Box squats Box squats - Page 3

starting strength gym
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 64

Thread: Box squats

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    74

    Default

    • phoenix arizona seminar date
    • texas seminar date
    Quote Originally Posted by Satch12879 View Post
    Rip's getting at an oft-repeated mistake people make with regard to understanding the performance of very strong individuals and how they got that way. The question you have to ask yourself is, "are they strong because of or in spite of whatever thing they are doing?" In other words, did the box squats make them strong or were they strong guys that were doing box squats? One is definitely true, the other not necessarily so. It's a study in phenomenology.
    I understand, which is why I chose the word "seem." I would also say your point cuts both ways. My observance of the strength displayed by these individuals cannot be definitively attributed to box squatting. But I can definitively say that these individuals have achieved significant levels of strength in the absence of squatting as described in SS which in turn would mean that the SS method of squatting is not necessary for the development of the displayed levels of strength in these particular individuals.

    Also....I only LBBS as described in SS. So my interest is more from an interest in gaining knowledge rather than a defense of something I do.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    West Bend, WI
    Posts
    10,969

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Satch12879 View Post
    Rip's getting at an oft-repeated mistake people make with regard to understanding the performance of very strong individuals and how they got that way. The question you have to ask yourself is, "are they strong because of or in spite of whatever thing they are doing?" In other words, did the box squats make them strong or were they strong guys that were doing box squats? One is definitely true, the other not necessarily so. It's a study in phenomenology.
    You can get strong using box squats. I've seen people only do box squats from the very beginning and still make good gains. If you are progressively overloading the musculature, you will adapt and get stronger. But the question is, are box squats the best way to get strong. For me they were always more of an assistance exercise, and they have their place in my training. But I always have to keep doing some form of low bar squatting too, especially since I compete that way.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    81

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Name the logic error for a free T-shirt.
    Ooh free t-shirt game! Iíll play!

    Iím going with the questionable cause fallacy, aka the confusion of correlation and causation.

    In the case, the author is assuming that the amount of weight these guys can lift has been directly caused by the box squats they prescribe.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    39,696

    Default

    I think Upchurch is technically correct. PM me your address.

    Quote Originally Posted by atw_abn View Post
    I understand, which is why I chose the word "seem." I would also say your point cuts both ways. My observance of the strength displayed by these individuals cannot be definitively attributed to box squatting. But I can definitively say that these individuals have achieved significant levels of strength in the absence of squatting as described in SS which in turn would mean that the SS method of squatting is not necessary for the development of the displayed levels of strength in these particular individuals.
    But the interesting question is: how much stronger would they be had they squatted correctly?

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    blanco, texas
    Posts
    42

    Default

    I box squat because I am old, and it is easier on my knees. I also hear that there are some "box squatters" in the WF area.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    958

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    I think Upchurch is technically correct. PM me your address.



    But the interesting question is: how much stronger would they be had they squatted correctly?
    Maybe stronger, maybe not. What may define a genetic freak is his/her ease of ability to go from baseline to 95+% of genetic potential by using any form of vigorous training, while the rest of us mortals have to optimize programming to make progress throughout the journey.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    39,696

    Default

    Are you suggesting that a "GF" who vigorously trains with dumbbells and swiss balls is actually stronger than a normal human who squats 405?

  8. #28
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    patagonia
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Im not training with box squats, but what i like about them is that under heavy weights I cant correctly watch if im bellow parallel, and with a box I can feel it.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    958

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Are you suggesting that a "GF" who vigorously trains with dumbbells and swiss balls is actually stronger than a normal human who squats 405?
    Not at all. But it is reasonable to assume that a "GF" who trains with dumbbells and swill balls will get closer to his genetic strength potential than the average person who trains with balls and bells.

    What I am suggesting that it may be entirely possible for a "GF" to reach 95% strength potential by doing box squats instead of SS squats and that this route to becoming as strong as possible may not be possible for the rest of the 99.9% of us. Is it really hard to believe that part of being a "GF" is the ability to optimize strength potential using methods that are not optimal for the general population?

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    74

    Default

    starting strength nutrition camp
    Quote Originally Posted by OZ-USF-UFGator View Post
    Not at all. But it is reasonable to assume that a "GF" who trains with dumbbells and swill balls will get closer to his genetic strength potential than the average person who trains with balls and bells.

    What I am suggesting that it may be entirely possible for a "GF" to reach 95% strength potential by doing box squats instead of SS squats and that this route to becoming as strong as possible may not be possible for the rest of the 99.9% of us. Is it really hard to believe that part of being a "GF" is the ability to optimize strength potential using methods that are not optimal for the general population?
    It's interesting how anyone that gets strong without doing SS must be a "GF." Do we get free t-shirts for pointing out the logical fallacy in that line of thinking?

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •