Apologies to the OP for getting even more off topic…The USAW level 1 course was (at least until recently) both an intro to coaching the sport of WLing, but also intended as a foundational course for using the power versions of the quick lifts for sports performance. Back in the mid 2000s there was a dedicated sports performance coaching course, but USAW retired and combined it with what was formerly known as the Club Coach course to make the current course. Too bad, I think. As for fitness, as Franco Colombu once quipped about bodybuilding, there are easier ways to say in shape than wling training; “fit for what” / “conditioned for what” still defines those things. The highest level elites in countries with state supported programs train over 40 hrs a week and have staggering annual training tonnages. It takes years of progressive loading and “work hardening” / conditioning to get to that level though. There’s an undeniable association between progressing annual tonnage and climbing the qualification ranks from beginner to international elite. The USAW curriculum, having taught it off and on over the last couple of decades, is totally lacking in how to progress an athlete and we have no qualification system which correlates to meet results/total or training tonnage whatsoever. Program Strong which was derived from Soviet era weightlifting sports science on how to organize volume and intensity effectively for non-weightlifting exercises, if folded into the actual SF weightlifting curriculum would be a great service to weightlifting coaches and for sports performance coaches alike.Absolutely. The same way weightlifting produces all those qualities (maybe minus the conditioning part, lol.. and the strong endurance). I just see it as what do you have as your beacon to aim your efforts toward -- competition performance, or being strong for a general or "higher" purpose? Day to day, it doesn't matter -- training is training and we get stronger by many methods. It just helps to understand end most effectively employ a method to know what it's guiding principles are.
I perceive StrongFirst O-Lifting is oriented the same way as the rest of StrongFirst's methods in terms of what it is trying to accomplish. I hope that it grows from a seminar to to a course or cert. Every other weightlifting / Olympic lifting course out there is aimed at competition performance as its end goal. StrongFirst is aimed at the exercises as a training method to build strength and related qualities. Just like with kettlebells and GS or hardstyle, in the process of training, you are headed in the same direction, and what you get is at least 90 - 95% overlapped with other methods. But the guiding light, or beacon that you are aiming for, is a little bit different.
But not everyone cares about all that... we just like to train, and of course appreciate impressive accomplishments however they are attained. The OP is certainly an impressive accomplishment! I follow her on Instagram and love her style.
The reasons for differences seem pretty staright forward (i.e., not gobblygooky).I find it to be marketing gobblygook.
It was, back in the day, considered good hard style technique to shift rearwards slightly to accelerate the bell upward, then “tame the arc” (Rob Lawrence) and then “lean into the bell” forward slightly at lockout. Dropping the bell, one leaned away slightly which kept the bell closer to CoG and facilitated delaying the hip hinge. If one is after power production, then a more vertical bell path will necessarily be more powerful and faster; displacing the body slightly aft to accelerate the bell then fore to lock out accomplishes that without unnecessary arm involvement. One of my master aged KB sport heroes Fedor Fuglev who was still an elite sport competitor at the time in training put up a staggering 300 legal reps in 10 minutes one hand switch 24kg…a very different almost hard style technique, lots of leg drive, not much swing and really like a “clean that ends up overhead” (with anatomical breath match appropriate to the sport: double breath at top and bottom…sounds like a locomotive!) Sport technique is somewhat flexible though and that is by design. You will see from time to time a variety of different approaches in one set as it progresses and a lifter tires and the grip is giving out..Johnny Benidze, an elite russian, would be doing squat snatches by the end of his set because he couldn’t pull the bell any harder or higher and still hang onto it. (and maybe a little showmanship…maybe) It takes a lot of training and a lot of reps to be good at the sport, but rather than call the sport technique “tricks” as some have, it’s more along the lines of problem solving to accomplish a particular end and that is an individual process.Thanks for the explanation on the heel lift! That makes a lot of sense. I "naturally" have done the upper body shift to the rear when snatching, and it was commented on at my certification - more of a "why do you do that are you afraid of the bell" and not a "you can't do that" - but wasn't ever something I spent a lot of time to try and get rid of.
It was, back in the day, considered good hard style technique to shift rearwards slightly to accelerate the bell upward, then “tame the arc” (Rob Lawrence) and then “lean into the bell” forward slightly at lockout. Dropping the bell, one leaned away slightly which kept the bell closer to CoG and facilitated delaying the hip hinge. If one is after power production, then a more vertical bell path will necessarily be more powerful and faster; displacing the body slightly aft to accelerate the bell then fore to lock out accomplishes that without unnecessary arm involvement. One of my master aged KB sport heroes Fedor Fuglev who was still an elite sport competitor at the time in training put up a staggering 300 legal reps in 10 minutes one hand switch 24kg…a very different almost hard style technique, lots of leg drive, than most (but with anatomical breath match appropriate to the sport) however you will see from time time a variety of different approaches in one set as it progresses and a lifter tires and the grip is giving out..Johnny Benidze, an elite russian, would be doing squat snatches by the end of his set because he couldn’t pull the bell any harder or higher and still hang onto it. takes a lot of training and reps to be good at the sport, but rather than call the sport technique “tricks” as some have, it’s more along the lines of problem solving to accomplish a particular end and that is an individual process.
Wait. Are you saying I SHOULDNT be panicking while I train?!?!The pace is consistent and there is no "sprint and panic."
I know this part is about weightlifting, but I tend to think this is revealing about GS / kettlebell sport style of kettlebell lifting, too. The results that GS athletes attain -- not just in competition performance but in body composition, muscle development, strength, power, endurance, and other qualities -- are quite amazing. But I would say these qualities are more a result of volume than technique. (Which then begs the question, does the technique enable the volume? Not just the volume in a set, but the overall volume/tonnage in a week/month/cycle? Maybe so. But that's another level of discussion.)The highest level elites in countries with state supported programs train over 40 hrs a week and have staggering annual training tonnages.
Good point and I think some of the higher level hardstyle snatch practitioners have figured this out (Harald Motz comes to mind) even if they start with a more standard StrongFirst style.It was, back in the day, considered good hard style technique to shift rearwards slightly to accelerate the bell upward, then “tame the arc” (Rob Lawrence) and then “lean into the bell” forward slightly at lockout. Dropping the bell, one leaned away slightly which kept the bell closer to CoG and facilitated delaying the hip hinge. If one is after power production, then a more vertical bell path will necessarily be more powerful and faster; displacing the body slightly aft to accelerate the bell then fore to lock out accomplishes that without unnecessary arm involvement.
On that note, probably have to be careful here using the term "higher" purpose, when what you mean is something akin to "generalized" purpose.Sometimes as variations are seen, it confuses newbies who don't know which standards of technique are important to maintain. Then when we try to explain that "we don't' do it that way" it sometimes comes off as "our way is better" or "another way is wrong" when maybe neither of those things are true or intended.
On that note, probably have to be careful here using the term "higher" purpose, when what you mean is something akin to "generalized" purpose.
Pavel says it best here: Strength Has a Greater Purpose | StrongFirst
Audrey recently did 125 reps with a 24kg bell in 6:00…. With one hand switch!! She’s amazing to watch, and I’m really looking forward to reading her book she just came out with.
Yes I know she’s GS.
She finishes so strong too. Most of the 6 minutes she’s so casual. You can tell she’s getting fatigued at the end, but even when you listen to her breathing as she shuts off the camera she’s so in control.
Audrey recently did 125 reps with a 24kg bell in 6:00…. With one hand switch!! She’s amazing to watch, and I’m really looking forward to reading her book she
Steve, her last name is spelled Burgio. Possible to correct the title?Just as one can do many different things with a barbell, so one can do many different things with a kettlebell. Or bodyweight - contrast the person who does 500 Hindu squats with the gymnast holding an Iron Cross for a few seconds.
“Proper snatch technique” will vary with the task at hand. GS is a sport.
-S-
Done.Steve, her last name is spelled Burgio. Possible to correct the title?
Hardstyle technique (what RKC and SF teach) is about making the exercise as inefficient as possible... on purpose, as a method to develop certain qualities.Pretty casual about it.
I’ve never watched a KB snatch now that I think of it and watching her technique really conflicts with what I thought proper snatch technique was.
For example: her arm stays straight on the upward portion which I find strange and her heel comes up on the working side foot nearly every rep.
I don’t know much about KB snatch technique but I’m wondering if those are productive idiosyncrasies for her technique or part of the norm.
It was, back in the day, considered good hard style technique to shift rearwards slightly to accelerate the bell upward, then “tame the arc” (Rob Lawrence) and then “lean into the bell” forward slightly at lockout. Dropping the bell, one leaned away slightly which kept the bell closer to CoG and facilitated delaying the hip hinge. If one is after power production, then a more vertical bell path will necessarily be more powerful and faster; displacing the body slightly aft to accelerate the bell then fore to lock out accomplishes that without unnecessary arm involvement.
I think Pavel's article, which dates to shortly after StrongFirst was created, hits the nail on the head - the meaning is clear, nothing religious about it, and no dragons have reared their heads in response.Speaking from experience of having taught, used and participated in "both" approaches, I will say regarding any discussions that verge on ecumenical accommodation of form: hic sunt dracones.
Hard to say, but I am guessing it is one of those idiosyncratic things you will see between individuals executing any sport movement. Conjecture here, but amongst some of the old school Eastern European weightlifting coaches, throwing the head back (an adult male head goes about + - 5kg on average) they thought, would added some extra reactive vertical impetus to the bar. 4 time Olympic medalist Dimas threw his back violently. Not really recommended and for beginners imitating his form, not fundamental to a successful technique: just not the right, most important thing to focus on. Fedor is cranking on that bell, so his head movement might be an intentional form fine point, it might be counterbalancing unconsciously , but I doubt he was coached to do it that way, just something he arrived at over time.thanks for this. i'd developed this pattern after watching tons of GS video partly as a way of makin things easier for a slightly hinky shoulder. good to hear it isn't hopelessly heterodox.
what's with Fuglev's head bend at the top of each snatch? taking pressure off the nerve? relaxing the neck/trap?
Of course form matters. Do sprinters train and run differently than marathoners? Do track cyclists train and ride differently than gran tour riders? Without going down a whole rabbit hole here, endurance athletes do speed work and sprinters do some conditioning work. Genetics play a huge roll Elite marathoners tend to be ectomorphs, and you wont see any gran tour riders (also ectomorphs) built like track rider (mega mesomorph ) "quadzilla" Forstemann and vice versa.Fascinating thread.
I know this part is about weightlifting, but I tend to think this is revealing about GS / kettlebell sport style of kettlebell lifting, too. The results that GS athletes attain -- not just in competition performance but in body composition, muscle development, strength, power, endurance, and other qualities -- are quite amazing. But I would say these qualities are more a result of volume than technique. (Which then begs the question, does the technique enable the volume? Not just the volume in a set, but the overall volume/tonnage in a week/month/cycle? Maybe so. But that's another level of discussion.)