional directors see this coming? Letting two top competitors have a hand in designing WODs (that no one else get to find out about) is going to cause precisely what is being stated on these pages.

I think that if someone is designing the WOD's, knows in advance what the WOD's will be, can plan to do the best for the WOD's = CONFLICT of INTEREST (certainly not cheating but definitely a conflict of interest). If that is the case (as it seems to be here) then at least 2 people were allowed extra time/knowledge to prepare for the WODs.

A way to prevent this from happening in the future... (cuz i bring not only complaint but solution)
1. people from different qualifying areas create the WOD's
2. only allow the equipment necessary for the WOD's be known to the parties responsible for putting on the event (especially if the people "responsible for putting on the event" are competeing)
3.crap this is getting confusing - because now logistics comes into play and planning/design of equipment set up can get confusing.

Even simpler - allow everyone to know the WOD's at least 1-2 months in advance. That should put an end to all the "issues" - everyone gets enough prep time and the Bainbridges can still tear it up.

This should NOT have happened in the first place.

34. StevieV wrote...

May 3, 2009 6:53 PM

Sorry - one last thing,

CONGRATS to all the competitors and especially the Bainbridges. Putting on one of these things is a logistical nightmare! Training for it, coordinating it, and competing in the events could not have been easy.

I applaud all the volunteers, organizers etc...

Bainbridges - I sure hope your "last chance" is a fruitful one.

35. Mizar Fuentes-Ortega wrote...

May 3, 2009 6:54 PM

Congratulations Roch!

... when you truly give yourself fully to what you do... without lying to yourself, only then you can be at peace... without regrets...

36. ChristineJ wrote...

May 3, 2009 6:59 PM

Anthony,
I think the bone of contention is that if you are 100% confident in your choice of events, then why change the scoring of events at the end? I am sure those that qualified and then were disqualified find it hard to stay focused on the postive. While I am sure all are appreciative of your hard work, surely you can understand their disappointment?

37. Jack wrote...

May 3, 2009 7:08 PM

I smelled something rotten as soon as I saw 1 rep max deadlift as the first event. That would be like Brian MacKenzie organizing a qualifier and starting off with a 15k run.

Should have simply picked a half dozen WODs off the main site and played it safe. You probably would have qualified and your reputation wouldn't be tarnished.

38. Kevin W wrote...

May 3, 2009 7:14 PM

Jack - And that is why HQ didn't choose you to host the Qualifiers. The event was very well balanced with regards to broad time and modal domains.

May 3, 2009 7:15 PM

My hats off to you and Jodi, Anthony. I was glad to have met you both at the Games last year and I'm sorry you had to pay such a price for all the hard work you put it to organize an event and train for it. I hope you still make it to the Games, man!

40. Jack wrote...

May 3, 2009 7:24 PM

Kevin W, if my advice was followed, the winners of the qualifier would be going to the games. ;)

May 3, 2009 7:25 PM

Ah, Anthony. Good on ya for doing what you have done. This is naught but a speed bump on the road to life's success. Chin up and head held high, the both of you.

The old guys will be lookin' for you and Jodi in Aromas.

42. Justin McCallon wrote...

May 3, 2009 7:27 PM

I can't believe that people complained about Anthony and Jodi competing.

The combination of events is one of the only "fair" combinations that I've seen so far this year. The pure strength event is something every competition needs (with exception; i.e. NorCal final event) and I'm always upset not to see it. Otherwise, when you have an event that has, among other things, a 275lb deadlift for a few reps, the person with the 750lb deadlift will score no more points than someone with a 450lb deadlift, despite the massive strength advantage and difference in fitness in that area.

As far as the choice of the lift -- the deadlift is the best choice for a pure strength event. It uses just about the entire body. It moves the most weight. It isn't too technical. It isn't dangerous for new lifters. And it is incredibly easy to judge -- you've either picked it up or you haven't.

And did anyone happen to take a look at the last event? Anthony and Jodi aren't exactly the greatest runners (I'd go further, but I think they've made great "strides").

The Bainbridges didn't bias the competition in their favor. They are (by far?) the most vocal and active CrossFit promoters in Eastern Canada. They took the time to organize the event, but they've been training all year long and they wanted to compete.

43. bingo wrote...

May 3, 2009 7:29 PM

As for the rest, we live and learn, eh? The good folks behind this adventure, people like the Glassmans, Tony B, Dave Castro, et al. will surely listen and hear words spoken in good faith and with goodwill, don't you think?

If not, surely there's another place that will bring you happiness.

For me, at least, I'll parse the words, seek goodwill, and remain confident that Games 2009 will surpass 2008 as 2008 did 2007.

And doubtless 2010 will 2009.

--bingo

44. John B wrote...

May 3, 2009 7:30 PM

Why are two of the woman that attempted the 4 workouts as prescribed not going to the games? But the fittest woman in Eastern Canada is a girl who scaled a workout? I find it hard to believe that any of the CrossFit community agrees with people qualifying for the "World Championships" while not being able to complete some of the required movements.

45. Jack wrote...

May 3, 2009 7:42 PM

Justin, you sound like you're rationalizing quite a bit. I'm sure they were expecting people to think the way you "think" when they selected the deadlift 1 rep max as the first event.

Let me ask you, how many other qualifiers use a 1 rep max deadlift as a qualifying event? You have two organizers who are competitors who both happen to have a 3x bodyweight deadlift and the one qualifier where 1 rep max deadlift is a qualifying event.

Uh huh....care to buy a bridge?

46. AlexBureau wrote...

May 3, 2009 7:46 PM

Hey Mr. Bainbridge ... you were right ... Man up Pussy out ;) and you did it by yourself, good one

47. Justin McCallon wrote...

May 3, 2009 7:54 PM

Rationalizing?! From what I remember, Anthony had a shin disease that prevented him from running at all up until about 3 years ago. Not to diminish his improvement, but he is a horrible runner. A 5k trail run is about the worst event possible for him. No other qualifiers used a 5k, but Anthony did because he wanted to test broad modal domains, and he wanted to give athletes with extreme cardiovascular abilities the chance to get credit.

Anthony simply understands the complaints that a lot of people have about CrossFit and its competitions. I hear the same stuff all the time from my powerlifting buddies -- once you reach a certain strength, there's no benefit to anything more in most of the CrossFit competitions. If the real goal is to see who has the highest level of fitness, then the line-up of events from CrossFit Fredericton is excellent.

48. RJ wrote...

May 3, 2009 8:01 PM

Jack
You seem to be fairly sure they were aiming to cheat. I assume you must know them and their character well to make that rather inflamatory claim. Even after they completed all the events (as well as setting them up and running the event) and then graciously stepped out. I'd say we're seeing more of your own character here than we are learning about theirs.

Stay classy.

49. Jack wrote...

May 3, 2009 8:01 PM

LMFAO @ "once you reach a certain strength, there's no benefit to anything more in most of the CrossFit competitions"

There is certainly a strength bias in crossfit. That's why the barbell cert was added a few years ago. But it isn't a strong man competition. It isn't a powerlifting meet. It isn't a olympic weight lifting meet.

It's called crossfit for a reason.

You have competitors chosen to organize the event. They both have a 3x body weight deadlift. I'm pretty sure one is even the national deadlift champ. And surprise surprise, deadlift is the first event. And no other qualifier has deadlift as an event.

Go ahead and defend it. They stepped down. That speaks volumes about who is right here.

50. grambo wrote...

May 3, 2009 8:03 PM

You know what sucks about this? Two people that should be competing at the games might not be.

The reality is the CF games, qualifiers etc. are an athletic event driven by volunteers and still in their infancy. Because of the fact that many of the top CF athletes also run some of the larger/more well known affiliates, and have been involved in CF for a long time, means they are going to be involved in the process of organizing the events.

Of course the games must strive for absolute fairness and transparency, but this is not the Olympics. It pisses me off when people think that there is a staff of 100's of paid people running these things with years of experience.

I think CFHQ should have invited top performers from prior years like OPT and Speal and exempted them from qualifying, especially considering they had to be involved in organizing the events. It's clear they are at the top of the game and it sucks dumb stuff like this has to happen.

51. Joe C. wrote...

May 3, 2009 8:11 PM

Why the hell do they have competitors coordinating these qualifiers? These regions seriously can't find somebody else who's a good programer that's not competing? Of course the Canada East coordinators had an andvantage over the rest of the field. THEY MADE UP THE WODS!! The guy knew he had a great deadlift so he put 1RM deads as a wod. It was obvious that they played to their advantages. Just like the Great Basin qualifier. Of course Speal is one of the best CrossFitters on the planet and would qualify in any qualifier. But he coordinated that region. And in watching one of the vids his bar for the snatches was the one closest to the next exercise. They should almost bring in a coordinator from a different region to run the qualifiers. Similar to how they have referees from different conferences reffing college bowl games. The competitors from these regions have every right to be upset over these controversies.

52. Justin McCallon wrote...

May 3, 2009 8:23 PM

This is absolutely unbelievable. Everyone is going to comment on the Deadlift, but they are all going to completely ignore the 5k trail run. With just these 2 events, I don't think either of the Bainbridges would have even qualified. The couple also did great on the events that nobody is really commenting on.

And I can't believe that people don't understand the point about a max strength event. Hypothetical Event: 275lb deadlift 5 reps, 10 pull-ups. Bob has a 800lb deadlift and can do 9 pull-ups. Joe has a 375lb deadlift and can do 12 pull-ups. Joe is going to win this event and Bob is going to get no credit at all for his tremendous strength advantage. Conversely, if the event was a single 400lb deadlit, Joe would never be able to finish, which is likewise unfair. So, instead of letting someone arbitrarily pick an event with an appropriate amount of weight to test strength, the much better test is to have a 1rm event (or do what NorCal did).

If your goal is to determine who has the max power output among broad time and modal domains, then it's not a bad idea to have BROAD TIME and modal domains.

53. RJ wrote...

May 3, 2009 8:28 PM

Joe C.
Speals snatch bar was closest to the run course, but his carry bag was the farthest one away. You're claims might be legit if they had any basis in fact.

You, as with many other people are making something out of nothing. Did you even compete in any of these events? Is anyone here that is complaining even competing in the qualifiers? Jack? Joe C.?

I expect not. You're just looking for conspiracy at the expense of insulting people you don't know.

54. Joe C. replied to comment from RJ...

May 3, 2009 8:50 PM

Ya bro actually I competed in the so cal qualifier. and i could of easily called bullshit on that one too. People who ran the event had sons and training partners in the competition. I couldn't imagine that none of them had 'any idea' of what was going to be in store. There's an easy solution to all this controversy bullshit: BRING IN A COORDINATOR FROM ANOTHER REGION THAT HAS NO TIES TO ANY OF THE COMPETITORS, STAFF ETC....! I'm not worried though, the Greg Glassman's and the Dave Castro's of CrossFit will sort this out for the future competitions. what qualifier did you compete in?

55. The Pie wrote...

May 3, 2009 8:54 PM

I just pray that speal, Anthony, Jodi and OPT are all competing at the games this july and this comes from someone who will be flying in from Vancouver just to be a spectator. I am going to be pissed if those athletes aren't laying down times in the dirt and running up that godamn hill.

56. Justin McCallon wrote...

May 3, 2009 8:59 PM

I can understand vocalizing concerns and saying that competitors should not be able to host. Whatever. But calling out specific competitors when they weren't doing anything "against the rules," actually spoke with HQ, and spent a tremendous amount of time organizing the events is pathetic.

This community isn't the NBA. We don't have overly vast resources.

Spiel, OPT, and both of the Bainbridges would have qualified under any reasonable event. It sucks that they are being forced to step down because they spent time to organize things.

57. Joey wrote...

May 3, 2009 9:22 PM

If you take out the first two events and add up the scores, the organizers would finish in the middle of the pack.

I'm glad they removed themselves from competition. This is a black eye for crossfit.

58. gaucoin wrote...

May 3, 2009 9:23 PM

I think one thing that people are missing is that Jodi and Anthony were tops in their Qualifiers only by a few points so the competition was pretty frickin' tight. I'm just disappointed that the backlash from all this has been so severe. This is not the type of talk that drew me to the CF Community back in 2005.

And for the last frickin' time people, OPT ain't competing!

59. t-thack wrote...

May 3, 2009 9:28 PM

Why not have a hopper of 'possible events' (based on equipment and space) and just compete with what is chosen? We talk about the hopper all the time in CrossFit, let's put its metaphor to use. Then if 1RM Deadlift comes out, or NorCal final event, what can anyone say?

60. Z replied to comment from Joe C....

May 3, 2009 9:41 PM

"Joe C." you competed in SoCal and you "could of [sic] easily called bullshit on that one too", huh? Mighty big of you to keep quiet then... Let me guess, you didn't finish anywhere near the top 6 and you need an excuse to make you feel better about yourself. That must be why you're not using your real name, because I missed the "Joe C." amongst the final rankings of the SoCal Qualifiers.

61. Joe C. replied to comment from Z...

May 3, 2009 9:58 PM

Yeah good one 'Z'! . I like guys like you and 'RJ' who reply to people like 'Jack' and myself by saying shit like "i bet you didn't even compete...." or "you probably didn't even come close to qualifying". All because i defend the other competitors from the Canada East qualifier that make a valid point of there being an unfiar advantage. Just analyze the situation for one second and put yourself in their shoes.

62. Brandon B. wrote...

May 3, 2009 10:01 PM

It sounds like the Canada East Qualifier went well.

63. Teacher wrote...

May 3, 2009 10:03 PM

The lesson here is that cheaters never win and winners never cheat. Thank God justice was done and the deserving competitors advanced to the games.

64. Z replied to comment from Joe C....

May 3, 2009 10:09 PM

One has nothing to do with the other, big guy. You mentioned you competed in SoCal and intimated that the qualifier was also flawed, but that you magnanimously decided not to say anything. I simply pointed out that I saw no "Joe C." in the final standings and suggested that perhaps it was a shortcoming in your performance/fitness and not some vast conspiracy amongst the organizers that prevented you from qualifying for the games.

But then you chose to ignore those points rather than simply providing us your name so we could all see how the alleged organizer conspiracy resulted in you being outperformed by athletes who supposedly had inside information.

65. Z replied to comment from Teacher...

May 3, 2009 10:13 PM

I've also learned that trolls exist under bridges and on internet message boards. I think I'm going to stop feeding them...

To the Bainbridges: Good luck on the Last Chance WoD; I hope to see you both in Aromas.

66. RJ replied to comment from Joe C....

May 3, 2009 10:37 PM

You're not defending anyone, you're attacking organizers, making many unfounded accusations, and providing no evidence to back any of it up. The one concrete point you did raise with Speal turned out to be a misrepresentation. I responded to comments you made about events you didn't take part in. It's amusing to see you play the victim now.

If you're so sure that something dodgey is going on at your own qualifier, be a man and talk to the organizers instead of hiding behind a blog.

The events in the east had a 1RM and a long distance run, with two metcons sandwiched between. That's as balanced as it gets. I think the final results tell an interesting story about the tradeoffs between 1RM's and LDR's.

67. Adam Stevenson wrote...

May 3, 2009 10:48 PM

The bickering back and forth is pretty ridiculous.
Once you guys are done "measuring", maybe you can join the grownups table.
Then we can discuss how to resolve this issue in the coming years.
We're all on the same side here guys...Right?...

You cant just say "We'll let the Glassmans and Castro fix this shit."
Come up with solutions.

Drop knowledge, not bombs!

68. Slim wrote...

May 3, 2009 10:49 PM

Right on Adam! Some people need to put on their man pants and stop defending the indefensible. HQ squared things away. Lessons learned. Let's train for the big show and stop the bickering.

May 4, 2009 12:19 AM

"This community isn't the NBA. We don't have overly vast resources."

People seem to be ignoring this fact. These events are not for profit with huge organizational teams. Talking about flying in different regional coordinators etc, on who's dime? This is the 3rd year of the games and they have been growing rapidly, cut some slack for bumps along the road and give respect to people that have been involved for a long time. Calling things like this cheating is ridiculous.

70. Paris wrote...

May 4, 2009 12:24 AM

When the organizers deadlift last, what do you call it if not cheating?

71. disgruntled wrote...

May 4, 2009 12:55 AM

Bainbridge wrote: "So it's clear to us the negative vibe was overblown by a few overzealous competitors with loud mouths intent on spreading discontent within the community to further their own agenda."

Keep telling your self that tough guy.

72. Laughing wrote...

May 4, 2009 1:26 AM

LMFAO @ little Anthony Bainbridge.

73. GP wrote...

May 4, 2009 1:38 AM

LULU, you rock...well done

74. Jonathan Kinnick wrote...

May 4, 2009 1:42 AM

I don't think CrossFit HQ should accept Anthony and Jodi's withdrawal. They rightfully earned their top spots at the qualifier, and no one can argue that they don't deserve to represent their region at the Games. The Bainbridges were chosen to coordinate the event for a reason. They are top CrossFitters who understand CrossFit. That is why they chose remarkably fair and broad workouts for the event (arguably the best of any region). Does anyone think that heavy Deadlifts shouldn't be part of an event like this? Deadlifts are one of the most important lifts in existence, which is why Anthony and Jodi are good at them (just like all top CrossFitters) and why they were included in the event. A 5k run was also included, to test the other end of the spectrum. Also, the only reason why the workouts aren't announced early is so people don't narrow their training to specialize in the specific chosen workouts (like doing Fran twice a week). You can look at their training logs and see that they have done what they always do, train to be top CrossFitters (just like all the other top CrossFitters did).

75. Jonathan Kinnick wrote...

May 4, 2009 1:45 AM

To call foul on this is bogus. I agree with HQ's original decision to allow them to coordinate as well as participate in their Regional Qualifier. While the problems with this scenario that have been brought up may raise questions, a little reflection cleared them up in my mind.

They chose fair and balanced workouts: agreed.
They did not alter their training to get an edge at the event: agreed.
When every female competitor DNF'd workout 2, they chose the solution that made the most sense: agreed.

My vote is that they be given the spots at the games they earned.

76. Anon wrote...

May 4, 2009 2:48 AM

It was the right decision from a PR perspective. Anthony Bainbridge should think about the comments that he is making. Dismissing people's concerns as ridiculous does more harm than the dispute over events and conflict of interest.

When you are organising an event that people are paying to attend, you should at least have the courtesy and respect for them to take their opinions seriously.

This is not just an argument on the internet. This is business and by not rising above it and responding sensibly to criticism he is damaging his reputation.

77. Dan wrote...

May 4, 2009 3:22 AM

Jonathan,

You CANNOT hold an event like this and have the Organizers participate. You can't even have athletes who are trained by the the Organizers compete in the event. This is the first year of Qualifiers and there will be some minor hiccups, however, a major hiccup is that the playing field is not even across the board...for various reasons. Based upon how these games are structured right now, can you really claim that the winner is the "fittest athlete in the world"?

Sip the kool aid, don't guzzle it.

78. Kevin W wrote...

May 4, 2009 3:33 AM

Anon - I was at the event. On day 2, when the announcer was giving the details of the 5k trail run, there were competitors yelling disrespectful and rude comments concerning the results from the day before. Respect should be given when respect is shown. There's no need for all of this bashing. There's a big difference between criticism and attack.

May 4, 2009 4:12 AM

Everyone who gave us valid feedback, good or bad, was met with open arms. That's how it was on Saturday, Sunday, and will continue to be. If you are interested in an open dialogue about any aspect of the event - the workouts, the scoring, the judging, the layout, the schedule, etc. Feel free to give me a call - you have my number.

80. AlexBureau wrote...

May 4, 2009 4:20 AM

Anthony ... you were right on one thing ... Man up Pussy out ;) and you did all this by yourself ... amazing

81. Leo S wrote...

May 4, 2009 4:27 AM

See you at the Games, Tony & Jodi.

Love the WoD's - would've loved to tear them up (or them tear me up!)

May 4, 2009 4:48 AM

Leo - congrats on your finish!!! I was stoked to see you place. We had a couple of big guys (210 ish) who were damn close to placing. One of them came roaring down the trail run like a viking about to storm a village - fun to watch!

83. N wrote...

May 4, 2009 4:53 AM

I'm a crossfitter but not anywhere near to the extent as to want to be involved in this.

However, that being said....Coming and reading this last night without having a clue who Tony & Jodi are, it still makes no sense to me that the organizers were allowed to compete in an event they organized.

I'm sorry but regardless of who's right or who's wrong, that makes no sense.

It just seems like a really odd decision was made and if these two really wanted to compete and organize, they should have attended a qualifier elsewhere or arrangements should have been made.

I have no clue who these people are but it seems there was a severe discrepancy with a 1RM Deadlift being an event and supposedly these two are amazing deadlifters (and known for that) so again, common sense would tell me there would be some conflict there.

It's kinda like umm....Ussain Bolt being asked to organize a sporting event and then deciding he would take part and the events would be the 100m and 200m run. Seems wrong.

I dont think Jodi & Anthony made any "devious" decisions to weight the event in their favor but maybe just made some poor judgment calls.

But ultimately, they should not have been competing in an event they organied.

Can someone please explain how Speal & OPT are involved in this? Two Crossfitters I follow and am expecting to follow during the games, how are they tied up in this.

Hope it all works out, but I would agree, all the arguing and bickering, sour grapes is a sad day for Crossfit. To hear that people were loudly and rudely voicing comments at the event is even worse. Think of the reputation hits crossfit will have taken for this and the spectators at the event.

84. Mike wrote...

May 4, 2009 5:03 AM

There are a lot of comments here from people who did not attend the Qualifier many of which raise valid points. However, some that are focussing on the negative are missing some key aspects of the weekend.

Having attended the Qualifier as a competitor and a coach for 8 other people, I, like some others, did have issues with event selection and changes in scoring which I expressed to Anthony directly. While I didn't agree with some of the decisions, the event itself was run extremely well with things proceeding on time and staying on schedule. With that many competitors and that many events it is extremely difficult and for that the organizers for this event (as well as the others) should be commended.

At the end of the day, it was no doubt a very difficult decision for Anthony and Jodi to withdraw but something they decided to do for the greater good. Personally, I think that they are both exceptional athletes and I truly would like to see them at the Games in California.

Good luck in the Last Chance Qualifier guys.

85. john wopat wrote...

May 4, 2009 5:07 AM

Anthony and Jodi, Good luck at the "Last Chance" qualifer. I'll be pulling for you both at Aromas!

86. Blame Canada wrote...

May 4, 2009 5:09 AM

87. jacques wrote...

May 4, 2009 5:33 AM

Awesome weekend Roch and Alexandra!
Make us proud in Aromas. It's gonna be hot:)

88. Leo S wrote...

May 4, 2009 6:06 AM

Tony,

May be that dude was related to legendary Technoviking?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwsntHcWiy4

89. AL wrote...

May 4, 2009 7:07 AM

The changed scoring for workout #2 devalues the effort of those who finished it within the time limit. It appears that workout #2 is now scored by number of rounds and that the times of the top 12 finishers were used as tie breakers. This is applying two different scoring systems. If its based on the number of rounds completed with a maximum of 5 rounds, then the top 12 unfortunately get the same score. If it is based on an AMRAP, then the top 12 should have been given more points based on their time (technically they could have kept on going to complete more rounds). The other solution is to leave the event as is for the men (i.e. only those who finished under 10 minutes get a score) and change it to round-based scoring for the women given that no women finished within the 10 minute time limit. Simply put, the women should have had more than 10 minutes to complete this workout. Change the scoring for the women all you want, but don;t touch the men's. Workout #2 did a good job of identifying the best athletes.
For those of you who don't like the 1RM deadlift event. How about using the every-second-counts system for events 2,3, and 4 and using event 1 (1RM deadlift) as a tie breaker.
The rankings would be different if any of the above alternatives are used. The last alternative would truly identify the athletes with the best work capacity.

90. Russell Pettypiece wrote...

May 4, 2009 7:11 AM

A few person points on the weekend.

1 - Anthony and Jodi were the top athletes at this competition and I think they would have qualified regardless of the events posted. So I'm hoping HQ will take this into consideration when they summit their last chance video.

2 - The only problems I had with the weekend were consistency of judging. Watching all the heats throughout the day I noticed that things were allowed by some judges and not by others. On WOD 2 I had to do "7" extra muscle-up and feel 2 reps short of completing the 5 rounds within 10mins. While watching another competitor during another heat literally jump into the muscle up.
But on the flip I think myself and a few other competitor got it easier on the Burpee WOD. During my heat the judge was looking for me to be vertical in the air with an audible clap above my head. I watched other heats were the judge wasn't counting reps of a competitor because they weren't clapping loud enough and because they wanted their arms fully extended at the top. Also on the KB swing I saw one judge make the athlete have the KB so far over her head I had to look away because she almost dropped it on her head 5 or 6 times but that same judge allowed the very next competitor to barely bring the KB past her forehead.

3 - The scoring on event #2 in regards to the woman side of the competition. Only 4 women attempted the WOD Rx'd and were able to complete a muscle up and were given the top 4 spot as they should have. But competitors were given 88,87,86....points for not doing the workout as Rx'd and 2 people that finish in the top 3 would have finished 4th and 6th. The 2 competitors that attempted the WOD and should be in the top 3 finished 11th and 13th. During the Great Basin Qualifier only 3 woman were awarded points on the 2 WOD of the day everybody that did the workout scaled received 0 points.

4 - other than that I thought the weekend was good. All the events were fun and challenging the final run was insane but in a good way.

91. Russell Pettypiece wrote...

May 4, 2009 7:14 AM

Forgive the spelling it was a long drive home and I'm tired

May 4, 2009 7:34 AM

Russell - valid points.

Judging - it's never going to be perfect. Even if you created an entire company based on Certified CrossFit Judges and put them into an intensive training program for 4 years, had them do internships for another 4, and then started in the minors and worked their way up to the regionals and worlds ... there would still be mistakes. Look at the NHL, NFL, NBA, MLB, etc. Entire TV shows created around debating calls made by professional referees.

Regarding the ladies not finishing - it was an unfortunate mishap that no one anticipated. But the WORK was there and should be credited. Otherwise you eliminate the two biggest components of CrossFit (weightlifting and gymnastics) and that would turn the entire event into DL, burpees, and a run? That type of test didn't make sense to us or HQ - and that was the reason for the change.

And amen on the brutal run - especially running slanted along that ridge!

93. Russell Pettypiece wrote...

May 4, 2009 9:23 AM

Anthony

in regards to the judging i don't think it would have made a difference to myself personally and this was the first year for the qualifier and wrinkles are expected. As far as the scoring goes. At the Great Basin qualifier the woman that finished 3rd got 0 points on the WOD she didn't do Rx'd and still was able to Qualify...when I went over the numbers which was self serving to a friend of mind I also saw that Tracy ( who I believe is Jodi's mom) should have finished 2nd instead of 11th so even for her own pride as an athlete she might want to know how she really did even if it doesn't mean going to Aromas.

Good luck on the last chance video I'll be trying too.

94. russell Pettypiece wrote...

May 4, 2009 9:27 AM

the run...i tried to keep out of the mud for the first 500 metre and then I realized there would have been nowhere to run...that hill after the tire flip blew my mind I had to walk up it and still passed 3 people before I hit the top.

hopefully I can recover in time for the last chance video

95. Matt DeMinico wrote...

May 4, 2009 9:47 AM

Bah, the workouts are heavy, I'm not exactly a strong guy (310/275/110 dl/squat/press), I just know I need to work on that, no biggie.

But with the organization, perception is king, just look at what happens when a politician is accused. They're "innocent until proven guilty" in case of the law, but public opinion doesn't follow the law, all you have to do is have a party accuse some politician of doing something, and they're "guilty until proven innocent" and lose their next election, only to find out at trial that they were completely innocent.

Isn't the obvious solution to just have each regional committee write workouts for another region? Don't need to penalize someone for volunteering to help out a region.

96. Russell Pettypiece wrote...

May 4, 2009 9:59 AM

I think you deal out the "Hopper Deck" to all the qualifiers and whatever you get you get.

97. Joe P wrote...

May 4, 2009 10:25 AM

No question Jody and Tony are great athletes. No question there is a reasonable perception of conflict of interest. For all of you lawyer wannabes arguing about whether or not any wrongdoing was "admitted", it seems most people agree that Tony and Jody did the right thing by stepping down. If they make it through the Last Chance Qualifier, they will have done the same thing all other qualifiers did, with no advantage, real or perceived, and that's only fair.

98. GJ wrote...

May 4, 2009 10:31 AM

Has anyone actually checked the stats? Correct me if I'm wrong but had the scoring system not been changed, Jodi would have tied for 4th. So stepping down doesn't mean as much as one would think.

99. Paul wrote...

May 4, 2009 10:34 AM

Anthony,

Bro you should really give yourself a time out and let this just fade away. You're coming across as arrogant. You did the right thing by stepping down. Don't blow it now by trying to explain yourself. People have already made up their mind and either their for you or against you. Nothing you can say is going to change anything.

Peace!

100. AllisonNYC wrote...

May 4, 2009 12:25 PM

Anthony and Jodi-

I hope you qualify. You deserve to be there based on your scores on the workouts. You're both incredible athletes across the board. Insane deadlifts, multiple Muscle Ups and Pull-Ups among many other achievements!? Sounds like CrossFIT people to me.

Seems to me like you did a great job choosing a variety of events, too.

The Games wouldn't be as good of a show without you two in it. Good Luck.

101. Justin McCallon wrote...

May 4, 2009 2:35 PM

I don't totally agree with the idea of having other regions choose the qualifier events. Aside from the practical/technical aspects, I like the idea of a little regional-rivalry. The Dirty South regional made clear their 3 goals, one of them being to select the top 7 fittest male and female athletes from the region. It makes sense to me that they get to choose the events that will determine it and not someone else.

I don't think Anthony or Jodi did anything wrong at all since they apparently talked this through with HQ's first, but I do agree that next year we should change this in some way. I can't come up with anything better than letting a different region pick the events, but I still think it has flaws.

102. Jacko wrote...

May 4, 2009 2:49 PM

Some days chicken, some days feathers.

Did they do anything wrong? Not in picking the deadlift but why go last? That's a big advantage.

No matter. Justice was done and the most deserving people are headed to the games.

103. Amazed in CDN wrote...

May 4, 2009 3:25 PM

I have to say that I'm absolutely amazed at reading all of this blabber. As a fellow crossfitter(but not one who could go to qualifiers due to injuries) and having friends that did compete, qualified and were disqualified, I'm absolutely amazed. If you read all this writing we sound like a bunch of Globos. Instead of going over and hashing out the same thing over and over, we should all agree to disagree and go from here. Where do we go? First, we support those who qualified, and those who will be going to the last chance to qualify. And we stand behind those that will represent with all our crossfit asskicking power. Secondly, we find a way that something like this doesn't happen again, not because we think it may or may not be wrong, but because we don't want to ever have the possiblity of discussions like this in the future, so that no one is questioned about their honour and morals. And thirdly we find a way that once everything is set(ie the WODs and the scoring) they stay set, that way everyone knows what is happening when they start.

I want to wish everyone great and wonderful success at both the last chance and the games....represent Crossfit well!
keep drinking the koolaid!

104. Paul wrote...

May 4, 2009 4:28 PM

Anthony,
Put on your man pants one leg at a time and stop whining. You tried to pull a fast one and fooled nobody but yourself.

105. RJ replied to comment from Jacko...

May 4, 2009 4:31 PM

I would just like to point out once again that Jodi and Tony both did their recent max PR`s for deadlift, regardless of what the competitors did. Check their workout logs. Tony`s listed max deadlift was 565lb back in his powerlifting days at 180lbs. Also, Jodi didn`t need to lift 315lbs to win, which I believe is what she finished with.

The other issues raised seem fair, but that is one people should just let go. They lifted exactly what they were able to lift, as any self respecting competitor would do.

106. RJ replied to comment from Paul...

May 4, 2009 4:33 PM

Trolling away...Must...not...feed...

107. Chad Furey wrote...

May 4, 2009 4:40 PM

Anthony and Jodi you probably don't know who I am since no one seemed to at the games seeing as I am neither training at a crossfit gym nor training with other crossfitters but i gotta speak my mind since it seems to be a trend.

I think a great job was done at the games, they were more than i expected and the routines were a lot of fun, especially that run.

It really sucks that all this controversy had to ruin something that im sure you both put a lot of effort into.
I could rant for hours about everyone who was complaining about the event but why ruin the great experience i had.
I hope you both qualify (even though you already have in my perspective). Tony if you're not at the games we won't be able to show the world how good Eastern Canadian crossfitters are.

Best of luck


Chad

108. Fail wrote...

May 4, 2009 5:12 PM

RJ - who are you trying to convince? If it was legit, they wouldn't have stepped down and given their spots to other competitors.

109. Keith wrote...

May 4, 2009 5:25 PM

How does this last chance to qualify work? Can someone please explain?

110. grambo wrote...

May 4, 2009 5:42 PM

Guess how weightlifting and powerlifting events work, you decide your opening weight and the lifts progress in order and get heavier. If you pick to heavy an opener and fail it 3 times you get no result. Since they have heavy deads they lifted at the end, makes sense to me.

111. Fail wrote...

May 4, 2009 5:59 PM

So grambo, you are saying they knew they were going to win the dead lift ahead of time. That's exactly what everyone is complaining about. They lead off with an event they knew they could win.

112. RJ replied to comment from Fail...

May 4, 2009 6:10 PM

I just wanted to clear the air on that little distortion. People can decide for themselves. I know them both, have trained with them, and they are good honest people.

Sometimes adults have to make decisions that aren`t in their favor for the good of the group. Some people will understand that, while others will see conspiracy. So be it.

The fact that you post nonsense without your e-mail address (as with many others) says much about the courage of your convictions.

113. Fail wrote...

May 4, 2009 6:29 PM

RJ, you're now resorting to making threats because people don't like the way your pals ran a competition? Birds of a feather flock together. Tony made some threats earlier ("say it to my face" etc).

Suck it up.

114. Keith wrote...

May 4, 2009 6:40 PM

some add value and explain what is the last chance qualifier?

115. Jeremy wrote...

May 4, 2009 6:44 PM

Since all of the negative stuff has been touched on, I'd like to say a few things.

First I'd like to thank everyone for coming to our little town and competing in a very tough event.

The event itself went VERY smoothly, considering the workouts, the timeline and the personalities involved. I have been around a lot of sporting events and to have 300+ workouts completed over the course of a weekend with no major injuries, and always being within 10 minutes of on time, speaks volumes of the co-operation of EVERYONE involved including the organizers, judges, volunteers, spectators and ESPECIALLY the competitors.

Everyone pulled together to execute what was truly an amazing event.

Congratulations and good luck to all competitors going to the games from all the qualifiers, make the most of your time in California.

And to everyone who ran the trail, you're lucky I relocated the course out of the raspberry/thorn patch ;) My legs are cut to crap.

116. Jeremy wrote...

May 4, 2009 6:45 PM

117. RJ replied to comment from Fail...

May 4, 2009 6:47 PM

A comment implying you should take responsibility for your comments is threatening?

Suck it up indeed.

118. Ian Haya - CF Ottawa wrote...

May 4, 2009 6:50 PM

I just want to give a shout out to Chad Furey who I was able to speak with a lot on Day 1. It was great meeting you and I know you'll represent Canada East well.

For all of those that didn't get to meet him, this guy is a monster but very humble and shows you just what is possible when you put it all out there. I think he said it was the first time he got to use real bumpers and drop weights! Something tells me he's got a lot more potential.

119. Goofy wrote...

May 4, 2009 7:33 PM

RJ, give yourself a time out. You're going to "hold people responsible" for posting a few comments on a message board? Seriously, you're taking this way way too seriously. A few people are unhappy about an event they trained very hard for and they have a right to express themselves in a way they see fit. That's not your call. If you don't like it, don't read it. But to some how suggest you're going to "hold people responsible" for what they say is flat out goofy and a little disturbing.

120. RJ replied to comment from Goofy...

May 4, 2009 9:31 PM

My goodness.

"Take responsibility" as in if you believe something is true and call someone on it, you take credit for it. Like adults do. There was no threat implied at any point and none of my wording even suggests any kind of threat. Nowhere did I say "hold people responsible" as you actually quoted me as saying (twice). My original comment that prompted this foolish exchange was that not adding your e-mail address suggests you lack "courage in your convictions" (i.e., you don`t believe what you are saying enough to claim the comment as your own).

People are welcome and encouraged to comment on the unfairness of the event as they see it and many constructive criticisms have been put forward. I think many points are valid in fact. I have only commented to people calling the organizers cheaters with no evidence supporting it, and several factors arguing against it.

121. James London wrote...

May 4, 2009 9:37 PM

As a member of the crossfit community, I accept your apology Anthony. I hope others do the same. Nobody gets ahead by trying to get even. Let's move on people. The community needs to heal. Bickering only impedes the much needed healing process.

122. RJ wrote...

May 4, 2009 9:57 PM

Agreed, time to move on as this is crossing over into Sillyland. Best of luck to the East coast competitors that qualified for the games!

123. Andrew Burns replied to comment from AL...

May 5, 2009 4:59 AM

I couldn't agree more Al ... The 12 athletes that completed the 2nd WOD as Rx'd deserve to be rewarded for their efforts. You can not change a scoring system after an event is completed in any sporting/athletic events. This needs to be addressed and the most deserving athletes need to be going to Aromas.

124. Jason Bird wrote...

May 5, 2009 8:39 AM

Thanks Anthony and Jodi for a great weekend in Fredricton....as I said before I think the workouts were amazing and very well rounded not to mention very very tough...just the way CrossFit should be.....a few hiccups but that all part of the growing pains.
On the mens side is was pretty obvious that Anthony was the most deserving to qualify based on ANY scoring system. Both myself and Chad were second and third because we are well rounded...we completed all the workouts as required and we were both consistantly top 10 or better in all of the events be it max strength, short met con, skill movements, or endurance.

In the end it seems to me that the best all round performances were the ones that were rewarded...just the way it should.......we all love a two minute Fran but CrossFit is about so much more... The top performers are the ones that are going and Anthony should be included in that.

On a more personal note I have to say that going into this thing I was really scared as to how it would go.......I kept telling people I just dont want to finish last .....I turn 40 in a few months and I could not imagine being able to hang with some of those young firebreathers.......hmmmm turns out I was wrong!!! Now I am absolutely terrified about California, I cant even begin to imagine how I am going to feel if I am in a heat with someone like Speal beside me....yikes!!!


125. McCord wrote...

May 5, 2009 9:06 AM

If you want elite athletes coordinating the qualifiers, give them an exemption from competing and allow them to advance directly to the games. It rewards their substantial efforts in organizing the qualifiers and avoids any appearance of a conflict of interest.

126. Crossfit St-Jean member wrote...

May 5, 2009 11:07 AM

Hello,

If you look carefully the results of the qualification, there is a guy who must be very disappointed, because if the point system has not changed over the weekend, it would be classified for Crossfit Games

The final results with the system changed

1 - Anthony Bainbridge (withdrawn)
2 - Jason Bird (Qualified)
3 - Chad Furrey (Qualified)
4 - Roch Proteau (DNF Second workout rx'd) (Qualified)
5 - Alex Possamai (DNF Second workout rx'd)
6 - Dominic Adam (DNF Second workout rx'd)
7 - Alexandre Beaulieu

Final results if the score does not change

1 - Anthony Bainbridge (withdrawn)
2 - Jason Bird (Qualified)
3 - Chad Furrey (Qualified)
4 - Alexandre Beaulieu (Qualified)

So think you are training hard for several months and during the competition, the rules change and it makes you get out of the race. During a season of hockey, baseball, and any sport, the classification system does not change. So why in the qualification rules has been changed?

I hope HQ will take into consideration that they have changed the rules and have a thought for him when he sent his tape for Late registration qualify. Provided that other qualified, he deserves his place in Crossfit Games!

Hoping to have the chance to go in California and encourage Alexandre Beaulieu at Crossfit Games 09

Congratulations to Alexandra Bergeron for her qualifaction for Crossfit Games!

Crossfit St-Jean members

127. Eric Martel replied to comment from McCord...

May 5, 2009 11:15 AM

I don't really see the point of having elite athletes coordinating, I think it's simply an issue raised by the fact that most CrossFit gym owners are themselves elite athletes! Organization and physical performance are two very different skill sets ;)

As for those who raised concerns that each qualifiers should come up with their own set of workouts, I'd rather have HQ decide on a list of predefined equipment (so that each qualifier has the required stuff for the competition) and like the WODs, the workouts to perform are posted the night before or something, and it's the same workouts, worldwide, on the exact same day, so that no one could complain about anything.

It was a fun week end, congratulation to my friends Roch and Alexandra who qualified! GO ALEX! ;)

128. Jake wrote...

May 5, 2009 12:46 PM

Anthony,
You're a fantastic example, you're also a fantastic athlete. I was sad to see that you gave up your qualifying spot.

Thanks for being vocal on the Crossfit boards as well as explaining yourself here. I wish I lived up there to train alongside yourself.

Best of luck to you on the last chance qualifiers and don't let the nasty 5% tear you down, keep your head up!!!

129. Mathieu Lalonde wrote...

May 5, 2009 2:56 PM

I second Ian Haya's comment. Good luck Chad

M@

May 5, 2009 5:51 PM

Let me guess the person whom you are speaking of that made the comment about those who complained and calling them pussy's is from your gym. For those that travelled any sort of a distance to the games I feel for you, you spent your time and money to travel to compete in an uneven playing field. The weekend was an absolute disaster, changing rules and workouts mid weekend? Poorly marked trail on the last day ( I am sure nobody from Fredericton lost their way), and well those writing the workouts competing in them? For those of you who think there was nothing wrong with the weekend please give your head a shake!

131. davelaemers replied to comment from Derek...

May 5, 2009 6:46 PM

I was wondering if someone was going to bring up the poorly marked trail. One of our athletes who thought he had a good chance to win the 5km run (his 5km time is 17ish) got lost for 5-10 minutes and ended up in the middle of the pack.

I think it is important test courses like this with people who have never run the trail to see if there are any confusing points. We have also learned that it is important to test workouts to make sure at least some of the athletes can finish within the time constraints.

May 5, 2009 7:00 PM

I was the 3rd person to do the trail run. I had no tracks from people before me to follow, and no one ahead of me after the first 5 minutes to follow. I did not get lost once. If anyone got lost, it's because they didn't look where they were going. The trail was well marked the entire way through.

May 6, 2009 2:37 AM

Poorly marked trail? Seriously? 5-10 minutes? Derek and Dave come on, give us a break.

As long as you kept your eyes open and your head moving you could follow the trail with no problems. Yes I lost the tail myself but you stop immediately and look. With in a second I found it and was off again. Using this as an excuse is even more sad then the other excuses I've been reading.

Now if you wanted to complain about those hills Jeremy threw in after the tire flip I'll help you beat him up at the swing set at recess. Those things were pure evil.

That being said the classiest act of the weekend goes to the athlete who started the run after I did. I found this out later from one of the judges, I think he tried to tell me as well at the finish line but at the time I was still trying to recover from that run.

With two of the events in the run being optional a lot of athletes didn't do the flip or keg press, I went out to do everything for the sheer challenge of it. I was struggling through the keg press, you wouldn't think a mere 100 lbs could be so hellish, when he caught up to me. When I was done I went back to the run, still in the lead, and didn't think anything of it. He easily passed me on the downhill section leading up to the pit.

I found out later that he saw me swearing through the keg section and said to the judges that he would not pass me when I was doing them as he wasn't and he gave me the lead back and we settled it in a foot race.

I wish I could remember his name so I could thank him personally for the very classy act but this is the best I can do. The first pint is on me if we meet up again.

134. Greg wrote...

May 6, 2009 2:51 AM

Anthony,
You blew it kid. You got greedy and tried to take a short cut. Short cuts don't work. You should know that! If you had played fair, you might have made the cut. Now you are not going. If you do go, you'll be the laughing stock of Aromas and everyone will know you got their out of charity from HQ.

135. Jeremy wrote...

May 6, 2009 5:29 AM

The run was designed so that if you did not pay attention, you would lose time. The importance of paying attention to where you were going was brought up in the pre-run speech.

The reason why not many people are complaining, is because only a few had real problems. I was on the course the entire time, and only one person expressed that it was "hard to find your way". Everyone else said they had to pay attention, but felt the course was well marked.

And I was the only one who knew the entire course, and it was flagged well enough that I could follow it in either direction, in the dark without a headlamp, provided I paid attention.

May 6, 2009 5:59 AM

I'm from Fredericton and the closest I'd ever gotten to this course was a drive by on the old Trans Canada. The trail run was designed to test a number of skills, not just running fast. Everyone got the same information/warnings before starting. CrossFit requires mental fitness as well as pure physical fitness and for sure, if your head wasn't in this one, you could get lost, twist an ankle, fall down a ridge, etc. This was not a road race and those of us who paid attention to the course had only split seconds when we lost the trail, slowed down to pick it up again, and kept on trucking. Perhaps the person that got lost is colour blind and couldn't see the bright pink & blue ribbons tied to every second tree?!

137. Eric Martel wrote...

May 6, 2009 7:15 AM

Alright, I think after 136 posts we've pretty much seen all your points of view, and I don't think anyone will be able to convince the other side to change their minds, so let's agree to disagree and move on!

Let's just focus our positive energies on supporting Jason, Chad, Roch, Danielle, Alexandra, and Megan!

138. NorCal Representin' wrote...

May 6, 2009 10:24 AM

/flameon

All of this is going to be moot come July anyway since NorCal competitors will be dominating all other regions. They even had athletes not qualify who would've smoked the participants from other qualifiers. Life's tough in a region with so many fire-breathers. ;)

Oh, and stop crying or post an address of where to send the vagisil.

/flameoff

May 6, 2009 11:04 AM

Jason, I think it's funny that you call them out for losing their way, and then mention the fact that you got lost as well! I literally laughed out loud for a good 5-10 min.
(ok, maybe that's an exaggeration.)

This is the first year we have ever done anything like this, and Im sure for the organizers out there, it seems like we all know how to do it better.
That is not the case.
This was the test bed, and now we just need to wash the sheets, iron out the wrinkles, and make it before mom and dad get home.

Still, as long as this thread has continued, I feel like the most important points have been lost.

We need to figure out a way to fix the appearance of impropriety, so that outsiders (and apparently insiders) wont look at this whole test of "the fittest man alive" and call foul!

I think it would be really cool for "Region A" to come up with WODs, fully evaluate them, and then send them to the designated affiliate in "Region B" hosting the qualie, a week out.
This should be plenty of time to organize an affiliate, and have a few days to become fully accustomed to the movements, exercises, form requirements etc.

Then no one could claim that anyone had prior knowledge, or was stacking the WODs in their favor.
Aside from that it would create some friendly rivalry between regions!

Is this plausible? Does anyone see any holes in this idea? If so poke away!

140. Jeff MacRae wrote...

May 6, 2009 11:54 AM

I was the very first person out on Sunday for the run. I guarantee that I had more scraps and cuts on me than anyone else when I finished due to breaking sticks and running through places where I was the only one to ever step foot, besides Jeremy who tied the ribbons to the trees. There were no tracks and some places did not remotely resemble a "trail". This being the case I still found it very easy to navigate. As long as you paid attention there was no problem figuring out where you were suppose to run! In my opinion the run was probably the best part of the weekend!(and I am definitely not a runner) Well done Jeremy!

141. Brad Biggar wrote...

May 6, 2009 4:22 PM

Lets take a moment and look at some of the positives from the weekend. Here is some video from the event.

http://www.vimeo.com/4517962

142. Louise Hodge wrote...

May 6, 2009 6:19 PM

The trail run was amazing!!!!! My fav of the weekend and if you looked up then you would not have been able to get lost. I was the 4th person to leave for the run and no one was infront of me to follow and I had NO problem following the bright pink flagging tape.
I am also glad that I got to speak with Jodi and Toni on Monday. There are always two sides to every story. It made things much more clear and I left Fredericton feeling satisfied and inspired by all of the machines I watched give it all they had.
Hope to See you in California Toni and Jodi.
Roch and I will be screaming at ya!!!
Louise Hodge Crossfit Montreal

143. Kevin Wood wrote...

May 6, 2009 7:06 PM

Awesome video Brad!!

144. Holla wrote...

May 6, 2009 8:35 PM

Anthony, put on your man pants. Enough with the explanations. It's obvious what you were doing. It wasn't against the rules but it was against the spirit of the rules. The result is that you get to sit on the side lines and watch better men compete.

Live and learn. Don't play cute games. We're not fools.

May 7, 2009 2:07 AM

Outstanding video Brad! And thank for you not putting my deadlift in there. :)

147. n replied to comment from McCord...

May 7, 2009 5:01 AM

SO you're saying we should allow the Olympic Organizing Committee free access to the events of their choice cause they organized?

148. Laughing wrote...

May 7, 2009 6:39 PM

Bainbridge got owned. Mess with the bull, get the horns. You got got.

BWAHAHAHAAA

149. Tom Fetter replied to comment from Laughing...

May 8, 2009 6:19 AM

Isn't it curious that "Laughing" and "Holla" have what appears to be the same e-mail address? And the same abrasive way of expressing their opinion?

I wonder if there are other, similarly "unique" posters earlier in the thread.

150. Darren replied to comment from Laughing...

May 8, 2009 1:02 PM

Hey 'Laughing' - as a fairly new member of CrossFit I've got to say I'm stunned by your demeaning portryal of the Bainbridges (or anyone for that matter).

It's people just like you - the ones who like to tar and feather in obscurity - who tarnish Crossfit.

151. McCord replied to comment from n...

May 8, 2009 2:56 PM

152. rareid wrote...

May 12, 2009 9:41 AM

I find it funny that those who complain the loudest seem to be the ones who left points on the board. I realize that many 20 somethings grew up playing sports where both teams "won" and no one lost, but there are winners and losers at the qualifiers. If you look at the final results, you'll notice that one of the posters complaining gave up approximately 25 points on the deadlift WOD but only made up approximately 4 points on the last WOD. I don't know about the rest of you but that seems to point out that Anthony simply is a more well rounded athlete than those who lost to him. And for those who complain that there should not be a 1RM event at a qualifier, take some of Rippetoe's advice and get stronger or quit crying.