Kettlebell Is simple and sinister all you need?

[marvinthemartian]

I have been doing S&S for a bit over 2 years now and I think it's good enough to allow you to do a wide range of physical activities for a long time. It's not magic, 2 exercises (plus warm up and stretching) covers only so much of your bodies physical attributes and an exercise program can only do so much if other life circumstances compromise your health. But when it comes to a minimalist low level GPP program with exercise equipment that is fairly cheap and compact it covers a lot of bases.

I park my KBs on a rubber door mat in a corner of my apartment, train in my living room and I paid about 18 months of gym fees for the book and 6 KBs in the 16-32kg range.

Besides my S&S training my life is pretty inactive (meaning I sit on my a#@ almost all day) and I am constantly sleep deprived (stay up too late) and despite all that my body has become much more resilient. I never enjoyed S&S all that much but it did accomplished what the books said it would pretty much from the beginning and IMO being able to do Simple is a pretty good benchmark for anyone.

 

[Steve Freides]

I would include things like pushups, pull-ups, run times, etc.

As an interested bystander to this conversation, I'll observe that none of the metrics you mention matters at all to me. I don't run any more except when the urge strikes me, I'm good at pullups but when I don't train them, my numbers go down and there are only so many hours in a day and other things matter more to me, and pushups have never had a place in my training.

-S-

 

[watchnerd]

I don't get why people think that doing only S&S or ROP or Q&D or PTP or some other two-lifts-only program is enough or will get them to their goals.

For the comment I'm about to make, I'm going to set aside those of low training age, as there is a very different set of physical, psychological, and pedagogical dynamics for those who are still relatively early in the process of GPP development where return on unit time invested is relatively high and minimum effective doses are still relatively low.

If, instead, we're talking about an individual further along in athletic development to the point of specialized focus (even at the amateur or hobbyist level) in a given endeavor --- whether tennis, rowing, kayaking, martial arts, weightlifting, or ballroom dancing -- there are virtues to a minimalist program that:

• Doesn't need to "tick all the boxes", because the individual has an active athletic practice outside of S&C programming; it only needs to "fill the gaps"
• Has low recovery debt so as not to detract from performance in the primary sport
• Doesn't require a high level of skill development that will compete with practice time in the primary sport
• Doesn't utilize movement patterns that will create technique pollution or RSI with the primary sport

FWIW, while I'm reasonably adept at S&C programming for athletic pursuits (having gone through it many times myself for different sports and having to get academically educated on it in the process) targeting very specific goals, often in the context of competition prep cycles, I have no gift at all for meeting gen pop where they're at in their fitness journey and helping them balance that with "normal life", as my peer group aren't normal people.

 

[renegadenate]

As an interested bystander to this conversation, I'll observe that none of the metrics you mention matters at all to me. I don't run any more except when the urge strikes me, I'm good at pullups but when I don't train them, my numbers go down and there are only so many hours in a day and other things matter more to me, and pushups have never had a place in my training.

-S-

They may not matter to you (which is fine), but they do have benefits for many people.

Being able to perform 40 pushups is a good indicator of heart health. They also have many other benefits (and I love using them for Q&D).

Pull-ups are a life-saving skill and have a huge carryover to many athletic events and recreational sports (and those of us that participate in The Murph Challenge, TSC, or OCR have to be good at them).

I hate running and rarely do it (even though I ran competitively in OCR's but never ran in my training), but everyone should be able to run/sprint (another one of those life-saving skills).

However, there are many other options one could choose from!

 

[renegadenate]

For the comment I'm about to make, I'm going to set aside those of low training age, as there is a very different set of physical, psychological, and pedagogical dynamics for those who are still relatively early in the process of GPP development where return on unit time invested is relatively high and minimum effective doses are still relatively low.

If, instead, we're talking about an individual further along in athletic development to the point of specialized focus (even at the amateur or hobbyist level) in a given endeavor --- whether tennis, rowing, kayaking, martial arts, weightlifting, ballroom dancing -- there are virtues to a minimalist program that:

• Doesn't need to "tick all the boxes", because the individual has an active athletic practice outside of S&C programming; it only needs to "fill the gaps"
• Has low recovery debt so as not to detract from performance in the primary sport
• Doesn't require a high level of skill development that will compete with practice time in the primary sport
• Doesn't utilize movement patterns that will create technique pollution with the primary sport

FWIW, while reasonably adept at S&C programming for athletic pursuits (having gone through it many times myself for different sports and having to read up on it) targeting very specific goals, often in the context of competition prep cycles, I have no gift at all for meeting gen pop where they're at in their fitness journey and helping them balance that with "normal" life, as my peer group aren't normal people.

Oh, I absolutely agree that for someone that competes in a sport, a minimalist program like S&S or Q&D is great!

But for most people, they will need more than that to truly achieve their goals (and look good as well).

 

[watchnerd]

Oh, I absolutely agree that for someone that competes in a sport, a minimalist program like S&S or Q&D is great!

But for most people, they will need more than that to truly achieve their goals (and look good as well).

The part where I get confused with how people view S&S is that it was my impression when I first read S&S is that it was intended to be a minimalist program that lived alongside other demanding physical endeavors, with particular mentions of military, LEO, and combat sports.

I never had the impression it was supposed to be one stop shopping for other comparatively sedentary demographics.

 

[renegadenate]

The part where I get confused with how people view S&S is that it was my impression when I first read S&S is that it was intended to be a minimalist program that lived alongside other demanding physical endeavors, with particular mentions of military, LEO, and combat sports.

I never had the impression it was supposed to be one stop shopping for other comparatively sedentary demographics.

Same!

 

[Matt_lux]

There have been some article and testimonies (like Pavel Macek's) who led to think that S&S could be "enough".
When you have a solid athletic backgrounds, it might help to conserve a lot.
For a total beginner, getting to timeless simple would be enough for being in good shape to live a normal life easily.
The subtility lies in "strong and healthy". Everyone has its own definition.

 

[TedM]

I am paying a tax to reality against slovenliness, and eventual morbidity and decrepitude at ages 70 80, or beyond.
for better or worse, I mean to minimize those payments in terms of time and money.

of course, this is all with respect to one's fitness goals.
My goal is:
I wanna be able to move my own furniture till the day I die.

Wow. Very eloquently said. "Tax to reality" - great!!!!

 

[watchnerd]

The subtility lies in "strong and healthy". Everyone has its own definition.

Right.

Without some measurable quantification of what one means by "strong" and "healthy", it degenerates into a semantics debate.

Healthy could include things like blood markers, VO2 max, BMR, mobility and stability screens, body fat percentage / lean body mass, blood pressure, resting heart rate, mental and emotional health, cognitive abilities, etc, etc.

 

[Steve Freides]

Being able to perform 40 pushups is a good indicator of heart health.

There are others. I'm 67 and have a family history of heart disease. I'm good, tested 16 ways to Sunday and all good.

Pull-ups are a life-saving skill and have a huge carryover to many athletic events and recreational sports (and those of us that participate in The Murph Challenge, TSC, or OCR have to be good at them)

From what else I do, I can knock out bodyweight pullups, and with weight, without training them.

I hate running and rarely do it (even though I ran competitively in OCR's but never ran in my training), but everyone should be able to run/sprint (another one of those life-saving skills).

I ran the Philly half marathon in 1:36:40 in 1982 - been there, done that.

However, there are many other options one could choose from!

Swings and getups, perhaps?



-S-

 

[silveraw]

And didn't he mentioned there he eats one meal a day?

Yeah, he has been doing OMAD since ETK came out AFAIK. He seems to find something he likes and stick with it long term.

There have been some article and testimonies (like Pavel Macek's) who led to think that S&S could be "enough".
When you have a solid athletic backgrounds, it might help to conserve a lot.
For a total beginner, getting to timeless simple would be enough for being in good shape to live a normal life easily.
The subtility lies in "strong and healthy". Everyone has its own definition.

To be fair, Pavel also runs a MA school, and has created several non S&S programs during his epic run of S&S. I think he certainly falls in to the category of "doing lots of other stuff on top of S&S" despite that being his main "program" during that time period.
I know other Master SFGs like Zar Horton do a lot of S&S AND XYZ. For example in an interview he talked about how he did up to 4 complete sessions of S&S a day, uses Q&D as his warmups, and piles it on with lots of other specific drills for firefighting. All the workouts I've done with him have been far more challenging than an S&S session.

To quote Dan John, "Minimal programs give minimal results". Which can be fine depending on your goals, but if that is your only source of exercise and movement in a year you are leaving a lot on the table in terms of size, strength, and conditioning gains. If all you have time for is 30 minutes a day, then it is a fantastic return on investment. But if you have an hour a day, but still only do S&S, you could use that extra time to get a substantially bigger return. (hope that makes sense, not bashing S&S, just saying it is a program minimum)

 

[Matt_lux]

I guess the best answer would be, as usual : "it depends".
Test it for yourself for weeks, months and re-assess. Is that enough for you? Stay with it. Not enough ? Switch. There are tons of good programs (KB-based only) out there to satisfy your needs.

 

[acutaiar12]

Your training logs are great examples of all around training. I respect your consistency and work capacity.

Thank you! I appreciate it. I’ve learned a lot in the past year and a half. But I’m still young (just 22), and I have a lot to learn, and a lot of strength to acquire!

 

[Ege]

The part where I get confused with how people view S&S is that it was my impression when I first read S&S is that it was intended to be a minimalist program that lived alongside other demanding physical endeavors, with particular mentions of military, LEO, and combat sports.

I never had the impression it was supposed to be one stop shopping for other comparatively sedentary demo

I think this confusion is quite normal. You, as many others here in the forum have long history of strength work and a current athleticism which is found in less than one percent of population, but I guess as SF continue to grow, people like myself will be seen more often. I mean people who are novices. And while I am learning from all generous people here in this forum including you, it is normal that I attribute “more” to S&S.

And you would not believe what is marketed to new bees like my self in youtube fitness era. I am one of the luckiest people to find my way here

 

[watchnerd]

And you would not believe what is marketed to new bees like my self in youtube fitness era. I am one of the luckiest people to find my way here

You might be surprised at the amount of "build your dream butt" content that gets marketed to weightlifters.

Any search I do on a glute related topics (weightlifters typically have a lot junk in the trunk, which leads to it being a big systemic recovery sponge) ends up with the search algos offering to shape my derriere for weeks after.

 

[Steve Freides]

To quote Dan John, "Minimal programs give minimal results"

Let’s fine-tune that. Minimalist programs give results that depend on the choice of lifts, the quality of the programming, and the adherence of the student more than traditional programs. If those three things are good, minimalist programs deliver big results.

-S-

 

[Bradley Duggan]

Man this question really opened a can of worms.
Recently I have not been motivated to train, busy with, work, kids ect.
With a lot of programmes and training advice out there its disabling sometimes.
if I just stuck with simple and sinster for years to come.
Would I be stronger and fitter than say 80% of the average man that does nothing?
I feel like that's the reason pavel wrote the programme in the first place. Keep it simple stupid sort of thing. If I'm wrong correct me.

I appreciate everyone's input and taking the time to answer.

 

[watchnerd]

Would I be stronger and fitter than say 80% of the average man that does nothing?

I have no data, but I don't know if it would be stronger than 80% of the people who do nothing because genetics can have a freaky part to play.

I've met people who can maintain a much higher than average level of muscle mass and strength innately without training due to genetics, frame size, etc. I'm actually one of those people -- I was always bigger and stronger than average, even before training, which then lead me to strength and power sports, because I was naturally good at them.

And I've met guys as teens or in college who had leverages such that they could walk in and bench press 315 lbs by the end of the first day they tried it. But just to look at them they looked average.

 

[Kev]

It’s meant to be a minimum effective dose with a ballistic component (swings) and The TGU which is an almost kata like time under tension high skill move. I remember it from The Russian Kettlebell Challenge when it was called the program minimum. I’ve done it and I achieved simple but I’m not a fan, rather famously on here. If it works for you good. If you want to achieve sinister, more power to you. But, and this is a Kevism, if you are wanting to replicate daily labour then I came up with an approach called “no matter what hit 10,000lbs as a minimum”. I stole this from Rob Orlando who did it as a metcon when he was pressed for time and he would use a heavy barbell and do squats or whatever and achieve 10,000lbs accumulated as fast as possible. My Kevism is if we are attempting to replicate labour why not just shift at least 10,000lbs daily? For perspective 182 swings with a 25kg is 10,000lbs accumulated. Very quickly this approach becomes easy and you will hit 20,000lbs, 30,000lbs and possibly higher. And when you are tired just hit 10,000lbs. The lifter can go hard and fast, they can go slow, they can go double kettlebell, they can work a lift, several lifts, complexes, sandbag work but no matter what….. shift that 10,000lbs as a minimum. I’ve done this for year long stretches. This is how I view a minimum effective dose. No matter what, shift 10,000lbs. And that’s just an arbitrary number. I don’t know what a labourer shifts a day. I don’t know what a blacksmiths strain is every time he swings a hammer but I do know that these dudes are offensively strong and a lot of them have never been near a barbell or a kettlebell. So it must be daily strain.