Kettlebells?

[danieeln]

DO any of you guys use kettlebells for boxing?

What are your thoughts on them?

[Redd Foxx]

They're awesome. Totally different dynamic than a dumbbell as the weight is past the hand and it is continually shifting. Strengthens supporting muscles a lot. Let's you work new angles. Get them and be sure to find some good videos as there's a lot exercises you can do with them.
Oh, and start light. About half of what you would lift with a dumbbell.

[*Stannis*]

I think guys who use kettlebells look a bit gay.

[SBleeder]

Pointless for boxing training.

[Hyper Knuckles]

really?

[Jack3d]

They're a good conditioning tool, good for developing core strength and hip flexibility.

[winky's right]

they're good for core/leg strength. great for boxing imo

[as646]

Pointless for boxing training.

What makes you say this? Kettlebells are compound movements. Compound movements have good crossover into more or less any sport, including boxing. As far as conditioning goes, kettlebells done correctly are far more effective than calisthenics for developing explosive strength.

[SBleeder]

What makes you say this? Kettlebells are compound movements. Compound movements have good crossover into more or less any sport, including boxing. As far as conditioning goes, kettlebells done correctly are far more effective than calisthenics for developing explosive strength.

They're pointless because they're not specific to boxing, and they take time away from actually learning the craft of boxing. Hitting the heavy bag is a "compound movement" too, so why waste time on something that doesn't improve boxing skill?

Completely disagree that they're better than good old calisthenics.

[as646]

They're pointless because they're not specific to boxing, and they take time away from actually learning the craft of boxing. Hitting the heavy bag is a "compound movement" too, so why waste time on something that doesn't improve boxing skill?

Completely disagree that they're better than good old calisthenics.

You do realise you could just as easily apply your argument against kettlebells to calisthenics? Calisthenics aren't boxing specific. What makes them so superior to kettlebells? Because boxers have traditionally always done calisthenics? Training methods change over time as people discover other, more effective methods of doing things. You can't just bury your head in the sand on the premise that people have always traditionally done something. Well, you can, and you can still be a good boxer, but then it isn't either calisthenics or kettlebells that really makes a good boxer.