Kettlebell A+A how does it work/can you freestyle it?

[Cearball]

Hi all,

I am thinking of changing my training.
Still inspired by Tom Furman's Armour of war I am thinking of trying a free style program from "Train for Life" called "NAK: minimalist freestyle programme".

It's heavily inspired by Pavel & it's essentially Naked warrior with swing/clean days & LSD cardio.
I probably won't bother adding the purposeful cardio other than walking for fun.

Anyway I like the idea of a freestyle programme ATM.

So let's get to the purpose of this thread.
A+A cardio/KB lifts. I don't really know much about it or where to start so resources would be good so I can understand what it even is exactly. I have googled & read bits & pieces but am still not 100%.

Would A+A work in a freestyle programme?
Do you need to commit to X amount of days & X amount of reps per session rather than say lifting for as long as you want & staying well rested/not huffing and puffing & ensuring explosiveness didn't drop off?

I have found A+A programmes but kinda want to know the A+A principles/summary.

Hope this makes sense.

Thanks

 

[Xene]

You can freestyle it if you like.
For example:
- do 5 heavy snatches, wait until your HR is down and then repeat
- 20-40 repeats per session (wave, feel…)
- 2-4x per week
- if you lose power, then stop for today
- add lsd on your off days
- optionally add some grinds (low volume)

That‘s just one interpretation of A+A.

 

[Cearball]

You can freestyle it if you like.
For example:
- do 5 heavy snatches, wait until your HR is down and then repeat
- 20-40 repeats per session (wave, feel…)
- 2-4x per week
- if you lose power, then stop for today
- add lsd on your off days
- optionally add some grinds (low volume)

That‘s just one interpretation of A+A.

The grinds would be covered by grease the groove push ups & pistols.
The waviness would come from freestyling.
I don't have a HR monitor handy ATM but can probably guesstimate my "normal HR" with fingers on neck.
Is LSD a key part of A+A then?
I saw it recommended/encouraged in a A+A programme.

Is "quick & the dead" about A+A.....?

Thanks

 

[Anders]

The grinds would be covered by grease the groove push ups & pistols.
The waviness would come from freestyling.
I don't have a HR monitor handy ATM but can probably guesstimate my "normal HR" with fingers on neck.
Is LSD a key part of A+A then?
I saw it recommended/encouraged in a A+A programme.

Is "quick & the dead" about A+A.....?

Thanks

1) Have you already read S&S and Q&D ?

2) Have you already achieved Simple ?

3) Is you snatch performance good ?

If I remember correctly most people seem to be doing it 3 to 4 times pr. week, in addition to one time of LSD cardio.
If you are not very experienced in making a program I would recommend NOT experimenting. When you have a lot of experience you can start experimenting. That is just a general experience coming from someone who loved to make his own programs and therefore got less than stellar results for a long, long time.

From what I read snatch seem to be the preferred A+A, but some people also use swings. I have not heard about people doing A+A with cleans. Maybe they don't find it explosive enough.

Q&D has some similarities with A+A but has fixed rest pauses between sets. Pavel also write that A+A tries to improve mitochondria functioning while Q&D tries to increase the numbers of mitochondria.

I have not tried A+A myself.

 

[Steve Freides]

Would A+A work in a freestyle programme?

Some people do well with a less-than-rigid structure for their programming, others not. Try it and see how it works out for you. Let us know a few weeks or months down the road.

-S-

 

[Cearball]

1) Have you already read S&S and Q&D ?

2) Have you already achieved Simple ?

3) Is you snatch performance good ?

If I remember correctly most people seem to be doing it 3 to 4 times pr. week, in addition to one time of LSD cardio.
If you are not very experienced in making a program I would recommend NOT experimenting. When you have a lot of experience you can start experimenting. That is just a general experience coming from someone who loved to make his own programs and therefore got less than stellar results for a long, long time.

From what I read snatch seem to be the preferred A+A, but some people also use swings. I have not heard about people doing A+A with cleans. Maybe they don't find it explosive enough.

Q&D has some similarities with A+A but has fixed rest pauses between sets. Pavel also write that A+A tries to improve mitochondria functioning while Q&D tries to increase the numbers of mitochondria.

I have not tried A+A myself.

1) Have you already read S&S and Q&D ?

I have read S&S but don't own Q&D.

2) Have you already achieved Simple ?

I have never tried but assume I probably couldn't do it from memory of what it is.
I have never done the S&S programme.
Closest I have come was doing the original version from ETK for a change of pace.

3) Is you snatch performance good ?

The only time I have had it assessed was by an RKC I paid for some personal training years ago.
They weren't worried about it.

I have done quite a bit of snatching in the past.
Probably did the most following VWC for a few months.

 

[Cearball]

Some people do well with a less-than-rigid structure for their programming, others now. Try it and see how it works out for you. Let us know a few weeks or months down the road.

-S-

Are there any books based around A+A or is it still being experimented with?

Is this summary what A+A "is"
more or less?

You can freestyle it if you like.
For example:
- do 5 heavy snatches, wait until your HR is down and then repeat
- 20-40 repeats per session (wave, feel…)
- 2-4x per week
- if you lose power, then stop for today
- add lsd on your off days
- optionally add some grinds (low volume)

That‘s just one interpretation of A+A.

If it is then I think it would fit quite well in the Tom Furman programme as the KB portion.

Thanks

 

[Adachi]

Are there any books based around A+A or is it still being experimented with

A+A is not the most rigidly outlined or thoroughly explained subject here. It's been discussed to death, but the fence lines are not perfectly or rigidly designed. Like a back yard with no fence, you know the but right outside your door is definitely your yard. But when you keep walking further away it might not be perfectly clear where the property line lies. @Harald Motz has an exhaustive thread here of his fruitful, long term A+A practice.

A+A is not one particular program, but a family or range of parameters within which the creatine phosphate and the aerobic energy systems are dominant, and glycolysis (consequently lactate) is kept to a minimum.

Q&D contains 4 particular plans, all of which qualify as primarily Alactic. Throw in some easy aerobic work like taking a light kettlebell for a walk, jogging or running at a sustainable pace, or rowing, or even very light snatch walking.

As far as I'm concerned...

Q&D is an A+A book.

 

[Pete L]

A+A is not the most rigidly outlined or thoroughly explained subject here. It's been discussed to death, but the fence lines are not perfectly or rigidly designed. Like a back yard with no fence, you know the but right outside your door is definitely your yard. But when you keep walking further away it might not be perfectly clear where the property line lies. @Harald Motz has an exhaustive thread here of his fruitful, long term A+A practice.

A+A is not one particular program, but a family or range of parameters within which the creatine phosphate and the aerobic energy systems are dominant, and glycolysis (consequently lactate) is kept to a minimum.

Q&D contains 4 particular plans, all of which qualify as primarily Alactic. Throw in some easy aerobic work like taking a light kettlebell for a walk, jogging or running at a sustainable pace, or rowing, or even very light snatch walking.

As far as I'm concerned...

Q&D is an A+A book.

I read it that the myokinase system also contributes in Q&D. Not just A+A. Making Q&D somewhere near your back garden fence line

Edit: in fact rereading Pavel's recent article he states;
"A+A is a subtype of Soviet anti-glycolytic training (AGT)"
By this I read that Q&D is also AGT.

 

[Cearball]

Anti-glycolytic Archives | StrongFirst

www.strongfirst.com

I have had a little look through these.

 

[Anna C]

A+A is not the most rigidly outlined or thoroughly explained subject here. It's been discussed to death, but the fence lines are not perfectly or rigidly designed. Like a back yard with no fence, you know the but right outside your door is definitely your yard. But when you keep walking further away it might not be perfectly clear where the property line lies. @Harald Motz has an exhaustive thread here of his fruitful, long term A+A practice.

A+A is not one particular program, but a family or range of parameters within which the creatine phosphate and the aerobic energy systems are dominant, and glycolysis (consequently lactate) is kept to a minimum.

Q&D contains 4 particular plans, all of which qualify as primarily Alactic. Throw in some easy aerobic work like taking a light kettlebell for a walk, jogging or running at a sustainable pace, or rowing, or even very light snatch walking.

As far as I'm concerned...

Q&D is an A+A book.

I would agree with this, except:

"A+A is a subtype of Soviet anti-glycolytic training (AGT)"
By this I read that Q&D is also AGT.

So, AGT is the "big umbrella" of this type of training.

A+A is one type of AGT. There are many other types of AGT, many of which are taught at Strong Endurance seminars and others are covered in various StrongFirst articles.

Q&D is also AGT, and contains programs/protocols/specific prescriptions of exercise/reps/sets to achieve power endurance training in a minimalist format.

Although.... fun with words.... If we say that there are 3 energy systems (Alactic, Glycolytic, Aerobic), and you subtract Glycolytic (as in, Anti-Glycolytic Training, or AGT)... what is left? Alactic, and Aerobic. So there you go. In that respect it's hard to argue with what you are saying, @Adachi. All AGT aims to train A and A. But I would say that A+A is perhaps the most "pure" form of avoiding the use of glycolysis and maximizing the use of the other two. Other types of AGT don't necessarily try to avoid glycolysis altogether -- they just manage and control it so that it is not deep or prolonged. (Which is likely true of A+A as well, to be honest.)

Hope that adds clarity, not confusion

 

[Adachi]

I agree @Anna C . AGT is the larger umbrella .

The basic way I summarize these ideas is something like this. Maybe a bit of literalism might help me.

AGT
Training so that I do not directly, routinely, use highly glycolytic protocols; by accident or design.

A+A
Lift heavy and short. run easy and long.

Q&D
The following protocols...
044, 033, Victor, straight 10x10.
(Which I find to fit under A+A , & therefore also AGT)

 

[Deleted 20758]

A+A
Lift heavy and short. run easy and long.

I like this

 

[Pete L]

I agree @Anna C . AGT is the larger umbrella .

The basic way I summarize these ideas is something like this. Maybe a bit of literalism might help me.

AGT
Training so that I do not directly, routinely, use highly glycolytic protocols; by accident or design.

A+A
Lift heavy and short. run easy and long.

Q&D
The following protocols...
044, 033, Victor, straight 10x10.
(Which I find to fit under A+A , & therefore also AGT)

I might edit Q&D to read "lift powerfully and short".

 

[John Grahill]

One question/comment regarding Q&D, specifically the 044. I thought I read that glycolisis isn't completely avoided. I assume it's because the reps go higher than 5 and there is incomplete recovery between sets??

 

[Steve W.]

One question/comment regarding Q&D, specifically the 044. I thought I read that glycolisis isn't completely avoided. I assume it's because the reps go higher than 5 and there is incomplete recovery between sets??

Yes, but glycolysis is NEVER completely avoided. All the energy systems are always active. It's more a matter of how and how much you're stressing each one. In fact, I recall seeing one study of energy systems in similar training that showed the glycolytic system was actually more active for the earlier work intervals and then contributed less as a session went on (which was surprising to me).

But the overall point that a longer effort and less complete recovery is going to stress the glycolytic system more is correct.

I tend to think of it in more of a black box, stimulus and response way than worrying about the physiology or biochemistry.

A shorter effort with longer recovery is going to allow you to maintain power over a longer time and greater total volume, while still being relatively sustainable day to day and long term.

Longer efforts with less complete recovery are going to train the ability to produce a higher density of work, but won't be sustainable over as high a volume or total time, and will have a higher recovery demand from day to day. Q&D uses an "accordion" pattern of less rest between sets and more rest between series to try to get some advantages of greater density, but mitigate the disadvantages. 015 is similar, with longer sets, but with consistently long rests. Timeless S&S is somewhat similar to 015 as well, but 015 doesn't have a goal of ever compressing the time.

The cool thing about this kind of training is that the recovery (call it aerobic if you want to think of it in terms of energy systems) is a big part of the training and adaptation. It's not just passive rest, it's actively (in the metabolic sense, even if you're not actually doing anything) training to be able to recover for the next high power effort. And even though it's not the same or a substitute for an aerobic base, especially for real endurance activities, it has a surprising amount of carryover to many daily and sports activities.

Programs like the Giant actually follow a similar kind of principle of regulating work and rest to maintain output over the length of a session, but the adaptations are not quite the same with grinds instead of high power ballistics.

 

[John Grahill]

Yes, but glycolysis is NEVER completely avoided. All the energy systems are always active. It's more a matter of how and how much you're stressing each one. In fact, I recall seeing one study of energy systems in similar training that showed the glycolytic system was actually more active for the earlier work intervals and then contributed less as a session went on (which was surprising to me).

But the overall point that a longer effort and less complete recovery is going to stress the glycolytic system more is correct.

I tend to think of it in more of a black box stimulus and response way than worrying about the physiology or biochemistry.

A shorter effort with longer recovery is going to allow you to maintain power over a longer time and greater total volume, while still being relatively sustainable day to day and long term.

Longer efforts with less complete recovery are going to train the ability to produce a higher density of work, but won't be sustainable over as high a volume or total time, and will have a higher recovery demand from day to day. Q&D uses an "accordion" pattern of less rest between sets and more rest between series to try to get some advantages of greater density, but mitigate the disadvantages. 015 is similar, with longer sets but consistently long rests. Timeless S&S is somewhat similar to 015 as well, but 015 doesn't really have a goal of ever compressing the time.

The cool thing about this kind of training is that the recovery (call it aerobic if you want to think it in terms of energy systems) is a big part of the training and adaptation. It's not just passive rest, it's actively training to be able to recover for the next high power effort. And even though it's not the same or a substitute for an aerobic base, especially for real endurance activities, but it has a surprising amount of carryover to many daily and sports activities.

Programs like the Giant actually follow a similar kind of principle, but the adaptations are not quite the same with grinds instead of high power ballistics.

Thanks Steve!

 

[John K]

Yes, but glycolysis is NEVER completely avoided. All the energy systems are always active. It's more a matter of how and how much you're stressing each one. In fact, I recall seeing one study of energy systems in similar training that showed the glycolytic system was actually more active for the earlier work intervals and then contributed less as a session went on (which was surprising to me).

Here's a graph that shows what you're talking about. Subjects performed 3x 30s sprints with a 4 minute rest period in between. Graph A is the first 30s sprint, Graph B is the third 30s sprint,

This was taken from here, but the study referenced is here.

 

[Adachi]

Here's a graph that shows what you're talking about. Subjects performed 3x 30s sprints with a 4 minute rest period in between. Graph A is the first 30s sprint, Graph B is the third 30s sprint,

This was taken from here, but the study referenced is here.

Wow that drop off is steeper than I thought

 

[SamTX]

Fascinating stuff. Thank you to all contributors. 95% of my A+A questions we’re answered on this thread.