Kettlebell VWC questions

[banzaiengr]

To be fair, there is a big difference between HIIT as it should be done, and butt-whacking metcons that are meant to fill a different role and typically done as a circuit.

See I just don't get this. I understand the difference Dr. Jay has explained in how the heart grows stronger regarding typical aerobic conditioning and aerobic conditioning done with weights like the KB and the snatch movement.

But how would any HIT training whether it be 20 rep squats as compared to a complex of barbell exercises be much different other than the muscles involved? You can even throw that extra "I" in there and call it interval training but I still don't see where the final product would be any different given all other things are consistent.

 

[Bret S.]

To whomever, I hope no one has taken any of my comments regarding VWC as bias against it. I have no horse in such a race.

I will play the devil's advocate and ask questions. I've even done this with Al and A+A. I don't have the knowledge that many of you have, therefore it's always necessary to ask questions.

No problem with me brother, I'm in your camp as an asker of questions and hopefully a learner of good stuff.

 

[Steve W.]

In my VWC experience, the 15:15 protocol feels different from typical (stereotypical?) HIIT.

It's a sustainable effort over 40 minutes (when you work up to that point). The relative lightness of the bell and the quick rhythm of 15 seconds work and rest subjectively feels as close to a sustained constant effort as it does to work and recovery intervals. Breathing and heart rates get elevated, but there is no muscular burn.

Intentionally maximizing power output is not really a factor; speed and cadence is the focus. As long as the bell gets to lockout and you get your reps in the allotted time, power is adequate (as you fatigue this may require more conscious effort, but you are not ever really trying to use more than the minimum power necessary).

I'm not going to speculate on how the involvement of various energy systems, the effect on mitochondria, or any other effects of VWC compare to any other mode of training. I mainly think of that as "black box" stuff -- internal processes that I have no direct way to monitor or assess, and are therefore of little practical interest to me (but still of some academic/theoretical/speculative interest).

As far as transfer to sustained efforts like a 5 minute snatch test (or even the S&S 5 minute test), my experience is that both VWC (with bells less than test size) and A+A are effective as different kinds of base training, but not adequate by themselves for maximizing performance. With VWC, I didn't really see great carry over to snatching heavier bells (but saw carry over to the 24kg snatch test when I was using 24kg for VWC). With A+A, I felt that my ability to do even sets of 10 regressed after an extended period of doing only sets of 5, even for very high volume and even using relatively heavy loads (28 and 32kg for snatches; and a lot of work with 2 x 28kg for double cleans). However, I did observe that I could quickly bring my ability to do longer sets back up if I did some more specific training. I would speculate that the carry over is individual and also might correlate with the differential between the A+A working bell and the test bell (bigger differential = more carry over).

 

[Anna C]

I'd imagine going from A&A to a program of mostly phosphagen with supplemental HIIT to keep mitochondrial density gains could be another way to go if training time is a factor.

Am not sure if anyone has tested this.

I did [A+A from late-2015 to early-2017] then moved to [barbell + variety kettlebell + bike riding in mid-2017 thorugh early 2018], then [barbell + HIIT in March-May 2017] then [barbell + bike riding and occasional HIIT] since May.

So that's hardly scientific for illustrating but there was some component of what you're looking for there, and I feel like it worked pretty well. The HIIT and barbell work in March-May 2018 maintained my aerobic capacity such that I actually did better on a 5-min snatch test in May than I did in Feb., and also didn't feel like I had lost anything substantial on the bike rides when I went back to it. But aerobic capacity/fitness is different from endurance.... little things like the ache in the shoulders from time on the bike, not to mention time in the saddle, just need cumulative time in the activity to be able to easily continue to do. And let's not even talk about running. I can be in great shape aerobically on the bike and still be a terrible runner.

 

[banzaiengr]

It's a sustainable effort over 40 minutes (when you work up to that point). The relative lightness of the bell and the quick rhythm of 15 seconds work and rest subjectively feels as close to a sustained constant effort as it does to work and recovery intervals.

Thanks Steve, I see that. Yes, in VWC you are working up the HR over a period of time, 40 min. 80 sets. Where as in a set of 20 rep squats you most likely aren't seeing the same type of HR as you do during the 80th set of VWC until after you are done with the set of 20 rep squats. Then again in a Tabata it's less time but you are hitting those higher HR sooner. But what is the difference in training outcome with all of this?

 

[Bret S.]

See I just don't get this. I understand the difference Dr. Jay has explained in how the heart grows stronger regarding typical aerobic conditioning and aerobic conditioning done with weights like the KB and the snatch movement.

But how would any HIT training whether it be 20 rep squats as compared to a complex of barbell exercises be much different other than the muscles involved? You can even throw that extra "I" in there and call it interval training but I still don't see where the final product would be any different given all other things are consistent.

Your question is pretty much the same as mine and as far as I know there are no clear answers forthcoming.

I'm not trying to answer for @North Coast Miller but I may give a clue about KJ's choice of tool for his program. He uses the snatch because the KB moves the furthest distance with the greatest amount of speed, when compared to swings which move approx half the distance.
He describes the heart rate being stimulated during valsalvic pressure and hard muscle contraction in anticipation of a coming need for blood flow increase. This response is not a contributor to the desired CVS adaptations. His use of the snatch test determines your bell size and cadence to elicit the true MVO2 response and adaptations his program is targeting.

 

[Anna C]

@Bret S. I have an opportunity Friday to do some kettlebell training. Can you describe how to do an intermediate "sample" VWC session with the 12kg?

100-200 total snatches perhaps...

 

[Steve W.]

But what is the difference in training outcome with all of this?

Physiologically? No idea. As I said in my previous post, since I have no way to observe or assess that stuff, I don't really think in those terms.

Objectively, I progressed in my ability to do the VWC 15:15 protocol from sets of 7 with 16kg (don't even recall how many sets my first session was), to 80 sets of 7, to 80 sets of 8, to 80 sets of 9, and eventually to 24kg for 64 sets of 7.

Subjectively, I felt very springy and many physical activities felt more effortless. My ability to snatch heavier bells did not improve (maybe this is objective, but I don't recall any specific benchmarks from that time to support the statement). A negative subjective aspect of VWC is that I found I didn't really enjoy that style of training.

Speculatively, I got sick with a bad and persistent respiratory infection which marked the end of my VWC experience. So I associate getting sick with VWC, even though I have no evidence that the training had any causal connection to the infection.

 

[Anna C]

I usually follow the general trend in whatever group I'm in but perhaps in the interests of providing a counterpoint of the current training climate, I can do my own n=1 trend with VWC. I'll do a baseline snatch test and VO2M cadence/weight test now, work through the protocols in the book and get a baseline test every 6 weeks. I'll continue with S&S for the strength component. I'll keep my log up to date along with any subjective experiences, durability issues, etc...

Hopefully another n=1 could be useful.

This would be N=1 for VWC + S&S. If you're following two programs at the same time, you can't attribute any of the results to one of them.

 

[Bret S.]

@banzaiengr
I'm not trying to answer for @North Coast Miller but I may give a clue about KJ's choice of tool for his program. He uses the snatch because the KB moves the furthest distance with the greatest amount of speed, when compared to swings which move approx half the distance.
He describes the heart rate being stimulated during valsalvic pressure and hard muscle contraction in anticipation of a coming need for blood flow increase. This response is not a contributor to the desired CVS adaptations. His use of the snatch test determines your bell size and cadence to elicit the true MVO2 response and adaptations his program is targeting.
@Anna C
Sure Anna, It's pretty simple as all you need is your bell, a clock and a towel or 2, I like to have one for hand drying which stays relatively dry and one for mopping up sweat.
Once you warm up with a few sets, I usually do 4-5 each hand, rest and do some more until I'm ready for speed.
Then snatch 7 reps at the start of a minute, set the bell down and start again at the 30 second mark, so 15 on and 15 off is the goal. Then go until you need to stop.

 

[Anna C]

Sure Anna, It's pretty simple as all you need is your bell, a clock and a towel or 2, I like to have one for hand drying which stays relatively dry and one for mopping up sweat.
Once you warm up with a few sets, I usually do 4-5 each hand, rest and do some more until I'm ready for speed.
Then snatch 7 reps at the start of a minute, set the bell down and start again at the 30 second mark, so 15 on and 15 off is the goal. Then go until you need to stop.

OK, I'll give it a go tomorrow, and report back on the experience. Maybe even video. Thanks...

 

[North Coast Miller]

See I just don't get this. I understand the difference Dr. Jay has explained in how the heart grows stronger regarding typical aerobic conditioning and aerobic conditioning done with weights like the KB and the snatch movement.

But how would any HIT training whether it be 20 rep squats as compared to a complex of barbell exercises be much different other than the muscles involved? You can even throw that extra "I" in there and call it interval training but I still don't see where the final product would be any different given all other things are consistent.

Again and to second Brett, good question!

As I see it the main difference is the volume and intensity. With HIIT you get max effort for a short burst and long recovery period. VWC has less intensity and shorter recovery, longer duration. Alactic part of A&A involves high intensity and longer rest period but training limit strength instead of max aerobic output.

All of these use pacing and rest periods appropriate to the effort.

Hiit probably the most will induce mitochondrial improvements and some improvement in sprinting with least general strength. VWC seems like it is intended as a split - improve mitochondria and improve physical conditioning. "A" intended to improve limit strength with the aerobic component aimed at improving mitochondrial health.

Metcons in a different class and probably the least sustainable day to day, but no doubt will have mitochondrial advantage, strength advantage, with the less CV adaptations compared to HIIT and especially VWC. If you dial it back a bit, you get higher intensity circuits a la Steve Maxwell:
"One advantage to HIT is you won't require a separate cardio workout. Believe me, HIT provides the best cardio you can get -- superior to running, biking, or swimming. To be good at any particular activity, you have to do it -- and often. I'm not saying that following a HIT protocol will make you a faster runner -- to do this, you must continually practice the skill of running -- but the supplementary HIT strength training increases muscular efficiency, so that running becomes less effortful."


I don't know how true that is, or how true I am to the Maxwell GPP ideal. I train the midpoint (IMHO) between high limit strength, high endurance, volume conditioning. Recently ran a 5k with no (zero) prep and felt fine, my feet were a little sore. I swam 25 yrds underwater on a single breath, no dive, with no (zero) prep. I feel like I'm getting good transfer, and to me that is what is most important - I really don't care what my numbers are on the stuff I train - it should improve but I'm not into the details. It MUST improve unprogrammed movements and activities.

Pick your poison!

 

[Bret S.]

I didn't really see great carry over to snatching heavier bells (but saw carry over to the 24kg snatch test when I was using 24kg for VWC).

Steve this was part of my original thinking with VWC, my test bell is 20 so I thought getting to 7 or maybe 8 reps x 80 sets there would have to be some carryover

 

[Anna C]

Yes, in VWC you are working up the HR over a period of time, 40 min. 80 sets. Where as in a set of 20 rep squats you most likely aren't seeing the same type of HR as you do during the 80th set of VWC until after you are done with the set of 20 rep squats. Then again in a Tabata it's less time but you are hitting those higher HR sooner. But what is the difference in training outcome with all of this?

I don't know... I see so many differences in these examples, I'm not sure there's any useful comparison.

 

[Bret S.]

Pick your poison!

Whiskey! and Tequila!

 

[Steve W.]

Can you describe how to do an intermediate "sample" VWC session with the 12kg?

Anna, there isn't really a representative sample session with a given bell. You have to take the cadence test to figure out what bell and cadence is appropriate for you.

Kenneth Jay has laid out a couple of versions of the cadence test. There's a six minute version:
1st minute: 10 reps left arm
2nd minute: 12 reps right arm
3rd minute 15 reps left arm
4th minute: 17 reps right arm
5th minute: 18 reps left arm
6th minute: all out effort

And a five minute version:
Minute 1: 10 reps, 1 rep/6 seconds
Minute 2: 14 reps, 1 rep/4.2 seconds
Minute 3: 18 reps, 1 rep/3.3 seconds
Minute 4: 22 reps, 1 rep/2.7 seconds
Minute 5: all out

The exact number of reps is not as important as ramping up over several minutes before the final minute (which is the actual test minute). A close enough approximation that is easier to time is:
Minute 1: 10 reps, 1 rep/6 seconds (snatch at :00, :06, :12..)
Minute 2: 12 reps, 1 rep/5 seconds (snatch at :00, :05, :10..)
Minute 3: 15 reps, 1 rep/4 seconds (snatch at :00, :04, :08..)
Minute 4: 20 reps, 1 rep/3 seconds (snatch at :00, :03, :06..)
Minute 5: all out

Snatch steadily for each minute, pausing in the lockout; don't do the reps quicker and then rest for the remaining time.

The all out number in the last minute is the one you base your cadence on. Divide that number by 4 for the 15:15 protocol and round up if you are above a whole number (so 7.1 rounds up to 8). The sweet spot for a given bell is 7 or 8. 9 is doable, but very rushed (and I believe 6 is also acceptable, although it seems very slow to me). So if you can do 33 or more in the final minute of the test, the bell is probably too light. If you can't get more than 24, the bell is too heavy.

Since 7-8 is the sweet spot, you COULD just pick one of those numbers as your cadence, but you wouldn't know if 12kg is the appropriate bell size or whether you should go heavier.

Once you have your cadence, just set a timer to beep every 15 seconds, and go to it, alternating work and rest intervals (obviously) and changing arms each work set, just like typical A+A training.

The goal is to work up to 80 sets at a given level, although I believe KJ originally suggested 50 and then increased it to 80 later on.

 

[banzaiengr]

I don't know... I see so many differences in these examples, I'm not sure there's any useful comparison.

So there is no difference in outcome? Then why all the confusion? Lift weights, do some cardio, run some sprints and some stairs. What North Coast Miller said.

 

[Steve W.]

Steve this was part of my original thinking with VWC, my test bell is 20 so I thought getting to 7 or maybe 8 reps x 80 sets there would have to be some carryover

Based on my experience, I would expect this to work. Once I was using my actual test-size bell, I felt much better carry over.

I also test drove the 36:36 protocol a few times, and my impression was it would have better carry over to a 5 minute test, even with 16kg, but I never really pursued it.

 

[Bret S.]

Anna, there isn't really a representative sample session with a given bell. You have to take the cadence test to figure out what bell and cadence is appropriate for you.

Kenneth Jay has laid out a couple of versions of the cadence test. There's a six minute version:
1st minute: 10 reps left arm
2nd minute: 12 reps right arm
3rd minute 15 reps left arm
4th minute: 17 reps right arm
5th minute: 18 reps left arm
6th minute: all out effort

And a five minute version:
Minute 1: 10 reps, 1 rep/6 seconds
Minute 2: 14 reps, 1 rep/4.2 seconds
Minute 3: 18 reps, 1 rep/3.3 seconds
Minute 4: 22 reps, 1 rep/2.7 seconds
Minute 5: all out

The exact number of reps is not as important as ramping up over several minutes before the final minute (which is the actual test minute). A close enough approximation that is easier to time is:
Minute 1: 10 reps, 1 rep/6 seconds (snatch at :00, :06, :12..)
Minute 2: 12 reps, 1 rep/5 seconds (snatch at :00, :05, :10..)
Minute 3: 15 reps, 1 rep/4 seconds (snatch at :00, :04, :08..)
Minute 4: 20 reps, 1 rep/3 seconds (snatch at :00, :03, :06..)
Minute 5: all out

Snatch steadily for each minute, pausing in the lockout; don't do the reps quicker and then rest for the remaining time.

The all out number in the last minute is the one you base your cadence on. Divide that number by 4 for the 15:15 protocol and round up if you are above a whole number (so 7.1 rounds up to 8). The sweet spot for a given bell is 7 or 8. 9 is doable, but very rushed (and I believe 6 is also acceptable, although it seems very slow to me). So if you can do 33 or more in the final minute of the test, the bell is probably too light. If you can't get more than 24, the bell is too heavy.

Since 7-8 is the sweet spot, you COULD just pick one of those numbers as your cadence, but you wouldn't know if 12kg is the appropriate bell size or whether you should go heavier.

Once you have your cadence, just set a timer to beep every 15 seconds, and go to it, alternating work and rest intervals (obviously) and changing arms each work set, just like typical A+A training.

The goal is to work up to 80 sets at a given level, although I believe KJ originally suggested 50 and then increased it to 80 later on.

Thanks for this Steve

 

[Anna C]

So there is no difference in outcome? Then why all the confusion?

I'm sure there's a difference in outcome. I'm just saying there are so many differences that I can't come up with anything meaningful to say about it, and I'd be skeptical if anyone else could either.

We've been discussing the differences in snatch protocols, VWC and A+A. At least there we're talking about the same exercise (KB snatch). The differences are in weight, timing (work and rest), effort, cadence. That's still a lot, and different adaptations are targeted. So there's some discussion to have.

You said "HIT training whether it be 20 rep squats as compared to a complex of barbell exercises" -- I wouln't call these HIT or HIIT myself, and besides that, what type of loading, timing, exercises are we talking about? It's just not defined to be anything we could meaningfully compare to VWC. Or to Tabata. Or to CF Metcon. Or maybe I am must misunderstaning what you are trying to compare... ?