Yuku free message boards

I recently posted what's below to a Usenet group - here it is:

What I can add to the discussion is that the ballistic nature of the movements, and the fact that they are performed with relatively light weights, does make them unusual, e.g., when I do a kettlebell swing (or clean or similar), I'm driving the weight with hip snap - call it hip extension if you wish - that finishes before the kettlebell completes its travel. I just hang out and wait for the weight to get to where it's going, and then I brace for it to hit the back. There is a lot of rapid turning on and off of muscle tension and it's repeated, sometimes for high reps. Those characteristics are relatively unique, and they are so due to the combination of the shape of the weight implement and the training practices that have grown up around it. Some movements don't lend themselves to being done with some implements, e.g., a dumbbell swing just isn't the same thing, and there are things you can do with Indian clubs (call them clubbells if you like) that you can't do with just any old dumbbell, again due to their shape.

There's that wonderful H. L. Menken quote about every problem having solution that's simple, elegant, and wrong. There are differences between doing the same movement with different weight implements, and anyone who doesn't see that is a fool. The question is whether or not those differences are significant, and there's no simple answer for that one - the implement's relative importance depends on the specifics of the movement being performed.

Conclusion? I don't know, other than I'm happy training with kettlebells. My day's training often features a lower- and an upper-body push and pull each, e.g., pistol (lower body push), swing (lower body pull), mil press (upper body push), pullup (upper body pull). Such a program really doesn't want for anything, IMHO, especially since you get cardio from the swings.

-S-
http://www.kbnj.com