new posts all posts post new thread

Old Forum destroying the body?

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)

Bill Been

Level 6 Valued Member
You're basically accusing Pavel, Dan John, Brett Jones, Geoff Neupert, Mark Reifkind, and a host of other SF instructors who have trained - and continue to train - athletes at high levels with kettlebells, of subjecting their athletes to hucksterism and propaganda.  You're accusing Brendan Hetzler, Mel Siff, and Brett Contreras of talking out of their backsides about what their foce plates and EMGs have showed them. Apparently, you're unaware that these guys have done detailed testing on multitudes of subjects - both trained  and untrained - in order to make the observations they make. You really think these guys never thought to measure ground force reactions associated with plyometrics?!!?  You really think all the Standing Vertical Jump increases different instructors have accomplished with light snatches heavily accelerated is what? a lie?  Decreases in four-corner drill times for the NFL combine? Also lies? Or you just haven't gotten to that chapter in your undergrad textbook yet? You don't find kettlebells to be your cup of tea. Fine. How bout you do us all a favor and shutyer piehole about them - at least until you have some vague idea what an overspeed eccentric is and how it relates to force.

 
 

HerrMannelig

Level 3 Valued Member
To repeat:

I hope my statements do not get glossed over and I am summed up as being “against kettlebells”. Ignore what I wrote if one does not want to address what I wrote. 

My statements here are not a personal attack on anyone,

I am not accusing anyone of lying any more than any marketing statement is a lie.

The actual results of kettlebell training are real, however, the benefit to them is not unique to them, and there may be easier and cheaper ways to get the same results.

Considering I posted a few things about Mark Rippetoe writing this article (http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/most_recent/rippetoe_throws_down&cr=), and Pavel posted here that Mark is on the "same team", I do not think my statements are so intolerable or offensive.
Likewise, bodyweight-only exercises like sit-ups, push-ups, burpees, air squats, one-legged squats, handstand push-ups, bodyweight dips, exercises done on rings, and kettlebell exercises – any exercise whose loading variable is the number of reps or the length of the set, and which doesn't have a 1RM – can't drive a strength improvement.
 

 

 

 
 

kris

Level 3 Valued Member
@ HerrMannelig,

I agree, they are hight technical tools, 100  % agree, the reason why they work much better as any other fitness tools.

- scientifically proven, that in matter of " fat ", they work quicker as any other fitness training, as Strenght is associated with Cardiovascular endurance training.

-you must be very strong if 2x 24 or 2 x32 are to light for you, can you double press for 10 reps or double snatch with 2 x 32 ? Get up with 32 ? How many ?

Don't have enought time to go further.
 

kris

Level 3 Valued Member
@ HerrMannelig, dead lift stressed your spine if your abs are weak orhis your technique his bad. Before to learn the kettlebells swing, deadlift, as hip hing is the same. Where did you learn your kettlebells technique, in a Crossfit gym ?
 

HerrMannelig

Level 3 Valued Member
Kettlebell apologetics are full of contradictions. It is turning into strength training homeopathy. It is too religious for me to get further involved, so I am not going to address the statements about endurance training being good for strength or the great skill needed in handing a particular shape of resistance is particularly beneficial.

There is nothing wrong with admitting that people lift kettlebells in the way they are doing because they enjoy it and it gives some physical results. It does not need to be raised to a mystical level and surrounded by misleading claims. Being strong enough to lift 24 or 32 kg many times does indicate a certain level of strength, but one can reach that level without having to go for reps, but by just being stronger and being able to move properly.

They are new to many parts of the world, new and exciting and mysterious, and they may indeed be particularly suited for the more  rich nations, whose sedentary populations are in need of remedial action. I have used kettlebells (or such inspired training) to help those. Strength is movement, and I think the best and universal form of training is calisthenics, but those who are too fat or two weak to do that need something easier, for they cannot move their own bodies properly, and for that, lighter hand held weights are useful until they are able to move like a human again.

And of course, those who have reached great levels of strength, but have sustained injuries or imbalances, may find that lighter repetitive lifting in a new manner to their body will indeed be restorative.

 
 

Resurrected

Level 1 Valued Member
Herr Mannelig-

Good morning Sir!

You have some very good points.  I agree with you on most fronts, and you bring some great info to the forum.  Consider the following:

1.  Bilateral Deficit.  Mike Boyle has spoken of this for quite some time.  There has been a few publications on this as well.  I have for one witnessed this for years within my own training and that of others I train.  In theory, the bilateral deficit hypothesizes that more force can be generated with 1 isolated limb, than the sum of both limbs divided by 2.  In other words, it is a very common observation that a you high school athlete who has a 1RM bench press of 225 lbs, to be able to do several (8-10) 1 arm db bench presses with 110 pounds (this is a real example of 1 athlete I train.)  Therefore, many can press a 32kg kettlebell (even several times), yet not be able to effectively press a 140/145 lb barbell once.  Each shoulder respectively is loaded with 32kg (half of the equal barbell bilaterally), getting a great overload effect, yet the body as a unit is spared with half the compressive and shear forces that the barbell creates (although, unilateral exercises will cause in increase in rotational torque.)  A winner of a strength choice in my book.

2.  Most people, including myself love kettlebells (and calisthenics) because they develop you into being strong enough.  As Dan and Pavel have both demonstrated in Easy Strength, there is a point in most sports in which strong enough, is well, enough.  Most people toying around with "light" kettlebells will have built enough strength for most activities, and be able to perform those activities at a high enough level (obviously calisthenics can build this as well).  I have used kettlebells (exclusively) to develop really high levels of strength and conditioning for several sub-elite alpine skiers (but close) as kettlebells have a very high level of carryover to the sport (swing, eccentric force absorption, anaerobic work capacity), and they once again develop enough strength.

There is no question that barbells are the preferred method for strength development for incrementally being able to progressively overload, program, and measure RM.  But most people don't need to be as strong as a barbell can make you (I realize you are not arguing the opposite).  I feel these are some of the few reasons why kettlebells are indeed popular, and are considered to be a strength tool indeed.  They do build strength (force is force is force), and alot of other qualities as well.

 

Cheers.
 

kris

Level 3 Valued Member
HerrManneling,

Wonder where did you find so many wrongs informations, not only in matter of kettlebells. Kettlebells are not a modern sports :

" the kettlebells goes way back, it first appeared in a Russian dictionary in 1704 ( Cherkikh, 1994). So popular were kettlebells in Tsarist Russia that any strongman or weightlifter was referred to as a girevick, or a kettlebell man."

You can get the best informations in hardstyle  kettlebells on this  website and the most basic guidelines in fitness on " American College of Sports and Medecines ". Better to begin by the basics, I guess, in fitness.

Just my opinion.

 

 

 

 

 
 

kris

Level 3 Valued Member
@ HerrManneling, Did you live in URSS, did you travel to this country ? When Russia was URSS, I don't think so.

Russian are hard workers and big heater ( and Vodka too ), and genetically strong. No food restrictions in quantity, in choice only.

Christine HerManowicz

 
 

prowler83

Level 3 Valued Member
Herrmanelig,

Noone said Kettlebelsl are the " Best" strength tool. But generally for the most part they give people enough strength for there individual needs. For 1rm strength of course the barbell wins.In my opinion what makes the Kettlebell superior is that is a tool that can build a good level of slow strength, powerful sport like movement, Strength endurance, anaerobic conditioning, Power, the natural cycling of Tension and relaxation, ( Swing and snatchs) found in many sport. And many hardstyle drills have been found by experimentation and scientific validation to have much carryover to many other drills and activities.Im not a fool and im always critical of Scientific research and the findings. What makes the Kettlebell superior is it gives great bang for Buck in one tool. One tool, bodyweight and tree pulling or whatvere you said is two tools.

Some points youve made are valid.  But im curious what bodyweight repped moves do you suggest are superior to the Kettlebell snatch and Swing, for anaerobic conditioning, powerful sport like movement, the cycling of tension and relaxation and general strength  endurance. I prefer the term strength endurance than muscular endurance as endurance comes from strength. And doin snatchs or Swings with a Kettlebell generally proves alot more demanding than a few pressups or hindu Squats.

Also you failed to note the way the force is displaced when regards to a kettlebell press. Not only does this prove safer but the shoulders but gives greater range of motion. Though I dont know if this fact as been scientific validated I believe that it lead to greater neuromusular activation.

:)
 

HerrMannelig

Level 3 Valued Member
Wonder where did you find so many wrongs informations, not only in matter of kettlebells. Kettlebells are not a modern sports :

” the kettlebells goes way back, it first appeared in a Russian dictionary in 1704 ( Cherkikh, 1994). So popular were kettlebells in Tsarist Russia that any strongman or weightlifter was referred to as a girevick, or a kettlebell man.”
The kettlebell design is found all over the world at various times (including Scotland and China I think). The sport is modern. "Girya" refers to a kettlebell, but it means "weight". See: http://russiapedia.rt.com/of-russian-origin/girya/ And if you look it up in a dictionary, it means "weight". It is a counter-weight. That is what Girya means!

So yes, a "weightlifter" in Russia would naturally be called a person who lifts weights.

"kettlebell" refers to what was used for strength training. It was a "bell" (a hollow sphere) which could be loaded with shot to adjust the weight, and it had a handle, making it look like a tea kettle. Kettle Bell or Kettle Weights were used as a lighter weight by strongmen for training and competition. See: http://www.sandowplus.co.uk/Competition/Saxon/Weightlifting/wl-05.htm

The sport of kettlebell lifting is modern, and was developed in the Soviet Union in the 20th century.

As a basic shape of weight, it is very old, and found all over the place, but I do not see the methods used by them being advocated, it seems based primarily on kettlebell sport as originated in the USSR, with borrowing elements from strength training.

That is part of the misleading marketing I think.

 
 

HerrMannelig

Level 3 Valued Member
@Resurrected I am a big advocate of unilateral training. I think that is one of the most effective ways to make one's body strong. Even when I lifted iron, I primarily lifted with one arm or leg, as well as doing deadlifts and the clean and press. It is very unfortunate that single arm lifting was dropped from competitive weightlifting (before they dropped the Press). It used to be a mainstay of lifting.

You have given a very realistic assessment of kettlebells. However, this is something which is often ignored, and it is highly exaggerated and sometimes misleading or even deceptive when kettlebells are marketed. It makes a hunk of iron with a handle far more than what it is.

Kettlebells are being shoehorned into any movement, and being treated differently. A kettlebell over 100 lbs is something special. Dumbbells and barbells over 100 lbs are ordinary.

I see colourful 3 lb kettlebells at Target now and no-name DVDs on how to use them. They are no longer a novelty from behind the Iron Curtain. Time to be real. I noticed that some people were not aware of the dumbbell swing or historical weightlifting lifts, but were so sure that kettlebells are tops. I was asked several times about my strength achievements, but they do not demand the same from their instructors. After all, if one were to take ability as the measure of worth, one would have to listen to Valery Fedorenko very carefully, as he is against using two hands on a kettlebell and Turkish Get Ups, and I think he has the credentials and physical ability to support his views.

 

 

 
 

prowler83

Level 3 Valued Member
Herrmanelig,

Noone said Kettlebelsl are the ” Best” strength tool. But generally for the most part they give people enough strength for there individual needs. For 1rm strength of course the barbell wins.In my opinion what makes the Kettlebell superior is that is a tool that can build a good level of slow strength, powerful sport like movement, Strength endurance, anaerobic conditioning, Power, the natural cycling of Tension and relaxation, ( Swing and snatchs) found in many sport. And many hardstyle drills have been found by experimentation and scientific validation to have much carryover to many other drills and activities.Im not a fool and im always critical of Scientific research and the findings. What makes the Kettlebell superior is it gives great bang for Buck in one tool. One tool, bodyweight and tree pulling or whatvere you said is two tools.

Some points youve made are valid.  But im curious what bodyweight repped moves do you suggest are superior to the Kettlebell snatch and Swing, for anaerobic conditioning, powerful sport like movement, the cycling of tension and relaxation and general strength  endurance. I prefer the term strength endurance than muscular endurance as endurance comes from strength. And doin snatchs or Swings with a Kettlebell generally proves alot more demanding than a few pressups or hindu Squats.

Also you failed to note the way the force is displaced when regards to a kettlebell press. Not only does this prove safer but the shoulders but gives greater range of motion. Though I dont know if this fact as been scientific validated I believe that it lead to greater neuromusular activation.
 

HerrMannelig

Level 3 Valued Member
Noone said Kettlebelsl are the ” Best” strength tool. But generally for the most part they give people enough strength for there individual needs.
The claims about them shift around, so it is very hard to get them all, because people can bring up other claims.

But, the admission of kettlebell users here seems to be going to "kettlebells are not the best, but they do offer some benefit, and it is often enough". That is hardly a selling point of kettlebells and it is not found in the marketing claims of them.
What makes the Kettlebell superior is it gives great bang for Buck in one tool. One tool, bodyweight and tree pulling or whatvere you said is two tools.
Of course, if one has a single tool and makes the most out of it, it can be found to be sufficient. I do not do calisthenics and strand pulling because it is necessary, but because calisthenics are good for my goals and cheap (and I like them), and I do strand pulling because it is personally rewarding and also a great means of developing strength. Take for example Hit Richards, a man who does only bodyweight exercises (with a weight vest too): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAwfIMYSKrY and people who do calisthenics only (often in public parks) are growing.

Also, a single dumbbell of a set weight can be used in a way which maximizes its use. Better yet, get an adjustable dumbbell. A high cost kettlebell with a fixed weight does force people to make the best of it, but there is no reason why people cannot make the best of anything else.

A sandbag likewise offers...I think I wrote this before.

Kettlebell apologists sure become more realistic when pressed though...it is hardly the one stop ultimate tool, but just another possible tool which can be used to develop "enough" strength.
Also you failed to note the way the force is displaced when regards to a kettlebell press. Not only does this prove safer but the shoulders but gives greater range of motion. Though I dont know if this fact as been scientific validated I believe that it lead to greater neuromusular activation.
It does not prove safer, it limits the weight which can be held. I do not think there is a great range of motion in kettlebell lifts...the hand is in the same place on the body.

Yes, it is "different" from a dumbbell...but so are many other things and using this difference as the selling point hardly makes sense. One can make the same claims about sandbags, strands, any assortment of heavy objects, or different designs of bells.

Again, I am against the exaggerated claims and misleading marketing, and the near religious fervor people have about kettlebells sometimes. It is like the world of martial arts, with the ninja dojo down the street owned by a local guy fascinated with kanji decorations, and pupils eager to learn the Secret from the "right" school and having warrior fantasies.

 

 
 

HerrMannelig

Level 3 Valued Member
I think I am done with this topic. It is probably imprudent to post much about it here, so I'll stop now.

These are just my thoughts...do whatever you want to do.
 

Siemen

Level 3 Valued Member
Well now, this is getting a heated argument.

Let anyone have his or her opinion. If you think kettlebells are superior or not doesn't really matter. It is not because Pavel is Chief on this forum that this is a kettlebell forum. I thougheing strong andt this forum was about and how to get strong and that it doens't care how you get strong, I mean by wich tool you use.

I too like the barbell more than the kettlebell. Maybe I'm too impatient to get my technique right and hit that volume etc. But I don't have these problems when I began starting barbell training. I really love it and that's why I think barbells are superior for strength than kettlebells in my opinion. But kettlebells have got me stronger too and I love doing kettlebell ballistics. It just doesn't really fir for me I think, or I'm plain dumb.

We should not attack each other for having an opinion. Not respecting one other is a sign of weakness.
 

prowler83

Level 3 Valued Member
Sieman,

How are you brother? Nothing heated on my part, just a few men agreeing to disagree on a few things. He made his points I made mine.

Hope your trainings goin well? :)

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

Siemen

Level 3 Valued Member
Hey Aaron!

Spoken like a real man!

Training goes well now. Fell in love with Wendler 5/3/1/ 2 days a weeks. Started very light to get the hang of things in case of technique etc. Slowly moving forward. Finding my hinge in the deadlift felt so good! And I have fallen in love with deadlifts, overhead presses, benches and certainly squats! But deadlifts are way cooler :D
 

prowler83

Level 3 Valued Member
Siemen,

Back in the Day I was always a Squat man. Great to hear Bro, stick with it. Im Rockin on the PM, see how are I can take it. Bulldog or Beast hopefully! :)
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Top Bottom