Dmitry Klokov Interview

[hamburgerfan]

Anecdotal, but anytime I've tried out "leading with the chest", it absolutely kills drive out of the hole. Kills it. It either puts the bar out of balance (dangerously, I might add, as it's very hard to recover a weight from behind the balance point), or it makes you slacken the hamstrings and let the knees shoot forward (which I think it is commonly what happens with such cuing, as the body typically will do what it has to to stay in balance).

The strongest way to stand up is the path you took to get down there. It's pretty simple.

No one's talking about leading with the chest out of the hole. I'm talking about raising the chest slightly halfway up. To prevent talking about a caricature, this is a squat set from my most recent workout. 495x5, the fourth set out of five that day. The chest raise at this weight is minute, but would be more noticeable at a heavy weight. The purpose it serves is to bring the hips under the bar and prevent losing it forward, which seems to me to be the most common cause of missed lifts that aren't missed in the hole or just out of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnTU...36WEQ_T0Lvq5WA

as for the triple ply comment, I'd like to get back in the gear at some point and give it an honest try, but it probably won't be anytime soon. Right now raw with wraps is what feels right.

[bugbomb]

How might the bar speed drop while "the rest" of the lift become easier? Isn't force production against the bar the quantity that moves the bar? Isn't this nebulous argument the same one used for the S-curve by the mathematicians at USAW?

I've been told in the form check forum by an SS coach that sometimes my chest comes up too early. I've noticed that my chest comes up right about the point where the "tough part" of the rep is over. I get a sense of "ok, let up a bit - you did it". I'm sure bar speed drops at that point as well.

In my own case, getting through the tough point -> less urgency -> relaxing a smidge -> chest rises -> lift slows down. There's still no doubt about completing the rep, and hip drive got the bar to that easier point. What in your opinion am I losing out on by not staying with the hips? Do you think that anthropometry plays any role here? I have never to my recollection done a "good morning'd" squat.

[tertius]

How might the bar speed drop while "the rest" of the lift become easier? Isn't force production against the bar the quantity that moves the bar? Isn't this nebulous argument the same one used for the S-curve by the mathematicians at USAW?

No idea. But I'd assume that there are some differences in how these things work when wearing that heavy of gear, and that the positions needed to take maximum advantage of said gear are not identical to ideal mechanics in the ungeared lifter.

[Mark Rippetoe]

No one's talking about leading with the chest out of the hole. I'm talking about raising the chest slightly halfway up. To prevent talking about a caricature, this is a squat set from my most recent workout. 495x5, the fourth set out of five that day. The chest raise at this weight is minute, but would be more noticeable at a heavy weight. The purpose it serves is to bring the hips under the bar and prevent losing it forward, which seems to me to be the most common cause of missed lifts that aren't missed in the hole or just out of it.

Raising the chest halfway up -- which you're not doing -- pulls the knees forward, which slacks the hamstrings, which diminishes support posterior. Which slows the bar speed. You really should come to a seminar. Compare the two videos I posted, and the effect is very clear.

What in your opinion am I losing out on by not staying with the hips?

Nothing, in a sub-max effort. Just an opportunity to practice staying efficient for when it counts at 1RM.

Do you think that anthropometry plays any role here? I have never to my recollection done a "good morning'd" squat.

Probably not. And I am not suggesting that you goodmorning your squats.

No idea. But I'd assume that there are some differences in how these things work when wearing that heavy of gear, and that the positions needed to take maximum advantage of said gear are not identical to ideal mechanics in the ungeared lifter.

Perhaps. But probably not. The gravity vector is still vertical, and the work against it is still vertical.

[hamburgerfan]

Raising the chest halfway up -- which you're not doing -- pulls the knees forward, which slacks the hamstrings, which diminishes support posterior. Which slows the bar speed. You really should come to a seminar. Compare the two videos I posted, and the effect is very clear.



Nothing, in a sub-max effort. Just an opportunity to practice staying efficient for when it counts at 1RM.



Probably not. And I am not suggesting that you goodmorning your squats.


Perhaps. But probably not. The gravity vector is still vertical, and the work against it is still vertical.

I don't think showing just two lifters is enough to demonstrate the superiority of a technique. They are at two opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to squat form (what I am describing is not as extreme as Cartwright) and it's kinda hard to think of Cartwright's squat as being vastly inferior, as he's still a 1000+ lb squatter.


I see what you're saying about the hamstrings, but if it happens as I describe, then it's not so much the hamstrings ceasing to contribute, as it is finishing their work slightly earlier. At the halfway point, I raise my chest to nearly standing level, and my quads lock the weight out easily, as the hamstrings job is finished.

My form was slightly different in that video than it would be if the weight was heavier. Maybe next week when my squats are heavier I will post a vid that will better illustrate what I'm talking about.

I would maybe attend a seminar if I could afford it.

[Mark Rippetoe]

I don't think showing just two lifters is enough to demonstrate the superiority of a technique. They are at two opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to squat form (what I am describing is not as extreme as Cartwright) and it's kinda hard to think of Cartwright's squat as being vastly inferior, as he's still a 1000+ lb squatter.

I agree completely, in that 2 data points are not enough for anything. This is why we rely upon an analysis of what should be optimum instead of a collection of disparate facts that may or may not demonstrate anything except that 2 guys did it differently.

[kidcolin]

Those just look like nice, strong squats to me, hbfan.

I still think it's nearly impossible to do what you're describing. It's a very unnatural movement, your knees would be under a ton of stress, and you'd risk screwing it up and just dumping the bar behind you. I think it's much more likely this is merely a mental cue you're using that keeps the back angle as it should be.

[bugbomb]

Probably not. And I am not suggesting that you goodmorning your squats.

No confusion there. I was just noting that I'm significantly more prone to the opposite form fault. In case that was pertinent to your answer.

[Mark Rippetoe]

Many people are, because they've heard this chest-up shit all their lives.

[Keith]

My form was slightly different in that video than it would be if the weight was heavier. Maybe next week when my squats are heavier I will post a vid that will better illustrate what I'm talking about.

I would maybe attend a seminar if I could afford it.

The bar speed looks pretty constant in the video but the raising the chest was too minute for me to see. It would be interesting to see what a more obvious raising of the chest at a heavier weight would do to the bar speed.

Maybe we could have a seminar scholarship fund for guys with a 500lb squat or better. I would donate $20.

The more I see stuff like this, the more frustrating the whole thing gets. Seriously, can someone tell me why there is such a strong, visceral reaction from so many in the WL and PL worlds about things when they come from Rip/Starting Strength community? It's really just weird at this point.

Not to be overly cynical but it is a mistake to see this as a simply a disagreement about strength training. This isn't a bunch of disinterested coaches trying to figure out best practices. It is about market share and money (and even though strength is the most important thing in life many still worship the golden calf).

Starting Strength is the best strength training product on the market--the books, the DVD, the seminar, the cert etc. Competitors have only two options: make a better product or attack it. It would be hard to make a better product. I am certain that the level of envy around the seminars is through the roof. That SS routinely sells out $800 weekend seminars is a massive source of frustration for these guys because they have trouble selling any tickets to their seminars which are a fraction of the cost.