all posts post new thread

Kettlebell Kettlebell Cardio & Endurance

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Question on HR recovery data points, what is the usual HR level to use? Just pick one? I was thinking maybe when it hits the top of level one again using Polar Beat.. I don't want to wait too long as when I'm done with VWC I'm really done, as in hitting the shower..
 
This is why I stopped doing most chest work unless it more or less isolates the upper pec. I didn't like what gravity was doing to my manboobs when they weren't pumped up good, which was less and less...they gotta just go.
Nothing worse than being in a tight push-up position and looking down at something that looks like you could feed kittens.. ROFL
 
Question on HR recovery data points, what is the usual HR level to use? Just pick one? I was thinking maybe when it hits the top of level one again using Polar Beat.. I don't want to wait too long as when I'm done with VWC I'm really done, as in hitting the shower..
We may be talking different applications, but my definition of HR Recovery Rate is something less than 55-60% HRM
 
We may be talking different applications, but my definition of HR Recovery Rate is something less than 55-60% HRM
I think 60% puts me right around the top end of zone 1 or for me about 96 BPM, which is about what I was thinking.. Thanks
 
How did you determine your HRmax?
I didn't, it's the generic Polar Beat number of 161. I also used another formula that put it higher, which I believe it is. If I really wanted to know for sure I could do it by accelerating VWC snatching density per minute, at least that would get me close. A 10 minute snatch test attempt would do it too I believe. The MVO2 test from KJ's book determined the load and cadence of the 15:15 program I'm doing currently, the test is designed to determine whether you're in the right HR zone to generate the VO2 adaptations as I understand it.
 
Unless one is highly detrained or young then only modest improvements in VO2 max are possible; if at all. It's genetically determined for the most part.

What a person can do however (and very successfully) is to increase their fractional utilization of their VO2 max.

Formulas for HRmax are notoriously wrong and only even statistically close on a large population size.

An HRmax test is the only way to get an accurate number.

The good thing is that for most of us unless we are chasing Olympic Gold, it 'probably' doesn't matter too much.

When I am actually training for something I do monitor HR zones as compared to HRmax, but only for sake of uniformity and consistency in tracking performance, and some common way of describing it.

For my simple aspirations it's adequate....
 
What a person can do however (and very successfully) is to increase their fractional utilization of their VO2 max.

This is my goal (well, one of them) as I'm seeing steady cardiovascular improvements across the board as I progress. It's all the other factors that count it seems.


he good thing is that for most of us unless we are chasing Olympic Gold, it 'probably' doesn't matter too much.

When I am actually training for something I do monitor HR zones as compared to HRmax, but only for sake of uniformity and consistency in tracking performance, and some common way of describing it.

For my simple aspirations it's adequate...

This is my line of thinking as well, it's kind of like framing a house, all I need is an anchor point to start, the rest I can figure out. When measuring progress in VWC whether I'm off a few percentage points on my scales, graphs and data points doesn't make a whole lot of difference for my purposes. Even if I had highly accurate data plotted and all my stuff laid out perfectly I would probably look at it and say, 'huh..., now what'? Right now I see almost daily CV improvements happening, it's one of the coolest things I've done in a long time and I'm very happy with it. I guess ignorance is bliss! :)

Having said that I may one day see how high the engine will rev, just for curiosity sake..
 
Like @offwidth said, VO2Max is just a number indicating an intensity. It is trainable to some extent, but what matters most is how much work you can do at that intensity. It's interesting to note that though VO2 Max is very high amongst elite endurance athletes, among them there is quite a range. The highest doesn't always win. Otherwise, we could could all just mail in our lab numbers to determine winners, no need to suffer through a race.
 
Like @offwidth said, VO2Max is just a number indicating an intensity. It is trainable to some extent, but what matters most is how much work you can do at that intensity. It's interesting to note that though VO2 Max is very high amongst elite endurance athletes, among them there is quite a range. The highest doesn't always win. Otherwise, we could could all just mail in our lab numbers to determine winners, no need to suffer through a race.

Power production is the name of the game for me right now, I'll push it to the literal limit with VWC. It's tough but tons (literally) of fun at the same time.
 
Also, VO2MAX of s usually expressed relative to body weight, mL O2/kg. So, lose weight and it goes up. Another reason endurance athletes are typically smaller. And full body demands emphasize it even more, so the highest numbers are recorded in rowers and XC skiers, since those sports demand more full body power than cycling or running. So a full body exercise like the KB snatch seems like a good training method. I should read VWC and see what he says. Prolly not for me, that sort of training would most likely completely nuke me.
 
Prolly not for me, that sort of training would most likely completely nuke me.

Not necessarily. Before you begin the protocol you take a test which determines what weight KB to use and how many reps in a set. Back when I did the test, which was some years ago, I could do 10 reps per arm with 32 kg in the snatch, but my working weight for VWC was 16 kg. The goal is to work up to 40 minutes (or 80 sets of 15:15 intervals) but how you get there is up to you. You can take months if you need to. It does get boring after a while.
 
Also, VO2MAX of s usually expressed relative to body weight, mL O2/kg. So, lose weight and it goes up. Another reason endurance athletes are typically smaller. And full body demands emphasize it even more, so the highest numbers are recorded in rowers and XC skiers, since those sports demand more full body power than cycling or running. So a full body exercise like the KB snatch seems like a good training method. I should read VWC and see what he says. Prolly not for me, that sort of training would most likely completely nuke me.

I would say read the book, cheap on Kindle.You could start with even 12k like I did, it kinda introduces your body slowly to the protocol. I would not recommend the aggressive schedule I followed, for me it was a personal test and challenge.
Right now 3 times/wk is my schedule. I'm getting ready to hit 80 sets this morning for the 3rd time, cycling 40, 60 and 80 sets in a week. If it doesn't get easier I'll keep cycling until it is.

The protocol carves fat from the midsection, it's the closest thing to 'spot reducing' I've seen, and I wasn't even looking for it..
 
I'm getting ready to hit 80 sets this morning for the 3rd time, cycling 40, 60 and 80 sets in a week.

That's impressive. How do you deal with the boredom? Or is the challenge of going that long enough to keep you motivated?

The protocol carves fat from the midsection, it's the closest thing to 'spot reducing' I've seen, and I wasn't even looking for it..

Men tend to lose fat from their midsection first, so probably not spot reducing, just general fat loss.
 
That's impressive. How do you deal with the boredom? Or is the challenge of going that long enough to keep you motivated?

I play loud Buddy Guy or the like, constantly monitor and refine technique and just get off on my body firing on all cylinders and cruising at a high rate of speed. Actually the time goes pretty fast as I stay very focused and I'm kinda let down a bit when it's over. I may be a little crazy but for some reason this protocol is just downright enjoyable for me and I can't wait to get to the next session..

Starting this plan was mainly an exploratory move for me but as I progress I'm just getting more hooked on it. I'm hooked on GT work in general as it really makes me feel alive and mimics karate training intensity in some ways.

Men tend to lose fat from their midsection first, so probably not spot reducing, just general fat loss.

That's true, it's very noticeable in a fairly short time span though. It makes sense as I'm driving along at nearly 800 kcal per hour in this format.

Edit: Today's session went well, the first 80 set effort was painful as I over trained going into it, then the 2nd session went smoother while today's smoother still. It comes down to lungs and guns feeling fatigue a bit in the last 20 sets. I think I'll cycle again for an 80 set effort next Monday and go from there, I'm relying on instinct to know I'm owning the 80 sets. Only then will I start adding a rep each set, it's similar to S&S in my approach.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the detailed answer Steve. I somehow thought it was related to your back.


If I'm not mistaken in my m memory doesn't Pavel caution against cycling in close time proximity to swings in S&S?

Thanks again...
I'm pretty sure Pavel wrote an article where he said that exercise that encouraged spine flexion like cycling or rowing were best done after swings but not before.
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom