EQOL Journal (2022) 14(2): 13-19

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Effects of CrossFit training program and traditional gym training on

morphological characteristics of men

Ljubiša Kićanović

• Bogdan Živanović

✉ • Mila Vukadinović Jurišić

•

Jelena Obradović

Received: 20

May, 2022 DOI: 10.31382/eqol.221202

Accepted: 4

November, 2022

Abstract

CrossFit is recognized as one of the fastest-growing

high-intensity functional training modes in the

world. The study aimed to compare the effects of the

CrossFit training program and traditional gym

training on anthropometric measurements in

healthy, active men. The study sample consisted of

50 participants who were divided into two groups,

22 participants who practiced the CrossFit training

program (CFT group; 28.64±2.04 years; body height

181.74±6.96 cm; body mass: 72.75±5.53 kg), and 28

participants who applied traditional gym training

(GT group; 26.89±2.99 years; body height:

184.52±7.80 cm; body mass: 74.86±8.48 kg). A total

of ten anthropometric measurements (Body height,

Body mass, BMI, Subscapular, Abdominal and

Triceps skinfolds, Chest, Forearm, Upper arm, and

Thigh circumferences) were monitored before and

after twelve weeks. The Shapiro-Wilk test was used

to test the normality of distribution. The multivariate

analysis covariance (MANCOVA) and analysis of

covariance (ANCOVA) were used to analyze the

data. The results of this study indicated that there

were statistically significant differences between

groups in the Circumference of the upper arm

(p=0.02), Thigh circumference (p=0.00), Chest

circumference (p=0.03), and Subscapular skinfold

(p=0.00). The findings of this study demonstrated

that healthy, active males who participated in the 12-

week CrossFit training program improved their

anthropometric measurements more than those

who trained in the traditional gym training.

Keywords Skinfolds • Body circumferences •

BMI.

Introduction

CrossFit (CF) training is high-intensity functional

training that combines aerobic and anaerobic

exercises which are performed quickly and

contain multiple repetitions with or without a

pause between series (Feito, Burrows, Tabb,

Ciesielka 2020). The CF training is often

characterized by the execution of exercises

integrating large muscle groups (i.e., squat, push,

press, etc.) or more specifically resistance training

with free weights or body mass performed with

high intensity with short rest intervals (Weston,

Taylor, Batterham & Hopkins, 2014). Initially,

this program was designed for people whose work

required a certain level of physical form as well as

muscle strength, like soldiers, policemen and

firefighters (Weisenthal, Beck, Maloney,

DeHaven, & Giordano, 2014). Because the CF

training includes weightlifting (squats,

deadlifting, power snatch, power clean) with a

large number of repetitions during a short period,

gymnastic movements (pull-ups, hand-walking,

push-ups on the wall), and aerobic exercises

(running, swimming, rowing) (Longe, 2012).

However, in the last few years, CF training has

also been applied to physically healthy boys of 16-

17 years (Petrova, Bala, Masliak, & Mameshina,

2022), overweight men aged 21.6 ± 1.6 years

(Dehghanzadeh Suraki, Mohsenzade, Tibana, &

✉

bogdanzivanovic97@gmail.com

University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Sport and

Physical Education, Novi Sad, Serbia

EQOL Journal (2022) 14(2): 13-19

Ahmadizad, 2021) and healthy active men aged 20.8

± 2.0 (Özbay, 2019).

The basic principle of CF training is based on the

uniform application of modalities that include

weightlifting, gymnastics, and metabolic

conditioning (Crawford, Drake, Carper, DeBlauw &

Heinrich, 2018). The CF program aims to choose

methods that will have an impact on the partial

segment improvement and which will later improve

overall fitness development. thehe Each complex in

CF training is referred to as "training of the day",

which is short for WOD ("Workout of the Day").

Most of these complexes bear a certain name (late

soldiers, policemen, firefighters). These complexes

are considered as official CF training and their

number is steadily increasing (Crossfit, 2016). Since

CrossFit is a relatively new group exercise program,

there are a few longitudinal types of research that

scientifically and statistically indicate its effects. Eun-

Ju, Wi-Young, and Taikyeongm (2017) reported that

14 weeks (two times per week) of CF training

improved the body composition of male students.

Barfild and Anderson (2014) concluded that the

CF program was effective for raising aerobic

endurance levels, but it did not have significantly

better effects on muscle endurance, flexibility, and

body composition in comparison to Olympic

weightlifting. Based on that, previous studies (Eun-Ju

et al., 2017; Barfild et al., 2014) showed that CF

training improves aerobic endurance level and body

composition of male population. On the other hand,

resistance training is a modality of exercise that has

grown in popularity over the past two decades,

particularly for its role in improving athletic

performance by increasing muscular strength, power

and speed, hypertrophy, local muscular endurance,

motor performance, balance, and coordination

(Kreamer et al., 2000). Additionally, Maksimović,

Vukadinović, Rakonjac, Obradović, and Barišić

(2016) reported that 12 weeks of heavy resistance

training effect on the morphological characteristic of

young males.

According to the author’s knowledge, no study

examined the effects of CF training programs and

traditional gym training on anthropometric

measurements of men. Therefore, the purpose of this

study was to compare the effects of the CF training

program and traditional gym training on

anthropometric measurements in healthy, active men.

Method

Participants

The study included 50 healthy, active men who

volunteered to participate in the survey and were

members of the Sports Society “Sportagora” from

Čačak. These 50 participants met the following

criteria: (i) all participants had to train CF in

'Sportagora' from Čačak for at least 6 months; (ii) this

study included only the male population; (iii) age

between 18 to 30 years. Exclusion criteria were: (i)

injury before or during the study (N=5); (ii)

supplementation (N=7). They were divided into two

groups. The experimental group consisted of 22

participants (CFT group; 28.64±2.04 years; body

height: 181.74±6.96 cm; body mass: 72.75±5.53 kg)

who trained the CF training program, and the other

experimental group included 28 participants (GT

group; 26.89±2.99 years; body height: 184.52±7.80

cm; body mass: 74.86±8.48 kg) who exercised

traditional gym training program. Both groups had

one-hour training sessions three times a week, for 12

weeks.

Measuring instrument

The following anthropometric measurements were

taken: Body height and Body mass, body mass index

(BMI), four circumferences (Chest circumference,

Circumference of the forearm, upper arm and thigh)

and three skinfolds (Subscapular, Abdomen, and

Triceps). The BMI was calculated using a formula

and the categorization of the feeding condition was

taken according to Harrison’s scale (Harris, Bradlyn,

Coffman, Gunnell & Cottrell, 2008). Body height was

determined by Martin’s anthropometer (GPM,

Switzerland), skin folds were measured using a John

Bull’s caliper (British Indicator Ltd, UK) with an

accuracy of 0.2 mm, and circumferences were

measured with a centimeter tape with an accuracy of

0.1 mm. Training program

Procedure

Anthropometric measurements were tracked for 12

weeks. The first testing was conducted at the

beginning of the program, while the final testing was

carried out after 12 weeks of CF training intervention

and the traditional gym training program. The

experimental group practiced CF workouts in the

presence of coaches, and the other experimental

group went to the traditional gym training. The study

was conducted at the Sports Society “Sportagora”

from Čačak. The participants were asked not to

perform any intense physical activity the day before

EQOL Journal (2022) 14(2): 13-19

the testing, and not to consume food or drink for at

least 3 hours before it. The testing was performed in

the morning, and the same examiners took the same

anthropometric measurements on the initial and final

testing, in the same order.

Following the principles of CF training, the CFT

group applied three training complexes. Each

complex consisted of three pieces of training

performed in one week (Table 1). For 12 weeks, these

complexes took turns every week. Each training was

followed by a 48-hour rest period to allow

participants to recover and prepare for the next

training.

The workout began with a warm-up, after which

participants did one of the complexes that lasted for

20 to 30 minutes, and the training was finished with

static stretching.

Table 1. Training program for CFT group

Complex 1

Name

“Cindy”

“Barbara”

“Ralph”

AMRAP 20’

5 rounds for time:

For time:

5 pull-ups

20 pull-ups

8 deadlifts

10 push-ups

30 push-ups

16 burpees

15 air squats

40 sit-ups

3 rope climbs

50 air squats

600m run

Complex 2

Name

“Angie”

“Helen”

“Kelly”

For time:

3 rounds for time:

5 rounds for time

100 pull-ups

400m run

100 push-ups

21 kettlebell swing

30 box jumps

100 sit-ups

21 pull-ups

30 wall ball

100 air squats

Complex 3

Name

“Annie”

“Loredo”

“Donny”

For time:

6 rounds for time

21-15-9-9-15-21 reps

50-40-30-20-10

24 air squats

For time:

Double-unders / single unders

24 push-ups

deadlifts

sit-ups

24 walking lunges

burpees

400m run

Legend: AMRAP – As many repetitions as possible

In the GT group, all participants followed the same

resistance training for twelve weeks (3 days/ weeks;

3-4 sets of 10-12 repetitions, resting between

repetitions in the series 2-3 minutes, between

exercises 4-5 minutes). The load ranged from 80-95%

of the 1 repetition maximum. Participants were

trained three days per week. There were three

different training sessions. Briefly, the first training

involved chest and biceps musculature and included

six different exercises; the second training involved

back and triceps musculature and included six

different exercises; the third training involved

shoulder and leg musculature included six different

exercises. The total time of one training session for

each participant was approximately 90-120 min.

Data analysis

Statistical data included descriptive statistics: mean

(Mean), standard deviation (SD). The statistically

significant differences between groups, for all

analyzed variables, during the initial testing were

measured by multivariate analysis of variance

(MANOVA) and univariate analysis of variance

(ANOVA).. To determine statistically significant

differences between groups in the final testing of a

given sample, a multivariate analysis of covariance

(MANCOVA) and univariate analysis of covariance

(ANCOVA) were used. Data were analyzed in the

IBM SPSS Statistics 20.0 software package at a

significance level of p ≤ 0.05.

EQOL Journal (2022) 14(2): 13-19

Results

Based on P-values (Table 2), it was concluded that

there was no statistically significant difference

(P=0.12) between the experimental groups in

anthropometric measurements during the initial

testing. In the individual analysis of each analyzed

variable, it was concluded that a statistically

significant difference (p≤0.05) existed in the Chest

circumference, Circumference of the forearm,

Circumference of the upper arm, Thigh

circumference and Subscapular skinfold.

Table 2. Differences between groups in anthropometric measurements on the initial measurement

CFT group

(n = 16)

GT group

(n = 16)

Variable

Mean ± SD

Body height (cm)

181.74±6.96

184.52±7.80

1.72

0.29

Body mass (kg)

72.75±5.53

74.86±8.48

1.01

0.32

Body mass index (kg/m

)

22.11±2.31

22.05±2.80

1.17

0.28

Chest circumference (cm)

87.35±2.90

86.18±2.75

5.29

0.03

Circumference of the forearm (cm)

23.70±0.87

23.78±1.50

5.49

0.02

Circumference of the upper arm (cm)

26.52±1.84

26.31±2.39

17.32

0.00

Thigh circumference (cm)

59.11±3.81

56.50±4.76

211.16

0.00

Triceps skinfold (mm)

100.45±23.79

104.57±33.57

0.06

0.80

Skinfold on the abdomen (mm)

133.45±55.56

125.00±48.39

0.11

0.74

Subscapular skinfold (mm)

91.64±28.26

92.29±24.12

8.32

0.00

F=1.70

P=0.12

Legend: f – test for univariate analysis of variance, p – statistically significant difference between the groups within one

variable (p ≤ 0.05); F – test for multivariate analysis of variance; P – statistically significant difference between the groups

in a system of variables (p ≤ 0.05)

Based on P values (Table 3), it was concluded that

there was a statistically significant difference

(p=0.00) between the experimental groups in

anthropometric measurements during the final

testing. An individual analysis of each

anthropometric measurement concluded that

statistically significant differences (p≤0.05) in the

Chest circumference, and Thigh circumference.

Statistically significant differences were not found for

the remaining 8 variables.

Table 3. Differences between groups in anthropometric measurements on the final measurement

CFT group

(n = 16)

GT group

(n = 16)

Variable

Mean ± SD

Body height (cm)

181.74 ±6.96

184.52±7.80

1.72

0.20

Body mass (kg)

72.41±4.69

74.81±7.45

1.73

0.20

Body mass index (kg/m

)

22.01±2.17

22.05±2.63

1.02

0.96

Chest circumference (cm)

87.90±2.99

86.18±2.81

4.37

0.04

Circumference of the forearm (cm)

23.89±0.94

23.80±1.52

0.50

0.82

Circumference of the upper arm (cm)

27.22±1.77

26.61±2.38

1.00

0.32

Thigh circumference (cm)

63.13±3.84

56.69±4.84

25.9

0.00

Triceps skinfold (mm)

94.59±22.70

100.25±28.58

0.58

0.45

Skinfold on the abdomen (mm)

135.86±76.73

124.75±49.45

0.38

0.54

Subscapular skinfold (mm)

86.41±27.30

90.86±23.09

0.39

0.56

F=5.99

P=0.00

By neutralizing the differences in the initial

measurement, the respondents from the CFT group

achieved better and statistically significant results

than the GT group (Table 4.). Statistically significant

differences were noted in Chest circumference

(p=0.03), Circumference of the forearm (p=0.02),

EQOL Journal (2022) 14(2): 13-19

Circumference of the upper arm (p=0.00), Thigh

circumference (p=0.00) and Subscapular skinfold

(p=0.00) in favor of the CFTgroup. Statistically

significant differences were not found for the

remaining variables (Table 4).

Table 4. Multivariate analysis of covariance for examined anthropometric measurements

CFT group

(n = 16)

GT group

(n = 16)

Variable

± SD

Body height (cm)

72.41±4.69

74.81±7.45

1.18

0.29

Body mass (kg)

22.01±2.17

22.05±2.63

1.17

0.28

Body mass index (kg/m

)

87.90±2.99

86.18±2.81

5.29

0.03

Chest circumference (cm)

23.89±0.94

23.80±1.52

5.49

0.02

Circumference of the forearm (cm)

27.22±1.77

26.61±2.38

17.32

0.00

Circumference of the upper arm (cm)

63.13±3.84

56.69±4.84

211.16

0.00

Thigh circumference (cm)

94.59±22.70

100.25±28.58

0.06

0.80

Triceps skinfold (mm)

135.86±76.73

124.75±49.45

0.11

0.74

Skinfold on the abdomen (mm)

86.41±27.30

90.86±23.09

8.32

0.00

Subscapular skinfold (mm)

72.41±4.69

74.81±7.45

1.18

0.29

F=34.83

P=0.00

Legend: M*– corrected mean

Discussion

The present study aimed at the comparison of the

effects of the CF training program and traditional

gym training on anthropometric measurements in

healthy, active men.

During the initial testing, the differences between

groups in anthropometric measurements (Chest

circumference, Circumference of the forearm,

Circumference of the upper arm, Thigh

circumference, and Subscapular skinfold) can be

observed. At the beginning of the treatment, the

groups were approximately equal in terms of

analyzed anthropometric measurements. The results

of descriptive statistics only confirmed the facts

presented by other authors in this field of group

training (Hillsdon et al., 2002), that CF requires a

certain level of motor skills, in addition to an

adequate body constitution and physique that is above

all harmonious.

The results of the final testing indicated the

difference between groups in Chest circumference

and Thigh circumference.

The results from Table 4. show the difference

between groups in Chest circumference,

Circumference of the forearm, Circumference of the

upper arm, Thigh circumference, and Subscapular

skinfold. After 12-week CFT group had a larger

increase in body volume and reduction in adipose

tissue compared to GT group. Similar results were

obtained from Eun-Ju et al., (2017), who noted

statistically significant changes in body composition

after 14 weeks of CF training. Furthermore, Bellar,

Hatchett, Judge, Breaux, & Marcus (2015) showed

that CF training contains both aerobic and anaerobic

activities which affected cardiovascular abilities as

well as the reduction of subcutaneous fat tissue.These

results support the findings that physically active

adults engaged in CF training have a higher level of

fat oxidation during the training (Tremblay, Coveney,

Despres, Nadeau, & Prud'homme, 1992) and during

the resting period (Choi, So, & Jeong, 2017). The

resulting changes during the final testing in the CFT

group could be explained by the body's adaptation to

training with muscle load and hypertrophy. The

training with load leads to muscle hypertrophy, which

is reflected in increased body volume (Outlaw et al.,

2014). It is assumed that during CF training the load

was higher than during the traditional gym training,

which led to the muscle hypertrophy which had a

positive effect on the increased body volume.

In contrast to other studies (Hillsdon et al., 2002;

Lyman et al. 2005)), participants from this study did

not have statistically significant differences (p≥0.05)

in BMI and Body weight, which could be attributed

to external control of research related to the diet of

exercisers that was not predetermined and controlled

for 12 weeks.

This research has shown that the application of 12

weeks of CF training led to a greater improvement in

anthropometric measurements in comparison to

EQOL Journal (2022) 14(2): 13-19

traditional gym training in healthy active men. The

strength of this study is that, according to the author’s

knowledge, this is the first study that investigated the

effects of CF training and traditional gym training on

the anthropometric characteristics of men. It is also

important to note that this study compares the effects

of CF training and traditional gym training on the

anthropometric characteristics of men, which has not

been done so far. Despite the benefits observed in this

study, there are a few limitations. First, we have a

small sample size. Secondly, we investigated only

male participants aged between 18 – 30 years while

female adults were not included. Thirdly, there was

no control group. Future research ought to investigate

the effects of CF training on the motor abilities

(strength, power, endurance, flexibility, and speed) of

male and female athletes. Also, future research should

compare the CF training programs to other traditional

training methods like HIIT. It can be assumed that

high levels of strength, power, and agility,

accompanied by low subcutaneous fat content and a

larger volume of thigh muscles, forearms, upper

arms, and normal nutritional volume, are required to

successfully participate in CF training.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the sports association “Sportagora”

from Čačak for permission to conduct the research.

References

Barfield J., & Anderson A. (2014) Effect of CrossFit on

health-related physical fitness: A pilot study. Journal of

Sport and Human Performance, 2(1), 23-28.

Bellar, D., Hatchett, A., Judge, L.W., Breaux, M.E. &

Marcus, L. (2015). The relationship of aerobic

capacity, anaerobic peak power and experience to

performance in CrossFit exercise. Biology of Sport,

32(4), 315-320.

Choi, E. J., So, W. Y., & Jeong, T. T. (2017). Effects of the

CrossFit exercise data analysis on body composition

and blood profiles. Iranian Journal of Public Health,

46(9), 1292–1294

Claudino, J. G., Gabbett, T. J., Bourgeois, F., Souza, H. S.,

Miranda, R. C., Mezêncio, B., Soncin, R., Cardoso

Filho, C. A., Bottaro, M., Hernandez, A. J., Amadio, A.

C., & Serrão, J. C. (2018). CrossFit Overview:

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Sports Medicine

- Open, 4, 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-018-

0124-5

Crawford, D. A., Drake, N. B., Carper, M. J., DeBlauw, J.,

& Heinrich, K. M. (2018). Are changes in physical

work capacity induced by high-intensity functional

training related to changes in associated physiologic

measures. Sports, 6(2), 26.

https://doi.org/10.3390/sports6020026

CrossFit. (2016). How to start CrossFit? Retrieved from

https://www.crossfit.com/how-to-start

Dehghanzadeh Suraki, R., Mohsenzade, M., Tibana, R. A.,

& Ahmadizad, S. (2021). Effects of CrossFit training

on lipid profiles, body composition and physical fitness

in overweight men. Sport Sciences for Health, 17(4),

855-862.

Eun-Ju C., Wi-Young, S.,

& Taikyeongm, J.

(2017).

Effects of the CrossFit exercise data analysis on body

composition and blood profiles. Iran Journal of Public

Health, 46(9), 1292-1294.

Feito, Y., Burrows, E., Tabb, L., & Ciesielka, K. A. (2020).

Breaking the myths of competition: a cross-sectional

analysis of injuries among CrossFit trained

participants. BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine,

6(1), e000750. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2020-

000750

Harris, C. V., Bradlyn, A. S., Coffman, J., Gunel, E., &

Cottrell, L. (2008). BMI-based body size guides for

women and men: development and validation of a

novel pictorial method to assess weight-related

concepts. International Journal of Obesity), 32(2), 336-

342.

Hillsdon, M., Thorogood, M., White, I. & Foster, C.

(2002). Advising people to take more exercise is

ineffective: a randomized controlled trial of physical

activity promotion in primary care. International

Journal of Epidemiology, 31(4), 808-815.

Kraemer, W. J., Ratamess, N., Fry, A. C., Triplett-

McBride, T., Koziris, L. P., Bauer, J. A., Lynch, J. M.,

& Fleck, S. J. (2000). Influence of resistance training

volume and periodization on physiological and

performance adaptations in collegiate women tennis

players. The American Journal of Sports

Medicine, 28(5), 626-633.

Layman, D.K., Evans, E., Baum, J.I., Seyler, J., Erickson,

D.J., & Boileau RA. (2005). Dietary protein and

exercise have additive effects on body composition

during weight loss in adult women. Journal of

Nutrition, 135(8), 1903-1910.

Longe, J. L. (2012). The Gale Encyclopedia of Fitness.

Detroit: Gale, Cengage Learning.

Maksimović, D., Vukadinović, M., Rakonjac, D.,

Obradović, J., & Barišić, V. (2016). Effects of heavy

resistance training on morphological characteristics of

young adults. Acta Kinesiologica, 10(1), 97-100.

Outlaw, J. J., Wilborn, C. D., Smith-Ryan, A. E., Hayward,

S. E., Urbina, S. L., Taylor, L. W., & Foster, C. A.

(2014). Effects of a pre-and post-workout protein-

carbohydrate supplement in trained CrossFit

individuals. SpringerPlus, 3, 369.

https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-3-369

Özbay, S. (2019). The Effects of Different Types of

Strength Training for Recreational Purposes on the

Body Composition and Strength Development of

EQOL Journal (2022) 14(2): 13-19

University Students. Asian Journal of Education and

Training, 5(2), 381-385.

Partridge, J. A., Knapp, B. A., & Massengale, B. D. (2014).

An investigation of motivational variables in CrossFit

facilities. Journal of Strength and Conditioning

Research, 28(6), 1714-1721.

Petrova, A., Bala, T., Masliak, I., & Mameshina, M.

(2022). The effect of CrossFit exercises on the physical

health level of 16–17-year-old boys. Journal of

Physical Education & Sport, 22(4), 955-961.

Sousa, A.F.M., Santos, B.S, Reis, T., Valerino, A.J.R., Del

Rosso, S., & Boullosa, D.A. (2016). Differences in

physical fitness between recreational Crossfit[R] and

resistance trained individuals. Journal of Exercise

Physiology Online, 19(5), 112-122.

Tremblay, A., Coveney, S., Despres, J. P., Nadeau, A. &

Prud'homme, D. (1992). Increased resting metabolic

rate and lipid oxidation in exercise-trained individuals:

evidence for a role of beta-adrenergic stimulation.

Canadian Journal of Physiology Pharmacology,

70(10), 1342-1347.

Waryasz, G. R., Suric, V., Daniels, A. H., Gil, J. A., &

Eberson, C. P. (2016). Crossfit® instructor

demographics and practice trends. Orthopedic Reviews,

8(4), 6571. https://doi.org/10.4081/or.2016.6571

Weisenthal, B. M., Beck, C. A., Maloney, M. D., DeHaven,

K. E., & Giordano, B. D. (2014). Injury Rate and

Patterns Among CrossFit Athletes. Orthopedic Journal

of Sports Medicine