Showing posts with label health. Show all posts
Showing posts with label health. Show all posts
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Kettlebell Swings: harder than Circuit Weight Traning; easier than Treadmill? How can this be?
Follow @mcphoo
Tweet
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:
Indeed, the protocol is even less specific in Bill Cullen's founding eponymous article describing it.
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:
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).
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,
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.
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
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.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
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.
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?
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: 20300022Tweet Follow @begin2dig
PDF
Friday, April 23, 2010
90 Seconds or less to Bond: skills of social engagement
Follow @mcphoo
Tweet
A bit ago i wrote about how Robert Sapolsky's Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers
describes a rich variety
of animal case studies of coping with stress in these creatures natural habitats. A biggie of stress seen among our non-human kindred is the effect on longevity and quality of life. A key factor in bringing down stress and increasing longevity? Good socialization. After looking at Sapolsky's work it became clear that the research i do on well-being which had been focusing on nutrition, movement and rest/recovery needed to add in socialisation. But how?
In nutrition, movement and recovery, i've been keenly aware that there are skills for each of these practices, and i've spent some time researching, practicing and writing about some of them. Socialization has been a bit of a mystery, though. What skills would one even look for? We're not talking about etiquette, but about how to connect and play nice with others. Thumbing through the material for the various management and leadership courses i'd been on didn't percolate up anything about basic human engagement. In coaching, the closest thing seemed to be motivational interviewing, but that's not developing peer-to-peer encounter skills.
And then, it - or at least a partial it - happened. I came across this fabulously concise (audio) book: how to make people like you in 90 seconds or less by Nicholas Boothman (uk cd | uk book|| us book
| us cd
).
In this wee book, Boothman presents a suite of skills to help us connect with people. These skills start before the first hello, such that the work of those 90 initial seconds (or less) in someone's company are richly prepared for optimal success.
The title sounds rather flakey, but in actual fact the skills are well founded in concepts like neural linguistic programming. That practice too sounds a little daunting as a controversial area of psychotherapy from the same era as TM. But whether one accepts the entire NLP package or not, the very pragmatic and specific application of it to human close encounters is both easy to grasp and to test with this simple question: do these techniques enable me to engage with other people more of the time and more successfully in more situations? For an introvert like myself, trying to add this Fourth Front of WellBeing to my skill set, believe me, this stuff has to be pretty robust if it's going to work. And it does seem to be helping.
Boothman sets up a handful of concepts, from introduction approaches, to paying attention to the kind of language another uses (visual, auditory, kinesthetic) in order to successfully and quickly get on to that other person's wavelength.
Some of the techniques in the book will likely sound like simple politeness: be aware of cues from one person's conversation of where they want to go rather than pushing our own agenda/interests first. Other skills are more subtle: learn what to watch in body language cues for openness and engagement and where the body language matches words spoken - or does not.
And that's really it seems what these skills are mainly about: how attend with intent to an other in order to enable that person to feel comfortable. This comfort is achieved by having so modulating oneself to be on that other person's wavelenght that they feel safe, at home, we're sufficiently the same to share this exchange.
I'm looking forward to finding other books that map out more skills in the socializing space, but it seems remarkably appropriate that the first source that seems to fall into my hands (or ipod) is about these first steps to Making Contact.
If you too might like to improve the quality of your contact with Others, then i'd recommend this wee tome or cd set. Tweet Follow @begin2dig
A bit ago i wrote about how Robert Sapolsky's Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers describes a rich variety of animal case studies of coping with stress in these creatures natural habitats. A biggie of stress seen among our non-human kindred is the effect on longevity and quality of life. A key factor in bringing down stress and increasing longevity? Good socialization. After looking at Sapolsky's work it became clear that the research i do on well-being which had been focusing on nutrition, movement and rest/recovery needed to add in socialisation. But how?In nutrition, movement and recovery, i've been keenly aware that there are skills for each of these practices, and i've spent some time researching, practicing and writing about some of them. Socialization has been a bit of a mystery, though. What skills would one even look for? We're not talking about etiquette, but about how to connect and play nice with others. Thumbing through the material for the various management and leadership courses i'd been on didn't percolate up anything about basic human engagement. In coaching, the closest thing seemed to be motivational interviewing, but that's not developing peer-to-peer encounter skills.
And then, it - or at least a partial it - happened. I came across this fabulously concise (audio) book: how to make people like you in 90 seconds or less by Nicholas Boothman (uk cd | uk book|| us book | us cd).In this wee book, Boothman presents a suite of skills to help us connect with people. These skills start before the first hello, such that the work of those 90 initial seconds (or less) in someone's company are richly prepared for optimal success.
The title sounds rather flakey, but in actual fact the skills are well founded in concepts like neural linguistic programming. That practice too sounds a little daunting as a controversial area of psychotherapy from the same era as TM. But whether one accepts the entire NLP package or not, the very pragmatic and specific application of it to human close encounters is both easy to grasp and to test with this simple question: do these techniques enable me to engage with other people more of the time and more successfully in more situations? For an introvert like myself, trying to add this Fourth Front of WellBeing to my skill set, believe me, this stuff has to be pretty robust if it's going to work. And it does seem to be helping.
Boothman sets up a handful of concepts, from introduction approaches, to paying attention to the kind of language another uses (visual, auditory, kinesthetic) in order to successfully and quickly get on to that other person's wavelength.
Some of the techniques in the book will likely sound like simple politeness: be aware of cues from one person's conversation of where they want to go rather than pushing our own agenda/interests first. Other skills are more subtle: learn what to watch in body language cues for openness and engagement and where the body language matches words spoken - or does not.
And that's really it seems what these skills are mainly about: how attend with intent to an other in order to enable that person to feel comfortable. This comfort is achieved by having so modulating oneself to be on that other person's wavelenght that they feel safe, at home, we're sufficiently the same to share this exchange.
I'm looking forward to finding other books that map out more skills in the socializing space, but it seems remarkably appropriate that the first source that seems to fall into my hands (or ipod) is about these first steps to Making Contact.
If you too might like to improve the quality of your contact with Others, then i'd recommend this wee tome or cd set. Tweet Follow @begin2dig
Monday, March 29, 2010
Hanging Leg Raise: With Technique Anything is Possible?
Follow @mcphoo
Tweet
Have you ever suddenly done something that seemed impossible, even just moments before, and then, seemingly, it just happened? You wonder if you really actually did it? This morning i did something that yesterday felt a million miles away and fettle or another incarnation. I speak of the Hanging Leg Raise.
In this move, one hangs (tho that's deceptive) from a pull up bar (or door jam in my case), and then raises one's outstretched legs all the way straight out and arc'ing up until they touch the bar with their toes.
The Hanging Leg Raise Proper: One hangs in an inverted U - the image of Will Williams (of the Master Class on Breathing in the Front Squat) on the right is going above and beyond that toes-to-bar edge as he pushes his legs further up past his hands. Pavel Tsatsouline has a number of innovations on this theme as well, modelled in his freebie Hanging Leg Raise book (comes with a subscription to the power to the people mailing list - nice bonus (you can sign up here)). But while these gents get on with the business of Going Beyond, let's just chat for a moment about the humble to Boldly Go in the First Place.
Here's the deal: for me, i was introduced to this move/challenge about a month ago at the RKC II - we spent time going over drills to prep for doing an HLR and that focused on what one might only term "getting short" by compressing in the middle, sucking in the gut, sucking in the shoulders.
Let me say right now, that these instructions while percolating in my head did not connect the bits with me on the day. I am not generally a fast learner. On the other hand, when i get it, i get it. This was not going to be a Get It day.
Here's what i felt: struggle struggle struggle struggle - just to get my outstretched legs to parallel - barely. Struggle struggle struggle struggle. Puff puff puff puff.
I would try to do the HLR each day since my return that i've had access to a place from which i can hang. Struggle struggle struggle.
Rannoch of Simple Strength suggested that i try doing the knee tuck (shown left, modelled by Pavel- knees to chest first, and then straighten legs. I have to say that that one just about made me cry: knees to chest, ok, but straighten the legs from there? oh ya. not happening. Thank you though, Rannoch, for trying to help.
And then a funny thing happened yesterday.
Floor Work. One of the challenges i'd been trying has been with lying on the floor pulling against jump stretch bands while doing the leg raise part (we learned this at the cert). Yesterday, this went from my previous experience of "i am ripping my arms out of my sockets and getting nowhere" to "my legs are going over awfully easily; i must be doing something wrong." I did try the HLR after that and got to a cleaner parallel, but not up all the way. So again i thought, hmm. must have done something wrong.
THis morning, without really thinking about it, i thought i'll give it a go, and kinda started doing a pull up, and found my legs going up. I did this a few times. Singles. I posted to the RKC forum to check with colleagues if this was indeed an HLR or if the starting pull up was not right. I didn't think it was; it's not: arms must be straight.
The gang there - Al (who's been featured on b2d), Jordan Vezina, Jon Engum and Max Shank, all gave me some terrific tips, to try. but the main point was arms have to be straight. So i tried everything again i'd done this morning except the elbows bent (arms straight did not work this morning), and it worked. repeatedly. Now why arms straight worked this afternoon and not this morning, i don't know. But it did. And here's the thing: it was pretty easy. The hard part is hanging on.
Technique Rules. We talk about technique all the time being so important. And i've definitely had technique tweaks improve something i've done, but i've never before had it help me go from barley there to prepped, cooked and served. But if anything is an example of a proof of the "strength is a skill" concept that Pavel Tsatsouline has engendered in the RKC, i can't think of a better personal demonstration.
Much and all as i would like to believe i am suddenly that much stronger today than i was yesterday, the evidence is everywhere before me that i am not (though i did just go try to press the 24 just in case). So the only difference is technique - getting the compression of the gut, the shoulder inhalation, the lat activation, et voila.
How to *get* the technique? Right now i don't know how to translate what i've learned about HLR technique into how to accelerate teaching "getting" the technique for someone in a similar position, but here are a few thoughts.
The above is still rather fuzzy. Perhaps folks who coach (including myself) are just saying "duh" because of course one teaches technique and focuses on that before adding load or at least concurrent to loaded work (as per the volume of the perfect rep quest). So why was this move different? I'm not entirely sure. But there are lessons to be learned from this about connecting with technique, patience with the technique, finding methods that make the technique accessible and achievable in another context if the actual context (like hanging from a bar) is a step too far. Whoever developed the floor work drills for teaching the feel of the leg raise - genius.
Related Story. All this must sound so basic as opposed to any new insight, so before i dig a further hole in trying to convey this, let me close with a related "ah ha".
A bit ago Asha Wagner, in an interview here about pistoling the 24 for the women's beast challenge, said that she had only used the 12 regularly, never a 24 before that on-the-day test. She'd done lots of volume, greasing the groove with the 12, but the most she'd ever pistoled prior to that test was the 16.
I own i was pretty amazed that technique/form work with a 12 would deliver such a result with the 24, but after today's experience, i'm more a believer in technique-as-strength, strength-as-a-skill than yesterday.
So, best takeaway perhaps? find whatever assisted variant will enable an athlete to experience the complete movement - and focus on the use of TECHNIQUE rather than strength to achieve that movement first and foremost - where there's just enough strength challenge to feel the technque - and then strength will come.
Again, that's plainly not a unique insight - but the clarity of just how critical that focus is has really come shining through - one might say finally. Tweet Follow @begin2dig
In this move, one hangs (tho that's deceptive) from a pull up bar (or door jam in my case), and then raises one's outstretched legs all the way straight out and arc'ing up until they touch the bar with their toes.
The Hanging Leg Raise Proper: One hangs in an inverted U - the image of Will Williams (of the Master Class on Breathing in the Front Squat) on the right is going above and beyond that toes-to-bar edge as he pushes his legs further up past his hands. Pavel Tsatsouline has a number of innovations on this theme as well, modelled in his freebie Hanging Leg Raise book (comes with a subscription to the power to the people mailing list - nice bonus (you can sign up here)). But while these gents get on with the business of Going Beyond, let's just chat for a moment about the humble to Boldly Go in the First Place.
Here's the deal: for me, i was introduced to this move/challenge about a month ago at the RKC II - we spent time going over drills to prep for doing an HLR and that focused on what one might only term "getting short" by compressing in the middle, sucking in the gut, sucking in the shoulders.
Let me say right now, that these instructions while percolating in my head did not connect the bits with me on the day. I am not generally a fast learner. On the other hand, when i get it, i get it. This was not going to be a Get It day.
Here's what i felt: struggle struggle struggle struggle - just to get my outstretched legs to parallel - barely. Struggle struggle struggle struggle. Puff puff puff puff.
I would try to do the HLR each day since my return that i've had access to a place from which i can hang. Struggle struggle struggle.
Rannoch of Simple Strength suggested that i try doing the knee tuck (shown left, modelled by Pavel- knees to chest first, and then straighten legs. I have to say that that one just about made me cry: knees to chest, ok, but straighten the legs from there? oh ya. not happening. Thank you though, Rannoch, for trying to help.And then a funny thing happened yesterday.
Floor Work. One of the challenges i'd been trying has been with lying on the floor pulling against jump stretch bands while doing the leg raise part (we learned this at the cert). Yesterday, this went from my previous experience of "i am ripping my arms out of my sockets and getting nowhere" to "my legs are going over awfully easily; i must be doing something wrong." I did try the HLR after that and got to a cleaner parallel, but not up all the way. So again i thought, hmm. must have done something wrong.
THis morning, without really thinking about it, i thought i'll give it a go, and kinda started doing a pull up, and found my legs going up. I did this a few times. Singles. I posted to the RKC forum to check with colleagues if this was indeed an HLR or if the starting pull up was not right. I didn't think it was; it's not: arms must be straight.
The gang there - Al (who's been featured on b2d), Jordan Vezina, Jon Engum and Max Shank, all gave me some terrific tips, to try. but the main point was arms have to be straight. So i tried everything again i'd done this morning except the elbows bent (arms straight did not work this morning), and it worked. repeatedly. Now why arms straight worked this afternoon and not this morning, i don't know. But it did. And here's the thing: it was pretty easy. The hard part is hanging on.
Technique Rules. We talk about technique all the time being so important. And i've definitely had technique tweaks improve something i've done, but i've never before had it help me go from barley there to prepped, cooked and served. But if anything is an example of a proof of the "strength is a skill" concept that Pavel Tsatsouline has engendered in the RKC, i can't think of a better personal demonstration.
Much and all as i would like to believe i am suddenly that much stronger today than i was yesterday, the evidence is everywhere before me that i am not (though i did just go try to press the 24 just in case). So the only difference is technique - getting the compression of the gut, the shoulder inhalation, the lat activation, et voila.
How to *get* the technique? Right now i don't know how to translate what i've learned about HLR technique into how to accelerate teaching "getting" the technique for someone in a similar position, but here are a few thoughts.
- i thought i needed to work on ab strength to do this move - develop more strength rather than skill. How can i spot the difference in someone else to see that it's not about more muscle fiber firing but about technique?
- I have been consciously thinking about applying the technique lessons - and trying to practice these - rather than thinking so much about brute strength - so maybe that's what sifted through and finally connected?
- and maybe that's the best way to coach someone: help them focus on the technique, chew on the technique, and feel the technique applied - this was for me why the floor work with the bands was such a biggie - i think - it's where at the cert i could feel like different parts were connecting.
The above is still rather fuzzy. Perhaps folks who coach (including myself) are just saying "duh" because of course one teaches technique and focuses on that before adding load or at least concurrent to loaded work (as per the volume of the perfect rep quest). So why was this move different? I'm not entirely sure. But there are lessons to be learned from this about connecting with technique, patience with the technique, finding methods that make the technique accessible and achievable in another context if the actual context (like hanging from a bar) is a step too far. Whoever developed the floor work drills for teaching the feel of the leg raise - genius.
Related Story. All this must sound so basic as opposed to any new insight, so before i dig a further hole in trying to convey this, let me close with a related "ah ha".
A bit ago Asha Wagner, in an interview here about pistoling the 24 for the women's beast challenge, said that she had only used the 12 regularly, never a 24 before that on-the-day test. She'd done lots of volume, greasing the groove with the 12, but the most she'd ever pistoled prior to that test was the 16.
I own i was pretty amazed that technique/form work with a 12 would deliver such a result with the 24, but after today's experience, i'm more a believer in technique-as-strength, strength-as-a-skill than yesterday.
So, best takeaway perhaps? find whatever assisted variant will enable an athlete to experience the complete movement - and focus on the use of TECHNIQUE rather than strength to achieve that movement first and foremost - where there's just enough strength challenge to feel the technque - and then strength will come.
Again, that's plainly not a unique insight - but the clarity of just how critical that focus is has really come shining through - one might say finally. Tweet Follow @begin2dig
Friday, March 19, 2010
Michael Castrogiovanni Interview: The Innovative Fine Art & Sport of Kettlebell Partner Tossing
Follow @mcphoo
Tweet
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.
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?
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?
to participate with you?
Wow that will be great for your sales.
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?
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?
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
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 strongpeople. 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 pat the point of doing this video, what was your main training? how did it come about?resentation 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 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.SO before we get to that one, how did you come to KB's?
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.
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?
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 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.
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?
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.
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 .
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.
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 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.
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.
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?
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.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.
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.
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?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.
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. jugglingNice. 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.
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.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?
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.
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.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?
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.
"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 OprahThat 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?
Thank you for taking the time, Michael, to talk about your practice and your new sport. Much obliged.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 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
- 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)
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Brain Health Workouts for Elder Rejuvination: Posit Science
Follow @mcphoo
Tweet
If you have a person in your life/family who's saying they're 
feeling a little less sharp, whether hearing things a little less clearly, or processing information a little less slowly, their may be an easy effective way to sharpen up the senses - literally. It's work (embodied in software) by a group at Posit Science (and it's on sale this week).
B2Diggers have heard me write about the Brain That Changes Itself many times. Well, Posit Science is the company founded by one of the authors featured in that book, Michael Merzenich. He's done work on so many ways to understand neural plasticity - how the brain maps and remaps skills onto our neural nets. That we know we are plastic people is in large part down to his founding work.
The software coming from this group is the stuff that has been peer reviewed to deliver what's on the tin. Other brain game nintendo-esque things have not.
I have personally purchased this group's software for elderly family members and been amazed at their response to it. They find the software "more fun than playing solitaire" and they are enpowered refining their neural plastic skills at audio processing, vision, and comprehension. Someone for instance may think they're going deaf and it turns out they're weak in skills they need for sound disambiguation. Skills can be trained. The software makes it easy. ANd this suff works so well because it is tapping skills development to recover cognitive function. THere's a test online a person can take to see what their neurological age is, too, so they can bench mark what a 10-20 year recovery of function would look like.
Please please, if you have elders in your life who you are experiencing as verging on what might colloquially be called "losing it" - please check out this software.
I'll tell you right up front that the software is not shareware priced, but it's (in some cases less than ) half the price of Photoshop or Microsoft Office retail. When you consider that the software has been demonstrated to gain back 10-20 years of cognitive function, the price of the software against potentially decades more independent living is trivial, is it not?
I strongly recommend the Brain Fitness program in particular.
(that's my affiliate link if you care to use it - but i wouldn't be recommending this stuff if it didn't deliver beyond expectation)
Tweet
Follow @begin2dig
feeling a little less sharp, whether hearing things a little less clearly, or processing information a little less slowly, their may be an easy effective way to sharpen up the senses - literally. It's work (embodied in software) by a group at Posit Science (and it's on sale this week).B2Diggers have heard me write about the Brain That Changes Itself many times. Well, Posit Science is the company founded by one of the authors featured in that book, Michael Merzenich. He's done work on so many ways to understand neural plasticity - how the brain maps and remaps skills onto our neural nets. That we know we are plastic people is in large part down to his founding work.
The software coming from this group is the stuff that has been peer reviewed to deliver what's on the tin. Other brain game nintendo-esque things have not.
I have personally purchased this group's software for elderly family members and been amazed at their response to it. They find the software "more fun than playing solitaire" and they are enpowered refining their neural plastic skills at audio processing, vision, and comprehension. Someone for instance may think they're going deaf and it turns out they're weak in skills they need for sound disambiguation. Skills can be trained. The software makes it easy. ANd this suff works so well because it is tapping skills development to recover cognitive function. THere's a test online a person can take to see what their neurological age is, too, so they can bench mark what a 10-20 year recovery of function would look like.
Please please, if you have elders in your life who you are experiencing as verging on what might colloquially be called "losing it" - please check out this software.I'll tell you right up front that the software is not shareware priced, but it's (in some cases less than ) half the price of Photoshop or Microsoft Office retail. When you consider that the software has been demonstrated to gain back 10-20 years of cognitive function, the price of the software against potentially decades more independent living is trivial, is it not?
I strongly recommend the Brain Fitness program in particular.
(that's my affiliate link if you care to use it - but i wouldn't be recommending this stuff if it didn't deliver beyond expectation)
Dr. Merzenich TED Talk
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Improving Longevity with Calorie Reduction in Humans?
Follow @mcphoo
Tweet
Lots of studies on rats and a few other mamals have seemed to 
show the benefit of caloric reduction and longevity - mainly it seems in the way that CR impacts core temperature (a bit lower is better), fasting insulin levels, and oxidative stress - that free radical stuff. Testing CR and humans is going to be trickier. So researchers a few years ago looked at simply the effects of CR on these very markers that have been hypothesised to have an effect on longevity. What their work shows is that yup, CR has these effects.
The resson i mention this piece here is that neither Alan Aaragon's 2007 critique of IF (which i've cited before as a good ref and which Chris over at conditioning resaerch has also detailed); nor have i seen the work referenced in the more recent Eat Stop Eat by Brad Pilon.
So here's the abstract; the full article is also available for free, which is nice.
Now, i haven't seen a comparison of these same markers considered in a study where folks are JUST exercising and eating right (say a la precision nutrition's principles), but that is what folks like Aragon suggest - that exercise and diet have the same effects. A head to head study or gathering of results would be nice.
There is a nice 2009 follow up study by this group that looks at metabolic adaptation of folks on CR and CR + exercise. Bottom line: the folks who keep exercising while on the CR do not experience a metabolic adaptation like the *just * CR's (in other words the CR's metabolism really drops, and so does their activity). IS that maintenance good for longevity markers? not clear. But in terms of weight loss maintenance, surprise surprise:
SO diet, combined with exercise is still a good thing for maintaining ongoing body comp goals. Great.
Oh and to put icing on the cake of why exercise with diet (spliting the total CR between diet and exercise) is a good thing, the gang just published a study showing that while fat loss is the same no matter how you get you mojo on and calories off, with exercise is better:
normal healthy eating (like PN) and exercise, there seems to be at least a few of us who are using say precision nutrition approaches to eating/health on most days (and getting questions on nutrition addressed) and ESE fasting once or twice a week - for me this protocol is an exploration; nothing definitive, but intriguing. Just FYI
Related Posts
Citations:
Heilbronn, L. (2006). Effect of 6-Month Calorie Restriction on Biomarkers of Longevity, Metabolic Adaptation, and Oxidative Stress in Overweight Individuals: A Randomized Controlled Trial JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 295 (13), 1539-1548 DOI: 10.1001/jama.295.13.1539
Redman, L., Heilbronn, L., Martin, C., de Jonge, L., Williamson, D., Delany, J., Ravussin, E., & , . (2009). Metabolic and Behavioral Compensations in Response to Caloric Restriction: Implications for the Maintenance of Weight Loss PLoS ONE, 4 (2) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0004377
LARSON-MEYER, D., REDMAN, L., HEILBRONN, L., MARTIN, C., & RAVUSSIN, E. (2010). Caloric Restriction with or without Exercise Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 42 (1), 152-159 DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181ad7f17 Tweet Follow @begin2dig
Lots of studies on rats and a few other mamals have seemed to 
show the benefit of caloric reduction and longevity - mainly it seems in the way that CR impacts core temperature (a bit lower is better), fasting insulin levels, and oxidative stress - that free radical stuff. Testing CR and humans is going to be trickier. So researchers a few years ago looked at simply the effects of CR on these very markers that have been hypothesised to have an effect on longevity. What their work shows is that yup, CR has these effects.The resson i mention this piece here is that neither Alan Aaragon's 2007 critique of IF (which i've cited before as a good ref and which Chris over at conditioning resaerch has also detailed); nor have i seen the work referenced in the more recent Eat Stop Eat by Brad Pilon.
So here's the abstract; the full article is also available for free, which is nice.
JAMA. 2006 Apr 5;295(13):1539-48.
Effect of 6-month calorie restriction on biomarkers of longevity, metabolic adaptation, and oxidative stress in overweight individuals: a randomized controlled trial.
Heilbronn LK, de Jonge L, Frisard MI, DeLany JP, Larson-Meyer DE, Rood J, Nguyen T, Martin CK, Volaufova J, Most MM, Greenway FL, Smith SR, Deutsch WA, Williamson DA, Ravussin E; Pennington CALERIE Team.
Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge 70808, USA.
Erratum in:* JAMA. 2006 Jun 7;295(21):2482.
Comment in: * JAMA. 2006 Apr 5;295(13):1577-8.
CONTEXT: Prolonged calorie restriction increases life span in rodents. Whether prolonged calorie restriction affects biomarkers of longevity or markers of oxidative stress, or reduces metabolic rate beyond that expected from reduced metabolic mass, has not been investigated in humans. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of 6 months of calorie restriction, with or without exercise, in overweight, nonobese (body mass index, 25 to <30) men and women. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized controlled trial of healthy, sedentary men and women (N = 48) conducted between March 2002 and August 2004 at a research center in Baton Rouge, La. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomized to 1 of 4 groups for 6 months: control (weight maintenance diet); calorie restriction (25% calorie restriction of baseline energy requirements); calorie restriction with exercise (12.5% calorie restriction plus 12.5% increase in energy expenditure by structured exercise); very low-calorie diet (890 kcal/d until 15% weight reduction, followed by a weight maintenance diet). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Body composition; dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEAS), glucose, and insulin levels; protein carbonyls; DNA damage; 24-hour energy expenditure; and core body temperature. RESULTS: Mean (SEM) weight change at 6 months in the 4 groups was as follows: controls, -1.0% (1.1%); calorie restriction, -10.4% (0.9%); calorie restriction with exercise, -10.0% (0.8%); and very low-calorie diet, -13.9% (0.7%). At 6 months, fasting insulin levels were significantly reduced from baseline in the intervention groups (all P<.01), whereas DHEAS and glucose levels were unchanged. Core body temperature was reduced in the calorie restriction and calorie restriction with exercise groups (both P<.05). After adjustment for changes in body composition, sedentary 24-hour energy expenditure was unchanged in controls, but decreased in the calorie restriction (-135 kcal/d [42 kcal/d]), calorie restriction with exercise (-117 kcal/d [52 kcal/d]), and very low-calorie diet (-125 kcal/d [35 kcal/d]) groups (all P<.008). These "metabolic adaptations" (~ 6% more than expected based on loss of metabolic mass) were statistically different from controls (P<.05). Protein carbonyl concentrations were not changed from baseline to month 6 in any group, whereas DNA damage was also reduced from baseline in all intervention groups (P <.005). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that 2 biomarkers of longevity (fasting insulin level and body temperature) are decreased by prolonged calorie restriction in humans and support the theory that metabolic rate is reduced beyond the level expected from reduced metabolic body mass. Studies of longer duration are required to determine if calorie restriction attenuates the aging process in humans.
Now, i haven't seen a comparison of these same markers considered in a study where folks are JUST exercising and eating right (say a la precision nutrition's principles), but that is what folks like Aragon suggest - that exercise and diet have the same effects. A head to head study or gathering of results would be nice.
There is a nice 2009 follow up study by this group that looks at metabolic adaptation of folks on CR and CR + exercise. Bottom line: the folks who keep exercising while on the CR do not experience a metabolic adaptation like the *just * CR's (in other words the CR's metabolism really drops, and so does their activity). IS that maintenance good for longevity markers? not clear. But in terms of weight loss maintenance, surprise surprise:Interestingly, despite similar body mass and composition changes, CR in conjunction with exercise (CR+EX) did not result in a metabolic adaptation. If weight relapse does occur in part as a result of a reduced metabolic rate in the weight reduced state, then perhaps the combination of CR and exercise may be the best choice of intervention to prevent weight regain in overweight and obese individuals. Certainly, more than 20 years ago, Pavlou observed that exercise during a CR-induced weight loss program was essential for success of weight loss maintenance [34]. Since then others have shown with doubly labeled water studies that weight stability following weight loss is sustained by higher levels of activity related energy expenditure and free-living physical activity [35], [36]. To our knowledge no studies have prospectively studied the energetic adjustments of CR only versus CR in conjunction with exercise during weight loss and weight loss maintenance.
SO diet, combined with exercise is still a good thing for maintaining ongoing body comp goals. Great.
Oh and to put icing on the cake of why exercise with diet (spliting the total CR between diet and exercise) is a good thing, the gang just published a study showing that while fat loss is the same no matter how you get you mojo on and calories off, with exercise is better:
In the meantime of waiting for the longevity marker comparison where the condition would be
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2010 Jan;42(1):152-9.
Caloric restriction with or without exercise: the fitness versus fatness debate.
Larson-Meyer DE, Redman L, Heilbronn LK, Martin CK, Ravussin E.
Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA. enette@uwyo.edu
There is a debate over the independent effects of aerobic fitness and body fatness on mortality and disease risks. PURPOSE: To determine whether a 25% energy deficit that produces equal change in body fatness leads to greater cardiometabolic benefits when aerobic exercise is included. METHODS: Thirty-six overweight participants (16 males/20 females) (39 +/- 1 yr; 82 +/- 2 kg; body mass index = 27.8 +/- 0.3 kg x m2, mean +/- SEM) were randomized to one of three groups (n = 12 for each) for a 6-month intervention: control (CO, weight-maintenance diet), caloric restriction (CR, 25% reduction in energy intake), or caloric restriction plus aerobic exercise (CR + EX, 12.5% reduction in energy intake plus 12.5% increase in exercise energy expenditure). Food was provided during weeks 1-12 and 22-24. Changes in fat mass, visceral fat, VO2peak (graded treadmill test), muscular strength (isokinetic knee extension/flexion), blood lipids, blood pressure, and insulin sensitivity/secretion were compared. RESULTS: As expected, VO2peak was significantly improved after 6 months of intervention in CR + EX only (22 +/- 5% vs 7 +/- 5% in CR and -5 +/- 3% in CO), whereas isokinetic muscular strength did not change. There was no difference in the losses of weight, fat mass, or visceral fat and changes in systolic blood pressure (BP) between the intervention groups. However, only CR + EX had a significant decrease in diastolic BP (-5 +/- 3% vs -2 +/- 2% in CR and -1 +/- 2% in CO), in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (-13 +/- 4% vs -6 +/- 3% in CR and 2 +/- 4% in CO), and a significant increase in insulin sensitivity (66 +/- 22% vs 40 +/- 20% in CR and 1 +/- 11% in CO). CONCLUSIONS: Despite similar effect on fat losses, combining CR with exercise increased aerobic fitness in parallel with improved insulin sensitivity, LDL cholesterol, and diastolic BP. The results lend support for inclusion of an exercise component in weight loss programs to improve metabolic fitness.
normal healthy eating (like PN) and exercise, there seems to be at least a few of us who are using say precision nutrition approaches to eating/health on most days (and getting questions on nutrition addressed) and ESE fasting once or twice a week - for me this protocol is an exploration; nothing definitive, but intriguing. Just FYIRelated Posts
- General b2d nutrition index
- Fasting and Working out - it's alright
- respect the fat
- "you can't handle.." - the protein
Citations:
Heilbronn, L. (2006). Effect of 6-Month Calorie Restriction on Biomarkers of Longevity, Metabolic Adaptation, and Oxidative Stress in Overweight Individuals: A Randomized Controlled Trial JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 295 (13), 1539-1548 DOI: 10.1001/jama.295.13.1539
Redman, L., Heilbronn, L., Martin, C., de Jonge, L., Williamson, D., Delany, J., Ravussin, E., & , . (2009). Metabolic and Behavioral Compensations in Response to Caloric Restriction: Implications for the Maintenance of Weight Loss PLoS ONE, 4 (2) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0004377
LARSON-MEYER, D., REDMAN, L., HEILBRONN, L., MARTIN, C., & RAVUSSIN, E. (2010). Caloric Restriction with or without Exercise Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 42 (1), 152-159 DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181ad7f17 Tweet Follow @begin2dig
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
COACHING with dr. m.c. 
