I came to this very same conclusion a long time ago. If I don’t see the potential for carryover/improved athleticism I’m not doing it. Kettlebells have enough of a carryover it’s been termed the WTF effect. Preface, Marker is fully legit imo.For example you could say that a back squat is functional because it mimics a standard human movement that we've been doing for 10s if not 100s of thousands of years. Although then you could argue that you are not usually lifting heavy weight on your shoulders, so therefore a front squat, deadlift or farmers walk be more "functional" because it more closely mimics lifting or carrying something off the ground. To take it further, you could argue that lifting a sandbag or some kind of irregular shaped heavy item be more "functional" because most objects that we need to lift in real life are not dense yet relatively small uniformly shaped discs at the end of a smooth stick.
Meanwhile, fitness equipment manufacturers sell "functional" trainers which are merely cable systems with different angles for pulling weight stacks.
The What the Hell Effect: How the Swing Improves Everything - Breaking Muscle
In the Hardstyle kettlebell community, people talk about the “What the Hell Effect.” The phrase is typically uttered after someone uses only kettlebells for a period of time and then finds great increases in strength in other movements, seemingly unrelated to the kettlebell. RELATED: The Origins...
breakingmuscle.com
I posted this anecdote before and it’s relevant again. Josh Henkin aka sandbag dude had a booth at a fitness convention. In the booth on the floor was a heavy sandbag. Many dudes with impressive #s in the gym struggled or just outright failed to lift it. Does that mean that sandbags are the best tool for developing raw strength? No. A barbell is. But...
Last edited: