Page 1 of 22 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 220

Thread: Because I don't get to sleep for a few weeks: Hbbs vs LBBS

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The People's Republic of Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    10,940

    Default Because I don't get to sleep for a few weeks: Hbbs vs LBBS

    First, if you haven't read the recent thread about this in it's entirety and just want to post something about the 13yo or the derailment, please refrain. It's a great achievement, but if you got your jimmies rustled be people talking about stuff other than the OP - which happens frequently on forums in general-chill out. No one said it's not impressive. No one. Any who, I'm looking to have an actual academic discussion of what in the f goes on in these squats. To prevent any more derailment, I present to you this new thread that's sure to be the end of the Internet. As for where we last left out hero..:

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Jones View Post
    On to the HBBS/LBBS debate.

    Let's say I have both: (a) a 500# weight with a fulcrum and a lever; and, (b) a 600# weight with another fulcrum but a longer lever. Let's assume it takes 100# of downward force on the opposite end of the both levers to lift these weights. Am I stronger because I can move the latter weight? No, my leverage (by virtue of the longer lever) is just better. The same is true of squatting. You are not "stronger" because you can LBBS more than you can HBBS. You HBBS less because you are in a disadvantaged position. The innate "strength" of a lifter is not changed by his or her methodology of moving...

    So someone is going to need to explain how if someone who has a 500lb 1rm Hbbs has the same muscular force production than a 600lb LBBS if both reps have the same velocity. I'll concede that the Hbbs has a certain non zero increase in rom, but surely it's rather obvious that the LBBS isn't a sort of "parlor trick" as suggested above, as the motor units recruited must produce more force to overcome a heavier load.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    74

    Default

    You mentioned in the other thread that a quick perusal of raw PL world records shows that LBBS is the preferred technique. Has anyone attempted to quantify who uses what?
    I made the same point to someone the other day, we ended up inconclusively trading HB/LB vids.
    Last edited by Nick Wilding; 02-27-2014 at 03:58 PM. Reason: Whisky.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jordan Feigenbaum View Post
    So someone is going to need to explain how if someone who has a 500lb 1rm Hbbs has the same muscular force production than a 600lb LBBS if both reps have the same velocity. I'll concede that the Hbbs has a certain non zero increase in rom, but surely it's rather obvious that the LBBS isn't a sort of "parlor trick" as suggested above, as the motor units recruited must produce more force to overcome a heavier load.
    As you seem to begrudgingly concede, the HBBS is moving the bar further, for one. His force production could be more (and, at least theoretically, there could be more muscle recruitment) because, by virtue of poorer leverage, he's essentially having to push "harder" to move that 500#. If I have two 500# weights with fulcrums and levers, I have to push harder on the shorter of the two levers to move that same weight. Same concept.

    Never said LBBS is a parlor trick. It is a different way to move weight than is HBBS (or FS for that matter).
    Last edited by Thomas Jones; 02-27-2014 at 04:23 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    5,776

    Default

    This thread okay for "PL" low bar vs "SS" low bar or is it reserved for the even deader horse?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    472

    Default

    The question should be if we take two identical people (who are not total notices) with identical FS, OHS or even 100m sprint times or vertical jumps, and have one train LBBS and one train HBBS for, say, 6 months, and then re-test their FS, OHS and/or 100 m times, who improves most? Rip would argue LBBS would result in the most improvement because it makes you stronger. He may be right. Others might argue HBBS would improve because it is better for "athleticism" or carries over better to the FS and/or OHS. They may be right.

    But I don't think anyone can actually answer that question because I don't think any meaningful study like this has ever been done.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Alanis, MT
    Posts
    5,645

    Default

    Thomas: I'm trying to get my physics-brain working, but it's not complying well....but aren't the motive and resistance arms going to increase & decrease equally during a squat?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    995

    Default

    my knowledge of physics is rough but I've always wondered why HBBS is said to be more inefficient. In the HBBS dont the primary movers pushing more vertically require less force to move? With gravity being a straight downward force wouldnt moving the bar more vertically require the least resistance? As apposed to the more extreme angle created by the lean in the LBBS. Maybe Im simplifying the model too much.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    3,980

    Default

    Everyone crying in that other thread should be fucking ashamed. It's a fucking thread. Who cares if it gets derailed. Seriously. Who gives a shit. Fuck. People are so damn sensitive these days.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The People's Republic of Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    10,940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike C View Post
    Everyone crying in that other thread should be fucking ashamed. It's a fucking thread. Who cares if it gets derailed. Seriously. Who gives a shit. Fuck. People are so damn sensitive these days.
    I agree and Thomas has his physics and metrics wrong but I won't get to fake going to the bathroom for awhile. Thomas how does force production increase in the lighter of two 1rms? What is work, Thomas? While this is not Germane to this argument, I'm curious to your reasoning.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Hanley View Post
    Thomas: I'm trying to get my physics-brain working, but it's not complying well....but aren't the motive and resistance arms going to increase & decrease equally during a squat?
    I frankly do not know.

    Look at a DL versus a snatch grip DL. One cannot lift as much with a snatch grip DL because one is in a disadvantaged leverage position. The person who can snatch grip deadlift 500# is stronger than the one who can DL 500# with a normal width grip is he not? And it is not because of force production or length of travel -- it is because of the more cramped starting position forces the snatch grip lifter to push/pull "harder".
    Last edited by Thomas Jones; 02-27-2014 at 05:05 PM.

Page 1 of 22 12311 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •