I Guess

[Burr]

I guess weight lifting is a thing of the pass around here!

You little boys have fun playing with your little balls!

[Existential Angst]

Post by Burr
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
bullshit. 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 bullshit 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.....

[david]

Post by Existential Angst

Post by Burr
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*.
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 bullshit. 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 bullshit 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

Post by Existential Angst
--
EA

[Existential Angst]

Post by david

Post by Existential Angst

Post by Burr
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*.
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 bullshit. 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 bullshit 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

Ceptin rowing is super-hellified, one of THE most strenuous whole-body
motions you can do.
Real rowing, that is, not these bullshit Concept 2 or whatever rowers.

The diff between rowing and swings is that swings preferentially load only
one part of the range of motion, giving momentum to the rest of the range of
motion -- and of course being semi-pendulum like.
Rowing loads the WHOLE range of motion, with no pendulum assistance. Rowing
is bust-ass, all the way.

Funny, tho, I expected rowers to be more hulk-ish, but they look more like
decathaloners.... thought they would look more like these super-bodied
sprinters, or pumped-up speed-skaters. Ever see those guys? Ben Johnson?
Holy shit.... Even the femaile sprinters got more muscle than I got....
Female sprinting is soft porn....

Not sure why the rowers aren't as pumped up, but they gotta be strong.
Mebbe I just haven't seen enough rowing/rowers. That stuff is hard to
catch, anyway.

I believe most of the hard bodies you see amongst kettleballers were already
hard before they started kb's -- from traditional weights. Heh.... find
one that will fess up, tho....

[david]

Post by Existential Angst

Post by david

Post by Existential Angst

Post by Burr
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*.
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 bullshit. 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 bullshit 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

Ceptin rowing is super-hellified, one of THE most strenuous whole-body
motions you can do.
Real rowing, that is, not these bullshit Concept 2 or whatever rowers.
The diff between rowing and swings is that swings preferentially load only
one part of the range of motion, giving momentum to the rest of the range
of motion -- and of course being semi-pendulum like.
Rowing loads the WHOLE range of motion, with no pendulum assistance.
Rowing is bust-ass, all the way.
Funny, tho, I expected rowers to be more hulk-ish, but they look more like
decathaloners.... thought they would look more like these super-bodied
sprinters, or pumped-up speed-skaters. Ever see those guys? Ben Johnson?
Holy shit.... Even the femaile sprinters got more muscle than I got....
Female sprinting is soft porn....
Not sure why the rowers aren't as pumped up, but they gotta be strong.
Mebbe I just haven't seen enough rowing/rowers. That stuff is hard to
catch, anyway.
I believe most of the hard bodies you see amongst kettleballers were
already hard before they started kb's -- from traditional weights.
Heh.... find one that will fess up, tho....
--
EA

Yes when you go by 'perceived effort' rowers are a hard workout for limited
results - and boring as hell -
Of course you are dead right about the pendulum effect etc - I dint think it
throo.
Sprinters . . .I have an idea a lot of them like Ben Johnson hit the
weights and on the juice.- great bodies tho' -

Post by Existential Angst

Post by david

Post by Existential Angst
--
EA

[Jason Earl]

Post by Existential Angst

Post by Burr
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

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

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
Overall, kb workouts are not bad, certainly better than yer average
infomercial bullshit 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>

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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]

Post by Jason Earl

Post by Existential Angst

Post by Burr
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

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

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
Overall, kb workouts are not bad, certainly better than yer average
infomercial bullshit 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>

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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
[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]

On Fri, Dec 10 2010, david wrote:

[...]

Post by david
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]

Post by david

Post by Jason Earl

Post by Existential Angst

Post by Burr
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

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

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
Overall, kb workouts are not bad, certainly better than yer average
infomercial bullshit 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>

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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
[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 SHIT, 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???

[david]

Post by Existential Angst

Post by david

Post by Jason Earl

Post by Existential Angst

Post by Burr
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

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

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
Overall, kb workouts are not bad, certainly better than yer average
infomercial bullshit 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>

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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.

Post by Existential Angst
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
[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 SHIT, 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?

--

Post by Existential Angst
EA

[Burr]

Got in a very good Monday workout.

Happy Days

[Emma]

IN NEED OF SOME EXTRA CASH WHY NOT GIVE THIS A TRY:


MAKE OVER £10,000 A MONTH USING PAYPALS PROVEN PROCESS AND JUST A £6 INVESTMENT!!!!

Make over £10,000 a month, using PAYPAL and a proven process, with
just a £6.00 investment. That's right, just six dollars invested. It's
easy, quick and simple, and can be repeated whenever you want.
How many times do you want to make over £10,000? You choose.
You just need to read this simple and clear report, follow the rules
and move quickly on this one.

Ok, a little while back, I was browsing through newsgroups and message
boards, and came across an article similar to this that said you could
make thousands of dollars within weeks with only an initial investment
of £6.00! So I thought, "Yeah right, this must be a scam", but like
most of us, I was curious, so I kept reading. After consulting with
some friends, they themselves heard about this but were, like me
sceptical about the idea. So I thought to myself "why not give it a
try, its only £6, I mean I've spent more than that on lunch!" So I
gave it a try and OH MY GOD!!! Trust me, the results were staggering!
Let's cut the boring part and get straight into it.
This can be done by anyone in the world.
PAYPAL VERIFIES THAT THIS BUSINESS PROGRAM IS 100%%%% LEGAL AND IS A BIG
HIT, TAKES JUST 15-30 MINUTES AND A SMALL £6 INVESTMENT.
This project has been on TV programmes such as 20/20, Oprah, and the
Wall Street Journal.
It's been in existence in many forms for at least a decade.
The entire process is FAST, EASY and VERY, VERY LUCRATIVE.
I WAS SHOCKED WHEN I SAW HOW MUCH MONEY CAME FLOODING INTO MY PAYPAL
ACCOUNT I turned £6 into over £10,000.
I will GUARANTEE that you will enjoy a similar return!
The only things you will need are:
1. An email address.
2. A Business or Premier PAYPAL account (FREE)3. Just 20 to 30 minutes
of your time.
This program takes just half an hour to set up. After that, there is
absolutely no work whatsoever to do on your part.
You have absolutely NOTHING to lose, and there is NO LIMIT to the
amount of income you can generate from this one single business
program.
Let's get started, just follow the instructions exactly as set out
below and then prepare you for a HUGE influx of cash over the next 30
days! Here's what you need to do.
STEP 1: Setting up your FREE PAYPAL Account
It's extremely safe and very easy to set up a FREE PAYPAL account!
Copy and paste the following link exactly into the address bar:
https://www.paypal.com/uk/mrb/pal=EPD2QXJ3BLX9G (notice the secure
"https" within the link)
Be sure to sign up for a FREE PREMIER or BUSINESS account (and not a
PERSONAL account) otherwise you won't be able to receive credit card
payments from other people.
STEP 2: Sending PAYPAL money
To give means to receive, and receive you will. Many waste £6 on
nothing of use. You'll make over £10,000 with the £6 you invest.
To send money, all you do is click on 'send money' located in blue at
the top of the page next to 'welcome'.
Now all you have to do is send £1.00 by way of PAYPAL to each of the
email address below.
Make sure the subject of the payment says... "PLEASE ADD ME TO YOUR
MAILING LIST".
(this keeps the program 100%%%% legal... so please don't forget!)
These are the e-mail addresses you send £1 to. (That is £1 to each
email address.)
1) ***@hotmail.com
2) ***@gmail.com
3) ***@ymail.com
4) ***@gmail.com
5) ***@outlook.com
6) ***@ymail.com

Remember, all of this is ABSOLUTELY LEGAL! You are creating a service!
If you have any doubts, please refer to Title 18 Sec. 1302 & 1241 of
the United States Postal laws.
STEP 3: Adding Your Email Address
After you send your £1.00 payment, to each email on the list above,
Take the #1) email off the list that you saw above, move the other
addresses up one - (#6 becomes #5 & #5 becomes #4 and #4 becomes #3 &
#3 becomes #2 and #2 becomes #1. etc)
Now add YOUR email address (the one used in your PAYPAL account) to
position #6) on the list.
*** MAKE SURE THE EMAIL YOU SUPPLY IS EXACTLY AS IT APPEARS IN YOUR
PAYPAL ACCOUNT SO YOU CAN GET PAID ***
STEP 4: The Pure Joy of Receiving PAYPAL Money!
You are now ready to post your copy of this message, to at least
50-200 newsgroups, message boards. I post to 200 for quicker surer
results. There are close to 32,000 news groups, this makes it easy for
you to earn money.
All you need is 200 news groups, but the more you post, the more money
you make - as well as everyone else on the list!
In this situation your job is to let as many people see this letter as
possible. So they will make you and me rich and of course
themselves!!! You can even start posting the moment your email is
confirmed. Payments will still appear in your PAYPAL account even
while your bank account is being confirmed.
DIRECTIONS: HOW TO POST TO NEWSGROUPS & MESSAGE BOARDS
You do not need to re-type this entire letter to do your own posting.
Simply do the following:
STEP 1: Put your CURSOR at the beginning of this letter and drag your
CURSOR to the bottom of this document, and select 'copy' from the edit
menu. This will copy the entire letter into your computer's temporary
memory.
STEP 2: Open a blank 'Notepad' file and place your cursor at the top
of the blank page. From the 'Edit' menu select 'Paste'. This will
paste a copy of the letter into notepad so that you can add your email
to the list.
STEP 3: Save your new Notepad file as a .txt file. If you want to do
your postings in different sittings, you'll always have this file to
go back to.
STEP 4: Use Netscape or Internet Explorer and try searching for
various newsgroups, on-line forums, message boards, bulletin boards,
chat sites, discussions, discussion groups, online communities, etc.

EXAMPLE: Go to any search engine like yahoo.com, google.com,
altavista.com, excite.com - then search with subjects like?
Millionaire message board? Or? Or? Opportunity message board? Or?
Money making discussions? Or? Business bulletin board? Or? Money
making forum? etc. You will find thousands & thousands of message
boards. Click them one by one then you will find the option to post a
new message.
STEP 5: Visit these message boards and post this article as a new
message by highlighting the text of this letter and selecting 'Paste'
from the 'Edit' menu. Fill in the Subject, this will be the header
that everyone sees as they scroll thru the list of postings in a
particular group, click the post message button. You're done with your
first one! Congratulations! THAT'S IT!! All you have to do is jump to
different newsgroups and post away. After you get the hang of it, it
will take about 30 seconds for each newsgroup!
REMEMBER, THE MORE NEWSGROUPS AND/OR MESSAGE BOARDS YOU POST IN, THE
MORE MONEY YOU WILL MAKE!!!
That's it! You will begin receiving money within days!
***JUST MAKE SURE THE EMAIL YOU SUPPLY AND PUT AT THE BOTTOM OF LIST
ABOVE, IS EXACTLY AS IT APPEARS ON YOUR PAYPAL ACCOUNT SO YOU GET
PAID.***
WHY IT'S EASY TO MAKE £10,000 CASH: OK, lets say I receive only 5
replies (a very low example). So then I Made £5.00 with my email at #6
on the letter. Now, each of the 5 persons who just sent me £1.00 make
the MINIMUM 200 posting, each with my email at #5 and
only 5 persons respond to each of the original 5, that is another
£25.00 for me, now those 25 each make 200 MINIMUM posts with my email
at #4 and only 5 replies each, I will bring in an additional £125.00!
Now, those 125 persons turn around and post the MINIMUM 200 with my
email at #3 and only receive 5 replies each, I will make an additional
£625.00! OK, now here is the fun part, each of those 625 persons post
a MINIMUM 200 letters with my email at #2 and they only receive 5
replies that just made me £3,125.00!!! Those 3,125 persons will all
deliver this message to 200 newsgroups with my email at #1 and if
still 5 persons per 200 newsgroups react I will receive £15,625.00!
£15,625.00! from an original investment of only £6.00! AMAZING!!
When your email is no longer on the list, you just take the latest
posting in the newsgroups, and send out another £6.00 to emails on the
list, putting your email at number 6, after sending your £1 payments
and start posting again.
The thing to remember is, thousands of people all over the world are
joining the internet and reading these articles everyday, JUST LIKE
YOU are now!!
All this takes is £6, which most people waste on nothing really
important anyway.
IT REALLY WORKS!!!
There are tons of new honest users and new honest people who are
joining the internet and newsgroups everyday and are willing to give
it a try. Estimates are at 20,000 to 50,000 new users of the Internet,
every day.
What will happen over the course of 30 days? Well, this money will be
sent to you by a few thousand people just like yourself, who are
willing to invest £6.00 and around 30 minutes of their time to receive
around £10,000 or more in cash. The first payments will arrive within
a few days and then they will continue at the rate of about 100
payments per day for about 30 days (obviously this will depend on how
quickly you act and how quickly people take you up on this offer and
then pass it on). After that time, the volumes of payments begin to
taper off as your email is removed from the No 1 position. That's all
you need to do!
There will be around £10,000 in payments waiting for you in your
PAYPAL account within the next few weeks. £10,000 for just 30 minutes
work! This is real money that you can spend on anything you wish! Just
deposit it to your own bank account or spend it directly from your
PAYPAL account!!! It's just that easy!!!
Send your emails only to people who are likely to want to participate
and move quickly on this.
Remember, play FAIRLY and HONESTLY and this will work. This really
isn't another one of those crazy scams! As long as people follow
through with sending out £6.00, it works!
Remember, play FAIRLY and HONESTLY and this will really work. There's
no use trying to cheat for only £6.00 Please. Use only opt-in
resources for this material it will work for you and it works much
faster without soliciting or spamming and has higher responses!!!
N.B. REMEMBER, IT IS 100%%%% LEGAL! AND THE MONEY YOU CAN MAKE IS
REALISTIC. DON'T PASS THIS UP
SOME EMAIL TESTIMONIALS RECEIVED.
"I followed the instructions just 2 weeks and 4 days ago, and although
I haven't made 10 grand yet, I am already up to £6,135. I am
absolutely gob smacked".
Mr. A baker, Leicester.
"Well what can I say? I sent out 40 emails like the plan said then I
just forgot about the whole thing. To be honest, I didn't really think
anything would come of it, but "I checked my PayPal account a week
later and there was over £3000.00 in it!!!"
Robert, New York.
"After 30 days I now have over £11,000 to spend".
L. Wang, Northampton.
"I was shocked when I saw how much money came flooding into my PayPal
account. Within 3 weeks my account balance has ballooned to £7,449"
Shirley Wicks, Ontario.
Send this to others, regardless of wherever you go ahead or not, they
may want to make over £10,000 even if you don't! This business
actually works! Even if you think 'nah this sounds like a scam' PASS
IT ON! There are people out there who can see through the 'nah this
sounds like a scam' rubbish and actually see the MAJOR benefits this
system can really make!
Just copy and paste the link into the address bar of your web browser
and away you go.
https://www.paypal.com/

WITH WARM WISHES, GOD BLESS YOU AND ALL YOUR LOVED ONE'S.