More GS Science

I was browsing through the Annual Digest of Weightlifting of 1986. It is the compilation of articles on the subject of training in this sport in Russian (Ezhegodnik. Tyazhelaya Atletika). In that particular issue there were a few articles on Girevoy Sport. One of them touched on the subject that may spark some debate between HS and OTW gangs.

G Vinogradov and M Lukyanov from the Institute of Physical Culture in Leningrad (this is the institution equivalent to Universities in the West where coaches get their degrees, by the way; study time is five years) were evaluating the ways of assessing physical qualities of gireviks. The study was based on several premises.

One. Girevoy Sport can be classified as cyclical sport, and the most important quality required for it is strength endurance.

Two. As this sport is associated with significant strain, it is necessary to conduct special training directed to the development of strength.

Three. Research shows that the significant achievement in one physical quality is possible only when other physical qualities have reached appropriate (optimal) levels. (Remember the subordinate relationship between functions in Supertraining 1 post?) That’s why strength endurance should be developed on the foundation of general endurance.

Therefore the goals of training in GS include: development of general endurance, development of optimal strength and building of strength endurance on the basis of general endurance and strength.

The main point of the study was to study the associations between various tests for assessment of physical qualities and best results (control runs during training sessions) of gireviks of 2nd and 3rd ranks. In total 16 athletes were studied.

The parameters that correlated best with the results were those reflecting maximal strength:

Bench press (r = 0.75-0.97)
Barbell squat (r = 0.72 – 0.89)
Deadlift (r = 0.64 – 0.87)
Dynamometry of the strongest hand (r = 0.83 – 0.93)

Other correlated variables:

Dips (reps) (r = 0.74 – 0.89)
Pull-ups (r = 0.62 – 0.73)
1000m run (r = - 0.79 to -0.97) – the shorter the time the better the GS performance.

Interesting, but there was no correlation between the GS results and parameters reflecting the ability to develop explosive force – jump and 60m sprint.

In conclusion the authors note that more research is needed.

Of course, this article has flaws, the main being small group of subjects. Yet, the results indicate some trends. Better gireviks are stronger and have better endurance. Are they better in GS because they are stronger and tougher, or they are stronger and tougher because they are better gireviks and are better for some other reasons? Strictly speaking it is impossible to say based on these numbers, and only some kind of intervention study could answer this question.

On the other hand it makes sense: the person who can snatch 100 kg will be able to do more 24 kg snatches than those whose max snatch is only 50 kg. The same goes for endurance: the better your cardiovascular system, the easier it is going to be to last for ten minutes under the bells.

The point? The debates regarding Hardstyle versus OTW keep popping up on IGX. While there should be no debates. Girevoy Sport should always start with Hardstyle for beginners. One needs to build some strength and endurance base before getting onto the intensive training with timed sets.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hello Smet,

To me the RKC vs. AKC debate should really come down to issues of technique. Sadly that's the least discussed aspect, everyone wants to focus on training protocol.

A debate over how to hold the KB would be much more interesting to me (for example), than an argument over timed sets vs. sets for reps. Can you do the former for a total count, and the latter at pace (which makes them pretty much one and the same), but still consider them all that different?

Just a thought... thanks for keeping up the blog, great work!

Thanks,
-Tommy D.

Anonymous said...

HI Eugene,

At Liberty's studio, we teach both hard style and soft style. I feel there is a place for both and we vary between the two styles in our workouts depending on what lifts we are doing. Sometimes we'll vary between styles depending on the athlete. Liberty holds the RKC, AKC, and IKFF certifications and I have the RKC and IKFF. Cotter(IKFF) teaches soft style. We also had Cotter as an instructor at the RKC.
Jerry

sherrb said...

If the RKC taught proper technique and timed sets per GS then there would be no debate. They teach bodybuilding, which does not build the special endurance needed for 10 minutes sets. Only timed sets do that.

sherrb said...

There is no "style" in kettlebell lifting. Only correct and incorrect technique. "Hardstyle" is just bodybuilding applied to kettlebells. 100 kg snatches do not develop the "special endurance" necessary for the sport. Those are just feats of strength.

Paul , Marguerite , Alex, Luke 'n' James said...

versSherrb the feats of strength are part of the marketing - to most reasonably strong guys they are something "I might be able to do" as opposed to high level (or even medium level) GS which is perceived as "something I couldn't possibly do".

The funny thing is if you do GS properly the feats of strength are no big deal. Time under the bell (esp 2 bells) develops the balance and technique to perform most of these feats without specific training.

RKCs biggest mistake is not teaching jerk training. If you are using kbs for sports enhancement this is a critical part of tweaking athleticism. Snatches , swings and presses are no substitute.

...unless you do double swings and snatches , regularly.