IGX

Resident Quack wrote:@Fers...you are funding the future target of a lawsuit, set up by an inside job from the beginning. Get it yet???

Gin Master wrote:On second thought, Johnny, don't introduce yourself. Just don't post anymore. You don't gain admission by praising the membership. You gain it by posting porn, hate, and hopefully a little bit of knowledge and decent prose.

We're here to hate, not entertain. But when you're hating on a such a dysfunctional group of narcissistic, promiscuous fucktards, we entertain by default. It's all about botox, silicon, pvc, gin, money, and the clap. Their poster girl is Typhoid Mary with big tits and a good deadlift. Shit, they're parading amputees and porn stars around at their Gaymes. They're led by a mumbling invalid who fell off some monkey bars and into a bottle of Tanqueray back in 1977. We're not making this shit up. We're just chronicling it.

Gin Master wrote:On second thought, Johnny, don't introduce yourself. Just don't post anymore. You don't gain admission by praising the membership. You gain it by posting porn, hate, and hopefully a little bit of knowledge and decent prose.

We're here to hate, not entertain. But when you're hating on a such a dysfunctional group of narcissistic, promiscuous fucktards, we entertain by default. It's all about botox, silicon, pvc, gin, money, and the clap. Their poster girl is Typhoid Mary with big tits and a good deadlift. Shit, they're parading amputees and porn stars around at their Gaymes. They're led by a mumbling invalid who fell off some monkey bars and into a bottle of Tanqueray back in 1977. We're not making this shit up. We're just chronicling it.

The Bastard Son of the Shafman wrote:Second, only PeeDee wants to email affiliates, probably because he feels betrayed and assraped by the state of the art folks over at the @F forums and their teeny tiny sneering fascist wannabe moderator. As the collective cum of the @F nation drips out his torn rectum, he feels the need to lash out. That Craigs list thing didn't work out well for him either, but he does have a brand new paying gig as a gut puncher.

Gant Grimes wrote:

Robert McBee wrote:If we want to generalize then I'll say that the worst about Crossfit is still infinitely better than the programming at the chain gyms.

Let's not go that far. The programming at chain gyms is an insurance-friendly, low risk way to shed a few pounds and "shape up" provided you don't eat crap. The worst of CF leaves you with an overuse injury or in the hospital with rhabdo.

You are correct in that CF programming can generally help a person along the path of "increasing blah blah blah." You will adapt to whatever time and modal domain in which you are working. The trick is to do it efficiently. You can do a half-ass smattering of random exercises and post some pretty decent times after 2-3 years. Or you can follow a good program and get there a lot faster. Justin Laseck, the guy at my gym, has his CF class kicking ass after only a few months. He's done this with a smart, focused program of strength lifting and smart metcons. Other trainers take a lot longer (or just never get there).

"Increasing work capacity across broad time and modal domains" is a nice tagline once you figure out what the hell it really means. But at some point you ask yourself, are all time and modal domains important? Personally, I'm just going to work on the cool ones. Let the other guys work on the sucky ones.

Kraj blog wrote:You need to train for what you do. If you're a fireman, practice pulling hoses, chopping stuff, carrying around heavy shit, operating in low-oxygen environments like Arby's bathrooms, etc. THAT'S what you're going to need. You're not going to be rushing out to a towering five-story inferno and say "Hey, Sarge, how many of these PVC pipes do you want me to toss up there to the victims?!" Train for REALITY. Put on a weight vest and run up flights of stairs. Just don't wear a long beard and yell threatening phrases in Arabic while you do it. Other people in the building may take it the wrong way.

If you're a policeman, practice shooting, running sprints, working on your reflexes and reaction time, planting shit on black people, etc. If you're a surgeon, practice having a steady hand, controlling your breath, being under pressure for long periods of time, etc. If you're a truck driver, practice keeping your ass from outgrowing your seat. If you're an office worker, practice keeping your knees strong and your back healthy, etc.

Resident Quack wrote: From the @F pet attorney:
http://www.crossfit.com/mt-archive2/004664.html

Some final points on the RRG:

1 - Folks need to understand that this isn't about HQ. CF HQ could buy a monster insurance policy from Lloyd's and protect itself...and leave the Affiliates twisting in the wind to the whim of the Affil's own insurance company. Instead, CF HQ has sunk an inordinate amount of money, energy, and time (my own included) into creating the structure so that the Affiliates can have the opportunity to protect themselves through this vehicle.
2 - I've had numerous conversation with people in other industries involving risk management who have done something similar (either a Captive Insurance Company or an RRG) and they all reported being exceedingly happen with the ability to control the defense of their industry and malpractice claims (think doctors and other professionals). This is not some exotic pyramid scheme - it's just that some of you haven't ever been sued for malpractice and don't understand what it means to be a "professional" offering a service where the client relies upon your discretion - and can sue you when that discretion can be questioned. (I'm not trying to talk down to anyone here, but I didn't know squat about PLI until I became a lawyer).
3 - This idea of the professionalization of training is at the heart of what CF is and why it's both enormously successful AND makes Affiliates a good target for the predation of unscrupulous plaintiffs (I won't put it on the lawyers, that's too easy, 'cuz there are no lawyers unless there are plaintiffs willing to claim injury and sue for compensation. Think about that prior to the next lawyer joke).
4 - If the Affiliates and trainers don't see the benefit, that's their choice. Being sued is an "existential threat" - right up until the moment you're sued. Just like getting in a car accident was someone else's problem and you didn't need insurance if you were a "good driver" - and then the states made it mandatory and we all reluctantly pay even though we know it's likely we will be in a scrape here or there.

Hope this adds some perspective.

dale

Comment #79 - Posted by: Dale_Saran at May 6, 2009 7:00 AM

Hebrew Hammer wrote:

Resident Quack wrote: From the @F pet attorney:
http://www.crossfit.com/mt-archive2/004664.html

Some final points on the RRG:

1 - Folks need to understand that this isn't about HQ. CF HQ could buy a monster insurance policy from Lloyd's and protect itself...and leave the Affiliates twisting in the wind to the whim of the Affil's own insurance company. Instead, CF HQ has sunk an inordinate amount of money, energy, and time (my own included) into creating the structure so that the Affiliates can have the opportunity to protect themselves through this vehicle.
2 - I've had numerous conversation with people in other industries involving risk management who have done something similar (either a Captive Insurance Company or an RRG) and they all reported being exceedingly happen with the ability to control the defense of their industry and malpractice claims (think doctors and other professionals). This is not some exotic pyramid scheme - it's just that some of you haven't ever been sued for malpractice and don't understand what it means to be a "professional" offering a service where the client relies upon your discretion - and can sue you when that discretion can be questioned. (I'm not trying to talk down to anyone here, but I didn't know squat about PLI until I became a lawyer).
3 - This idea of the professionalization of training is at the heart of what CF is and why it's both enormously successful AND makes Affiliates a good target for the predation of unscrupulous plaintiffs (I won't put it on the lawyers, that's too easy, 'cuz there are no lawyers unless there are plaintiffs willing to claim injury and sue for compensation. Think about that prior to the next lawyer joke).
4 - If the Affiliates and trainers don't see the benefit, that's their choice. Being sued is an "existential threat" - right up until the moment you're sued. Just like getting in a car accident was someone else's problem and you didn't need insurance if you were a "good driver" - and then the states made it mandatory and we all reluctantly pay even though we know it's likely we will be in a scrape here or there.

Hope this adds some perspective.

dale

Comment #79 - Posted by: Dale_Saran at May 6, 2009 7:00 AM

There are so many things so wrong with this quote that it is hard to know where to begin. One is that lawyers should know better than to try to sell interests in a company by promoting them over the internet, and certainly should know better than to offer his own sales pitch. Insurance companies may have exemptions from securities laws, but this is flagrantly abusive. Also, for those who want to read about a similar project done in Ohio by a law firm and doctors for malpractice insurance, google PIE Mutual Insurance Company and Ohio.

Is this Dale Saran the lawyer who drafted the offering and put together the RRG? I thought someone said it was the Wilson Sonsini firm. And is he also the lawyer who will be paid to defend these suits?

Mickey O'neil wrote:Kraj, that was fantastic.

The killer instinct is that little voice inside us all that says "Hey, your enemy is down, kick him in the balls!"

JohnnyBadAss wrote: That was exactly the kind of greeting that I knew I'd get and which makes IGx a place I am proud to call myself a member of.

Gin Master wrote:

Hebrew Hammer wrote:

Resident Quack wrote: From the @F pet attorney:
http://www.crossfit.com/mt-archive2/004664.html

Some final points on the RRG:

1 - Folks need to understand that this isn't about HQ. CF HQ could buy a monster insurance policy from Lloyd's and protect itself...and leave the Affiliates twisting in the wind to the whim of the Affil's own insurance company. Instead, CF HQ has sunk an inordinate amount of money, energy, and time (my own included) into creating the structure so that the Affiliates can have the opportunity to protect themselves through this vehicle.
2 - I've had numerous conversation with people in other industries involving risk management who have done something similar (either a Captive Insurance Company or an RRG) and they all reported being exceedingly happen with the ability to control the defense of their industry and malpractice claims (think doctors and other professionals). This is not some exotic pyramid scheme - it's just that some of you haven't ever been sued for malpractice and don't understand what it means to be a "professional" offering a service where the client relies upon your discretion - and can sue you when that discretion can be questioned. (I'm not trying to talk down to anyone here, but I didn't know squat about PLI until I became a lawyer).
3 - This idea of the professionalization of training is at the heart of what CF is and why it's both enormously successful AND makes Affiliates a good target for the predation of unscrupulous plaintiffs (I won't put it on the lawyers, that's too easy, 'cuz there are no lawyers unless there are plaintiffs willing to claim injury and sue for compensation. Think about that prior to the next lawyer joke).
4 - If the Affiliates and trainers don't see the benefit, that's their choice. Being sued is an "existential threat" - right up until the moment you're sued. Just like getting in a car accident was someone else's problem and you didn't need insurance if you were a "good driver" - and then the states made it mandatory and we all reluctantly pay even though we know it's likely we will be in a scrape here or there.

Hope this adds some perspective.

dale

Comment #79 - Posted by: Dale_Saran at May 6, 2009 7:00 AM

There are so many things so wrong with this quote that it is hard to know where to begin. One is that lawyers should know better than to try to sell interests in a company by promoting them over the internet, and certainly should know better than to offer his own sales pitch. Insurance companies may have exemptions from securities laws, but this is flagrantly abusive. Also, for those who want to read about a similar project done in Ohio by a law firm and doctors for malpractice insurance, google PIE Mutual Insurance Company and Ohio.

Is this Dale Saran the lawyer who drafted the offering and put together the RRG? I thought someone said it was the Wilson Sonsini firm. And is he also the lawyer who will be paid to defend these suits?

Couch used to say that Wilson Sonsini backed him on the trademark stuff. They're certainly a good firm, and I can see someone throwing him a bone in the early years, but you don't do pro bono for operation the size that @F is now. Even if they are still doing TM shit (if they ever were), I can't imagine they'd get involved in the RRG stuff.

I don't know if Dale drafted the offering. I don't imagine he did. He has said he works for HQ now. I don't know if he's going to be a corporate counsel type or part of the RRG. I can't speak to his legal acumen (he seems decent enough), but he filters everything through the haze of kool-aid surrounding him. He drank early and often.

Comparing this to a physician's RRG is asinine. Medmal claims are extremely expensive to pursue, and many states have capped recovery, basically wiping out any claims except those made by high-earners cut down in their prime. These are relatively cheap and the proof is much more direct (and obvious).

There will be a membership agreement that will state how capital will be returned to each member. A member will not be able to sell their part of the RRG to another member or any other individual. I am working with the Montana Attorney on this document and will have something for review within the next few days. You are correct regarding no interest. The capital contribution is not a savings account. Only principal will be returned and if that member is due a dividend then that too will be paid.

Nexo Insurance is currently able to write the "wraparound"/complementary policy to the one (the E&O) that the RRG will write when it's stood up. Thus, you could get that policy today if you're a trainer or affiliate. Solo trainers may also buy in.

If you want to buy the complementary policy today with an eye toward the RRG policy for E&O/rhabdo later, contact Gary Rimler or Art Baldwin at Nexo Insurance. Go to the contact page for email addies. They're great guys and helped us craft this whole thing.

JamesonBushmill wrote:http://www.board.crossfit.com/showthrea ... 227&page=3

Phillip Garrison
Banned

Profile:
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mesa AZ
Posts: 1,382
Re: Hitler hates CrossFit & Thrusters

SS wrote:Running joke from the IGX forums. I won't post the link, search if you're really curious. Funny vid though.

4. While CrossFit is not edited or censored, we do reserve the right to remove any postings that are considered inappropriate.

JamesonBushmill wrote:http://www.board.crossfit.com/showthrea ... 227&page=3

Phillip Garrison
Banned

Profile:
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mesa AZ
Posts: 1,382
Re: Hitler hates CrossFit & Thrusters



Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Matteson
Notice he didn't disagree that "Coach is a brilliant fitness expert."

He avoided the subject by saying that "Couch is a gin-swilling, pompous blowhard."


xxxxxxxxxx


Last edited by Lynne Pitts : Yesterday at 04:14 PM. Reason: AUP


Does anyone know what this blasphemous redacted comment was?

As an aside, I know they are banning people for farting out of the wrong hole, but the sheer stupidity of getting rid of someone who has 1300 posts is mind bogglingly ignorant. This guy is obviously their target market, if he thought enough of the place to post 1300 times. I would think he warranted a warning, or just having the post edited, as CuntE did, rather than tanking his ass.

I am surprised the hubris hasn't worn off and this bitch has realized that if you get rid of everyone, there is no one left to pay for your fucking 1000 dollar glorified lectures. She strikes me as someone who thinks the gravy train will never end, and there is no limit to stupid people who will embrace this crossshite. But the reality is that eventually people start wising up if you treat them like crap.

The right way to string them along is to massage the suckers and rubes with faux niceties, and pretend to be their cohort and friend.

Obviously, her looks aside, she was never a carny.

Sofa King wrote: From what I can gather, he said something like, "I always thought Couch was a rum-swilling pompous. . ."
An obvious joke that stuck in the Pitts' craw. The little despot is just pissed that neither sex will have her, no matter how hard she tries.

Regarding the RRG:

At the end of the video, the guys says he wants to put 5K into the RRG because it is going to make money.

How exactly are they going to make money? On the premiums charged to crossfiters? Who else are they going to sell insurance too? Because if you buy stock, pay a preimum and get a dividend from the company, you're really only getting part of your premium back. You're not making any money.

Also, they said the RRG is better than a normal insurance company because a normal insurance company only cares about making money.

So RRG is going to deviate from the business plan of a normal insurance company yet still make money?

The idea of "never settling" sounds amateurish. If you have a claim that is obviously legit, your lawyer isn't going to take it to trial. You will settle.

Again, the assumption is that there will never be a legit claim filed against Crossfit. That's wishful thinking.
Comment #17 - Posted by: Leroy at May 6, 2009 6:59 PM
--
What's up cf'ers. I have a couple questions about the RRG video and site if anyone wants to comment.

Based on what I've seen/heard, the RRG sounds like it is designed to hire lawyers in the event that someone gets sued. This doesn't sound like an insurance company to me, but more like a legal defense fund.

An insurance company collects premiums and invests them. It uses that money to meet capital requirements in the event of a payment, like an insurance claim. It isn't completely clear from the site what those premiums will be and how much coverage will be offered. I know that the RRG is looking for its initial capitalization, but this other information is important.

Lastly, insurers typically like to insure against measurable quantities. That is, in a sufficiently large population, the number of people with profile y who are going to die at age x is relatively certain. Some will live longer and some less time, but on average that is the age a person of a certain profile will die. That is how an insurance company determines its premiums and whether it insures people, making it a low risk proposition for the insurance company. Is it possible to determine such statistics with CrossFit, when an activity like rhabdo is both trying to be avoided and may or may not have statistically relevant information as to how often it occurs? Is there a measurable statistic for how often people get sufficiently injured to sue, and then actually do sue their gym?

I love CF and love that it's at the cutting edge of fitness, but I don't understand this component and would like to. Thanks.

Comment #19 - Posted by: BRzl at May 6, 2009 7:09 PM
--
Comment #35 -$200 of risk capital into a type of business that almost always makes money - hell, yeah, sign me up.

Benny, you should read March's journal:

"The CF-RRG will not exist to make money."

You are NOT going to make money by investing in the CF-RRG.

I watched that video and was a little dismayed with the scare tactics and bullying. Also, I don't see how the RRG is going to hire "the best attorneys in SF" and "refuse to settle."

So long as you're paying your attorney's bills, he'll be happy not to settle. The other attorney will be happy to not settle too. Maybe the RRG should find out how a losing plaintiff's attorney gets paid in California and you'll understand why PI attorneys love a stubborn client who will allow them to run up fees.

Comment #40 - Posted by: Steve at May 6, 2009 11:13 PM
--
Re: RRG

Refusing to settle in all cases? What if a trainer/affiliate is blatantly negligent? Better to settle than waste money defending and having to pay out anyway + legal fees. The RRG is a great idea, but some of the stuff in that video seems a bit off, they should have had one of the lawyers there to answer questions.

Comment #43 - Posted by: grambo at May 6, 2009 11:32 PM
--
Trying to do the right work and make a well informed decision about whether to go with the RRG, I consulted an attorney, who reviewed my waiver, that has specific language that indemnifies our affiliate from "errors and omissions", spells out the specific risks associated with and more unique to CrossFit, and reviewed my policy, issued by an insurer that specializes in working with the CrossFit community.

She said (she's a CrossFitter) that the risks associated with a potential CrossFit case will stem from the opposing side posing strong arguments that attack the expertise of the trainer, specifically along the lines of length of experience, training certifications, accepted standards within the fitness industry, etc.

She mentioned that the Level 1 solely as the credential because of a lack of practical examination leaves a window of opportunity for an enterprising attorney, and that a deposition would typically grill the trainer on scope of expertise. She mentioned further that it is ridiculous and unethical to present to the lay public that a settlement would never occur, this is contingent on the specifics of the case, all of which are unique.

The RRG still sounds like a unique idea, but it's a little disconcerting that the scare tactics are being used. It's taking on a flavor of "be with us or be against us."

Further, as most of our clients are avid perusers of the board, as well as the mainsite, the heavy promotion of the RRG smacks a little of the same scenario of an airline greeting you with parachutes at the check in gate.

Perhaps the marketing could be directed through emails to affiliates and trainers.

That being said, CrossFit is the best thing out there.

Comment #54 - Posted by: Erik at May 7, 2009 5:47 AM
--
"Once you settle, it sets that precedent, then all those lawyers come out, they sue every one of us starting at the smallest ones...now you can't get insurance, now you're out of business."

What is this but a scare tactic? The Mimms case happened already, have we seen this spate of lawsuits? Do they know that "bogus lawsuits" are actually initiated by injured people and not a coordinated throng of lawyers?

If the RRG is such a good idea, why do they have to pitch it so aggressively? They don't even let the guy finish his questions before four people are telling him a story of doom and gloom. Starting the discussion with "What's the holdup?" sets a pretty aggressive tone. CrossFitters have a pretty independent streak, and I'm sure this raises as many red flags as it allays.

Comment #56 - Posted by: Richard at May 7, 2009 5:58 AM
--
How in the world can Crossfit claim that they will never settle?

*Lots* of affiliates have *bad* trainers. Just because someone is Level 1 certified does not mean that will never cause a person harm. Maybe the trainer in the Mimms case wasn't at fault. But surely we can imagine an affiliate trainer making a mistake and causing a client injury.

What will the Crossfit insurance company do in a case where the affiliate trainer *does* cause injury? Not settle, even though the trainer was at fault? That's unethical and doesn't make financial sense either, since they will likely lose in court.

An insurance company is *supposed* to pay valid claims. I don't know what an RRG is, but a group that says they will never pay a valid claim is not an insurance company.
Comment #68 - Posted by: Very confused at May 7, 2009 6:58 AM
--
Saw the RRG video and have to agree that they are bullying tactics. Any good lawyer whether defense or Plaintiff, will give you the strenghts and weaknesses of your case, the odds of winning or losing, and the exposure you will face. To tell someone lawyers cost 50 to 60 thousand or more to hire is a bunch of bull...if that were the case, think of how many "cases" this RRG would be able to defend (50K x 10), and now the RRG is out of money...and that was for the lawyer, what if the Plaintiff wins his/her 5 million dollar case??
I have seen some bad advice, but this takes it to a whole new level.
Where are the lawsuits? where are the bus loads of Plaintiffs attorneys filing suits? Any insurance company will give you an attorney to defend you from the lawsuit, and if they are worth their salt, will file the appropriate documents to get the suit thrown out if it is bogus.

Comment #84 - Posted by: legal eagle at May 7, 2009 9:16 AM
--

She strikes me as someone who thinks the gravy train will never end, and there is no limit to stupid people who will embrace this crossshite.

Thud wrote:Seems like couch must always maintain any problems are the fault of trainers who go off the reservation and the the program itself. Seems axiomatic that couch will throw anyone under the bus to save the program.

Rick Ross FAQ wrote:Is there actually a kind of mindset within potentially unsafe or destructive groups?
Yes. There seems to be a typical mindset within most destructive cults. This is often characterized by black and white thinking, a low tolerance of ambiguity and a relentlessly judgementa1 attitude. Members of such a group often think in "we, they" opposing terms regarding those outside their group. This mindset frequently produces feelings of superiority and/or spiritual elitism, claims of supposed "persecution" and unreasonable fears. These fears typically concern the outside world and the consequences of disagreeing with or leaving the group.

Paranoid delusion guy wrote:CrossFit as a whole (you and me) is waging war. Our battleground is the health and fitness landscape. Our opponent is the Globo Gym. What's at stake is the future of fitness in the world. Oh, yeah, the winner's share of a $78 billion industry.

And here's why the RRG is of vital importance aside from insuring your a$$ doesn't get handed to you if someone does one-too-many rhabdo-inducing pullups after indulging in their birthday bash...

Our opponent will not go quietly into the night.

To think the Globo Gyms might just let us take what they have come to expect (income) is inane. Globos make money (not necessarily profit, nor fitness, but that is another post) and that money is, I suspect, being used to line the pockets of two major players. The conventional insurance industry and government officials are those players.

Why?

Because, in battle, an opponent will do anything to win. Especially if their lively hood (again, income) is on the line. You would too, maybe.

Here’s how it works… a $78 billion industry is being threatened by an upstart through loss of market share. Market share they cannot get their hands on. And due to the effectiveness of the upstart the Globos will NEVER get that market share back. And it’s only getting worse. See the upstart is growing at an unheard of rate. 300% over the pat 18 months. So the Globos read something about this Rhabdo case in the paper and immediately put a call into their insurance providers. Yes, plural, they use many providers and pay them a lot of money. And on that call the Globo tells the insurance company to “do something about the upstart because they are threatening our cushy lifestyle, er, I mean causing the permanent damage done by the evil rhabdo.” The insurance providers read the writing on the wall… their biggest client is risking loss of business which threatens the profit of the insurance companies. So the insurance companies have a dozen lobbyists in Washington DC. And those lobbyists lean on the legislators who are sympathetic to their cause.

How long do you think it will be, if we don’t take hold of our future, until nonsensical laws are passed covering the health and fitness industry? And don’t be surprised if adherence to those laws is only able to be met by large companies with deep checkbooks.