Kettlebell The Fallacy of the Heavy Kettlebell Swing

[Adachi]

Football S&C coaches using barbell power cleans would beg to differ.

You are correct, sir. ?

We would have very different goals and preferences.

 

[watchnerd]

You are correct, sir. ?

We would have very different goals and preferences.

Well, if the goal is max power production for 1 rep, there isn't really any debate about KBs vs barbells.

The data is pretty clear.

While the work distance of a chest level KB clean and a power clean to the shoulder rack is comparable, KBs just don't get heavy enough compared to what you can load on a barbell and thus hit a wall for 1 rep max force training pretty early.

 

[Adachi]

if the goal is max power production for 1 rep, there isn't really any debate

You are absolutely correct.

 

[Steve W.]

Heavy A+A power repeats with heavy snatching, the bell simply cannot travel as fast as a bell sized more for Q&D application.

But don't confuse power and speed.

Those A+A snatches with a heavier bell are going to be higher power per rep than slightly faster snatches with a lighter bell.

With snatches, the height is always the same, so the potential energy at the lockout is proportional to the bell size. The energy imparted to the bell by the lifter equals the potential energy at the lockout, so that is also proportional to the bell size.

The other dimension of power is time. But even though you might be able to snatch a lighter bell slightly faster, the time to complete a rep just doesn't vary that much. The distance is too short and the difference in velocity isn't that significant compared to the size of the bell. A heavier bell is 4 or 8kg, but the difference in velocity is only going to be a fraction of a meter per second. So a bigger bell is always going to take more energy over the same distance and nearly the same time, and therefore more power.

With swings, there is an inflection point where as the mass goes up, the height goes down, and at some point the lower height outweighs (pun intended) the higher mass and power will drop. With snatches and cleans, the height is always consistent as long as you can generate enough power the get the bell to lockout or to the rack. Past that point, you just won't be able to complete a rep (at least without dipping under on the catch).

Well, if the goal is max power production for 1 rep, there isn't really any debate about KBs vs barbells.

The data is pretty clear.

While the work distance of a chest level KB clean and a power clean to the shoulder rack is comparable, KBs just don't get heavy enough compared to what you can load on a barbell and thus hit a wall for 1 rep max force training pretty early.

Yes, which illustrates my point about the power depending mainly on the mass (normalizing the height to the shoulder rack and the time of a rep being roughly similar).

So to me, the value of KB ballistics (beside the fact that I just really enjoy them), is not in optimally training maximum power production, but in training rhythmic repeated efforts in various ways -- which I suppose boils down to different forms of "conditioning".

 

[Stefan Olsson]

You and I might be remembering the same thing:

Does this has any benefits to it? From what information I´ve gathered absout the (hardstyle) swing ... this resembles nothing of it.

 

[watchnerd]

Does this has any benefits to it? From what information I´ve gathered absout the (hardstyle) swing ... this resembles nothing of it.

Contreras' full article is here:

Are Heavy Kettlebell Swings Better Than Deadlifts?

Heavy kettlebell swings could be the best damn posterior chain exercise you're not doing, possibly even better than deadlifts! Here's why.

www.t-nation.com

 

[Bauer]

Interesting discussion. Let's appreciate for a moment that Q&D is indeed not focused on using the heaviest bell, but on using the bell that allows the highest power production.

I also liked the "take your kettlebells to the beach" newsletter, though I haven't had a chance to try it.

And as far as I know classic AGT works with semi grinds too, so heavier bells might work there (with very low reps and generous rest), as long as the reps comply with technique standards.

 

[Steve W.]

Let's appreciate for a moment that Q&D is indeed not focused on using the heaviest bell, but on using the bell that allows the highest power production.

I disagree. The bell that allows the highest power IS the heaviest bell (that you can snatch for 5 series or swing to a chest height every rep for 5 series).

Those qualifiers are significant because maintaining that power over 5 series is highly likely to require using a lighter bell than say A+A with 5 or fewer reps per set and generous rest. But that heavier A+A bell will require higher power per rep than the lighter Q&D bell.

 

[Nate]

If anyone wants another assessment opportunity, this is me with 48kg. It was a higher than normal test set so i know power drops off but do you see it as too heavy from the start?
Thx.

KB Swing

youtube.com

 

[Steve W.]

If anyone wants another assessment opportunity, this is me with 48kg. It was a higher than normal test set so i know power drops off but do you see it as too heavy from the start?
Thx.

KB Swing

youtube.com

IMO, those are all solid, legit swings. My preference is to keep the arms straight throughout, but that's a separate issue from whether the bell size is appropriate.

So whether the weight is "too heavy" just depends on what you're trying to accomplish.

IMO, that would go for someone doing super heavy T-handle "rocking deadlifts" as well. As long as you're maintaining reasonably safe form and not getting pulled around dangerously by the weight, the appropriateness of the weight depends on the context.

Personally, I'm not looking to police other people's lifting choices. The point in the article that you don't necessarily have to always be chasing heavier bells is one I agree with, but there's also nothing wrong with challenging yourself or trying things outside your comfort zone.

 

[ali]

@watchnerd ....the PUSH band. What data does it provide?
Is it more useful after training or during if you can calibrate to beep if a velocity is obtained?
Just interested......
As a double blind experiment....I'd like to do some maths to see if my calculations fall more or less in line with the data from real time, if you'd oblige.
Give me bell size, the length of your arm, your kb deadlift position (height of bell handle from floor) and your shoulder height. Plus the height of bell from floor to handle.
Just a little physics prediction....Great if you can, not a problem if you can't.
For that matter, anyone with a PUSH band out there at all able to assist please?
Something I've pondered on for a while. I know, bit weird.

 

[watchnerd]

@watchnerd ....the PUSH band. What data does it provide?
Is it more useful after training or during if you can calibrate to beep if a velocity is obtained?
Just interested......
As a double blind experiment....I'd like to do some maths to see if my calculations fall more or less in line with the data from real time, if you'd oblige.
Give me bell size, the length of your arm, your kb deadlift position (height of bell handle from floor) and your shoulder height. Plus the height of bell from floor to handle.
Just a little physics prediction....Great if you can, not a problem if you can't.
For that matter, anyone with a PUSH band out there at all able to assist please?
Something I've pondered on for a while. I know, bit weird.

PUSH is a VBT (velocity based training) system, one of many on the market:

System // PUSH // Train with Purpose

www.trainwithpush.com

The Band is a fancy pants accelerometer with software designed for exercise movements. You can put it on an object (e.g. a barbell, my main use case) or even a body part.

When I Push with a KB I strap it to the KB handle.

The Portal is where you input the other data, such as load, and can track power, bar velocity, volume, etc, over time and across multiple
workouts.

The intended use is during training sessions -- in VBT methodology, you're trying to hit target velocities within a given weight zone while training, as opposed to arbitrarily doing a %1RM according to standard methodologies.

Right now, as I'm in competition prep for November, it's set up on my barbell.

 

[Adachi]

I also liked the "take your kettlebells to the beach" newsletter, though I haven't had a chance to try it.

I liked that too. Great analog for testing power production, if you don't have a force plate handy

I disagree

I disagree.
The accelerometer test is the meter stick prescribed in Q&D .
The Sprint test is the secondary choice.

In either case peak power is measured against the bell size, or the speed dropping within a certain window of time.

Not measured against 5 reps. It's expressed during the 5 reps.

 

[watchnerd]

Is it more useful after training or during if you can calibrate to beep if a velocity is obtained?

This video is a short, simple example of how it is intended to be used in the middle of a training session:

 

[Steve W.]

I disagree.
The accelerometer test is the meter stick prescribed in Q&D .
The Sprint test is the secondary choice.

In either case peak power is measured against the bell size, or the speed dropping within a certain window of time.

Not measured against 5 reps. It's expressed during the 5 reps.

I've posted about this before, but I think the tests in Q&D are pretty half-baked and not very useful.

All else being equal (a swing to a given height or a snatch to lockout), max power is going to be proportional to bell size. You can add a marginal amount of power with overspeed eccentrics, but not a significant amount compared to using a heavier bell.

Everyone who has posted accelerometer results on this forum that I have seen has gotten results consistent with this -- the heavier bell always produced higher power (for the snatch or swing to a given height; a heavier bell that you can't swing up the same height may produce lower power).

I know kinetic energy is proportional to the mass, but proportional to the square of the velocity, so theoretically a small change in velocity has a big effect. However, look at the units. The mass is in kg and the velocity is in m/s. Going up a bell size adds 4 or 8 kg, but you can only add small fractions of a meter per second since the bell only travels a couple of meters at most and the time for a rep is very brief. The speed of a swing or snatch just can't be increased enough to make a significant difference compared to the mass of the bell.

So you don't need a test to find your highest power bell, just the heaviest bell you can swing to chest height or the heaviest bell you can snatch.

But with the heaviest bell I can snatch for 5 reps, I can not even do one full series of Q&D.

And I have found that I can power through a 20-30 second sprint test with a bell that is too heavy for me to complete 5 series of Q&D. This may vary by individual, but for me the sprint test is the opposite of "estimating one's 40 yard dash by testing a 200 meter sprint," as it states in the book. It's more like estimating one's ability to play a full court basketball game (repeated sprint) by testing one's 40 yard dash time.

And the two tests are not consistent with each other. A five rep sprint (the accelerometer test length) gives me a different result than a 20-30 second sprint.

So I basically ignore the tests in the book and just use a test session of 5 series to decide the right bell size. Too easy? How does one size up feel? Too heavy? What about one size down? Then pick the bell that is closest to goldilocks and work it until it starts to feel easy, and like it might be time to give the next size up another test run.

Q&D is NOT about using the highest power bell. It's about using the highest power bell you can sustain through a Q&D session. So the best test is to just run test sessions. There's really no reason to have separate tests at all, except maybe to save time, or because the guidelines in the book are to break into the program slowly, without doing full sessions. But you can still do that by just making your test session fewer series. Do a two or three series test session. How does it feel? Are you cooked after those two or three series? Try a bell size down. Was it a piece of cake? Try a bell size up.

Then you can make a choice how to break in. Do you want to start with a bell you might struggle with for five series, but can do a solid two or three? Fine. Just limit your sessions to two or three series until you're comfortable enough to add volume. Or maybe you want to be a little more conservative and start with a bell you COULD complete five series with, but you'll start by doing fewer. You can always move up if you start to feel underbelled.

 

[ali]

@watchnerd ...thank you.

Agree @Steve W.

For a one metre arm length, velocity is sqrt 2g....4.3 m/s with no other forces acting on the bell.
Of course, in a swing there are other forces, conscious or otherwise.
Little bit slower if you live on the equator, a bit faster if you live in the poles. ?

 

[Steve W.]

Agree @Steve W.

For a one metre arm length, velocity is sqrt 2g....4.3 m/s with no other forces acting on the bell.
Of course, in a swing there are other forces, conscious or otherwise.
Little bit slower if you live on the equator, a bit faster if you live in the poles. ?

Yeah, my coffeemaker has an adjustment for altitude to account for the effect of altitude on boiling point. Maybe we need latitude and altitude compensated accelerometers when we lift kettlebells...and maybe windage for lifting outdoors or with a fan blowing. In the name of science, of course.

 

[watchnerd]

Of course, in a swing there are other forces, conscious or otherwise.

Swings have significant conservation of energy and momentum, even in hardstyle.

In contrast, in today's weightlifting workout, I was doing light (70 kg) snatches for triples, but each one gets dropped from overhead and has to start from 0 energy with every rep.

Even though the effort isn't maximal for me, it's enough that after a set of 3, I have to stop, rest, and let the ATP tank re-charge.

There's just no juice left in the muscle. And, after a few rounds, the CNS is getting fatigued, too.

In contrast, when I get taxed from swings, it's much more systemic and oxygen deprivation.

My conclusion is that whatever "power conditioning" KB swings are doing, it's not the same mixture of energy systems as barbell ballistics.

Probably because (in addition to being lighter) KB swings conserve energy.

 

[Colin Stewart]

The only way to truly measure the power output of a swing or a snatch is to have a timestamped forceplate under the lifter with a timestamp video.

A lot of information can be derived from the accelerometer (and if I did have a forceplate and camera, I 'd definitely have an accelerometer on there for data gathering too).

These together would allow us to see how much drive is coming from the hips alone (with no additional force from the pull) or, mostly in the snatch, how much you were pulling up with the arm.

For those of you pulling out the maths/physics, you're only considering the vertical displacement. Most of you are forgetting about the arc (rotation) in the sagittal plane and any arm pull (mostly thinking of the snatch and clean here).

I learned a long time ago not to bring maths to a kettlebell fight

Years ago.... in the Crossfit journal Steve Cotter did a hardstyle vs GS swing on a force plate and presented the data.
Interestingly.... he interpreted the data wrongly and it actually said the opposite of what he was claiming.

Long story short, if you can two handed swing a 48kg to eyeline for 5 reps (Technical Rep Max) then you will be able to generate more power with a lighter bell (probably the 40kg).

Your arm is a rope, don't confuse flight time with the time it takes for you to generate your force into the floor.

 

[ali]

Yup, swings are a neat package of energy conservation.
Most of the recent months I've trained outside in my garden on grass. Always my preferred option. Been fortunate with the weather that it feels unusual to battle my way through the clutter of my garage to find my winter training spot but so it has been that rain has forced me into it.

Concrete floors give better energy return than grass.
There's a good few reps in difference, too.

Obvious but not really considered.

For testing purposes, is it cheating to preferentially select floor surface?
Daft, yes but you know, very real.

Like track times...surface matters: grass/track for training/impact considerations. And grass is slower.

Absolutely, we are governed by laws of energy conservation.

This is THE thing for me....low impact elastic training. And the aim of all what SF advocates through technique and details of the swing....timing and the quest for perfection. In so doing, the result is greater transfer of kinetic energy to potential elastic strain energy of the backswing. The more efficient that exchange, the better transfer of power.