all posts post new thread

Kettlebell Can kettlebell swings replace running?

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
You know what would be a fun way to test this question?
Four groups of people
1) Running Group - People who will only run to train for the tested distance (1.5 miles would be a better distance than anything higher) meaning they will only do 100/200/400/800m Sprint workouts, long duration runs (20min or so for the 1.5mile test).

2) Mixed Group - People who will combine Hardstyle KB Swings with running. Kind of like the DoE Man Makers. Swing a relatively heavy bell (relative to bodyweight, or make it a single standard for gender to keep it scientific) for 5-10 reps for power/strength then jog for 200m or 400m. Combine the benefits of KB ballistics with the "practice" of running a distance.

3) KB Only Group - People who will do a KB protocol for the 1.5mile test. This could get complicated in protocol, but I'm certain a mix of aerobic and anaerobic workouts in a training week with sufficient emphasis in each will be well... sufficient. Mixing 5-10 swings at a heavy weight, with high rep sets of sports style aerobic swings at a lighter weight.

4) Control Group - People who will run the 1.5 mile run, do nothing aerobic/anaerobic (preferably no training at all) for the experiment's duration, then run the 1.5mile run again. Creates the baseline and independent variable for the experiment.

I'm no scientist, and this was typed out in about 6 minutes, so if this was of interest to anyone who runs protocols on the site, it could be a good starting point. Of course, no one in the testing groups should be highly conditioned as either a runner or KB'er. I mean that you shouldn't be running as really fast time, and expect to still drop it if you're already doing what the program is having you do. Same goes for the KB side. If someone is already doing a similar protocol for the KB groups, then they probably shouldn't be put back into that group for testing purposes.
My hypothesis would be that the mixed group would be the fastest because you still practice running while adding in anaerobic/aerobic KB ballistics to boost your muscles.

Cheers!
 
It seems to answer your question 'can swings replace running?'........

the short answer is: yes or no, it depends. The long answer is: yes or no, it depends. Same as it ever was.....

The other question for you to ask yourself is why? If the answer is ' I'm a crap runner and hate it and don't want to run ever again'.....then don't run. Problem solved. If it's 'I'm fed up getting injured' or 'I'm too fat to run' or you've just become disillusioned with running....getting your goal is just slowly killing you....then getting stronger, leaner and more mobile will help with that.

I've totally ditched performance oriented distance running......the goal is enjoyment and pain free, easy running when I do. We all set ourselves goals and running is one of those pursuits where it is easy to do...but there is a cost to that approach....the why? For yourself, an accomplishment, a box ticking exercise....nothing wrong with that .... versus a specific professional/vocational need to do so. There needs to be a separation here because it is easy to feel disillusioned that you cannot reach the goal you've assigned yourself because it was misguided to begin with. If the focus on running is technique, awareness and aerobic (maffetone) then you become a better runner without necessarily having a performance goal in sight. Relaxing, enjoying the moment serves very well for combating disillusionment. So looking to replace 'something' for 'something' else is very ill defined and can mean many different things for many different reasons.
The answer to your question is found in the why not the can. For me, S&S improved my running by non running. It was more to do with the slow burn effect of coming to terms with what my strengths and weaknesses are, or were, and where I want to be. Why do you want to replace running? What does running do for you? Why do you run? Without sounding over-dramatic they are important questions which led me to where I am.....walking and sprinting, occasional easy beach/trail runs at an easy pace. I don't want to replace any of that, at all, ever. And I do so when and how I want. However this has totally replaced the huffing, puffing and pounding the pavements in a trail of sugar farts trying to be someone I'm not.....a competitive distance runner. I've replaced my old self with a Pavellian/Maffetonic format. It isn't so much to do with the choice of exercise but the approach underpinning exercise, health and performance. Kettlebells can and should replace bad running but good running should also replace bad running. In many ways walking should replace running for a lot of people come to think of it. Kettlebells and running? What's not to like?......
 
If your goal is to maintain middle of the pack average or adequate times then no doubt you can do that with Kettlebells or other non-running aerobic training regimens with a minimum of running for cadence.

Previously I've used low impact interval moderate to high intensity work on a long stroke elliptical machine to maintain my capacity. This past year I've moved to doing less of that and working(slowly) towards the simple standard. I did not find the run particularly more or less challenging and I did not find that my time was substantially in variance with previous years evaluations.

Obviously if you are looking for max performance points then you're going to have to run... probably a lot.
 
Thank you all for the replies.

It would be nice to see someone experimented with this. I will have to do this experiment. Because I'm not sure if anyone has done this before.

The experiment would be to do kettlebell swings consistently for six months for example. Do a 5k run and see if your time goes down. Also what changes to body composition and weight loss. Do another six months of just running. Take the same 5k run test and see what changes happens.
 
There is a burnishing effect of running that conditions the legs,shins,joints and connective tissue to that particular exercise.Kettlebells and other non running activities cant provide this important factor.The best runners in the world run.If you want some cross training effects--use KBs,swim,ski-whatever.But dont expect to make great strides in running if you dont concentrate on the discipline itself.
 
the conditioning effects of running to the running structures can not be ignored. Going 5k after 6month layoff will make the legs very sore the next day. On the other hand I have some current tested numbers, on this topic. Since beginning of 2016 I completed two pure swing protocols from Al Ciampa. I did besides snatch tests running tests (10min) to have reference:

- 04/26/16 - 2250m - 164avg/184max (+ 4,7% to Pretest, +15% from beginning)
- 02/27/16 - 2150m - 166avg/183max (+ 10,3%)
- 01/04/16 - 1950m - 165avg/178max

My schedule was 5reps of 50kg one hand swings four times (6 weeks ofprotocol 103) and three times (6weeks of protocol 104 A) of varying hig"hish" volume. The absolute numbers are not that high, staying around 93kg my running days are a gone for quite some times. But relatively there seems to be some development. I did no running in this 16 week timeframe. I did a bit of easy ropeskipping of 10min sometimes as a warm up, to have that conditioning aspect for the structure of my legs. Sure, I have no comparison with a running only schedule but pondering I would be doing 12 weeks of running only, and than going snatch test? I would rather stay at kettlebelling and going run test. But that is a choice of preference.
 
Last edited:
I was going to do a long post and probably will, but this essentially summarizes the differences between "traditional" cardio, e.g., running and "lifting weights fast."

reading article in Strength Matters magazine about VO2MAX snatching and comparison to running, swimming etc... conclusion was that running,swimming etc is better due to lack of restriction of blood flow (As contractions are very short ), but it can be used, its just another tool, but if you need to be better runner you will have to run sometime.. as per SAID principle.

There is a certain book that was written by a certain former RKC that explains this in great detail about how traditional cardio and "lifting weights fast" have different effects on the structure of the heart muscle. Just because you are breathing hard and your heart is racing does not make an exercise "cardio," at least in the physiological sense. This is a mistake that many fitness enthusiasts and trainers make. I'm pretty sure I was banned from another site because they thought I was some troll who was promoting this book in response to one of their "articles" about how traditional cardio is "stupid," so I will not divulge any names or titles. The author was accused of being a "traitor" to the kettlebell community because it seemed to go against another book he wrote which explained how to increase VO2max with KB snatches. However, these critics clearly hadn't bothered to read the book, or if they had, either skipped some key parts or have reading comprehension that's worse than my dog's reading comprehension level. I have read both books and there was no contradiction.

So, should we all trade in our KBs for running shoes? No. What I got from the book is that it is not lifting or moving weights by itself that changes the effects on the heart. When we do traditional forms of cardio such as run, swim, bike, or row, we are still "moving weight." It's the amount of weight. As the weight gets heavy, muscle tension increases, the weight moves more slowly (simply because it's heavy and not necessarily because we are purposefully moving it slowly), and this changes the nature of the stress on the heart muscle. It causes the heart muscle to thicken, which makes the chamber smaller, and reduces the volume of blood being pumped out. However, high-rep snatches done at a fast pace with a light KB is, according to the book, "in between" traditional cardio and circuit weight training (the book says that circuit weight training is useless for improving cardiac function). Thus, high rep fast paced KB snatches can improve cardiac health, just not as well as traditional forms of cardio. This is not necessarily bad news. Sure, I would have loved it if the book concluded that heavy swings are great for cardio as this would have given me one tool that increased both strength and cardiac function in one workout. But at least now I have a use for my lighter KBs. Lots of people have asked what to do with their lighter KBs once they get stronger and the answer is you can use them as a reasonable substitute for traditional forms of cardio if you either really hate traditional forms of cardio or the weather is bad and you can't go for a run or bike ride.
 
Interesting... but there are a lot more benefits to cardio (in whatever form) than the effects directly on the heart, so that might be an incomplete assessment.
 
Interesting... but there are a lot more benefits to cardio (in whatever form) than the effects directly on the heart, so that might be an incomplete assessment.

I think the author did this on purpose so he could focus solely on the heart physiology issue. While I agree that there are other benefits of traditional cardio/aerobic exercise, I would argue that the heart health and strengthening benefits are the most important, at least they are for me. I have some negative family history and I currently suffer from middle-aged fat guy problems: pre-diabetes, high cholesterol, and high blood pressure. Whenever I go back to doing some running, these problems are mitigated. This is one of the reasons why I am taking a break from Olympic lifting and doing more KB sport stuff.
 
I think this is what Marty Gallagher called 3rd Way Cardio in Purposeful Primitive.
A very interesting concept of strength/cardio hybrid.
 
I think the author did this on purpose so he could focus solely on the heart physiology issue. While I agree that there are other benefits of traditional cardio/aerobic exercise, I would argue that the heart health and strengthening benefits are the most important, at least they are for me. I have some negative family history and I currently suffer from middle-aged fat guy problems: pre-diabetes, high cholesterol, and high blood pressure. Whenever I go back to doing some running, these problems are mitigated. This is one of the reasons why I am taking a break from Olympic lifting and doing more KB sport stuff.

Mike, those health issues are much more likely a result of your food intake rather than the type of exercise chosen.
 
As others have stated above, if you have to perform a fitness test that involves running then train you have to train to run. If you hate running and just want a solid conditioning base then kettlebells should be sufficient. I wrote a dissertation on the effects of kettlebells on performance and from the research kettlebell training as a means to improve aerobic capacity were generally supported. Something worth noting is the participants used in these studies are "moderately trained" and the researchers didn't measure aerobic capacity before and after the kettlebell intervention apart from the semi elite soccer players mentioned below, so what improved their aerobic capacity may not improve yours. Anyway, here's some snippets below:

- The American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM), states that exercise intensities between 77 and 90% of HRmax or above 40–50% of oxygen uptake reserve are sufficient to improve cardiorespiratory fitness (Thompson et al., 2010). In order for a kettlebell exercise program to be effective, it needs to meet these parameters.

- Williams and Kraemer, (2015) compared sprint cycling and a kettlebell Tabata protocol. The results showed that the kettlebell Tabata protocol produced similar caloric expenditure (kcal·min-1), minute ventilation, breathing frequency, and heart rate responses. The average heart rate (HR) responses (168 ± 2.21 b·min-1) equated to 88.5% of heart rate maximum (HRmax), in comparison to the kettlebell Tabata protocol (166 ± 1.41 b·min-1) which was 87.5% of HRmax. Which meets the guidelines for cardiovascular exercise outlined by ACSM.

- A study matched an RPE of a kettlebell 10 minute swing routine with a 10 minute run and found that their heart rate averaged 90 and 89%, respectively, of age-predicted HRmax (Hulsey et al., 2012). Similarly, a study matched the VO2 found in three 10 minute bouts of kettlbell swings and sumo deadlifts followed by 3 minutes of rest between bouts, with a treadmill walk matched with the work to rest ratio of the kettlebell protocol (Thomas et al., 2014). This study demonstrated that VO2, respiratory exchange ratio, kcal·min, and blood pressure were similar for the kettlebell intervention and the treadmill, but RPE and heart rate were higher during kettlebell exercise, this to, matched the ACSM’s guidelines for cardiovascular activity (Thompson et al., 2010).

- Falatic et al. (2014) demonstrated that high intensity interval training (HIIT) utilising the kettlebell snatch. The protocol used in this study was from Jay's Viking Warrior Conditioning: it consisted of multiple sets of 15 seconds of kettlebell snatching alternating with 15 seconds of rest for 20 minutes. Kettlebell snatch training was carried 3 days per week for 4 weeks using a 12kg kettlebell. Analysis showed a 6% in VO2 max, an average heart rate was 93% of HRmax and oxygen consumption was 78% of VO2max in a semi elite female football players.
 
yes, diet is everything (possibly including knees, in the absence of real injury). Unless you rack up serious mileage, it's awful hard to outrun a donut.
 
Wow. What an interesting thread. As a certified HKC instructor for 5 years, and an avid runner for the past 4, I have had my share of ups and downs learning to balance the two. About 3 months ago I stopped training for a 50k due to overtraining related issues with my left knee, and have since returned my focus to kettlebell training. I diligently use a heart rate monitor to try to follow the Maffetone method and keep my ego in check both as a runner, and when I train ballistically with kettlebells. At 48, however, I have found that it is too easy for me to overdue the running as my cardiovascular system reached higher levels of efficiency.

During the first few weeks of recovery from my injured knee, I struggled with missing my long mountain runs with a light pack, and the sense of well-being I felt from it. I also worried about losing some of my cardio fitness. Once I had an MRI and was cleared by an orthopedist, I increased my volume of double c+p, continued every other day 3-5 TGUs per side, and began using the one handed snatch as my tool of choice for 2 days a week of interval based cardio. Basically, after a solid warmup, I do sets of 10-15 snatches per hand with a 53lb. Kb until my heart rate hits 90% of max, then rest until it goes back down to 120bpm. I repeat this process for 20min, then cool down. My volume will vary based on what my heart rate does on a given day (based on Strong Medicine cardio by Marty Gallagher and Chris Hardy). What I like about this method is you are limited by your ability to recover, which helps prevent overtraining, which at 48 I find easy to do! To replace my long mountain runs, I simply carry a heavier pack and hike for both fitness and pleasure. With the right trail, it is possible to maintain an optimal heart rate for long periods of time without beating oneself up...basically Al Ciampa's rucking article.

After 6 weeks of these training changes, I went out and ran a 5k and was able to maintain my previous min/mile pace from 3 months ago at the same heart rate, but with a sore left knee ;). My take on all of this after my long-winded post - I can develop my cardiovascular fitness in many ways, and can accomplish the specific heart strengthening benefits of LSD without beating myself up. But as many have said in previous posts, if you want to be a runner, you have to run.
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom