I know I'm being a bit anal, but I wish people would stop making up routines and labelling them as Tabata just because they work for 20 seconds and rest for 10. The tabata protocol was a cardio workout done at a ridiculous intensity (170% of vo2 max) and if you have ever tried it you would not be able to contemplate doing it for three rounds. Same goes for tabata front squats, tabata push ups, whatever. I know doing squats and kettlebell swings is very knackering, but nowhere near as taxing as working at 170% vo2 max and the weights as far as intensity of 1rm are concerned are too low to have any real strength benefits. Train with heavy weights for strength and do cardio for stamina. Your workout is just circuit training which is not very good at improving either.
Farmer: you are 100% correct...this is not a tabatas in the technical sense of the word, and I think most people who use the protocol are aware of that. it's more an issue of expediency. it's alot quicker to explain a workout in 1 word like "tabatas" then "8 rounds of 20:10 work:rest intervals." It's like plyometrics. How many people misuse that word to refer to cardio workouts that involve a lot of jumping? But you know what they're referring to.
As far as heavy weights for strength, cardio for stamina? Why not do both at the same time? Either you are stuck in the 1980s mindset of exercise science, or you know some secret I don't...oh and Alwyn Cosgrove, Robert dos Remedios, Chad Waterbury, Eric Cressey, etc. don't know either. Read up, buddy, before you criticize someone else's methods just because they are different than yours.
FightinIrish: x2!! But more than just fighters. Anyone who does anything could benefit from this type of training (if they're in good enough shape for it.) btw, I graduated from ND 2005, what year were you?
You're right it is a question of terminology this workout is circuit training. I also agree that this type of training can be effective if you have a limited amount of training time and want to improve strength and stamina. However I stand by the statement that doing them separately will result in greater improvements. Please link me to some studies showing how weights of 35% of 1 rm can result in strength improvements in "trained" individuals. Good luck finding some. (Studies with controls etc).Don't sneer at scientific studies, this is the only way we can determine the effectiveness of training systems, without being influenced by empirical evidence and opinion. I'm sure the reason these sorts of workouts are popular with Cosgrove, Waterbury etc is because they give "the most bang for your buck" for people who only have 45 minutes 3x week to train. I'm sure if you asked them what is the best way to increase strength and what is the best way to improve stamina, they would give you very different answers!