Lombard’s paradox and Hip Drive

[Javier González Bauzá]

Hi Rip, follower of first principles and SS from Puerto Rico. Would you mind to deepen discussion on Lombard’s paradox as it pertains to your cue of hip drive in the Squat movement?

[Mark Rippetoe]

From Wikipedia: Lombard's paradox - Wikipedia

Lombard's paradox describes a paradoxical muscular contraction in humans. When rising to stand from a sitting or squatting position, both the hamstrings and quadriceps contract at the same time, despite them being antagonists to each other.

The rectus femoris biarticular muscle acting over the hip has a smaller hip moment arm than the hamstrings. However, the rectus femoris moment arm is greater over the knee than the hamstring knee moment. This means that contraction from both rectus femoris and hamstrings will result in hip and knee extension. Hip extension also adds a passive stretch component to rectus femoris, which results in a knee extension force. This paradox allows for efficient movement, especially during gait.

Sure. Obviously. But how is this a "paradox"? More like Obscure Trivia.

[Maybach]

"Paradox" in this case is I think used as an apparent contradiction which, when examined, yields an underlying insight into the phenomenon, as in dialectical analysis.

The role of the two biarticular muscles connecting knee extension to hip extension is I think a significant insight which Starting Strength, if not originated primarily, is at least at the forefront of highlighting, especially in a fitness industry which seems to grow stupider about the mechanics of movement every decade (ex. phys. students are still being taught the difference between "squat" and "hinge" movements, among such apparently useless terms as "sagittal plane")

[Javier González Bauzá]

My question comes after first hearing about this “paradox” and immediately clicking with the “hip drive” cue. My main reflection on this is not as deep as it sounds, its more a revelation on how short and well placed cues such as this can make us understand complex biomechanical positions. Its in part a pragmatic art of simple communication, which I believe Rip has mastered to the tee. Good riddance.

-----------------------------------------------------

Most definitely. Exactly my thought. Especially on how, experience has brought Rip to summarize these “bio mechanic concepts” in a handful of useful cues which carry a lot more than they give at face value.

-----------------------------------------------------

"Paradox" in this case is I think used as an apparent contradiction which, when examined, yields an underlying insight into the phenomenon, as in dialectical analysis.

The role of the two biarticular muscles connecting knee extension to hip extension is I think a significant insight which Starting Strength, if not originated primarily, is at least at the forefront of highlighting, especially in a fitness industry which seems to grow stupider about the mechanics of movement every decade (ex. phys. students are still being taught the difference between "squat" and "hinge" movements, among such apparently useless terms as "sagittal plane")

I appreciate what you say, and in fact, my thought is that SS is a the forefront of the biomechanical understanding of the movement, specially in how to communicate with the lifter. When I first heard of the "Lombard's paradox" my initial reaction was, this is the Hip Drive cue. I guess my comment comes to appreciate the power of these cues. Because the trained eye of an experienced coach summarizes in those quick phrases a complex biomechanical understanding which is brought to us in a fraction of a second. There is a lot of wisdom in those cues. It would be neat to hear Rip and some of the other coaches delve into explanations of what some of those cues help them inform to the lifter. Although, when spending some time reading the Blue Book, one can distill that.

[Jdcuth]

Trying to get my thick skull around this. Quadriceps extend the knee. Hamstrings can flex the knee, but if contracting whilst the knee is being extended by the quads, instead achieve hip extension. Thus coordinated contraction of both groups leads to both hip and knee extension (coming out of a squat). Obviously lots of other muscles doing there thing as well

??

[Mark Rippetoe]

Trying to get my thick skull around this. Quadriceps extend the knee. Hamstrings can flex the knee, but if contracting whilst the knee is being extended by the quads, instead achieve hip extension. Thus coordinated contraction of both groups leads to both hip and knee extension (coming out of a squat). Obviously lots of other muscles doing there thing as well

Hamstrings can also extend the knee distally, by pulling back on the proximal tibia. like the rectus femoris can flex the hip. See why machines are such inadequate devices? They do not permit normal human movement patterns to be strengthened.

[Jdcuth]

Hamstrings can also extend the knee distally, by pulling back on the proximal tibia. like the rectus femoris can flex the hip. See why machines are such inadequate devices? They do not permit normal human movement patterns to be strengthened.

I do. It always intrigues me when people take the squat, and try to modify it to isolate the quads more (back vertical, knees forwards, look up), whilst making the movement as a whole less productive.


My wife will come home from her pilates class and show me their latest move for really isolating a muscle because the burn felt in it is then assumed to be beneficial. It's like they think we have secret muscles that hide from activity during everyday activities like squatting, lifting and carrying that the pilates instructors cleverly mange to trick in to being turned on by their latest moves thus avoiding the need for hard productive lifting.