Kettlebell Difference in training adaptations - higher rep sets Vs higher volume of low rep sets?
- Thread starter kiwipete
- Start date
- Status
North Coast Miller
Level 9 Valued Member
All depends on the loading...
kiwipete
Level 8 Valued Member
OK, what about 50% of 1 RM?
Training goal?
Alexander Halford
Level 8 Valued Member
50% of 1rm is nowhere near the 3-5 reps range. Should be ~70% for 5 reps, 80% for 3, and pretty short cycles. 50% 1rm - bigger ranges, both in volume and reps. Can be also used for deload periods after heavy lifting.
kiwipete
Level 8 Valued Member
@Mark Limbaga just a question out of curiosity more than anything else...
Say you did 5 sets x 5 reps @ 70%
or
you did 8 sets x 3 reps @ 70% 1RM
Would their be any practical difference in the adaptions from those two sessions?
Personally I find that 1-3 reps seems more natural to me and my 'wiring' than 5 rep sets, so wondering if total volume matters more than reps / sets within reasonable bounds when comparing more sets of 3 reps Vs less sets of 5-7 reps for example
Say you did 5 sets x 5 reps @ 70%
or
you did 8 sets x 3 reps @ 70% 1RM
Would their be any practical difference in the adaptions from those two sessions?
Personally I find that 1-3 reps seems more natural to me and my 'wiring' than 5 rep sets, so wondering if total volume matters more than reps / sets within reasonable bounds when comparing more sets of 3 reps Vs less sets of 5-7 reps for example
5x5 allows you to be more precise in technique due to less accumulated fatigue..
So what does better technique lead to?
More progress
Less injuries
Etc etc
Hope that helps
So what does better technique lead to?
More progress
Less injuries
Etc etc
Hope that helps
Antti
Level 10 Valued Member
Wouldn't shorter sets mean less fatigue?
Hung
Level 8 Valued Member
The relationship between fatigue and technique is not linear.
Glenn Pendlay suggests things like 80% of your 1RM for multi sets of 2 (for grinds like squat/bench) or of 1 (for clean or snatch); EMOM style. He states that even though you get tired, but your performance (in terms of technique) is better.
His word could be in the same line with Kenny's word about percentage of 1RM for technique work.
Glenn Pendlay suggests things like 80% of your 1RM for multi sets of 2 (for grinds like squat/bench) or of 1 (for clean or snatch); EMOM style. He states that even though you get tired, but your performance (in terms of technique) is better.
His word could be in the same line with Kenny's word about percentage of 1RM for technique work.
This could be right for grind, heavy lift, but for explosive lift I'm not sure.
Good example, as this would result in just about the same total weight lifted in a session.
You didn't specify an exercise -- you're in the kettlebell forum, so what did you have in mind? My answer is thinking more towards a barbell strength training scenario -- press, squat, deadlift, bench press.
IMO there wouldn't be that much difference but I think you would get a better strength adaptations from the 5x5. If I had to guess at the physiological mechanism it might be recruitment of motor units. 3 reps at 70% isn't enough to create local fatigue to make that happen to the same degree as sets of 5.
However the sets of 3 would have you fresher, perhaps resulting in more quality reps (though the quality really shouldn't deteriorate at 70% even for sets of 5) and possibly giving your body more chances to expend PCr energy and replenish it (think A+A energy systems development... though this is a poor way to do that, with only 8 sets total, and no "power" training involved).
If you are thinking about the strength development aspect, you would probably enjoy this Barbell Medicine podcast as they spend some time discussing that exact subject.
Kenny Croxdale
Level 7 Valued Member
Strength Training
5 X 5 is optimal for developing technique.
5 X 5 Sets/Repetition with heavy loads are traditionally employed in the development of Maximum Strength.
The use of light to moderate load may provide some technique development it amount to using the wrong using the wrong tool for the job.
Technique Development
1) Performing 1 or maybe 2 Repetition per Set.
2) Load of 85% of 1 Repetition Max
3) Long Rest Periods between Sets.
4( Multiple Sets
5) Once fatigue occurs the exercise is terminated.
Last edited:
Kenny Croxdale
Level 7 Valued Member
Objective
Your objective is the determinate factor in your chose of...
1) Repetitions
2) Sets
3) Training Percentage Loads
4) Rest Periods
5) Exsercises
0 - 100: Know Your Percentages
From 0 to 100: Know Your Percentages!
Each training percentage, from zero to 100% of your 1RM, has a distinct effect on speed, power, and hypertrophy. Here’s how to use that info wisely.
This article provide you with a better understanding of the above.
Picking The Right Tool For The Job
You need to work backward. Determine what type of Strength you want to train/improve.
Then pick the right Repetitions, Sets, Training Percentage Load, Rest Periods, Exercises, etc to get you to your destination.
As someone said, "A Goal without a Plan is a just a dream".
Alexander Halford
Level 8 Valued Member
Fair enough. If we're talking about kettlebell explosives, it would be hard to determine 1rm in a first place. You need to have a very extensive set of bells to do it. That's probably why we test capabilities of 5rm or 10rm around existing typical bells.
But, let's say, someone can swing 48kg for 1-2 reps with a good form. Would it be wise to build his training around 24kg bell, for the sets of 5 and volume? I don't think so. 32kg would be more logical choice, which makes it ~65% of 1rm.
If we're speaking about hardstyle here (I assume, that's The place ?), where each rep in a series treated as individual, maximum tension, it won't be that different from the typical scheme for strength. Weights - lighter and variable, volume - variable, same scheme.
I can assume also that CP fuel usage timeframe can absorb more explosive lifts due to its speed, but I'm not sure about that one. Give or take, with a serious weight we're still revolving around ~2 sec@rep, and first 10 seconds (imho) is the nice limit for the pure strength set.
I read 8x3 as 8 reps 3 sets
Hung
Level 8 Valued Member
@Alexander Halford clean, snatch, high pull with barbell is what I mean
North Coast Miller
Level 9 Valued Member
There will be no difference.
Even at higher loading, the diff between 3 and 5 reps per is going to be minimal unless you do quite a few more sets, make those sets a Cluster or use Rest/Pause.
What exercise and what tool are you referring to when you experience this?
This thread is all over the place with grind/strength vs. explosive/power/ballistic, and kettlebell vs. barbell.
kiwipete
Level 8 Valued Member
Sorry should have said - Dbl KB front squats
kiwipete
Level 8 Valued Member
Thank you for detailed reply - the T nation article is very good for a layperson such as I!Objective
Your objective is the determinate factor in your chose of...
1) Repetitions
2) Sets
3) Training Percentage Loads
4) Rest Periods
5) Exsercises
0 - 100: Know Your Percentages
From 0 to 100: Know Your Percentages!
Each training percentage, from zero to 100% of your 1RM, has a distinct effect on speed, power, and hypertrophy. Here’s how to use that info wisely.www.t-nation.com
This article provide you with a better understanding of the above.
Picking The Right Tool For The Job
You need to work backward. Determine what type of Strength you want to train/improve.
Then pick the right Repetitions, Sets, Training Percentage Load, Rest Periods, Exercises, etc to get you to your destination.
As someone said, "A Goal without a Plan is a just a dream".
OK, so for double kettlebell front squats... I would not expect much difference in adaptation between 5x5 vs. 8 sets of 3. The stimulus comes from giving your legs (and whole body, really) a certain amount of work at a hard-ish weight. Not much difference probably between the two scenarios. Although, worth noting, you get in 3 more double kettlebell cleans in with the 8 sets than you do with 5 sets!
- Status