Reflections on "The Quick and the Dead"
“The Quick and the Dead” is Pavel Tsatsouline’s most recent book. Pavel is most famous for popularizing kettlebells in the US, but in this book he takes a larger aim and it is the culmination of five years of work. Yes, there’s plenty of kettlebell content in this book, but he introduces a workout structure that can be implemented with kettlebells, bodyweight, barbells, or any other type of implement. This program is targeted for athletes and experienced trainers, which impacts a lot of the structure and guidelines for his new protocol.
The biggest thing Pavel introduces is his concept of “Anti-Glycolytic Training”. This idea moves away from how kettlebells are often typically programmed (high reps, low load, circuits etc.). Instead of being focused on conditioning and decreasing rest periods or increasing rep ranges Pavel makes a strong argument for being as explosive as possible and not pushing into fatigue. He backs this up with a lot of research from Russian sports scientists that he has personally translated. Additionally, he gives a good overview of the energy systems which breaks it down well for people not familiar with the science (though, I would argue oversimplifies it for people that are familiar).
Another foundation of the book is to use the minimum effective dose and keep the workout as simple as possible. The main program involves just two exercises; kettlebell swings and push ups, with another option being solely doing kettlebell snatches. I’m personally a fan of simple and straightforward programming, so this works for me. He also does a good job breaking down the exercises from a technical standpoint, and spends plenty of time laying out how to implement them into the exact protocol as well as a couple different variations.
Critique
I want to start by saying that overall I liked the text! And will definitely implement a few pieces from it. But I do have a number of issues. While the protocol is flexible and not limited to just swings, snatches, and push ups, it does seem a little bit like Pavel only has a hammer and everything looks like a nail. He does not make a lot of allowances for athletes needing different qualities. You can substitute different exercises, but there is no real progression, no adjustments for different individuals. It seems to be an effective protocol, but it’s one-size fits all.
One thing I really admire is how efficient the protocol is; in 12-30 minutes you are completely done. Additionally, the volume is fairly low and the rest long so that athletes don’t get beat up. I’ve played around with a few of the sessions and you end up finishing feeling fairly fresh. With that in mind it seems like it would work well for athletes that have a lot of other energy to dedicate to their sports specific training. Format is simple, quick and hard set or two of 10, plenty of rest, then do the alternating exercise. Rinse and repeat. But, he lays out how to track the workout with a timer. Once a team had the training down it would be very easy to administer to a group of athletes since they would all be going at the same time.
I have some fairly strong issues with how Pavel has interpreted some of the studies though, and, in particular, some of his terminology. He refers to this as “Anti-Glycolytic Training” and claims that sets of 10-15 seconds helps minimize use of the glycolytic system. My main issue is that it vastly overstates the duration of the alactic system. Research indicates that 7-10 seconds is where the body switches to predominantly glycolysis for substrate utilization. And, that’s while fully rested; as a workout lengthens the utilization of glycolysis for fuel increases. So, this is not anti-glycolytic! I get that his main argument is to keep power output high and minimize lactate production, and maybe short duration exercise with sufficient rest will keep lactate production in check, but it would have been nice to see him even provide some simple studies conducted on himself or others showing that this protocol did not drastically increase lactate accumulation.
Additionally, some of the western research he references I’ve worked to track down (and I can’t be completely sure, because he does not list his references, but the study seems to line up), and, to my eyes, he seems to be slightly twisting it to fit his anti-lactate narrative. I get why he wants to minimize lactate production in some contexts, but there are a lot of benefits to it as well, and with his black and white discourse we don’t get that viewpoint. Energy systems are incredibly nuanced, and here Pavel is trying to overly simplify. I am confident that he’s smart enough that he knows what he is doing here, so I’m a little frustrated by his totalitarian approach.
To build off this, I am left a little wanting by his “evidence”. Much (if not all) of the research he references simply is not available in the West. While I appreciate that he is giving us a window into these texts it’s impossible to fact check him. Considering that I question some of his interpretations this makes it really hard to evaluate his claims. He also spends a lot of time referencing anecdotes. While case studies and anecdotes are valuable, the plural of anecdote is not data! It makes an entertaining read, but can lead to a selection bias.
For example, one concept he introduces is the idea of “Variable Overload”. The concept here is that by having sharp changes in load and volume instead of traditional progressive overload. It makes sense in a similar way to daily undulating periodization, but almost seems to go a little too far into “muscle confusion” bro-science realm. Once again, Pavel has quotes from Russian scientists and references “spectacular results” from Russian weightlifters, but it’s hard to properly evaluate. What Pavel implements from that concept is volume always changes by a minimum of 20% from workout to workout (you will do 40, 60, 80, or 100 reps of each exercise).
Overall, there are a lot of intriguing concepts, but I want to see how it plays out in the real world. The text is still somewhat new, so I’ll be interested to see if some of the protocols do start trickling down to different gyms and trainers.
Takeaways
The biggest takeaway I have is that if you want to improve explosive power you need to really prioritize power output and have sufficient rest. This keeps the quality of movement high and helps athletes not get beat up for practicing their sport. This point leads into the next one
The goal of strength and conditioning is to improve the qualities that lead to athletic development, not just to make an athlete tired. I know this is a rabbithole that I’ve gone down in the wrong direction! It feels super satisfying to have a “brutal” workout and be sore the next day. But if it takes away from practicing your sport (or worse, causes injury) then it’s not productive.
Make the program reflect the goals of the session. If you want to improve power make sure that your program uses protocols to improve power. If you want to improve strength or hypertrophy, the same lessons apply. It’s not enough just to have a plan that “gives a good workout” you need to target a particular stimulus.
Be ruthlessly efficient. Look at your workout program and figure out what exercises are actually helping and which are fluff. By eliminating unnecessary exercises we can direct more energy towards the bigger “bang for your buck” movements and practicing your sport as well as save time.
Interrogate your sources. This is particularly important for information that comes from so-called “gurus” like Pavel. Yes, there is a ton of good information in this text and I’m generally a fan. But that doesn’t mean you should take everything at face value. What is the author’s goal? What might some of their blindspots be? These are always important questions to ask when evaluating your information.
Simple does not mean easy. Just because the program is two exercises alternated for moderate volume does not mean it is easy! By exerting maximal effort throughout the workout you can get a great stimulus from something that is very straightforward and might look easy on paper.
Execution of movement is paramount. Pavel gives great step by step guidelines for kettlebell swings and snatches, however this likely isn’t enough. Kettlebell swings are maybe the most butchered exercise I have seen in commercial gyms, and if done improperly are not going to have the benefits that this program advertises.
Style is important. Pavel has clearly done a lot of research and could have turned out a dry pamphlet. But he uses a lot of metaphors and anecdotes to spice it up. While I don’t love that, I recognize that it likely makes it more digestible for most people.
You don’t need a ton of resources for a good training program. It’s easy to want to use everything at a gym, but with just one kettlebell and your bodyweight you can hit most movement patterns you need to
Challenge your preconceptions. For example, I know that progressive overload works, but that doesn’t mean it’s the only tool available. By opening up to other ideas of progression I can become a more effective programmer.