all posts post new thread

Kettlebell Kettlebell "Squat Style" Swing

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Kenny
Too much to reply to tonight but basically you ignored several things I had in my post and overreacted IMO

I said I would have to see it - you failed to provide video.

I said I didn't see the benefit (as described) - not that it was new (your posting the stages of how something new is eventually accepted has no relevance here) or that I couldn't be convinced it had benefit
and
you don't think that I've experimented with pretty much every swing variation there is...well that is funny.

My comment on the "Burn" was specific to the "squat swing" video posted.
 
Simply strong said:
From watching the videos it’s my honest opinion that a “squat style swing” is just a regular swing done incorrectly.
Click to expand...

watchnerd said:
IMHO, the advantage of the hinge swing is that it's laying a progression pattern that eventually leads to the snatch.

The squat swing is a bit of an anti-pattern from this POV.

Caveat: unless you're doing GS snatches for reps over long time.
Click to expand...
So this all gives the impression, that GS is incorrect way to do thing. It's been around while though. Lot longer than HS.

I agree that it's not the way how SF teaches, but it doesn't mean that it's bad because of that.
 
I've always felt like squats are best for grinds, and hinges are best for ballistics. To me, it seems like this kind of swing would only be useful if you are an athlete trying to really enhance specific areas of your performance.
 
masa said:
So this all gives the impression, that GS is incorrect way to do thing. It's been around while though. Lot longer than HS.

I agree that it's not the way how SF teaches, but it doesn't mean that it's bad because of that.
Click to expand...

I think the same reason applies here. StrongFirst teaches hardstyle kettlebell training. The hardstyle swing is a hinge. The hinge (and the other characteristics that differ from GS) are for maximum power generation. For that objective, there is an optimal way to do it, so that is StrongFirst's "correct" way. Doesn't make others wrong, but makes this "the way that works" for StrongFirst's objectives.
 
masa said:
So this all gives the impression, that GS is incorrect way to do thing. It's been around while though. Lot longer than HS.
Click to expand...

Note I also wrote: "Caveat: unless you're doing GS snatches for reps over long time."

Thus, if you want to do GS, a more squatty swing is a building block for that sport.

TBH, this reminds me a bit of the silly high bar vs low bar back squat debates.

Weightlifters use a high bar squat and powerlifters use low bar squat because they have different training goals.

Pick the swing style that suits your training needs.
 
watchnerd said:
Thus, if you want to do GS, a more squatty swing is a building block for that sport.
Click to expand...

True, GS does use more quads to get more of an upward and vertical path. That would make the squatty swing a decent training exercise for GS.

watchnerd said:
TBH, this reminds me a bit of the silly high bar vs low bar back squat debates.
Click to expand...

This debate will not go away. I tried to deal it a death blow by writing a very long article in which I concluded, based on a review of the current research and basic biomechanics, that the high-bar back squat is superior for Olympic weightlifters. If you're a general strength trainee then I don't care what you use. But the rather vocal group that insists the low-bar is superior for everything including the training of weightlifters just needs to stop.
 
masa said:
So this all gives the impression, that GS is incorrect way to do thing. It's been around while though. Lot longer than HS.

I agree that it's not the way how SF teaches, but it doesn't mean that it's bad because of that.
Click to expand...

Interesting enough, I learned KB swing from Maxwell and he taught to keep the shins as vertically straight as possible. I always thought the SF HS swing and especially snatch use too much knee bend/knee tracking over the foot, which encourages...more quad. And here we have a version that uses even more knee bend/tracking, interesting.

As far as the squat style swing, I'm curious if it encourages anything that jumping squats or power cleans don't. There's only one way to find out I guess.
 
I'll stick with hardstyle swings for the posterior chain and goblet and front squats for the anterior chain. I don't think it's uneccessary to blend them together into one movement. I'm sure there can be benefits to it, but I feel like it dilutes the effectiveness of any one technique I want to squeeze every last drop of effectiveness out of my training and in order to do that, I don't want to do any hybrid movements.

I know that GS is considered kettlebell sport, but in some strange way, hardstyle kettlebell training and my dedication to continually improving my technique seems like a sport in and of itself. I'm only competing with myself.
 
I have done these - a few sets way back. The main thing I recall is that they put my heart rate right up there very quickly - I don't know the technical terminology but it was like a sprint, high output, short duration.
 
MikeTheBear said:
This debate will not go away. I tried to deal it a death blow by writing a very long article in which I concluded, based on a review of the current research and basic biomechanics, that the high-bar back squat is superior for Olympic weightlifters. If you're a general strength trainee then I don't care what you use. But the rather vocal group that insists the low-bar is superior for everything including the training of weightlifters just needs to stop.
Click to expand...

Would you mind pointing me toward a link to your article, Mike?

My Google Fu is weak.
 
North Coast Miller said:
As far as the squat style swing, I'm curious if it encourages anything that jumping squats or power cleans don't. There's only one way to find out I guess.
Click to expand...

There should be quite a bit of energy conservation that cleans don't have and thus less need for maximal explosiveness.

After all, nobody does power cleans for 10 minutes straight like the GS athletes do during long cycle.
 
MikeTheBear said:
This debate will not go away. I tried to deal it a death blow by writing a very long article in which I concluded, based on a review of the current research and basic biomechanics, that the high-bar back squat is superior for Olympic weightlifters. If you're a general strength trainee then I don't care what you use. But the rather vocal group that insists the low-bar is superior for everything including the training of weightlifters just needs to stop.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Lu Xiaojun would be a much better lifter if only he would learn how to low bar squat instead of wasting his time on high bar.

back%2Bsquat%2B2.jpg


All those wasted gainz!
 
I'm a musician.

When I took lessons from one teacher, I followed that teacher's instructions to the best of my ability. When I switched teachers because I moved to another city, I followed my new teacher's instructions, even though they were quite different, to the best of my ability. At no time did I think I knew better than my teachers - I studied with them because I trusted them and I trusted the approach they'd decided to use. I knew there were other ways, but I wanted to learn the way my teacher at the time taught.

As a student, I trust that the way we at StrongFirst teach the swing is good for my life and for my athletic activities. For me, it doesn't go further than that. I did try another approach for about six months - this was about 12 years ago. It didn't work for me - I got injured.

There are a lot of considerations that go into what we teach and how we teach it at StrongFirst, some of which I know and some of which I don't. I like our "inch wide, mile deep" approach - it has served me well since I first read "Power To The People!" in 2001.

In one of Pavel's books he quotes a Russian as saying, "Understanding is just a delaying tactic." Take that for what it's worth - a joke of sorts, yes, but some understanding only comes through doing, and doing at a fairly high level at that. I don't completely understand why a hard style swing is "better" because, at the end of the day, I can't say it's "better" for everyone, all the time, but it has proven better for my purposes, and it has proven to be very good for our students. Other approaches have yielded results for other people - if anyone wishes to try another approach, they are free to do so. It's Strong_First, not Strong Only, and not "it's my way or the highway."

To bring this post back to the subject of the thread: At StrongFirst, our teaching continues to evolve, and the "shins must remain vertical" aspect has been tempered with the recognition that a good, athletic stance with a heavy weight means the shins won't be completely vertical. But that doesn't change the teaching point - beginners need to try to keep their shins vertical because they aren't able to fully engage their hips in their swings unless they try to follow this cue. Some cues aren't intended to produce a literal result - trying to wedge yourself between the bar and the ground when you deadlift doesn't mean that will happen, but thinking it makes good things happen. Trying to keep your shins vertical - trying not to have a squatty swing - is for many people, an important step in their journey to increased strength, health, and athleticism.

Just my opinion. Your mileage may vary.

-S-
 
Steve Freides said:
In one of Pavel's books he quotes a Russian as saying, "Understanding is just a delaying tactic." Take that for what it's worth - a joke of sorts, yes, but some understanding only comes through doing, and doing at a fairly high level at that.
Click to expand...
Reminds me of my favorite quote from Taleb's Antifragile:
"There are secrets to our world that only practice can reveal, and no opinion or analysis will ever capture in full."​
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom