Kettlebell A+A and AGT Resources?

[Snowman]

My understanding from Al's research is that it's nearly impossible to not go glycolytic while lifting. But to minimize the glycolytic effects two things had to be done. First change the number of reps from 10 to 5. That sounds reasonable to me with the little understanding I have with these energy systems. You could do more than 5 reps but then you are not minimizing glycolytic effects and if I understand correctly wouldn't it take longer to become recovered enough to then do the next set? So, in theory are you actually making the workout shorter? Over time, as your conditioning improves the time it takes you to recover between sets/repeats will become shorter and the training time will become shorter.

I agree that more repeats and fewer reps per repeat provides a better training effect. From looking at my HR data, I've found that execution and recovery of a 5 rep repeat take an average of just under 1.5 minutes (and it's been pretty consistent there for a while), while a 7 rep repeat takes 2 minutes. On a basis of total number of lifts, 7 rep repeats are more efficient for me. I'm trying to increase volume without increasing training time very much. That means swapping a few sets of 5 for sets of 7 and dropping my number of repeats per session a little. The other option would be to increase volume by compressing rest periods, which I just don't want to do, if I'm being honest. I've been spoiled by luxurious rest periods and don't want to go back.
I should be able to do around 18 repeats of 7 in the same amount of time I was doing 24 repeats of 5, and the idea is that I'll be able to squeeze in a few more as my recovery time drops. I can comfortably use a mix of 5 and 7 rep repeats for a while. I doubt I'll increase the reps much beyond that until a few weeks before I switch to a heavier 'bell. Which is still quite a ways off.
The obvious issue is that if I keep increasing the number of reps per repeat and decreasing the number of total repeats, then I'm transitioning from actual A+A training to something more akin to moderate/high volume HIRT training (which was discussed in the HIRT for Hypertrophy thread). My prediction is that my strength will keep improving at 7 reps per repeat, but at some point my aerobic development will stall out (if it hasn't already). I'm ok with that for now, as long as it doesn't nose dive. The alternative strategy of compressing rest periods would probably actually maintain aerobic development a little bit better, though not develop strength as well. I guess I'm just figuring out how I want to make my bed at this point
But yeah, "real" A+A would be ideal.

 

[Stuart Elliott]

@banzaiengr my own lifting experience whilst doing A&A concurs. I btp and did these in 2 or 3 reps for 4-8 sets with 32kg, 4-5 sets were ok'ish, but 6-8 were proving more stressful on my CNS. I've switched to almost daily singles 2-5 each side which feels a much better fit with A&A. Also 32kg is not near my btp max which is also key.

 

[offwidth]

I tend to agree and disagree here. S&S is a fine program, but if the goal is to stay as aerobic as possible then there should be some definite changes made.

My understanding from Al's research is that it's nearly impossible to not go glycolytic while lifting. But to minimize the glycolytic effects two things had to be done. First change the number of reps from 10 to 5. That sounds reasonable to me with the little understanding I have with these energy systems. You could do more than 5 reps but then you are not minimizing glycolytic effects and if I understand correctly wouldn't it take longer to become recovered enough to then do the next set? So, in theory are you actually making the workout shorter? Over time, as your conditioning improves the time it takes you to recover between sets/repeats will become shorter and the training time will become shorter.

Second, anti-glycolytic training does not work "well" with grinds. The get-up like some other favored strength moves is a grind. Not that it should be eliminated from training because if I understand correctly Harald has had good progress by adding deadlifts and zercher squats to his A+A training. My guess is that you would want to only do singles, maybe you could get by with doubles and triples but I doubt it. Maybe @Al Ciampa or @Harald Motz can shed some light on that.

So, if I were wanting to use a S&S type template for A+A I would first change the swings to 20 or more repeats of 5 swings. Where each swing is done as powerfully as possible and enough rest is taken between repeats that you are recovered. Then I would maybe only do two get-ups one each side as heavy as possible with good form and full recovery between each move.

You would also most likely want to limit the training to just 3 days per week with LED type aerobic training done on the other days.

One important part and benefit of A+A training as I understand it is to teach your body to burn fat rather than sugar for energy. To do this you must limit glycolysis as much as possible and it's works better to eat ketonic. Many of us have goals that include getting stronger and becoming leaner. To accomplish this A+A is from what I've experienced and so have others then is the way to go.

I'm not a trainer and I don't have any fancy letters behind my name so take what I've written with a grain of salt. These threads become very esoteric for me and I most likely shouldn't comment. So if anyone can shed some light on this please do.

Just to be clear I am not saying S&S is strict A+A, but rather it is the 'closest thing' that I currently do that resembles it. (If that makes any sense...)

 

[fractal]

I agree that more repeats and fewer reps per repeat provides a better training effect. From looking at my HR data, I've found that execution and recovery of a 5 rep repeat take an average of just under 1.5 minutes (and it's been pretty consistent there for a while), while a 7 rep repeat takes 2 minutes. On a basis of total number of lifts, 7 rep repeats are more efficient for me. I'm trying to increase volume without increasing training time very much. That means swapping a few sets of 5 for sets of 7 and dropping my number of repeats per session a little. The other option would be to increase volume by compressing rest periods, which I just don't want to do, if I'm being honest. I've been spoiled by luxurious rest periods and don't want to go back.
I should be able to do around 18 repeats of 7 in the same amount of time I was doing 24 repeats of 5, and the idea is that I'll be able to squeeze in a few more as my recovery time drops. I can comfortably use a mix of 5 and 7 rep repeats for a while. I doubt I'll increase the reps much beyond that until a few weeks before I switch to a heavier 'bell. Which is still quite a ways off.
The obvious issue is that if I keep increasing the number of reps per repeat and decreasing the number of total repeats, then I'm transitioning from actual A+A training to something more akin to moderate/high volume HIRT training (which was discussed in the HIRT for Hypertrophy thread). My prediction is that my strength will keep improving at 7 reps per repeat, but at some point my aerobic development will stall out (if it hasn't already). I'm ok with that for now, as long as it doesn't nose dive. The alternative strategy of compressing rest periods would probably actually maintain aerobic development a little bit better, though not develop strength as well. I guess I'm just figuring out how I want to make my bed at this point
But yeah, "real" A+A would be ideal.

That's interesting. I think I get higher density with repeats of 4 and a shorter rest personally.

 

[Jim Lauerman]

I'm not a trainer and I don't have any fancy letters behind my name so take what I've written with a grain of salt. These threads become very esoteric for me and I most likely shouldn't comment. So if anyone can shed some light on this please do

+1. Banzaiengr’s understanding of A+A is the same as mine. Of course, we both may be wrong.

 

[Mike C]

@banzaiengr my own lifting experience whilst doing A&A concurs. I btp and did these in 2 or 3 reps for 4-8 sets with 32kg, 4-5 sets were ok'ish, but 6-8 were proving more stressful on my CNS. I've switched to almost daily singles 2-5 each side which feels a much better fit with A&A. Also 32kg is not near my btp max which is also key.

"btp" = bent press?

 

[Stuart Elliott]

@Mike C ....Yes

 

[Al Ciampa]

+1. Banzaiengr’s understanding of A+A is the same as mine. Of course, we both may be wrong.

@banzaiengr and you have it right.

They’re just using descriptors for relating the concepts. Communication would be more accurate with a Venn diagram than it is with words, but we only have words here.

S&S fits under the umbrella of A+A more than it doesn’t, but it’s not a complete placement.

Both methods, however, fit under the larger umbrella of the Strong Endurance philosophy.