For Paul Tucker

So this is your version of burying the hatchet eh?


From Paul tucker on another forum:
I see a number of folk are dabbling in basic physics these days. Bless them! Even a certain blogging SrRKC is giving it some neuronal play ; viz: “Even if the number was even the heavier bell exposes one to more injuries.Moving a lighter bell faster can produce more force, and more power, than moving a heavier bell slower. The argument should be about whether the kb is as good of a power tool as it is a strength endurance tool. Those that say it is too light to be a power tool just don’t understand the force velocity curve.”

------------------------------------------------- My (PT) late night rough power calculations FWIW: Your fair average quality 250kg deadlifter = 550lbs over say 2 ft = 1100ft/lbs over ~4 secs = 275lbs/sec

Your fine older Oly lifter (name withheld) 90kg snatch = 198lbs over say 4 ft = 792 ft/lbs over ~1 sec = 792lbs/sec. What does this prove? Powerlifting is a misnomer, as we know. And that the worm is turning…albeit via a circuitous route. Light kbs give better power development. Where does this place the hardstyle “power is better” mindset? Probably should stick to the 1 pood. Perhaps I’m missing something. Comments please. The other PT


Rif:
Paul,since I am not welcome on the site you posted this I will reply here( which you could have done as well)

First off how many 551 pound deadlifters do you know? Although that's an average dl in the power world its not very common at all amongst 'average' fitness enthusiasts.Secondly, that's only one rep you are referring to. How many times can your average 551 # deadlifter do those reps at those speed? And how many days a week?

Most intermediate kettlebell lifter will be able to put up those numbers I wrote about regularly and easily.Or close to them. That is precisely my point.Even with light kbs with compensatory acceleration training one can increase the amount of force for each rep without increasing the weight. It's not about heavy or light weight its about the right weight for your training goal.

And although I will agree with you that powerlifting should indeed be called strength lifting, as any good lifter familiar with WSB and Louie knows, speed in the lifts is EVERYTHING;especially when the weight gets heavy. No one tries to lift a heavy weight slowly.And most decent powerlifter knows they can judge their strength that day by how fast they can move their warmup weights. When light weights move slowly you are not in for a strong day.

And although the day we timed our snatches we didnt have anything fancy( just a stopwatch) to measure EXACTLY how fast the reps were, the 2 and 3 sec numbers were pretty close. The power expressed by the lighter bells was close to or better than that done with the heavier bell.And these were sets of 5, not single reps.

That's NOT to say heavier isnt good, or better, it's great if increasing strength is the goal. If increasing power or speed is than a slightly lighter bell is better. If it's too light( your 16kg analogy) it will move too fast to create enough force for any kind of overload.If you can swing or snatch the two pood that fast there is always the Bulldog.

So if one wants to increase the amount of force they are producing each rep they can go heavier, or try to swing the bell faster. Both are valid.

AS far as your hardstyle question that is precisely the concept: increase force production via increased acceleration."Virtual force" as Louie calls it.

This is Zatsiorsky's( louies) submaximal dynamic effort approach. Both the DE day AND the Max effort day are considered max effort workouts. Only on DE day,with the submaximal load you are trying to put max force on the bar( or bell). You are just adjusting for decreased mass with increased acceleration. Why is this so hard to comprehend?

RFD has NOTHING to do with the biomechanics of the movement.

And for cate, although I dont have a study proving these numbers we did take the time to time this in the gym and the empirical evidence( the difference in how fast the bells moved) was obvious.AS far as results go no, I didnt measure my vertical jump but knowing that using submax weights with comp acc would produce as high or higher levels of force per rep helped my program design. I realized I could use lighter weights and train to move them faster and still keep my strength up. For an old injured guy this was a great discovery.

And as far as your desk jockey clients( same as mine) go this has profound applications: they can use a smaller weight and produce the same amount of force as with a heavier one, by using compensatory acceleration and hardstyle techniques.More force equals more overload which equals more adaptation: the basis for all physical improvement.

To Scott Shelter: I thought you were a WSB guy; you should care how much time it takes you to perform your max squat, bench and deadlift.It would give you insights as to your weaknesses and how to improve them ANd you are right ,you dont't need a calculator but it shouldnt scare you either.