Talk:Kettlebell

message: The "Detractors" section is supported by a single source, whose argument against the cardiovascular benefits of kettlebell exercise consists solely of the following ridiculous paragraph:
"How about cardiovascular exercise? High repetition kettlebell swings are indeed a good cardiovascular exercise. However, they are in no way superior to other cardiovascular activities. Take brisk walking.  If you can go outside and walk briskly, you’re getting fresh air and the whole body is getting exercised evenly. Also, the joints of the upper body in particular get a rest - unlike kettlebell swinging. Fresh air is in itself a very important component in health.  How about swimming? Again, the buoyancy of the water rests the joints and the entire body (especially the back) gets a workout. Also, spending time in the water is a good way to prepare the body against sudden chills or cold draughts. Finally, swimming in a local pool can be a rewarding social activity.  Let’s put it this way:  Where are you more likely to see a bikini-clad beauty - in a swimming pool or in your own garage?  If the answer is the latter, then I want a garage like yours."
Like I said, ridiculous. 173.50.247.189 (talk) 21:45, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Detractors 

message: Hello, I have tried several times to offer up a great external link to a collection of instructional/introductory online kettlebell videos. These videos come from some of the best kettlebell instructors (with permission) without promoting one style of kb training over another. Here is the link:
 Online Video Gallery of Kettlebell Exercises
Perhaps I've broken wikipedia protocol, but a person by the name of Karuna8 keeps deleting this link as spam (and even "aggressive spam!"). It strikes me that maybe I'm not supposed to be posting anything here without someone like Karuna (who might be an approved editor or something?). If that is the case, I would ask that Karuna8 add this non-spam, free resource to the list. Or at least offer some reasons why this link keeps getting rejected?
--Kbjeff (talk) 21:05, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kettlebell Videos 

message: http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,645195431,00.html News article, mentions "kettlebells, or the martial art of strength training".  Anomo 01:23, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A worthy source? 

message: Please only add external links in accordance with Wikipedia's guidelines, which can be found at Wikipedia:External links.  --Karuna8 17:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: Based on the following statement in the policy, "You should avoid linking to a website that you own, maintain or represent, even if the guidelines otherwise imply that it should be linked. If the link is to a relevant and informative site that should otherwise be included, please consider mentioning it on the talk page and let neutral and independent Wikipedia editors decide whether to add it.", please examine and consider allowing kettlebell.com to remain as a resource link to this entry.  On examination, you will see that it is full of high-quality training articles for kettlebells.  This is not a spam site.  There aren't even any products for sale on the site.  It is an important resource and has been a kettlebell resource for years now.  Some of the other links that seem to remain on this wiki page are blatantly commercial... however they somehow continue to stay on the site.  It only makes sense that kettlebell.com should be considered a legitimate resource.  Please consider the site for accepted and permanent entry on this page.  Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.82.243.74 (talk) 18:03, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please consider adding this link 

message: I'd like to see more info about the history of this thing.
–anon  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.17.199.113 (talk) 14:32, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: They are not any more "Russian" than barbells or dumbbells.  They were developed in Scotland, and they were granite with an iron handle attached.  They were used for the winter sport of curling, which is now an Olympic sport.  At other times of the year, the Scots used them not just for curling, but for other athletic contests like throwing and strength training.
Later, Scottish strongmen used hollow iron balls (bells) filled with lead shot and fitted with a handle.  They used them not for training, but for betting contests with audience members.  Skill is an integral part of kettlebell manipulation and even the strongest audience members couldn't beat the strongmen at their own game.
There is a reason why Wikipedia is laughed at by most knowledgeable people: it's the ridiculous amount of misinformation that gets published here by well-meaning but basically clueless dupes.  If you Wikipedia experts want to do something useful, you should put your reasearch skills to use and verify what I've stated here, then correct this article.  Thanks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.226.209.13 (talk) 22:06, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Great. Source it. intooblv (talk) 10:00, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

text: Citations are needed here...would posting your theories be any less laughable? I think the "Russian" part is that Kettlebell Sport is Russian. Wikipedia is a community effort. It is not something you can look down upon while posting this on the talk page with any credibility. Asking others to do your research? Strongmen would practice with weights they would use in contests. That is a no-brainer. No strongman would plan on making a wager that they planned without having planned to do what you admit requires "skill". They trained with them. Arthur Saxon, in his Text Book of Weight-Lifting, on chapter 5 describes what he calls "Ring" or "Ball" weights (and "kettle" weight) among other things. He describes using them to do things familiar to modern kettlebell users. He also includes a feat which he states explicitly won't be in any competition, but is worth practising. Given that he is still a record holder, and a strongmen of highest praise, I think this source from 1905 would do well to show your comment contains an error of fact. How laughable is that? You are not among the "most knowledgeable" it seems! Arthur does not, obviously, discuss what we call Kettlebell Sport, as that was another thing, and that is Russian as far as I can tell. LaRoza (talk) 13:03, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Claim that Kettlebells are "Russian" 

message: "Because more muscle groups are utilized in the swinging and movement of a kettlebell than during the lifting of dumbbells, a kettlebell workout is said to be more effective, and yields better results in less time."
Is there anything supporting kettlebells utilizing more muscle groups? More effective for what? What kind of results in less time? 
"Because the center of mass on a kettlebell "swings", micro-muscles are needed to balance a kettlebell, more so than a dumbbell. The existence of a handle allows for "release moves" which are not available to a dumbbell."
What's meant by micro muscles? What's meant by "release moves"? Why are these benefits over dumbells? What's supporting these claims?
"Unlike a traditional kettlebell, a SandBell® or SteelBell™, is a neoprene bag filled with sand or steel shot. They also have a center of mass extended beyond the hand and allow for swing movements and release moves with added safety and added grip, wrist, arm and core strengthening due to the shifting fill material."
This sounds like an add for "SandBell® or SteelBell™".
This article reads like an advertisement, not an enyclopedia article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.52.153.223 (talk) 09:34, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biased, unsupported statements 

message: The link is reported as dead but I found it on the site, unfortunately they have put it behind a paywall and only the abstract is available for public viewing. How should this be handled? Here is the link for anyone interested: http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/statesmanjournal/access/2100616151.html?FMT=ABS&date=Jul+29%2C+2010 Lando242 (talk) 04:53, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference number 5 (Kettlebells can add to established workouts) 

message: "...This necessitates ballistic and swinging movements." Are you kidding me? Let us check a reliable souce for exercise with the kettlebell:
http://www.sandowplus.co.uk/Competition/Saxon/Weightlifting/wl-05.htm
"In ring weight-lifting the principle feat, of course, is to hold these out at arm's length."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.113.232.125 (talk) 20:33, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Types of exercise 

message: I was wondering what information should I include about the kettle bells? I have an assignment where I need to contribute to a topic on Wikipedia. I was thinking about introducing a couple of workouts such as the kettlebell swing. Any ideas would be wonderful.
Nuggabob (talk) 05:27, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  New ideas 

message: The article was at least implying that the "kettle-bell" as used in Western Europe and America around 1900 was of Russian origin. This is very well possible, but it needs a reference. 
So far, we have the term girya, but no date when it was first applied to the exercise weight (its dictionary meaning is simply "weight", and we need a specific source to pinpoint when this word was first applied in this specific sense).
Then we have the claim (also unreferenced) that the instrument was used for basic training in the Red Army. This is possible, but needs a source. I have now found a reference for the English term "kettle bell" dated 1908, so whatever the Red Army was doing, "kettle bells" were already sold to fitness enthusiasts in New York at the time.
It is very well possible that e.g. Russian immigrants brought the things to New York in the late 1800s or so, but we do not have any kind of reference making such a claim. 
The fact that "16 kg" weights are common (i.e. pood weights) is suggestive, but I haven't seen a reference that this was already the case for the "kettle-bells" sold around 1910. It could just as well be later influence. --dab (𒁳) 15:05, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Russian origin

message: If kettlebells are round, what is the name for the wedge-shaped weight this guy is holding up, and is there a Wikipedia article describing it, or should it be described in this one?
https://previews.123rf.com/images/cthoman/cthoman1506/cthoman150600794/41845908-A-big-cartoon-strongman-lifting-a-heavy-weight--Stock-Vector.jpg  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.249 (talk) 20:06, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Square/pyramid-shaped weights?

message: Main types
*Hardstyle kettlebellshttps://fitnessmastered.com/fitness-tips/soft-kettlebell-vs-hardstyle
**Cast iron kettlebell, aka  “Original” kettlebell https://www.kettlebellkings.com/blog/what-kind-of-kettlebell-should-you-use/
**Competition / Sport kettlebell
**Steel kettlebell
**Cement kettlebell - vinyl shell filled with cement  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.201.184.27 (talk) 08:45, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Variations 

message: Competition kettlebells have standardised colours, from pink to gold. Convention or 'official', this should be mentioned on this page?Halbared (talk) 09:48, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Standardised colours

message: This article would really benefit from pictures for the specific exercises. I get such pictures need to be both freely usable and also not have any commercial ads. But there's slim pickings in Wikicommons and so it be nice if someone could contribute some informative usable illustrations there, or later find something good to add in the future. I inserted 2 pics of an athlete doing a windmill. But I have to admit their form isn't perfect as the overhand arm needs to be fully straight while extended. I also added a pic of a kettlebell squat. Those are the very few that I found that was half decent and acceptable enough. But it be swell if someone could find something better. 49.195.62.91 (talk) 20:04, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures for exercises