Back

Mechanical demands of the two-handed hardstyle kettlebell swing performed by an RKC-certified Instructor

Meigh, N. J.; Hing, W. A.; Schram, B. J.; Keogh, J. W. L.

2021-05-16 physiology
10.1101/2021.05.13.444085 bioRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThe effects of hardstyle kettlebell training are increasingly cited in strength and conditioning research, yet reference data from a proficient swing is scarce. The aim of this exploratory study was to investigate the force profile of a two-handed hardstyle swing performed by a Russian Kettlebell Challenge (RKC) instructor. MethodsThe subject is a 44-year-old male, body mass 75.6 kg, height 173.5 cm, with six years of regular hardstyle training experience. Two-handed hardstyle swings were performed with a series of incremental mass kettlebells (8-68 kg). Ground reaction force (GRFs) was obtained from a floor-mounted force platform. Force-time curves (FTCs), peak force, forward force, rate of force development (RFD) and swing cadence were investigated. ResultsData revealed the FTC of a proficient swing is highly consistent and dominated by a single force peak (mean SD = 47 N), with a profile that remained largely unchanged to 24 kg. Pearson correlation analysis revealed a very strong positive correlation in peak force with kettlebell mass (r = 0.95), which increased disproportionately from the lightest to heaviest kettlebells; net peak force increased from 8.36 {+/-} 0.75 N.kg-1 (0.85 x BW) to 12.82 {+/-} 0.39 N.kg-1 (1.3x BW). There was a strong negative correlation between RFD and kettlebell mass (r = 0.82) that decreased from 39.2 N.s-1.kg-1 to 21.5 N.s-1.kg-1. There was a very strong positive correlation in forward ground reaction force with kettlebell mass (r = 0.99), expressed as a ratio of vertical ground reaction, that increased from 0.092 (9.2%) to 0.205 (20.5%). Swing cadence exceeded 40 swings per minute (SPM) with all kettlebells. ConclusionOur findings challenge some of the popular beliefs of the hardstyle kettlebell swing. Consistent with hardstyle practice, and previous kinematic analysis of expert and novice, force-time curves show a characteristic single large force peak, differentiating passive from active shoulder flexion. Ground reaction force did not increase proportionate to kettlebell mass, with a magnitude of forward force smaller than described in practice. These results could be useful for coaches and trainers wanting to improve athletic performance, and healthcare providers using the kettlebell swing for therapeutic purposes. Findings from this study were used to inform the BELL Trial, a pragmatic controlled trial of kettlebell training with older adults. www.anzctr.org.au ACTRN12619001177145.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 4%
26.6%
2
European Journal of Applied Physiology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.7%
3
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
5.0%
4
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
5
Experimental Physiology
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
50% of probability mass above
6
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.5%
7
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 28%
4.3%
8
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.0%
9
Physiological Reports
35 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.7%
10
Journal of Applied Physiology
29 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.0%
11
Journal of Experimental Biology
249 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
12
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
13
Human Movement Science
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
14
Journal of Biomechanics
57 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.9%
15
Journal of Orthopaedic Research
19 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.4%
16
Gait & Posture
22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.4%
17
The Journal of Physiology
134 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
18
Experimental Brain Research
46 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
19
Experimental Gerontology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
20
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
21
American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology
32 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
22
Biology Open
130 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
23
npj Microgravity
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.5%
24
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.5%
25
Function
15 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.5%
26
Frontiers in Aging
10 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.5%