kettlebells (why not dumbells?)

January 14, 2004

Why not just use dumbells instead of kettlebells? I was considering buying

a kettlebell or two. I've been doing all the kb exercises with dumbells.

Kb's seem really expensive, too. I guess because there are not as popular and

mass

produced as dumbells. Why else could they cost so much? $100 for a 18lb

weight,

seems high.

I'd like to know if anyone does swinging type exercises with KBs and feels they

are

better than dumbells.

January 16, 2004

, good question.

Here is an excerpt from my KB company's certification manual (Kettlebell

Concepts, Inc.) that briefly explains how/why KB's are different (not

necessarily better than) DB's. Each implement has it's own unique

qualities that should be used appropriately. (The following information

is copyrighted and subject to applicable copyright laws).

Adam Cronin

Kettlebell Concepts, Inc.

NYC, NY

USA

The Lifter and the Kettlebell

The human body is a system of levers and soft tissue attachments that

enable us to manipulate our environment in order to achieve goal

acquisition (Broer, 1964). The nervous system is the direct link by

which these muscles are recruited for the desired action.

Unfortunately, the human body is comprised of predominantly third class

levers, putting us at a biomechanical disadvantage (Broer, 1964).

Humans have a shorter force arm than resistance arm since the tendons

insert closer to the joint and the load we manipulate is concentrated

farther from the joint. Therefore, the human body favors speed,

dexterity, and mobility at the expense of force output capacity (Broer,

1964).

Purposeful movement results from the system of levers functioning in

specific, sequential patterns executed within context and task

orientation. Proper segmental sequence is critical to elicit precise

movements by well-timed summation of forces (Broer, 1964). Efficient

movement attempts to sum all forces acting on the body to zero through

dynamic postural control (Enoka, 2001). This is represented by the

equation:

F x FA = R x RA

Since FA, R and RA are independent variables, F is the dependent

variable that must be manipulated to overcome the moment of inertia, or

resistance we encounter (Enoka, 2001).

Distinctive from the dumbbell, the handle of a kettlebell creates an

extra lever segment within the lifter-weight unit. It adds length to

the RA as well as a great deal of extra R at the end of the segment,

dramatically increasing the R x RA side of the equation. This has

tremendous implications of what must be accomplished with regards to the

F x FA side. Since FA is constant, force output must greatly increase

to compensate and balance the equation (Enoka, 2001).

In addition, the kettlebell's center of mass is constantly changing in

relation to the last human lever segment holding it. The perpetual

length fluctuation of the RA forces the neuromuscular system to not only

increase overall force output, but to reactively modulate the total

twitch amplitude and rate of tension development (Behm, 1995).

Therefore, excitation and inhibition of agonist and antagonist motor

units becomes a more critical element with use of the kettle-bell in

order to adapt to its' shifting inertial characteristics. As a result,

a finely tuned relationship of agonist/antagonist synergy is required.

Kettlebell Biomechanics

In many respects, strength and conditioning is beginning to come full

circle, both methodologically, and philosophically. Prior to the

inception of training modes such as elastic, pneumatic, hydraulic,

isokinetic, and accommodating resistance as well as " super-slow "

techniques, strength trainers and body builders relied on simpler tools

and more intuitive methodologies. Ungainly-looking modalities such as

kettlebells were swung around with seeming imprecision and little

attention to specific muscle involvement.

The relatively modern approaches mentioned above share two common

themes: They each attempt to provide relatively constant tension

throughout the movement, while minimizing the role of inertial forces.

However, when examining the majority of sport movements as well as

activities of daily living, we find little application for such methods.

The human neuromuscular system is well equipped to generate and control

inertial forces and very seldom encounters a sustained level of tension

throughout a movement. Whether swinging a bat or a hammer, or lifting a

child from the floor, most human movements are made more effective when

the momentum is directed and controlled, rather than reduced. Briefly,

when an object is at rest, it provides resistance to anyone attempting

to move it (independent of gravity) and does so to a degree

proportionate with its mass. Once the object is moving, force will be

necessary to slow down or stop it (gravity included.) Any time an object

is accelerated (hurled, swung), it will tend to continue on its initial

path unless force is applied in the opposite direction. This normal

resistance to changes in an objects motion is called inertia. Any time

we accelerate or decelerate and object, we are fighting inertia.

Additionally, if the object's weight is centered more distally to the

axis of rotation (joint) the object's momentum of inertia is increased,

making it more difficult to start and stop.

This scenario plays out will when examining the kettlebell in contrast

with a typical dumbbell. The longer kettlebell has a mass center which

will be arranged much more distally to the joint than that of a

dumbbell. The additional lever created by placing the resistance distal

to the handle also provides a unique challenge to the nervous system, as

well as to the grip. The result: The athlete will need to encounter much

greater inertial forces. This may provide a distinct advantage when

attempting to transfer strength gains to athletic tasks with a strong

inertial component, i.e., baseball pitching, golf swing, all the Olympic

lifts, etc. It is this very component of natural human movement that

many modern resistance devices seek to eliminate-the result being an

unnatural and non-sport-specific method of training.

Before strength trainers began experimenting with these devices,

weightlifter and bodybuilders, " knowing no better, " utilized barbells,

dumbbells, and kettlebells in a controlled but explosive manner,

generating tremendous inertial forces in the process. Resistance during

certain phases of the movement was consequently reduced. In the context

of " training the muscles, " this may have seemed counterproductive.

However, in the context of " training movements, " the kettlebell methods

are all too sound. Inertial forces are simply a fact of life on and off

the athletic field and, therefore, they should be kept in the gym as

well.

Ted Keating, Ph.D, CSCS

Assistant Professor-Manhattan College

Department of Physical Education and Human Performance

kettlebells (why not dumbells?)

Why not just use dumbells instead of kettlebells? I was considering

buying

a kettlebell or two. I've been doing all the kb exercises with

dumbells.

Kb's seem really expensive, too. I guess because there are not as

popular and mass

produced as dumbells. Why else could they cost so much? $100 for a

18lb weight,

seems high.

I'd like to know if anyone does swinging type exercises with KBs and

feels they are

better than dumbells.

January 18, 2004

,

I have been training with kettlebells for a few years now and attended a

few seminars on kettlebell training. The advantage to using a kettlebell vs. a

dumbell in the swinging exercise is in the grip. The kettlebell has a wider

handle which makes it easier to hold than a dumbell when doing two-handed

swings. The handle is also a great deal thicker than the typical dumbell so it

gives a great hand and forearm workout while doing one-handed swings. However,

I find that the advantages in using a kettlbell vs. a dumbell aren't really in

the swinging exercise. I mean aside from a slightly more comfortable grip and a

good hand and forearm workout at the same time, there is really not much

difference between the two when doing swings. I've noticed the differences to

be much more apparent when doing snatches and cleans. As explained to me by

RKC, Gregg Althen, the kettlebell moves more fluidly than a dumbell when doing

these exercises. Gregg also showed me how by being more

aggressive with the kettlebell and finishing the snatch by " punching through "

at the top of the movement, the kettlebell actually lands quite softly on the

forearm. I would recommend going to a kettlebell seminar held by someone who is

RKC certified to see if the extra price is really worth it for what your

training goals are. The seminar I attended in Mountain View, CA was only $40

and well worth it.

Hope this helps.

Jon

San Francisco, CA

Bodybuilt4u@...

de la Garza wrote:

Why not just use dumbells instead of kettlebells? I was considering buying

a kettlebell or two. I've been doing all the kb exercises with dumbells.

Kb's seem really expensive, too. I guess because there are not as popular and

mass

produced as dumbells. Why else could they cost so much? $100 for a 18lb

weight,

seems high.

I'd like to know if anyone does swinging type exercises with KBs and feels they

are

better than dumbells.

January 18, 2004