begin to dig: fitness

Showing posts with label fitness. Show all posts

Friday, February 24, 2017

PLEASE - would you Help Me Help You Tune In Dial Up Shift Gears for your WELLTH SUCCESS

Follow @mcphoo How can i Help - i’m asking this all the time when engaging with folks who share they’re a bit tired or stressed, or they’re keen to start getting fit, i really want to help! i can HELP SO MUCH - trust me…). I mean, i KNOW - it’s my research ok - that we’re complex and that we can defeat our best plans if we try one practice and expect great results, and we don’t get them, because the other bits of our complexity don’t get tuned to support the new practice.

Like if you start lifting, how make it possible to make sure your rest and food and partying align with that new thing so you feel great rather than totally fatigued? so you burn fat rather than actually start to store more of it? and then feel frustrated because what you believe is supposed to work - stops working.

It’s a personal challenge to let folks have their process but also offer - in a trustful way - that i’m here if you’d like some feedback. I get a little eager.

Like just last night, i asked on twitter for pete’s sake when someone just said they’d successfully lifted some heavy stuff i aks - so what is your aspiration in doing this new thing?
And perhaps they’ll share what they hope to achieve - like they’re now lifting weights and they say it’s cuz they want to get leaner. Like lose weight really.

And i’m trying really hard not to jump up and down and go (in 145 characters)

that’s so great that’s super. Heh, what about your diet? You know you can’t outrun a donut, right? not that you’re eating donuts, but i mean working out is great, you’ll get stronger, help your bones all good - but if you really want to kill the fat, if that’s your aspiration, and you’re doing the strong thing, it’s really diet not exercise that’s the prime mover there - i mean do you want to dial that in. And heh, do you know how to do that? what are you doing? i know how to do that. You don’t really know me, but i’m insured, i’m certified, i help people, heh just talk with me, promise this is going to be great. C’mon - maybe what you’re doing is perfect, but maybe just a little tweak could make it exponentially better - like totally - you’ll be so amazed. Really: you’ll be able to test it yourself. It’s awesome.

Too intense?

And see i KNOW that it doesn’t matter about food, right away - moving is great. What's importnat is beginning to build self- efficacy. And hopefully not hurting yourself.

What i’m really trying to do is just flag up - well, you can start here if that sounds great, but if you want to have a chat about this WHOLE THING - rather than try to hack this space and DIY it, and maybe get it right; maybe not, a wee conversation could give you view of the horizon you could use to be aware of some more of the factors you could play with as well to get to your goals FASTER and having more FUN doing it and less risk of injury or frustration.

How say that? Or not? should i not try?

And ok the other thing is - how build trust? This person may never catch up with me about this - why should they? they don’t know me - but maybe they’ll have this conversation with someone else who has a wholistic view.

or not.

Oh it’s hard to shut up shut up shut up and not say oh wow can we talk about this? because i really really like to hear what people do, how they come to their decisions about what they’re doing, and how they support this.

And i like to say “you won’t believe how this really tiny thing can make this HUGE difference? want to know more? How you can test it for yourself?" Cus sometimes these little conversations help figure out that there may be some beliefs that aren’t helpful that are interupting making real gains towards the aspiration.

For instane, a colleague shared about her running, and i offered a tip about pacing she thought was really useful (practicing offer a little and shut up) so when i saw her again, we talked about her runs over the winter - how she wasn’t really cuz it’s wet and yucky out so she’s running up and down her one set of stairs at home. Fantastic. I ask if she’d like to look at something to complement that stair practice if she doesn’t feel like running. She says yes, sure (not sure if she’s just being polite).

So i ask has she ever thought about lifting heavy

stuff (i’m actually thinking about the power of swinging a kettlebell) - and she tells me, no she doesn’t want to bulk up. AND THERE IT IS: the huge belief about weights that keep women from protecting ourselves from osteoporosis. And that’s just the kind of belief so important to explore!

Because guess what? that lack of lifting heavy stuff, means lack of muscle, means lack of stress on the bones from having to support the muscle that is pulling load, means lack of need to have bone because we’re use it or lose it systems, means less tissue laid down, means a future likelihood of osteoporosis. Why don’t guys have as much incidence of osteoporosis? more muscle mass, more stress on bones, more need therefore to have bone, so more bone tissue, more resilience. Jeeze eh?

And as for bulky? What i wouldn’t give for some biceptual bulk! Ha. SO i share as well, it is SO SO hard for women to build mass.

not me

I actually finally say “do i look bulky?” NO! comes the reply Exactly AND I”m REALLY WORKING IT! (See? small white gal - lifts heavy - looks well not like x-fit champion to be sure).

Anyway, to get back to my point about this personal challenge.

I LOVE to talk with folks about how to help them TUNE IN what they’re already doing right now to better support their aspirations. To help them get their foot off the brake if it’s there - if they don’t even know or suspect their foot is on the break while hitting the gas. Or maybe how to shift gears to really pick up momentum - because things are revving really high but things aren’t changing. That ever happen? OR folks just don’t know things they’re doing could feel better, easier...

My challenge is i’d love to develop a way to engage with folks so that i could offer this kind of tune up without overwhelming that person and so it invites trust to explore - not making that person feel defensive - open the possiblity that’s inviting. That i’m keen to hear rather than prescribe; that anything i offer is testable to see how it works etc etc.

So if you connect with me and health or anything about performance comes up - first let me say so sorry if i get a little carried away - i’m working on it to pull back.

And second: as i’ve written about in detail before you really are doing everything you need to be doing for health - you move, you eat, you sleep, you talk with others, you seek to learn new things - all fantastic. What you may find helpful is some insight into how to tune what you’re doign already on those fundamentals to get to that resonant frequency with with these activities where they really just hum. When that dialing in occurs, you can build that resiliane, leanness, fitness, as effeciently and joyfully as possible.

So please pardon me - i’d love to learn about your health aspirations and if i can help you find your path more quickly more joy less chance of injury - at bottom, on my side, this is likely a joyful path for making contact with another human. Some people cook for others; i coach and research and design for health and wellbeing (“wellth”). Thanks for your patience.

Thanks for listening. Have a great fitness practice thing today, whatever you're doing. And heh - door's open...literally

Follow @begin2dig

Friday, November 19, 2010

And Speaking of Indian Clubs...Swords to Ploughshares and sticks to fishing poles - kali

Follow @mcphoo All this thinking and chatting about indian clubs and swinging things recently rather reminds me of a secret desire i have to be able to whack at "things" (you know? things!!) with sticks.

Rannoch Donald, Monk of the North of Simple Strength, shows how both can be accomplished by blending Thomas-esque style club swinging (as discussed yesterday) with Filipino Kali Sticks - and while i don't know the formal history of the sticks i understand that there's a fishing pole part to the history. How nice is that? If someone messes with your effort to get a meal for your family, what else ya gonna do?

Rannoch suggests looking at the similarities of the two movements. Cool, no?

These are but a few attractions of Edinburgh:

Rannoch's promise to show me how to use sticks (potentially to whack things), and good coffee (like black medicine, by the eScience center)

If you need more of an excuse to get to Edinburgh. There's also my fave suit shop, 21st Century Kilts (ask for Howie, and suggest mc from the south recommended you).

But also, Rannoch has a bunch of workshops in Edinburgh coming up. Please check them out here at Simple Strength. And while you're at it, perhaps consider Rannoch's amazingly elegant 100 Rep Challenge. Fitness can be easy, and Rannoch sweeps a clear path to get one there. Follow @begin2dig

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Kettlebell Swings: harder than Circuit Weight Traning; easier than Treadmill? How can this be?

Follow @mcphoo

There's a new study in English of Kettlebells that shows 12mins of two handed swings is tougher/harder than circuit weight training, but not as hard as treadmill work. That's probably a surprise for folks used to swinging kettlebells, and certainly how kettelbells have been promoted as an amazing, tough, cardio conditioning endurance tool, where more is more. What this great new study does, therefore, is help us ask some questions about studying kb's. It also gives us new ways to think about where kb work might be situated relative to other activities. So this post is a wee overview of one of the first english language, peer reviewed articles on Kettlebells.

There's not a lot of english-based research on the effects of using kettlebells. In the latest Journal of strength and Conditioning, though, there is a small paper looking specifically at a 12 min 2 handed swing protocol. The authors credit this protocol as "Dept of Energy Man Maker" described in Pavel Tsatsouline's Enter the kettlebell. Just a note, however: the protocol from what is in Enter the Kettlebell is a wee bit different than what these sudy authors use - it's looser. Here's Tsatsouline's description:

The Man Maker is a painfully simple workout that was devised and implemented at a federal agency’s academy by Green Beret vet Bill Cullen, RKC. Its template is simple: alternate sets of high-rep kettlebell drills—swings in our case—with a few hundred yards of jogging. Do your swings “to a comfortable stop” most of the time and all-out occasionally. Don’t run hard; jogging is a form of active recovery. Senior RKC Mike Mahler prefers the jump rope to jogging, another great option.

Indeed, the protocol is even less specific in Bill Cullen's founding eponymous article describing it.

Do 10 to 75 snatches with each arm depending on your ability level, be sure that you use good form, dig your toes in, and at the top of your snatch or swing hold for a second. Breathing is important, get a good rhythm going. Once done with your snatches jog -don’t run! - quarter of a mile, jogging lets your heart and body recover, if you are running fast it means you didn’t do enough repetitions with your KB.

Continue this routine for 2 miles or farther or till you leave a lung on the ground. This is a fat buster and a cardio gut check but the great thing is you can always make it harder or easier by tweaking the number of repetitions.

Note that the quantifier in Cullen's work is distance rather than time and number of snatches rather than time. The protocol tested in the study is, by contrast, more specific. It's 12 mins of 2 handed swings. Not sure where 12 mins came from, but the version run in the study is described in three different ways. First, the abstract describes it as "a kettlebell exercise routine consisting of as many 2-handed swings as could be completed in 12 minutes using a 16-kg kettlebell." I initially thought this meant "continuous" swings. But, in the article itself - thanks to Mike Reid, RKC for pointing this out, it is described as "Subjects performed 2-handed swings, in accordance with
the routine’s published description, for 12 minutes in duration." Er, and that would mean? Sets of high reps with jogging? No, because later it reads:

Subjects completed a 12-minute exercise bout, known as the ‘‘US Department of Energy Man-Maker’’ (ETK). The bout consisted of performing 2-handed swings, using a 16-kg kettlebell (Perform Better, Cranston, RI) for 12-minute duration. A 16-kg kettlebell was used in this study because that is a recommended weight for beginning men (ETK). Subjects were told to work at their own pace, resting as needed, while aiming to complete as many swings as possible in the 12-minute time frame. Heart rate was monitored continuously and recorded every minute of the bout.

Ok, so what is not the man maker is that (a) time is fixed at 12 mins (b) there is no active recovery, one is "working at their own pace" rather than, in Cullen's case of this routine being a "smoker" as hard as possible. I'd nay be inclined to call this the man maker, then. More "swing at your own pace, stopping as often as necessary, to get as many swings in as possible for 12 mins"

Standard benchmark tests for max heart rate and vo2 were taken; then during the actual kb trial, VO2 and HR levels were recorded throughout the 12 min swing set. The study looked at just this one kb experience. Results varied pretty wildly among participants (10 "active" men).

Subjects completed an average of 265 plus or minus 68 swings during the 12 minutes, for an average work rate of 22 plus or minus 6 swings per minute.

Ok, looking at the numbers, 12 mins of swings, does this sound like a man maker to anyone who's focused on a "smoker"? Just looking at myself, a wee 5'6", 60kg female, i do 100 swings for recovery during RTK with a 12 or 16 - i just checked with the 16 - it's 2 mins and a bit. So i'm mystified at how non-manmaker'ish (ie "smoker") this protocol must have been run.

Even given that "active men" were doing this, the results seem to have a heck of a standard deviation in such a small sample size, eh? I'm curious about how many times people stopped. Did the person with the lowest score only stop once? Did the best score recover frequently? That would be interesting to know.

Main results: during the kb effort, %HRmax was "significantly higher (p<0.001) than average VO2max. That's a bit of a surprise. One would usually expect that %HRmax would be strongly corelated to predicted VO2max. For instance, 85% MaxHR should connect with about 75% VO2max (see calculation here). In this small study of "active men" however,

The equation describing the regression line to predict %V̇o2max from %HRmax was %V̇o2max = 0.714%HRmax − 4.57, with a significant correlation of 0.58 and an SEE of 6.6%. Figure 2 illustrates the relationship between %V̇o2max and %HRmax.

That resulted in an 85% max heart with 65% V02max

What the results of the study mean
These results show that, at least according to the ACSM, the KB 12 min swing circuit rates as "hard". Second, the respiratory exchange ratio (RER) shows that the 12min effort means that this workout is high in "non-oxidative metabolism." That means that these 12 mins are not primarily fat burning minutes - calorie burning yes, but where many of those calories are coming from sources other than fat. But these results do suggest, that at least in this protocol, this is not a hugely stimulating protocol for enhancing Vo2max.

So again, i'd say that the way this protocol must have been run was out for a stroll with the 16, it still shows a pretty durn good effect, cardio wise.

Where does this KB workout Fit?
In terms of other similarly tested workouts - circuit weight training (see description of cwt here, mid port) and treadmill running, amazingly, it's higher than circuit weight training but lower than treadmill running.

lance armstrong: two handed kb swing

The authors recommend that this particular protocol is good for cardio training, but that coaches should be aware that the HR cost relative to the VO2 demainds. Treadmill work (where speed and incline are used to push on cardio work).

Moving Ahead
The intent of this study the authors say "was to document the heart rate (HR) response and oxygen cost of performing a kettlebell exercise routine that is intended to improve cardiorespiratory fitness." That's a rather general claim to make about investigating ONE protocol - one way - of working with a kb.

It's also a protocol used in ETK specifically, as "a smoker" as bill cullen called it and as a "man maker" as its name implies. That's pretty much an all out effort for miles not time and "until you leave a lung on the ground." That's not, it seems, how this study ran the protocol. That's ok; just don't call it a particular protocol if that's not the test you're running.

On the high side, it's great to see the formal research running assessments of KB protocols in a comparative, peer reviewed study. A recent American Council of Exercise test shows that kb's are just awesome for Vo2max training in particular - they effectively paid to have Kenneth Jay's protocol for VO2max replicated and tested, but without standard research protocols for running a comparative analysis, or having the protocol peer reviewed. Indeed, it's at the very least intriguing that the results in that article (shown in the image below) using the snatch got such different results than the swing - that's in 20mins, with 15 secs on, snatching, 15 secs off, as opposed to 12mins, swinging as many reps as possible non-stop.

Not saying there's anything wrong with these results - just that the benefit of the JSCR shorty gives us a way to situate a KB protocol relative to OTHER kinds of training, and the results are a wee bit of a surprise - we tend to think that all kb's all the time are the hardest ass whopping we can get. And, what seems to have been the case here, is that sure, if you're not swinging with intent to get smoked, you don't get smoking results.

But that's ok. Not all protocols, all the time. And that's actually a good thing. We need physiological variety. Now we're learning what kind of variety kb's can deliver - relative to other workouts.

Looking forward to more formal KB research, to learn more about this awesome fitness tool.

Related Resources

b2d KB article index
Review of KJ's Viking Warrior Conditioning (VO2max)
Cardio, VO2max, Kettlebells
Hill Workouts with Kettlebells
Respect the Fat - the role of fat in energy metabolism
6 mins a week workouts?

Citation

Farrar RE, Mayhew JL, & Koch AJ (2010). Oxygen cost of kettlebell swings. Journal of strength and conditioning research / National Strength & Conditioning Association, 24 (4), 1034-6 PMID: 20300022

Follow @begin2dig

Saturday, April 24, 2010

Hypertrophy: More sets are Better than 1, from Day 1

Follow @mcphoo

In strength training, research has looked at the question of "how many sets" to make a difference for strength - does it matter if we train with 1 set or multiple sets? Most research of late has put the strength question to bed: more sets = more strength. What is less known is the relationship of hypertrophy to strength development. Strength is about at least two things: neural adaptations - muscle firing patterns - to be able to lift stuff, and structural changes to be able to support these loads without tearing ourselves apart. The latter is generally known as hypertrophy. So an open research question has been: are the changes in real strength more about the neural side of the fence than the structural? According to work done to review a TON of studies that have ever bothered to measure hypertrophy along with strength, more seems to be better here, too. In other words, hypertrophy is playing a side-by-side roll in strength training. At least as far as we can tell from eligible studies. The juicy bits are highlighted.

This review is published in the April 2010 Journal of Srength and Conditioning Research. Here's the abstract:

Previous meta-analyses have compared the effects of single to multiple sets on strength, but analyses on muscle hypertrophy are lacking. The purpose of this study was to use multilevel meta-regression to compare the effects of single and multiple sets per exercise on muscle hypertrophy. The analysis comprised 55 effect sizes (ESs), nested within 19 treatment groups and 8 studies. Multiple sets were associated with a larger ES than a single set (difference = 0.10 +/- 0.04; confidence interval [CI]: 0.02, 0.19; p = 0.016). In a dose-response model, there was a trend for 2-3 sets per exercise to be associated with a greater ES than 1 set (difference = 0.09 +/- 0.05; CI: -0.02, 0.20; p = 0.09), and a trend for 4-6 sets per exercise to be associated with a greater ES than 1 set (difference = 0.20 +/- 0.11; CI: -0.04, 0.43; p = 0.096). Both of these trends were significant when considering permutation test p values (p < 0.01).

Mean hypertrophy effect size for single vs. multiple sets per exercise. Data are presented as means 6 SE. *Significant difference from 1 set per exercise (p <0.05).

There was no significant difference between 2-3 sets per exercise and 4-6 sets per exercise (difference = 0.10 +/- 0.10; CI: -0.09, 0.30; p = 0.29). There was a tendency for increasing ESs for an increasing number of sets (0.24 for 1 set, 0.34 for 2-3 sets, and 0.44 for 4-6 sets). Sensitivity analysis revealed no highly influential studies that affected the magnitude of the observed differences, but one study did slightly influence the level of significance and CI width. No evidence of publication bias was observed. In conclusion, multiple sets are associated with 40% greater hypertrophy-related ESs than 1 set, in both trained and untrained subjects.

Correlation of Hypertrophy with Strength. To get into the detail a little further, after the results are presented of comparing the various studies' methods, muscles, participants and periods of study, the author states:

In a previous meta-analysis on strength using an identical statistical model, a 46% greater ES was observed for multiple sets compared with single sets (²³) (Figure 3). A 40% greater ES was observed in this study. This indicates that the greater strength gains observed with multiple sets are in part because of greater muscle hypertrophy.

This is a nice finding: hypertrophy - structural changes in muscle - seems to go hand in hand with strength, and right from the start of training. This is interesting in no small part because changes in measurable muscle size seem to lag behind measurable differences in strength.

It is known that mechanical loading stimulates protein synthesis in skeletal muscle (³⁹), and increasing loads result in greater responses until a plateau is reached (²⁴). It is likely that protein synthesis responds in a similar manner to the number of sets (i.e., an increasing response as the number of sets are increased, until a plateau is reached), although there is no research examining this. The results of this study support this hypothesis; there was a trend for an increasing ES for an increasing number of sets. The response appeared to start to level off around 4-6 sets, as the difference between 2-3 sets and 4-6 sets was smaller than the difference between 1 set and 2-3 sets (figure 4)

Figure 4

Dose-response effect of set volume on strength from Krieger (23). Note similarity to dose-response effect for hypertrophy in Figure 2. Data are presented as means ± SE. ES = effect size. *Significantly different from 1 set per exercise (p < 0.001).

The key bony bit of the result above is that some of us (i count myself in here) may need to change our thinking about the role of hypertrophy especially in the early phases of training with untrained participants. Now, that finding does not mean that noticeable mass gains are happening from day one, but it would mean that structural adaptations are happening way sooner in the process than has been pretty much taken as given for some time. For instance:

It has been proposed that the majority of initial strength gains in untrained subjects are because of neural adaptations rather than hypertrophy (²⁸). The results of this analysis suggest that some of the initial strength gains are because of hypertrophy. Given the insensitivity and variability of hypertrophy measurements, it is likely that hypertrophy occurs in untrained subjects but is difficult to detect. This is supported by research that shows increases in protein synthesis in response to resistance training in untrained subjects (²⁴). Recent evidence also shows measurable hypertrophy after only 3 weeks of resistance exercise (³⁸).

What the studies do not discriminate about is whether these hypertrophic adaptations are more myofibrial or sarcoplasmic. And that rather makes sense as the main consideration has been (1) strength and (2) simply whether or not hypertrophy is more or less corelevant with the development of neural adaptations that lead to strength.

Practical Application

A super attribute of the JSCR articles is their "practical application" section - what can someone do with these results. The first application Krieger suggests is to get behind the awareness that hypertrophy increases from day one from more sets. In other words the number of sets does make a difference whether a beginner or not. Cool. Move it move it:

Multiple sets per exercise were associated with significantly greater changes in muscle size than a single set per exercise during a resistance exercise program. Specifically, hypertrophy-related ESs were 40% greater with multiple sets compared with single sets. This was true regardless of subject training status or training program duration.

The second point is that those multiple sets make a statistically significant difference in terms of the amount of hypertrophy. More is more (at least up to 4-6 sets) for strength and structural development.

There was a trend for an increasing hypertrophic response to an increasing number of sets. Thus, individuals interested in achieving maximal hypertrophy should do a minimum of 2-3 sets per exercise. It is possible that 4-6 sets could give an even greater response, but the small number of studies incorporating volumes of ≥4 sets limits the statistical power and the ability to form any definitive conclusions. If time is a limiting factor, then single sets can produce hypertrophy, but improvements may not be optimal.

So while 1 set is certainly not useless, it mayn't be optimal (where that means before we hit a plateau). What remains to be done, according to Krieger, is to figure out that optimal set range:

More research is necessary to compare the effects of 2-3 sets per exercise to ≥4 sets. Future research should also focus on the effects of resistance training volume on protein synthesis and other cellular and molecular changes that may impact hypertrophy.

Practical Awareness

For beginners interested in doing more sets, excellent. What to watch out for: fatigue. Stay fresh. Might be a grand idea to make sure to get a program that waves the volume so that there's ample recovery. Without that recovery, growth in strength/hypertrophy does seem to get retarded pretty fast.

For more experienced trainees, from what i hear among the folks i work with is: want to get bigger? lift more. More sets. more reps. more more more. The question this article nicely raises is what's an optimal more? Will be interesting to see if, when and how this question is formally explored in the future.

Related Links:

What is the Pump, really? Do we know?
Get Huge or Die?
Occlusion training
Supplement Curmudgeon: Does this stuff work?
b2d General Fitness Articles

Citation:

Krieger JW (2010). Single vs. multiple sets of resistance exercise for muscle hypertrophy: a meta-analysis. Journal of strength and conditioning research / National Strength & Conditioning Association, 24 (4), 1150-9 PMID: 20300012

Follow @begin2dig

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Ankle Sprains: Tape, Bracing - doesn't matter finds research - but how'd we get so busted up in the first place?

Follow @mcphoo

A recent paper has presented the results of a bunch of trials looking at interventions for ankle sprains. Main result? if someone's had an ankle injury - like a sprain - then tape or brace doesn't seem to show a difference: both seem to cut down reinjury. What's troublesome on a metalevel, is first how sort of accepted the notion of this level of injury seems to be, and second how nascent in the approach described here is the model that for folks who haven't been injured - as a preventitive - they maybe should be immobilised too. Aren't there other questions to ask - perhaps especially about the injury free staying injury free - rather than whether incapacitating natural function is a Good Idea? But perhaps more fundamentally, how did we get to this point where someone is so beaten up their joints are written off as so dysfunctional they must be immobilized to perform?

Here's the abstract:

Epidemiological studies have shown that 10–28% of all sports injuries are ankle sprains, leading to the longest absence from athletic activity compared to other types of injuries. This study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of external ankle supports in the prevention of inversion ankle sprains and identify which type of ankle support was superior to the other. A search strategy was developed, using the keywords, ankle supports, ankle brace, ankle tapes, ankle sprains and athletes, to identify available literature in the databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, etc.), libraries and unpublished papers. Trials which consider adolescents and adults, elite and recreational players as participants were the study of choice. External ankle supports comprise ankle tape, brace or orthosis applied to the ankle to prevent ankle sprains. The main outcome measures were frequency of ankle sprains. Two reviewers assessed the quality of the studies included using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI Appraisal tool). Whenever possible, results were statistically pooled and interpreted. A total of seven trials were finally included in this study. The studies included were of moderate quality, with blinding as the hardest criteria to fulfill. The main significant finding was the reduction of ankle sprain by 69% (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.18–0.51) with the use of ankle brace and reduction of ankle sprain by 71% (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.14–0.57) with the use of ankle tape among previously injured athletes. No type of ankle support was found to be superior than the other.

This is when it's nice to have the whole article, because you'd think it just stops there, right? For previously injured, folks who were taped didn't seem to get reinjured. How does one predict the future like that? Well that's the toughie: only one study had a control group - so did they just get reinjured that many more times than the athletes who braced? No, it's of the populations taped or braced, how many did NOT have a recurrence in a given period.

So what's going on here that this is even considered a useful strategy?

Apparently, there's a lot of functional instability, mechanical and proprioceptive factors are also considered in some of the studies to be impaired. Mechanical instability (lax joint) can be a cause of functional instability. These effects build up from - you guessed it - repeated ankle injuries. Where reflexes get slower, joints can get hypermobile, funtional loss of static and dynamic support of the joint has gone way down. Effectively, the ankle for a potential variety of reasons, is so beaten up and abused, it can no long function as an ankle, so, a greater degree of immobility is preferable to too much.

Um. what happened that a person gets to this point of so MANY repeated injuries they're beyond the pale of recovering normal function? Ah right: this is sport, not health.

Intriguingly, there's a claim that some bracing helps proprioception:

"they restrict range of motion to a certain degree and enhance proprioception of the injured ankle making them more useful in the prevention of possible re-injury."

Wow, that's wild. How does that work? And can that awareness be re-trained rather than delivered only through a device? Where's it coming from? But there's not a lot of interest in the article in looking at say other strategies like rehab, movement assessment. Why not? There's a model here that says once injured, you're toasted:

As mentioned earlier in the discussion, after a sprain, structural damage occurs to the ligamentous tissues, nervous and musculo- tendinous units in the ankle joint. Functional and mechanical instability arise. For these reasons, the risk of injury to a pre- viously injured ankle is increased. his is the point where external ankle supports play an important role.

And that may have informed the authors' decision simply to look at what type of bracing is better to reduce re-injury, rather than to wonder if

training that can find movement or other sensory-motor issues that may be related to WHY a person roles their ankles
investigation of the stupid shoes that may be killing proprioception necessary to reduce ankle sprains
anything else that may help the athlete perform with less likelihood of injury, better performance

What's kinda scary is a one line toss off in the conclusion:

This review provides good evidence for the use either ankle taping or ankle braces to prevent lateral ankle sprains among previously injured players. However, for those with- out previous ankle injuries this still needs to be proven. There is no evidence on which external ankle support is better than the other. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages.

You see it? These folks with this model of the weakness of the ankle - where "10-28%" of all athletic injuries occur - are already thinking MAYBE - we don't know yet - but maybe if we just brace the ankle up from the get go, we'll keep more ankles from being sprained.

There are alternatives approaches: perhaps we should ask, as indicated, what's causing these injuries in the first place? Is it a skills-on-the-field problem? turning skills? cognitive processing for field awareness skills? Is it lack of ankle flexion or hip/pelvis restrictions? Is it a sensory-motor disconnect with shoes or other gear killing proprioceptive awareness of foot placement?

Folks like Gray Cook working with NFL football teams have been looking at athletic mobility/stability. Eric Cobb has been looking more at sensory-motor approaches, and cognitive stress for field performance that's more effective and injury free.

Any solution assumes a model for which that solution is appropriate. The solutions proposed by these authors seems to presuppose a model where (a) the amount of reinjury that leads to such horrible dysfunction is taken as a given and seems to be ok such that (b) further bodily immobilization seems like a good idea to enable athletic movement seems problematic to me on a number of levels.

Strategies to understand why the injuries are so high in the first place - never mind acceptable - seems to be a more humane way to begin strategizing about enabling athltetes to play ball, no?

Related Posts

b2d movement/mobility article index

Citation
Dizon, J., & Reyes, J. (2010). A systematic review on the effectiveness of external ankle supports in the prevention of inversion ankle sprains among elite and recreational players Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 13 (3), 309-317 DOI: 10.1016/j.jsams.2009.05.002 Follow @begin2dig

Friday, April 16, 2010

Getting Deeper about Sleep: Towards the Perfect Sleep Rep - even for parents and caffeine adicts

Follow @mcphoo This is the second part of my interview with sleepologist Stephan Fabregas of Zeo, the folks who make the device that lets us visualize our sleep patterns. As we heard in part 1, good sleep has various stages from waking, to light, to REM to Deep - and that we cycle through these stages over the course of a night. How many and how well we achieve these states seems to have a lot to do with how well rested we feel. In this part we talk a bit more about the Zeo itself, about caffeine and its effects on Deep Sleep (not good), about sleep coordination with physical benefits and a wee jag about help for kids and parents in getting better zzz's.

Welcome back, Stephan. The zeo is a pretty unique device on the market. Some devices more or less just track movement in bed to get a sense of sleepfulness. The Zeo is going right for the action in the frontal lobe of the brain. It's also a very nice alarm clock, with a very pro web site, and associated coaching. None of that - especially getting hardware designed, produced and out the door, with all the TON of support material that's in the box and on the site, is a trivial undertaking. So someone believes in Zeo in a Big Way. What's the Zeo story?

Zeo, formerly Axon Labs, was founded by some sleep deprived Brown University students back in 2004 with the idea of helping people wake up at the right time to minimize the effects of sleep inertia (that grogginess you feel right when you wake up). However, when they built a technology that could help people track their sleep and unlock that mystery for the first time for the average person, they realized there was more power than just waking up a little easier. Bring in world-class Scientific and Executive Boards and Zeo has developed the first scientifically-based personalized sleep coaching system. I joined the company full time about 3 years ago after having helped out a bit in the past. I've known two of the co-founders, Jason Donahue and Eric Shashoua, since we were freshmen. In fact, Eric and I were roommates and lived right across the hall from Jason.

Seems to me there's a great business case study here. Very cool to get that the company has been working so long on this. Makes sense now that everything looks so well-considered in the package. I'll come back to that in a review of the myZeo experience. In the interim, let's come back to the ues of the Zeo to help with sleep.

The device tracks brain waves from the frontal lobe and translates these into representations of sleep state (nicely described in this blog post by Zeo scientist Ben Rubin) - very cool.

Despite this rather amazing technology, a person might be tempted to ask, however, why fork out $250 on a device rather than just follow some tips for getting a better sleep, and just sleep better?

Here goes: The first reaction tends to focus on the ability to track something that you've never really been able to track before. You have an idea of when you get to bed and when you wake up, but you never write it down. And even if you did... people's reports of how they sleep and how they actually sleep don't line up very well. Self-reports of sleep are very subjective - and tend to reflect how a person feels more than how they actually slept. Zeo provides an easy tool to give you accurate information, and allows you to aggregate that information and look back over time. How was your sleep affected by the daylight saving switch (for the sake of argument, since you didn't have to deal with that in the UK)? It's hard to remember what's happened with your sleep in the past without a reliable record. But that's not all...

Beyond being able to track your sleep, Zeo is about empowerment. Track your sleep, learn about your sleep, make changes in your lifestyle to find better ways to sleep. There's a lot of value in learning about the cause and effect patterns around sleep, and being able to actually connect those things to your daily life. Reading a book will provide a lot of good information, but behavior change is more likely when you can connect the science to your own life. I knew about sleep before I had a Zeo. Now I know about MY sleep, with a Zeo. It has made that daily connections relevant to me. I only drink caffeine when I need it - if I have to stay up late, if I have to be alert and ready for an early meeting.

I think twice about doing a heavy meal before bed, even if I'm really hungry. I know that a nap is a great idea, but not too late and not too long. It's like there's now a level of accountability when it comes to my sleep, because I have to report to my Zeo every night. And that's produced good results for me.

Oh dear. You've mentioned caffeine. And not in a good way. And that's already distressing me. So before we get into that, you also talk about these kinds of habits you're developing around sleep behaviour. Is sleep a skill?

I'm not sure it's about skill as much as control. One can't really become a marathon sleeper (sleep for 16 hours a night with 3 hours of deep sleep) with the right regimented training program, just through practice. But one can learn how to make sure their sleep is natural and under their control. The best thing about sleep is that once it's under your control, it can become very a very passive process. The body will dictate how much it needs and when. That's when sleep is a real pleasure and a relief.

Alright then, as part of getting sleep under control, what's the story with caffeine and sleep?

Caffeine can really muck with sleep. Taken too close to bedtime, it can make it more difficult to fall asleep. It's also been shown to affect deep sleep. As a matter of fact, some studies have shown that caffeine intake up to 16 hours in advance of going to bed can have an effect on deep sleep. And if you're tired at 3 in the afternoon, a 15min nap has been shown to get you going again better than a cup of coffee. I could dig up some of that research if you like.

That's a good segue to some Zeo research. One study that was just completed (by Chris Drake and co. at Henry Ford in Detroit) looked at the effects of different caffeine doses at different timings before bed. Another study (from the same folks) looked at the creative and cognitive benefits of sleep extension in people who habitually get little sleep (on purpose). We also did a study in the fall that looked at the habitual sleep of college students at Cornell. The short of that - they don't think they sleep very much, and they sleep less than they think. We also have a couple reports looking at the effects of daylight saving changes, weekend vs weekday sleep, and sleep across age and gender. Reports from all these studies have been accepted as abstracts at either/both of APSS 2010 (in June) and ESRS 2010 (in September). And I'm happy to provide more details once those reports are publically available. :) We also have preliminary validation results for Zeo's technology available on our website (abstracts presented at APSS and ESRS in the past).

[That said] caffeine's not all bad. It can be really handy in a pinch, because life happens and you just need to stay awake sometimes. (And I'm sure you're aware that caffeine increases physical ability in addition to just keeping you awake.) However, it's not all good, either, and getting more sleep is probably a much better idea in the long run.

In sum, what is the effect of caffeine on sleep?

It reduces the sleep drive, making it harder to fall asleep, and reducing the depth and amount of deep sleep:

1. Landolt, H., Rétey, J. V., Tönz, K., Gottselig, J. M., Khatami, R., Buckelmüller, I., et al. (2004). Caffeine attenuates waking and sleep electroencephalographic markers of sleep homeostasis in humans. Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 29(10), 1933-9.

It also has an effect on deep sleep well after you'd expect it to be out of the blood stream:
2. Landolt, H., Werth, E., Borbély, A. a., & Dijk, D. (1995). Caffeine intake (200 mg) in the morning affects human sleep and EEG power spectra at night. Brain research, 675(1-2), 67-74.

And a quick insight into how caffeine and alcohol combined can really make sleep tough:
3. Stradling, J. R. (1993). Recreational Drugs and Sleep. BMJ, 306, 573-575.

There is also that study I mentioned coming out of Henry Ford in Michigan. Those data have not been published yet, so I can't go into specifics, but I can say they definitely confirm previous work that has shown caffeine to affect sleep.

Well that's i guess great news: a potentially way to improve sleep is to cut out caffeine. Great. Dandy. Let's shift gears a bit. Since discussing sleep with some colleagues, i've had a few questions.
Here goes. Mike T Nelson asks:

1) what phase of sleep is most beneficial for what type of training. I believe there are some data to show that REM is best for motor acquisition of new tasks. What is best for tissue recovery, etc
2) Can we push our body into one of these phases for a longer period of time?

Stephan?

Different sleep phases have been indeed associated with different kinds of functioning. For instance, REM sleep is associated with procedural and motor memory tasks. Deep sleep has been associated with declarative memory tasks and is the phase of sleep when the most Human Growth Hormone is released into the body. A lot of cognitive tasks, however, are very specific, and these associations are tougher to solidify in more real-world scenarios.

As for "pushing" the body into these phases. I don't know of any meaningful, natural way to do so (other than what appear to be purely homeostatic responses - doing a very difficult and new-to-you fine-motor task for hours a day may boost the amount of REM sleep you get, but that may not be providing overall general benefits, it could just be a response to the hours you spent doing that task). And I'm not sure what the costs/benefits of such an effect would be, were you to artificially boost one phase or another.

Interesting. Many of us are so keen on tweaking parameters of this that or the other thing, that we might miss simply achieving these sleep states well and naturally, never mind pushin them, may be the best thing we can do for ourselves. Cool. I do not think i have optimize normal good sleep yet. That caffeine thing will be a bear.

And with respect to optimization, here's perhaps one of the most popular push backs and questions around sleep, and it's about kids and parents - at least one of whom has expressed to me that the vision of being able to get a great sleep - to plan for such a thing - with children in the picture is "ridiculous." Any thoughts for the sleep-deprived parents in the house?

Parenting is certainly tough on sleep - but it's not the end of sleep. There are some things that might help. First, for the very young, it's going to be a struggle to get solid sleep. However, working out a system with a partner to take shifts could help distribute the effort. As kids get older and they're sleep consolidates (they're sleeping through the night) it can also help a lot to set a very specific schedule regarding sleep and waking (this is bedtime, and this is when's it's okay to leave your room in the morning, etc). That kind of consistency can be helpful to everyone. Also, communicate with children to set ground rules.

I'm not saying it's easy, but it's not impossible. For more info on dealing with children and sleep, sleep scientists Jodi Mindell and Judy Owens have put together a couple books on the topic. "Take Charge of Your Child's Sleep: The All-in-One Resource for Solving Sleep Problems in Kids and Teens", by Judy and Jodi, and "Sleeping Through the Night, Revised Edition: How Infants, Toddlers, and Their Parents Can Get a Good Night's Sleep" by Jodi.

Excellent. Thank you for the references Stephan. Will look forward to the comments on this post.

Part III of this sleep discussion will be a review of the zeo/myzeo sleep coach in use. That's about a month away.

Related Posts

Part 1 of this interview, Seeing Sleep.
Sleep - should be the new fitness craze
Carrot Cake and the Perfect Sleep
Carbs or Protein before bed for Better Sleep?
Caffeine and Athletic Performance (can use less than you think)
b2d Fitness Article Index

begin2dig (b2d) on Facebook

Follow @begin2dig

Friday, March 26, 2010

Windmill/Press 100's - volume that works ya.

Follow @mcphoo Ever have what you think will be a wee workout take you by surprise? That's what happened to me with a humble combo of see saw presses and windmills. 10 walking see saw presses with my light kb's, followed by 10 windmills each side, without letting go of the bells, or pausing but to swap sides on the windmills. To be clear:

1 set of ten, walking see-saw presses
1 set of ten, windmills with both bells one side
1 set of ten, windmills, with both bells, other side
put the bells down
shake it off
breath
repeat 10 times

Just to clarify what windmills, with both bells means: one bell is up and pressed, the other is down with hand reaching for the ground to be really explicit:

from the see-saw, both bells, back to the rack
one arm avec one bell is extended down
the other presses up
align feet for windmill in opposite direction of up arm as per usual
kick out hip in the up arm direction
descend until bottom of bell of lowered arm makes contact with ground
c'mon back up to standing
go on back down.
for me ten times was my happy place.
after ten, bring bells to the rack,
swap sides for windmilling to the opposite side
do the ten for that side
after ten come back to the rack
from rack, park the bells
shake it out, recovery, rinse, repeat

the photo on the right is for illustration purposes only:
get that hip back, mike, lock out that pressing elbow

Windmill Fever. I have not done this many consecutive windmills before, and i don't think i've done this many sea-saws before (i'm not sure there were this many in the 2008 grad workout). And i felt this - a sense of having really worked my shoulders, moved my hips and adductors, and, why is this a surprise but it is, my obliques.

And i feel a wee bit cooked. Neural motor adaptations is a wonderful thing.

You may wonder why this particular combination?

One of the cool things about going to various events in one's space is meeting folks. At the RKC II i was surprised to see Dan John whom i'd not met before. We got talking about my quest to press the beast

, and his advice was to press. A lot. Indeed, his view is that gals need to press more to press big. One of his suggestions was mixing up windmills with sea-saws for one of the press days. I'm not sure if the above is what he had in mind, but it feels pretty good.

Light Bells Rejuvenated. So if anyone thinks their light bells have run out of gas, i'd suggest giving a highish volume workout like this a go. Especially the windmills in volume - who'd have thought?

And as part of that beast challenge quest, i've been mixing in pistols and pull ups - lots of each, even if high volume means box pistols (barely touch down) and band assisted pull ups to get my 50-100 in.

Reminder, too, RKC Master Trainer Andrea du Cane (shown left with model form) of the Kettlebell Goddess workout & ruler of the Windmill, will be in Southampton, UK June 6 to lead the first UK HKC kettlebell certification (more info here)
Hope to see ya there. Follow @begin2dig

Friday, March 19, 2010

Michael Castrogiovanni Interview: The Innovative Fine Art & Sport of Kettlebell Partner Tossing

Follow @mcphoo For many folks, playing catch is a fun activity - get a little exercise, exercise a little skill to catch a ball while moving or to adapt to a crappy pitch or to pitch well for a great catch. Usually the implements of such game play are at most a few ounces (a few hundred grams). Now imagine taking this game up a notch and playing catch tossing 12kg (26lb) to 32kg (70lbs) or more via an iron ball that has a handle on it.

This particular form of catch is an evolution in Micahel Castrogiovanni's kettlebell practice, developed with his colleages RKC TL Jeremy Layport and RKC Blair Ferguson. It's called Kettlebell Partner Tossing, previewed half a dozen posts ago here at begin2dig. The video above is from Michael's forthcoming DVD on progressions to develop the skills for these out-of-the-sagital-plane movements few of us working out with kb's have ever tried.

I got to see this tossing live (way more incredible and very "beautiful strength"y than even the video conveys) and found it so compelling, i asked Michael if he'd do an interview about his own background in athletics, how he came to kettlebells, how the heck KB Partner Tossing came about and fits into his practice. Michael kindly agreed, and beyond those points, we also discuss some thoughts on who else might consider adding Tossing kb's to their athletic regimen.

Historical Note - it may well be that strongmen (and maybe stronggals) of yore partner kb tossed. You know, it's bound to happen: have a kettlebell; a couple strong people. Eventually, it has to come up "heh let's throw that at each other " (thanks ltd for that '30's link).
The ever vigilant Randy Hauer sent me a link to a demo of Ukraniane KB partner tossing hence me calling Michael an Innovator, rather than an Inventor. What i saw with Michael and Jeremy was not as formalized as the ukranine precision tossing, used heavy kb's, and seems to have the potential to evolve into a sport (my assessment; Michael makes no such claims). It seems to me that by doing a How To DVD on this practice, Michael is making an effort to enable others to gain access to this practice. All good. Here's to you experiencing delight and joy in this practice, too.

Background: In what's known as the hard style kettlebell community Michael is a quiet but potent presence. For context, he is the co-author with Brett Jones of the well regarded Kettlebbell Basics for Strength Coaches and Personal Trainers. We'll come back to this one.

Michael also has a Bachelors degree in Kinesiology with an emphasis in Fitness Nutrition and Health, his certifications include NSCA Certified Strength and Conditioning Specialist; he is an RKC team leader. Michael's training has seen him working with business executives, the Orange County fire authority, high school football teams, and Hermits at a monastery to name just a few. More bio details are available at Michael's Facebook page.

Interview Proper
Have you always been an athletic guy? If yes, what's the path been? if not, what's the path been?

I have always been involved in athletics and it has taken me many years of practice and dedicated training to develop my athletic abilities. I view athleticism as a lifelong pursuit and it is something I am continually working towards improving. I played soccer, basketball and football as a youngster. When I turned 14 I asked Mark Reifkind (the owner of the World Gym at the time and current Master RKC) if I could work out at his facilities. Unfortunately the age requirement was 16. After begging and pleading he told me I needed a note from my mom and dad with their permission to work out. My parents felt it was a good idea so I started at the World Gym shortly thereafter. In high school I played football, tennis and wrestled. I continued wrestling on club teams in college and I furthered my pursuit of athleticism in the weight room and in the class room. After college I spent as much time as possible with leaders in the industry honing my skills, learning as much as I could from as many people as possible.

it sounds like you may have moved progressively away from sports to more strength based training. Is that the case or is something else happening here?

I have been doing strength based training with weights since I was 14 to supplement my sports performance. As I am getting older I am participating less in competitive sports and have moved more towards the strength training, yes. I also do quite a bit of work for my hand eye coordination, overall coordination and agility as well in order to keep things well rounded and balanced. My intention is to increase athleticism and my ability to move optimally and restriction free in all ways, anything that will improve these abilities gets incorporated into my training.

Your early DVD on KB coaching with Brett Jones- it took me ages to connect
the guy with the beard is you! you taught me how to push press a kettlebell, dude! that's a great video. Would you care to discuss a bit more about how that dvd came about since it's become such a reference set?

Sure. The KB basics DVD came from my 2004 presentation on kettlebells at the NSCA national conference. I had made contact with the NSCA and they invited me to do a presentation on kettlebells in Minnesota of all places. I contacted John Du Cane of Dragondoor publications and told him of the business opportunity and he got on board.

Shortly after I spoke with John, Brett Jones senior RKC and a fellow CSCS sent me an e-mail asking to be a part of the presentation, and that he would help in any capacity that he could. So I decided that it would be a good idea for him to demonstrate the Kettlebell movements. The presentation was a huge success and we received positive feedback for our performance and our chemistry. Pavel, who was also at the conference, remarked at how well we worked together and told us that we should do a DVD. We agreed and worked for the next several months building the outline. We shot the DVD in early 2005 had it edited and on the market by late June of 2005 and the rest is history.

at the point of doing this video, what was your main training? how did it come about?

At the point of filming I had just left the monastery where I had been living for the previous six months. While I was there my training consisted of all things kettlebells, squats, deadlifts, pull-ups and yoga. When I wasn’t working out I was splitting wood, climbing trees, lifting rocks, mountain biking and hiking.

The way that it came about is actually quite cool. I brought my bells up to the monastery and they had some very basic weights in their gym. I worked ninety percent with kettlebells and ten percent or sometimes less with more conventional types of training. My style of training was dictated by what I had available to me and how creative I could be. It is one of the fondest memories I have of training even thought the equipment was minimal.

SO before we get to that one, how did you come to KB's?

Interestingly enough the same man who opened his gym doors to me when I was 14 would introduce Kettlebells to me 9 years later. Mark Reifkind had been telling me about this strength and conditioning tool called a "kettlebell" for several months. Finally one afternoon in his garage he showed me the swing, clean and snatch. After the initial lesson, he ran me through a quick circuit with the kettlebells that left me mindboggled and out of breath! From that moment I knew my training would be changing for the better.

That's cool. What was your practice at this time? still sports focused? strength focused? or did you just trying to get a sense of what you mean your training would get better?

There was still sport focus but it was beginning to taper quite a bit. I had sustained a wrestling injury so my competitive days had come to a standstill. I was predominately focused on rehabilitating myself and getting as strong and healthy as I could. When the kettlebell was introduced to me I realized that my training was going to get better in the sense of more interesting, more creative and in a way a totally different paradigm of training. I moved away from many of the lifts I was doing with the intention of immersing myself in the kettlebell.

How did strength become important to you?

The first response that comes to mind is that I wanted to be as strong as possible so that when I wrestled I could man handle my opponents. If I look deeper, a more honest answer is that strength became important to me because of my desire to not feel weakness or vulnerability and the insecurity that accompanies the two. I guess you could say fear of being week or vulnerable was where it all started-compensation based if you will. I used my apparent strength to feel better about the areas where I was not strong. Later in my strength training career I learned that the very thing I was aiming to avoid, vulnerability, was the key to finding real strength. To be willing to be vulnerable and face weakness is where authentic strength is spawned. The willingness to make mistakes, to fail and to not be perfect is true strength training. This is my ongoing practice and by no means I am a master yet. However, now I know that vulnerability is not something to fear. Rather, it is an ally to be embraced, accepted and learned from.

Sounds like you've had at least one experience - perhaps that was not in the strength space - that led you to this discovery about the vulnerability/strength tao. if you care to share a bit more about that, that could be cool.

The experience that comes to mind is a wrestling injury. I was in tip top shape wrestling five to six days a week going to school full time, teaching grade school P.E. part time and studying some martial arts. My plate was full, my speed was full throttle, and my definition of who I was came from all the physical demands that I placed on myself. I felt invincible, powerful, fully alive and completely identified with my body. At wrestling practice the week before league finals I made a poor choice to wrestle with a novice. I took a sloppy shot, he dove at me, my face met the crown of his head and he knocked me out. I awoke on my back with blood in my throat and no feeling in my legs. I freaked out and began to pray.

Slowly I felt sensation come back to my body. Dazed, I sat up; stabilizing my neck with my hands I went to the bathroom and packed my nose with toilet paper. I had a friend drive me to the gas station to buy a big bag of ice for my neck. She wanted me to go to the emergency room and I insisted I would be fine. I had a test the next morning and couldn’t afford to wait in the ER. She took me back to my house and I passed out for the night. The next morning I knew that I was in bad shape, I bombed my test and headed over to Student health services with a swollen neck and pounding headache. The doctor immediately put me in a neck brace, diagnosed me with a concussion and sent me off for a CT scan.

Fortunately nothing was broken. Since I was feeling numbness and tingling in my left arm the doctor sent me to a neurologist who ordered an MRI. We discovered a herniated disc and was ordered to stop physical activity. Everything that I identified with had been taken away from me in a moment and I was left questioning who I was. I didn’t realize how much self worth I put in my identities, as a wrestler, as a coach, as a teacher, as a strong man, etc until I was unable to be those things. I felt that there was more to me than my physicality and I also saw that many of the superficial aspects of my life were what I believed myself to be. The journey back to physical, mental and emotional health was where my true strength journey began. Vulnerability and weakness became the norm and my lessons became more about acceptance and letting go than making personal records and building my body. I began to experience a different type of strength from a whole, new perspective .

It will sound trivial to say that is a compelling and powerful story, Michael. It's the sort of thing one wants to ponder. How then now do you measure your satisfaction with your own pursuit of strength?

I feel most satisfied in my strength pursuit when what I am doing to build strength carries over into other aspects of my life. The measurement for that is quite intrinsic but I know when there is carry over and that is what is most important to me.

Moving then from this intrinsic aspect to the extrinsic and the particulars of your new practice, at the RKC II 2010 cert in San Jose you spoke of a kind of dissatisfaction with kb's always in the same movement plane - effectively, going between one's legs and over one's head. What inspired you to move outside that plane/box?

Ideas came to me and I wanted to try and see if they could actually work. By allowing myself permission to explore the possibilities, the conceptual moves soon became reality that in turn lead to more possibilities. The kettlebell is a creative outlet for me.

Was that a surprise to you?

I see myself as a very creative person so it was not a surprise to me.

Good for you. That's cool. Dare i ask what are the properties of the kettlebell that appeal to you such that it made sense for this kind of exploration?

This is a deep conversation that I think we ought to have over a cup of tea after we have tossed some bells together. I can show you better than I can tell you.

Delighted. How long have you been developing/playing with less static movement in kb's.

The more dynamic movements started in 2004 when I was living in Big Sur at a monastery. Yes, at a monastery.

Well i can think of few better places for one than on the Big Sur road. Pray continue.

I felt confined in the traditional ranges and I wanted to incorporate more movement to promote greater growth in general and in athleticism. So I started to explore as many possibilities as I could imagine.

Can we do something very basic here and ask about movement? Folks used to pressing weights in the gym might already see kettlebell swinging as dynamic and a wee bit dangerous. So to say you wanted more movement may be intriguing for folks watching regular kb vids, or those who are already practicing with them.

Even though the kettlebell moves are much more dynamic than most people are used to, the movements are all done with stationary feet. As an athlete and strength and conditioning coach, I recognize the importance of footwork and agile feet. So when I talk about wanting more dynamic movements, I am referring to moving the body through time and space as well as the kettlebells.

What motivated the partner kb tossing? how did you encourage others
to participate with you?

The motivation for partner passing came from my desire to progress further outside the box. Once I tried passing I immediately knew that it was something that I wanted to pursue. Unfortunately it is not that easy to convince other people to let you throw cannonballs at them. Luckily, I met Blair Ferguson of Sportfitproformance.com and he was totally into the idea!

The other person that I was able to convince to throw bells at me, AND who has been instrumental in the development process is Jeremy Layport. Thanks to Blair and Jeremy I have been able to develop KB passing beyond what I ever imagined.

The difference between the video clip and the demonstration/performance with you and Jeremy in San Jose seemed to be the closeness of the space. There was something even more compelling i found both in the tighter space of the performance and also, sitting on the ground to watch it low. Have you seen video from that seated position of you guys passing the kb? if not, i hope you'll take a look.

I have not and I will take a look at that as it presents itself thank you for the insight.

Also, do you see your movement in partner passing as demonstration or performance or something else?

It is demonstration, performance and training all in one. All aspects are going on when an audience is present. The degree of perceived danger is increased with an audience in front of you-especially the first time demonstrating.

From an athletic wellbeing perspective, what do you see as the benefits from kb tossing?

The benefits are many. I find that the most important thing that it has facilitated in me is greater trust: trust in my body's ability to handle whatever is "Thrown at me", trust in my partner to do his or her best and trust in the process as it unfolds. Another benefit that comes from partner passing, is learning to read situations and make split second adjustments accordingly without compromising structural or personal integrity.

Some additional training effects of KB passing are increased awareness and sharpened focus. As the perceived degree of difficulty and/or danger of a given activity increases, we tend to invest more of our focused attention on the activity at hand. Some side benefits that I have seen are increased eye hand coordination, grip strength and endurance, the ability to manage load and force from many different angles and improvement in one's ability to improvise to name just a few.

i wonder how we could set up a functional mri of kb tossing - just to see how the brain lights up as the risk/attention and coordination go up. fascinating.

That is a great idea and I would love to be a part of that and see what the results would be.

Two quick questions: i'm betting that y'all would call kb partner tossing safe because you train with weights against which you know you can get position when they're thrown. Is that fair?

That is fair and there is still danger involved.

That said, what are your usual partner tossing weights? do you train with these or heavier/lighter weights?

I use as many different weights as possible. The amount of weight is one important variable of this type of training that allows for so many possibilities. As the weight changes, even though the patterns stay the same, the exercises become radically different. I do most of my experimentation with the 12kg, 16kg, or 20kg, with the goal of being able to eventually do the patterns with the 24kg, 32kg, and up. There was a session a few months back where Jeremy and I were tossing a pair of 48kgs for reps back and forth. I also toss the 8kg’s with some of my female clients, it really depends on who I am tossing with and what my intention is for our session.

How much time would you say you and your colleagues put into training tossing daily/weekly to get to the proficiency you have - and let's just get it out there now that you are all veteran kettlebell trainers and practitioners in the standard arts of swing, snatch,get up.

For the year prior to filming the video I was practicing with Blair Ferguson three times a week for one to two hours depending on what we were working on. I only had a few weekends to work with Jeremy several months before we filmed. Fortunately, Jeremy is such a stud and incredible athlete he was able to pick it up quickly and he also had [RKC Team Leader -mc] Chris Holder to practice with and that made a big difference.

Tossing is also a single person endeavor. On the days I was not practicing with Blair or Jeremy I would practice my single man juggling routine to get better at handling the bell and understanding its nature to prepare for partner passing.

You also say you trust your partner to give "his or her best" - have you worked with women in the tossing? if so, are any parts of the experience different from working with men/women in this practice?

Yes I have worked with a few women and there is very little difference other than the amount of weight used. Women tend to pick it up fast and enjoy the challenge just as much as the men I have worked with. I want to work with more women because one of the major benefits is the balancing, grounding and rooting aspects this type of training has to offer. I feel tossing has quite a lot of potential for women of all ages.

In your experience how is tossing different than kb juggling?

There is far less control in tossing vs. juggling

Nice. good point.

You never know what kind of a rep is going to be thrown at you and adaptation is paramount. There is also a component of communication that exists with the passing that is not there when you are juggling. Tossing kettlebells is an interaction between two humans and a way of relating with each other through the kettlebell, whereas juggling you are relating to the kettlbell. Kettlebell passing is in its essence a complete model for communication and I still have much to learn about communication from this type of training.

You sound pretty passionate about the importance of communication. could you speak a bit more about why this is critical for you?

The reason I am so passionate about Communication is because it is the platform for all interaction. To be effective and successful at life is to be an excellent communicator. Communication is both listening and speaking and to be a master of communication allows one the ability to exist in any environment with ease and grace. Listening is one of the most powerful aspects of kettlebell passing, it becomes more than an act of the ears, rather, an act of one’s entire body. Listening takes on a whole new meaning as all the senses are employed to read a given situation as it is unfolding in the present moment.

What would you advice folks to do who are new to kettlebells, see your video and say "wow that looks so cool; i want to do that?"

Don't.

Wow that will be great for your sales.

This type of training was developed for advanced athletes and kettlebellers. Spend a few years learning the basics before you get any crazy ideas. Strength health and longevity are the goals of training and making poor choices will only keep you from the goals.

You know as soon as you put out your dvd though, that folks who haven't worked much with KB's are going to get excited about this as "extreme kettlebelling"

So a few questions here: what kind of prep would you say is crucial - how does someone know they're and advanced kettlebeller - you mention time - what else?

You might be an intermediate kettlebeller if you have been practicing for a year or more and teaching for about as long, and you have an RKC, AKC, or IKFF cert under your belt.

You might be an advanced kettlebeller if you have three to five years under your belt and you are a Team Leader, a Senior RKC, a Master RKC, or if you are a competitive kettlebell lifter with several meets under your belt and you are a higher level instructor for one of the other reputable kettlebell certifying bodies out there..

Seven or more years of continuous practice and you are more than likely to be in the advanced category provided you have had a credible instructor teach you the techniques of the trade. Learning from magazines books and DVD’s does not count!

If you can easily complete the single man [sic] kettlebell juggling routine from my KB partner passing DVD with good form and in a safe manner, it is most likely o.k. to proceed. Provided you have had instruction from credible instructors.

Also, i mention "extreme kettlebelling" - it doesn't sound however like it has that "extreme" mantra to you - that you're not driven by how far you can toss or how heavy. What is the key focus for you?

I do enjoy tossing bells as far as possible and passing heavy bells back and forth and you are right the drive is not the extreme aspect of the training. The key of the kettlebell partner passing for me is the highly focused state of Zen like meditation that is achieved from practicing. It is a movement meditation and a form of self cultivation like no other that I have experienced. It is a cross between Tai Chi, wrestling, and weightlifting.

Have to say that my recollection of watching the tossing at the RKC the youtub clip just doesn't do it justice. WHen you kept saying to the group to move back and give you a bit more room, i don't think most of us had any idea what was coming - for what would you need that much room with a kettlebell?

I think it is far more impressive to see KB passing in person then in video format. It was an amazing experience to have the space I did and the audience to demo for. I was so into what we were doing that time and spaces were of little concern.

Kettlebell tossing is an act to be seen by others as well as practiced for dynamic strength, is it not? Where does performance in front of others come into your practice? What's its role?

I hope others see this style of training and realize that it takes good sound judgment to determine if it is appropriate for their personal practice. To see is one thing and to do is a whole different ball of wax. I recommend extreme caution when others consider this kind of training. It is Dangerous! The element of danger adds to the benefit of the training and the reward must be weighed against the risk.

Does it feel much different when there's folks watching?

The performance aspect creates more pressure, when I start tossing the only thing I have on my mind is what's being tossed at me and what I am tossing back.

When you're not tossing kettlebells with the willing, what do you do, Michael?

One of my favorite things to do is train at sportfitproformance.com in Ventura, California with Blair Ferguson. Our collaboration is one of the main reasons that the KB passing has advanced and evolved to this level. I love being active, hiking, biking, yoga, surfing, grappling, kayaking and just about anything else that involves nature. I also enjoy learning, communicating, reading and I am learning to enjoy writing more. Spending time with friends and family is very important to me and I always enjoy developing and growing my relationships.

Yoga? any particular form? and how long has that been in the Michael mix?

I began yoga in 2000 just before I was introduced to kettlebells. The tyle of yoga was predominately vinyasa flow, I have also practiced restorative yoga, tantra, and power yoga. Four years ago, I transitioned to a more aggressive and challenging form of power yoga called Blanchard yoga and have been practicing it since.

Is that activity what sets your hair on fire or is there something else that also moves you?

I tell ya, watching you do pull-ups at the RKC 2 moved me!! The natural world and the mysteries' of life along with the depth and beauty of the human body sets my hair on fire.

Goodness.

What would you say if it hasn't been covered is important for folks to be sure to incorporate into their own strength practice that you think may be missing or underplayed?

Squats, Deadlifts, overhead press and pull-ups.

OK, let's go: why each one, and with which implements?

All implements are good to use and should be used in moderation.

They are all full body exercises and require significant amounts of tension to perform and they all systemically fortify the body.

Pull-ups because it is important to be able to pull your weight.

Squats because they teach you to stand up

Overhead press because this is one of our weakest positions and it is always good to have the strength to put your own luggage in the overhead bin.

Deadlifts because it is important to be able to pick up heavy stuff you never know when you will need this.

As we've been discussing, you do have a video on kb parner tossing coming out. What will it be called, when can we expect it, and where will we be able to order it?

"Michael Castrogiovanni's Kettlebell Partner Passing" (as of right now) is in the final stages of production and is expected to be released this quarter. It will be available through multiple outlets including my website transformativefitness.com.

Fabulous; looking forward to it. I'm sure the three of you could get onto tv shows demonstrating this - that strength can be fluid and beautiful in different ways.

Yes I want to juggle for Oprah

That would be fantastic. How do we make that happen? In the meantime, is there anything else you'd care to share that i haven't touched on here related to wellbeing, fitness, what's important to you in this space?

Yes. I feel that there is one key ingredient to wellness and fitness that is overlooked and often thrown by the wayside in favor of increasing numbers, winning and achieving new personal records.

That crucial ingredient is fun.

We have been conditioned at such an early age to win that the idea of fun gets glossed over. The win at any cost attitude is a fast track to burning out. If a lifelong pursuit of health, fitness and wellness are the goals, I highly recommend doing more of things that you enjoy, that make you laugh and smile, with people you love.

Thank you for taking the time, Michael, to talk about your practice and your new sport. Much obliged.

Thank you for the opportunity to share my experience with you and your readers. Peace and blessings to all.

Michael is one more incredible athlete whom i've spoken with from the RKC II who's independently said the premium should be on fun, being in the moment, rather than numbers. There's a theme from the best practitioners developing here.

Will post an update as soon as Michael's video is out. In the meantime if you'd like to hook up with Michael for training, he can be reached via sportfitproformance.com

In the meantime, let's see that again...

Related Posts

Asha Wagner: taming the beast with Greasing the Groove (interview)
What if we were no longer how we define ourselves - like strong?
RKC Cert Experience
Prepping for the RKC Cert
GS first impressions
Enter the Kettlebell Review
Deadlift Resources: Deadlift Digest
Sensory-Motor Contribution to Strength/Performance
Green Tea, why it rocks for health || how to prepare it
Sedona Method Review: getting rid of crap around goals

Related Resources:

KB Basics for Strength Coaches and Personal Trainers double DVD set
ETK (Enter the Kettlebell)
Kalos Sthenos (beautiful strength)
Power to the People Pavel Tsatsouline (deadlift guide)
Starting strength Mark Rippetoe (squat/deadlift guide)

Follow @begin2dig

begin to dig

Pages

Friday, February 24, 2017

PLEASE - would you Help Me Help You Tune In Dial Up Shift Gears for your WELLTH SUCCESS

Friday, November 19, 2010

And Speaking of Indian Clubs...Swords to Ploughshares and sticks to fishing poles - kali

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Kettlebell Swings: harder than Circuit Weight Traning; easier than Treadmill? How can this be?

Saturday, April 24, 2010

Hypertrophy: More sets are Better than 1, from Day 1

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Ankle Sprains: Tape, Bracing - doesn't matter finds research - but how'd we get so busted up in the first place?

Friday, April 16, 2010

Getting Deeper about Sleep: Towards the Perfect Sleep Rep - even for parents and caffeine adicts

Friday, March 26, 2010

Windmill/Press 100's - volume that works ya.

Friday, March 19, 2010

Michael Castrogiovanni Interview: The Innovative Fine Art & Sport of Kettlebell Partner Tossing

ShareThis

Connecting

it's in b2d somewhere...

How to Subsrcibe to B2D

Blog Archive

About Me