all posts post new thread

Kettlebell If S&S is considered a good programme for GPP, why would we do other lifts?

Pavel.Kosenkov said:
Thank you everyone.
Is there a point of training for an SFG1 cert before achieving the simple standard?
I am 64kg, timed simple with 32kg would be pretty impressive for me.
And if yes - let's say I succeed and I have passed the snatch test.
How would I be able to recommend people S&S training, if I did not complete it myself?
Click to expand...
As you are under 68kg your SFG test weight would be a 20kg. So you definitely wouldn’t need to have hit simple to be able to do that.

I’m wondering if there is a question beneath the question? You’ve posted a few threads that suggest a, forgive me if I’m wrong, frustration/dissatisfaction with your s&s training? If you’re comfortably swinging and putting up a 24kg maybe it’s time for some different programming?

I don’t know if you’ve seen the videos Geoff Neupert has been putting on YouTube recently about the 5 levels of kettlebell training? Might tie in to some of the questions in this thread.
 
Symanoy said:
As you are under 68kg your SFG test weight would be a 20kg. So you definitely wouldn’t need to have hit simple to be able to do that.

I’m wondering if there is a question beneath the question? You’ve posted a few threads that suggest a, forgive me if I’m wrong, frustration/dissatisfaction with your s&s training? If you’re comfortably swinging and putting up a 24kg maybe it’s time for some different programming?

I don’t know if you’ve seen the videos Geoff Neupert has been putting on YouTube recently about the 5 levels of kettlebell training? Might tie in to some of the questions in this thread.
Click to expand...
It's not frustration or dissatisfaction.
While I am posting this, I am keeping my practice. Usually about 5 sessions a week.

I am mostly curious of other people's experiences. And I have questions.

For me, for example, there is a fundamental difference: is S&S a standard, or is it the way to get to the standard? Those 2 are not the same.
 
Standards. ‘Standards’ oftentimes are very arbitrary and also often in the eyes of the beholder, not to mention highly contextual in nature. Personally… I really do not concern myself with standards, nor find them interesting to ponder or discuss. Now ‘records’ on the other hand…. I do find interesting, but I’ll freely admit that those can be very arbitrary at times as well.
As Steve would say… JMO, YMMV
 
Adam R Mundorf said:
Some of the fittest people I've ever seen in my life are at parks, doing exactly what you said.
Click to expand...
One of my favorite saying is that, out of a million strength and conditioning programs, the good ones number in the thousands. That's a small percentage, it also means that there's certainly more than one way to become a stronger, better conditioned person.

-S-
 
Pavel.Kosenkov said:
For me, for example, there is a fundamental difference: is S&S a standard, or is it the way to get to the standard? Those 2 are not the same.
Click to expand...

Standards are created for a variety of reasons E.g., we have them for our instructor certifications because we want to be sure StrongFirst Certified Instructors can walk the walk and not just talk the talk.

There are standards in my powerlifting federation because they have to decide who is good enough to participate in national and international competitions. In this case, rather than being a standard which must be met, regardless of whether no one or everyone can meet the standard, they're standards based on actual lifting performances, e.g., if you're in the top 1%, you rank International Elite for your division/weight/age. (Don't quote me on the 1% but it's something like that.) I pay no attention whatsoever to those standards except to look at them once in a while for the dual purposes: 1) patting myself on the back for my strength and, 2) lamenting the sorry state of powerlifting competition at my age and weight.

S&S is a book. S&S contains several standards so one cannot say that "S&S is a standard" - it's multiple standards. In this case, because it's a program whose focus is General Physical Preparedness, those standards are intended as guidelines for a wide variety of people in pursuit of a wide variety of goals. Reaching an S&S standard is a way to get to other things because GPP is, by its very nature, a way to get to other things.

-S-
 
Is it really unrealistic to have someone 64kg completing Simple training 5 times per week by the way?

Would it be similar to an average weight person completing it with 40kg or is there more to think about than just %BW?
 
Pavel.Kosenkov said:
is S&S a standard, or is it the way to get to the standard? Those 2 are not the same.
Click to expand...
Standards, imo, are only useful if you have a need or desire for comparison. As Steve said, they have an obvious place in certifications and competition, but outside of that they become too nebulous to make any sense.

For example: Just because you have a strong core from doing S&S doesn’t mean you will be able to do hanging leg raises or an L-sit. So if you want to be able to do something in particular you have to train it . That should be obvious too, given that S&S is considered a GPP program.

I don’t worry about other peoples standards unless I want to test a claim (eg, if you can do [x] many push-ups you press a certain amount of weight, or something).

I guess topics like this seem very preferential and subjective. Are you getting what you want out of training? Yes? Carry on. No? Change something.
 
watchnerd said:
I have massive respect for the ability of GS athletes to endure suffering.

But Sweet Christmas it must be the most boring spectator sport in the world.

No wonder it had to be invented under Communism where ratings didn't matter.
Click to expand...
So, weightlifting falls into that category too? Same movements, different tool. You must be doing something else than those sport lifts too, so it gives variety. Cycling, swimming etc. are as boring as girevoy sport and weight lifting. But different strokes for different folks.
 
SUOMI-PUKU said:
Is it really unrealistic to have someone 64kg completing Simple training 5 times per week by the way?
Click to expand...
@Pavel Macek completed Sinister by following the plan in the book and he weighs 68 kg. It seems perfectly realistic to me, 69 kg and 68 years young, to complete Simple by training as the book suggests. I haven't done it because I generally do heavy 2h swings (48 and 56 kg) at least half the time. I'm able to performs 1h swings @ 32 kg.

-S-
 
masa said:
So, weightlifting falls into that category too? Same movements, different tool. You must be doing something else than those sport lifts too, so it gives variety. Cycling, swimming etc. are as boring as girevoy sport and weight lifting. But different strokes for different folks.
Click to expand...
I've watched a lot of weightlifting competitions the past 3 years (watched almost none prior to that - maybe the Olympics once or twice) and from my perspective what makes them interesting to watch is that every competitor is trying a very difficult lift. You get to watch their approach, their technique, whether or not they make it, and their reaction. Then the next competitor comes out. Then you see the strategy in the meet overall as one competitor may try to best another as they try to do their own best lifts that day.

All that to say, I haven't watched a GS competition, but seems like you're watching the suffering more than anything else there. Of course the technique and everything... but each lift repetition in itself doesn't carry much drama.

Funny how "same movement, different tool" -- snatch, and C&J -- can be so very different in competition.
 
renegadenate said:
I disagree. You'll still be missing out on a lot.
Click to expand...

offwidth said:
It depends upon your concept of what it means to be ‘healthy and fit’.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it does depend on the definition of "healthy and fit" which aren't very specific terms. I'm putting it in context... I believe S&S is a great way to check the boxes for exercise as it relates to health promotion, risk reduction, and function retention. You can live a full and complete life if this is all you pursue. Just like if all you do is the elliptical and Nautilus circuits. Some people don't want "all the skills", "all the strength", "all the abilities." They just want to stave off diseases of aging and develop some full-body strength and athleticism. S&S does this. (Caveat... if you don't do it well, it doesn't work well. Focus, intent, getting instruction, reading the book -- all help to actually achieve the benefits.)

However, I agree with @renegadenate that you would be missing out on a lot. There are many more aspects available to train. Speaking for myself, I've really enjoyed going beyond S&S to SFG I and II, barbell and bodyweight strength, weightlifting, etc. But I, like everyone else who spends time on this forum, enjoy going deeper into these topics. We only have to look around us to know that's not the norm.

I could make some analogies... If I always eat my same favorite 12 healthy meals, aren't I missing out on a lot? Yes, but it works for what I need and keeps me healthy and fed. If I only read three books in a year, aren't I missing out on a lot? Yes! But 3 books are better than none. If I know my basic family history but have not researched older generations and ancestors, aren't I missing out on a lot? Certainly. Someday I might get a chance to discover more. If I attend just one of my kid's or grandkid's baseball games, aren't I missing out on a lot that I could get if I went to every game? Of course. If I do a bit of home improvement work, am I missing out on how much more I COULD do? Yes, but we all have that amount of effort and time that we choose to put into something like that. If I do some basic saving and investing of money am I missing out on how much more I could earn if I really delved deep into it? Probably so. But most people just want to do the basic required commitment and effort in this area and let time and the market take care of the rest. Etc....
 
SUOMI-PUKU said:
Is it really unrealistic to have someone 64kg completing Simple training 5 times per week by the way?

Would it be similar to an average weight person completing it with 40kg or is there more to think about than just %BW?
Click to expand...
Well. From where I stand now - if I ever get the simple standard, I will get myself a cape, a mask, and I will go fight crime at night. Like batman, I will be that fit.
 
Pavel.Kosenkov said:
Well. From where I stand now - if I ever get the simple standard, I will get myself a cape, a mask, and I will go fight crime at night. Like batman, I will be that fit.
Click to expand...

Not quite.

Batman can clean and press 690 lbs.

5v7e5k4qe0881.jpg
 
@pavel.k

I understand what you are saying. But what you are asking are the things that only experience can teach. I am assuming you are not working directly with a coach/teacher. (Like most of us.) So the only way we can really learn is to train our way through it. We don't have a coach. So experience is our coach.

You're asking questions that you just have to train yourself through. The only thing is - learning how to train yourself through questions WITHOUT sabotaging yourself.

Have you worked your current program long enough? Do you know who to transition to something else without losing what you have gained?

It's not either or. You can train get ups and swings and introduce new movements.

And you don't always get it right. That's fine. There is no "forever program."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom