Coaches Exercise Tip #19 – Weightlifting vs. Kettlebells on strength and vertical jump performance
I recently read a piece on the effects of kettlebell training vs weightlifting on strength development – I was intrigued in the results as we at Synergy utilize both of these modalities (weightlifting to a much higher degree). My hypothesis before reading the study would have been that weightlifting was far superior to kettlebell training for strength development. Below is the study findings.
Researchers used a group of 30 healthy men in a 6 week linear periodized program of either kettlebells or weightlifting. The groups trained twice a week with one volume adjustment at week number four. The programs followed were;
Kettlebells;
A. KBS 3×6
B. Accelerated swings 4×4
C. Goblet squats 4×6
Weightlifting;
A. High pulls 3×6
B. Power cleans 4×4
C. Back squats 4×6
Strength was assessed using a 1RM back squat test and power was assessed using a vertical jump test as well as a 1RM power clean. Researchers were comparing what program produced the greatest results. All subjects chosen were required to have one year of resist6ance training experience, but none had any true experience with weightlifting or kettlebells. After a 6 week training program the results were slightly in favor of the weightlifting group. Back squat increased by 13.6% in the weightlifting group vs a 4.5% increase in the kettlebell trained group. The power cleans improved in both groups equally and the vertical jump did not change in the two groups from original testing
Thoughts;
This was at first relatively surprising to me that weightlifting would not improve weightlifting movements to a higher degree than they did, compared to kettlebell training. After a bit of reflection I think the results are probably typical considering;
1. The group was relatively untrained. The groups were given 2-3 training sessions to be taught how to do the exercises. Having taught all of these movements to new trainees hundreds of times, I know that the potential to learn kettlebells and be able to handle heavier loads quicker with kettlebells than weightlifting movements is always the case do to the relative simplicity of the movements. So theoretically the loads given would be much more efficient for the KB group vs. the weightlifting when compared to the true potential of the lifters and their relative inexperience. Meaning the ability to overload the weightlifting group was minimal due to technical issues with the lifts.
2. Load does matter. The weightlifting group saw a larger increase in strength due to the fact that when training for strength one must lift heavy things (more than a KB can provide). This is the reason the barbell and bumpers are used as the primary strength tool at Synergy. Absolute and relative loads will always be higher in barbell training than kettlebells.
3. Not enough volume. I would love to see this study repeated with 3 or 4 training sessions per week. I often tell clients who ask me “how many training sessions per week are needed for progress?” – 1 is better than none and 2 is better than 1. 3 is greater than 4 and 4 is even better than 3. In order to reap the benefits of exercise volume must be high. Trainees who train 4 times/week make 30-50% more progress than those who train 3 times/week.
4. Power is key for weightlifting. I think the reason that the KB group increased the power clean numbers similar to the weightlifting group is due to the fact the KB group was training power in a similar movement pattern as the power clean group. The KB group used accelerated swings (which, I term power bombs) and they are designed to increase power and speed, which are the demands of the power clean. The carry over effects would theoretically be just as high for an relatively untrained group.
5. New trainees always have accelerated progress. When one begins training the cross-over effect of movements is very high. We always tell new class members and trainees that doing KB swings and rowing will influence your power cleans and running speed simply due to the focused work on developing general power and speed. There is a high cross-over effect for beginners with all movements due to the body increasing its overall strength, efficiency of motor patterning, and muscle fiber recruitment. This is highest in trainees who have little starting neurological efficiency and experience. As a trainee becomes stronger and more effective the carry over effects diminish and the role of the SAID principle begin to take effect. The SAID principle is “specific adaptations to imposed demands” – which in short means to get better at back squats one needs to back squat.
6. Not long enough. As mentioned above for relative beginners this study is important as it shows the carry over effect of multiple training modalities for strength development. At some point in time the carry over ceases to occur due to the lack of ability to over load the body and continue to apply progression with the kettlebell. The barbell will soon become the main choice of overload. If this study looked at effects over 6 months I think we may see different results.
– At Synergy we use the KB as a strength endurance tool not a strength tool. Although it may become a bit of both for newer trainees i prefer to keep the KB as a endurance tool for energy system training. Rather than ask for 4×6 KBS – every 2-3 minutes I prefer to ask for 50KBS every 4 minutes, which delivers a higher energy system training stimulus.
