Brett hits the nail on the head. A post on Dragon Door forum:
The One True Way....the speach of domatic zealots (A fanatically committed person) every where - oh what a wonderful place the world would be if everyone would just recognize the answer that we (insert group here) hold.
The one true way is only accessable to those that believe as we (insert group) do...
Oh I have seen the light and the light is good....
The one true way to lift a barbell is Olympic lifting.
The one true way to lift a barbell is Powerlifting.
The one true way to lift is functional training.
The one true way to lift is unstable surface training.
The one true was to lift is bodyweight exercise.The one true way to lift a kettlebell is GS...
STOP - STOP - STOP the madness and take a deep breath...
If you want to train GS - train GS - as John pointed out below - The RKC used to contain a GS section - separtate from the rest of the cert - VF and others presented - The RKC group has never said don't train GS the only true way to train with KBs is our way.
The RKC has always included, respected and deferred to those GS people as an option in kettlebell training.
Now ask yourself why the people "who have seen the light" cannot do the same.Those "that have seen the light" have not dicovered the one true way to lift kettlebells - They have discovered how to train for GS - congratulations! and Period.
I have nothing but respect for GS and those that choose to undertake the demands of the sport - but stop the "one true way" speak and realize that you are caught in the business interests of those preaching this "new religion".The RKC system results speak for themselves and have always included GS as an option. Why can't the "new GS religion" do the same?
JMOBrett
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
48 kg swings 20 x 5 ( 25 min) 48 kg belt squats 3 x 10, pullapartsThe
These went ok but took awhile to really find my legs. No real issues and I slept better than I have in two weeks but just hard getting my w...
-
This has proven to be a most effective method of taping hands as a preventative to tears or after one has already torn.I used it for years ... -
.jpg)
KJ killing the Beast. Training to increase Max Vo2 with a kettlebell. I will share with you one of my best advanced protocols for improving... -
Its amazing what disapears first on me when I have to miss training. My glutes and hips go first; amazingly quickly too, and then the quads....
96 comments:
What the hell? People actually get hot and heavy about this stuff? The only style I care about is my style. Everything else to me is "ears and eyes open, mouth shut."
My philosophy is be thankful for the ability to participate in any of these things, and don't be a turd.
Agree completely, Rif.
I like your philosophy, Aaron. The longer I see & participate in this dead horse debate, the more I see the wisdom in your words.
aaron you wouldnt beleive the drama. it's silly.
It is silly. My entire viewpoint on this subject has been "there's more than one way to use a barbell, right? Right."
Do whatever works for you and stop trying to piss on everyone else is what I think.
Here's a site I found from some guy that hates kettlebells! At least his link to learn about them is good!http://slowburn.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/05/my_top_5_exerci.html
opps...here's the end of that link:
my_top_5_exerci.html
From kettlebell lady's link:
Here are my top 5, never do these or I'll find your home address and scold you exercise programs:
1.Plyometrics
2.Boot camp
3.Aerobics classes with added resistance (like jumping in place with a barbell on your back).
4.Kettlebell training
5.Explosive weight lifting (lifting weight really fast).
LOL! No matter what stupid exercise I choose to do, if you research my home address and actually show up to scold me, I may have to beat the fuck out of you ~ something that will be all the easier to do because of kettlebell training.
I completely agree. Do whatever works for you and keep yer mouth shut. Here's the issue though.
1. To paraphrase Pavel in the first RKC (original) book-kettlebells develop rugged staying power more than a one repetition max, something soldiers, farmers and hard guys of all types need.. or something along those lines. Does he mean Strength-Endurance?? As in girevoy sport?
2. The oft cited and as of yet unpubblished (in English) Voropoyev study (1983) outlines VERY clearly that the test subjects followed a training protocol quite similar to those currently training GS style, e.g. the "traditional" lifts (jerks, snatches, LCC&J, etc.) I have the ability to translate Russian...sorry "bout that, it doesn't mention a hard style approach...not once.
3. It has been stated that previous RKC certs have had guest appearances by GS athletes and that there has always been an "openess" to this idea of training but that there are no people suitable to teach it these days. Isn't someone a "Master of Sport"? Wouldn't that lead to a level of experience and competence to teach the traditional lifts if desired? Seriously, what are the bona fides in regards to this issue?
4. The ETK protocol is nothing more than a PTTP version of KB lifting. How do you equate powerlifting to Girevoy sport? A fixed weight is always a fixed weight, the only way to show real improvement with it is to lift it for greater and greater repititions, anal lock not withstanding. I guess you could attach a theraband to it to "compensatorily accelerate the negative" or whatever, but what is the point of that, really? You don't build max strength with a fixed (light) weight any more than you build endurance with a 1RPM.
5. If the RKC methods are the penultimate GPP use of KB's, why then are the workloads so grossly inferior to those practicing a more "traditional" method of KB lifting? The very definition of GPP is the ability to transfer that level of S&C to other areas, aka the much touted "WTH effect". Where is the science, the REAL science to back it up?
6. Lastly, if anyone hasn't experimented with BOTH methods and compared the results, then your opinion is speculative, at best. There are those that have trained both ways, and they are almost unanimous in their ascertion that the more traditional method of training is superior. I believe that this point, above all else, sums it up.
Yes you can use a particular tool for many applications, but using it in the intended and proper manner yields the best results.
no shit man. Asong as were all trying to get stronger its all good. Scott Shelter had a great post on his blog a while back about stone lifting. No politics, no debate on depth, no drama, get it to your waist, shoulder, or over your head. Done deal. Amen.
Hard is Hard. period.
Aaron - lol!
tom,
glad to hear from you again. as far as your first point, there is more than one way to achieve strength endurance.tracy did fantastic on her first ssst and her first attempt at one hand switch snatches and yet did nothing but hard style sets, albeit longer sets.
You can do long sets without using soft style form or techniques.
doing shorter rep multiple sets will develop strength endurance as well.
The difference with HS and soft style is as much about speed as anything. When Andrew Durniat, the first american do do ten minutes in the snatch with 32 kg, had to do his max vo2 sets at the RKC 2 he " had to do it hardstyle,there is no way to go that fast and use gs"
His exact words.
So yes, strength endurance of which GS is ONE option.
remember also that when Pavel did HIS MS he did not use modern GS techniques an sill did 40/40.
So again, doing hi reps does not necessitate gs style techniques.
Program design should always be tied to goals. If your goal is long sets, guess what, do long sets.In the RKC Challenge book, in the section on military training programs there is a huge mix of exercises and techniques and NO 6-8 minute sets.
Pavel states quite clearly that in his unit, which was using Shotokan karate as their hand to hand application, that the hardstyle technique were used to help re inforce their karate training.
You know that as 'centralized' as the Soviets were there was LITTLE to NO real across the board utilization of any standardized training protocols, just as was the case with powerlifting or olympic lifting.
The Dynamo club that Louie patterned WSB after was NOT doing the exact same thing as other Russian clubs.
Tom, techniques change all the time if one is"evolving". Look at early WSB programs and techniques and look at them now. Not the same by a long shot. The key is that they, like Pavel snd RKC, are always learning and growing and adding( and Pavel ,like Louie, is always giving credit to where the ideas come from. No ego problems there).
Cotter,when he taught the GS section of the cert was no 'gs athlete' but just a Sr. with an interest in GS.Pavel has always given GS it's due, but always recognized the differences in technique between it and RKC.
The RKC SYSTEM is just that, a unique system of training with principles that can be used in other applications,not just kb work;IT IS NOT GS TRAINING.
And the ETK system is different in MANY ways than the original RKC book; a method of organizing the training to give a good balance of strength and endurance training.
Most people will be quite challenged by pressing a bell closest to half their bodyweight as well as doing 200 snatches in 10 minutes,regardless of the # of hand switches.
Again, growth and development,not just a blind retention of 'what was'.
As far as how to equate kbs to powerlifting you must not have read much WSB methodolgies.SO MUCH of current powerlifting training is about speed and acceleration training, increasing gpp,force and rate of force development, accomadatiing resistance ,etc. Kettelbells,especially Hardstyle KB training, is PERFECT for these special applications. NO ONE is suggesting one can just do kb rutines and go in a do great at powerlifting. Oh wait,VF and the AKC is, but no one beleives that anyway.
Just ask Donnie Thompson, Marc Bartley,Lance Mosely and MANY others. None of these guys is lifting their bells "soft".
What so many forget is that no matter what weight you can lift "soft" it HAS to be a sub maximal weight to do so or else you can get hurt.It doenst matter if it is the beast. If you can lift it soft then it is sub max.When you are lifting max OR TRAINING OR LIFT MAX, you must use basic and proper pressurization techniques.Thats just safe and SOP for training.
Teaching techniques on how to activate and connect the entire body for grind lifts is GREAT practice for translating that to other lifts.
I have watched MANY try to lift heavy heavy weighght and guess what? MOST have serious problems staying tight.Learing and using these technques with bells will carryover to bar or other objects if the person is.
Again, the RKC methods are NOT just about ballistic training but an overall system of learing how to use the body in different situations. What is so hard to accept about that?
What do you mean the RKC methods of doing gpp are vastly inferior to developing GPP. Everyone knows if you do 'sets and reps" with weight instead of a few long sets you can do huge amounts of volume. Again, just look at what my wife does.1600-2000 swings and or snatches per hour, three to four days a week, easily? What's inferior there?and each of those reps is done hardstyle with solid acceleration and force.
This method is MUCH more applicable to the average person/client who cares way more about how they look than jsut what their GS 'number 'is.
And for the average client, who will NEVER press the Beast, Kettlebells are PLENTY heavy enough to develop real strength. How many in the AKC can press two beasts for sets and reps? The bells aren't heavier enough for them to increase their strength? Bullshit.
That is the same reason I never taught the wide stance ,low rack power squat to my clients; they didnt care about the most effective way to leverage the most weight up; they wanted a safe effective way to do a squat pattern, develop strength and not get hurt.The power squat didnt fit that bill and either does the gs swing in that respect, imo.
As far as the 'science, the real science' to back that up, you, as an athlete should know that science is ALWAYS light years behind the curve of what the athletes in the field are doing.
I know from my own experience and what I see happen to my clients that these techniques not only work but work FANTASTICALLY and SAFELY.
I don't need a bunch of geeks in lab coats and a peer review board telling me it shouldnt work when I know it does.
More data is great as is more research but I will go with my 35 years of experience and what my eyes and body tell me before I let "pure"science dictate my methods.Science's "truth" changes every day.
Using RKC methods I have gotten better and stronger everyday for the last three years.As has my wife and my clients. Why would I dispute that?
Lots of things happen that science cannot 'explain' oh well.maybe they will catch up. RIght now KJ's work and force plate data give me the basic info I need to know I am on the right track.
Increasing my work capacity with this type of training is an indisputable fact for me. I know it translates into SO MANY other areas of my real world life I dont need any other confirmation.As Pavel says, I dont need to understand hydrodynamics, I know how to swim now!
and please give this"proper way to use it" bullshit a rest! Didnt you read Bretts post?
Please tell me the proper way to use a barbell Tom.Again, the proper way to use a kb for a gs athlete is clear, why you transpose that into everyone ,under every circusmstance, for all applications is beyond me.It is is simplistic at best.
To add some levity here, the REAL enemy we should be attacking is exemplified by the pompous, idiotic fitness "expert" who wrote the "slowburn" article. Go to his site and search for "kettlebell" and read my reply.
I'm waiting for his email, so he can come to scold me and I can shove a 2 pood down his throat... Just kidding - it would have to be a 4kg to really fit....
tom
I agree. BUT we (RKC) NEVER said GS was wrong, only we were different. GS has said( and continues to say) RKC is wrong. Not different. Wrong. BIG difference.
Rif,
I'm not touching these debates, discussions, flames, etc. with a ten foot pole! Not because I have no opinions, it's just that I'd like to see every KB lifter focus on training how they want, to get the results they want. Then spend some their excess energy going against fitness idiots who attack KB lifting as non-productive and dangerous, not attacking each other.
JMO, YMMV,
Tom
Nice responses on the slowburn blog, guys. I got a kick out of that.
aaron, lol, the guy's a tool. did you check the photos for "mr lean" himself?Got no room to talk about ANYTHING.
tom.
I wish I had your restraint, but alas, I do not.Hard for me not to defind myself when I'm attacked.
Bwahahahahahahahaha! Not a Greek statue, is he?
And not one to criticize other methods.
Tom Shook,
I think people forget that I was standing on a field competing in Virginia when the first "GS" national meet was held there. I have done "reps" in my training.
As for the rest of your response - come on we can sit here all day and try pick the fly shit from the pepper but the facts are:
the RKC system works as a training system and the GS system works as a training system (when you goal is GS - sorry but you will have to go a long way to convince me that rounding my back and relaxing under load is a good thing).
Why isn't there still a GS section at the RKC - Time - we decided to focus more on teaching and refining the basic RKC techniques not spend time trying to introduce a whole other training system.
Strength-endurance does not mean GS - claiming an exclusivity to an entire strength classification is bit much don't you think?
Military experts have been quoted as saying that when you can hit 50 + 50 snatches with the 24kg you have hit all you need to hit out of KBs for military fitness - Where does GS fit into that? How come they don't recommend 100 +100 with the 32kg? Because conditioning is specific to the goals and to sit back and say that GS matches everyone's goals is lunacy.
"use the tool for it's intended use" What CRAP - Ol, PL, Bodyweight - it's the same "one true way statement" again - give it a rest!
Your response begins by saying let people train the way they want and then you proceed to lay your case for GS and "the one true way" - at least you are open to letting people train the way they want.
You are an RKC - did you not learn a great deal at the cert - have you not used the techniques and information to your and your clients benefit? But now that you have seen the "one true way" all others must fall?
Come on....
aaron he is about 15 years behind the times.and fat to boot.
WOW lengthy counters from not one but TWO SrRKC's aren't I the fortunate one. I must have really struck a nerve. My bad.
Listen guys, in all sincerity, let it go. You have both missed my entire point in your zealous efforts to defend the RKC vs. The AKC (which needn't be taken on in my case). I didn't realize the depth of either of your monochromatic view(s).
Me thinks that a switch to de-caffeinated Kool-Aid is in order....
Word.
As pathetic responses go Tom that is a pretty good one.
You choose not to continue the discussion YOU jumped in on and try to slide out with snide comments and no substance - very nice. It is the GS side with its "one true way" speach that needs to back off of the kool aide.
Just as Matt Furey used to catch a lot of flack for his "bodyweight" only solution to everything - the GS only solution will do the same.
Brett, why would I continue a discussion that neither of you is willing or able to answer? neither you nor Rif actually answered my questions, but rather engaged in lengthy diatribes about the efficacy of one ideology over another, I merely am taking an empirical approach and questioning things in order to better understand. With you guys the "Party is always right" schtick is a little heavy.
If you want to degenerate this into a series of personal attacks, then by all means have your fun. It does, indeed, look rather pathetic from where I'm standing.
How did I not answer your questions?
I tried to address all of your points in your post but if you will lay out the ones you are looking for answers on I will answer.
I do not want this to turn into anything personal either so if you will put the questions down here - I will answer them.
I guess I'll jump in, I'm Irish.
I think what Tom S is trying to say is that RKC is a bad way to train for GS.
OK, so train GS style for GS meets and results. RKC was designed for a different purpose and says so and seems to offer good results for several different things, even high volume/rep results in some cases (eg., Tracy R)
So if I'm not interested in training for a GS meet and I'm happy with the results I am getting and I can see a clear path for progress laid out before me and I see posted evidence of many making similar progress by following a similar path, why would I want to switch to GS style instead of the RKC style I was taught?
Convince me Tom.
tom,
I'm sorry but I thought I addressed each of your points in my diatribe. sorry my communication isn't better, but I believe if you read my answer more carefully you will see that I did address your questions.
Rif, Brett, et al.
Forgive me, perhaps my challenging questioning methods stems from a long career in medicine where we eat our young.
I could give two shits about who is right, what i am interested in, in a nutshell is this: If there is a more efficient way of doing this thing or a way that lends itself to better results in terms of GPP, why then are we not questioning our own methods and at least exploring someone else's point of view?
I'll be the first to admit that there has been a lot of bullshit on BOTH sides of the fence, I'm not choosing sides. I want to know what makes one method superior and in what context. I have a masters' degree and 30 years experience in sport, I'm not a child! A fixed weight cannot be made to do things it isn't designed to do. So we are left with the neccesity to find an optimal method of using this thing to achieve our desired results. If we open ourselves up to scrutiny then, and only then, can we validate our methods. I honestly don't know which side is right. My gestalt says both are right, and neither are in some instances. I can tell you from my own experience that repetition snatches, swings and jerks done for time has given me and some of the folks I work with the best results with KB's thus far. I am going to keep asking questions until I'm satisfied that the answers I get are relible, unbiased and based on experience and knowledge and not an agenda. Don't take this last part as an indemnification of either of you, please, merely stated as a matter of fact.
tom,
to me its not about the fixed weight at all, it's about your body and how you move it and for how long.I think in terms of interval training and I think that allows for a much higher workload than using high reps for a limited number of sets.
have you read Randy hauers commentrary on cotters kb comparison on cotters site.its excellent.It addresses the biomechanical safety issues of arched vs round back and anatomincal vs biomechancial breathing.
To me its about fiber activation( through intentional speed use- fast or slow) energy system activation and total amount of work done per session. These are the variables one can control with a fixed weight and that can alter the adaptations we choose to stimulate in the body.
I just dont see the neccesity, outside of the rule sof gs sport(or the rkc snatch test) of limiting ones workload because of the limitations of the grip.
switching hands and overloading the system rather than the hand and arm flexors makes more sense to me ,from a gpp conditioning sense.
why NOT try to move the body as explosively as possible in order to maximize ground forces as such? Why only focus on building to a ten minute work bout?
why not tailor the workloads to the needs of the athlete/client and the total amount of work to the specific goal?
It certainly has not been proven to me that this other method is superior. Using top level athletes as the case study does not even come close to convinving me.
I hope this answers your question more succinctly.
Jr
I see you rethoughtyour reluctance to come over here. good.As it is 4:50 and I am about to leave for work I canonly handle a part of the question.
to begin with there is only anecdotal evidence on my part as to the WTH effect with the RKC style and I have no experience with the gs style so I can't speak to that. I do believe that virtually anything you do with a kb( ballistically) will have a unique effect on the body due to the overspeed eccentric aspect on the posterior chain.
How would you like me to "prove" it?
the difference in HS is that by adapting mechanical positions and breathing patterns similar to other methods of producing high forces and fast speeds( squatting jumping sprinting) there would seem to be more of a direct connect to those activities than a style that utilized the exact opposite postures and force productions curves.
I doubt that will satisfy you but again, what "proof" would?
as far as your second part of the question the rkc snatch test, which is a repetition test, much like that used in the study IS in RKC program so I don't know what you are speaking to.SO are the jerks, although they are now a level 2 skill as Pavel found that introducing it too early lead to form issues in those not able to maintain tension in their midsection.
SO the basic protocols are in place, just slight variations. as stated in another post, the studies have found diminishing returns after a certain number of snatches could be done and our test certainly approaches those numbers.
so where is the conflict?
Just to ask, because i'm curious... Force=mass x acceleration. The weight is fixed. The acceleration is not. Right? I can generate more force and power by increasing the acceleration of the kb. It is inefficient. So?
Running for a marathon is slow, smooth and efficient. Running an all out sprint is fast, explosive, powerful, and inefficient (especially if trying to run a marathon). Both types of running will get me from one place to the other. The question is "how do i want to get there?" Train for what you want. Right? I'm a sprinter.
Like I said over at IGx...Several people have trained with me since April prior to heading to the RKC with the specific task of passing the snatch test. One gentleman told me at my workshop 3 weeks ago, he was one of a few people that did not require a tape job because he did not tear up his hands at the Cert in June. He attributed this specifically to working with me.
I never said there wasn't value in what was taught at the RKC. I have trained people going to the RKC as an AKC coach..I never disparage the cert and tell everyone of them that they will have a good time and learn a lot about strength training and conditioning and that there are some very smart people who teach there.
But, you guys act like what is taught at the AKC is only useful for the sport and you perpetuate it and then you don't get the hostility? You don't even know what is taught; Yet you continue to speculate. As I said at IG, Rif assumes that we all do slow paced sets? Really, 61 Jerks in 5 min with a 2-16kg bells is not slow to me; neither is 91 with 2-12kg bells..Oh and I didn't set the weight down or lower it out of the rack. It was a sprint, rest/sprint 5 minutes and it floored me.
We know what you are attempting to do when you do this. Please. We aren't a stupid bunch and we know attacks come in many different forms. I actually don't expect any less. Everyone has their interest to protect( and it includes the AKC). So, let's just be honest about that.
CI
Tom,
here is another stab at answering your questions...
Does he mean Strength-Endurance?? As in girevoy sport?
GS does not mean strength-endurance - like I said earlier - attributing an entire strength quality to a sport is silly - strength-endurance is a component of GS but that does not make the two synonymous. There are many ways to train strength-endurance.
sorry "bout that, it doesn't mention a hard style approach...not once.
Thats because "hard style" is an American coined term (marketing - the american way) and wasn't around during the study - as Randy Hauer has pointed out upon working with and observing Ukranian KBers - they use an aggressive hip extension, braced bottom position and a strong exhale at the top for their swings. Point is - KBs work - Just as barbells work - how you use them is up to you and your goals.
GS at the RKC
Answered this one - it is a time issue and not wanting to introduce an entire other training methodology in the midst of a large amount of other information to be covered.
Fixed weight and increasing reps as the standard - bodyweight (Fury)
The issues with a fixed weight and the every increasing reps as the standard of improvement comes back to the Fury bodyweight only solution of 1000s of reps a day because you have no other option.
But if you vary volume, intensity and design a fixed weight can be used for many applications - short rest periods with lower reps, short rest periods with higher reps, longer rest with heavy low rep, longer rest with lighter weight and higher reps - total volume in an hour, total volume in 10 minutes - manipulate the variables.
Also remember that the 10 minute time frame of GS is a recent development and resulted from a change in the rules - not from a discovery that it was the ultimate way to train - there was a time when you had no time limit and could rest with the KB on the shoulder (competitions became so long they had to change the rules). So why isn't that the ultimate way to train? Why not rest on the shoulder and have unlimited time? - because the rules of the sport changed. Period.
GPP and science
Remember that General Physical Preparredness is a means of general conditioning for a variety of goals and the Specific Physical Preparredness is a means of preparing for a sport.
GS is a sport and the training techniques there in are a form of SPP.
Where is the science? People like Kenneth Jay and others will be doing this and we have the russian research and we have 100's of testimonials to the effectiveness of KB training.
RKC methods are the penultimate GPP use of KB's, why then are the workloads so grossly inferior to those practicing a more "traditional" method of KB lifting?
The workloads are specific to the goals. I don't know about you but I don't have 4-5 hours a day (as current US KB sport people say they need) to train and my clients don't have 4-5 hours to train - so why would I use a method who's only answer to progression is more, more, more and hour upon hours of training. There are more efficient ways to get there.
Also you have people accumulating 100's to 1000's of reps in their workouts using the RKC method - that is more than enough for me and my clients.
Experiemented with both and the "proper use of a tool"
I was a part of the early attempts at GS in this country. I have completed 1,160 snatches with the 16kg in an hour. And I have used the Beast and bulldogs for my training - since late 2001 I have been experimenting with the KB.
The proper use of a tool as generic as a weight is up to the goals of the person using it. To claim there is ONE proper use for a weight is silly and similar to the claims that Olympic lifting is the one true use for the barbell. Come on - you can see the flaw in this argument can't you?
If there is a more efficient way of doing this thing or a way that lends itself to better results in terms of GPP, why then are we not questioning our own methods and at least exploring someone else's point of view?
If 4-5 hours of training is necessary to utiltilize this "more efficient" way of doing things - then I do not find it very efficient. And as stated earlier - it does not result in better GPP - GS is SPP. Also - I continually question my methods and contiually read and explore many training options. And in terms of GS I defer to GS people but I don't find it to be the "better" method - it is simply an option specific to the goals of GS.
I can tell you from my own experience that repetition snatches, swings and jerks done for time has given me and some of the folks I work with the best results with KB's thus far.
KBs have given me unbelievable results as well and with my clients - repetition swings and snatches are incredible. On this we agree. But I don't have to become a GS athlete to realize these benefits.
I am going to keep asking questions until I'm satisfied that the answers I get are relible, unbiased and based on experience and knowledge and not an agenda. Don't take this last part as an indemnification of either of you, please, merely stated as a matter of fact.
I continue to question everything as well. My agenda is what invetigating what works for me and my clients not on what works for those people trying to establish a new business by attempting to tear down a competing method. If you want agenda free information then use both techniques for yourself and post the results. I can provide my opinion but that comes along with my perspecitve and experience and knowledge. Accept it as you will.
So just because I don't agree with you or because I defend my current beliefs in the face of "you are wrong" claims doesn't mean I am closed off or immune to learning.
The mind set of "I'm opened minded - as long as you agree with me" is not one I support.
So people repeating what they have been told about a different method being "right" and another method being "wrong" does not make it so.
This whole debate is similar to two fleas arguing over who owns the dog - Kettelbells have many uses and many techniques just as dumbells, barbells and so many things in life do.
Only people with an agenda try to frame competitors in a "right" or "wrong" game of flawed logic - GS is SPP for GS and there are things that general trainees can learn from GS but it is not the "one true way".
Does that answer your questions?
BTW - i had your comments in italics and mine in regular font - hope they come out that way on the blog.
Cate,
The RKC has never said GS has nothing to offer and the forum and the RKC has always celebrated the success of GS athletes like yourself.
Why then the "right or wrong" speak from AKC people and GS converts?
GS converts are attacking - the RKC is simply presenting the "other side". It is a damned if we do - damned if we don't situation.
I respect GS and those that undertake it - this is not a "right or wrong" situation but others are framing it in that context.
BTW - how's your training coming along?
BAD,
There is conflict because of the tactics of some individuals to attack and demonize - others have framed this into a "right or wrong" debate not us - and we are the bad guys for responding?
yes - if you hit the required numbers with a lockout and pause at the top - you would pass the snatch test.
I'm personally am not out to state someone else is wrong to prove what I do works. So, yes, I have been vocal about that even with the AKC head honchos. I speak my mind anywhere ;)
I have also been very quick to point out that this training is not for everyone. I'm not even talking about training for the sport. Some people will not like the minimalist approach, they may simply not want to work that hard (and trust me there are days I don't want to work that hard:)
So, we're clear. I don't regret going to a single RKC workshop (and I went to 5)...I met some extremely cool knowledgeable people there. It all served a purpose in the grand scheme of things. I didn't feel like the training I was doing fit in with the RKC methodology and that is why in part I declined the Team Lead offer and decided to align myself as an AKC Coach. It just fit better with my personal training philosophy and what I have come to value in my own training and what I would choose to impart to others.
Training is going great. Thanks for asking.
CI
B.A.D.,
I am only a level 1 RKC, but I think the main flaws they are concerned with is pressing out the bell instead of a real snatch and displaying adequate shoulder mobility (ie. upper arm near ear and 'behind' the face at lockout.
I don't think they are concerned about GS style drops (I wish I knew how to do that for my cert!) and as long as you didn't lean back too much I don't think the round back would DQ you.
Maybe one of the Srs' will chime in here to amend my view.
jr,
the conflict continues ONLY because certain people keep insisting that the RKC methods are WRONG and not legitimate.That's the true crux of this problem. Please remember that Pavel and RKC embraced VF and GS and never had bad things to say about it, only that it wasnt our methods. NOT that they were wrong.
and yes you would pass the snatch test with lazy style and corkscrew technique. happens all the time.
Tim,
you are 100% correct. why that is so hard for some to get I have no idea.
cate,
gregor started this mess by coming to DD and basically calling us out( its either gs way or the "wrong" way).I could not let that stand unanswered.
LOL@ aarons first post.see what I mean dude?
cate,
part of the problem is that no one but those who go to the akc cert have anyidea about what goes on as the info is so secretive and then you have guys like gregor spouting stuff like GS = Kettlebell lifting, and other top people stating RKC is wrong and dangerous when they know it is not.
Where is the akc website with some basic info about the program and methodology?
If one looks at the training logs of akc people all we see are time sets of snatche and jerks and swings. Looks pretty much like pure gs training to me.
also as Randy said on cotter site teaching round spine lifting and anatomical breathing to beginners would be fround upon in 100% of all S& C programs across the board. Where is the data, other than anecdotal, that this is safe way to lift? especially for beginners?
if you guys would back off on "rkc is wrong use of the kb" I bet you would find a change in attitude.
I was going to answer regarding the round back lifting the breathing/but Cotter did it quite eloquently in his response to Randy and I've got nothing else to offer here.
CI
Jr
I find it ironic that you bait me into arguments and then chastise me for engaging in them with you.
I responded to gregor's very obvious trolling attempt to say the rkc is wrong and that we need to change.more of the same.
then I reply on Garm, where YOU hang out, perhaps the most vile place on the entire lifting internet as far as hate and violence being preached is concerned and you say I am not being classy enough and breaking my word?
Well that is in the eye of the beholder is it not? You are very quick to judge others; time for a mirror check perhaps?Glass houses and such. grow up.
AS far as the snatch test; if you roll back and forth on your heels, exhale on the downswing,round your lower back while dropping your head,come up on one leg during the ascent, keep your knees locked and just bend over I might have a problem with that, yes.
It certainly isnt rkc technique. Now, if you snap your hips, drive hard through the middle maintain a flat back and neutral neck, keep the arm connected to the body,control the bell, get a solid lockout but corkscrew on the descent, you are fine.
cate,
I see your point about cotters response to randy about back position and breathing techniques. with athletes with no back issues and a good bodyawareness I can see hwo this would be good if the goal is a gs style attempts at very high reps. then learning to relax makes sense.
but for most of the people I see everyday, with VERY tight hamstrings and ankles, very weak lower backs and poor spinal stability this would be a TERRIBLE method as a starting point. Randy's point as to the chicken or the egg concept is right on, imo. Strength before power and the flat back and biomechanical match is just going to be better for a higher number of people ,imo.
So many get hurt rounding over to pick up the laundry or their kids.
B.A.D, did you read this?
yes - if you hit the required numbers with a lockout and pause at the top - you would pass the snatch test.
Rif just added that, if you have shitty form, he would have a problem with it. Are you a proponent of shitty form?
aaron,
proper gs forms looks VERY different than proper RKC form.its great for long rep sets for gs but not what we teach our instructors to teach.
JR
please feel free to email or call Pavel and report my violations.
JR
as far as
"ah gs style reps will not count"
do not forget that the rkc course is an INSTRUCTOR COURSE. We are teaching people HOW TO BE RKC INSTRUCTORS TEACHING RKC METHODS.
Why would we have certify someone as an instructor not capable of demonstrating our techniques?
A corkscrew is one thing, ignoring all the technical aspects of our method is quite another.
jr
who did I call out?I responded on OUR forum to gregor and I answered you on garm . what I couldnt resist was setting the record straight to you man to man.
Once again, Rif represents Hard Style training with true professionalism.
He even stands up for a style of training he doesn't teach, noting that it is for a different purpose and therefore has a different method, but is in no way a wrong approach if it is aligned with one's goals.
Rif could be 95 years old and limited to 8kg bells for his own training, but I would still seek out his instruction and advice because he cares about helping people and actually does it.
b.a.d.
I just re-read the Code of Conduct that you posted, and I can't see where Rif doesn't adhere to it.
Quiet and restrained? Yes. This is Rif's blog, where he expresses his thoughts and actions in his own personal space.
If you had a blog and Rif showed up to give you shit, that might be interpreted as "unrestrained." But he hasn't done this. You have, whoever you are.
CI,
I respect your accomplishments and your decisions to follow the path you want to pursue and I wish you continued success in your training.
This is a debate in semantics and an attempt to rename something in an attempt to claim "ownership" over something no one can own.
We are all KB lifting. Different goals and different styles but we are all KB lifting.
Glad to hear your training is going well and I am looking forward to the AAU worlds in Oct.
BAD,
Responding to being attacked and presenting his case is not inappropriate - One might think you were a lawyer or something with your convoluted lines of argument.
Besides - what is this to you other than internet joy time - I make my living as an instructor so I have a stake in this - why are you like a dog that will not let go of a bone?
No, you're right b.a.d. I see now that you say Rif invited you, so it's my bad and not yours.
Still, your posts reak of "giving shit" without any attempt to give RKC training a thumbs-up in any way and for any purpose. Rif and Brett both give credit where it's due to GS, but you attack Rif for essentially being too enthusiastic about what he does. Where's your argument that his methods don't work?
jr
I am not complaining you are here, in fact I complimented you on having the cojones to show up.
as far as not living up to the code of conduct that is purely your opinion. as I said feel free to email john or pavel and register a complaint.
this is my version of quite professional.
you see jr, I am passionate and intense about what I do because I actually do something. You just type of the keyboard and try to build yourself up by tearing others down. not quite the same thing.
Let me tell you in a real gym, with real lifters, who are training to accomplish real goals, it is not uncommon at all to call BULLSHIT when someone is spouting that just. That is my quiet professionalism.
After all your years of being Renegade Doughboy, proud purveyor of internet bullshit and lies and your three weeks of supposed 'conversion' to Born Again Doughboy has me not convinced at all of anything other than another attempt to be malicious under the guise of sanctity.
Talk training or go away.
"That is not a quality to have when trying to talk to me on the internets. ;)"
god forbid I upset you
and after reading your posts on various forums for the last few years I know that the only reason you appear to be reasonable is to set people up. you are a truly untrustworthy individual and you and I couldnt be more different from each other.
"Rif OTOH seems to get his knickers all bunched up at the slightest slight"
its just that I suffer fools so badly.
ROFTLMAO,
aaron you kill me man.
Rif,
Anything more is wasted energy. Love ya, mean it.
you're right tim and I think jr knows it. he probably is done too.
BAD, While I do think you come across as a troublemaker and should use your real name, my last comment was a bit much. My apologies to you.
jr,,
and I answered that question directly did I not?
to be honest jr I do not trust you as per our many enounters on garm and the fact that you never fail to try to antagonize me over there; constantly commenting on whatever I do or say on DD or here as well.
Shall I dig through the garm archives for some of your more salient points about me?
jr,
probably best not to go wading in that slime again, once was enough. as far as the question girevikmethods are NOT frowned upon.
we have a high rep snatch test with only one hand switch( should be classical enough)clean and press( which used to be part of the kb triathlon til they switch rules, same as OL ) and the jerk is part of level 2 cert( as are other classic lifts such as windmill and bent press). what classic lifts are we missing?
and how is the grip not taxed in the snatch test, or from repeated sets and reps with heavy bells? virtually EVERY time you pick up a bell the grip is worked so if anything, the grip is a constant in RKC kb work. Just not to exhaustion.
as I see it the GS competition is ultimately JSUT about the grip. All the techniques manipulations are about saving grip, from the corkscrew, to the hooking of hte fingers to the now allowed 'hang' position.
What is really being tested in grip endurance, as is obvious from comparisons to the SSST. If you let people swithc hands and NOT let the grip bemce the main focus then the overload is on the system.not just the grip endurance.
since you brought up the dl and powerlifting there are also many stories( andlifters- steve goggins, ernie frantz) who believe one SHOULD use straps to overload the back one one's grip limit is found and not let the grip limitation restrict the adapatations the back can get from these overloads.
Plus,even with straps the grip is getting worked.
The system has evolved because experience and observation has lead it down this path. RKC is a school of strength, which encompasses endurance.pavel is always tweaking things to make them better, more efficient and get people stronger faster. Same as louie.
Why would it stand still? things have been added to improve the course and the methods.
again, there is a strong endurance component and why do you assume that unless one does all there reps in a row that endurance isnt taxed. You should go back to the cert and get through the three days now; beleive me endurance is seriously taxed.
Rif,
I have to comment, but I think even when Tracy did her short test, she noticed an overhead fatigue from working the same side?
The grip is the first thing people notice but there is way more than that.
There is a mental benefit to putting yourself through the hell of one handswitch..Until you've trained it and done it, you don't realize it..I know I didn't until the first time Federenko made me do a slow 6 minute set (< 100 reps). It is humbling to the ego.
I did 255 on the SSST long before i could do 200 on the single hand switch competition.
Since the grip is the first thing to go, that is the first thing people notice, but it really is much more than that.
Just offering my experience and not for the sake of being argumentative (this time :)
CI
Cate,
you are right there are lots of thing going on in a long set of snatches or jerks.or any other high repetition cyclical activity.and yes tracys shoulder fatigue was noticeable.but it was as much from holding each rep and going much slower than she was used to and going 20 reps over what she had ever done before as anything.
the limiting factor for most will be grip,biomechanically it's the weakest link. Just as the lower back in any barbell squat. the back always goes first.
and you remember of course that the snatch in the original contests the bell used to be allowed to be lowered onto the shoulder and could rest there.
the contests went on forever and that why the current rules were applied.
I don't doubt the mental training benefits or toughness required for one second.
But the grip is the first to go and it's the main limiting factor for almost all.
Do you think GS technique would be the same as it is now if, for instance, one could 'strap' themselves in and elimate the grip as a factor?
I'm not sure.
It is hard to explain until you do it. The first thing is always the grip for newbies. It is the stabilization on one side for a length of time. The posterior chain also gets tired with working one side. I don't see women at the higher levels struggling with their grips now. I'm sure that would change, but even on the sets where I've gone a while with a 24kg, it's not so much the grip.
The collective toll it takes is more impacting over 10 minutes or whatever duration. That is, I didn't feel near as wiped out on the 255 set with the 16kg (or quite frankly in the 300 I did in 12:30) as I have on the sets where I've switched hands once.
I'm not sure why this is..But, it makes any Test or workout where you can set the bell down or switch hands..trivial.
For the record, we don't push everyone to go so long without hand switches, but i do feel like it opens a lot more doors once you reach a certain level...and yes it does come down to the mental aspects of holding onto a weight for a given time not necessarily 10 minutes..I've done "triathlon" work that Christine mentioned in her blog with 2-12kg bells that lasted 30 minutes. This consisted of a 10 min LCC&J set with 2-12kg bells (10 min), 10 min snatch set, then a 10 min Jerk set with 2 bells. I didn't train specifically for it, but the stuff I've done prepped me for it. It was just a test and certainly not something I would do often.
CI
CI,
Thanks for the insights - very good information.
BAD,
As to the WTH effect - read the testimonials and search the forum - lots of info there and it's called the WTH effect because it is a carryover to other activities that is hard to explain. Very hard to "study".
The progression of the RKC is a continual process and swings are the foundation and the other 5 drills allow for learning many training techniques and principles (the techniques and principles are what the course is really about not just the exercises). Snatches still get there time and jerks are covered in the level 2.
While I prefer to accumulate volume in short sets with lower rest periods - we never say "don't do high reps". The "anything over 3 reps is cardio" is tongue in cheek - I do sets of 5 frequently ;)
I find a lot of beginning Kb trainees go too quickly past the swing and develop form issues related to going to the snatch too soon - so I and the RKC focus a bit more on the swing. (lots to learned from the lowly swing).
Keep me posted on your progress with the snatches, LC and C&J.
jr,
the grip will always give out before the bigger muscles of the back and legs in any full body lift such as a deadlift , clean or snatch with a barbell or a limit weight kb version or a hi rep version.
as far as the rkc snatch test being hi rep , its hi rep enough to stimulate great gains. remember the military study found diminishing returns for over 50 reps per arm for soldiers. for the biggest guys 37 and 37 is close. these aren't military people either we are testing.
this is even more of a grip test if it is done with no corkscrew grip saving techniques and flipping over the top.
I'm not advocating the regular use of straps on dl but it is a form of overload.
and how much grip strength does one need to be 'strong enough'
so many seem so concerned with 'ultimate' or absolute programs or skills when most can't string together a few weeks of perfectly attended workout schedules and progressive loading.
The best is very often the enemy of the good.
as far as ETK the reason it takes so long as it is based on volume training to build strength, lol. You gotta pay your dues man and volume traiing is a proven method.
as I wrote to mr tucker, I too have had to give up high tension work but I did that for 15 years on powerlifting and god knows how much in bodybuilding and before that gymnastics. A little bit of tension won't hurt ya.
jr,
as far as strapping in, I did use gymastics grips and it really did take a ton of stress off the grip. that is not the same as using dl straps or something similar to eliminate the grip but close.
again, how do you think it would affect technique if grip were taken out of the equation?
And jr
While I have you here a question for you:
can you accept that the RKC is a safe and effective method of training with a kettlebell and is a viable option for those who wish to use the tool for strength and conditioning?
jr,
absolutely, using the appropriate back position and breathing they can handle.Tracy does timed sets all the time,just usually not longer than 2min.
the longer the continuous set, though, the less overall intensity will be displayed per unit of time worked. that is just pure physicology and there is no way around that. You can't run as fast per mile for 18 minutes as you could if you broke that down into smaller work bouts.
but yes I can accept that.
given my background I much prefer higher intensity, higher force work.Just my nature and experience.
I would argue that trying to take the grip out of kb is precisely what GS is trying to do; limit the stress on the grip as much as possible with technqiue manipulations. Certainly not a bad thing for competition,but for stressing the grip as much as possible one would stay with hs swing style snatches and over the top techniques.
I was just using a hypothetical about truly taking the grip out of the equation to see your answer re snatch techique, which you did not answer.
can you answer that?IF grip wasnt the limiting factor do you think gs athletes would swing as 'soft' as they do now or more explosively?
and jr, I can smell the sarcasm growing. Is it getting hard to maintain this polite demeanor?
"Taking the grip out of..."
I think what Rif is referring to is the grip sparring techniques - when people drop bells during their training it is not due to fatigue in the calves. The grip connects you to the bell and is the last transition point for power from the hips and body to the KB - therefore it is the "weak link".
The gymnastics grips etc... are used to limit tearing and hand stress more than anything.
Grip is one of the more important factors and Rif is speaking (if I am correct) of the grip endurance to perform the one hand switch sets. (and as CI pointed out - there are multiple factors here but grip is one of the top ones).
Yes JR - timed sets in classical lifts are great but remember that the 10 minute time frame is a result of the rules of the sport - not because they are optimal. GS specific training is by its nature a form of SPP. But is a valid way to train - I have been saying this from the beginning.
BAD -
Your post comes off as pompous and with an air of superiority -
I do not mean this to start a pissing match - I am not into that but that is how your post comes across - did you realize that?
To the points in the post -
Yes I have considered all of those things and am well aware of what you can learn by enduring.
(Rif has competed in ultra-endurance running (50+ miles) and cycling - so he understands the concept of enduring as well)
I am also well versed in program design and understand the ideas of progression and variation of load and intensity. So informing me of how to begin using timed sets is a bit unnecessary.
And I am very familiar with the "Party line".
(the above is written with an air of pompousness so you do not need to "call" me on that - it is intended - I have 18 years experience in the strength and conditioning field between undergrad to now as both an athletic trainer and fitness professional so I feel confident in saying have studied this area a bit more than you have.)
And I am continually studying and experimenting with a wide variety of information and am willing to learn from anyone willing and able to teach.
I am also going to start implementing the VO2 Max work as suggested by Kenneth Jay so we can compare notes on that if you utilize it as well.
One last thing...
The assumption is that we train for the competitions the same pace we compete. This is incorrect and of course not everyone is going to compete.
Is there a pacing involved with someone who's goal is it to work for time? Yes, they start off slow to make sure they are performing the movements correctly. I'm sure you would agree that you wouldn't take someone just learning snatches and have them do VO2 training?
For training, it has not been uncommon for me to do 8 or 12 minute sets. Within those 8 or 12 minute sets "sprint" sessions of 14 reps in 30 seconds are not uncommon/followed by an overhead rest. If I do 200 in 8, you can assure my pace is not always even. The difference is the rest is not really a full rest because I still have the bell in hand.
Jerks...Jerks are really different. I've done 91 Jerks in 5 minutes with 2-12kg bells. Sprint/rest/Sprint rest. Same thing. The bells stay in the rack they don't touch the ground.
A LSD type workout for me is with the 16kg Jerks or LCC*J..30 minutes, switching hands every 5 minutes at a pace of <10 rpm.
I also do other things for conditioning. Try 500M rows and 50/50 Swings with a 24kg for 5 rounds...It feels good.
We work different energy systems too...But, a newbie will not sprint with snatches or Jerks until they can work for time (say 6 minutes). Then the varying pace comes into play. However, this doesn't mean that we don't advocate conditioning with swings/short rest periods ect, rowing and running.
CI
Jr,
its is not a straw man. In HS training because we are not focused on doing very long sets we can be as explosive as possible thereby creating an entirely different set of physiological adaptations than if we were limited by grip endurance.
the same could be true in deadlifting if the rules were such that a mixed grip or hook grip were not allowed.
One would have to be much less explosive in their lifting as the bar would be pulled out of the hands.This is what I was referring to.
GS form is dictated by the limitations of what the hand can hold onto for long periods.remove that limitation( shorter sets or the ssst) and more explosiveness can be demonstrated. thats all.
JR,
whether or not you set the bell down has everything to do with what you want to get out of your training. If you want to develop the specific endurnace to last ten minutes, or fifteen or whatever then that's what you have to train towards.
Every work bout has a time consideration to it which also has an energy system attatched to it which ALSO has fiber type attatched to it. CHange one and you change the other.
Training to go ten minutes when you need short term explosive power is silly as is training for short bouts when the goal is to maintain energy for long competitions.
This is what Brett is saying, the GS ten inute format IS SPP by it's very nature and has no more meaning to it other than it is a rule for a specific sport. Change it to five minutes or fifteen and different training is required to maximize that energy system
jr,,
you said
' I think it might be best for the general fitness enthusiast, too"
but this is based on what? your experience or the experience of others that have told you such? I am not saying it couldnt be beneficial but both Brett and I have trained numerous people, numerous hours per wekk for many years. I beleive I am more familiar with the needs and abilities of the average fitness enthusiast than you.
ANd I would love to see some of the data from the AKC documenting this fitness approach they have alluded to but have not detailed in any way, anywhere.
cate,,
so what are the general parameters and and principles that one uses to design programs using this methodology? and where does this knowledge come from?
jr,
you could easily contact Kenneth Jay to get the details of his Vo2 Max study and I am sure he can convince you of the validity of his research.
Of course, the AKC is in it's infancy one of the reasons their is ambiguity regarding what is done.
I'm not a trainer by trade; My Masters is in Comp Sci. But, I've been training for 22 years (since 14)...So, while not a pro, I've got time in the gym..under the bar and bells.
So, here is what I'm safe in saying
You've got to start slow to get the correct positioning down. Even holding the bell in the hands for time can be uncomfortable. Most of us have no problem going fast because we've always been able to stop/switch hands or switch exercises in a circuit. That's why you take a step back and go slow...it's hard.
Here is how I started. Valery (in 2005) asked me how many snatches I had done. I said 140. How long did it take? I said 6 min and some change. Ok..Do 6 minutes, but go 16rpm..Then build up to 8 then build up to 10 at this pace. Within 3 months...I was doing 180+ reps (May 2005). This was doing 3 snatch sets per week..everything else I did was barbell stuff (Jerks,Squats, ect)
Problem is, I didn't keep up this training in 2005, I switched and did others stuff because there was no meet.
Once I got to 10 and got comfortable there(next training cycle), then I messed around with speeding/tempo and hit 200.
I took a significant hit on my numbers when switching to the competition bells. So, I had to overcome that through 2006.
The point is that anyone can go fast..But, you have to condition yourself mentally to hold onto the weight for 10 minutes or however long you choose. This is where the progression comes in. Now, 10 minutes is something I can do in my sleep..So, I can speed/rest/speed because I know I can hang onto the bell.
Of course, 10 minutes is a competition time. Others may set goals of 6 minutes if they have no competition aspirations. Basically, if someone can demontrate the technique, then they can go as fast or slow as they want. I think people are truly benefiting from fact that they don't set the bells down...Breathing after sprinting through jerks is much harder with the bells in the rack than with them on the ground.
My work capacity in several areas is good and my strength has stayed up which tells me I'm not doing LSD for the most part. I can row a 5K in 23min, and row 500M in 1:45 (which is supposedly very good and would probably get me on the Concept 2 ranking chart).
Take Kelly Moore...She is an elite Crossfitter...(3X BW deadlift, 33 Dead Hang pullups..at age 44, you get the idea). She started off in December and had struggled going 4 minutes with one hand switch. She did 178 in 10 min last week, and did 135 Jerks in 10 (one arm). One would think that her Crossfit stuff would have suffered from this "endurance" training. It didn't. She had a kipping pullup PR of 62 and finally broke a 7 minute mile. My opinion is that while she may have not made any physical improvements (because well, they just aren't going to be huge), that she got a mental benefit from learning to hold onto the weight. Because even with here elite crossfit times on their standard workouts, you get to switch exercises and set the weight down. This of course is just my opinion.
In the end, I'm not sure most of this matters. What I've told people is that most people don't stick with anything long enough to get the benefits, and there is one thing for sure..This will not attract instant gratification types. Going slow and doing less reps than you know you can do fast (in the beginning) is a huge ego test.
BTW, Brett..Good luck with your powerlifting. I've been watching your training on your blog. Strong stuff.
BAD,
I can certainly agree to disagree (although all we are disagreeing on is the fact that you like the GS style training more than I do) as long as we do agree that both training methods are valid and appropriate when applied correctly.
The heart of the matter was people claiming that one approach was "wrong" and the other "right" - we can all train in the manner we deem best and have fun achieving our individual goals.
Again I respect GS and the training involved but I choose the RKC style as my predominate method.
Neither is "right" or "wrong" - different strokes for different folks.
And we can certainly coexist - peacefully even.
CI,
I can certainly appreciate the complexities and variables possible within the timed set protocols and respect GS training.
Also like to see the programs represented - thank you for sharing some of yours.
CI,
Thanks - the PL journey is loads of fun right now and I am very excited to get to this Oct. meet.
And - thank you for providing this last post - very good info. No doubt you will continue to do well with your GS training.
BAD,
you are correct the original system gave too much leeway and people wanted more guidelines. But also there were cultural differences not thought of in the beginning - like the fact that most Americans cannot squat rock bottom, have tight hip flexors, poor hip mobility and other americanized issues - so the program adapted to work people through these issues and then progress them into other areas.
A wise step in my opinion.
The program adapted to the needs of the people and continues to progress.
If I remember correctly some of the studies merely looked at groups of students at military or state schools divided into separate groups and trained on the Kbs or not - i could be wrong - my russian is non-existant so I am going off of what was written of the studies.
But as has been mentioned in other places - there is great variation within GS form so just because GS training was used it doesn't mean it was of one style. Could be either or neither of the ones being debated here.
I agree with your last paragraph and am willing to bury this at this point. And wish you luck in your training.
great info cate, thanks. but what do you see as the advantage for your 'regular' clients( non gs interested) as opposed to regular sets/reps?
sorry hit enter too fast. I dissagree that anyone can go fast. as most know, in sport speed is king( and queen) and NOT everyone has great speed. ask any powerlifter. but speed can be developednad improved upon, especially rate of force development.
also, going fast is one thing, being able to keep UP that speed and explosiveness as fatigue sets in is a totally nother ball game( ask a boxer in the 12th round).
so I would categorically disagree with that statement and beleive speed is a VERY important to train. Plus, speed, as you know from crossfit stuff, makes you want to puke,and pushing that back builds mental toughness in a different way.
jr,
remember that ETK has hi rep snatches swings three days per week as well as the low rep presses. Doing all out swings for 12 minutes aint no joke and nothing says you have to stop there either.
you seem to imply that ETK or the original RKC is the ONLY way RKC's are allowed or encourage to train. From reading everyone's logs you know that this is not the case. Pavel put together ETK because there was a demand for a method to take the complexity out of all the available variety that kb training can offer. It's NOT set in stone and no one would say that it is.
as far as why Pavel doesnt get involved in this stuff I know that he realizes that trying to argue with people that already have their minds set is a waste of time( I have more time than him :))
AS far as the scientific aspect the studies I beleive were not done on gireviks but soldier. I love scientifc data, but ALWAYS view it with a shadow of a doubt. Way too many variable for there to be an absolute truth for everyone for all time covering every possible variation.
So I rely on my experience, the data and my intuition.
Art is where science meets intuition.This is what I strive for, as well as mastery. Its a process and the more info the better but I dont' count on it being perfectly accurate.
Please remember that we (RKC) have never said gs is bad or wrong. Only the GS people have stated( over and over, in print) that RKC is 'not kb lifting', will hurt you and is the wrong way to lift a kb.
We have always made room for gs. It's their statements that we are misguided that keep this thing alive.
if they have a system for fitness that has as much success as ours( and anecdotal or not, hundreds if not thousands of testimonials as to its efficacy can't be wrong) well then, bring it out for all to see.
They are the ones with the passcode secret forum.
So again, we are the ones that had vf and gs presentations at OUR cert, will they have HS presentations at theirs?
ah, c'mon jr you can do better than that!
Rif,
As you know, you can't snatch or Jerk Slow. Yes, you can add speed to your snatches and swings, and we've discussed that. When I do my Jerks, I'm thinking..speed. Because the faster I am with my legs, the less of a chance my arms are in the equation. I get under the bells as fast as I can, and I lockout as fast as I can.
The people I advise do some timed sets and swings (what few I've got), but not really long. I've also attracted "older" guys. Guys with mileage and the stuff I'm teaching them is easy on them. We ease into stuff and they are doing quite well. They work for 4 minutes or 6 minutes. This is augmentation work for some of them. So, they run, they bike, they swing, ect.
If you are used to working unpaced, then going slower is difficult. I'm sure when Tracy did her timed set, going that slow was harder than if she just had a rep count and could do it as fast as she wanted..that's what I meant.
I've done 40 snatches in a minute with a 16. Of course the bell wasn't fixed overhead..so I'm fast enough. I"ve done 40/40 with a 24kg in < 4 minutes *without dedicated work with the 24kg.
I guess from my perspective..I'm fast enough/powerful enough as evidenced by my 500M row and 15+ jerks with a 32kg (each arm), tells me that I can move.
What I've said elsewhere...I won't boast that this training is going to shave time off someone's 40, or give them a boost on their vertical. It will improve their fitness/GPP and sure many things can do that. I've gotten decent results and maybe it is the stimulus that worked for me. But, for other sedentary people and people who carry a lot of stress/tension, they find it almost meditative at the end of a long day...kind of like a martial art. Could your training have that effect? Sure. Depends on the individual. Like I said in my prior post, it is about the individual and what will hook them You can make progress with a lot of different things provided you are consistent.
Yes, I've done Crossfit and metcon stuff. I like it (if I ever get tired of this, I will probably do more of it) and still do metcon for my conditioning for the sport.. It's speculative as to why she saw a small jump in her pullup numbers (She could do a lot before) with KB Sport numbers even though she had taken a small break from Crossfit. I suspect that the idea of "holding" onto something for time may have provided just enough of a stimulus that she could hang onto the bar for kipping pullups..or maintain just little faster pace on her run. The point is she realized these PRs after not working specifically on the exercises for a little while and doing primarily snatches, heavy jerks, and heavier swings.
Same thing with me..and rowing, or me and deadlifting, or pressing, ect. I can maintain pretty good fitness/strength levels with this training-add muscle/lose fat. That's really all I need. I have a feeling that there are others out there who would enjoy this, but readily admit..it's not for everyone.
Sorry if I didn't respond to all points..this thread is a little long and I'm a little tired.
Good luck to you in your training. I'm done on the topic just mainly because my focus is on my training and the energy I need for that.
CI
thanks cate, for coming over and sharing your thoughts. I think we're all done with this. for now at least,lol.'
the key thing is that we are training, and training with kettlebells. the how isnt' nearly as important as that we are. and helping others to discover it as well.
good night.
This has been a really interesting and informative thread, thanks people! There seems to be really a lot of ways to Rome :)
Post a Comment