Kettlebell S&S 2.0 - "Customize the Rate of Progression"

[cwheeler33]

The easiest way to get that experience is by making the mistakes... (oh did I make mistakes in the past)
Here's the thing, if you're in tune with your body and the routine... You won't bother asking the question. You'll just know and just do.

 

[Papa Georgio]

My understanding of it was that timeless is the standard and to keep progressing from there. It almost seemed to me what I read (please correct me if I am wrong) to get to timeless then keep progressing weight. Then when you feel up to it regress to previous weight and try for Timed.

I'm not trying to downplay this portion of the program, but the way it reads, the "timeless" simple part of the program is an introductory phase of the program. Once you hit this milestone, you can start putting the program in full gear to see more of it's benefits. Read the first part of PART 3: Sinister and it kind of explains that.

"Timeless" is so ambiguous. I can imagine there could be a huge discrepancy of ability between 2 individuals who claim to hit "timeless" simple. But, the timed standard is pretty black and white, you either hit the time with all the technique criteria standards, or you don't. Driving towards the timed standards also makes the program more rounded as GPP by adding in the endurance/conditioning component.

In the end, everyone is free to run the program any way they choose, and do whatever makes them happy. But, it's my opinion that you'll be missing out what this program can offer if you stop after "timeless" simple.

 

[cwheeler33]

"Timeless" is so ambiguous. I can imagine there could be a huge discrepancy of ability between 2 individuals who claim to hit "timeless" simple. But, the timed standard is pretty black and white, you either hit the time with all the technique criteria standards, or you don't. Driving towards the timed standards also makes the program more rounded as GPP by adding in the endurance/conditioning component.

Does it make it more ambiguous? Sure. But that's the point, it's meant to motivate more people to achieve. It's also appeases the people who have short attention spans. I will disagree on the GPP point. One still develops a good base GPP with a Timeless Simple Standard.

I will agree that shooting for a higher goal is better. But not everyone wants to, not everyone needs to. Then again, I think a lot of people will want to progress because they did get to a perceived impossible goal. 32 kilo is no small feat for the average man and 24 kilo is no small feat for the average woman...

Timeless Simple is a good standard to achieve for novices.

 

[Anna C]

But, the timed standard is pretty black and white, you either hit the time with all the technique criteria standards, or you don't.

You'd like to think so... but in reality, I think if we were to see everyone's videos of their "Timed Simple", we would see quite a large variety of techniques, power levels, and precision.

As @Papa Georgio said, in the end, it only matters that you are happy with your own progress, and that you are getting what you want out of the program. If you are not, there are many opportunities to improve within it... As we discuss endlessly here on the forum.

 

[Sean M]

I'm not trying to downplay this portion of the program, but the way it reads, the "timeless" simple part of the program is an introductory phase of the program. Once you hit this milestone, you can start putting the program in full gear to see more of it's benefits. Read the first part of PART 3: Sinister and it kind of explains that.

"Timeless" is so ambiguous. I can imagine there could be a huge discrepancy of ability between 2 individuals who claim to hit "timeless" simple. But, the timed standard is pretty black and white, you either hit the time with all the technique criteria standards, or you don't. Driving towards the timed standards also makes the program more rounded as GPP by adding in the endurance/conditioning component.

In the end, everyone is free to run the program any way they choose, and do whatever makes them happy. But, it's my opinion that you'll be missing out what this program can offer if you stop after "timeless" simple.

I believe it talks about “strength reserve” wherein you work with heavier bells (36kg+) while compressing rest just once a week.

Seems like a way more efficient way to achieve Timeless Simple than “pushing a rope” (stopping at 32kg and just grinding away at the rest period).

 

[Mark Limbaga]

I believe it talks about “strength reserve” wherein you work with heavier bells (36kg+) while compressing rest just once a week.

Seems like a way more efficient way to achieve Timeless Simple than “pushing a rope” (stopping at 32kg and just grinding away at the rest period).

Exactly. It also means we're not constantly in glycolisis

 

[Papa Georgio]

Timeless Simple is a good standard to achieve for novices.

If you are satisfied with this and it left you in better shape then when you started then nothing wrong with that.

 

[Papa Georgio]

I believe it talks about “strength reserve” wherein you work with heavier bells (36kg+) while compressing rest just once a week.

Seems like a way more efficient way to achieve Timeless Simple than “pushing a rope” (stopping at 32kg and just grinding away at the rest period).

I agree that building up a strength reserve with bigger bells and testing down once a week is a kinder gentler way.

I was just trying to point out the simple standard is still "timed" and, according to Pavel, is achievable by most, and " makes a dramatic difference in all-around fitness and body composition "

 

[barrak]

Does it make it more ambiguous? Sure. But that's the point, it's meant to motivate more people to achieve. It's also appeases the people who have short attention spans. I will disagree on the GPP point. One still develops a good base GPP with a Timeless Simple Standard.

Timeless Simple is a good standard to achieve for novices.

Timeless Simple certainly motivated me to get back to S&S after I abandoned it a year earlier. What turned me off back then was the constant EMOM/time compressing that demanded 2+ days of recovery from my mid-50s body after every session. I'm now in week 12 of S&S 2.0 and it takes 5-6 straight practice days before my body signals a need for a day off. I even have the energy after every session to practice unassisted floor presses to tall-sits with the next get-up weight during the 2 weeks before including it in the rotation.

 

[advtracer]

Perhaps, another angle...
In classic "Pavel" style of not "over explaining" what the underlying intention of certain practices inside of his programs may be... Could achieving "timeless" simple before time compression, serve the practitioner to focus on strength building (keeping the goal the goal= be StrongFirst)? At least, until the "timeless" standard is met before someone starts to push into the potential conditioning (not to say swings and getups do not develop conditioning) aspect of S&S 2.0, as to not interfere with the strength/mitochondrial development of the programs design? Most of us here are familiar with peoples inclination to want to "get your burn on, Bro," to psychologically attempt to accelerate the process at the expense of prioritizing what may be of greater value to his/her physical development. If I am not mistaken S&S 1.0 had timed compression and timed tests at each KB weight on the way to the Simple standard before moving up in weight, and 2.0 does not??? While the time tests were valuable as measures, perhaps, they were less valuable in terms of developing the ever important practice of patience and humility in ones efforts (@Anna C 's post defines a standard of self-assessment that is a huge part of anyone's practice)??? Or, the timed tests, until a certain standard is met, hinder the potential strength development of "timeless" training ( along the lines of what @barrak has stated). Like...a practitioner can actually get to a "stronger" state more rapidly and be inherently "more " ready for certain tests by working "timelessly" rather than testing along the way.

 

[Colby Pitre]

Perhaps, another angle...
In classic "Pavel" style of not "over explaining" what the underlying intention of certain practices inside of his programs may be... Could achieving "timeless" simple before time compression, serve the practitioner to focus on strength building (keeping the goal the goal= be StrongFirst)? At least, until the "timeless" standard is met before someone starts to push into the potential conditioning (not to say swings and getups do not develop conditioning) aspect of S&S 2.0, as to not interfere with the strength/mitochondrial development of the programs design? Most of us here are familiar with peoples inclination to want to "get your burn on, Bro," to psychologically attempt to accelerate the process at the expense of prioritizing what may be of greater value to his/her physical development. If I am not mistaken S&S 1.0 had timed compression and timed tests at each KB weight on the way to the Simple standard before moving up in weight, and 2.0 does not??? While the time tests were valuable as measures, perhaps, they were less valuable in terms of developing the ever important practice of patience and humility in ones efforts (@Anna C 's post defines a standard of self-assessment that is a huge part of anyone's practice)??? Or, the timed tests, until a certain standard is met, hinder the potential strength development of "timeless" training ( along the lines of what @barrak has stated). Like...a practitioner can actually get to a "stronger" state more rapidly and be inherently "more " ready for certain tests by working "timelessly" rather than testing along the way.

WOW, WOW, WOW!!!!! I like that explanation.

 

[mar2safety]

A= You are good with this weight for a regular practice; do most or all reps with it and consider advancing to the next
B= This weight is challenging - proceed with caution and just one or two sets with it

• Breathing
  • A: Calm diaphragmatic breathing, "behind the shield" but well-controlled, during and after the rep
  • B: Shallow, chest breathing, involuntarily holding breath; gasping breaths afterwards
• Movement
  • A: Controlled, even tension
  • B: Any jerkiness, rushing, struggling to stabilize, grinding through a sticking point
• Recovery (later that day and the day after)
  • A: Feeling fresh and energized
  • B: Feeling sore, worn down, less strong the next day

This is fantastic Anna. Like everyone, I self assess, but I hadn't broken my assessment down like that.

Your posts shows the three areas you are assessing are for the TGUs, would you be willing to share your breakdown of A/B assessment for swings? Typically, I've been assessing (1 - overall grip strength throughout all sets, 2 - hip snap and plank).

 

[Anna C]

Your posts shows the three areas you are assessing are for the TGUs, would you be willing to share your breakdown of A/B assessment for swings? Typically, I've been assessing (1 - overall grip strength throughout all sets, 2 - hip snap and plank).

Let's see... for swings

A= You are good with this weight for a regular practice; do most or all reps with it and consider advancing to the next
B= This weight is challenging - proceed with caution and just one or two sets with it

• Breathing
  • A: Solid power breathing during the set; controlled after the set; deep and slow recovery breathing, settles fairly quickly
  • B: Shallow breaths or holding during set; chest breathing, gasping breaths immediately after the set, long time for breath to settle
• Movement
  • A: You control the kettlebell -- movement is strong and crisp, leading the bell
  • B: The kettlebell controls you -- weak initial hike, having to back off the power because grip can't hold the handle, inability to hold strong plank, bell pulling you too far down into the hinge, any involuntary spine movement due to the weight
• Recovery (later that day and the day after)
  • A: Feeling energized but like you have done some work
  • B: Feeling sore, worn down, less powerful the next day; aches and knots in muscles, especially traps and upper back

 

[cwheeler33]

Perhaps, another angle...
In classic "Pavel" style of not "over explaining" what the underlying intention of certain practices inside of his programs may be... Could achieving "timeless" simple before time compression, serve the practitioner to focus on strength building (keeping the goal the goal= be StrongFirst)?

As I'm re-reading S&S2.0 in the chapter "Speed Endurance is the Answer", Pavel does indeed clearly state that Timed was purposefully removed from Simple Standard because the practitioner needs to develop strength first.

from S&S2.0 (1757/2057 kindle ed)
--As bluntly stated by Steve Bacari, 'Don't worry about strength endurance. You have no strength to endure.'--

Me, I'm going back to finish re-reading the book. What else do I need to remind myself about?

 

[Papa Georgio]

As I'm re-reading S&S2.0 in the chapter "Speed Endurance is the Answer", Pavel does indeed clearly state that Timed was purposefully removed from Simple Standard because the practitioner needs to develop strength first.

from S&S2.0 (1757/2057 kindle ed)
--As bluntly stated by Steve Bacari, 'Don't worry about strength endurance. You have no strength to endure.'--

Me, I'm going back to finish re-reading the book. What else do I need to remind myself about?

Incidentally, this is one of the reasons S&S does not prescribe training for timed tests until you have reached the Timeless Simple strength level.
Tsatsouline, Pavel. Kettlebell Simple & Sinister: Revised and Updated Edition . StrongFirst, Inc.. Kindle Edition.

"Timeless Simple strength level" does not mean "Simple Standard"

If you want to make it your personal standard, then that's OK.

Pavel wrote 2.0 with a kinder & more gentle path to the standards (which are based on time), but the destination is just as evil as it was before. I'm sure he was muttering that we are all a bunch of sissies under his breath while he wrote it.

 

[Sean M]

Incidentally, this is one of the reasons S&S does not prescribe training for timed tests until you have reached the Timeless Simple strength level.
Tsatsouline, Pavel. Kettlebell Simple & Sinister: Revised and Updated Edition . StrongFirst, Inc.. Kindle Edition.

"Timeless Simple strength level" does not mean "Simple Standard"

If you want to make it your personal standard, then that's OK.

Pavel wrote 2.0 with a kinder & more gentle path to the standards (which are based on time), but the destination is just as evil as it was before. I'm sure he was muttering that we are all a bunch of sissies under his breath while he wrote it.

And the training now involves working in heavier bells; so you achieve Timed Simple with 32kg while training with 36-40kg as your working bells for regular sessions during the week (32kg "for time" only once a week). This is drastically different than working up to 32kg (no time limit) in 2-4 months and then grinding out the rest period without further "strength reserve" development. In other words, Timeless Simple becomes a side-effect/benchmark/demonstration of ownership of even heavier training weights.

 

[Papa Georgio]

And the training now involves working in heavier bells; so you achieve Timed Simple with 32kg while training with 36-40kg as your working bells for regular sessions during the week (32kg "for time" only once a week). This is drastically different than working up to 32kg (no time limit) in 2-4 months and then grinding out the rest period without further "strength reserve" development. In other words, Timeless Simple becomes a side-effect/benchmark/demonstration of ownership of even heavier training weights.

I fully acknowledge in 2.0 that when you can use the 32kg in all of your sets, Pavel encourages you to:
A. start slowly feeding in heavier sets with 36kg/40kg. &
B. Start time tests with 24kg/28kg
So that maybe by the time you are doing "timeless"sessions with the 36kg/40kg, you can hit the "Simple Standard" (which remains the same across V1.0 & V2.0, timed test with 32kg in less than 16min total)

V2.0 method is a little less minimalistic (need more bells), but a little more gentle in trying to meet the timed simple standard than what Pavel suggested back in V1.0 (hitting 32kg and then compressing rests, and then not advancing to heavier bell until you hit time). Either method works to meet Pavel's standard of "dominating" a bell with the successful completion of the test within the alotted time.

I guess different people can perceive "timeless simple" quite differently based on whether their main goal is to:
* Chase heavier bells
or
* Achieve the Simple Standard (timed test).

 

[Sean M]

All I know is I,and several others I’m aware of, spent 80% of our total S&S training weeks/months on the last 20% of the program: getting the 32kg rest periods down. Having done a legit barbell strength program after finally hitting the old Simple standard, I can attest to the power of the “strength reserve” concept. I wasted a few months pushing a rope when I would’ve been better served upping my strength after attaining a base level with 32kg swings and getups.

 

[Anth]

I've been following this thread for a while. Progression has always been difficult for me to manage (I tend to push ahead before I'm ready).

Personally, I love the idea of moving up to the 36 or 40 before trying the simple challenge at 32. One thing that works really well for me is using a heavy weight to get better at the lighter weight.

Right now I do my S&S sets as 24, 24, 32, 24, 24. Those last two 24's feel so much easier. I'm thinking I won't even attempt the simple challenge with the 32 until I can do timeless simple with the 36 or 40.

 

[SimplySimpleNZ]

I've been following this thread for a while. Progression has always been difficult for me to manage (I tend to push ahead before I'm ready).

Personally, I love the idea of moving up to the 36 or 40 before trying the simple challenge at 32. One thing that works really well for me is using a heavy weight to get better at the lighter weight.

Right now I do my S&S sets as 24, 24, 32, 24, 24. Those last two 24's feel so much easier. I'm thinking I won't even attempt the simple challenge with the 32 until I can do timeless simple with the 36 or 40.

This is where I’m currently at with the 32. Have achieved simple before a couple of times (ages ago) but never quite made the jump to the 40 after compressing swing time down. Can currently get up the 32 in 10 mins easily but still on swings emom. From experience think my time will be better spent going up a bell and building a bigger strength base. In late 30s and feel this is more important than aerobic capacity at this point. That being said the 40 feels very heavy so could change my mind.