Kettlebell Current thoughts on exercise theory

[Kozushi]

Without getting into all the justifications for things, this is what I've come to think about exercise and kettlebells. I'm very much an amateur, but most people who do this stuff are amateurs just wanting to stay healthy and fit.

1. Weights are great if you're already doing "cardio" - walking, jogging etc. If not, you just get fat and strong but without good shape nor much in the way of endurance.
2. Our bodies are made mainly for walking and running, so these exercises get us in shape and train our hearts in the perfect way.
3. "cardio" exercises like walking and running also grant strength gains and strength maintenance throughout the body - they aren't "just" for your heart and lungs.
4. You get get to a certain level of strength, like (roughly, depends on the individual) 1.5 bodyweight deadlift, bodyweight barbell squat, etc through technique mainly since our bodies are already capable of these "feats" naturally. To go significantly higher is possible but takes a lot of training and is hard to maintain.
5. If you're already staying fit with judo/hiking whatever, it is often better to train less strenuous moves with weights to aim for moderate strength gains, as you don't need ridiculous strength necessarily for sport nor life, and you'll tire yourself out for the sport by doing too heavy weights.
6. The movement is not the muscle, thus training moves like the goblet squat with the kettlebell, even though nowhere near the weight a barbell squatter can squat, is a different movement pattern and uses different muscle systems in the body. This is also why kettlebell moves like the Turkish Getup and swing are nothing to scorn since they exercise muscles and movements that heavier weights cannot do.
7. Regarding exercises with weights, it's generally recommended to at least do a big pushing movement and a big pulling movement and/or something more for the legs and something more for the arms. It also seems that one that focusses more on your own bodyweight paired with one focussing on free weights is a good balance of skills and muscular systems. Moves with lighter weights often mix together your own bodyweight with the free weight, examples: Turkish Getups and goblet squats.

Thus, here are some paired exercises:

1. Kettlebell swings and Turkish Getups. (Intense!)
   
2. Goblet squats and presses. (Moderate.)
   
3. Barbell deadlifts and presses or dips.

 

[Arryn Grogan]

Interesting thoughts...

 

[Antti]

1. Fat comes from food. One can train conditioning with weights. But of course, nothing wrong with pure aerobics either.

2. Our bodies aren't meant to pick things up from the ground? I'd say that's far more elementary than running.

3. Strength gains? I'm not sure I would call them meaningful, but sure, of course better than nothing.

4. Yes, a certain level of competency in exercises can be developed with just improved technique. Can we separate strength from exercises? If one just practices the squat, for example with a set, light weight, improving his form, will he become stronger in moving furniture, for example? Or would he just be better off increasing the weight while he trains? Why wouldn't he increase the weight? But of course, technique is king, and something to always improve upon.

5. I'm not sure what ridiculous strength is. But sure, for a healthy, happy life, not much absolute strength is necessarily needed. Being fit is also relative.

6. Yes, the movement is not the muscle. A classic example I like to use is having a squat day instead of a leg day. The swing and the TGU are excellent exercises. Why not use "heavier weights" with them? I'm not sure if I otherwise get you.

7. ??? I do agree that it's a good idea to strive for a certain degree of balance. Not sure of the pull/push/arms/legs. But versatile movement while keeping an eye on weaknesses is likely the best route for those with minimal interest in training.

 

[North Coast Miller]

Without getting into all the justifications for things, this is what I've come to think about exercise and kettlebells. I'm very much an amateur, but most people who do this stuff are amateurs just wanting to stay healthy and fit.

1. Weights are great if you're already doing "cardio" - walking, jogging etc. If not, you just get fat and strong but without good shape nor much in the way of endurance.
2. Our bodies are made mainly for walking and running, so these exercises get us in shape and train our hearts in the perfect way.
3. "cardio" exercises like walking and running also grant strength gains and strength maintenance throughout the body - they aren't "just" for your heart and lungs.
4. You get get to a certain level of strength, like (roughly, depends on the individual) 1.5 bodyweight deadlift, bodyweight barbell squat, etc through technique mainly since our bodies are already capable of these "feats" naturally. To go significantly higher is possible but takes a lot of training and is hard to maintain.
5. If you're already staying fit with judo/hiking whatever, it is often better to train less strenuous moves with weights to aim for moderate strength gains, as you don't need ridiculous strength necessarily for sport nor life, and you'll tire yourself out for the sport by doing too heavy weights.
6. The movement is not the muscle, thus training moves like the goblet squat with the kettlebell, even though nowhere near the weight a barbell squatter can squat, is a different movement pattern and uses different muscle systems in the body. This is also why kettlebell moves like the Turkish Getup and swing are nothing to scorn since they exercise muscles and movements that heavier weights cannot do.
7. Regarding exercises with weights, it's generally recommended to at least do a big pushing movement and a big pulling movement and/or something more for the legs and something more for the arms. It also seems that one that focusses more on your own bodyweight paired with one focussing on free weights is a good balance of skills and muscular systems. Moves with lighter weights often mix together your own bodyweight with the free weight, examples: Turkish Getups and goblet squats.

Thus, here are some paired exercises:

1. Kettlebell swings and Turkish Getups. (Intense!)
   
2. Goblet squats and presses. (Moderate.)
   
3. Barbell deadlifts and presses or dips.

Thanks for putting this up! I don't often think in specific terms within an overall framework, so I just looked at your thinking line by line - much of which I agree with and some of which I diverge. GPP is such a mixed bag depending on the person.

1. A person can get very good cardio carry over using weights if they use them with higher intensity interval circuits. Helpful, yes, but separate cardio programs are not really needed for base levels of cardio fitness depending on how you train with your weights.

2. Yes, but I don't know about the "perfect" part. Our bodies are mainly made to walk often, sprint occasionally, and to use tools. Same way we can survive on a varied diet, you can get many (not all) of the benefits of LSD work through HIIT protocols as long as you don't overdo it.

3. Yes, they can grant some strength gains but also can cause a shift to slow twitch dominance. I don't regard running and walking as the same type of activity and without resistance training they are marginally effective for maintaining health beyond a very base level. Overuse in the absence of resistance training can actually make your limit strength and muscle mass decline.

4. Yes, just getting out of poor shape will enable most folks to express a reasonable amount of strength and endurance at low intensity/short duration. Day to day it is amazing how well a moderately fit person can keep up with a very fit one. outside the gym you have to really increase the workload to see a functional difference.

5. Yes, depending on your longer term goals. Training for sport performance is different from casually using a sport to stay fit, the latter allows for a lot more freedom to train in other ways to match other goals - aesthetic, power, endurance. Either way you need to account for the volume from all sources.

6. Yes, with caveat that virtually all movement patterns we train with resistance are different from actual day-to-day or sport specific. Loading does dictate to some extent the possible exercises, and many submax movements are a closer fit to reality than high load ones. The definition of what is functional changes with the individual. Goal in my philosophy is to improve carry-over as much as possible to limit the amount of surplus strength needed to maintain, as the alternative is to accumulate ever increasing amounts of strength - not very efficient.

7. Push, pull, hinge, squat, and locomotion. I think more in terms of variety of effort (ballistic/grind/iso/plyo) rather than on specific ways to apply resistance - that is more of a convenience factor. Variety allows for better impromptu expression of strength (movement patterns we don't specifically train). Variety is the best way to avoid overuse injuries as well as simplifying adaptive response (less need for counterintuitive loading/pacing schemes). This also from the mindset that I am looking to build non-specific strength.

To this I'll add one of my own:
8. The mission of the lower body is to brace the upper body, and to locomote. There are some sport specific uses such as kicking and swimming, but the base mission is bracing and movement of the same over-hip load - ourselves and whatever is in our hands.

The mission of the upper body is to manipulate things including other people, ourselves /climbing etc. But the primary mission is to handle tools and items in our environment, so the application can run to an enormous variety. Successful use of high force application depends on core linkage between upper and lower and is largely task specific. This the largest specificity factor for many relatively low skill physical activities and accounts for the lion's share of success or failure expressing strength at unprogrammed tasks.

Exercise selection and pairing is really goal specific, but I have come to the conclusion that upper/lower splits are the best way to train for anything but BB type mass gains (and even then...) and limit strength attempts. This extends recovery time of the specific movements without adding to the total training time. Virtually any combination can be used.

 

[User 7569]

What if humans were just made to be really strong and not think about it? What if we just walked around and were naturally resistant to injury / capable?

Here's a question I'll pose to members of this forum. Do you believe you are strong?

Exercise theory is indeed an odd thing.. people seem to really dive into the minutiae, in search of adding a few pounds here and there to their lifts, or maybe reps to their bodyweight pullups, etc.. I wonder if those things are what really makes a strong individual.

I'm pretty new to exercise and still forming my own theories about the whole thing. I will probably have a lot to learn and it will probably change quite a bit over the years, as I progress through injuries, life, etc.

PS: i think you are a really good thinker Kozushi, I like how your brain works

 

[North Coast Miller]

Do you believe you are strong?

Exercise theory is indeed an odd thing.. people seem to really dive into the minutiae, in search of adding a few pounds here and there to their lifts, or maybe reps to their bodyweight pullups, etc.. I wonder if those things are what really makes a strong individual.

Confidence, and above all intent I believe are what make us strong in addition to having more mass, less stretch in our tendons etc. Strength begins in the mind, with intent.

That said I believe I am strong, just as I believe my knife is sharp. But my knife can be broken if abused, and dulled in an instant if asked to do something it can't or was never meant to do.It will also dull over time if its isn't cared for and rehoned from time to time.

In the same way I believe I might be more at risk of injury in some respects than an untrained individual as I can rapidly exceed the strength of smaller connective tissue if I flex against it at an awkward angle. All part of the prep to use what strength we have rather than having strength for its own sake.

 

[User 7569]

Confidence, and above all intent I believe are what make us strong in addition to having more mass, less stretch in our tendons etc. Strength begins in the mind, with intent.

That said I believe I am strong, just as I believe my knife is sharp. But my knife can be broken if abused, and dulled in an instant if asked to do something it can't or was never meant to do.It will also dull over time if its isn't cared for and rehoned from time to time.

In the same way I believe I might be more at risk of injury in some respects than an untrained individual as I can rapidly exceed the strength of smaller connective tissue if I flex against it at an awkward angle. All part of the prep to use what strength we have rather than having strength for its own sake.

could you clarify what you mean by "intent" i think I understand confidence

 

[North Coast Miller]

could you clarify what you mean by "intent" i think I understand confidence

With confidence as the first component, this is the side of it where you command your body to execute. I believe this is where higher tension work pays off, but is isometric initially.

Interesting that a number of studies show very little change in isometric force production even though subjects gain strength against external resistance. When both go up you know you've gotten stronger.

 

[Kozushi]

1. Fat comes from food. One can train conditioning with weights. But of course, nothing wrong with pure aerobics either.

2. Our bodies aren't meant to pick things up from the ground? I'd say that's far more elementary than running.

3. Strength gains? I'm not sure I would call them meaningful, but sure, of course better than nothing.

4. Yes, a certain level of competency in exercises can be developed with just improved technique. Can we separate strength from exercises? If one just practices the squat, for example with a set, light weight, improving his form, will he become stronger in moving furniture, for example? Or would he just be better off increasing the weight while he trains? Why wouldn't he increase the weight? But of course, technique is king, and something to always improve upon.

5. I'm not sure what ridiculous strength is. But sure, for a healthy, happy life, not much absolute strength is necessarily needed. Being fit is also relative.

6. Yes, the movement is not the muscle. A classic example I like to use is having a squat day instead of a leg day. The swing and the TGU are excellent exercises. Why not use "heavier weights" with them? I'm not sure if I otherwise get you.

7. ??? I do agree that it's a good idea to strive for a certain degree of balance. Not sure of the pull/push/arms/legs. But versatile movement while keeping an eye on weaknesses is likely the best route for those with minimal interest in training.

1. I think the "fat"ness comes from letting our natural locomotive muscles go to pot by not walking or running. I've found for myself that I'll weigh the same either way but if I walk or run, moreso if I run at least a significant amount, that my whole body is tighter and thinner.

2. No, I think we're made to pick things up too, but not all day long. We are made to walk and run all throughout the day, and we do in fact do this. We're living coddled lives now and so we're losing our natural stimuli like having to constantly walk in daily life, and we're suffering for it.

3. I definitely feel strength gains from walking and running. I test these in judo. If I go back to judo after a hiatus having not walked or run for a while, I'm terribly weak, but if I've been hiking etc I'm quite strong still. I don't think weight training can fill in all the little gaps in natural body strength that the natural exercises of running and walking provide. Running is a plyometric jump-lunge if you will. It definitely strengthens the legs! Even walking does - it's half lunge after half lunge! It is WAY better than "lunging" inside a gym!

4. why not increase the weight? Because it gets hard and annoying to do, and without a pressing reason to suffer like this, I can't see why. Many guys have been on here who do things like BJJ saying that if you maintain about a 300lbs deadlift that's all you need. I'm also hinting that the "cardio" stuff maintains a lot of these kind of "feats", once you know how to do them you don't forget and if your whole body is kept fit overall you can keep doing them. Maybe my judo is blinding me here, since judo isn't pure cardio; I can maintain my strength with (at times) very little weight training.

6. The reason I wrote this is that I thought light exercises were pointless if I had access to heavier weights. But everything is a compromise and so doing heavy deadlifts while still a hip hinge is not the same as doing light swings, for example, and doing one arm front squats with a kettlebell is a different challenge to your system than barbell back squats. In other words you can still get a very good workout with lightish weights.

 

[Kozushi]

Thanks for putting this up! I don't often think in specific terms within an overall framework, so I just looked at your thinking line by line - much of which I agree with and some of which I diverge. GPP is such a mixed bag depending on the person.

1. A person can get very good cardio carry over using weights if they use them with higher intensity interval circuits. Helpful, yes, but separate cardio programs are not really needed for base levels of cardio fitness depending on how you train with your weights.

2. Yes, but I don't know about the "perfect" part. Our bodies are mainly made to walk often, sprint occasionally, and to use tools. Same way we can survive on a varied diet, you can get many (not all) of the benefits of LSD work through HIIT protocols as long as you don't overdo it.

3. Yes, they can grant some strength gains but also can cause a shift to slow twitch dominance. I don't regard running and walking as the same type of activity and without resistance training they are marginally effective for maintaining health beyond a very base level. Overuse in the absence of resistance training can actually make your limit strength and muscle mass decline.

4. Yes, just getting out of poor shape will enable most folks to express a reasonable amount of strength and endurance at low intensity/short duration. Day to day it is amazing how well a moderately fit person can keep up with a very fit one. outside the gym you have to really increase the workload to see a functional difference.

5. Yes, depending on your longer term goals. Training for sport performance is different from casually using a sport to stay fit, the latter allows for a lot more freedom to train in other ways to match other goals - aesthetic, power, endurance. Either way you need to account for the volume from all sources.

6. Yes, with caveat that virtually all movement patterns we train with resistance are different from actual day-to-day or sport specific. Loading does dictate to some extent the possible exercises, and many submax movements are a closer fit to reality than high load ones. The definition of what is functional changes with the individual. Goal in my philosophy is to improve carry-over as much as possible to limit the amount of surplus strength needed to maintain, as the alternative is to accumulate ever increasing amounts of strength - not very efficient.

7. Push, pull, hinge, squat, and locomotion. I think more in terms of variety of effort (ballistic/grind/iso/plyo) rather than on specific ways to apply resistance - that is more of a convenience factor. Variety allows for better impromptu expression of strength (movement patterns we don't specifically train). Variety is the best way to avoid overuse injuries as well as simplifying adaptive response (less need for counterintuitive loading/pacing schemes). This also from the mindset that I am looking to build non-specific strength.

To this I'll add one of my own:
8. The mission of the lower body is to brace the upper body, and to locomote. There are some sport specific uses such as kicking and swimming, but the base mission is bracing and movement of the same over-hip load - ourselves and whatever is in our hands.

The mission of the upper body is to manipulate things including other people, ourselves /climbing etc. But the primary mission is to handle tools and items in our environment, so the application can run to an enormous variety. Successful use of high force application depends on core linkage between upper and lower and is largely task specific. This the largest specificity factor for many relatively low skill physical activities and accounts for the lion's share of success or failure expressing strength at unprogrammed tasks.

Exercise selection and pairing is really goal specific, but I have come to the conclusion that upper/lower splits are the best way to train for anything but BB type mass gains (and even then...) and limit strength attempts. This extends recovery time of the specific movements without adding to the total training time. Virtually any combination can be used.

3. I mean that resistance training should be added on top of already going for walks and runs, or playing soccer or judo. I see your point with HIIT and HIIRT training, and this has been discussed before, which means that kettlebell swings cover cardio quite nicely and can replace walks and runs in regards to cardio considerations - okay. I still wonder about muscular development as keeping the locomotive muscles fit from challenging them in hikes and jogs more fits what they were designed for than swinging a weight.

 

[Kozushi]

What if humans were just made to be really strong and not think about it? What if we just walked around and were naturally resistant to injury / capable?

Here's a question I'll pose to members of this forum. Do you believe you are strong?

Exercise theory is indeed an odd thing.. people seem to really dive into the minutiae, in search of adding a few pounds here and there to their lifts, or maybe reps to their bodyweight pullups, etc.. I wonder if those things are what really makes a strong individual.

I'm pretty new to exercise and still forming my own theories about the whole thing. I will probably have a lot to learn and it will probably change quite a bit over the years, as I progress through injuries, life, etc.

PS: i think you are a really good thinker Kozushi, I like how your brain works

This reminds me of questions about military history like which is better, an army of heavily armoured knights or one of lightly armoured horse-archers? Is it better to be super strong at a few moves or light, balanced, fit, quick and mobile?

 

[Kozushi]

Confidence, and above all intent I believe are what make us strong in addition to having more mass, less stretch in our tendons etc. Strength begins in the mind, with intent.

That said I believe I am strong, just as I believe my knife is sharp. But my knife can be broken if abused, and dulled in an instant if asked to do something it can't or was never meant to do.It will also dull over time if its isn't cared for and rehoned from time to time.

In the same way I believe I might be more at risk of injury in some respects than an untrained individual as I can rapidly exceed the strength of smaller connective tissue if I flex against it at an awkward angle. All part of the prep to use what strength we have rather than having strength for its own sake.

I asked a former motorcycle gang member about how to fight. He said that people don't lose fights, they give up. This is something I've kept in mind about life in general.

 

[Kozushi]

Your legs are made for walking and running. They can also squat, although they weren't made to squat all day whereas they were made to walk all day. I think if we squat too much or with heavy weights and don't walk or run also, we're overdeveloping and underdeveloping parts of our legs and the result is weird. Even just visually, having huge thigh muscles just looks odd. In any case, I'm starting to get into kettlebell squats as serious exercise component and we'll see what happens over the next few months with this.

 

[Dasho]

My only random thought about exercise at the moment is that I've had good luck lately with hypertrophy when pursuing one-rep maximal strength at low volume, aka GTG. I did nothing but NW on a recent TDY, and got a ton of compliments on my arms when I returned. I was also definitely at a caloric deficit.

I have no clue what the lesson here is, but maybe sometimes things just work when they "shouldn't", and it's better to just put the reps in instead of overthinking it.

 

[WhatWouldHulkDo]

Fun thread, lot's of good thoughts.

1. I wouldn't agree that weight without cardio = fat. But, I think this is kind of looking at strength through a tactical lens - there are some tasks where it doesn't matter how strong you are if you can't move well/fast enough to apply your strength. That's certainly my mindset, anyway - I want to be useful in any situation.

Maybe a way to think about it is, if a completely out-of-shape person came to you for help, and only had enough time/energy starting off to work cardio or strength, what would you start them on? I guess I'd have to say cardio - you won't get much out of strength building if you get gassed after 5 minutes. That said, if you've got enough aerobic base to train, then train strength. Strong first, after all.

2. I don't put any particular stock in the idea that any one modality is more "natural" than another - we're amazing adaptive machines that can do incredible things. That said, looking through the tactical lens, I'd say running/walking is absolutely the best for GPP - you might not always have a bike or a canoe handy, but with any luck your feet will always be with you, best know how to use them.

3: No doubt, there's a skill-specific strength aspect to being able to move well. I really envy people who are truly fleet - who move quickly without looking like they are killing themselves to do it. Usain Bolt is a great example - the relative strength of being able to just have your body glide along the ground like he does, so awesome. That's as inspiring to me as 600#+ deadlifters.

4. Certainly there's diminishing returns once we cross some threshold. To me, that just means an experienced lifted has to learn patience, and how to accept smaller victories sometimes - to recognize that your bad day today is still stronger than a good day a few years ago.

5. This is just the classic issue of the poison being in the dose - you can't out-train your recovery rate. Here again, an experienced lifter has to recognize that as the peaks get higher, the costs to get to them goes up - and so does the penalty for being stupid/stubborn. Of course, we may eventually reach a point where competing priorities (like, say, taking care of your family) mean we can no longer afford what it would cost to push further. I feel fortunate to not be at that point.

And, do I need to be ridiculously strong? Nah. Do I want to anyway? Hell yeah. Desire is a good thing, even if it might be for something out of your reach - as long as you're smart enough not to let it drive you into the dirt.

6. Absolutely, there's a lot of great stuff you can do that doesn't require big weights. But, I would suggest that doing no absolute strength training is a little like doing a martial art without sparring. Yes, you can learn to control your body and move effectively, and get very strong and resilient. But you miss the aspect of putting yourself to the hazard. I think that putting yourself up against a big pile of iron is something that builds a mental resilience that other things can't.

7. Strength in all directions - again, a tactical view of strength. If you can lift a car engine off the ground, but can't carry it anywhere because your legs would buckle, most of the time you probably just aren't that useful. Gotta plug all the leaks. This is why I love the TGU - it doesn't quite hit everything, but it attacks you from so many angles.

 

[Antti]

It looks like we'll have to agree to disagree.

I think in part the difference between our viewpoints boils down to this:

4. why not increase the weight? Because it gets hard and annoying to do, and without a pressing reason to suffer like this, I can't see why.

I love fighting against gravity, while you suffer while doing it.

But, like I said, nothing wrong with aerobic training, it's good for us and even better if one enjoys it. I just don't see the strength part in them, even if they're a part of a good strength training program. And being strong is not necessary to have a happy and healthy life.

 

[Kozushi]

It looks like we'll have to agree to disagree.

I think in part the difference between our viewpoints boils down to this:



I love fighting against gravity, while you suffer while doing it.

But, like I said, nothing wrong with aerobic training, it's good for us and even better if one enjoys it. I just don't see the strength part in them, even if they're a part of a good strength training program. And being strong is not necessary to have a happy and healthy life.

I mean after a certain point. I lift weights at home and at judo I'm lifting humans. Running and walking or other bodyweight moves like pushups and dips are weight bearing activities and so develop and maintain a certain degree of strength. Naturally if you add iron onto that you're getting stronger.

My overall point to this thread is that weights without locomotion exercise are deficient, but that locomotion exercise (walking, running) is best complemented with weight lifting to some degree or other.

But running - that's intense muscular activity there. You're banging your body with legs bent off the ground and jumping forward time after time after time. There is a lot of muscle getting activated with this. Walking is nothing to shake a stick at either. A trick I do is to start off with a run and then after 5 or 10 minutes walk and then when I feel like it run again, on and off like this.

Running is to squatting as swings are to the deadlift. Running is a bent leg explosive strength and cardio move and the swing is an explosive hinge and cardio (HIIRT) move. Grinds don't make you fast and explosive (unless done that way on purpose).

 

[Deleted member 5559]

Weights are great if you're already doing "cardio" - walking, jogging etc. If not, you just get fat and strong but without good shape nor much in the way of endurance.

I would alter this thought a little to say that cardio helps the body recover from intense training and volume of any flavor in order to help optimize your hormones to handle a more diverse diet.

Our bodies are made mainly for walking and running, so these exercises get us in shape and train our hearts in the perfect way.

The world was flat until it was round; we don't know what our bodies are truly designed for and maybe never will. Perhaps it's sitting at a desk for 8 hours per day and it just took us a long time to figure it out and we're really out of shape.

"cardio" exercises like walking and running also grant strength gains and strength maintenance throughout the body - they aren't "just" for your heart and lungs.

Intensity + volume + frequency = training load. Only 2 of the 3 can be high at a time and 2 of the 3 should be high at a time.

You get get to a certain level of strength, like (roughly, depends on the individual) 1.5 bodyweight deadlift, bodyweight barbell squat, etc through technique mainly since our bodies are already capable of these "feats" naturally. To go significantly higher is possible but takes a lot of training and is hard to maintain.

One can add light bulbs to the circuit, turn on more of the existing light bulbs, or use higher wattage bulbs. Each is developed through different means of adaptation to specific stimulus that is likely different for everyone.

If you're already staying fit with judo/hiking whatever, it is often better to train less strenuous moves with weights to aim for moderate strength gains, as you don't need ridiculous strength necessarily for sport nor life, and you'll tire yourself out for the sport by doing too heavy weights.

I simply disagree

The movement is not the muscle, thus training moves like the goblet squat with the kettlebell, even though nowhere near the weight a barbell squatter can squat, is a different movement pattern and uses different muscle systems in the body. This is also why kettlebell moves like the Turkish Getup and swing are nothing to scorn since they exercise muscles and movements that heavier weights cannot do.

Heavier weights can do it, we can't

 

[Jim Lauerman]

4. Certainly there's diminishing returns once we cross some threshold. To me, that just means an experienced lifted has to learn patience, and how to accept smaller victories sometimes - to recognize that your bad day today is still stronger than a good day a few years ago.

5. This is just the classic issue of the poison being in the dose - you can't out-train your recovery rate. Here again, an experienced lifter has to recognize that as the peaks get higher, the costs to get to them goes up - and so does the penalty for being stupid/stubborn. Of course, we may eventually reach a point where competing priorities (like, say, taking care of your family) mean we can no longer afford what it would cost to push further

This is pure gold. Thanks.

 

[Manuel Fortin]

Interesting. Here are a few thoughts.

[EDIT]: I see that Bro Mo beat me to a lot of things I said. We were posting at the same time basically.

Or would he just be better off increasing the weight while he trains? Why wouldn't he increase the weight?

I think it's because there is a cost to lifting heavier. If you dip in your recovery too much with heavy weights, something else will have to go. That something else may be more important than heavy weight to some people. This kind of rejoins many other comments on this point.

1. A person can get very good cardio carry over using weights if they use them with higher intensity interval circuits. Helpful, yes, but separate cardio programs are not really needed for base levels of cardio fitness depending on how you train with your weights.

Exactly. If I remember correctly, @Harald Motz used to do mainly snatches for exercise and got in very good shape from it. He now added running and rowing and is in better shape than before, but that's not a fair comparison I think as he now basically trains twice as long as he used to. It's to be expected that he is now in better shape.

I myself got into good enough shape for tennis by doing snatches with a 24kg. 40-80 reps a day 5-6 times a week. I got back into the sport after not playing for more than 30 years. After 2 months of snatches, my problem wasn't cardio.

What if humans were just made to be really strong and not think about it? What if we just walked around and were naturally resistant to injury / capable?

Humans are made to be adaptable. That's why you find humans all over the earth. In the desert, on tropical island, in the antarctic, in cities...

There is a cost to maintaining strength (or anything), so it's not maintained if not needed. Humans will develop what is used. Do you lift heavy things all day? You will become stronger. Do you run all day, you will become faster/develop endurance. That's because your body "thinks" you need that quality to survive. In the past, that was true. Stop doing any of these activities and you lose the ability.

The only thing that you don't seem to lose quickly is nervous systems adaptations. You can learn to ride a bicycle and stop doing it at 20, at 40 you will still be able to ride. I don't have to use calculus in my day job, but for fun (I know, I'm weird) I picked up a calculus book after 15 years of not doing any calculus and was able to do some problems without any problem, at least basic ones. I may not be as good as I was, but I could still perform well.

By the way, some animals are made to do something without thinking about it. Some birds automatically gain muscle endurance (measured through biological markers) without training at all when migration time approaches. I find that very cool.

Exercise theory is indeed an odd thing.. people seem to really dive into the minutiae, in search of adding a few pounds here and there to their lifts, or maybe reps to their bodyweight pullups, etc.. I wonder if those things are what really makes a strong individual.

The people who participate in forums do dive into the minutiae. That's why you see them. These are the people who take pleasure in doing this kind of things. Most people don't care about the details. To get back to my tennis example, I took a class to get back into the sport, and yes, people worried a bit about technique, but not as much as you would think for tennis lessons. I saw people not improving for the whole class. Many did not ask any questions to the instructor. They were recreational players, and nobody talked about strength, interval training, endurance, long slow distance or kettlebells.

My daughter is also taking tennis lessons and her instructor, who is from what I see very good and who is certified by tennis Canada, barely knows what a kettlebell is. And before you say he should, tennis Canada is like Strongfirst in that you have to have a certain level of proficiency to get your certification. That is, you will have to play tennis at a level much higher than the level you teach to get the first certification. He is good at tennis and obviously in great shape, but I don't think he can do a Turkish get-up with any significant weight. He doesn't care if he doesn't need it.

I asked a former motorcycle gang member about how to fight. He said that people don't lose fights, they give up. This is something I've kept in mind about life in general.

Not so sure about that one in the absolute. Even though I practiced contact sports (water-polo and rugby), I have zero martial arts training. As much as I would want the opposite to be true, anyone who practiced martial arts seriously or who got military training at a high enough level could probably kill me in a few minutes, whether I give up or not. I get the spirit, but the whole "try harder" mentality just doesn't work for everything.

I lift weights at home and at judo I'm lifting humans.

Lifting humans...That's why you don't need a lot of weight lifting. A human is about 200 pounds. If you repeatedly dominate 200 pounds and push it around many times a week, I guess that will get you pretty strong. That's also why going too heavy in the gym is not helpful. If you are tired, that 200 pounds human will be harder to move around.