THE WEEKLY HOWL IS HEADED TO THE POLLS

Sugar Water: Earlier this week was Election Day where millions of people headed to the polls and voted both on who would represent us as well as a number of propositions. In Washington, voters had the opportunity to vote on whether future soda taxes should be legal. Unfortunately, it doesn’t sound like the voters understood what they were voting for and that was by design. From Vox:

Voters in the state passed Initiative 1634, a ballot measure that makes it impossible for cities and counties to enact new soda taxes. (An existing soda tax in Seattle will still stand.)

But some voters might not have realized they were voting against soda taxes. The industry-led campaign “Yes! To Affordable Groceries” described the measure as “opposing new taxes on everyday grocery items, such as meats, dairy and beverages.” But state-level bans on food and beverage taxes increasingly seem to be an effective way for industry to curb the soda tax momentum that’s been building.

As rates of obesity and diabetes, which have been linked to excessive soda consumption, rise, more and more US cities and counties and countries around the world have been turning to soda taxes.

The basic idea behind the taxes is this: Making drinks like soda more expensive through taxation helps reduce consumption, improves awareness of the health harms they carry, and nudges people to choose lower- or no-calorie beverages instead. To date, 40 counties and seven cities — including Berkeley, California, and Philadelphia — have implemented soda taxes, and more municipalities are currently considering them.

Preliminary research suggests these taxes do seem to curb soda drinking, and ding beverage makers’ bottom line at a time when soda sales are already flagging.

In an effort to prevent more taxes from being enacted, beverage makers are taking a page from the tobacco industry’s playbook and supporting ballot measures and state laws that block governments from passing new taxes on food and drink. But the trick is that these measures are framed as a way to help consumers avoid spending more on what they’re putting in their grocery carts.

And that’s exactly what happened in Washington last night.

There are a lot of things causing the obesity epidemic but that fact that purveyors of sugar water have so much money and power in this country is a huge factor. They stick their dirty hands into health research and politics and lobbying. The fact that they are emulating the tobacco industry’s tactics should tell you all that you need to know about Big Soda.

Motivation: Bustle published a list of 7 ways to get motivated for the gym. It wasn’t a bad list, it was pretty good. My issue is that it presented all 7 as equivalent when one stood out from the rest.

1.    Set Concrete Goals

2.    Go With a Friend

3.    Find a Comfortable Outfit

4.    Listen to Music

5.    Create a Plan

6.    Branch Out

7.    Keep a Visual Reminder

This list should be presented as #1 and some other stuff:

“Here’s the #1 way to get motivated for the gym, 4 other useful tips and some fluff”

In case you’re wondering, I would rank them in this order:

1.       Set Concrete Goals (This is the single best way to stay motivated, have a defined goal that you’re working towards)

2.       Create a Plan (Know what you’re going to do before you set foot in the gym and then get it done)

3.       Go With a Friend (Making the gym a more social experience can keep you accountable and make it more fun)

4.       Branch Out (Variety is the spice of life)

5.       Keep a Visual Reminder (This works for a lot of people)

6.       Listen to Music (This kind of contradicts #3 but also, doesn’t everyone already do this?)

7.       Find a Comfortable Outfit (As opposed to working out in uncomfortable clothes? I can’t say that it’s wrong, it’s just common sense)

What frustrates me about this is that the entire article should be about #1. That’s the real secret and I feel like it’s hiding in plain sight in article like this. They make it seem like it’s equivalent to Listen to Music.

Domination: Steve Jobs once told the CEO of Nike that they should completely streamline their product line and make it more like Apple’s. Just have one product in each category. Mark Parker did not take Jobs’ advice because athletic apparel is completely different from consumer electronics and he understood that. I think of this whenever I see someone write that something is going to replace gyms or trainers. From Fast Company:

Currently, the majority of Aaptiv’s community skews female, college-educated, under 34, with household income around $100,000. Most already have a gym membership or boutique fitness regimen, notes Agarwal, but they find that Aaptiv serves as a worthwhile add-on–either to fill in for the days they don’t head to the gym, or because the experience trumps what they get in a live class.

              The fitness industry isn’t predisposed to being a winner-take-all, zero-sum environment. It is an immature industry and frequently misunderstood. It’s not like the tech industry. There will never be an iPhone of fitness because 1) people have very different fitness goals 2) people have very different preferences for what they want their fitness experience to be and 3) some people will choose to mix and match.

              The biggest trend that we’re seeing right now is a move away from the big box gym, where you can pretty much do anything under one roof, to smaller, specialized gyms. That is only going to lead to more mix and matching. People need more fitness options not less. Convenience is the name of the game and that might mean having a traditional gym membership as well as some work-out at home options. It means that consumers are going to be assembling a routine from an increasingly diverse fitness menu. The success of a service like Aaptiv might hinge on being a complement to brick and mortar gyms not on being a gym-killer.

Army Strong: The Army’s new physical fitness test is coming in 2020 and it is not without controversy. The ACFT is a complete re-imagining of what a military fitness test can look like. The Army, Navy, and Air Force currently test push-ups, sit-ups (or some version thereof), and a short run. The Marines swap pull-ups for the push-ups but otherwise stick to the formula. The advantage of this is that it’s easy to test. You don’t need much equipment if any and you can test a lot of people at the same time. The disadvantage of this is that it’s a poor test of the fitness that is required for combat. Implementation of the ACFT is going to be a lot harder than the current test so they tried out at West Point. From War On The Rocks:

The U.S. Military Academy’s Department of Physical Education administered the ACFT twice in the past two weeks to two different populations: members of the faculty who are over 40 years old, and the class of 2019. The class of 2019 is particularly representative because the testing population is the approximate size of a light infantry battalion. Using 16 testing lanes over the course of two days, it took just under four hours per day to test 732 cadets, plus 40 minutes of daily set up and tear down. The test was administered on a large, flat field adjacent to a two-mile run course. It required 32 graders, each of whom had been trained on movement standards, grading criteria, and traffic flow through one hour-long session the week prior. By testing four cadets per lane, throughput was approximately 64 cadets every 25 minutes, yielding an overall flow rate of around 128 people per hour. Throughput was enabled by the use of six lane supervisors who helped to manage graders, monitor movement standards, and field questions. Neither the cadet population nor the over-40 population sustained any injuries during testing — a remarkable statistic given that some test participants had never done a deadlift. Cadet feedback was largely positive, in spite of the fact that few approached the maximum test score.

What did we learn about the ACFT from this experience? First, the test is not “too complicated,” nor is its execution too time- and labor-intensive for the average unit to handle. Our pilot suggests that four hours for 400 people is a generous upper limit for overall testing time. That number will only go down as units and leaders gain testing familiarity. The data show that a battalion of 514 soldiers, using one company to grade, will be able to test their entire formation in four and a half to five hours. This is, admittedly, about two–three times longer than it takes to administer the current APFT, but is still less time than it takes to rehearse for and execute a single battalion change of command.

Furthermore, the comparative complexity of the new test may turn out to be a good thing. The amount of planning and preparation required to administer the ACFT means that it will likely become a battalion-level event, as opposed to a company-, squad-, or platoon-level event that it is easy for leaders to ignore. This means that every member of the battalion will have to participate, and they will have to do so in front of other unit members. Gone are the days of pencil-whipping an APFT card or of leaders simply opting out of an APFT because they cannot be bothered to take it. The ACFT may thus bring a welcome culture change not only in its emphasis on realistic physical standards, but on its demand for visible leader accountability to those standards. Far from micromanaging, the ACFT has the potential to empower local commanders to hold themselves and their formations to a higher standard of fitness across a broader range of physical domains.

              It sound like the ACFT will take most of the work day to complete and I think that’s a good thing.  It will feel like more of an event. The old-school test felt perfunctory, something to get over with before you start another regular work day. This will require a lot more resources but that sends a message. The message is that fitness is important. It’s not just a check in the box.  Fitness should be a big deal in the military. If you think that you can’t devote 2 days a year to ensuring that your people are fit and combat-ready then you need to re-evaluate your priorities as a military leader.

Marketing: If you watch television, then there is a good chance that you have seen a commercial that looks like an ad for CrossFit and then turns out to be hawking light beer or something else completely unrelated to fitness. I dubbed this fitness marketing a while back and it is an emerging trend. From PR Newswire:

The "2018 Southwest Sports Marketing Report," crafted and commissioned by leading marketing services agency LAVIDGE, reveals insights about consumer spending choices in this fast-evolving space. Among the key findings: in addition to a preference for TV advertising around health and exercise, consumers spend more money on gym memberships than sporting events, equipment or apparel, and prefer a casual approach when it comes to sports and fitness.

Indeed, ads that contain the word "healthy" strongly resonate with consumers who want more products and services that "support a healthy lifestyle."

"We've analyzed the business from all angles and have discovered the most impactful tactics and messages to reach the sports and fitness-minded public," said David Nobs, managing director, business development at LAVIDGE.

              You can also see fitness marketing manifested in experiential marketing initiatives. This is department stores offering boutique fitness classes in order to generate foot traffic in their stores. I consider fitness marketing to be a close relative of sports marketing. PR Newswire seems to think that it is a part of sports marketing.

Sports marketing is a booming industry, continuing to dominate corporate spending, far outpacing entertainment, causes and the arts. A recent report published by ESP Properties further predicts brands will spend more on marketing, advertising and sponsorship this year, resulting in industry growth of 4.5 percent in North America and 4.9 percent globally.

"Today, the relationship between sports and entertainment is inseparable and interchangeable. Sports still makes sense as a way to enhance corporate image and increase product visibility. If done well, it provides companies with opportunities to promote brand awareness, build loyalty, deliver quality content and enhance customer relationships, all in a single package," said Nobs.

              The relationship between sports and fitness is not as close as people tend to assume. The primary way that the majority of Americans interact with sports is as a passive observer. Adults watch football, baseball, and basketball and rarely, if ever, play the game themselves. Fitness is something that people actually, they interact with it as a participant. I don’t consider fitness marketing a subset of sports marketing for that reason. You’re selling a completely different ball of wax with fitness than you are with sports.

CrossFit: There are a lot of people that are not fans of the changes that have come to the sport of CrossFit. Change is usually unpopular at first. Nicolas Atkin of the South China Morning Post is one of them.

Gone are the old Regionals. Instead now the CrossFit Open will crown 162 male, female and team national champions from each nation with a CrossFit affiliate. They will all be in Madison, Wisconsin next August, along with the winners of 16 newly-sanctioned events acting as invitationals.

These 16 events span the globe, in an attempt to give the sport a more international flavour. The first qualifier takes place in Dubai in December, with the 2019 schedule kicking off in Australia in January, before taking in other stops in Iceland, China, Dubai, South Africa, France, Brazil, the UK, Italy, the Netherlands and Argentina.

Of course, the US still gets a look in with four events. But there’s the rub – CrossFit as a sport originated in North America, and most of its best athletes are from there. And now some of them are likely to miss out on qualifying for the 2019 Games.

“[At this 2018 Games] I did see athletes coming into the arena carrying their flags. And boy, it looked like a 4th of July parade, you know?” CrossFit CEO and founder Greg Glassman told the Girls Gone WOD podcast.

“And there’s nothing wrong with that, but better than that would be a true reflection of the growth and the universal nature, the globalisation, of the affiliate … 160-something [countries], I believe, participated in the Open. They don’t all make it to the end.

              I disagree that North American athletes are going to miss out on qualifying for the Games because I think that athletes will get on a plane if they need to. People that have dedicated their lives to CrossFit will be willing to travel in order to qualify. I would be more concerned about the potential financial burden this puts on the athletes. Transporting a handful of people around the world is an easy problem to overcome. Getting the media attention that comes from having a CrossFit event in Brazil or China cannot be replicated any other way.

And while before you had a straightforward 40-man and 40-woman field at the CrossFit Games, the new qualification system will cause similar format changes.

Now there are likely to be around 200 athletes in each field, with the top 20 finishers from the CrossFit Open who aren’t national champions also qualifying, plus four “at-large” wild cards chosen by CrossFit Inc.

“What could happen – it seems enjoyable to me – is earlier in the week put 200 [athletes] to a task that leaves 10. And then [we’re] watching 10 for two days,” Glassman said. “A higher intensity, denser format, where there’s less to watch but more to see.”

He added: “In short order we’re gonna cull the herd to a very watchable and exciting number of people.”

But if so many athletes are going to be culled because they’re not good enough, then why have them there in the first place?

              This new system might not be as fair. Making a cut to ten athletes so early in the competition is going to leave out some people who could have made a late surge for the top of the leaderboard but will instead be watching from the beer garden. But sports are not always fair. There are arbitrary cutoffs in every system. In Olympic track & field, every country can send a max of 3 athletes per event. Why not 4? Why not 2? It’s an arbitrary number and every four years, there are deserving athletes who missed 3rd place by inches and get nothing to show for it. Is that fair? I don’t know but it is thrilling to watch. Sports fans live for the drama and cutting down to 10 is going to crank up the intensity on the 1st day. The drama of who gets left out is going to be fascinating.

              I think that Nicolas gets the why. CrossFit Inc. has always used the sport of CrossFit as sports marketing. That’s the ultimate goal, to grow the affiliate base. It’s not to find out who the Fittest on Earth is. Making the qualifying process more international and crowning national champions is a reflection of where CrossFit’s future growth is going to come from. Everyone will adapt to these changes. Top American athletes will hop on a plane if they have to. The Games will look very different but Mat Fraser is still going to be standing on the top of the podium when it’s all over. And ten years from now, there will be a lot more top athletes from outside North America.

Tidbits:

-How do you know when it’s time to get a new gym?

-Dwayne Johnson’s new fitness competition show looks like a combination of American Gladiators and the Hunger Games

-Under Armour has a serious culture problem

-Don’t trust the Kardashians

-I want to work-out all night

-Redneck Fitness