No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Transference Of Kettlebell Training To Traditional Olympic Weight Lifting And Muscular Endurance
... Promoters of kettlebell exercise suggest that exercises, like the swing, can simultaneously improve muscular strength, endurance, and power, in addition to cardiorespiratory fitness (18). However, considering its popularity, scientific commentary on the efficacy of these claims is limited and remains equivocal (7,9,11,12,14). Chiu (1) reviewed the relevance of kettlebell exercise in the strength and conditioning process and explained that because the mass of commercially available kettlebells is relatively small (typically 16-40 kg), the force applied during cornerstone exercises, like the swing, would not be sufficient to improve maximum or explosive strength. However, Lake and Lauder (12) recently demonstrated that the mechanical demands of swing exercise are largely comparable with, and in some cases exceed, the mechanical demands of resistance exercises commonly used to develop lower body maximum and explosive strength. ...
... There is some research evidence to suggest that kettlebell exercise can improve measures of both maximum (1RM and 3RM) and explosive (vertical jump performance) strength (11,14). However, description of the design of the kettlebell exercise programs used in these studies has been vague. ...
... Therefore, the aims of this study were to address points raised by Chiu (1) and limitations to existing kettlebell exercise-based research (11,14) by establishing the effect that kettlebell swing training (using Tsatsouline's Program Minimum protocol) had on measures of maximum (half squat-HS-1 repetition maximum [1RM]) and explosive (vertical jump height-VJH) lower body strength. Informed by data recently presented about the mechanical demands of swing exercise (12), it was hypothesized that short-term swing exercise would significantly improve explosive strength but might not be sufficient to improve maximal strength. ...
The aim of this study was to establish the effect that kettlebell swing (KB) training had on measures of maximum (half squat-HS-1 repetition maximum [1RM]) and explosive (vertical jump height-VJH) strength. To put these effects into context, they were compared with the effects of jump squat power training (JS-known to improve 1RM and VJH). Twenty-one healthy men (age = 18-27 years, body mass = 72.58 ± 12.87 kg) who could perform a proficient HS were tested for their HS 1RM and VJH pre- and post-training. Subjects were randomly assigned to either a KB or JS training group after HS 1RM testing and trained twice a week. The KB group performed 12-minute bouts of KB exercise (12 rounds of 30-second exercise, 30-second rest with 12 kg if <70 kg or 16 kg if >70 kg). The JS group performed at least 4 sets of 3 JS with the load that maximized peak power-Training volume was altered to accommodate different training loads and ranged from 4 sets of 3 with the heaviest load (60% 1RM) to 8 sets of 6 with the lightest load (0% 1RM). Maximum strength improved by 9.8% (HS 1RM: 165-181% body mass, p < 0.001) after the training intervention, and post hoc analysis revealed that there was no significant difference between the effect of KB and JS training (p = 0.56). Explosive strength improved by 19.8% (VJH: 20.6-24.3 cm) after the training intervention, and post hoc analysis revealed that the type of training did not significantly affect this either (p = 0.38). The results of this study clearly demonstrate that 6 weeks of biweekly KB training provides a stimulus that is sufficient to increase both maximum and explosive strength offering a useful alternative to strength and conditioning professionals seeking variety for their athletes.
... Investigators have begun to quantify the efficacy of kettlebell exercise with mixed results (4)(5)(6)11). For example, Farrar et al. (4) and Fung and Shore (5) reported considerable aerobic demand during bouts of kettlebell exercise. ...
... Chiu et al. (1) stated that the stimulus provided by kettlebell exercise is not sufficient to stimulate increases in maximal, reactive, and explosive strength. Nonetheless, Manocchia et al. (11) reported significant increases in upper-body and whole-body strength and power, and trunk endurance, after a 10-week kettlebell training program, although details about their program were not provided. Further, Jay et al. (6) reported significant increases in lower-back strength after 8 weeks of kettlebell training. ...
The aims of this study were to establish mechanical demands of kettlebell swing exercise, and provide context by comparing them to mechanical demands of back squat and jump squat exercise. Sixteen men performed two sets of 10 swings with 16, 24, and 32 kg, two back squats with 20, 40, 60 and 80% 1RM, and two jump squats with 0, 20, 40, and 60% 1RM. Sagittal plane motion and ground reaction forces (GRF) were recorded during swing performance, and GRF were recorded during back and jump squat performance. Net impulse, and peak and mean propulsion phase force and power applied to the center of mass (CM) were obtained from GRF data, and kettlebell displacement and velocity from motion data. Results of repeated measures analysis of variance showed that all swing CM measures were maximized during the 32 kg condition, but that velocity of the kettlebell was maximized during the 16 kg condition; displacement was consistent across different loads. Peak and mean force tended to be greater during back and jump squat performance, but swing peak and mean power was greater than back squat power, and largely comparable with jump squat power. However, the highest net impulse was recorded during swing exercise with 32 kg (276.1 ± 45.3 N·s vs. 60% 1RM back squat: 182.8 ± 43.1 N·s, and 40% jump squat: 231.3 ± 47.1 N·s). These findings indicate a large mechanical demand during swing exercise, that could make swing exercise a useful addition to strength and conditioning programs that aim to develop the ability to rapidly apply force.
... It may have a positive effect on different components of a person's physical fitness, such as strength, power, muscle endurance and oxygen function [14,16]. In view of the beneficial influence on listed areas, it is also applied in sport, e.g. in weightlifting [17]. Amongst advantages of such training, it is also necessary to emphasize the possibility of its use in the rehabilitation of athletes with muscular dysfunctions within the back [5]. ...
An aim of this work was to determine the influence of women’s experimental training using kettlebells on selected components of physical fitness. Two groups of women, experimental (N = 20) and control (N = 20), took part in this study. In order to determine the influence of the training program developed by the present authors, participants were subjected to examinations aimed to assess the level of selected components of physical fitness (speed of hand movements, flexibility, explosive strength of lower limbs muscles, strength endurance of abdominal muscles and hip flexors, strength endurance of upper limbs muscles and the shoulder girdle, agility, the maximum oxygen uptake, the maximum and average power). Women who participated in kettlebells training showed statistically significant changes in all the examined components of physical fitness. In this group the greatest increase (84.25%) occurred in the endurance strength of upper limbs and the shoulder girdle. However, standard fitness training was more beneficial for shaping flexibility. A key element to the benefit of circuit training with kettlebells use (and additional exercises carried out in this training) is a possibility to improve comprehensive physical fitness.
... There were large differences in the bilateral GRF and the kettlebell force across different parts of the range of motion.The kettlebell swing has received more attention than the kettlebell snatch in the scientific literature, possibly due to the relative ease of teaching and learning of the swing compared to the snatch. The kettlebell swing has been found to be an effective exercise for improving jump ability (Jay et al., 2013;Lake & Lauder, 2012a, 2012bOtto et al., 2012), strength (Beltz et al., 2013;Lake & Lauder, 2012a, 2012bManocchia et al., 2010;Otto et al., 2012) and aerobic fitness (Beltz et al., 2013;Falatic et al., 2015;Farrar, Mayhew & Koch, 2010;Hulsey et al., 2012;Thomas et al., 2013). Additionally, the kettlebell swing was suggested to be a useful exercise for improving sprinter performance as it has a higher ratio of horizontal to vertical GRF compared to squat variations (Beardsley & Contreras, 2014). ...
Background
Kettlebell lifting has gained increased popularity as both a form of resistance training and as a sport, despite the paucity of literature validating its use as a training tool. Kettlebell sport requires participants to complete the kettlebell snatch continuously over prolonged periods of time. Kettlebell sport and weightlifting involve similar exercises, however, their traditional uses suggest they are better suited to training different fitness qualities. This study examined the three-dimensional ground reaction force (GRF) and force applied to the kettlebell over a 6 min kettlebell snatch set in 12 kettlebell-trained males.
Methods
During this set, VICON was used to record the kettlebell trajectory with nine infrared cameras while the GRF of each leg was recorded with a separate AMTI force plate. Over the course of the set, an average of 13.9 ? 3.3 repetitions per minute were performed with a 24 kg kettlebell. Significance was evaluated with a two-way ANOVA and paired t -tests, whilst Cohen?s F (ESF) and Cohen?s D (ESD) were used to determine the magnitude.
Results
The applied force at the point of maximum acceleration was 814 ? 75 N and 885 ? 86 N for the downwards and upwards phases, respectively. The absolute peak resultant bilateral GRF was 1,746 ? 217 N and 1,768 ? 242 N for the downwards and upwards phases, respectively. Bilateral GRF of the first and last 14 repetitions was found to be similar, however there was a significant difference in the peak applied force ( F (1.11) = 7.42, p = 0.02, ESF = 0.45). Unilateral GRF was found have a significant difference for the absolute anterior?posterior ( F (1.11) = 885.15, p < 0.0001, ESF = 7) and medio-lateral force vectors ( F (1.11) = 5.31, p = 0.042, ESF = 0.67).
Discussion
Over the course of a single repetition there were significant differences in the GRF and applied force at multiple points of the kettlebells trajectory. The kettlebell snatch loads each leg differently throughout a repetition and performing the kettlebell snatch for 6 min will result in a reduction in peak applied force.
Aim: Kettlebells are a famous implement in many strength and conditioning programs, and their advantages are touted in popular literature, books, and videos. However scientific information on their efficacy are limited. This study was to investigate the effect of kettlebell training on selected physical fitness variables among students form Alagappa University College of Physical Education. Methods: Thirty subjects (mean age = 22 years, range 20–24 years) participating students were randomly selected for participation in this study. 30 students were selected from Alagappa University College of Physical Education, Karaikudi, Tamilnadu. All the selected subjects were healthy and physically fit. In this study Thirty (30) subjects, of healthy students were randomly selected in kettlebell training and in control group, fifteen (15) in each group. The dependent ‘t’ test was applied to determine the difference between the means of two groups. To find out whether there was any significant difference between the experimental and control groups. To test the level of significant of difference between the means 0.05 level of confidence was fixed. The kettlebell training intervention consisted of 40-60 min/day, 3 days in a week till twelve weeks in the Alagappa University College of Physical Education. Physical fitness variables completed of the both groups at zero time and after twelve weeks of kettlebell training intervention group in control group (no kettlebell training). Result: In the present study clearly demonstrate that 12 weeks Kettlebell training provides a stimulus that is sufficient to increase Strength (), Power () and Endurance () were changed significantly. Conclusion: Traditional coaching strategies may additionally now not be convenient or accessible for strength and conditioning specialists, athletes, coaches, and recreational exercisers. The modern-day records suggest that kettlebells may also be an high-quality alternative device to improve healthy life style modification. Therefore kettlebell training covered in this study are beneficial for the students.
Das Trainieren mit freien Gewichten ist – bezogen auf die Alltags- und Sportartspezifität, die Funktionalität sowie den Metabolismus – weitaus effektiver als ein Krafttraining an Maschinen.
Background. Kettlebell lifting has gained increased popularity as both a form of resistance training and as a sport, despite the paucity of literature validating its use as a training tool. Kettlebell sport requires participants to complete the kettlebell snatch continuously over prolonged periods of time. Kettlebell sport and weightlifting involve similar exercises, however their traditional uses suggest they are better suited to training different fitness qualities. This study examined the three dimensional ground reaction force (GRF) and force applied to the kettlebell over a six minute kettlebell snatch set in 12 kettlebell trained males.
Methods. During this set, VICON was used to record the kettlebell trajectory with nine infrared cameras while the GRF of each leg was recorded with a separate AMTI force plate. Over the course of the set, an average of 13.9 ± 3.3 repetitions per minute were performed with a 24 kg kettlebell. Significance was evaluated with a two-way ANOVA and paired t-tests, whilst Cohen’s F (ESF) and Cohen’s D (ESD) were used to determine the magnitude.
Results. The applied force at the point of maximum acceleration was 814 ± 75 N and 885 ± 86 N for the downwards and upwards phases, respectively. The absolute peak resultant bilateral GRF was 1746 ± 217 N and 1768 ± 242 N for the downwards and upwards phases, respectively. Bilateral GRF of the first and last 14 repetitions was found to be similar, however there was a significant difference in the peak applied force (F (1.11) = 7.42, p = 0.02, ESF = 0.45). Unilateral GRF was found have a significant difference for the absolute anterior-posterior (F (1.11) = 885.15 p < 0.0001, ESF = 7.00) and medio-lateral force vectors (F (1.11) = 5.31, p = 0.042, ESF = 0.67).
Discussion. Over the course of a single repetition there were significant differences in the GRF and applied force at multiple points of the kettlebells trajectory. The kettlebell snatch loads each leg differently throughout a repetition and performing the kettlebell snatch for six minutes will result in a reduction in peak applied force.
Background. Kettlebell lifting has gained increased popularity as both a form of resistance training and as a sport, despite the paucity of literature validating its use as a training tool. Kettlebell sport requires participants to complete the kettlebell snatch continuously over prolonged periods of time. Kettlebell sport and weightlifting involve similar exercises, however their traditional uses suggest they are better suited to training different fitness qualities. This study examined the three dimensional ground reaction force (GRF) and force applied to the kettlebell over a six minute kettlebell snatch set in 12 kettlebell trained males.
Methods. During this set, VICON was used to record the kettlebell trajectory with nine infrared cameras while the GRF of each leg was recorded with a separate AMTI force plate. Over the course of the set, an average of 13.9 ± 3.3 repetitions per minute were performed with a 24 kg kettlebell. Significance was evaluated with a two-way ANOVA and paired t-tests, whilst Cohen’s F (ESF) and Cohen’s D (ESD) were used to determine the magnitude.
Results. The applied force at the point of maximum acceleration was 814 ± 75 N and 885 ± 86 N for the downwards and upwards phases, respectively. The absolute peak resultant bilateral GRF was 1746 ± 217 N and 1768 ± 242 N for the downwards and upwards phases, respectively. Bilateral GRF of the first and last 14 repetitions was found to be similar, however there was a significant difference in the peak applied force (F (1.11) = 7.42, p = 0.02, ESF = 0.45). Unilateral GRF was found have a significant difference for the absolute anterior-posterior (F (1.11) = 885.15 p < 0.0001, ESF = 7.00) and medio-lateral force vectors (F (1.11) = 5.31, p = 0.042, ESF = 0.67).
Discussion. Over the course of a single repetition there were significant differences in the GRF and applied force at multiple points of the kettlebells trajectory. The kettlebell snatch loads each leg differently throughout a repetition and performing the kettlebell snatch for six minutes will result in a reduction in peak applied force.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.