The Development of Strength and Power Endurance in Kettlebell Lifting
S.L. Rudnev & E.V. Lopatin, 2009
Machine Translation from Russian, originally published on Girevik-online.ru
This material is reproduced for educational purposes only, aligned with the principles of Fair Use as defined by U.S. Law
The development of strength and power endurance is prioritized in kettlebell lifting, with power endurance assigned the leading role. The academic consensus is that high repetition counts are achieved through strength endurance. As for strength, researchers are unanimous that it is necessary to develop only to a “sufficient level.”
As Voropaev (1997) notes, the strength of a National-level Kettlebell athlete is equivalent to that of a category II Olympic lifter. According to Voropaev, this is the “sufficient level.” However, for some reason he does not account for weightclasses; the difference in strength between light- and heavyweight athletes is significant. In other words, lightweights and heavyweights need to produce significantly different absolute levels of force to lift the same 32kg kettlebell. This mistake was repeated by Romashin (1992) in defining testing loads for determining force development. 80kg athletes were required to perform 110-115kg barbell squats as a prerequisite for fulfilling the Master of Sports Candidate (CMS) standard. In the same publication, Romashin makes the connection between maximum strength level and results in kettlebell lifting.
Vorotyntsev’s manual (2002) provides basic levels of strength and endurance that should be strived for in general physical training for kettlebell lifting:
[Vorontyntsev’s Standards for a 65kg athlete, v.s. the results of Rudnev’s student, World Record holder E.V. Lopatin]
Bench: 80kg [Lopatin: 65kg]
Deadlift: 110kg [Lopatin: 90kg]
Squat: 110kg [Lopatin: 80kg]
32kg Press: 1-2 [Lopatin: 0]
3000m run: Youth Category [Lopatin: Adult Category]
As you can see, the World Record holder did not pass any of the strength tests and shouldn’t count on a high result!
Such errors are understandable, because researchers have not correctly defined the content of the strength component of kettlebell training. Therefore, it is wrong to use barbell exercises as a testing load. Barbell squats do not correspond to the kettlebell jerk modality and cannot be a test of capability. The differing positions of the weight (on the shoulders v.s. in the rack position) causes dissimilarity in posture and force-distribution into muscle groups. So, it is unsurprising that a lightweight athlete who significantly exceeds even the heavyweights’ CMS standards in kettlebell reps, is not able to perform even one 110kb barbell squat!
The mechanism for producing the required force in kettlebell lifting is the explosive type - providing the necessary acceleration to projectiles in order to carry them to a certain height. The amplitude of the squats (leg bending angles) is significantly less than in barbell lifting, and the period of the Jerk (or snatch) cycle is much shorter (Gomonov, 2000). Strong and easily fatigued muscle fibers are not recruited; activity is carried out by slow endurance and fast endurance fibers. In barbell lifting, on the contrary, the main work is carried out by fast, easily fatiguable (white) fibers. It is now clear that in kettlebell lifting, the condition of the endurance fibers is most important, not the condition of the entire muscle. Therefore, tests should be selected to determine the level of endurance muscle strength, in other words, to determine strength endurance.
The synchronization of the activity of endurance fibers is determined by the frequency of nerve impulses, not by their strength. It is this synchronization that produces the necessary force in kettlebell lifting, which explains the moderate hypertrophy resulting from kettlebell lifting versus barbell. In addition, due to the long duration of competitive sets, oxidative enzyme activity is higher than that of glycolytic enzymes.
Thus, the strength component in kettlebell lifting is not decisive, as indicated by most researchers. Muscle strength in a kettlebell lifter is limited to the slow and fast endurance fibers, which means that strength level only reaches 70% of the Maximum Voluntary Force (Platonov, 1997). As you can see, strength in kettlebell lifting is of interest not in its pure form, but in combination with endurance.
Strength endurance is, of course, one of the foremost qualities of a kettlebell lifter. However, here too it is necessary to clarify some issues. The structure of strength endurance, according to Verkhoshansky (1977), is a “blank spot” in Sports Training Theory. Contradictory data can be found when trying to define strength endurance as a physical quality. Thus, some authors (Kuznetsov, 1972; Yeger, Oelshlegel, 1975; Matveev, 1977; Verkhoshansky, 1977; Laputin, Oleshko, 1982; Platonov, 1984) classify strength endurance as a quality of strength, others (Nabatnikova, 1983; Gurevich, 1976; Kuramshin, 1980) - as endurance. Vinogradov defines strength endurance as “the ability to perform activity with consistent output voltage over time.” As we discovered, the output never exceeds 70% of the Maximum Voluntary Force, or the strength of the endurance muscle fibers. The duration of strength endurance exercises, as a rule, does not exceed 2-3 minutes (Platonov, 1997).
Strength endurance in its pure form implies continuous repetition of movements (stopping only to fix positions) not exceeding 40 reps (Myakinchenko, 1997). In kettlebell lifting, pauses between reps reach 10-20 seconds, and the number of reps often exceeds one hundred. Under these conditions, the body’s recovery process during exercise become especially important. The higher the speed of recovery, the higher the pace of the exercise, that is, the pace that allows you to work all 10 minutes of the competition time. Athletes with well-developed speed-strength qualities (strength endurance) achieve high results in 30-60 second sprint sets [attempting maximum rep count in short intervals]. In such a test, work happens via continuous muscle contraction, with a pace of 30-40 repetitions per minute (i.e., strength endurance mode), with the main energy source being glycogen reserves. These athletes are significantly inferior to endurance ones in a five-minute test, not to mention the 10 minutes of competition. In the case [of endurance athletes], work happens via oxidative reaction, where oxygen supplied during respiration is the energy source. Thus, strength endurance is not decisive in kettlebell lifting either. It only allows you to perform sets at a fast pace for 1-3 minutes.
Kettlebell competitors need the endurance to work for 10 minutes. Therefore, we should talk about special endurance, i.e. the endurance to work with pauses between repetitions which are sufficient to recover before the next repetition (within the tempo of a snatch or jerk) (Lopatin, 2000; Romashin, 1991). Exceeding an athlete’s optimal pace is the factor that causes overwork/premature ending of work, not insufficient development of strength endurance, volitional qualities or motivation, as Vinogradov notes in his research (1998). So far we have not found descriptions of special endurance in the kettlebell lifting research, although the importance is obvious.
In the course of research on improving the abilities of junior athletes, Vinogradov (1998) revealed its’ dependence on their levels of general, special, and strength endurance, but strength endurance was prioritized; in the recommendations of Voropaev (1986) on the organization of the training process, special endurance is generally considered as strength endurance.
From the above it is clear that competitive pace is strictly individual and depends on weightclass, qualifications, and training stage. In any case, the pace should ensure work throughout the allotted time (10 minutes). According to Zatsiorsky (1982), stable pace is an important indicator for achievements in cyclic sports. Vinogradov, in 1988, pointed out that Masters of Sports use 7-10 minutes, Master of Sports Candidates 5-6, Class I athletes even less, but today athletes of all levels strive to use all of the allotted time, choosing their own optimal pace. As for Voropaev's (1986, 1988) statement about the stimulating effect of fast paces (up to 27 reps per minute), we dare to disagree. As already noted, a fast pace causes premature fatigue, requiring inefficient white-muscle fibers to work, while a significant part of the energy is produced by the wasteful glycolytic pathway causing the formation of oxygen debt. Therefore, premature cessation of sets happens and no amount of willpower can resist it. Voropaev points out that thean average pace of 19 Jerks per minute is optimal, but today such rates simply do not exist in kettlebell lifting. The World Record in the Jerk in 10 minutes is 170. It becomes clear why athletes using this “average” pace do not last the entire time limit - it is simply impossible. The fallacy of attempting to determine rates without taking the intensity of the activity of functional systems into account is obvious.
On this issue, we agree with the opinion of Myakinchenko (1997) about the careful use of interval training methods in the mode of glycolytic energy production. The most effective way to train slow muscle fibers is a steady mode of work, i.e. a regime of sufficient oxygen supply. This mode is ensured when working at 80-90% of the maximum oxygen consumption, or working at a heart rate of 170-190 beats per minute (Platonov, 1997; Myakinchenko, 1997). Based on your heart rate, you can easily determine the optimal operating mode and optimal pace. Zaitsev (1991) recommends a training load heart rate range of 160-180 beats/min, but during competitive activity the heart rate can exceed 190 beats/min, which means that work in this mode must be included in the training program in the Preparatory period.
So, the modern trend in kettlebell lifting is to predominantly develop General, and on its basis, Special endurance, rather than strength and power endurance as stated by most well-known manuals on kettlebell lifting (Shvydky, 2002). The proof is the victories and World Records of former skiers, rowers, and long-distance runners. It is these athletes who show better results in the kettlebell training groups at our Institute. The development of general endurance at the stage of General Physical Training was considered by Vinogradov (1998). Development of general endurance is considered one of the primary tasks during the Initial stage of training (N.M. Makarov,1976 & A.V. Chernyak, Zh.T. Butinvinov,1978). The authors note that the optimal combination of special training means and general-developmental exercises aimed at developing general endurance not only doesn’t interfere with, but also increases general and special performance.
Modern kettlebell lifting is distinguished by high achievements, and places high demands on the development of general and special endurance. Today, without these qualities, it is impossible to show a high result and work through all 10 minutes of regulation. Therefore, in modern conditions, the utility of the experience of kettlebell lifting of the ‘80s is doubtful. We propose new priorities - the development of special endurance on the basis of general endurance and the use of methodological experience in cyclic sports.
Professors of the Department of Physical Training and Sports, Far Eastern Military Institute
E.V. Lopatin, Master of Sports - International Class (Kettlebell Lifting)
S.L. Rudnev, Master of Sports - International Class (Kettlebell Lifting.)