all posts post new thread

Kettlebell Power and endurance - questions about programming with KB vs O-lifts

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

TimmyCK

Level 4 Valued Member
Hey everyone! First post here, so apologies if I broke a rule (or if this was asked earlier and I couldn't find it).

From what I understand from Pavel's various KB programs, lifts are divided into grinds (no more than 5 reps) and ballistics (cleans, swings, snatches, jerks, etc.), which are rarely done for less than 10 reps. My question is, why are high-rep O-lifts, which are also ballistic, generally frowned upon, while ballistics with kettlebells are not? Is it because kettlebells are much lighter and so fall into the power endurance range? Does the technical difficulty of the O-lifts just make them impractical for power endurance? I'm just trying to understand this from a programming point of view. Thanks in advance!
 
Brilliant question. I don't know if this is the answer, but I'll give it my thoughts.

I think it's three things: training adaptations, technique, and safety.

As far as adaptations:
  • Generally, yes, the kettlebell used to get the desired training effect is lighter, because it's usually a one-handed operation and the set uses elastic/rebound energy instead of dead weight from the floor on every weight.
    • I would snatch a 20kg or 24kg for a heavy kettlebell snatch. But for a barbell snatch, I would snatch 35 - 47 kg (47 kg as a recent PR). Maybe 35kg for doubles, 30-33 kg for triples. I might do 5 reps with the bar only (15 kg) but that's about the only way I'd do more than 4 reps in a set.
    • Either of these examples would be an example of PCr depletion, the rest and recover, then repeat... basically, A+A.
    • Same for kettlebell swings vs. barbell cleans. I might swing 32 kg for 10 reps from the hinge to chest height. I might clean 48 kg for 3 reps from the floor to shoulders. Similar overall effort.
  • Any of these examples (2-3 O-lifts, or 5-10 kettlebell ballistic lifts) would build strength, power, and strength endurance and would stay away from being overly glycolytic... which you may have noticed is a thing around here.
  • Both of these examples would be such that when the fast twitch (highest threshold motor units) are fatigued, you don't want to be trying to get more reps.
So, how can you do high rep O-lifts? Well, you could do partials - push presses, hang cleans, etc... and then it makes more sense to do 5 or more reps. Or you could use a very light weight, and then turn it into a strength endurance exercise. Personally I think kettlebells are better for high reps because they're safer and they use use elastic energy on the rebound. But if all you know is a barbell, or all you have is a barbell, it could be used for similar objectives and be more like the kettlebell examples.

As far as technique:
  • If someone's objective is to do a bunch of work to get sweaty, hot, and tired (metcon...), then technique doesn't matter that much towards that objective. And if that's all you ever intend to do, not really trying for a maximal lift, then you might not get hurt with sloppy technique... but that's iffy.
  • However, if your objective is to get better at O-lifts, sloppy technique will send you backwards in your quest. Every single rep has to be focused and done as best you can do it. And if you're doing the complete lift, every lift starts on the floor.
  • Kettlebell technique involves the reps, the rebound. It's part of the effort. So getting my 2nd, 3rd, 5th snatch in a set right is part of the whole effort -- almost like it's one lift, as one way of thinking about it.
As far as safety:
  • Any weight can hurt you if things go awry, and things are more likely to go awry when you are fatigued. The barbell is bigger, and usually heavier per the examples above.
  • So, why do we do high-rep snatches in the TSC and the SFG? Well, it's a good overall test of a lot of combined qualities, and they're pretty safe. The grip isn't usually the first thing to fatigue, and if it does, you can almost always finish the rep and set the bell down before it fails. It's also not usually a weight that will injure you, such as, throw your back out, if you're fatigued. IMO the same can't be said for high-rep O-lifts... though I'll admit I've really never done high rep O-lifts, so that part is theoretical for me.
 
Here is my "too long, didn't read" answer: If you have good technique in the lifts and can use a somewhat respectable weight in the lifts, there is no reason why you can't use high reps in the Olympic lifts for conditioning if you want.

I can give you a longer more detailed answer, but be careful what you wish for because I can get wordy.
 
Here is my "too long, didn't read" answer: If you have good technique in the lifts and can use a somewhat respectable weight in the lifts, there is no reason why you can't use high reps in the Olympic lifts for conditioning if you want.

I can give you a longer more detailed answer, but be careful what you wish for because I can get wordy.

My technique is good enough that I *could* use the Olympic lifts for conditioning.

But I never do, because I get technique pollution and it messes up my competition lifts, especially the timing.

Also, at lighter weights that would be used during conditioning, either:

1. Everything becomes a power version because I don't have to get into a squat to catch lighter weights. Which means I don't get the full ROM.

2. I do an unnecessary fake squat catch (i.e. do a full clean or full snatch when I could have just as easily done a power clean or power snatch), which completely jacks up my practiced sense for how low I need to go in order to catch a heavier weight.

I can avoid all of this by just using KBs for the bulk of my ballistic power conditioning, which I do.
 
Last edited:
My technique is good enough that I *could* use the Olympic lifts for conditioning.

But I never do, because I get technique pollution and it messes up my competition lifts, especially the timing.

Also, at lighter weights that would be used during conditioning, either:

1. Everything becomes a power version because I don't have to get into a squat to catch lighter weights. Which means I don't get the full ROM.

2. I do an unnecessary fake squat catch (i.e. do a full clean or full snatch when I could have just as easily done a power clean or power snatch), which completely jacks up my practiced sense for how low I need to go in order to catch a heavier weight.

I can avoid all of this by just using KBs for the bulk of my ballistic power conditioning, which I do.
As a recovering regular attendee of a crossfit-affiliated gym, that's the best explanation of that phenomenon that I've seen. Personally, I never got comfortable squatting to catch weights, nor using weights heavy enough to need to squat to catch. Vicious circle.
 
Hey everyone! First post here, so apologies if I broke a rule (or if this was asked earlier and I couldn't find it).

From what I understand from Pavel's various KB programs, lifts are divided into grinds (no more than 5 reps) and ballistics (cleans, swings, snatches, jerks, etc.), which are rarely done for less than 10 reps. My question is, why are high-rep O-lifts, which are also ballistic, generally frowned upon, while ballistics with kettlebells are not? Is it because kettlebells are much lighter and so fall into the power endurance range? Does the technical difficulty of the O-lifts just make them impractical for power endurance? I'm just trying to understand this from a programming point of view. Thanks in advance!

As a weightlifter, I would love to hear the perspective of a girevoy sport athlete on this.
 
As a recovering regular attendee of a crossfit-affiliated gym, that's the best explanation of that phenomenon that I've seen. Personally, I never got comfortable squatting to catch weights, nor using weights heavy enough to need to squat to catch. Vicious circle.

It's kind of a goofy paradox to create in programming.

The whole reason these complex, highly technical lifts were invented was to lift really heavy weights overhead.

They're not designed for conditioning, at all.

I see that Jillian Michaels recently opined on this topic, as well.
 
The last point I'd make is around energy systems:

Heavy Olympic lifts in the single, double, and triple range are pretty much entirely anaerobic and bounded by ATP recovery time.

If I start doing a set of 10 snatches, I'm starting to bleed over into other energy systems, and if I keep going for enough sets, probably into the glycolitic system.

Which isn't necessarily bad, but I don't need to use complex Olympic lifts to train glycolitic systems.

When I want to do glycolitic training, I do rowing. But there are certainly other options.
 
Last edited:
As a recovering regular attendee of a crossfit-affiliated gym
How's your recovery going? Is this a 12 step program? :D

The late Glenn Pendlay had a great quote about this:

“If you’re a competitive weightlifter, why would you do it? If you’re not, why does it matter?”

I promised a longer answer, so here it is.

I think that a lot of the "hate" for high-rep Olympic lifts comes from the fact that Crossfit gives newbies one day of instruction on the lifts - instruction that may not teach correct technique - and then sends them off to do WODs involving high rep snatches. The criticism is warranted. A trainee who is new to the Olympic lifts has absolutely no business, zero, doing high reps. I don't care how strong they are, I don't care that all they want to do is use the lifts in WODs and have no desire to compete in Olympic lifting.

Once technique has become decent, you can then split trainees into two broad groups: Those who want to compete and/or do well in Olympic weightlifting and those who just want to do WODs.

The first group has no reason to do high reps, for all the reasons mentioned, i.e. it messes with technique. If competitive weightlifters want to do some conditioning work, and there's not reason why they shouldn't do conditioning (just not too much), there are hundreds of ways to do that without using high rep Olympic lifts.

For those who just want to do the WODs, I take Glenn Pendlay's view: I don't care. This assumes that the Crossfit coach isn't a moron and allows the trainee to develop some semblance of decent technique and also allows the trainee to scale the load so that the trainee isn't using 95% of their 1RM snatch for a set of 30.
 
How's your recovery going? Is this a 12 step program? :D

The late Glenn Pendlay had a great quote about this:

“If you’re a competitive weightlifter, why would you do it? If you’re not, why does it matter?”

I promised a longer answer, so here it is.

I think that a lot of the "hate" for high-rep Olympic lifts comes from the fact that Crossfit gives newbies one day of instruction on the lifts - instruction that may not teach correct technique - and then sends them off to do WODs involving high rep snatches. The criticism is warranted. A trainee who is new to the Olympic lifts has absolutely no business, zero, doing high reps. I don't care how strong they are, I don't care that all they want to do is use the lifts in WODs and have no desire to compete in Olympic lifting.

Once technique has become decent, you can then split trainees into two broad groups: Those who want to compete and/or do well in Olympic weightlifting and those who just want to do WODs.

The first group has no reason to do high reps, for all the reasons mentioned, i.e. it messes with technique. If competitive weightlifters want to do some conditioning work, and there's not reason why they shouldn't do conditioning (just not too much), there are hundreds of ways to do that without using high rep Olympic lifts.

For those who just want to do the WODs, I take Glenn Pendlay's view: I don't care. This assumes that the Crossfit coach isn't a moron and allows the trainee to develop some semblance of decent technique and also allows the trainee to scale the load so that the trainee isn't using 95% of their 1RM snatch for a set of 30.

Agree.

The last bit is the differences in rules between what counts as a good lift.

A lot of the reps I've seen in boxes, from lifters who crossover, and on TV at the Crossfit games would be ruled "no lift" in weightlifting.

Multiple times, I've seen crossover lifters completely bomb out at meets for press outs.

This can cause frustration for all concerned.
 
If I may here's me TLDR reply

Back in the day when I was a junior coach at my old gym, we used a system which on surface looks like the repeats we do here and clusters for Oly lift variations (power clean, power snatch, jerk, push press and squats)

Did it work? Everything works initially..

In retrospect, if I had access to intelligent kettlebell training and had access to kettlebells back then they would be my choice for conditioning..

And maybe sled work.

High rep Olympic lifts often have more risk than reward
 
If I may here's me TLDR reply

Back in the day when I was a junior coach at my old gym, we used a system which on surface looks like the repeats we do here and clusters for Oly lift variations (power clean, power snatch, jerk, push press and squats)

Did it work? Everything works initially..

In retrospect, if I had access to intelligent kettlebell training and had access to kettlebells back then they would be my choice for conditioning..

And maybe sled work.

High rep Olympic lifts often have more risk than reward

I'm curious, how old were the trainees?

When I played football in high school and college, we did a lot of really crude power cleans.

But given the raging anabolic state that is late teens and early 20s, we could have probably done sandbag cleans and gotten the same results.
 
I'm curious, how old were the trainees?

When I played football in high school and college, we did a lot of really crude power cleans.

But given the raging anabolic state that is late teens and early 20s, we could have probably done sandbag cleans and gotten the same results.

Mostly high school and college level athletes to semi pro athletes and professionals
 
As a weightlifter, I would love to hear the perspective of a girevoy sport athlete on this.

I've done weightlifting and dabbled in girevoy sport so I'll share my 2 cents.

Does the implement - barbell vs. KB - make a difference? Yes. IMO, girevoy sport technique is easier to learn that Olympic lifting technique with a barbell. Because KBs are not connected, it may be easier to ditch a bad lift. If a lifter lacks overhead stability on the bottom position of the snatch, that bar can land on head. From a safety perspective, doing high reps with KBs is probably safer than high rep Olympic lifts.

What about load? I think this is somewhat of a non-factor and depends on the athlete. A lot of Crossfit WODs that use high rep snatch usually recommend using 95 lbs. for males. For someone who snatches 200 lbs., using 95 lbs. for high reps shouldn't be a huge challenge and does not pose a high risk of injury. OTOH, a new KB trainee who is still learning with light KBs but who really really wants to try snatching the 32 kg. could be setting themselves up for injury.

The real issue I think is in attitude or philosophy. I'm talking about CrossFit vs. girevoy sport instructions. Why an I only picking on CrossFit? Because they're the only ones who program high-rep Olympic lifting. So what is the CrossFit philosophy? First, they believe that to develop "elite fitness" an athlete needs to be good at many movements, many of which have a technique component. The Olympic lifts are only 2 of these movements and because the WODs must be "varied" they are not practiced as frequently as they need to be (although this depends on the coach). Related to this is that CrossFit now claims to be the "sport of fitness." The Olympic lifts are only two of many disciplines that make up the CrossFit Games. It is difficult to focus on two lifts when there are many other movements in which a trainee must excel. Second is the CrossFit idea of a fitness community, which is one of the reasons for Crossfit's success. Although often stated as a positive, it can have a negative side. Many trainees who start CrossFit want to be part of the "real" community as quickly as possible. Standing in the back using a PVC pipe to do snatches for a snatch-based WOD while everyone else is 135 can make a trainee feel left out. As a result, some (not all) Crossfit coaches will allow and even encourage a new trainee to move up in weight even if their technique still needs work. Third is the competitive environment - WODs are done "for time," which means as fast as possible. Sloppy technique is allowed, and to some extent encouraged, if it will allow a trainee to complete the WOD with a faster time. These factors combine to create an environment that make high-reps with the Olympic lifts riskier and can introduce some bad movement patterns in a trainee who may already have proficiency with the lift.

In girevoy sport, lifting KBs is the sport, so the trainee can focus on improving in only the snatch and C&J. You must earn the right to lift a heavier KB and there's certain right of passage flavor to this. I've read a few girevoy sport training programs and the first goal is usually to be able to last the full 10 minutes in the snatch and C&J. Your ego is checked at the door and if you need to start with the pink 8 kg KB, then that is what you use even of you think you're a big strong guy. The assumption is that you won't last the 10 minutes on your first attempt so you do shorter "sets" that are programmed in minutes, not reps. You will be taught how to "rest" in the rack position for the C&J and the overhead position for the snatch. You will have workouts where you will need to stand there with KBs in the rack position or overhead position. Boring? You bet, but necessary to build endurance in the stabilizer muscles. The majority of programs recommend some form of cardio for general endurance, and supplemental exercises such as squats and deadlifts are also programmed for endurance, usually for a few sets of 20 reps.

I don't know if this is what you were looking for, but it's my 2 cents.
 
Power Endurance

This is a oxymoron because Power is one end of the Strength spectrum with Endurance being on the other end.

why are high-rep O-lifts...generally frowned upon,

Olympic Lifts

1) Skilled and Technical "Movements"

Olympic Movement require more skilled and are a more technical movement that a Kettlebell Swing.

While there some skill is required with Kettlebell Swings, it is a much easier and faster to learn.

2) Power Movement

Olympic Movements are a Power Movement. Research has demonstrated that Olympic Movements produce some of the greatest Power Outputs, if not the greatest.

That is one of the reason that Olympic Movements are part of most sports training programs.

Muscle Fatigue

There is an indirect relationship when it comes to the number of repetitions performed in a movement and the development of Technique and Power.

As the number or repetitions increase Technique and Power Output goes down, deteriorates.

With high repetition Olympic Movement you learn to perform the movement incorrectly. You increase your Endurance at the expense of Power.

CrossFit

One of the reason that CrossFit is criticized in this case is that they take a Power Movements like an Olympic Movement and use them for something other than their intended purpose; using them for Metabolic Conditioning.

To reiterate, high repetitions Olympic Movements definitely blow your heart rate through the roof. However, it come at the expense of developing poor technique. Strength Endurance is developed at the expense of Power Development.

Does the technical difficulty of the O-lifts just make them impractical for power endurance?

The Wrong Tool For The Job

1) Power Endurance is a oxymoron.

2) Performing high repetition Olympic Movement amount to using a Crescent Wrench to drive a nail rather than a Hammer. It works but it not the right tool for the job. Constantly destroys the Crescent Wrench; it not going work for it's intended purpose.

Yes, they are the wrong tool for the job.

Is it because kettlebells are much lighter and so fall into the power endurance range?

The Kettlebell Swing Paradox

The Kettlebell Swing is an exercise paradox.

1) Metabolic Condition

It is an effective exercise that can be used for Metabolic Conditioning with light to moderates loads with moderate to high repetitions.

With that said, the movement should be stopped once technique falls apart.

2) Power Training

It can be used to increase Power Output when with heavy swings (30% push of your body weight) for lower repetitions.

Paradox High Intensity Interval Training Example

A paradox amount to a contradiction from the rules.

Research shows that High Intensity Training is a paradox. It increases both anaerobic and aerobic capacity at the same time.

"The high-intensity intermittent protocol improved V02max by about 14%; anaerobic capacity increased by a whopping 28%." Source: Forget the Fat-Burn Zone
 
Last edited:
1) Metabolic Condition

It is an effective exercise that can be used for Metabolic Conditioning with light to moderates loads with moderate to high repetitions.

I don't know of any study that supports this, but my subjective perception is that BFR work with ultra light loads also increases work capacity.

My bro science hypothesis is that it may relate to circulatory level changes in capillaries and vascularity.

I've had periods where I went a month or more without doing any BFR work, but the improvement in work capacity seems to persist.
 
Could you use the OLs (snatch, c&j) for endurance training? Yes.
Could you use KBs for strength training? Yes.
Could you use PLs (barbell squat, bench, dl) for power or endurance training? Yes.

Are any of those the best tool for the job? Maybe not, but that depends on your goals, training experiences, and preferences.

I like squatting and I like kettlebell snatching. I want to improve my cardio fitness. Can I use those? Yes. Is it THE BEST tool for the job? Again, maybe not, but it's what I like and (more importantly) it's what I'm willing to do. I don't know many people willing to do barbell squats or kettlebell snatches for 30mins to an hour - I do, and I think my cardio is pretty solid.
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom