Xenom: EPI Under Fire

XENOM presents itself as a new fitness concept aiming to bridge CrossFit, HYROX and traditional sports competitions. But after the first edition in Dallas, the conversation went beyond the workouts. The standout EPI scoring system took center stage. Supporters see it as a fairer way to measure fitness, while critics question whether strength currently carries too much weight. One thing is certain: the system is making the sports world think.

What is XENOM?

For those unfamiliar with the concept: XENOM is a new fitness competition built around a fixed set of ten events. Unlike CrossFit, where athletes often learn what awaits them only shortly before competing, all of XENOM's tests are known in advance.

The idea behind it is straightforward. When everyone knows the same events, performances can be compared directly across different competitions, locations and even seasons. A score in Dallas should, in theory, be comparable to a score in London, Miami or any future location.

This positions XENOM differently from CrossFit, where programming changes constantly, but also differently from HYROX, which is entirely built around one fixed race format. XENOM aims to preserve the breadth of fitness, with events covering strength, weightlifting, conditioning, gymnastics and work capacity, while still keeping results mutually comparable.

To make that possible, the EPI system was developed.

A score based on performance, not placement

Traditionally, fitness competitions are decided by rankings. Win an event and you receive, say, 100 points. Second place gets 95, third gets 90, and so on.

XENOM moves away from that model.

The organization uses a system more similar to the scoring in athletic multi-events. Every performance is converted into a point total. The better the performance, the more points an athlete receives.

That means the gap between two athletes is determined not by their finishing position, but by the actual margin between their performances.

An example:

• Athlete A completes an event much faster than the rest.
• Athlete B wins a different event by only a small margin.

In a traditional system, both receive the same event win. Under EPI, Athlete A's dominant victory yields significantly more points.

The result is that athletes are not just trying to win, they want to accumulate as many points as possible.

Why athletes find the system appealing

During the post-event discussion following XENOM 001, several participants said the system fundamentally changes how they experience competition.

CrossFit athletes are used to thinking strategically. Sometimes it is enough to beat a direct rival. When that is achieved, energy can be saved for the next event.

That largely disappears under EPI.

Masters athlete Klay Hamilton described it as one of the most interesting aspects of the weekend. According to him, you are constantly pushed to deliver your maximum performance.

A one-second lead is good. A twenty-second lead is better.

That sounds logical, but it has major consequences for competitive behavior. Athletes can less easily play it safe when they are at the top. Even in a final event, giving everything remains worthwhile, because every extra second or rep can earn points.

Emily Rolfe observed the same dynamic. The Canadian CrossFit Games athlete won multiple events during the weekend but found she could not ease up anywhere.

Normally you might sometimes settle for an event win. In Dallas, pushing to the end was often necessary because every additional rep counted.

The main debate: is strength rewarded too heavily?

Although the concept behind EPI received many positive responses, a recurring debate also emerged during the weekend.

Several athletes got the impression that strength and weightlifting events carry a relatively heavy weight in the overall score.

Rolfe mentioned her comparison with competitor Abby Domit. In certain strength tests, the gap could reach hundreds of points. At the same time, she felt that dominant performances in conditioning events yielded relatively few additional points.

That impression was reinforced by examples from the results.

In some running events or metcons, athletes could create large time gaps without a significant impact on the standings. With heavy lifts, the same performance gap seemed to carry considerably more influence.

That does not automatically mean the calculations are wrong.

The core problem is that fitness spans many different disciplines. How do you compare twenty extra reps with twenty extra kilograms on a barbell? Or a minute gained on a long run?

That is precisely the puzzle XENOM is wrestling with.

A system that likely still needs to grow

The organization now holds one important advantage: data.

Where the first edition was largely based on calculations and projections, XENOM now has hundreds of real performances from participants.

That gives developers the ability to refine future versions of the points system further.

Hamilton even argued that the first season should be viewed as an experimental phase. Not because the system failed, but because these kinds of models need time to develop.

That is not unusual.

Athletics spent decades refining the scoring tables for the decathlon. World records, performance distributions and statistical analyses were continuously adjusted before the current points systems emerged.

XENOM is only at the very beginning of that process.

A challenge for the sport

Beyond the balance between strength and conditioning, a second question remains.

Does the audience understand what it is watching?

CrossFit fans immediately know what an event win means. HYROX participants instantly understand that a lower finish time is better.

But what does a score of 9,700 points mean?

Or 8,400?

For now, not much.

That may be the biggest challenge for the organization. A successful scoring system must not only be fair to athletes, it must also be understandable to spectators.

At the same time, that is precisely where the greatest opportunity may lie.

When fitness fans learn what a top score means, something emerges that the sport has barely seen before: a universal performance benchmark. Comparable to a marathon under 2 hours 10 minutes, a 100 meters under 10 seconds or a 500-kilogram powerlifting total.

XENOM's biggest win

After just one event, it is impossible to say whether EPI will become the future of fitness competition. More competitions, more data and more athletes are needed for that.

What Dallas did prove is that the system generates reactions. Strong reactions.

Athletes debate strategy, programmers analyze the points tables and fans try to understand how performances are valued.

For a brand-new concept, that may be the best result you can hope for. Because in a sport that is constantly searching for innovation, XENOM achieved in a single weekend what many new competitions never manage: people are talking about it.