all posts post new thread

Kettlebell Geoff Neuperts thoughts

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

Deleted member 316

Guest
As the double kettlebell hypertrophy and fat loss guru, what is his go to program that him and his clients had the best reaults. His top pick for hypertrophy and his top pick for fat loss.
 
@HUNTER1313

Tough to narrow down "the best" as it depends on where the student currently is.

If you have someone who is reasonably familiar with the double kettlebell lifts, but doesn't have much time under their belt, I would recommend "The Slow & Steady" from Kettlebell STRONG. It is 16 weeks, self paced and builds a great foundation of skill. The student will get some hypertrophy as well if they eat enough.

For the more experienced girevik who wants to focus on fat loss, I would personally go for "The Wolf" or "Lucky 13" from More Kettlebell Muscle. Both are 6 week programs.
 
Here's something worth experimenting..

Pick any of his prgrams, eat according to your goal..

You'll be surprised that you can drop bodyfat on a muscle gaining program if you eat at a deficit.


Case in point: my n=4 experiment at the gym, we did RMF, 3 ate at a deficit, 1 at a surplus..

The three leaned out, the single test subject gained 3lbs
 
Mark Limbaga said:
Here's something worth experimenting..

Pick any of his prgrams, eat according to your goal..

You'll be surprised that you can drop bodyfat on a muscle gaining program if you eat at a deficit.


Case in point: my n=4 experiment at the gym, we did RMF, 3 ate at a deficit, 1 at a surplus..

The three leaned out, the single test subject gained 3lbs
Click to expand...
100% agree with this. I have had the same exact experience.
 
HUNTER1313 said:
As the double kettlebell hypertrophy and fat loss guru, what is his go to program that him and his clients had the best reaults. His top pick for hypertrophy and his top pick for fat loss.
Click to expand...

@HUNTER1313 -

"Guru" may be too strong of a word... ;-)

It really depends on the individual. And most of the answers already are spot on.

Here's a general rule of thumb I use with my clients for body recomposition and how we write their programming:

Do the opposite of what you're used to doing.

In other words:

If you're a ballistics guy/gal, then do heavy grinds. Or a grinds-dominant program.

If you're a heavy grinds guy/gal, then do ballistics. Or a ballistics-dominant program.

Also, if, off the top of my head, I had to suggest a "doubles" plan or a path to follow, it would be as follows:

1. Kettlebell STRONG!
2. Kettlebell Burn EXTREME! or "...RELOADED"
3. Kettlebell Muscle or More Kettlebell Muscle (pick any plan - preferably one you're weak at)
4. Kettlebell RMF

You could also sub in pretty much any of the non-complex Kettlebell Express! ULTRA plans into this between #2 and #3 and #3 and #4.

Hope that helps.
 
Geoff Neupert said:
Do the opposite of what you're used to doing.

In other words:

If you're a ballistics guy/gal, then do heavy grinds. Or a grinds-dominant program.

If you're a heavy grinds guy/gal, then do ballistics. Or a ballistics-dominant program.
Click to expand...
Interesting! Time to hit the grinds for me, I guess.
 
Mark Limbaga said:
Here's something worth experimenting.

Pick any of his prgrams, eat according to your goal..

You'll be surprised that you can drop bodyfat on a muscle gaining program if you eat at a deficit.


Case in point: my n=4 experiment at the gym, we did RMF, 3 ate at a deficit, 1 at a surplus..

The three leaned out, the single test subject gained 3lbs
Click to expand...

That is so interesting. I assume that the muscle-building programs involve more volume at a higher intensity thereby just amount to more work in the physics sense. Did the guys who leaned out hold or increase their strength is the key question.

There seem to be so many ideas that people keep repeating in fitness and nutrition but don't really have solid empirical evidence. In addition, there seem to be significant individual differences in genetics, health conditions, muscle type etc.

Recently, I have read that time under tension for hypertrophy may not be as important as once thought as long as you recruit enough muscle fiber through approaching failure either by intensity or volume at least a certain percentage of RM.

I have always been a little suspicious of the clear divisions between strength vs hypertrophy vs weight loss categories. They seem to be in textbooks and blogs but in the real world, it often turns out to be a matter of emphasis or tendency or mainly outliers and elite preformers on very specialized programs that they have already adapted their bodies to.
 
guardian7 said:
That is so interesting. I assume that the muscle-building programs involve more volume at a higher intensity thereby just amount to more work in the physics sense. Did the guys who leaned out hold or increase their strength is the key question.

There seem to be so many ideas that people keep repeating in fitness and nutrition but don't really have solid empirical evidence. In addition, there seem to be significant individual differences in genetics, health conditions, muscle type etc.

Recently, I have read that time under tension for hypertrophy may not be as important as once thought as long as you recruit enough muscle fiber through approaching failure either by intensity or volume at least a certain percentage of RM.

I have always been a little suspicious of the clear divisions between strength vs hypertrophy vs weight loss categories. They seem to be in textbooks and blogs but in the real world, it often turns out to be a matter of emphasis or tendency or mainly outliers and elite preformers on very specialized programs that they have already adapted their bodies to.
Click to expand...

One outlier turned a 10rm in her clean and jerk into a 22rm by phase 2
 
Mark Limbaga said:
One outlier turned a 10rm in her clean and jerk into a 22rm by phase 2
Click to expand...

If a client's goals are body composition and hypertrophy and you are already working pretty heavy with double kettlebells then I would think that measuring progress by reps rather than increase in 1RM would make sense. Unlike other types of volume and density training, it is also easy to measure. Maybe reps rather than weight should maybe be used more often to measure progress. I have seen I think BROMO advocated that for barbells by starting with a weight that is very heavy and then keeping the weight steady but adding reps for barbell too, owning the weight as Pavel recommends before increasing weight on ladders. Someone learning the KB snatch could keep the weight light until they achieve 100 reps in five min and only then move up in weight.
 
As someone who does lots of doubles work, I have moved back to using a single. I'm 5 weeks into Kettlebell Burn 2.0, running it with a 70 lb. bell except the presses which starting Phase 2 dropped to 62 lb. Thank God there are only 3 workouts per week. It's NASTY, yet Beautiful.

I haven't locked in the diet piece yet only losing 2 lb. but I've lost an inch off the navel.
 
BrianCF said:
As someone who does lots of doubles work, I have moved back to using a single. I'm 5 weeks into Kettlebell Burn 2.0, running it with a 70 lb. bell except the presses which starting Phase 2 dropped to 62 lb. Thank God there are only 3 workouts per week. It's NASTY, yet Beautiful.

I haven't locked in the diet piece yet only losing 2 lb. but I've lost an inch off the navel.
Click to expand...
I've been thinking about picking this up...I've KB Burn Extreme, but what are the difference between that and 2.0?
 
guardian7 said:
That is so interesting. I assume that the muscle-building programs involve more volume at a higher intensity thereby just amount to more work in the physics sense. Did the guys who leaned out hold or increase their strength is the key question.

There seem to be so many ideas that people keep repeating in fitness and nutrition but don't really have solid empirical evidence. In addition, there seem to be significant individual differences in genetics, health conditions, muscle type etc.

Recently, I have read that time under tension for hypertrophy may not be as important as once thought as long as you recruit enough muscle fiber through approaching failure either by intensity or volume at least a certain percentage of RM.

I have always been a little suspicious of the clear divisions between strength vs hypertrophy vs weight loss categories. They seem to be in textbooks and blogs but in the real world, it often turns out to be a matter of emphasis or tendency or mainly outliers and elite preformers on very specialized programs that they have already adapted their bodies to.
Click to expand...

One thing almost always overlooked is an individual's effort.

Over the past 15+ years, I have been fortunate to have regularly trained with Special Ops Pipehitters and seen what "effort" really is.

People often say "I want to" rather than what they really mean: "I would like to." In other words, "I would like to as long as it isn't too difficult or requires too much effort." Outside of the aforementioned SOF Group, I have seen "want to" a few times. One of those was StrongFirst History, when our own @Anna C picked up a kettlebell for the first time!! Hers is a quiet, strong, determination. Anna is like a glacier in that she progresses somewhat slowly, but extraordinarily powerfully and simply will NOT be stopped.

I've also trained with many people who went through the motions, were inconsistent, or both. Better yet I have heard, "I followed program X but changed this, changed that, etc." Better yet I have heard "I followed diet X except for the alcohol part." When I told those people "well, then you didn't follow the program" I was met with blank stares.

Back to my point: the old saying of "a terrible program done with heart beats the heck out of a perfect program done halfheartedly" is very true, but when you do a perfect (i.e. Neupert) program with heart and passion, your results are incomparable!! Check out @Mike Torres recent results from a Neupert Program!!
 
Just got one of Geoffs recent emails. In it he states the programs (taken from MKM) can be run as stand alone, GPP or as a warm up/finisher.

This kind of threw me off, having read KB Strong and various other complex focussed training books I would say the general message is not to do much work over and above whats in the program.

What do most people do on here, use these types of programs as stand alone or run as components of a main routine?

Pros/Cons etc

Thanks
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom