A new definition of fitness' components

S

Spartan 117

0
Hi everyone,

I know this sounds ridiculous, but with so many fitness products, supplements, training methods, etc. out there I feel like I don't even know what exactly fitness constitutes anymore. Its like the more details I take in, the more I lose sight of the big picture, does anybody else feel that way? My personal view right now is that a fitness component must:
1. aid in both health/enjoyability of life and athletic performance across many sports
2. be a trainable trait, not something you either are born with or aren't

I've also heard of a 5-part model for fitness, with cardiorespiratory fitness, body composition, flexibility, muscle endurance, and muscle strength being the 5 components. But that model just doesn't seem right since shouldn't things like muscle explosiveness, running ability, balance, agility, coordination, reaction time, and speed also count as fitness? I feel so lost.
 
It is hard to define what fitness is for a broad base. Fitness, to me, is best described in the eye of the beholder. What I feel is fit is totally different that what others feel for themselves. Yes, everything you described can go into the measurement of fitness. The biggest variable depends on the desired outcome of being fit. For instance, a body builder can be described as fit and so can an olympic marathon runner. Two totally different body types, two totally different training programs. Both considered very fit in their genre, but lacking very good scores in those opposite of each other. A very fit 90 year old may mean that he can walk 5 miles without a rest or assistance.

Basically, when determining fitness, first look at the desired outcome then chose what variables can apply.
 
Arobe said:
A very fit 90 year old may mean that he can walk 5 miles without a rest or assistance.
Click to expand...

That may be above average, but nowhere near the limit of fitness, since Jack LaLanne says that he will swim the Catalina Channel on his 95th birthday.
 
Spartan, your definition of fitness is what you should pursue. It sounds like Crossfit-type workouts are for you. Their philosophy is to train 10 levels of fitness to gain an overall level of fitness.



There's a reason why the SEALS use crossfit principles to train their soldiers.



I can relate to the reasons you listed. Which is why I use both crossfit type training for metabolic conditioning and general physical preparedness, while I use more traditional strength training to get stronger. They work well together.
 
Ya, I guess I should stop trying to settle for any one definition of "fitness". People who want to incorporate too many components run the risk of becoming a jack-of-all-trades but master of none and specialists run a risk of being really good at some things but really bad at others. Ya, that crossfit model of fitness is well-rounded enough to fit my preferences, thanks for posting a link!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top