Sweat is a bad sign?

[RichD]

Wall Street Journal carries a weekly health section. Recently,
I found an astounding item: people apparently shy away from
exercise, because they view perspiration and raised pulse rate
as bad signs.

Holy Jane Fonda, Batman! Isn't that very strange? I've never
known anyone who thought that. Has anybody here ever run
across such a thing?

http://tinyurl.com/WSJ-anti-exercise

Also, the bit about ventilatory threshold is interesting,
and news to me.

--
Rich

[Steve Freides]

"ventilatory threshold" a new term for an old, and simple, idea - the
place where you cross from aerobic to anaerobic. The article makes good
points - there is a lot of psychology involved.

It's troubling that the article assumes "exercise" means aerobic
exercise - I recommend everyone lift weights instead, which is
anaerobic, and don't worry about the "ventilatory" whatever, just rest
until you catch your breath between sets - couldn't be simpler.

I competed at a powerlifting meet 2 days ago - here I am, at age 57 and
a rather runner/bikie-like 148 lbs, lifting 345 lbs. off the floor, with
no belt, wrist or knee wraps, or other supportive gear. The clip is 25
seconds long but the weight starts to move at about the 15-second mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65Obo6FLMg

Thank you to my wife for taking the video with her phone. This lift was
good for a new age/weight/division American record in the World National
Powerlifting Federation. My blood work is all excellent, as is my blood
pressure and every other measure of my health, including my resting
pulse in the upper 40's.

I still enjoy running and riding a bike once in a while (the last time
for either was at least six months ago) but ...

One does not need aerobic exercise in order to be healthy

and there is convincing evidence to suggest that, the older one gets,
the more important it is make one's exercise priorities working to
build/retain muscle and preserve/improve joint health and full range of
motion.

And I am living proof that weight lifting does not need to make one
"bulk up" if you don't want to - avoiding that is very easy.

Steve Freides
http://www.kbnj.com
http://RideChickens.blogspot.com

[Steven Bornfeld]

There is nothing here that seems individually wrong, but the casual
reader may come away thinking that some people are just too out of shape
to exercise. The assertion that "ventilatory" (anaerobic) threshold can
be raised (very significantly) is almost lost.
The idea that stress is necessarily bad was thrown out over 50 years
ago with Selye.

Steve

[Steven Bornfeld]

I guess Murdick better not screw around with you.
The Led Zep was a nice touch.

Steve

[Steve Freides]

Damned straight. :)

> The Led Zep was a nice touch.

That was the music playing at the meet - not my personal choice and I
pretty much ignored it.

-S-

[John Hurley]

Steve:

# I competed at a powerlifting meet 2 days ago - here I am, at age 57

and a rather runner/bikie-like 148 lbs, lifting 345 lbs. off the
floor, with no belt, wrist or knee wraps, or other supportive gear.

... Congratulations!

I do not understand much about weight lifting ... but why wouldn't one
want to use some supportive gear as long as it is legal?

I thought weight lifters are supposed to take the bar and press it
above your head???

What you were doing I would guess is mostly using the legs?

[Steve Freides]

John Hurley wrote:
> Steve:
>
> # I competed at a powerlifting meet 2 days ago - here I am, at age 57
> and a rather runner/bikie-like 148 lbs, lifting 345 lbs. off the
> floor, with no belt, wrist or knee wraps, or other supportive gear.
>
> ... Congratulations!

Thank you, John.

You know, as it just so happens, I'm going to give running a bit of a go
again this summer, and I started already - I ran around the block, a
pretty long block here, yesterday. My mission is to breath both ways
only through my nose - when I can't do that, I walk until I've recovered
enough to do it again. I had to stop twice in my ~1/2 mile run but I'm
on my way.

> I do not understand much about weight lifting ... but why wouldn't one
> want to use some supportive gear as long as it is legal?

The goal for me isn't winning, it's becoming stronger. I'd rather do
the work myself. The subject of gear is a complicated one in the sport
of powerlifting (which is different than weighlifting - the latter is
used to refer to what they do in the Olympics).

In most powerlifting federations, there are two divisions, geared and
raw. The geared division allows all sorts of stuff, some of which
functions like a spring (for lack of a better explanation). Imagine
performing a squat in a very tight set of pants that were strong enough
not to rip - the tightness of the clothing helps you lift more weight.

In the raw divisions I lift in, they still allow a belt, and some
federations also allow supportive wraps on the knees and/or wrists.
Again, my choice is to use none of that. I compete because I enjoy the
challenge of performing on someone else's clock.

> I thought weight lifters are supposed to take the bar and press it
> above your head???

The overhead press was the third lift in the Olympics until they dropped
it to two lifts, the current snatch plus clean-and-jerk, both of which
are overhead lifts but performed explosively using legs, hips, and back
strength to get the bar overhead. The overhead press was deemed too
difficult to judge because people would keep their knees locked but lean
back a _lot_ as they were pressing the bar. If you look at old videos
on YouTube, you'll see what was supposed to be a standing press
performed by some people leaning back so far that their torsos were
parallel, not perpendicular, to the ground. I think the last time it
was used was 1972, if memory serves.

> What you were doing I would guess is mostly using the legs?

In my case, mostly back and hips, I think, but yes, a lot of legs.
You'd be surprised how much of the rest of your body you do use, though.
You're holding onto the weight with your hands, and if everything
between your hands and your feet isn't strong, the weight isn't going to
come off the floor. The deadlift is said to use more of your body's
musculature than any other individual lift.

Thanks again for your reply, John.

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

[thirty-six]

Obviously, but what means have you to intimidate the opposition?

[RichD]

On Feb 25, "Steve Freides" <st...@kbnj.com> wrote:
> > Wall Street Journal carries a weekly health section.  Recently,
> > I found an astounding item: people apparently shy away from
> > exercise, because they view perspiration and raised pulse rate
> > as bad signs.

> > I've never known anyone who thought that.  Has anybody
> > here ever run across such a thing?
>
> >http://tinyurl.com/WSJ-anti-exercise
>
> > Also, the bit about ventilatory threshold is interesting,
> > and news to me.
>
> "ventilatory threshold" a new term for an old, and simple, idea -
> the place where you cross from aerobic to anaerobic.

Perhaps, but isn't that backward? The short term
is anaerobic, then later aerobic.

> It's troubling that the article assumes "exercise" means aerobic
> exercise - I recommend everyone lift weights instead, which is
> anaerobic, and don't worry about the "ventilatory" whatever, just rest
> until you catch your breath between sets - couldn't be simpler.

This question is an area of research, so I'd say the
most conservative program is a combination. My
typical gym workout is 15 minutes warm up and
stretch, half hour lift, half hour cardio. Until more
data comes in, this type of thing looks most sensible.

--
Rich

[Steve Freides]

RichD wrote:
> On Feb 25, "Steve Freides" <st...@kbnj.com> wrote:
>>> Wall Street Journal carries a weekly health section. Recently,
>>> I found an astounding item: people apparently shy away from
>>> exercise, because they view perspiration and raised pulse rate
>>> as bad signs.
>>> I've never known anyone who thought that. Has anybody
>>> here ever run across such a thing?
>>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/WSJ-anti-exercise
>>
>>> Also, the bit about ventilatory threshold is interesting,
>>> and news to me.
>>
>> "ventilatory threshold" a new term for an old, and simple, idea -
>> the place where you cross from aerobic to anaerobic.
>
> Perhaps, but isn't that backward? The short term
> is anaerobic, then later aerobic.

OK, sure. I was just thinking of the continuum being from doing
something slow/easy to doing it faster and faster - you cross from an
aerobic effort to anaerobic. No big deal.

>> It's troubling that the article assumes "exercise" means aerobic
>> exercise - I recommend everyone lift weights instead, which is
>> anaerobic, and don't worry about the "ventilatory" whatever, just
>> rest until you catch your breath between sets - couldn't be simpler.
>
> This question is an area of research, so I'd say the
> most conservative program is a combination. My
> typical gym workout is 15 minutes warm up and
> stretch, half hour lift, half hour cardio. Until more
> data comes in, this type of thing looks most sensible.

IMHO, the data is out there already. Cardio as an exercise mainstay
results in intial fat loss followed by adaptation follow by worsening
body composition - less muscle, more fat, especially in mid-life and
beyond.

Tabata has already proven you can have a healthy heart and make
cardiovascular improvements, both aerobic and anaerobic, by sprinting
like a manic (I think the quoted figure is 170% VO2 Max or something
like that) for a few seconds at a time. Anyone can look up up the
Tabata Protocol and read that one.

I am not interested in only sensible; I'm interested in me, better -
sensible but produces tangible results. To me, results means continued
good body
composition and, in my case, hopefully improvement in body composition.
(I'm already lean, have enough muscle to deadlift more than twice my
bodyweight on demand, and I'm about to turn 58. If I remain in the 148
lb. class and get stronger, I'm happy.)

I measure my cardio health by a variety of means - how easy is it for me
to take a brisk walk for a few miles, or carry 20 lbs. of groceries home
from the store, how is my resting pulse, how is my blood pressure, what
do my blood tests look like? If all of those things are good, any
further cardio benefit would be sport-specific, meaning that, unless I
want to enter a distance race, it serves absolutely no purpose in my
life.

Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

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

[Existential Angst]

"Steve Freides" <st...@kbnj.com> wrote in message
news:appc9c...@mid.individual.net...

Indeed, mileage does vary.
Strength training is important, super important, but so is the ability to,
say, run for a continuous 1/2 hr.
The term used is "metabolic fitness", altho proly not the best coinage.

The fact that Friedes thinks this has "absolutely no purpose in his life"
speaks volumes.

Running for 1/2 hr (or the equivalent) is unlikely to negatively affect body
composition one whit -- ESP when coupled with a strength-training routine.

Even without a strength-training routine, moderate running, even at old-man
12 min miles, confers huge improvements in health/fitness, as was well
documented by Ken Cooper, military MD.

It should be noted that most of Friedes' accomplishments are fueled by sheer
narcissism, rather than by knowledge, ability, or technique.
--
EA

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

[Existential Angst]

"Steve Freides" <st...@kbnj.com> wrote in message

news:ap83mg...@mid.individual.net...

> John Hurley wrote:
>> Steve:
>>
>> # I competed at a powerlifting meet 2 days ago - here I am, at age 57
>> and a rather runner/bikie-like 148 lbs, lifting 345 lbs. off the
>> floor, with no belt, wrist or knee wraps, or other supportive gear.
>>
>> ... Congratulations!
>
> Thank you, John.
>
> You know, as it just so happens, I'm going to give running a bit of a go
> again this summer, and I started already - I ran around the block, a
> pretty long block here, yesterday. My mission is to breath both ways
> only through my nose - when I can't do that, I walk until I've recovered
> enough to do it again. I had to stop twice in my ~1/2 mile run but I'm
> on my way.

From a physiological pov, that is THE dumbest most counterproductive goal
one could endorse.
The goal is to REMOVE bottlenecks in the metabolic pathway, not to introduce
them.

Now, having said that, if Friedes were a boxer, where the future of one's
teefuses just might outweigh physiological concerns, yeah, you gotta
practice this, but from a pure health/fitness pov, it is idiocy -- a state
not unfamiliar to the verbose Friedes.
Who to this day maintains that kettlebells are superior to dumbbells, with
nary a shred of physics/physiology to justify this.
Iirc, Friedes believes a 20# kb is heavier than a 20# db..... Go
figger....

Exept for mebbe a dozen other lifts. <doh>

What IS true, however, is that the muscles that the deadlift does maximally
exploit, are exploited to the max.
--
EA

[Existential Angst]

"RichD" <r_dela...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:06b48efd-477b-43b4...@kt16g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...

===================================================

The cardio is/can be its own warmup.
Then lift.
Then stretch.... if you must. Stretching is over-rated, imo, and much of
it can be accomplished with simple large ROM movements.
You'll save 15 mins, every workout.... lol

Also, consider doing the lifting and cardio on separate days. This way you
can "explore" more options in each.
Running in a park affords a leg workout that goes far beyond
jogging/running, if you choose to explore, be a little creative.
Running/walking backwards is just one option. HeavyHands is another. Many
more, as well, great for over-all agility.

Are you still doing stairs? I'm still doing 1,000 W climbs (sprints), but
not as often. But, I now keep elevators to a minimum, and 90% of the time
opt for the stairs. 40 stories of stairs is calorically equivalent to
running 1 mile.

Friedes dudn't understand that running et al IS a form of weight lifting.
He doesn't realize that multiples of bodyweight are being landed on/pushed
off by ONE foot at a time -- that is tremendous loading, with concommitant
tremendous effects. Not all of them good all the time, but still..... :)
--
EA



--
Rich

[Syamu Mamilla M]

gty

[thirty-six]

On Mar 10, 7:09 pm, "Existential Angst" <fit...@optonline.net> wrote:
> "Steve Freides" <st...@kbnj.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ap83mg...@mid.individual.net...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > John Hurley wrote:
> >> Steve:
>
> >> # I competed at a powerlifting meet 2 days ago - here I am, at age 57
> >> and a rather runner/bikie-like 148 lbs, lifting 345 lbs. off the
> >> floor, with no belt, wrist or knee wraps, or other supportive gear.
>
> >> ... Congratulations!
>
> > Thank you, John.
>
> > You know, as it just so happens, I'm going to give running a bit of a go
> > again this summer, and I started already - I ran around the block, a
> > pretty long block here, yesterday.  My mission is to breath both ways
> > only through my nose - when I can't do that, I walk until I've recovered
> > enough to do it again.  I had to stop twice in my ~1/2 mile run but I'm
> > on my way.
>
> From a physiological pov, that is THE dumbest most counterproductive goal
> one could endorse.

Quite so. Running is very stimulating and can show an inordinate
amount of physiological stress despite limiting effort by restriction
simply by nose breathing. I believe this is mostly due to the active
pumping of the lymphatic system. The muscle forces involved are
simply never there in cycling, even during the strongest sprints.
Unless the prospective runner specifically targets the major lymphatic
ducts beforehand by stretching(could be yoga) AND use of weights then
he is possibly in for a harder time than imagined.

> The goal is to REMOVE bottlenecks in the metabolic pathway, not to introduce
> them.

Yes, it's better to walk first. With daily practice of easy walking,
the tempo should increase, so eventually one will naturally and
smoothly break into a run. Daily distance should be between 1 and 2
miles twice a day, the aim being to get walking smoothly, to become
light of foot. If all goes well, running will occur naturally between
2 and 3 weeks. This shall be easy running, no effort whatsoever.
Once this occurs and is present for the the remaining distance whence
it starts, then the next day the distance may be increased. There
should be no targets but if times and distance are not improving there
should be a rest day and consideration given to rest, diet, stretching
and breathing. There are breathing techniques which the successful
weights man will likely already come to know directly through
experience.

>
> Now, having said that, if Friedes were a boxer, where the future of one's
> teefuses just might outweigh physiological concerns, yeah, you gotta
> practice this, but from a pure health/fitness pov, it is idiocy -- a state
> not unfamiliar to the verbose Friedes.

I'll happily take that tag, I agree with limitation of output by
restriction to nasal breathing for building aerobic capacity.

> Who to this day maintains that kettlebells are superior to dumbbells, with
> nary a shred of physics/physiology to justify this.
>  Iirc, Friedes believes a 20# kb is heavier than a 20# db.....  Go
> figger....
>

I'm interested in the use of kettlebells for general health and
specifically core training. It seems to me that abdominal control and
strength is vital to health and sports fitness, whatever the
discipline.

[thirty-six]

On Mar 11, 1:02 am, "Existential Angst" <fit...@optonline.net> wrote:
> "RichD" <r_delaney2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

If you feel that, you are doing it all wrong. Too aggressive by
half. Forward momentum is what lifts the body as the hip passes over
the foot, the pulling back of the foot is what creates the speed.
Making the transition from landing a foot to getting the relative hip
to pass smoothly over without loss of speed is the key to running most
effectively. It helps also to play a fast "ball" sport such as table
tennis or badminton where one is principally on one's toes.

[Existential Angst]

"thirty-six" <thirt...@live.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a39fc0e9-d2ab-4485...@h11g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...

===================================================

Regardless of what pop running books say or how you couch the biomechanics,
about 3/4 of the energy expenditure of running is simply the vertical
travel. Bang, case closed.
Elite runners might have it a bit lower, yer avg joggers proly quite a bit
higher.

I've read those running books, and they're all totally fullashit.
If you in fact have running talent,(read: good running biomechanics) then
that talent can be exploited, by good coaching.
If you don't have running talent, you can also improve a bit, but not all
that much.

Still, talent or no talent, more miles beget more miles, times can improve,
and one's physiology absolutely changes, for the better.

And, the fact remains, the forces involved in running are very substantial.
If you have a bathroom scale you don't mind breaking, have someone watch it
while you land on it in a running stride. Even walking may peg the needle.
--
EA

[thirty-six]

On Mar 13, 4:34 am, "Existential Angst" <fit...@optonline.net> wrote:
> "thirty-six" <thirty-...@live.co.uk> wrote in message

Your mind is closed!

> Elite runners might have it a bit lower, yer avg joggers proly quite a bit
> higher.
>
> I've read those running books, and they're all totally fullashit.

Wouldn't know what you are on about, the only book I read on
running(specifically) principally addressed the psychological factors
involved, which i was more interested in how they could be transferred
to cycling. This was before I received multiple medical
determinations which were aimed to make me have no hope at regaining a
normal sedate life, never mind any notions of returning to sport.
With the total lack of medical assistance I did become much worse, but
not before seeing a glimmer of what I should have (at least) been
capable of, possibly national level at 400 to 1500m running and/or
make a fair representation in many track cycling events. The facts
are at the time I was showing unprecedented progress(for me) in
running and cycling, I had no intention other than to enjoy walking
and gentle cycling. A good amount of sun and some unwitting dietary
choices enabled high-level performances without apparent effort in
very few weeks, much less than any reference I had read or heard.

On the road I was turning the pedals at between 230 and 240rpm during
sprinting which equated to in excess of 50mph and I was winding this
up from 100rpm with 50yds and could further sustain this level for at
least 150yds. Unfortunately my turn of speed did not last for long
enough that I would attempt this sprinting speed more than once in a
ride as my sessions generally worked up to this over an hour or two.
I didn't feel the need to press for performance. I took a downturn in
health, possibly as a result that the efforts, though light as they
seemed, had triggered a healing crisis of which I had not the
knowledge at the time to cope.

Realistically it is unlikely that I will make for a full healing and
so I doubt I'll be riding the track in a few years at 50, for although
i could, I do not want to cause myself stress of which I have found,
as yet, difficult to recover.

> If you in fact have running talent,(read: good running biomechanics)  then
> that talent can be exploited, by good coaching.
> If you don't have running talent, you can also improve a bit, but not all
> that much.
>
> Still, talent or no talent, more miles beget more miles, times can improve,
> and one's physiology absolutely changes, for the better.

Bullshit! I've done it both ways and I didn't read a book to
determine how to run effectively, it came to me as a result of walking
every day, without need for rushing. Pounding the pavement leads to
failure and illness.

>
> And, the fact remains, the forces involved in running are very substantial.
> If you have a bathroom scale you don't mind breaking, have someone watch it
> while you land on it in a running stride.  Even walking may peg the needle.

consumer-science.

[Existential Angst]

"thirty-six" <thirt...@live.co.uk> wrote in message

news:67cb70d3-6200-4494...@x15g2000vbj.googlegroups.com...

======================================================

I hae trouble follwing your logic, syntax......

Evewrything has its optimum.... too little is too little, too much is too
much.
Dr. Ken Cooper, a military MD, author of Aerobics (which you should read),
studied poss. the largest demographic, running-wise, in recorded history --
likely hundreds of thousands of GIs. Runing, as a potentiator of health,
works.

BUT, his Running Rx, if you will, was surpirsingly mild -- just a few miles
a week. He even specified an upper limit: of 20-30 miles, MAX, which for
RR peeple, is tame indeed.

You -- everyone -- should read that book. I used to think Cooper was just
another pop icon, more pop bullshit.
Au contraire, this is a very thoughtful, well-written, insightful book,
written by a very dedicated guy, a real scientist imo. First came out in
1968.

Is walking "better" than running, health-wise?
Depends. Anything can be subject to anything. MY running Rx is mild
indeed., I don't respond terribly well to it "skeletally". But
*metabolically*, if you catch the diff, running is hard to beat -- altho
there are ways to "beat" it. Stair climbing is one, which I discovered thru
RichD. Stair climbing is Da Bomb -- proly good for diehard runners, as
well.
--
EA

[Steve Freides]

thirty-six wrote:

>>> You know, as it just so happens, I'm going to give running a bit of
>>> a go again this summer, and I started already - I ran around the
>>> block, a pretty long block here, yesterday. My mission is to breath
>>> both ways only through my nose - when I can't do that, I walk until
>>> I've recovered enough to do it again. I had to stop twice in my
>>> ~1/2 mile run but I'm on my way.
>>
>> From a physiological pov, that is THE dumbest most counterproductive
>> goal one could endorse.
>
> Quite so. Running is very stimulating and can show an inordinate
> amount of physiological stress despite limiting effort by restriction
> simply by nose breathing. I believe this is mostly due to the active
> pumping of the lymphatic system. The muscle forces involved are
> simply never there in cycling, even during the strongest sprints.
> Unless the prospective runner specifically targets the major lymphatic
> ducts beforehand by stretching(could be yoga) AND use of weights then
> he is possibly in for a harder time than imagined.
>
>> The goal is to REMOVE bottlenecks in the metabolic pathway, not to
>> introduce them.

No, the goal is to train with appropriate stresses to induce the
adaptation desired.

> Yes, it's better to walk first. With daily practice of easy walking,
> the tempo should increase, so eventually one will naturally and
> smoothly break into a run. Daily distance should be between 1 and 2
> miles twice a day, the aim being to get walking smoothly, to become
> light of foot. If all goes well, running will occur naturally between
> 2 and 3 weeks. This shall be easy running, no effort whatsoever.
> Once this occurs and is present for the the remaining distance whence
> it starts, then the next day the distance may be increased. There
> should be no targets but if times and distance are not improving there
> should be a rest day and consideration given to rest, diet, stretching
> and breathing. There are breathing techniques which the successful
> weights man will likely already come to know directly through
> experience.

I walk regularly, e.g., I walked 3 miles today, 2 miles yesterday, 3
miles on Sunday. The thought that "running will occur naturally" after
walking for a few weeks is nonsense.

>> Now, having said that, if Friedes were a boxer, where the future of
>> one's teefuses just might outweigh physiological concerns, yeah, you
>> gotta practice this, but from a pure health/fitness pov, it is
>> idiocy -- a state not unfamiliar to the verbose Friedes.
>
> I'll happily take that tag, I agree with limitation of output by
> restriction to nasal breathing for building aerobic capacity.

The purpose of restricted breathing is to improve breathing which, in
turn, can improve running. It's not a difficult connection to make and
if it's not the approach for everyone, so be it. It will be my
approach. One of the most common mistakes recreational runners make,
IMHO, is that their easy days aren't easy enough. It was regularly my
mistake and lead to chronic overtraining in my case, which in turn
explains why running has left a bad taste in my mouth. Nasal breathing
during easy running is just what the doctor ordered for me - it's
self-limiting and self-correcting in just the ways I need. And my
running will all be my attempts at easy until I succeed at easy running.
When I did this two years ago, I got up to running more than a mile with
nasal only breathing - I'm hoping to take it further this year.

To be clear, I'm am not going to run in order to be more fit. I venture
to say that, by every measure, I am more fit now than when I was a
runner except when the measure is aerobic exercise. I'm going to run,
to run.

>> Who to this day maintains that kettlebells are superior to
>> dumbbells, with nary a shred of physics/physiology to justify this.
>> Iirc, Friedes believes a 20# kb is heavier than a 20# db..... Go
>> figger....
>>
>
> I'm interested in the use of kettlebells for general health and
> specifically core training. It seems to me that abdominal control and
> strength is vital to health and sports fitness, whatever the
> discipline.

They are an excellent weapon in one's arsenal. And a 20 lb. kettlebell
will give one more of a workout than a 20 lb. dumbbell in most cases.

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

[thirty-six]

How does one determine the weight required? I should be around 5'11"
only for disease causing spinal compression, curvature and
scolliosis. I should have a natural lean and muscled racing weight of
around 155llb only I'm a little bloated with poor circulation. It's
not something I'll be capable of using with intensity but when my pain
is tolerable I may give it go in short bursts through he day.
Lightest weight available to start?

[Steve Freides]

thirty-six wrote:


> How does one determine the weight required? I should be around 5'11"
> only for disease causing spinal compression, curvature and
> scolliosis. I should have a natural lean and muscled racing weight of
> around 155llb only I'm a little bloated with poor circulation. It's
> not something I'll be capable of using with intensity but when my pain
> is tolerable I may give it go in short bursts through he day.
> Lightest weight available to start?

The first thing you should do is visit your doctor and get cleared to
exercise without restrictions or, if not, get a clear idea of what you
should and should not attempt.

The standard starting weight for an adult male is 16 kg which is 35 lbs.
The standard resource for learning what to do is Pavel's, "Enter The
Kettlebell," available in both book and DVD form, and here's a link
There is no "required" weight although about 1/3 of one's bodyweight has
proven to be a good size for two-handed swings for training explosive
strength according to the research I'm aware of.

http://www.kbnj.com/etk.htm

You could certainly start with 12 kg instead of 16 or get both - I would
not go lighter.

Last but not least and at the risk of stating the obvious, the very best
course of action would be to visit http://StrongFirst.com, click on
Instructors, and find yourself someone to work with in person, at least
to get started and perhaps after that as well.

Hope that helps.

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

[Existential Angst]

"Steve Freides" <st...@kbnj.com> wrote in message

news:aqch0h...@mid.individual.net...

This is actually in inneresting point, and legit, in a narrow context.
Basically akin to altitutde training.

However, still esp. practical for "normal" fitness, health goals, but legit
for specific training, adaptive purposes.

>
> To be clear, I'm am not going to run in order to be more fit. I venture
> to say that, by every measure, I am more fit now than when I was a
> runner except when the measure is aerobic exercise. I'm going to run,
> to run.
>
>>> Who to this day maintains that kettlebells are superior to
>>> dumbbells, with nary a shred of physics/physiology to justify this.
>>> Iirc, Friedes believes a 20# kb is heavier than a 20# db..... Go
>>> figger....
>>>
>>
>> I'm interested in the use of kettlebells for general health and
>> specifically core training. It seems to me that abdominal control and
>> strength is vital to health and sports fitness, whatever the
>> discipline.
>
> They are an excellent weapon in one's arsenal. And a 20 lb. kettlebell
> will give one more of a workout than a 20 lb. dumbbell in most cases.

Actually *possibly* in only ONE case, the between-the-leg swing, which is of
dubious value from the gitgo.
Soon you will be hawking perpetual motion energy machines, or selling the
run-yer-car-on-water conjob -- the physics of kb's is just about the same..
--
EA


>
> -S-
> http://www.kbn.com
>
>
>

[Existential Angst]

"Steve Freides" <st...@kbnj.com> wrote in message

news:aqdqh8...@mid.individual.net...

OR, after 36 consults his doc, he could buy a $5 db handle with spring
clips, a bunch of 2.5 and 5# plates, and for 1/10th the price of one kb,
have the equivalent of about two dozen kbs, with 10x the versatility, 10x
improved ergonomics, 1/10th the risk, and...... <drum roll>..... 10x the
results, benefits.

OH, and without the megacost of some deluded ex-RKC knuckleheaded kb
cult-head, exiting DragonDoor -- where all these deluded kb cultheads used
to reside.

If you MUST swing a fukn weight between yer legs, go to rosstraining.com,
and you'll find out how to make an *adjustable* plate-kettlebell system for
those ridiculous swings, for about another $5, in plumbing parts.

36, the single most effective most efficient whole-body exercise you can do
is lift a db off the ground, and over yer head. And you can do this in at
least a dozen different ways.
Or do HeavyHand running, walking.
Or use my apparatus..... which is not on the market yet, but it will be,
perty soon.

Also read Drew Baye on strength training, adaptation, which will further
disabuse you of this kb horseshit.

Oh, the WSJ article..... Wall Streeters don't want to perspire, while they
fuck the world population in the economic ass. That's why Bloomberg has
spent 100's of millions of dollars air conditioning the main subway hubs at
Wall Street.
So of course they will be concerned about sweat and elevated HR.
Believe me, they already get quite rush from pounding us in the ass. It's a
kind of sport, might could become an olympic event.

[thirty-six]

On 14 Mar, 11:27, "Steve Freides" <st...@kbnj.com> wrote:
> thirty-six wrote:
> > How does one determine the weight required?  I should be around 5'11"
> > only for disease causing spinal compression, curvature and
> > scolliosis.  I should have a natural lean and muscled racing weight of
> > around 155llb only I'm a little bloated with poor circulation.  It's
> > not something I'll be capable of using with intensity but when my pain
> > is tolerable I may give it go in short bursts through he day.
> > Lightest weight available to start?
>
> The first thing you should do is visit your doctor and get cleared to
> exercise without restrictions or, if not, get a clear idea of what you
> should and should not attempt.

I doubt that's going to help me, following doctors orders helped get
me into this shit.

>
> The standard starting weight for an adult male is 16 kg which is 35 lbs.

That'd likely be too much for me, I doubt I could manage with much
over 10kg at any time right now.

> The standard resource for learning what to do is Pavel's, "Enter The
> Kettlebell," available in both book and DVD form, and here's a link
> There is no "required" weight although about 1/3 of one's bodyweight has
> proven to be a good size for two-handed swings for training explosive
> strength according to the research I'm aware of.

If i let 25kg fly it'd put a right big hole in the lawn.

>
> http://www.kbnj.com/etk.htm
>
> You could certainly start with 12 kg instead of 16 or get both - I would
> not go lighter.

They were on offer in local shop, I'll see what they have. I'll
likely make my decision on how I feel on the day.

>
> Last but not least and at the risk of stating the obvious, the very best

> course of action would be to visithttp://StrongFirst.com, click on

> Instructors, and find yourself someone to work with in person, at least
> to get started and perhaps after that as well.
>
> Hope that helps.

Well, only if I can get one cheap to start with, I don't really need
to keep a door prop.
Are these things usually suitable for leaving outside, are they
protected from weather corrosion?

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

[thirty-six]

On 14 Mar, 15:02, "Existential Angst" <fit...@optonline.net> wrote:
> "Steve Freides" <st...@kbnj.com> wrote in message
>
> news:aqdqh8...@mid.individual.net...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > thirty-six wrote:
>
> >> How does one determine the weight required?  I should be around 5'11"
> >> only for disease causing spinal compression, curvature and
> >> scolliosis.  I should have a natural lean and muscled racing weight of
> >> around 155llb only I'm a little bloated with poor circulation.  It's
> >> not something I'll be capable of using with intensity but when my pain
> >> is tolerable I may give it go in short bursts through he day.
> >> Lightest weight available to start?
>
> > The first thing you should do is visit your doctor and get cleared to
> > exercise without restrictions or, if not, get a clear idea of what you
> > should and should not attempt.
>
> > The standard starting weight for an adult male is 16 kg which is 35 lbs.
> > The standard resource for learning what to do is Pavel's, "Enter The
> > Kettlebell," available in both book and DVD form, and here's a link There
> > is no "required" weight although about 1/3 of one's bodyweight has proven
> > to be a good size for two-handed swings for training explosive strength
> > according to the research I'm aware of.
>
> >http://www.kbnj.com/etk.htm
>
> > You could certainly start with 12 kg instead of 16 or get both - I would
> > not go lighter.
>
> > Last but not least and at the risk of stating the obvious, the very best

> > course of action would be to visithttp://StrongFirst.com, click on

> > Instructors, and find yourself someone to work with in person, at least to
> > get started and perhaps after that as well.
>
> > Hope that helps.
>
> OR, after 36 consults his doc, he could buy a $5 db handle with spring
> clips, a bunch of 2.5 and 5# plates, and for 1/10th the price of one kb,

Not really. New kettlebells through regular bricks'n'mortar shop
recently offered nearby at £6 and £8 IIRC

> have the equivalent of about two dozen kbs, with 10x the versatility, 10x
> improved ergonomics, 1/10th the risk, and......   <drum roll>.....   10x the
> results, benefits.

I'm sure that you are satisfied with your most excellent choice.

>
> OH, and without the megacost of some deluded ex-RKC knuckleheaded kb
> cult-head, exiting DragonDoor -- where all these deluded kb cultheads used
> to reside.
>
> If you MUST swing a fukn weight between yer legs,

I have plenty of experience of that, gave up the Jockey's years back.

> go to rosstraining.com,
> and you'll find out how to make an *adjustable* plate-kettlebell system for
> those ridiculous swings, for about another $5, in plumbing parts.

I might break my nails. ;-)

>
> 36, the single most effective most efficient whole-body exercise you can do
> is lift a db off the ground, and over yer head.  And you can do this in at
> least a dozen different ways.

I'm a simple man with simple needs.

> Or do HeavyHand running,

there's likely a law against that.

> walking.
> Or use my apparatus.....  which is not on the market yet, but it will be,
> perty soon.
>
> Also read Drew Baye on strength training, adaptation, which will further
> disabuse you of this kb horseshit.

but we (in Britain) have been eating horses for breakfast, what's so
bad about a little horseshit in the kettle?

[Steve Freides]

thirty-six wrote:
> On 14 Mar, 11:27, "Steve Freides" <st...@kbnj.com> wrote:
>> thirty-six wrote:
>>> How does one determine the weight required? I should be around 5'11"
>>> only for disease causing spinal compression, curvature and
>>> scolliosis. I should have a natural lean and muscled racing weight
>>> of around 155llb only I'm a little bloated with poor circulation.
>>> It's not something I'll be capable of using with intensity but when
>>> my pain is tolerable I may give it go in short bursts through he
>>> day. Lightest weight available to start?
>>
>> The first thing you should do is visit your doctor and get cleared to
>> exercise without restrictions or, if not, get a clear idea of what
>> you should and should not attempt.
>
> I doubt that's going to help me, following doctors orders helped get
> me into this shit.

I'm sorry to hear that. Sounds like you need a different doctor. You
know this joke, I take it:

Q: What do you call the person who graduated dead last in their medical
school class?

A: Doctor.

>> The standard starting weight for an adult male is 16 kg which is 35
>> lbs.
>
> That'd likely be too much for me, I doubt I could manage with much
> over 10kg at any time right now.

The way we teach the kettlebell swing now is to start with a two-handed
kettlebell sumo deadlift, and everyone can deadlift 16 kg. And once you
do that, you'll figure out how the swing and the deadlift are just two
sides of the same coin. The height of the kettlebell handle is close to
the height of a barbell with plates, and the kettlbell will allow you to
place the weight between your feet - it's actually a fantastic way to
learn about deadlift mechanics.

>> The standard resource for learning what to do is Pavel's, "Enter The
>> Kettlebell," available in both book and DVD form, and here's a link
>> There is no "required" weight although about 1/3 of one's bodyweight
>> has proven to be a good size for two-handed swings for training
>> explosive strength according to the research I'm aware of.
>
> If i let 25kg fly it'd put a right big hole in the lawn.

Holes in the lawn are OK - pick an area of the lawn for training and off
you go.

In 10+ years of doing this, I think I've lost my grip on the kettlebell
exactly once and that was because I was talking to someone while
swinging a bell.

I started with a 16 kg (asked for it for Christmas, 2001, and my wife
was nice enough to oblige) and, after I did my first swings, I couldn't
imagine how I'd ever be able to swing something that heavy - that lasted
a few minutes, and a couple of weeks later, I ordered a 24 kg. The 24
again seemed like something I'd never be able to use but, within a few
weeks, I'd gotten comfortable with that, too.

>> http://www.kbnj.com/etk.htm
>>
>> You could certainly start with 12 kg instead of 16 or get both - I
>> would not go lighter.
>
> They were on offer in local shop, I'll see what they have. I'll
> likely make my decision on how I feel on the day.
>>
>> Last but not least and at the risk of stating the obvious, the very
>> best course of action would be to visithttp://StrongFirst.com, click
>> on Instructors, and find yourself someone to work with in person, at
>> least to get started and perhaps after that as well.
>>
>> Hope that helps.
>
> Well, only if I can get one cheap to start with, I don't really need
> to keep a door prop.
> Are these things usually suitable for leaving outside, are they
> protected from weather corrosion?

No, they'll eventually rust but it does depend on what they're made of -
most are cast iron with a coat of paint on them, but I've seen stainless
steel, the latter costing a pretty penny, however. But you can leave
them outside, and you can use them rusty, and you can always sand them
down and refinish them, and people do all of those things. The people
who leave them outside are the ones with the rust-colored calluses. :)

Kettlebells have become a commodity of late - there are good, expensive
ones, good less expensive ones, pretty good cheap ones, and lousy cheap
ones. The finish of the handle is what matters most - a little bump in
the wrong place and you'll find it unuseable (although you can fix that
by sanding it if you're able). You can also look on craigslist or
similar and find them used for local pickup - that's a great thing to
do.

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

[thirty-six]

cotton gloves ("for gardening") then?

>
> Kettlebells have become a commodity of late - there are good, expensive
> ones, good less expensive ones, pretty good cheap ones,

that's what I'm after.

> and lousy cheap
> ones.  The finish of the handle is what matters most - a little bump in
> the wrong place and you'll find it unuseable (although you can fix that
> by sanding it if you're able).

Probably, I have a roll of production cloth (the black grit stuff) and
can get short lengths of aluminium oxide if that be necessary.

> You can also look on craigslist or
> similar and find them used for local pickup - that's a great thing to
> do.

I think at the price that the new stuff has been been offered, I'll
save myself the rust for the moment. If they are still available I
also have the option of returning if unsuitable.
>
> -S-http://www.kbnj.com

Just thought, a sack of malt or potatoes is 25kg and I used to haul
two of them together without much difficulty as an adult. Even with
me at half size (very rough estimate) when I was a child I'd carry
three sacks with a little help getting them on my shoulders and head.
I can see that when I progress (with God's help) I should easily
manage the fat weight. It doesn't matter what the number is when I
don't fear the accountant. I'll load up a bag to do some tests and
see where it is at.

[Existential Angst]

"thirty-six" <thirt...@live.co.uk> wrote in message

news:7b95c732-e909-4742...@hl5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...

====================================================

Now THAT is mildly creative, inventive.

Why would you then fall for this kettlebell con????

In fact, lifting a sack of potatoes over yer head is a perty good idear.
MMA guys use these sandbags all the time.

Look, you gotta unnerstand how this whole kb thing came about.

It's all about good ole Merkin competition, dick size, and ignerints. It
dudn't matter whether shit is good, bad, legit, or bogus. As long as it's
DIFFERENT, as long as you can psyche out the witless Jones-es with it, and
even more importantly, as long as it has some fuknMystique/PASTICHE attached
to it -- in this case, this dumbassed Roosky Medievil pastiche.

Some dumb fuck -- Pavel in this case -- emigrates from goddamm Siberia, and
BANG, kbs are the new hot thing.
NOT because kbs have ANYTHING to do with Pavel's skill set, but only bec of
his genetics and the fact that Rooskies are among the toughest muthafuckas
in the world -- you'd be too, iffin you grew up in temps 80 deg BELOW ZERO.

So assholes like Friedes say, Oooh, Oooh, Mommy, Mommy, I wanna be like
Pavel, I wanna be like Pavel.....
Oh, didja read in this thread where g-d Friedes is STILL asking for Xmas
presents from his hapless Wife??? Didja read dat????? Holy shit......

So Mommy bought him a kettlebell, and we been listening to this fukn
bullshit ever since..... cuz Friedes is too self-obsessed and too ignerint
to understand the simple PHYSICS -- and basic physiology -- of weight
lifting.

You can find some long drawn-out """"explanations"""" of WHY kb's are
"better than dumbbells" on youtube. Really neat to watch, because if all's
you can do is resolve a vector into its perpendicular components, you can
understand that kb's and all that bullshit """"science"""" behind them is
just medievil smoke and mirrors, from fundamentally uneducated exercise
"gurus". Those """expanations""" -- and Friedes' """"ecplanations"""" --
are total incoherent gibberish.

A weight is a weight, and kb's happen to be a particularly UN-ergonomic
weight, which HINDERS usage. Assholes then misconstrue this "difficulty of
usage" and drama (taped hands, wrists, injuries, etc) with EFFECTIVENESS.
Figgers.....
Just assholes in dire need of some fukn badge of honor..... gimme a fukn
break ferchrissakes....

You'd be much better off taking a kb and just cutting off the handle, and
just hurling it like a cannonball or medicine ball. In fact, I actually DO
this with medicine balls, either by myself or with my buddy, when we go
running in a local park. Beyond ossum, yo, beyond ossum.
And, you could just as easily do this with a big rock.

So Friedes fellated Pavel 'til the cows came home, became RKC certified, and
has been publically masturbating himself ever since.

Merkins also have a thing fer fereigners and fereign accents.
Look at all the ilitirit Cockney Brits we have over here, hawking
infomercial bullshit. I had no idea about this, until le Wife, who lived in
Britain for a while, pointed out to me, You know, dear, dat muthafucka's
speech is the Bri'ish equivalent of a streetcorner Brooklyn hoodlum, dis
dat and de udder ting.... Holy shit.....

And then we have Pilates, Montessori, Nuryev, blah blah.
Iffin yer name is Jones, and you want to really fuck the Merkin Pubic, you
better change yer name and get an accent.

Unless you are blonde with long legs, skinny thighs, with enough space
between them that you could drive a Tonka Toy dump truck between them.
Suzanne Somers, Jane Fonda, and Tammi Lee, and, of course, Jillian Michaels
come to mind. Then you can really fuck Le Pubic.
Oh and Sally Fields, who has osteoporosis and hawks Boniva precisely bec
she's too dumb to do any REAL exerxise.

Tammi Lee admitted in an interview that Buns of Steel was total bullshit,
that she had buns of steel when she fell out of her mom. AND had to wear
flesh-colored stockings to hide her varicose veins, past a certain age. Go
figger......

So there you go, the History of Fitness in a nutshell.

Do yerself a favor.
Watch out for my apparatus, when it's ready, I'll announce it on this ng.
It's designed for people like you, in need of versatile rehab, as well as
ultra-intensity fitness regimens.

In the meantime, buy a db handle with spring clips, and 2.5# plates. Get a
chinup bar and start **hanging**, and do "chinups" off a chair. Get a
medicine ball, and start throwing dat muthafucka as high up in the air as
you can, in various ways. Do isometrics.

Don't be an fuknidiot with these dopey kettlebells.
--
EA

[Steve Freides]

thirty-six wrote:

>> No, they'll eventually rust but it does depend on what they're made
>> of - most are cast iron with a coat of paint on them, but I've seen
>> stainless steel, the latter costing a pretty penny, however. But you
>> can leave them outside, and you can use them rusty, and you can
>> always sand them down and refinish them, and people do all of those
>> things. The people who leave them outside are the ones with the
>> rust-colored calluses. :)
>
> cotton gloves ("for gardening") then?

You could, but you lessen the learning experience for yourself that way.
There is something cool that happens as you figure out how not to get
your hands beat up from lots of kettlebell swings and snatches - not
only does your grip get stronger, but it gets more coordinated, and you
learn to grip the bell hard at some times and let it just rest in the
hooks of your fingers at others. For mere mortal workouts, e.g., you're
going to do 15 2-handed swings on the minute for 10 minutes, you
shouldn't need hand protection. I can understand it more when you're
doing some of the super-human feats out there, e.g., people who swing a
kettlebell on the same on/off format but go for an hour and do hundres,
sometimes thousands, of swings.

In other words, skip the gloves, increase your work load sensibly and
don't forget that getting beat-up hands is a sign of poor technique or
too much workload.

>> Kettlebells have become a commodity of late - there are good,
>> expensive ones, good less expensive ones, pretty good cheap ones,
>
> that's what I'm after.
>
>> and lousy cheap
>> ones. The finish of the handle is what matters most - a little bump
>> in the wrong place and you'll find it unuseable (although you can
>> fix that by sanding it if you're able).
>
> Probably, I have a roll of production cloth (the black grit stuff) and
> can get short lengths of aluminium oxide if that be necessary.

Pavel and others talk about having rust-colored calluses - there's
nothing wrong with that, either.

>> You can also look on craigslist or
>> similar and find them used for local pickup - that's a great thing to
>> do.
>
>
> I think at the price that the new stuff has been been offered, I'll
> save myself the rust for the moment. If they are still available I
> also have the option of returning if unsuitable.
>>
>> -S-http://www.kbnj.com
>
> Just thought, a sack of malt or potatoes is 25kg and I used to haul
> two of them together without much difficulty as an adult. Even with
> me at half size (very rough estimate) when I was a child I'd carry
> three sacks with a little help getting them on my shoulders and head.
> I can see that when I progress (with God's help) I should easily
> manage the fat weight. It doesn't matter what the number is when I
> don't fear the accountant. I'll load up a bag to do some tests and
> see where it is at.

A sack of potatoes can make a fine workout. There has been a lot
written, good DVD and books published, etc., about working out with
sandbags, which are basically the same thing. I get 50 lb. bags of salt
pellets for use in the water softening system we have in our house, and
I love carrying them - I hold them in a sort of palm pinch grip, between
my hands but without touching my chest, and carry them that way -
simple, brutal, and effective.

Another thing along similar lines is a product from Jeff Martone called
a Pack Weight. It's basically a small duffel bag with a plastic handle
over the fabric handle - you load it up with whatever you like and can
then swing it like a kettlebell, and it makes a fine carryon bag for
travel, too. I've gotten a good amount of use out of mine as luggage
although I confess that, since I have a house full of kettlebell, I
don't resort to using it as a weight very much. I'm also not sure he
still makes it but his company was/is called Tactical Athlete, I think.

I will say this - talk to anyone who's a regular kettlebell trainer, and
they'll tell you that you shouldn't be put off by the price of the iron.
There is just something about the design that lets you get all kinds of
workouts done, and almost no one regrets the purchase. When, the weight
gets to be too light for you, you can clean and press it upside down and
get a tremendous workout that way - see "bottoms up" clean or bottoms up
press and you'll find pictures, videos, etc., I'm sure. As Pavel likes
to say, the Russians had lots of time and lots of "volunteers" so they
ended up not caring why something works - they just tried everything,
and they found that kettlebell training works. The ever-increasing
popularity of the kettlebell in military and law enforcement circles
here is also testimony to its effectiveness as a training weight.

Best of luck to you, and please keep us posted on your progress.

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

[Existential Angst]

"Steve Freides" <st...@kbnj.com> wrote in message

news:aqj7t8...@mid.individual.net...

But, yet, you shouldn't beat up yer hands, right??
Right....

Gee, you'da thunk that after all these hunnerds and hunnerds of years of kb
use, y'all'da figgered it out by now??
STILL a mystery, still cain't explain it???

and almost no one regrets the purchase. When, the weight
> gets to be too light for you, you can clean and press it upside down and
> get a tremendous workout that way - see "bottoms up" clean or bottoms up
> press and you'll find pictures, videos, etc., I'm sure. As Pavel likes to
> say, the Russians had lots of time and lots of "volunteers" so they ended
> up not caring why something works - they just tried everything,

Oh, and you know this.... how???

> and they found that kettlebell training works. The ever-increasing
> popularity of the kettlebell in military and law enforcement circles here
> is also testimony to its effectiveness as a training weight.

Oh yeah, the mindfuck of an ignerint majority is the final testimonial,
right?

But, wait a minute.... who said it was a majority? ""Ever-increasing""
means exactly what?
That 1% of assholes instead of 1/2% of assholes in the military are using
kbs?? OK.....

Keep shotgunning, Stevie, mebbe one day you'll ackshooly hit sumpn.
Hey, I got a great idear:
Mebbe you'n'Pavel'n'dat drugged-out KennyJay can brainstorm some new laws of
physics/physiology to bolster yer faux premises. The Quantum
Mechanics/Entanglement Theory of Kettlebells??

Oh, just to be clear on what the issue really is:

I NEVER siad kb's don't ""work"". They ""work"" just fine. They just
don't work as well as dumbbells, for sundries of reasons.
With the basic dumbbell handle/spring clips, 2.5/5# plate system being THE
most versatile and economical basic weight lifting system around.

The Kettlebell Bullshitters will have you think that because kb's require
more skill to use -- and they do -- that THAT is, in part, what makes them
oh-so superior. If you read Drew Baye et al, they are right on the money
when they say that skill-based **activities** -- such as sport,
fuknCrossfit, kb's -- are actually *inferior* ito pure adaptive-based
strength-gaining exercise. Don't get me started on Crossfit.....

Iow, when you introduce SKILL into the equation, you actually dilute the
"raw" exercise value.

Which is not to say skill-based exercises don't have their
neurological/neuromuscular/calorie burning place -- they certainly do.
But, ferchrissakes, we're talking about **lifting a fuknWeight**. Just how
fukn complicated and mysterious do you want to make lifting a g-d
WEIGHT????????????

Oh, and it's not that I'm fixated on dumbbells.
I don't hardly use them any more, bec of my latest selectorized weight
stack/pulley/bar design, which quite has its roots in legitimate gym-ology.
I just made it apartment-manageable, affordable, and is what I currently
use. Selectorized weight stacks are Da Ergonomic Resistance Bomb, SUPER
efficient, ito time, work volume, etc..
I still use dumbbells as a kind of "reference exercise", but I'm not wedded
to them. Dumbbells will always have their very legitimate place.

I AM, however, wedded to physics and physiology, and really get my panties
in a bunch when I see assholes buggering physics/physiology for their own
ignerint and/or bullshit entreepreenerial ends.

If **YOU** love kb's, dats fine, tell the world all about it, tell'em why,
right a fukn book about it, if you want..
But don't bullshit the whole fukn world with bullshit rationalizations about
some bullshit inherent superiority that simply doesn't exist, and which in
fact winds up being INferior..
--
EA

[thirty-six]

I don't see that.

>
> The Kettlebell Bullshitters will have you think that because kb's require
> more skill to use -- and they do -- that THAT is, in part, what makes them
> oh-so superior.  If you read Drew Baye et al, they are right on the money
> when they say that skill-based **activities** -- such as sport,
> fuknCrossfit, kb's -- are actually *inferior* ito pure adaptive-based
> strength-gaining exercise.  Don't get me started on Crossfit.....

I dunno what you are targetting here, but I have no requirement for
lifting heavy bars, I have no intention of being the monkey at a
ferrous stockholders.

>
> Iow, when you introduce SKILL into the equation, you actually dilute the
> "raw" exercise value.

It seems to me that the use of a kb echoes more the movements of
everyday life. I don't want to press weights or be sucking a steel
lolly, I want to be fit for life.

>
> Which is not to say skill-based exercises don't have their
> neurological/neuromuscular/calorie burning place -- they certainly do.
> But, ferchrissakes, we're talking about **lifting a fuknWeight**.   Just how
> fukn complicated and mysterious do you want to make lifting a g-d
> WEIGHT????????????

and it's relatively compact and simple to transport and store.

>
> Oh, and it's not that I'm fixated on dumbbells.
> I don't hardly use them any more, bec of my latest selectorized weight
> stack/pulley/bar design, which quite has its roots in legitimate gym-ology.
> I just made it apartment-manageable, affordable, and is what I currently
> use.  Selectorized weight stacks are Da Ergonomic Resistance Bomb, SUPER
> efficient, ito time, work volume, etc..
> I still use dumbbells as a kind of "reference exercise", but I'm not wedded
> to them.  Dumbbells will always have their very legitimate place.
>
> I AM, however, wedded to physics and physiology, and really get my panties
> in a bunch when I see assholes buggering physics/physiology for their own
> ignerint and/or bullshit entreepreenerial ends.
>
> If  **YOU** love kb's, dats fine, tell the world all about it, tell'em why,
> right a fukn book about it, if you want..
> But don't bullshit the whole fukn world with bullshit rationalizations about
> some bullshit inherent superiority that simply doesn't exist, and which in
> fact winds up being INferior..

I don't want to press weights as a daily routine, ever, but I may be
tempted to use one of the lighter kbs on a daily basis should I manage
to decalcify my soft tissue. I don't want muscle bulk, but
effectiveness and I don't care to be lifting bars. 20 years ago I
was a fit young adult but did have a few problems which showed
themselves from time to time. Lifting ever increasing weights will
never help me to be fit for life. I never did that but was still
capable of carrying my end of a piano.

[Existential Angst]

=======================================================

Mebbe you should just do fuknYoger.
--
EA

[thirty-six]

Maybe I already am. gotta book onit somewhere, just avnt seen it for
30 years,