all posts post new thread

Other/Mixed Pavel Asking You for Article Ideas

Other strength modalities (e.g., Clubs), mixed strength modalities (e.g., combined kettlebell and barbell), other goals (flexibility)
Thank you, ladies and gentlemen! Processing...

Meanwhile, a few answers.

* Will definitely write about A+A.
* Will not be writing about sandbags or clubs as I have no experience with either.
* A Program Maximum is a highly individual choice.
* ROP 2.0 programming is covered in the Kettlebell 201 workshop.
* I have forwarded the suggestions aimed at Fabio and Derek to them.
* For stretching go to Flexible Steel – Be Both Flexible & Strong! Become Flexible Steel!
 
I would love to see a breakdown of tests one could run to give you an idea of where you may be most lacking, and then what path would be beneficial to overcome those deficiencies. For instance, should you do Q&D, A+A, strength aerobics, etc? If there was a test that would help determine where you are weak (aerobic capacity, muscular endurance, etc) it could help guide on what you should work on next.
 
Seeing a lot of stuff our there regards to CV adaptations for mitochondria, longevity, heart anatomy... explanations of the physiology behind different adaptations from strength, ballistics, vs SS cardio style stuff would be cool. This was touched on in SE, but maybe an expansion of that train of thought
 
More about greasing the groove, for example, would a steady diet of snatches, squats, and cleans throughout the day be enough of a workout to help get you in shape and if so is there a magic target number of total reps for the day.
 
Edward's Here said:
More about greasing the groove, for example, would a steady diet of snatches, squats, and cleans throughout the day be enough of a workout to help get you in shape and if so is there a magic target number of total reps for the day.
Click to expand...
I can attest - greasing the groove is great. and bringing that to the fore would be great.
I bet the main target is still 100 quality reps, but going over greasing the groove sounds like a great idea.
I don't think it's too thoroughly fleshed out in too many places.

Similarly: maybe tempting @Geoff Neupert into doing a write-up on Strength Shortcuts could be good.
That higher frequency stuff doesn't get as much attention, but having gone over it again - it makes me wanna bring a kettlebell in the car with me, or stage one at work - or sneak into the garage more often.
 
I would like to see where the original PM of Snatch and Bent Press now sits in light of PS and SE. How could this be programmed.
Easy Strength with a view to Hypertrophy- Easy Hypertrophy.
Glycolytic Peaking approaches for snatch test and or TSC
 
BJJ Shawn said:
I would love to see a breakdown of tests one could run to give you an idea of where you may be most lacking, and then what path would be beneficial to overcome those deficiencies. For instance, should you do Q&D, A+A, strength aerobics, etc? If there was a test that would help determine where you are weak (aerobic capacity, muscular endurance, etc) it could help guide on what you should work on next.
Click to expand...
I am not Pavel, but I would argue that deficiencies aren't universal but based on specific needs. I'll give a personal example - I have spent many a month doing nothing but one-armed kettlebell presses, barbell deadlifts, walking, and stretching. Now I regularly do kettlebell swings, primarily because I wanted to increase my work capacity, but I don't feel I had a "deficit," rather just that my wants changed - tough for me to say I needed to add swings to my routine.

If you're looking for a strength-related weakness across all three modalities, consider the requirements of the SFG, SFL, and SFB - work up to being able to meet all of those. I recall Pavel, at the first US-hosted SFL, responding to come attendee complaints about the strength standards being too hard - he said those people who meet those standards can consider themselves only "not weak."

I don't think anyone who can walk comfortably for a few miles can be considered to have an aerobic deficit; I don't think anyone who can meet the SFG, SFL, and SFB standards can be considered to have a strength deficit. If you can do both, you have enough muscular endurance.

JMO, YMMV.

-S-
 
As offwidth and others suggested, would love to read more about integrating SF Strong Endurance methods for longer (mountain) endurance events. In particular, integration/ periodisation of aerobic base building with A&A and strength work.

The other thing I’d enjoy reading about is Pavel’s take on health/longevity and [prioritisation of] training considerations as we age. Dan John speaks about an increasing priority being placed on hypertrophy-style training which seems logical due to the tendency toward muscle atrophy and risk of falls. Q&D speaks of power loss. Then there’s cardiovascular and mitochondrial health and AGT’s improvement of both.

Many Thanks
 
Steve Freides said:
I am not Pavel, but I would argue that deficiencies aren't universal but based on specific needs. I'll give a personal example - I have spent many a month doing nothing but one-armed kettlebell presses, barbell deadlifts, walking, and stretching. Now I regularly do kettlebell swings, primarily because I wanted to increase my work capacity, but I don't feel I had a "deficit," rather just that my wants changed - tough for me to say I needed to add swings to my routine.

If you're looking for a strength-related weakness across all three modalities, consider the requirements of the SFG, SFL, and SFB - work up to being able to meet all of those. I recall Pavel, at the first US-hosted SFL, responding to come attendee complaints about the strength standards being too hard - he said those people who meet those standards can consider themselves only "not weak."

I don't think anyone who can walk comfortably for a few miles can be considered to have an aerobic deficit; I don't think anyone who can meet the SFG, SFL, and SFB standards can be considered to have a strength deficit. If you can do both, you have enough muscular endurance.

JMO, YMMV.

-S-
Click to expand...

I am not one to disagree with this, I would just explain my rationale for it. I have seen people who struggle to hit any target, say Simple for instance. Some people can't meet the standard because their grip strength gives out, some people can't catch their breath, some don't have stability in their getups, etc. This gives them something they know they need to focus on sine it is what is keeping them from hitting the standard.

But when picking your next program, it seems often times to get picked by what seems fun, and not necessarily by what your weaknesses are since often times until you start doing a program you don't know what those weaknesses are. My thought process is that having a few tests to run to test your GPP in different aspects would A.) give you more meaning to why you are picking a program if you are like me and truly don't know where you are weakest, and B.) give an overview of what each program is really designed to address.
 
Honestly, as an onlooker, I am interested in the strength and variation of opinions about strength/performance standards.
What constitutes an excess or deficit of certain physical metrics?
I would read about that.
 
Pick a few sports, discuss how you might program for those athletes. My requests would be baseball, basketball, and volleyball.

Any thoughts on how to train for injury-proofing, particularly for older athletes.
 
I'd like to see compendiums of Strong Endurance and Plan Strong programs for various purposes, with some implementation guidance. I wouldn't expect this in free articles, and I'd be happy to purchase them in book form.

The seminars don't interest me because of:
--Cost
--Limited scheduling availability
--Don't like the format. IMO, the seminar format is a very inefficient and tedious way of learning. I MUCH prefer text for information and explanation. I find it very tedious to listen to a talking head explanation on video, and it makes it much harder to quickly find and review specific information I'm looking for. And, as far as I can tell, the Strong Endurance and Plan Strong seminars are not available as recordings for reference anyway. Video can be indispensable for demonstration. Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words, and sometimes a video is worth a thousand pictures -- but only when it's something visual and dynamic like technique demonstration. For programming information, I don't want to sit and listen to a talking head.
--Not interested in a lot of the theory, biochemistry, etc. Pavel frequently quotes Taleb's assertion in Antifragile:
We are built to be dupes for theories. But theories come and go; experience stays. Explanations change all the time, and have changed all the time in history (because of causal opacity, the invisibility of causes) with people involved in the incremental development of ideas thinking they always had a definitive theory; experience remains constant.
Click to expand...
"This way works really well for this purpose under these circumstances" is a compelling enough explanation, without tying it to a theoretical explanation that may or may not turn out to be valid, and which makes no practical difference in implementation.

So anyway, put it in a book and take my money.
 
Anna C said:
The advantages of increased training volume (as opposed to a minimalist approach), when overall lifestyle tends to be sedentary.
Click to expand...
+1, with a thought that minimalism is not necessarily an antipod of increased volume. Minimalistic choice of exercises + volume, always liked it.

I would also like to hear updated take on combining and better integration of volumes of the ballistics and grinds, if something new came up since the ETK.
Another humble request would be to reflect about the differences training at the young age and at late 40s, aiming not to degrade or go down a level.

Павел, большое спасибо за возможность озвучить наши идеи. Всегда рад видеть любой Ваш материал.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom