With the recent announcements from CrossFit regarding changes to the 2025 season, some athletes are exploring alternative avenues for competition, placing less emphasis—if any at all—on the Open and the CrossFit Games season as a whole.

While the top athletes in the sport excel in both in-person and online competitions, at the mid-tier and local level, the profile of athletes who perform well in online competitions often differs from those who thrive in local, in-person events. This disparity largely comes down to the types of workouts, movements, and equipment used in these formats.

Online competitions, constrained to the four walls of a gym and a more limited equipment list, generally rely on one key element: volume. Over the years, the volume of movements in online competitions has increased substantially. For example, in the very first Open workout (2011), top scores included 270–300 double-unders in a 10-minute workout. Seven years later, in 18.3, the best scores reached 800 double-unders in a 14-minute workout.

In contrast, in-person local events often incorporate challenges that cannot be replicated in an online format. It’s not uncommon for up to 20% of the testing body to consist of a single movement, such as a running-only event like a 5k trail run.

In this week’s episode, we explore the differences between these types of competitions and discuss whether it’s worth adjusting your training to prepare for more in-person local competitions.

Listen Here:

Show Notes:

  • [2:00] A renewed interest in other competitions following the CrossFit Games 2025 season announcement
  • [3:00] Key differences between online and in-person competitions
  • [8:00] Equipment considerations for online competitions
  • [12:30] How running translates into general aerobic fitness and conditioning
  • [16:00] The importance of volume tolerance versus general fitness
  • [20:30] Using online competitions to build training volume early in your career
  • [23:30] The trade-off of building volume for movements that are less frequently tested