Kettlebells: Good Exercise Tools?

Are kettlebells good for getting fit and lean?

My belief is that weight loss is 80% diet — about what you eat (or don’t eat). Having said that, exercise (the remaining 20%) helps not just in resetting your metabolic rate but ultimately your mental state. Regular, habitual exercise increases your chance of sticking with a healthy diet. Ironically, physical exercise is extremely effective in helping with the “mental” aspects of weight loss – in terms of managing stress-induced cortisol levels, mood, and generating a heightened sense of psychological well-being.

Back to the topic of kettlebells…

Are kettlebells really effective for strength and conditioning?

What most people don’t know is that there are actually two basic types of “approaches” to KB training. The “hardstyle” approach, promulgated by Pavel Tsatsouline at dragondoor.com, is one. This is taught by RKC instructors (certified by Pavel). It’s characterized by relatively low reps (e.g., 5 sets of 5, or 1-5x ladders). The emphasis is on strength and power. Right now, the hardstyle is the “dominant” school of kb training.

The other approach is the AKC style (lead by Valery Fedorenko), which emphasizes technique, and strength-endurance. In my personal opinion, the AKC approach is much safer and sustainable over the long run, because it focuses on structural alignment and correct lifting technique. The reason is that the AKC uses KB as a competitive sport. People compete on 3 basic lifts (2-arm KB jerks, one-arm snatches, and the 2-arm long cycle clean and jerk). Since it’s a timed-set competition (ten minutes a set, with one hand switch), there is very little margin for error in term of sloppy technique — after one minute of continuous lifting, any deficiency in form/technique is greatly magnified. Because of the demands of kettlebell sport, practitioners develop very efficient (and safe lifting form), versus the hard style where power/strength/brute force can carry you.

This is not to say that hardstyle practitioners have bad form. It’s just that you can afford to be sloppy using hardstyle methodology, since the rep requirement is lower and interspersed with breaks. The injuries come when the growth in muscle strength outstrips the corresponding development in the tendons and ligaments (and bone density). When this happens, one may be able to lift the weight successfully, yet the weak link (the tendon and/or ligament) may not be able to bear the stress of the weight. This results in injury. This happens a lot with rotator cuff issues.

Growth in muscle strength usually outpaces the readiness of the “supporting” structure. This scenario often happens in hardstyle training. It’s less of a problem in the AKC approach because practitioners tend to use lighter weights (comparatively) over time, compared to hardstyle.

In addition AKC uses the same KB shape and configuration and handles, across different weights. Hardstyle KB’s are differently shaped, depending on the weight. The grip positions are very different. In hardstyle the handle is perpendicular to the forearm, while in AKC, it’s about 45 degreees (diagonal across the palm). In AKC, “fixation” is paramount, i.e., there has to a clean stop at the end of the snatch or jerk, for the rep to be counted. In HS, this is not emphasized. Even the Swings are different: in HS, the vector of the swing is directed towards the front (as a result of the strong hip snap); in AKC, the vector of force is upwards (as a preparatory for the clean or snatch, since after all swings are considered as assistance exercises).

A lot of people argue that kb’s can be replaced by dumbells. To a certain extent, there is some logic behind this. For example, get-ups or windmills, or even swings can be done with a dumbell. However, when one considers very high reps sets (as in the AKC’s objective), then this reasoning is weakened. The AKC method and dynamics (i.e., the form) has evolved because the goal of the activity (high reps within a timed interval of 10 minutes or more) demands structural and muscular efficiency.

I’ve practiced hardstyle technique for more than five years, but recently shifted to the AKC methodology. In doing so, I had to relearn everything, unfortunately. And I’m still in the process of perfecting my technique, and I’m nowhere near the poundage that I use to lift using HS.

My acid test question was: Can I personally continue to do this regularly until I’m 108 years old, without the risk of injury? I’d have to answer that for hardstyle, probably not. For AKC, I think it’s highly likely. I respect both approaches, and they have their own purposes and merits depending on one’s fitness goals. I just wanted people to know that kb training is not a monolitic, homogeneous approach that the general public is made to believe. Older folks like me (I’m 56) have to be more careful. I happen to think that the AKC approach is more useful and sustainable for health purposes. But then again this is just my personal opinion…