Kettlebell Anti-glycolytic Training -- HELP!

[Robert Noftz]

Just one more thing before I move on to a more intelligent discussion.
There is a great deal of evidence that the anti glycolytic approach recommended by Pavel, and his S&S plan, get very good results. I have tried it and I have been astounded by the results I'm getting,

After about 6 months of kettlebell training using his recommendations and nothing more, my strength and endurance have improved dramatically. I'm also getting some significant hypertrophy which I wasn't concerned about when I started but now I am quite happy about it. I had to buy new shirts and pants because my muscles are growing so much. Ok, I'm not happy about all the money I have had to spend on new cloths. Shirts that used to be loose on my feel like a second layer of skin now and my back and shoulders stretch them out. My stomach is flat and strong. I gained a lot of weight but I don't think I'm fatter than I was before. I'm getting incredible results at 49 years of age. It is far better than any training program I have ever used.
If someone gained the kind of muscle I have I would have thought they were taking steroids but I'm not. I started drinking a big protein drink before bed instead of the sugary snacks I used to eat before bed time.

The anti glycolytic approach recommended by Pavel and the Simple and Sinister program have radically changed the way I view physical fitness. If some people think I am dogmatic or some kind of fanatic then so be it. I stand by what I have said and I embrace the approach enthusiastically. I won't apologize for it.

God bless everyone and best wishes in regards to your training.
Robert Noftz

 

[Matts]

mitochondrial disease sounds like it could be serious...they're pretty important for all cellular metabolism. Hope it can be cured!

 

[Frank_IT]

Sorry for the delay, I see your answers just now.

If you tested yourself on every day then you never even gave the anti glycolitic approach a chance and you have no idea what kind of results you would have gotten.

It was my intention to show you that the antu glycolitic approach is definitely not the only one that works. And it shows you too have no idea of the results you would have gotten if you did the same things I did.
And I said it once I'll say it again: I advice people against doing what I did.

Frank, the person you mention in the quote did clearly write that what Pavel taught about anti glycolitic training was all wrong. Perhaps you don't remember that part.

And perhaps you don't remember the one in which he apologized (a thing I already wrote in my previous comment) for that.

In regards to some of the other things you said, it doesn't look like you followed the conversation very well, but instead you want to disagree with me for some reason.

Not the case, Robert. And I sincerelly don't know what would make you think so.

In regards to testing yourself every day, if you really pushed yourself to the limit testing yourself every day then you were not following the S&S approach at all. I find it difficult to believe that you pushed yourself to a testing level every day. Yes, that is my opinion of course. Perhaps your idea of testing yourself and my idea of testing myself are different. I could not have pushed myself to a testing level every day without suffering a severe breakdown at some point.

My idea is litterally meet the testing standards every day. If you feel hard to believe this, than I'm sorry but I have no proof or evidence to convince otherwise and I don't wish to. Still, every (read from the first one to the last one) session was completed in under 5 minutes for the swing and 10 minutes for the get ups. The get ups where faster than the swing because they didn't follow an interval scheme.

I stand by everything I have said. I think the people arguing with me a little confused.

You are actively arguing with us and no, I can guarantee you I'm far less confused than you think. I'm not an exercise professor, but I like to get informations from a lot of channels and elaborate on them. Even from CrossFit.
Anyways, I may have taken it out of contest, but this statement not supported by scientific evidences sound to me a little like "I know things and you know nothing".

After about 6 months of kettlebell training using his recommendations and nothing more, my strength and endurance have improved dramatically. I'm also getting some significant hypertrophy which I wasn't concerned about when I started but now I am quite happy about it. I had to buy new shirts and pants because my muscles are growing so much. Ok, I'm not happy about all the money I have had to spend on new cloths. Shirts that used to be loose on my feel like a second layer of skin now and my back and shoulders stretch them out. My stomach is flat and strong. I gained a lot of weight but I don't think I'm fatter than I was before. I'm getting incredible results at 49 years of age. It is far better than any training program I have ever used.
If someone gained the kind of muscle I have I would have thought they were taking steroids but I'm not. I started drinking a big protein drink before bed instead of the sugary snacks I used to eat before bed time.

The anti glycolytic approach recommended by Pavel and the Simple and Sinister program have radically changed the way I view physical fitness. If some people think I am dogmatic or some kind of fanatic then so be it. I stand by what I have said and I embrace the approach enthusiastically. I won't apologize for it.

I'm happy (with no sarcasm) for your results, but you should still respect training methods and results of other people, as all these are just empirical experiments gone well.
No one here says Pavel's wrong, some here say that his is not the only way, moreover if we talk anti glycolitic approach in particular.

Just one more thing before I move on to a more intelligent discussion.

This didn't go as far as hurting me, but I don't like this at all.

God bless everyone and best wishes in regards to your training.

Likewise, Robert, and all the best for your training (again, no sarcasm).

 

[Robert Noftz]

My idea is litterally meet the testing standards every day. If you feel hard to believe this, than I'm sorry but I have no proof or evidence to convince otherwise and I don't wish to. Still, every (read from the first one to the last one) session was completed in under 5 minutes for the swing and 10 minutes for the get ups. The get ups where faster than the swing because they didn't follow an interval scheme.

Frank,
Perhaps you left out some important details or perhaps I missed them. How did you manage to complete every S&S session with 5 minutes for the swing, and 10 for the gets ups "from the first one to the last"? How did you do that? Can you explain in a little more detail what those practice sessions were like? What size of kettlebells did you use? Perhaps that could clear some of this up for me.

Thank you,
Robert

 

[Frank_IT]

Of course I can, @Robert Noftz!

I started a session with the normal warm ups, so some halos, some goblets squats and some bridges. I must be honest and say that after some practice, I dropped the bridges completely.
After that is was time for the swings. I set a Tabata timer I have on my phone for 5 intervals of 0'30" of work and 0'30" of rest, and swang in both of them. I basically means I did 10 swings every 0'30". I allowed myself one minute of rest at the end (some times one minute and a half), and in that time I set the timer for 10 minutes straight (the time limit for the TGUs). The get ups were performed with no rest or as little as possible between reps.

Progression looked something like this:
16 kg to 24 kg - I added one new set for each side of swings or get ups every week. In a "spreadsheet" fashion, it would look like this:
W1 - Swing: 16 kg/10 of 10; TGU: 16kg/10 of 1
W2 - Swing: 16 kg/8 of 10, 24 kg/2 of 10; TGU: 16 kg/10 of 1
W3 - Swing: 16 kg/8 of 10, 24 kg/2 of 10; TGU: 16 kg/8 of 1, 24 kg/2 of 1
W4 - Swing: 16 kg/6 of 10, 24 kg/4 of 10; TGU: 16 kg/8 of 1, 24 kg/2 of 1
W5 - Swing: 16 kg/6 of 10, 24 kg/4 of 10; TGU: 16 kg/6 of 1, 24 kg/4 of 1
and so on.
24 kg to 32 kg - Same prograssion, but I was more "conservative" and the sets were added every three weeks.

If I remember correctly, I didn't wait three weeks to test Simple, I think I just waited one week after I was doing all 32s.

I hope it makes sense, I'm here for everything you might want to know!

 

[Robert Noftz]

For eight months straight, I never missed a time mark in my S&S sessions and very seldom I took more than a minute between exercise.

Thanks for providing that information. If I understand correctly you used a weight that was light enough to allow you to finish every practice session within the time limit. You probably already know that is not what is recommended by the Simple and Sinister plan but if it worked for you then great.
I was a little confused about how you could accomplish the time limit every day because of what you wrote about seldom taking more than a minute between exercise.
If you don't mind answering another question, what did you mean by that. I don't want this to take on the tone of an interrogation but it didn't seem to make sense who you could do that.
What I mean when I say that is that it probably takes around 20 seconds to do that average set of 10 swings. I have seen other people use that number as an approximate. That allows 10 seconds rest in between sets of swings to make the time limit. If someone rested for 30 seconds in between sets they would not make the time limit.
If someone is resting more than 30 seconds or so they might not make it through the get ups, depending on who quickly they do them of course.

Ok, take care
Robert

 

[krg]

@ajaan

Thank you for putting together the links in that last post, really good to have them collected like that. Good luck in your training, although with Al and Anna to guide you I don't think you'll need the luck.

 

[Frank_IT]

Thanks for providing that information. If I understand correctly you used a weight that was light enough to allow you to finish every practice session within the time limit. You probably already know that is not what is recommended by the Simple and Sinister plan but if it worked for you then great.
I was a little confused about how you could accomplish the time limit every day because of what you wrote about seldom taking more than a minute between exercise.
If you don't mind answering another question, what did you mean by that. I don't want this to take on the tone of an interrogation but it didn't seem to make sense who you could do that.
What I mean when I say that is that it probably takes around 20 seconds to do that average set of 10 swings. I have seen other people use that number as an approximate. That allows 10 seconds rest in between sets of swings to make the time limit. If someone rested for 30 seconds in between sets they would not make the time limit.
If someone is resting more than 30 seconds or so they might not make it through the get ups, depending on who quickly they do them of course.

Ok, take care
Robert

It doesn't feel like an interrogation at all, Robert, the opposite! I'm happy when I get questions about my training experience.

The minute between exercises I talk about is the one you have to take between the swings and the get ups, as per S&S standards. When I felt really fatigued, I sometimes took from 1'30" to 2'00", even though it didn't happen very often.

Again, I know well this is not the recommended way of training, and I encourage everyone to not follow this, it's just what I did (and, to be honest, it never left me really gassed or whiped out).

When taking one minute between the swings and the TGUs, my avarage S&S session lasted about 14'30" more or less (5'00" for the swings, 1'00 rest, around 8'30" for the get ups - even though at the end they were taking considerably less time).

I'm stating this again (as I said in other posts): S&S up until Simple, to me, is the best bang for the bucks for anyone wanting to start with kettlebell for the following reasons:
1. For GPP it's a solid program, it lays a foundation for virtually evertything else one would like to do under StrongFirst principles;
2. It's easy to follow, in every possible way;
3. If followed properly until the Simple standard is met, it takes a lot of dedication to do the same two exercises for months and months and months, so it provides a base for of mental concentration that will have important carry overs to any other type of training.
After Simple, it is my opinion that the program drifts from GPP to SPP, and I honestly don't know how convinient would be for the general population to be specifically trained in swings and get ups, meaning I think there are more valuable alternatives like developing the press and the squat, improving aerobic base, improving hypertrophy, ecc, although progressing over the 32 kg with the protocol is a tall goal and will produce great results.