I am curious why the 35# KB, it seems like a light weight for that amount of reps. Is there an advantage to doing the lighter weight and going slightly faster or is there another reason you chose this weight?
Very simple reason Trickle. I only have a 35# KB:) The actual Front Range WOD calls for a 53#-er.
But even @ 35# this is still a good WOD if you hit it with intensity. I did all sets unbroken and I was on my back afterward.
Q: Is there an advantage to doing the lighter weight and going slightly faster or is there another reason you chose this weight?
A: My short answer would be to plug both WODs into the power calculator, and see which produced more. Because that's really the bottom line. Which WOD had the highest Power Output(force x distance/time)?
I will do this one again as rx'd by you, I really liked it. The only reason I changed the weight yesterday was because after running hard last week and then moving furniture over the weekend I developed a soreness in my left knee and a very painful right calf, down the tendon all the way to my heel??. I wanted to go a little heavier to work on the strength part of the WOD and take the time element out as well as not do anything that would strain either leg too much. I only included my time at the end as a means of refernece and not comparison. I was using a 20# kb on a chain belt and not flying from station to station.
**Current bw 205, bf% 16 Still on the no sugar diet. Started at 210, bf 16.9%. Working more on burning fat than actually losing lb's. Just happen to be doing both, and would like to get in the 180 range, but will take a long time.
7 comments:
5:42
then:
some deadlift work
I am curious why the 35# KB, it seems like a light weight for that amount of reps. Is there an advantage to doing the lighter weight and going slightly faster or is there another reason you chose this weight?
21-15-9
Weighted Pullups @ 20#
KB Swings @ 53#
Wall Ball Shots, 20#
12:21
21-15-9
Pullups
KB Swings @ 35#
KB Thrusters @35#
10:44
Very simple reason Trickle. I only have a 35# KB:) The actual Front Range WOD calls for a 53#-er.
But even @ 35# this is still a good WOD if you hit it with intensity. I did all sets unbroken and I was on my back afterward.
Q: Is there an advantage to doing the lighter weight and going slightly faster or is there another reason you chose this weight?
A: My short answer would be to plug both WODs into the power calculator, and see which produced more. Because that's really the bottom line. Which WOD had the highest Power Output(force x distance/time)?
I will do this one again as rx'd by you, I really liked it. The only reason I changed the weight yesterday was because after running hard last week and then moving furniture over the weekend I developed a soreness in my left knee and a very painful right calf, down the tendon all the way to my heel??. I wanted to go a little heavier to work on the strength part of the WOD and take the time element out as well as not do anything that would strain either leg too much. I only included my time at the end as a means of refernece and not comparison. I was using a 20# kb on a chain belt and not flying from station to station.
**Current bw 205, bf% 16 Still on the no sugar diet. Started at 210, bf 16.9%. Working more on burning fat than actually losing lb's. Just happen to be doing both, and would like to get in the 180 range, but will take a long time.
I'd like to try your version as well!
Post a Comment