all posts post new thread

Kettlebell ? With Snatch

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Kenny, I made the calculation based on a 1RM for snatches of 32 kg. There are many guys here who are snatching 40 kg for reps, so clearly these guys can snatch more than 32. Maybe for them the ideal snatch weight for power development is more than 24.

Kettlebell Swing Load

Oscar, the information that I presented is on the Kettlebell Swing load, not for the Snatch. Thus, training load will be different.

It amount to trying to use the same load for a Olympic Snatch that you use for a Olympic Jerk.

Kenny Croxdale
 
I’ve heard the research cited several times but have never bothered to locate the precise source.

Resources

It amount to hearsay; inadequately information with no support. It may or may not be true.

In situations like that you need to drill down and find research and/or empirical data from various sources.

I don’t agree that an experienced coach’s guesstimate is useful in any scientific way.

What You Can See/Feel

A good coach that has been around knows Power when they see it.

Car Example

The majority of people know the different between a car going 30 mph and 50 mph when they see it without using a radar gun.

The feel of going 30 mph is different than going 50 mph.

Power Factor

I have an inexpensive devise that measures Power Output. It amount to having some cheap scales. The cheap scales will give you and idea of you body weight that is within a few pounds of a good set of medial scales.

In performing Speed Jump Squat years ago, I experimented with the various Speed Training Percentages; research has demonstrated that 10- 40% of 1 Repetition Max, with 30% being the "Sweet Spot" for Speed.

What I found was my speed was optimizes with 27% of 1 Repetition. There is a plus/minus factor. However, I was in the ball park.

Ironically, all it did was reaffirm what I felt. As the Speed Training Percentage research stated, I felt that my speed was maximized with a load of around 30% of 1 Repetition Max.

Competition Deadlift

The amount of Power you see a Powerlifter pull a Deadlift on his second attempt provide you with a good idea of what his/her final attempt should be.

I am sure you can "Read The Signs" on a second attempt for someone and determine about how much more they can pull on their final attempt.

...you are making concrete suggestions about basing training weights on kettlebell swing percentages of max

1 Repetition Max

The foundation of Strength Training is built on the Training Percentage "Guidelines" that provide you with information on how to optimize the various type of Strength Training: Limit Strength, Acceleration Strength, Explosive Strength, Hypertrophy...

To reiterate, there no practical way for a lifter to measure or know there 1 Repetition Max Kettlebell Swing.

With that said, anecdotal data obtained by watching others as well as performing Kettlebell Swings with various loads provides the observant lifter/coach with great feed back on which loads (Training Percentages) elicit that greatest amount of Power Output.

Cross Reference

In my previous post, I provide some of my resources on Power Output Training Percentages for Traditional Exercises (Squats, Bench, Deadlft, etc) and for Explosive Movements For those interested, I can provide the research articles on that.

I provide Dr Bret Contreras' research on the load that produce the greatest Power Output with the Kettlebell Swing.

To fully comprehend how to evoke and develop Power Output with the Kettlebell Swing, you need to examines the data on Explosive Training and determine the prime root linchpin which they all share.

I have presented some research information and can provide more for those who might want more.

Kenny Croxdale
 
Last edited:
Here's a thread that asks (and answers) some fairly relevant questions about the "30% of Body Weight For Power" idea:

A Vague Answer

It is an interesting read but with a vague reference.

It is a Case Study; one individual, only he, was used in the study. Thus, the study appears to be relevant to him but may not apply to others.

The Law Of Large Numbers

Good research is based on The Law of Large Numbers. The greater the number is with the study, the greater the accuracy.

The lower the number in the study, the lower the accuracy of the experiment.

Repeatability

The validity of the study must be able to be repeated with others.

Resources

Brandon Hetzler provides some graphs but there's is not reference on where and how it was obtained.

It is a "Snap Shot" that doesn't provide the whole picture.

Contreras' Article

Contreras article provides an in depth analysis with regard the Power Output produced with Heavy Kettlebells
Swings.

Contreras provide 9 References on where that information was obtained.

Power Output Comparisions

The Power Output comparison of Olympic Movements and Kettlebell Swing is close; providing the correct Kettlebell load is employed.

Contreras provides the Power Output produced with Heavy Kettlebells.

Strength of Athlete

Brandon Hetzler's article states that 30% Body Weight is the right Training Percentage for everyone.

So, a lifter who, let say Squats 400 lbs and Deadlifts 500 lbs will produce the same amount of Power Output and develop Power with the lifter who Squats 200 lbs and Deadlifts 300 lbs at the same body weight.

It doesn't work that way.

Don't Believe Anyone

Do your own home work and come to you own conclusions.

Look for references. Then drill down and read the references.

There is some truth in, "Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear."

Kenny Croxdale
 
@kennycro@@aol.com you are ok with coaching estimates sometimes and other times you require peer-reviewed studies.

I don’t want or need to convince you of my position. I swing a variety of kettlebells in a variety of ways. I’m bowing out of this conversation.

-S-
 
It's funny that what you got out of that thread I linked was the idea that I thought highly of the swing "power" article. If I had metaphorically rolled my eyes any harder at it my whole family would've gotten dizzy.
 
@kennycro@@aol.com you are ok with coaching estimates sometimes and other times you require peer-reviewed studies.

-S-

That's not an accurate description of what @kennycro@@aol.com said. The way I read it, because testing for a 1RM in the swing is not practical, we need to estimate based on a "coach's eye." A coaching estimate isn't ideal, but it's the best we can get under the circumstances.

Olympic lifting coaches have for years noted direct correlations between squat strength and the lifts. I have read about these ratios for several years now so they are likely to be fairly accurate.

Squat more, Lift more: Olympic lift ratios

I think experienced kettlebell coaches could get together and work up some similar ratios for KB swings and snatches so that if we know what a lifter can squat for a 1RM, we can then get a decent estimate of what the lifter can swing or snatch for 1RM.

Having said that, I don't know how valuable these squat to KB ratios would be. I would say that if someone wants to increase power with swings, get or make a T handle aka Hungarian Core Blaster, load it up, and swing heavy.
 
Good research is based on The Law of Large Numbers. The greater the number is with the study, the greater the accuracy.

If I may be overly pedantic, the statistics concept you are thinking of is "large sample size." This is why I get very irritated when people respond by saying "such-and-such worked great for me so I'm sure it will work for you, and if you disagree you're wrong." Thanks for the personal story but it is irrelevant because it is based on a sample size of 1.

The law of large numbers is a probability concept. If you flip a coin 5 times you may get all heads and it won't mean that you have an unfair coin. If you flip a coin 1,000,000 your results should be very close to 50% heads and 50% tails, and if not, then you have an unfair coin. It's what guarantees that a casino will make money.

Law of large numbers - Wikipedia
 
If I may be overly pedantic, ...

Overly Pedantic = "The Devil Is In The Details"

Like you, I am a proponent of taking things apart to see how they work.

...the statistics concept you are thinking of is "large sample size." This is why I get very irritated when people respond by saying "such-and-such worked great for me so I'm sure it will work for you, and if you disagree you're wrong."

"...It worked great for me...it will work for you..."

As you stated, what work for on may not work for another for a variety of reasons.

This takes us to examining the details of the individual application in utilizing the program, genetic factors, diet, etc.

Thanks for the personal story but it is irrelevant because it is based on a sample size of 1.

Case Study

I agree. A sample size of 1 is a "Snap Shot" that only provides a small part of the picture rather than the whole picture.

The point of my story was...

Applying The Concepts

I applied the research data utilizing the optimal Speed Training Percentages. What I found was the Speed Training Percentages that worked for the masses, worked for me, as well.

The law of large numbers is a probability concept.

The Law of Large Numbers

Essentially, research determines what works for the majority of individuals; what might be called the
"Average" or "General Population". That since the majority of us are more alike that dis-alike.

However, within the statistical analysis exist two minor populations...

NonResponders: Training Programs that are effective for the General Population don't work for Nonresponders; little works for this group. Medication and Treatments for heath issue that work for the General Population do little to nothing for this group.

As an example, I am a Creatine Nonresponder.

Super Responders: This group enormous results Training Program; almost anything and everything works. Medication and Treatments for health issue produce greater results than for the General Population.

Kenny Croxdale
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I’m about to share some data on this in one of my upcoming projects. It’s not a SF project, so I won’t promote it here. you all will have to track it down on your own, sorry.

Please let us know when you do. A cryptic message will do.....an interesting study here about the difference between things and matches. Not exactly the enigma code I know.
I've had some fine outcomes with swings and sprints. Taking a break from sprinting and spending a bit of time now with A&A snatching. Really just to get good at snatching in case I go for the sfg and also as a n=1 short session to see if there is any noticeable +/- effect on sprinting.
So very interested to read your study.
 
I remember the 25%-30% of BW being thrown around a while back and agree that a big discrepancy exists relative to experience & strength levels not to mention when we're asked consider 'power for what'? One rep only? 100 reps? Power:load efficiency ratio? A lot of variables can come into play.

Anecdotally: BW 52kg, 30% is 16kg...33% more than snatch sized. For the snatch tests (SFG or SSST), 14kg is the sweet subjective power spot (plus it doesn't destroy my grip for the next day's training). For a few 10s sets with 30s rest in between...16kg is nice, 18kg is doable, and 20kg freaks my brain out so I doubt I get max power there. Assuming the 20kg is therefore my technical 1RM...30% of that = 6kg is more than a bit silly.

I personally like using S&S as a proxy for my swing power sweet spot.

Science of the Swing
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom