Dr Mel Siff Blog

.

Some of you have expressed an interest in kettlebell lifting, so here is some
Russian information on this topic, based upon Bud Charniga’s translations of
the 1984 Russian Weightlifting Yearbook (obtainable from his website at
www.dynamic-eleiko.com). This is the first of two episodes.

PART 1

Kettlebell Lifting

From the Editors.

Weightlifting Yearbook, 1984 Fizkultura I Sport, Moscow

In September of 1981 the decree of the Central Committee of the Communist
Party of the Soviet Union “To further raise the mass character of Physical
Culture and Sport” gave new impetus to the development of all “mass” forms of
strength training; which, besides the classic Olympic type ‘of weightlifting,
folk exercises with weights, such as kettlebells, as well as other loads,
apparatus and training devices for the development of strength-athletic
gymnastics, are included.

The leaders in the development of these mass types, who at present are in the
organizational stage, have recruited many hundreds of thousands of our
citizens and have formed an Athletic Gymnastics and Kettlebell Commission
under the auspices of the USSR Weightlifting Federation. Beginning with this
issue, the editorial-board is starting a new section “Kettlebell Lifting”
which can be subsequently expanded to publications on athletic gymnastics.

The reader’s attention is directed to the following two articles, in which
objectives and methodological questions of kettlebell lifting are outlined.
Furthermore the methodology of assessing competition results of a Kettlebell
lifter in light of the scheme to prepare classification norms is presented as
part of the Unified All-Soviet sport classification of 1985-1988. These
articles are not only sources of information but they are serve to open
further discussion (therefore, it is possible that not all of the authors’
viewpoints and recommendations will be universally accepted by the readers).

Kettlebell lifting is a very old and, at the same time, a young sport. It is
very old because kettlebell exercises have been around since time immemorial.
It is young because up until the present time, there were no rules of
competition or classification norms on the all-Soviet scale. Undoubtedly, as
kettlebell lifting develops rules, classification requirements and norms will
be subjected to revision.

———————–

Kettlebell Lifting as an Effective Means of Physical Education

Voropayev V I

In recent years interest in one of the national types of sport — Kettlebell
lifting has increased significantly. The number engaged in organizing groups
and sections-in the physical culture and state-farm collectives, schools,
industries and the armed-forces, have increased. Many competitions, of
different scale, are being held. They are becoming more wide-spread.

However, along with the great number of enthusiasts of this type of sport
there are people who consider it an antiquated and ineffective means of
physical education. Over a period of several years we researched kettlebell
lifting as an effective means of physical education.

It is known that if physical exercise lacks two fundamental qualities –
accessibility and effectiveness, it loses its value as a means of physical
education. We attempted to analyze kettlebell lifting in this-light.

Accessibility implies the following:

1. The technique of the exercise is relatively simple.

There are three exercises in Kettlebell lifting competition: press one
kettlebell, clean and jerk two kettlebells and snatch one kettlebell. These
are cyclic exercises with comparatively small weights. They are mastered
rather quickly since there is no non-support phase (as in weightlifting) or
complex movement of the athlete (as in gymnastics and acrobatics).

Although the general center of mass shifts, it is identical in each phase of
the exercise. It has been demonstrated in practice that an athlete of average
physical development can acquire the technique of the Kettlebell triathlon in
4-6 months. This enables one to devote more time to the development of
physical qualities per se.

2. The Ability to train Individually or in Groups.

The best form of training organization is the study group. However, working
aboard a ship, at a field-camp, working shifts and many other occupations do
not permit one to train in a group; but one must train periodically with an
experienced coach, who controls the training plan. Training alone with
kettlebells does not require a sport hall or large area. One can lift
kettlebells in practically any place which has about 4-5 sq m of free space.

3. The Simplicity of the Training Equipment.

The training equipment for Kettlebell lifting is the least difficult to
obtain in comparison with many other sports. The training and competition
costumes are trunks, vest and any athletic shoes. It should be pointed out
that a kettlebell is a durable piece of equipment. Kettlebell practice is not
limited by large exploitation. This gives Kettlebell lifting a significant
advantage over many others, which require a large expenditure on materials
for workouts.

Everything that concerns training materials, of course, should be considered
somewhat more broadly. The Kettlebell lifter should use barbells, run, throw,
do flexibility exercises and take part in skiing and other sports that
require additional training equipment. This is also true for other types of
sports. Thus, track and field athletes lift weights, exercise with medicine
balls, play different sport games, lift kettlebells and do gymnastics.
Therefore, when one speaks of obtaining training equipment, one has to bear
in mind that this is in reference only to the equipment needed for this one
sport.

4. Small Risk of Injury.

Studies of the Kettlebell triathlon indicate the exercises are not dangerous.
These exercises are not associated with great risk when correctly executed.
Tearing of the skin on the palm of the hands due to the improper preparation
of the apparatus (the handle of the kettlebell should be smooth, carefully
polished and rust-free) is the most common injury. This type of injury can
occur even with a smooth, polished kettlebell, but this happens after a lot
of tearing in workouts, when the hands are tired. Consequently, the type of
injury associated with Kettlebell lifting is not due to the nature of the
sport itself, but to outside factors, which can be avoided.

5. The wide age-range of Participants.

The value of any means of physical education increases considerably if it can
be utilized by different age groups. As a means of physical education,
kettlebell lifting has such value. Although the age-range of kettlebell
lifters at present has not been fully researched; practice has shown, that
the ages of the participants varies over a wide range. The average age of
the. competitors at the 1980 regional tournament in Lipetsk was 26 years. The
oldest competitor was 49 and the youngest 16 years old. At the 1981 republic
tournament in Kazan, the mean age was 25.5 years. The oldest competitor was
48 and the youngest was 15 years old. At the moment, the move to expand the
age limits of the participants is one of the problems in athletics. In many
types of sports, athletes who begin at 16-17 years of age are considered to
have no prospects, and competitions in some sports are converted to
“children’s competitions”…..

END OF PART 1

TO BE CONTINUED

Dr Mel Siff
Denver, USA
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Supertraining/

There are few sports which offer as many variations of upper and lower body
plyometric action as gymnastics, a fact that tends to be obscured by the
proliferation of texts on so-called plyometric drills like hopping, depth
jumping and ball throwing.

Gymnastics involves complex jumps, depth landings from certain apparatus,
depth jumps, plyometric rebounds, ballistic actions in three dimensions,
training of reaction time, short sprints, explosive trunk activities and Read more…

Some years ago I seem to recall an article which concluded that loaded
hyperextension of the spine was potentially less harmful to the lumbar spine
than unloaded hyperextension such as that encountered in throwing and jumping
sports. Possibly someone else can locate that reference. This might explain
why the incidence of hyperextension injuries in Olympic weightlifting appear
to be far less common than in sports such as cricket and gymnastics.

Many have militated against all spinal hyperextension, but they seem to
forget that McKenzie techniques (as variants of the ancient yoga Cobra asana)
actually comprise controlled forced hyperextension of the spine in a posture
which does not allow the lower body to sway and dissipate stress as in the
standing Olympic Press. Sure, we have pointers such as the
peripheralisation or centralisation of pain symptoms to guide us to the
suitability of McKenzie, but why are many folk adamant about avoiding all
forms of hyperextension, irrespective of such guidelines?

Then, we also must distinguish between the strictly controlled hyperextension
of the spine in the sagittal plane during the Olympic Press, compared with
the complex lumbar hyperextension, trunk rotation, lateral pelvic tilting and
asymmetric foot impact actions involved in cricket bowling, tennis serving,
gymnastics and so forth. Are we justified in comparing simple hyperextension
in one plane with complex trunk actions in several planes?

All too often, it seems to be forgotten that even small torque about the
vertebrae can produce more strain in the peripheral annulus of the disk than
far more extensive flexion or extension. This tends to reflect itself in
training and rehabilitation programs drawn up for athletes and workers – the
(often machines-controlled) movements and stretches very rarely involve
significant use of rotatory actions, especially under progressively
increasing conditions of resistance and range. Yet, all physical therapists
have been exposed to the well-known patterns, pacing, procedures and
principles of PNF with all of its emphasis on the regular use of spiral and
diagonal patterns.

This may well explain why the incidence of injuries associated with forceful,
sudden, ballistic or large range rotation of joints may be so rife in sport -
witness for instance, the mainstays of sports therapy with its epidemic of
rotator cuff, ACL and similar injuries. Machine training and even free
weight training seems to concentrate largely on linear or uniplanar actions,
and if rotation is involved in training, it takes place only in the sport
itself or in the gym via the use of gentle yoga-like stretches and warmups.

It is not only exposure to a stressful action that can cause injury, but also
religious avoidance of so-called dangerous actions (which might occur during
actual sporting conditions). One cannot expect the body to cope with the
immense structural and functional demands placed on the body in sport unless
one methodically conditions the body to cope with progressively greater
structural and functional stresses.

Dr Mel C Siff

PILATES MYTHS

Another great article by Mel Siff, from his Supertraining List at YahooGroups.

Now that the Pilates system of training has undergone a huge rebirth in the
USA and started to attain the status of culthood, its latter day
practitioners are now reviving some of the myths of strength training. Here
are a few that are now doing the rounds, taken directly from the advertising
copy that is promoting Pilates in the media:

MYTH 1.

Weight training tends to shorten the muscles, but Pilates lengthens them. All
that lifting bunches up the muscles and makes one tight and stiff.

FACT:

All muscles contract and shorten when they are activated. All muscle lengthen
when they relax. If muscles appear to lengthen and flatten with training,
then this would imply that one is losing muscle bulk, which is not a highly
desirable state for anyone. This Pilates belief is total nonsense and betrays
a sorry knowledge of muscle physiology. It would also seem to suggest that
the more Pilates work you do, the longer your muscles become. That, of
course, would mean that your muscles would develop slack and you even tually
would not be able to move your joints!

MYTH 2.

Pilates offers much more variety than weight training. It now has over 2000
exercises.

FACT:

The field of weight training, which includes free barbell and dumbbell
weights and machines, offers at least ten times that number of exercises and
exercise variations. Pilates does not even come close.

Pilates practitioners, of course, should note that the well-known Pilates
machine, the Reformer (a type of lying sled device), the Cadillac, the Spine
Corrector and various other machines were developed by Joseph Pilates from a
host of earlier weird and wonderful machines that were on the fitness and
gymnastics market of Europe and Russia during the late 19th and early 20th
century. If one examines some early patents from Germany, for example, even
some weight training devices like some made by Nautilus were derived from
these earlier innovations.

One might even state that “Pilates training” constitutes just another man’s
own range of strength training routines and machines, someone like Arthur
Jones, Bob Hoffman, Eugene Sandow, Professor Attila or Joe Weider. Those who
are “doing Pilates” thus are simply doing another type of strength training
program and they don’t even recognise that fact. If any of their instructors
think that old Joe Pilates had a totally unique approach or philosophy, then
they would do well to learn that several of the strengthening trend setters
of the past 100 years all had some fascinating philosophies and methodologies
that are not dramatically different from that of Pilates. Reading through a
book such as Webster’s “The Iron Game” or talking to Dr Terry Todd and his
wife will fill in some of the gaps in their education if anyone is unaware of
that fact.

MYTH 3.

Pilates realigns the body, corrects muscle imbalances and helps to heal
injured backs. Weight training usually causes imbalances and overstresses the
back.

FACT:

Suitably individualised Pilates and progressive weight training programs both
can be used to “correct imbalances” and improve postural alignment, which
actually have a lot more to do with motor education than what means is used
to achieve those ends. Conversely, poorly taught Pilates and weight training
both can be injurious. There are very few other methods that can develop such
great spinal strength, power and stability under loading as a well-designed
heavy weight training program.

The bottom line? Why don’t modern Pilates teachers and enthusiasts simply
state that they really prefer Pilates training to any other methods at the
moment and that other forms of training may well be more enjoyable and
productive for others? There is no scientific or clinical evidence that
Pilates is any better or worse than any other form of training for the
average population, so let it be marketed as such.

Of course, anyone who is a student of international sport knows that Pilates
training done as the sole form of conditioning has produced very few or none
of the world champions in sport, nor has it been shown to offer superior
musculoskeletal healing to any other form of therapy. That does not make it
any the less enjoyable or effective for those who feel justified in spending
thousands of dollars a year to learn it. Those people simply enjoy it because
they have found that it suits them, nothing more, nothing less.

Fortunately, when I was being taught Pilates methods more than 15 years ago
by some Pilates teachers in return for my teaching them modified forms of PNF
training which Pilates did not specifically address, we discovered that we
all had something to teach and learn from one another’s training — though we
agreed that Pilates methods of pelvic stabilisation were not intended for
lifting heavy loads in weightlifting and powerlifting. Once again, a case of
live and let live! Pilates teachers and weight trainers were getting along
just fine until the commercial marketeers came along to distort the facts
with their comparative advertising.

Dr Mel Siff