PDA

View Full Version : I Guess


Burr[_2_]
December 10th 10, 08:00 AM
I guess weight lifting is a thing of the pass around here!

You little boys have fun playing with your little balls!

Existential Angst[_2_]
December 10th 10, 03:03 PM
"Burr" > wrote in message
.. .
>I guess weight lifting is a thing of the pass around here!
>
> You little boys have fun playing with your little balls!
>

So Burr, where are YOU when me'n'David are tryna straighten these cult-head
kettleballers out??

I don't believe you have said Word One in this whole multi-month debate.

But, since you are one of the few barbell lifters left around here, some
thoughts come to mind.

In David's Steve Cotter vid, it finally dawned on me how these kb-ers not
only go for reps, but for *mega-reps*.

Which strikes me as follows:

This would seem to be an inneresting limbo-land between raw strength
and raw endurance, an inneresting meld, perhaps.
I do much the same thing, except with an apparatus, that allows mega-calorie
burns, and therefore a greater taxation of VO2 -- Porcari's ""study""
(Jason's link?) notwithstanding, cuz, well, that ""study"" was utter
bull****. Kb's do not use enough total body muscle to tax VO2, despite the
propagandized insinuations.

But, kb's still illustrate that weightlifting CAN burn significant calories,
just not aerobic-level calories, as Porcari would like.

In the case of kb's, I think the distinction between the truly aerobic
(running, boucou calorie burn) and the truly resistive (heavy-ish weights,
raw strength gain) are kind of lost.

KB-ers would say (I'm sure) that THEIR method is better, whole-body, etc
etc., but I wonder if it really is, in the general case. I wonder if
nailing raw strength gain (heavy non-swung weights) AND running a few miles
doesn't fill the "fitness spectrum" better than the "all-in-one" kb-style
workout -- as impressive as some of them are/appear to be.

In David's Cotter vid, Cotter specifically talks about the "utility" of
lifting a weight off the ground ito preparation for everyday practicalities,
yet.... kb-ers don't do much lifting off the ground!!!

Whereas dumbbell snatches and deadlifts, cleans from the floor are PRECISELY
this.
Swinging a kb 500 times between your legs is certainly exertive.....

BUT, it is NOT the same a crouching/squatting down, and grunting up 200 #.

Which do you think is the "better preparation" for real-world manual
labor/lifting?

Overall, kb workouts are not bad, certainly better than yer average
infomercial bull**** workouts.
But do they live up to their own hype? I don't think so.
And are they "better" than traditional heavy wieghts and running? I don't
think so, altho I do think they fill an in-between niche perhaps. Esp. the
recruitment of "whole-body ANCILLARY" muscles. And this is in fact pretty
important.

Of course, in this "in-between niche" and ancillary muscle bidness, clearly
individual dumbbells are just as good or better, a couple specific moves
notwithstanding -- as Jason is finding out.

We'll have to wait for Jason's -- and David's -- full reports, for the
complete resolution.
Heh, I still haven't made it to Sports Authority.....

--
EA

David
December 10th 10, 07:59 PM
"Existential Angst" > wrote in message
...
> "Burr" > wrote in message
> .. .
>>I guess weight lifting is a thing of the pass around here!
>>
>> You little boys have fun playing with your little balls!
>>
>
> So Burr, where are YOU when me'n'David are tryna straighten these
> cult-head kettleballers out??
>
> I don't believe you have said Word One in this whole multi-month debate.
>
> But, since you are one of the few barbell lifters left around here, some
> thoughts come to mind.
>
> In David's Steve Cotter vid, it finally dawned on me how these kb-ers not
> only go for reps, but for *mega-reps*.
>
> Which strikes me as follows:
>
> This would seem to be an inneresting limbo-land between raw strength
> and raw endurance, an inneresting meld, perhaps.
> I do much the same thing, except with an apparatus, that allows
> mega-calorie burns, and therefore a greater taxation of VO2 -- Porcari's
> ""study"" (Jason's link?) notwithstanding, cuz, well, that ""study"" was
> utter bull****. Kb's do not use enough total body muscle to tax VO2,
> despite the propagandized insinuations.
>
> But, kb's still illustrate that weightlifting CAN burn significant
> calories, just not aerobic-level calories, as Porcari would like.
>
> In the case of kb's, I think the distinction between the truly aerobic
> (running, boucou calorie burn) and the truly resistive (heavy-ish weights,
> raw strength gain) are kind of lost.
>
> KB-ers would say (I'm sure) that THEIR method is better, whole-body, etc
> etc., but I wonder if it really is, in the general case. I wonder if
> nailing raw strength gain (heavy non-swung weights) AND running a few
> miles doesn't fill the "fitness spectrum" better than the "all-in-one"
> kb-style workout -- as impressive as some of them are/appear to be.
>
> In David's Cotter vid, Cotter specifically talks about the "utility" of
> lifting a weight off the ground ito preparation for everyday
> practicalities, yet.... kb-ers don't do much lifting off the ground!!!
>
> Whereas dumbbell snatches and deadlifts, cleans from the floor are
> PRECISELY this.
> Swinging a kb 500 times between your legs is certainly exertive.....
>
> BUT, it is NOT the same a crouching/squatting down, and grunting up 200 #.
>
> Which do you think is the "better preparation" for real-world manual
> labor/lifting?
>
> Overall, kb workouts are not bad, certainly better than yer average
> infomercial bull**** workouts.
> But do they live up to their own hype? I don't think so.
> And are they "better" than traditional heavy wieghts and running? I don't
> think so, altho I do think they fill an in-between niche perhaps. Esp.
> the recruitment of "whole-body ANCILLARY" muscles. And this is in fact
> pretty important.
>
> Of course, in this "in-between niche" and ancillary muscle bidness,
> clearly individual dumbbells are just as good or better, a couple specific
> moves notwithstanding -- as Jason is finding out.
>
> We'll have to wait for Jason's -- and David's -- full reports, for the
> complete resolution.
> Heh, I still haven't made it to Sports Authority.....

Burr is kinda like an old school guy - traditional -
By the way mega reps is freaking insane doing these kb suckers - I ax you
somethin which I jus' friggin thot of . . .. what is the friggin
difference between kb swings and rowing? same movement nearly exactly
>
> --
> EA
>

Jason Earl[_2_]
December 10th 10, 10:57 PM
On Fri, Dec 10 2010, Existential Angst wrote:

> "Burr" > wrote in message
> .. .
>>I guess weight lifting is a thing of the pass around here!
>>
>> You little boys have fun playing with your little balls!
>>
>
> So Burr, where are YOU when me'n'David are tryna straighten these
> cult-head kettleballers out??
>
> I don't believe you have said Word One in this whole multi-month
> debate.

Personally, I think it speaks well of Burr that he has kept himself out
of this discussion.

> But, since you are one of the few barbell lifters left around here,
> some thoughts come to mind.

I have not lifted a kettlebell (except a rep or two for fun) for weeks.
Right now my personal program is nothing but barbell lifts (well, and
some running). I only did some dumbbell lifts because you essentially
triple dog dared me.

I only did kettlebell drills over Thanksgiving because a kettlebell is
easier to throw in the back of the van.

> In David's Steve Cotter vid, it finally dawned on me how these kb-ers
> not only go for reps, but for *mega-reps*.
>
> Which strikes me as follows:
>
> This would seem to be an inneresting limbo-land between raw
> strength and raw endurance, an inneresting meld, perhaps. I do much
> the same thing, except with an apparatus, that allows mega-calorie
> burns, and therefore a greater taxation of VO2 -- Porcari's ""study""
> (Jason's link?) notwithstanding, cuz, well, that ""study"" was utter
> bull****. Kb's do not use enough total body muscle to tax VO2,
> despite the propagandized insinuations.

Really, kettlebell snatches do not work enough total body muscle to tax
VO2?

That's your story now.

EA, you really need to push away from your keyboard and try some
snatches. I don't even care what kind of snatch you try. Then come
back and tell me that snatches are not a "full body" exercise. It would
be easier to name the muscles *not* involved in a snatch, than to name
the muscles that are involved.

I will grant you that Porcari's calorie-burn calculations based on
lactate monitoring are a bit fishy. That's OK, though. Even without
those numbers the measured VO2 numbers give this exercise a calorie burn
that is basically equivalent to running a 10 minute mile.

I suppose next you'll say that the oxygen in question just disappeared.
Well, then perhaps kettlebells are magical after all. They change O2 to
CO2 without any oxidation.

> But, kb's still illustrate that weightlifting CAN burn significant
> calories, just not aerobic-level calories, as Porcari would like.

I believe you mean "as Porcari measured."

Otherwise I agree with you here. This sort of exercise (whether done
with a kettlebell or whatever other weight you want to swing around) can
burn a significant amount of calories. It doesn't even have to burn as
many calories as running to be useful.

Take me as an example. I have found that if I run to much I injure
myself. I can elevate my heart rate and breathing levels, and keep them
up, with high rep snatches (or swings, or sledgehammer smashes), on the
other hand, and I am fine. Heck, I even get stronger in the process.
So what if this did not burn quite as many calories as running?

Not that I am saying that kettlebell snatches can't burn as many
calories per minute as jogging, because I think that it can.

> In the case of kb's, I think the distinction between the truly aerobic
> (running, boucou calorie burn) and the truly resistive (heavy-ish
> weights, raw strength gain) are kind of lost.

It's not lost. High rep kettlebell drills are just another way to get
your heart rate up and keep it up for an extended period of time. I
will admit that I think that 20 minutes is at the outer limits of what
is really possible for non-super-heroes. I can run for longer than 20
minutes, but I can not really keep my heart rate elevated with
kettlebell drills for longer than that.

> KB-ers would say (I'm sure) that THEIR method is better, whole-body,
> etc etc., but I wonder if it really is, in the general case. I wonder
> if nailing raw strength gain (heavy non-swung weights) AND running a
> few miles doesn't fill the "fitness spectrum" better than the
> "all-in-one" kb-style workout -- as impressive as some of them
> are/appear to be.

I am sure that there are plenty of ways to skin this particular cat, and
there probably are lots of ways that you could argue are "better" than
kettlebell drills. For the most part the exercises you choose are going
to be dependent on the goals that you have. Or at least they should be.
Competitive powerlifters and long distance runners are not going to be
able to agree on whether an exercise is "better" or not (well, both
would probably agree that kettlebell drills are "better" exercise than
bowling).

Part of the reason that *I* like kettlebells is that they allow me to
get better at running (at least for the distances that I am most
interested in) without having to actually run. Is this the optimal way
to train if running is your primary goal? No, it is not. Is it the
optimal way to train if weight loss is your primary goal? I would say
that there is compelling evidence that says that kettlebell drills is at
least competitive in this arena.

It certainly worked better than running for me.

If you are interested in running performance for distances over about 2
miles then even the kettlebell folk say that you probably should simply
spend more time running. Of course, if you want to be a good 5K (and
up) runner, then you probably could skip weight training altogether.

> In David's Cotter vid, Cotter specifically talks about the "utility"
> of lifting a weight off the ground ito preparation for everyday
> practicalities, yet.... kb-ers don't do much lifting off the
> ground!!!

I think, EA, that you really need to educate yourself as to what
kettlebell folks actually do before you spend any more time criticizing
their workouts.

We've talked a lot about swings, mostly because you are apparently
convinced that they are the devil, but swings are only a part of a
typical kettlebell workout. In fact, as far as time spent goes,
kettlebell swings are often the smallest part of the workout. The
reason for this is ridiculously simple. You can only swing a
significantly-sized kettlebell for so long before you are forced to sit
it down. I usually take this break as an opportunity to lay on my back
and contemplate the sky for a bit.

Take the Rite of Passage workout that I was doing. It's far and away
the most popular kettlebell workout. And, in fact, I believe it is what
both Jim and Steve are doing now.

The first part of the workout is cleans and presses, *with each press
starting from the ground*. So on my heavy day, when I was doing cleans
and presses with the 24kg kettlebell I did 150 reps all of which started
from the ground.

I think that this would qualify as a lot of "lifting a weight off the
ground" in most people's opinion.

Then, after all of that was done, I would roll two six-sided dice and do
that many minutes of swings. Generally speaking the time spent doing
swings was less than a fourth of the time spent doing cleans and
presses, and I never did even close to 150 swings in the allotted time.

Now, granted, when I moved up to the 32kg kettlebell my heavy day
consisted of 5 ladders to 3 (or just 60 reps). On the other hand, it
took me far longer to get these 60 reps than it took to get the 150 reps
with the 24kg bell, and 60 reps is still a fair amount of reps.

> Whereas dumbbell snatches and deadlifts, cleans from the floor are
> PRECISELY this. Swinging a kb 500 times between your legs is
> certainly exertive.....

200 times (or more) in 10 minutes with a 24kg weight is the goal that
the Rite of Passage suggest for men.

> BUT, it is NOT the same a crouching/squatting down, and grunting up
> 200 #.
>
> Which do you think is the "better preparation" for real-world manual
> labor/lifting?

The Rite of Passage also says the goal for a man is a single kettlebell
clean and press (from the ground) of half their body weight. I would
argue that a 100# one-armed clean and press is better preparation for
real-world manual labor/lifting than a 200# squat.

For one thing, I can do a 200# front squat. In fact, I did 6 sets of 3
using weights between 195 and 215 just last night. I can't do a 100#
one-armed clean and press.

If I were to follow the Rite of Passage template to work up to a 100#
one-armed clean and press I would do so by first being able to do 150
reps with an 88# kettlebell first.

I would bet that would be pretty good preparation for "real world"
lifting.

> Overall, kb workouts are not bad, certainly better than yer average
> infomercial bull**** workouts. But do they live up to their own hype?
> I don't think so.

<sarcasm>
You don't like kettlebell workouts? I had not noticed.
</sarcasm>

> And are they "better" than traditional heavy wieghts and running? I
> don't think so, altho I do think they fill an in-between niche
> perhaps. Esp. the recruitment of "whole-body ANCILLARY" muscles. And
> this is in fact pretty important.

I don't think that even the kettlebell people say that kettlebell drills
are "better" than traditional heavy weights and running. Well, at least
not the heavy weights bit.

Pavel has been quoted many times that kettlebell drills are a way to get
in shape "without the dishonor of jogging." However, /Power to the
People/ is basically a book about deadlifting, and the goal for the
beginner is a double bodyweight deadlift.

As further proof that heavy weights are part of the kettlebell tradition
The Tactical Strength Challenge (tacticalstrengthchallenge.com) includes
three exercises a powerlifting max deadlift, pullups for reps, and
kettlebell snatches for reps in 5 minutes. You should take a look at
that site. Here's the top five competitors in the last competition.

|---------------+--------+----------+--------+--------+--------|
| Name | B Wght | Deadlift | Pullup | Snatch | Score |
|---------------+--------+----------+--------+--------+--------|
| Kevin Montoya | 166.4 | 500 | 31 | 137 | 135.21 |
| Tyrone Ross | 204 | 555 | 23 | 135 | 125.38 |
| Chris Dozois | 209 | 530 | 25 | 129 | 124.82 |
| Josh Behr | 198 | 485 | 26 | 132 | 124.08 |
| Thomas Doran | 184 | 455 | 29 | 117 | 121.8 |
|---------------+--------+----------+--------+--------+--------|

You'd have a hard time convincing anyone that a 167 pound guy that can
pull 500, do 31 pullups and snatch a 24kg kettlebell 137 times in 5
minutes wasn't doing something right when it came to strength and
conditioning.

Sure, Kevin Montoya probably does his fair share of work with a barbell,
but that's typical of people that use kettlebells. Heck, even Freides
(if you bothered to read his training log) has been doing barbell front
squats. Not to mention the fact that he has competed in powerlifting
competitions.

In short, I think that the picture you paint of the folks in the
kettlebell community is largely a strawman. In the real world these
people tend to use barbells as well.

I *do* think that there is a distinct tendency to neglect dumbbells, but
that is mostly because kettlebell people do their one-armed drills with
kettlebells instead.

> Of course, in this "in-between niche" and ancillary muscle bidness,
> clearly individual dumbbells are just as good or better, a couple
> specific moves notwithstanding -- as Jason is finding out.

Once again, no one is stating that kettlebells are magical. Just handy
and fun. Feel free to use something else if you want. Dumbbell
snatches are good too. Just remember, you should also take a page from
the kettlebell handbook and pair the high rep dumbbell snatches with
some traditional strength training.

> We'll have to wait for Jason's -- and David's -- full reports, for the
> complete resolution. Heh, I still haven't made it to Sports
> Authority.....

I agree that it will be interesting to see what else David has to say.
Personally, I am hoping that we can finally get past this particular
obsession we seem to have with kettlebells.

As an incentive to that sort of discussion, please allow me a question.

I am looking to work my way back up to a double bodyweight deadlift
again. Last time I reached this goal I did it with a classic /Power to
the People/ program where I deadlifted and bench pressed[1] 5 days a week
(2 sets of 5 each day).

I was able to work up to a 440 pound deadlift and a 230 pound bench
press following this protocol, and I am tempted to simply do the same
thing again (I weighed between 222 and 230 during this period).

Does anyone else have any other suggestions? As an example of where I
am right now last month on the 8th I deadlifted 315 for a double and on
the 9th I bench pressed 185 for a double. I weighed approximately 207
both of these days.

Jason

Footnotes:
[1] Power to the People actually suggests the side press as the press
that should be used, but I wanted to increase my bench press
instead.

David
December 10th 10, 11:35 PM
"Jason Earl" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, Dec 10 2010, Existential Angst wrote:
>
>> "Burr" > wrote in message
>> .. .
>>>I guess weight lifting is a thing of the pass around here!
>>>
>>> You little boys have fun playing with your little balls!
>>>
>>
>> So Burr, where are YOU when me'n'David are tryna straighten these
>> cult-head kettleballers out??
>>
>> I don't believe you have said Word One in this whole multi-month
>> debate.
>
> Personally, I think it speaks well of Burr that he has kept himself out
> of this discussion.
>
>> But, since you are one of the few barbell lifters left around here,
>> some thoughts come to mind.
>
> I have not lifted a kettlebell (except a rep or two for fun) for weeks.
> Right now my personal program is nothing but barbell lifts (well, and
> some running). I only did some dumbbell lifts because you essentially
> triple dog dared me.
>
> I only did kettlebell drills over Thanksgiving because a kettlebell is
> easier to throw in the back of the van.
>
>> In David's Steve Cotter vid, it finally dawned on me how these kb-ers
>> not only go for reps, but for *mega-reps*.
>>
>> Which strikes me as follows:
>>
>> This would seem to be an inneresting limbo-land between raw
>> strength and raw endurance, an inneresting meld, perhaps. I do much
>> the same thing, except with an apparatus, that allows mega-calorie
>> burns, and therefore a greater taxation of VO2 -- Porcari's ""study""
>> (Jason's link?) notwithstanding, cuz, well, that ""study"" was utter
>> bull****. Kb's do not use enough total body muscle to tax VO2,
>> despite the propagandized insinuations.
>
> Really, kettlebell snatches do not work enough total body muscle to tax
> VO2?
>
> That's your story now.
>
> EA, you really need to push away from your keyboard and try some
> snatches. I don't even care what kind of snatch you try. Then come
> back and tell me that snatches are not a "full body" exercise. It would
> be easier to name the muscles *not* involved in a snatch, than to name
> the muscles that are involved.
>
> I will grant you that Porcari's calorie-burn calculations based on
> lactate monitoring are a bit fishy. That's OK, though. Even without
> those numbers the measured VO2 numbers give this exercise a calorie burn
> that is basically equivalent to running a 10 minute mile.
>
> I suppose next you'll say that the oxygen in question just disappeared.
> Well, then perhaps kettlebells are magical after all. They change O2 to
> CO2 without any oxidation.
>
>> But, kb's still illustrate that weightlifting CAN burn significant
>> calories, just not aerobic-level calories, as Porcari would like.
>
> I believe you mean "as Porcari measured."
>
> Otherwise I agree with you here. This sort of exercise (whether done
> with a kettlebell or whatever other weight you want to swing around) can
> burn a significant amount of calories. It doesn't even have to burn as
> many calories as running to be useful.
>
> Take me as an example. I have found that if I run to much I injure
> myself. I can elevate my heart rate and breathing levels, and keep them
> up, with high rep snatches (or swings, or sledgehammer smashes), on the
> other hand, and I am fine. Heck, I even get stronger in the process.
> So what if this did not burn quite as many calories as running?
>
> Not that I am saying that kettlebell snatches can't burn as many
> calories per minute as jogging, because I think that it can.
>
>> In the case of kb's, I think the distinction between the truly aerobic
>> (running, boucou calorie burn) and the truly resistive (heavy-ish
>> weights, raw strength gain) are kind of lost.
>
> It's not lost. High rep kettlebell drills are just another way to get
> your heart rate up and keep it up for an extended period of time. I
> will admit that I think that 20 minutes is at the outer limits of what
> is really possible for non-super-heroes. I can run for longer than 20
> minutes, but I can not really keep my heart rate elevated with
> kettlebell drills for longer than that.
>
>> KB-ers would say (I'm sure) that THEIR method is better, whole-body,
>> etc etc., but I wonder if it really is, in the general case. I wonder
>> if nailing raw strength gain (heavy non-swung weights) AND running a
>> few miles doesn't fill the "fitness spectrum" better than the
>> "all-in-one" kb-style workout -- as impressive as some of them
>> are/appear to be.
>
> I am sure that there are plenty of ways to skin this particular cat, and
> there probably are lots of ways that you could argue are "better" than
> kettlebell drills. For the most part the exercises you choose are going
> to be dependent on the goals that you have. Or at least they should be.
> Competitive powerlifters and long distance runners are not going to be
> able to agree on whether an exercise is "better" or not (well, both
> would probably agree that kettlebell drills are "better" exercise than
> bowling).
>
> Part of the reason that *I* like kettlebells is that they allow me to
> get better at running (at least for the distances that I am most
> interested in) without having to actually run. Is this the optimal way
> to train if running is your primary goal? No, it is not. Is it the
> optimal way to train if weight loss is your primary goal? I would say
> that there is compelling evidence that says that kettlebell drills is at
> least competitive in this arena.
>
> It certainly worked better than running for me.
>
> If you are interested in running performance for distances over about 2
> miles then even the kettlebell folk say that you probably should simply
> spend more time running. Of course, if you want to be a good 5K (and
> up) runner, then you probably could skip weight training altogether.
>
>> In David's Cotter vid, Cotter specifically talks about the "utility"
>> of lifting a weight off the ground ito preparation for everyday
>> practicalities, yet.... kb-ers don't do much lifting off the
>> ground!!!
>
> I think, EA, that you really need to educate yourself as to what
> kettlebell folks actually do before you spend any more time criticizing
> their workouts.
>
> We've talked a lot about swings, mostly because you are apparently
> convinced that they are the devil, but swings are only a part of a
> typical kettlebell workout. In fact, as far as time spent goes,
> kettlebell swings are often the smallest part of the workout. The
> reason for this is ridiculously simple. You can only swing a
> significantly-sized kettlebell for so long before you are forced to sit
> it down. I usually take this break as an opportunity to lay on my back
> and contemplate the sky for a bit.
>
> Take the Rite of Passage workout that I was doing. It's far and away
> the most popular kettlebell workout. And, in fact, I believe it is what
> both Jim and Steve are doing now.
>
> The first part of the workout is cleans and presses, *with each press
> starting from the ground*. So on my heavy day, when I was doing cleans
> and presses with the 24kg kettlebell I did 150 reps all of which started
> from the ground.
>
> I think that this would qualify as a lot of "lifting a weight off the
> ground" in most people's opinion.
>
> Then, after all of that was done, I would roll two six-sided dice and do
> that many minutes of swings. Generally speaking the time spent doing
> swings was less than a fourth of the time spent doing cleans and
> presses, and I never did even close to 150 swings in the allotted time.
>
> Now, granted, when I moved up to the 32kg kettlebell my heavy day
> consisted of 5 ladders to 3 (or just 60 reps). On the other hand, it
> took me far longer to get these 60 reps than it took to get the 150 reps
> with the 24kg bell, and 60 reps is still a fair amount of reps.
>
>> Whereas dumbbell snatches and deadlifts, cleans from the floor are
>> PRECISELY this. Swinging a kb 500 times between your legs is
>> certainly exertive.....
>
> 200 times (or more) in 10 minutes with a 24kg weight is the goal that
> the Rite of Passage suggest for men.
>
>> BUT, it is NOT the same a crouching/squatting down, and grunting up
>> 200 #.
>>
>> Which do you think is the "better preparation" for real-world manual
>> labor/lifting?
>
> The Rite of Passage also says the goal for a man is a single kettlebell
> clean and press (from the ground) of half their body weight. I would
> argue that a 100# one-armed clean and press is better preparation for
> real-world manual labor/lifting than a 200# squat.
>
> For one thing, I can do a 200# front squat. In fact, I did 6 sets of 3
> using weights between 195 and 215 just last night. I can't do a 100#
> one-armed clean and press.
>
> If I were to follow the Rite of Passage template to work up to a 100#
> one-armed clean and press I would do so by first being able to do 150
> reps with an 88# kettlebell first.
>
> I would bet that would be pretty good preparation for "real world"
> lifting.
>
>> Overall, kb workouts are not bad, certainly better than yer average
>> infomercial bull**** workouts. But do they live up to their own hype?
>> I don't think so.
>
> <sarcasm>
> You don't like kettlebell workouts? I had not noticed.
> </sarcasm>
>
>> And are they "better" than traditional heavy wieghts and running? I
>> don't think so, altho I do think they fill an in-between niche
>> perhaps. Esp. the recruitment of "whole-body ANCILLARY" muscles. And
>> this is in fact pretty important.
>
> I don't think that even the kettlebell people say that kettlebell drills
> are "better" than traditional heavy weights and running. Well, at least
> not the heavy weights bit.
>
> Pavel has been quoted many times that kettlebell drills are a way to get
> in shape "without the dishonor of jogging." However, /Power to the
> People/ is basically a book about deadlifting, and the goal for the
> beginner is a double bodyweight deadlift.
>
> As further proof that heavy weights are part of the kettlebell tradition
> The Tactical Strength Challenge (tacticalstrengthchallenge.com) includes
> three exercises a powerlifting max deadlift, pullups for reps, and
> kettlebell snatches for reps in 5 minutes. You should take a look at
> that site. Here's the top five competitors in the last competition.
>
> |---------------+--------+----------+--------+--------+--------|
> | Name | B Wght | Deadlift | Pullup | Snatch | Score |
> |---------------+--------+----------+--------+--------+--------|
> | Kevin Montoya | 166.4 | 500 | 31 | 137 | 135.21 |
> | Tyrone Ross | 204 | 555 | 23 | 135 | 125.38 |
> | Chris Dozois | 209 | 530 | 25 | 129 | 124.82 |
> | Josh Behr | 198 | 485 | 26 | 132 | 124.08 |
> | Thomas Doran | 184 | 455 | 29 | 117 | 121.8 |
> |---------------+--------+----------+--------+--------+--------|
>
> You'd have a hard time convincing anyone that a 167 pound guy that can
> pull 500, do 31 pullups and snatch a 24kg kettlebell 137 times in 5
> minutes wasn't doing something right when it came to strength and
> conditioning.
>
> Sure, Kevin Montoya probably does his fair share of work with a barbell,
> but that's typical of people that use kettlebells. Heck, even Freides
> (if you bothered to read his training log) has been doing barbell front
> squats. Not to mention the fact that he has competed in powerlifting
> competitions.
>
> In short, I think that the picture you paint of the folks in the
> kettlebell community is largely a strawman. In the real world these
> people tend to use barbells as well.
>
> I *do* think that there is a distinct tendency to neglect dumbbells, but
> that is mostly because kettlebell people do their one-armed drills with
> kettlebells instead.
>
>> Of course, in this "in-between niche" and ancillary muscle bidness,
>> clearly individual dumbbells are just as good or better, a couple
>> specific moves notwithstanding -- as Jason is finding out.
>
> Once again, no one is stating that kettlebells are magical. Just handy
> and fun. Feel free to use something else if you want. Dumbbell
> snatches are good too. Just remember, you should also take a page from
> the kettlebell handbook and pair the high rep dumbbell snatches with
> some traditional strength training.
>
>> We'll have to wait for Jason's -- and David's -- full reports, for the
>> complete resolution. Heh, I still haven't made it to Sports
>> Authority.....
>
> I agree that it will be interesting to see what else David has to say.
> Personally, I am hoping that we can finally get past this particular
> obsession we seem to have with kettlebells.
>
> As an incentive to that sort of discussion, please allow me a question.
>
> I am looking to work my way back up to a double bodyweight deadlift
> again. Last time I reached this goal I did it with a classic /Power to
> the People/ program where I deadlifted and bench pressed[1] 5 days a week
> (2 sets of 5 each day).
>
> I was able to work up to a 440 pound deadlift and a 230 pound bench
> press following this protocol, and I am tempted to simply do the same
> thing again (I weighed between 222 and 230 during this period).
>
> Does anyone else have any other suggestions? As an example of where I
> am right now last month on the 8th I deadlifted 315 for a double and on
> the 9th I bench pressed 185 for a double. I weighed approximately 207
> both of these days.
>
> Jason
>
> Footnotes:
> [1] Power to the People actually suggests the side press as the press
> that should be used, but I wanted to increase my bench press
> instead.

Well I just hope EA doesn't see this but I am definitely impressed with the
workout and the product - and inspired by Cotters drill

Swings is the first step for me and I will graduate to snatches soon
>

Jason Earl[_2_]
December 10th 10, 11:47 PM
On Fri, Dec 10 2010, david wrote:

[...]

> Well I just hope EA doesn't see this but I am definitely impressed
> with the workout and the product - and inspired by Cotters drill
>
> Swings is the first step for me and I will graduate to snatches soon

To be honest, I think that if EA actually *tried* some of these drills
he would feel the same way.

Jason

Existential Angst[_2_]
December 11th 10, 01:34 AM
"david" > wrote in message
nd.com...
>
> "Jason Earl" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Fri, Dec 10 2010, Existential Angst wrote:
>>
>>> "Burr" > wrote in message
>>> .. .
>>>>I guess weight lifting is a thing of the pass around here!
>>>>
>>>> You little boys have fun playing with your little balls!
>>>>
>>>
>>> So Burr, where are YOU when me'n'David are tryna straighten these
>>> cult-head kettleballers out??
>>>
>>> I don't believe you have said Word One in this whole multi-month
>>> debate.
>>
>> Personally, I think it speaks well of Burr that he has kept himself out
>> of this discussion.
>>
>>> But, since you are one of the few barbell lifters left around here,
>>> some thoughts come to mind.
>>
>> I have not lifted a kettlebell (except a rep or two for fun) for weeks.
>> Right now my personal program is nothing but barbell lifts (well, and
>> some running). I only did some dumbbell lifts because you essentially
>> triple dog dared me.
>>
>> I only did kettlebell drills over Thanksgiving because a kettlebell is
>> easier to throw in the back of the van.
>>
>>> In David's Steve Cotter vid, it finally dawned on me how these kb-ers
>>> not only go for reps, but for *mega-reps*.
>>>
>>> Which strikes me as follows:
>>>
>>> This would seem to be an inneresting limbo-land between raw
>>> strength and raw endurance, an inneresting meld, perhaps. I do much
>>> the same thing, except with an apparatus, that allows mega-calorie
>>> burns, and therefore a greater taxation of VO2 -- Porcari's ""study""
>>> (Jason's link?) notwithstanding, cuz, well, that ""study"" was utter
>>> bull****. Kb's do not use enough total body muscle to tax VO2,
>>> despite the propagandized insinuations.
>>
>> Really, kettlebell snatches do not work enough total body muscle to tax
>> VO2?
>>
>> That's your story now.
>>
>> EA, you really need to push away from your keyboard and try some
>> snatches. I don't even care what kind of snatch you try. Then come
>> back and tell me that snatches are not a "full body" exercise. It would
>> be easier to name the muscles *not* involved in a snatch, than to name
>> the muscles that are involved.
>>
>> I will grant you that Porcari's calorie-burn calculations based on
>> lactate monitoring are a bit fishy. That's OK, though. Even without
>> those numbers the measured VO2 numbers give this exercise a calorie burn
>> that is basically equivalent to running a 10 minute mile.
>>
>> I suppose next you'll say that the oxygen in question just disappeared.
>> Well, then perhaps kettlebells are magical after all. They change O2 to
>> CO2 without any oxidation.
>>
>>> But, kb's still illustrate that weightlifting CAN burn significant
>>> calories, just not aerobic-level calories, as Porcari would like.
>>
>> I believe you mean "as Porcari measured."
>>
>> Otherwise I agree with you here. This sort of exercise (whether done
>> with a kettlebell or whatever other weight you want to swing around) can
>> burn a significant amount of calories. It doesn't even have to burn as
>> many calories as running to be useful.
>>
>> Take me as an example. I have found that if I run to much I injure
>> myself. I can elevate my heart rate and breathing levels, and keep them
>> up, with high rep snatches (or swings, or sledgehammer smashes), on the
>> other hand, and I am fine. Heck, I even get stronger in the process.
>> So what if this did not burn quite as many calories as running?
>>
>> Not that I am saying that kettlebell snatches can't burn as many
>> calories per minute as jogging, because I think that it can.
>>
>>> In the case of kb's, I think the distinction between the truly aerobic
>>> (running, boucou calorie burn) and the truly resistive (heavy-ish
>>> weights, raw strength gain) are kind of lost.
>>
>> It's not lost. High rep kettlebell drills are just another way to get
>> your heart rate up and keep it up for an extended period of time. I
>> will admit that I think that 20 minutes is at the outer limits of what
>> is really possible for non-super-heroes. I can run for longer than 20
>> minutes, but I can not really keep my heart rate elevated with
>> kettlebell drills for longer than that.
>>
>>> KB-ers would say (I'm sure) that THEIR method is better, whole-body,
>>> etc etc., but I wonder if it really is, in the general case. I wonder
>>> if nailing raw strength gain (heavy non-swung weights) AND running a
>>> few miles doesn't fill the "fitness spectrum" better than the
>>> "all-in-one" kb-style workout -- as impressive as some of them
>>> are/appear to be.
>>
>> I am sure that there are plenty of ways to skin this particular cat, and
>> there probably are lots of ways that you could argue are "better" than
>> kettlebell drills. For the most part the exercises you choose are going
>> to be dependent on the goals that you have. Or at least they should be.
>> Competitive powerlifters and long distance runners are not going to be
>> able to agree on whether an exercise is "better" or not (well, both
>> would probably agree that kettlebell drills are "better" exercise than
>> bowling).
>>
>> Part of the reason that *I* like kettlebells is that they allow me to
>> get better at running (at least for the distances that I am most
>> interested in) without having to actually run. Is this the optimal way
>> to train if running is your primary goal? No, it is not. Is it the
>> optimal way to train if weight loss is your primary goal? I would say
>> that there is compelling evidence that says that kettlebell drills is at
>> least competitive in this arena.
>>
>> It certainly worked better than running for me.
>>
>> If you are interested in running performance for distances over about 2
>> miles then even the kettlebell folk say that you probably should simply
>> spend more time running. Of course, if you want to be a good 5K (and
>> up) runner, then you probably could skip weight training altogether.
>>
>>> In David's Cotter vid, Cotter specifically talks about the "utility"
>>> of lifting a weight off the ground ito preparation for everyday
>>> practicalities, yet.... kb-ers don't do much lifting off the
>>> ground!!!
>>
>> I think, EA, that you really need to educate yourself as to what
>> kettlebell folks actually do before you spend any more time criticizing
>> their workouts.
>>
>> We've talked a lot about swings, mostly because you are apparently
>> convinced that they are the devil, but swings are only a part of a
>> typical kettlebell workout. In fact, as far as time spent goes,
>> kettlebell swings are often the smallest part of the workout. The
>> reason for this is ridiculously simple. You can only swing a
>> significantly-sized kettlebell for so long before you are forced to sit
>> it down. I usually take this break as an opportunity to lay on my back
>> and contemplate the sky for a bit.
>>
>> Take the Rite of Passage workout that I was doing. It's far and away
>> the most popular kettlebell workout. And, in fact, I believe it is what
>> both Jim and Steve are doing now.
>>
>> The first part of the workout is cleans and presses, *with each press
>> starting from the ground*. So on my heavy day, when I was doing cleans
>> and presses with the 24kg kettlebell I did 150 reps all of which started
>> from the ground.
>>
>> I think that this would qualify as a lot of "lifting a weight off the
>> ground" in most people's opinion.
>>
>> Then, after all of that was done, I would roll two six-sided dice and do
>> that many minutes of swings. Generally speaking the time spent doing
>> swings was less than a fourth of the time spent doing cleans and
>> presses, and I never did even close to 150 swings in the allotted time.
>>
>> Now, granted, when I moved up to the 32kg kettlebell my heavy day
>> consisted of 5 ladders to 3 (or just 60 reps). On the other hand, it
>> took me far longer to get these 60 reps than it took to get the 150 reps
>> with the 24kg bell, and 60 reps is still a fair amount of reps.
>>
>>> Whereas dumbbell snatches and deadlifts, cleans from the floor are
>>> PRECISELY this. Swinging a kb 500 times between your legs is
>>> certainly exertive.....
>>
>> 200 times (or more) in 10 minutes with a 24kg weight is the goal that
>> the Rite of Passage suggest for men.
>>
>>> BUT, it is NOT the same a crouching/squatting down, and grunting up
>>> 200 #.
>>>
>>> Which do you think is the "better preparation" for real-world manual
>>> labor/lifting?
>>
>> The Rite of Passage also says the goal for a man is a single kettlebell
>> clean and press (from the ground) of half their body weight. I would
>> argue that a 100# one-armed clean and press is better preparation for
>> real-world manual labor/lifting than a 200# squat.
>>
>> For one thing, I can do a 200# front squat. In fact, I did 6 sets of 3
>> using weights between 195 and 215 just last night. I can't do a 100#
>> one-armed clean and press.
>>
>> If I were to follow the Rite of Passage template to work up to a 100#
>> one-armed clean and press I would do so by first being able to do 150
>> reps with an 88# kettlebell first.
>>
>> I would bet that would be pretty good preparation for "real world"
>> lifting.
>>
>>> Overall, kb workouts are not bad, certainly better than yer average
>>> infomercial bull**** workouts. But do they live up to their own hype?
>>> I don't think so.
>>
>> <sarcasm>
>> You don't like kettlebell workouts? I had not noticed.
>> </sarcasm>
>>
>>> And are they "better" than traditional heavy wieghts and running? I
>>> don't think so, altho I do think they fill an in-between niche
>>> perhaps. Esp. the recruitment of "whole-body ANCILLARY" muscles. And
>>> this is in fact pretty important.
>>
>> I don't think that even the kettlebell people say that kettlebell drills
>> are "better" than traditional heavy weights and running. Well, at least
>> not the heavy weights bit.
>>
>> Pavel has been quoted many times that kettlebell drills are a way to get
>> in shape "without the dishonor of jogging." However, /Power to the
>> People/ is basically a book about deadlifting, and the goal for the
>> beginner is a double bodyweight deadlift.
>>
>> As further proof that heavy weights are part of the kettlebell tradition
>> The Tactical Strength Challenge (tacticalstrengthchallenge.com) includes
>> three exercises a powerlifting max deadlift, pullups for reps, and
>> kettlebell snatches for reps in 5 minutes. You should take a look at
>> that site. Here's the top five competitors in the last competition.
>>
>> |---------------+--------+----------+--------+--------+--------|
>> | Name | B Wght | Deadlift | Pullup | Snatch | Score |
>> |---------------+--------+----------+--------+--------+--------|
>> | Kevin Montoya | 166.4 | 500 | 31 | 137 | 135.21 |
>> | Tyrone Ross | 204 | 555 | 23 | 135 | 125.38 |
>> | Chris Dozois | 209 | 530 | 25 | 129 | 124.82 |
>> | Josh Behr | 198 | 485 | 26 | 132 | 124.08 |
>> | Thomas Doran | 184 | 455 | 29 | 117 | 121.8 |
>> |---------------+--------+----------+--------+--------+--------|
>>
>> You'd have a hard time convincing anyone that a 167 pound guy that can
>> pull 500, do 31 pullups and snatch a 24kg kettlebell 137 times in 5
>> minutes wasn't doing something right when it came to strength and
>> conditioning.
>>
>> Sure, Kevin Montoya probably does his fair share of work with a barbell,
>> but that's typical of people that use kettlebells. Heck, even Freides
>> (if you bothered to read his training log) has been doing barbell front
>> squats. Not to mention the fact that he has competed in powerlifting
>> competitions.
>>
>> In short, I think that the picture you paint of the folks in the
>> kettlebell community is largely a strawman. In the real world these
>> people tend to use barbells as well.
>>
>> I *do* think that there is a distinct tendency to neglect dumbbells, but
>> that is mostly because kettlebell people do their one-armed drills with
>> kettlebells instead.
>>
>>> Of course, in this "in-between niche" and ancillary muscle bidness,
>>> clearly individual dumbbells are just as good or better, a couple
>>> specific moves notwithstanding -- as Jason is finding out.
>>
>> Once again, no one is stating that kettlebells are magical. Just handy
>> and fun. Feel free to use something else if you want. Dumbbell
>> snatches are good too. Just remember, you should also take a page from
>> the kettlebell handbook and pair the high rep dumbbell snatches with
>> some traditional strength training.
>>
>>> We'll have to wait for Jason's -- and David's -- full reports, for the
>>> complete resolution. Heh, I still haven't made it to Sports
>>> Authority.....
>>
>> I agree that it will be interesting to see what else David has to say.
>> Personally, I am hoping that we can finally get past this particular
>> obsession we seem to have with kettlebells.
>>
>> As an incentive to that sort of discussion, please allow me a question.
>>
>> I am looking to work my way back up to a double bodyweight deadlift
>> again. Last time I reached this goal I did it with a classic /Power to
>> the People/ program where I deadlifted and bench pressed[1] 5 days a week
>> (2 sets of 5 each day).
>>
>> I was able to work up to a 440 pound deadlift and a 230 pound bench
>> press following this protocol, and I am tempted to simply do the same
>> thing again (I weighed between 222 and 230 during this period).
>>
>> Does anyone else have any other suggestions? As an example of where I
>> am right now last month on the 8th I deadlifted 315 for a double and on
>> the 9th I bench pressed 185 for a double. I weighed approximately 207
>> both of these days.
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> Footnotes:
>> [1] Power to the People actually suggests the side press as the press
>> that should be used, but I wanted to increase my bench press
>> instead.
>
> Well I just hope EA doesn't see this but I am definitely impressed with
> the workout and the product - and inspired by Cotters drill
>
> Swings is the first step for me and I will graduate to snatches soon

Oh ****, the world IS coming to an end!!!!

More later.... no doubt the kb swings are innerresting.... and taxing.
BUT, I'll stick with db hurls for now. I think the db hurls/snatches
recruit more overall muscle.

But David, where's yer full report???
--
EA


>>
>
>

David
December 11th 10, 03:40 AM
"Existential Angst" > wrote in message
...
>
> "david" > wrote in message
> nd.com...
>>
>> "Jason Earl" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Fri, Dec 10 2010, Existential Angst wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Burr" > wrote in message
>>>> .. .
>>>>>I guess weight lifting is a thing of the pass around here!
>>>>>
>>>>> You little boys have fun playing with your little balls!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So Burr, where are YOU when me'n'David are tryna straighten these
>>>> cult-head kettleballers out??
>>>>
>>>> I don't believe you have said Word One in this whole multi-month
>>>> debate.
>>>
>>> Personally, I think it speaks well of Burr that he has kept himself out
>>> of this discussion.
>>>
>>>> But, since you are one of the few barbell lifters left around here,
>>>> some thoughts come to mind.
>>>
>>> I have not lifted a kettlebell (except a rep or two for fun) for weeks.
>>> Right now my personal program is nothing but barbell lifts (well, and
>>> some running). I only did some dumbbell lifts because you essentially
>>> triple dog dared me.
>>>
>>> I only did kettlebell drills over Thanksgiving because a kettlebell is
>>> easier to throw in the back of the van.
>>>
>>>> In David's Steve Cotter vid, it finally dawned on me how these kb-ers
>>>> not only go for reps, but for *mega-reps*.
>>>>
>>>> Which strikes me as follows:
>>>>
>>>> This would seem to be an inneresting limbo-land between raw
>>>> strength and raw endurance, an inneresting meld, perhaps. I do much
>>>> the same thing, except with an apparatus, that allows mega-calorie
>>>> burns, and therefore a greater taxation of VO2 -- Porcari's ""study""
>>>> (Jason's link?) notwithstanding, cuz, well, that ""study"" was utter
>>>> bull****. Kb's do not use enough total body muscle to tax VO2,
>>>> despite the propagandized insinuations.
>>>
>>> Really, kettlebell snatches do not work enough total body muscle to tax
>>> VO2?
>>>
>>> That's your story now.
>>>
>>> EA, you really need to push away from your keyboard and try some
>>> snatches. I don't even care what kind of snatch you try. Then come
>>> back and tell me that snatches are not a "full body" exercise. It would
>>> be easier to name the muscles *not* involved in a snatch, than to name
>>> the muscles that are involved.
>>>
>>> I will grant you that Porcari's calorie-burn calculations based on
>>> lactate monitoring are a bit fishy. That's OK, though. Even without
>>> those numbers the measured VO2 numbers give this exercise a calorie burn
>>> that is basically equivalent to running a 10 minute mile.
>>>
>>> I suppose next you'll say that the oxygen in question just disappeared.
>>> Well, then perhaps kettlebells are magical after all. They change O2 to
>>> CO2 without any oxidation.
>>>
>>>> But, kb's still illustrate that weightlifting CAN burn significant
>>>> calories, just not aerobic-level calories, as Porcari would like.
>>>
>>> I believe you mean "as Porcari measured."
>>>
>>> Otherwise I agree with you here. This sort of exercise (whether done
>>> with a kettlebell or whatever other weight you want to swing around) can
>>> burn a significant amount of calories. It doesn't even have to burn as
>>> many calories as running to be useful.
>>>
>>> Take me as an example. I have found that if I run to much I injure
>>> myself. I can elevate my heart rate and breathing levels, and keep them
>>> up, with high rep snatches (or swings, or sledgehammer smashes), on the
>>> other hand, and I am fine. Heck, I even get stronger in the process.
>>> So what if this did not burn quite as many calories as running?
>>>
>>> Not that I am saying that kettlebell snatches can't burn as many
>>> calories per minute as jogging, because I think that it can.
>>>
>>>> In the case of kb's, I think the distinction between the truly aerobic
>>>> (running, boucou calorie burn) and the truly resistive (heavy-ish
>>>> weights, raw strength gain) are kind of lost.
>>>
>>> It's not lost. High rep kettlebell drills are just another way to get
>>> your heart rate up and keep it up for an extended period of time. I
>>> will admit that I think that 20 minutes is at the outer limits of what
>>> is really possible for non-super-heroes. I can run for longer than 20
>>> minutes, but I can not really keep my heart rate elevated with
>>> kettlebell drills for longer than that.
>>>
>>>> KB-ers would say (I'm sure) that THEIR method is better, whole-body,
>>>> etc etc., but I wonder if it really is, in the general case. I wonder
>>>> if nailing raw strength gain (heavy non-swung weights) AND running a
>>>> few miles doesn't fill the "fitness spectrum" better than the
>>>> "all-in-one" kb-style workout -- as impressive as some of them
>>>> are/appear to be.
>>>
>>> I am sure that there are plenty of ways to skin this particular cat, and
>>> there probably are lots of ways that you could argue are "better" than
>>> kettlebell drills. For the most part the exercises you choose are going
>>> to be dependent on the goals that you have. Or at least they should be.
>>> Competitive powerlifters and long distance runners are not going to be
>>> able to agree on whether an exercise is "better" or not (well, both
>>> would probably agree that kettlebell drills are "better" exercise than
>>> bowling).
>>>
>>> Part of the reason that *I* like kettlebells is that they allow me to
>>> get better at running (at least for the distances that I am most
>>> interested in) without having to actually run. Is this the optimal way
>>> to train if running is your primary goal? No, it is not. Is it the
>>> optimal way to train if weight loss is your primary goal? I would say
>>> that there is compelling evidence that says that kettlebell drills is at
>>> least competitive in this arena.
>>>
>>> It certainly worked better than running for me.
>>>
>>> If you are interested in running performance for distances over about 2
>>> miles then even the kettlebell folk say that you probably should simply
>>> spend more time running. Of course, if you want to be a good 5K (and
>>> up) runner, then you probably could skip weight training altogether.
>>>
>>>> In David's Cotter vid, Cotter specifically talks about the "utility"
>>>> of lifting a weight off the ground ito preparation for everyday
>>>> practicalities, yet.... kb-ers don't do much lifting off the
>>>> ground!!!
>>>
>>> I think, EA, that you really need to educate yourself as to what
>>> kettlebell folks actually do before you spend any more time criticizing
>>> their workouts.
>>>
>>> We've talked a lot about swings, mostly because you are apparently
>>> convinced that they are the devil, but swings are only a part of a
>>> typical kettlebell workout. In fact, as far as time spent goes,
>>> kettlebell swings are often the smallest part of the workout. The
>>> reason for this is ridiculously simple. You can only swing a
>>> significantly-sized kettlebell for so long before you are forced to sit
>>> it down. I usually take this break as an opportunity to lay on my back
>>> and contemplate the sky for a bit.
>>>
>>> Take the Rite of Passage workout that I was doing. It's far and away
>>> the most popular kettlebell workout. And, in fact, I believe it is what
>>> both Jim and Steve are doing now.
>>>
>>> The first part of the workout is cleans and presses, *with each press
>>> starting from the ground*. So on my heavy day, when I was doing cleans
>>> and presses with the 24kg kettlebell I did 150 reps all of which started
>>> from the ground.
>>>
>>> I think that this would qualify as a lot of "lifting a weight off the
>>> ground" in most people's opinion.
>>>
>>> Then, after all of that was done, I would roll two six-sided dice and do
>>> that many minutes of swings. Generally speaking the time spent doing
>>> swings was less than a fourth of the time spent doing cleans and
>>> presses, and I never did even close to 150 swings in the allotted time.
>>>
>>> Now, granted, when I moved up to the 32kg kettlebell my heavy day
>>> consisted of 5 ladders to 3 (or just 60 reps). On the other hand, it
>>> took me far longer to get these 60 reps than it took to get the 150 reps
>>> with the 24kg bell, and 60 reps is still a fair amount of reps.
>>>
>>>> Whereas dumbbell snatches and deadlifts, cleans from the floor are
>>>> PRECISELY this. Swinging a kb 500 times between your legs is
>>>> certainly exertive.....
>>>
>>> 200 times (or more) in 10 minutes with a 24kg weight is the goal that
>>> the Rite of Passage suggest for men.
>>>
>>>> BUT, it is NOT the same a crouching/squatting down, and grunting up
>>>> 200 #.
>>>>
>>>> Which do you think is the "better preparation" for real-world manual
>>>> labor/lifting?
>>>
>>> The Rite of Passage also says the goal for a man is a single kettlebell
>>> clean and press (from the ground) of half their body weight. I would
>>> argue that a 100# one-armed clean and press is better preparation for
>>> real-world manual labor/lifting than a 200# squat.
>>>
>>> For one thing, I can do a 200# front squat. In fact, I did 6 sets of 3
>>> using weights between 195 and 215 just last night. I can't do a 100#
>>> one-armed clean and press.
>>>
>>> If I were to follow the Rite of Passage template to work up to a 100#
>>> one-armed clean and press I would do so by first being able to do 150
>>> reps with an 88# kettlebell first.
>>>
>>> I would bet that would be pretty good preparation for "real world"
>>> lifting.
>>>
>>>> Overall, kb workouts are not bad, certainly better than yer average
>>>> infomercial bull**** workouts. But do they live up to their own hype?
>>>> I don't think so.
>>>
>>> <sarcasm>
>>> You don't like kettlebell workouts? I had not noticed.
>>> </sarcasm>
>>>
>>>> And are they "better" than traditional heavy wieghts and running? I
>>>> don't think so, altho I do think they fill an in-between niche
>>>> perhaps. Esp. the recruitment of "whole-body ANCILLARY" muscles. And
>>>> this is in fact pretty important.
>>>
>>> I don't think that even the kettlebell people say that kettlebell drills
>>> are "better" than traditional heavy weights and running. Well, at least
>>> not the heavy weights bit.
>>>
>>> Pavel has been quoted many times that kettlebell drills are a way to get
>>> in shape "without the dishonor of jogging." However, /Power to the
>>> People/ is basically a book about deadlifting, and the goal for the
>>> beginner is a double bodyweight deadlift.
>>>
>>> As further proof that heavy weights are part of the kettlebell tradition
>>> The Tactical Strength Challenge (tacticalstrengthchallenge.com) includes
>>> three exercises a powerlifting max deadlift, pullups for reps, and
>>> kettlebell snatches for reps in 5 minutes. You should take a look at
>>> that site. Here's the top five competitors in the last competition.
>>>
>>> |---------------+--------+----------+--------+--------+--------|
>>> | Name | B Wght | Deadlift | Pullup | Snatch | Score |
>>> |---------------+--------+----------+--------+--------+--------|
>>> | Kevin Montoya | 166.4 | 500 | 31 | 137 | 135.21 |
>>> | Tyrone Ross | 204 | 555 | 23 | 135 | 125.38 |
>>> | Chris Dozois | 209 | 530 | 25 | 129 | 124.82 |
>>> | Josh Behr | 198 | 485 | 26 | 132 | 124.08 |
>>> | Thomas Doran | 184 | 455 | 29 | 117 | 121.8 |
>>> |---------------+--------+----------+--------+--------+--------|
>>>
>>> You'd have a hard time convincing anyone that a 167 pound guy that can
>>> pull 500, do 31 pullups and snatch a 24kg kettlebell 137 times in 5
>>> minutes wasn't doing something right when it came to strength and
>>> conditioning.
>>>
>>> Sure, Kevin Montoya probably does his fair share of work with a barbell,
>>> but that's typical of people that use kettlebells. Heck, even Freides
>>> (if you bothered to read his training log) has been doing barbell front
>>> squats. Not to mention the fact that he has competed in powerlifting
>>> competitions.
>>>
>>> In short, I think that the picture you paint of the folks in the
>>> kettlebell community is largely a strawman. In the real world these
>>> people tend to use barbells as well.
>>>
>>> I *do* think that there is a distinct tendency to neglect dumbbells, but
>>> that is mostly because kettlebell people do their one-armed drills with
>>> kettlebells instead.
>>>
>>>> Of course, in this "in-between niche" and ancillary muscle bidness,
>>>> clearly individual dumbbells are just as good or better, a couple
>>>> specific moves notwithstanding -- as Jason is finding out.
>>>
>>> Once again, no one is stating that kettlebells are magical. Just handy
>>> and fun. Feel free to use something else if you want. Dumbbell
>>> snatches are good too. Just remember, you should also take a page from
>>> the kettlebell handbook and pair the high rep dumbbell snatches with
>>> some traditional strength training.
>>>
>>>> We'll have to wait for Jason's -- and David's -- full reports, for the
>>>> complete resolution. Heh, I still haven't made it to Sports
>>>> Authority.....
>>>
>>> I agree that it will be interesting to see what else David has to say.
>>> Personally, I am hoping that we can finally get past this particular
>>> obsession we seem to have with kettlebells.
>>>
>>> As an incentive to that sort of discussion, please allow me a question.
>>>
>>> I am looking to work my way back up to a double bodyweight deadlift
>>> again. Last time I reached this goal I did it with a classic /Power to
>>> the People/ program where I deadlifted and bench pressed[1] 5 days a
>>> week
>>> (2 sets of 5 each day).
>>>
>>> I was able to work up to a 440 pound deadlift and a 230 pound bench
>>> press following this protocol, and I am tempted to simply do the same
>>> thing again (I weighed between 222 and 230 during this period).
>>>
>>> Does anyone else have any other suggestions? As an example of where I
>>> am right now last month on the 8th I deadlifted 315 for a double and on
>>> the 9th I bench pressed 185 for a double. I weighed approximately 207
>>> both of these days.
>>>
>>> Jason
>>>
>>> Footnotes:
>>> [1] Power to the People actually suggests the side press as the press
>>> that should be used, but I wanted to increase my bench press
>>> instead.
>>
>> Well I just hope EA doesn't see this but I am definitely impressed with
>> the workout and the product - and inspired by Cotters drill
>>
>> Swings is the first step for me and I will graduate to snatches soon
>
> Oh ****, the world IS coming to an end!!!!
>
> More later.... no doubt the kb swings are innerresting.... and taxing.
> BUT, I'll stick with db hurls for now. I think the db hurls/snatches
> recruit more overall muscle.
>
> But David, where's yer full report???
>
Ha ha you mean report about comparing dbs and kbs? nah i dont need to do it
as ah tried dbs and dont like the grip thing - grip is not comfortable for
2 hands and the ergonomics are not right for me - what about you? have you
been to SA?

--
> EA
>
>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Burr[_2_]
December 13th 10, 04:37 AM
Got in a very good Monday workout.

Happy Days

Amery
March 17th 11, 07:09 AM
hello...
Its really true that you above mentioned...
But who can we stop the boys.... If you have any suggestion tell me..
Thanks in advance...