Pelvis Crazy High = Bad Back Angle?

[johnb]

Hey Ripp,

Thanks for everything, all the help, guides, articles, etc.

I started SS about 12 weeks ago. Got the squat up to 210. Finally filmed it, realized it was hot garbage and thus did a cold turkey reset all the way back down to 135. I was doing quarter squats with intense good mornings.

I'm now getting decent depth, at least in comparison. As the weight has risen depth has become more hit and miss. I'll be at 205 tonight. This is a vid from Friday @ 195.



Now the question: my pelvis is crazy high, would that be the reason for my very horizontal back angle? The top of it is about 1-1.5" below the bottom of my ribs, just enough room for me to jab my fingers in between and push in a bit. I figured this anthropomorphic situation, or the hip insertion point resulting from it, may be the reason that I've found it so hard to keep a decent back angle.

Or is it just me being mentally incapable or dull and thus not getting it for some reason?

Hope to fix this soon as it messes up everything else from bar being over mid foot to hip drive and probably loads more.

Thanks a ton-

[Mark Rippetoe]

These squats are all still high, some more than others. Do you think your back angle is supposed to be more vertical?

[johnb]

i was thinking so. not significantly, necessarily. i had a good amount of feedback that i was doing good mornings. i definitely was back before resetting (can provide video if it'd help comparison) and could feel the shear in my back during and afterwards. i don't feel that back stress anymore overall. there are some reps where i know my hips are rising faster than my chest to the point that they're almost even w/ my shoulders and those are certainly bad form/reps, but overall i feel as if the GM'ing issue is nearly gone, but that's just from my own musings, nothing more than anecdotal when compared to the videos.

i've got some vids from last night @ 205 as well that may be helpful if you'd like to see.

and, yes, my depth hasn't been as good as it was beginning to get. i think it's because my main focus has been chest up more than knees out, butt down, etc., which sacrificed the depth. it seems like that extra bit of depth i need to get past just above parallel was usually reached by my torso bending even further beyond a reasonable angle.

thanks-

[johnb]

i just rewatched the vid and it seems like my best reps in regards to depth are the ones that i'm bent forward on the most. this moves the bar out of a strictly vertical path, over the end of the foot instead of the middle, and causes inefficiency all around w/ hip drive and what not, correct?

[Mark Rippetoe]

it seems like that extra bit of depth i need to get past just above parallel was usually reached by my torso bending even further beyond a reasonable angle.

Depth is not achieved by lowering the bar, but by lowering the hips. Conversely, the back angle kept too vertical prevents effective hip drive. This shit is pretty confusing, huh? Maybe a thorough search of the board's previous posts will lend clarity.

[johnb]

Depth is not achieved by lowering the bar, but by lowering the hips. Conversely, the back angle kept too vertical prevents effective hip drive. This shit is pretty confusing, huh? Maybe a thorough search of the board's previous posts will lend clarity.

right. i wasn't intending to imply that it should be achieved in such a way, but rather that the final portion of hips dipping down looked like it was achieved when my folding became too much.

i came across two posts from previous Q&As w/ you where guys were having similar issues. one response of yours was this:

We've discussed this many times before. You cannot let your back angle go horizontal to facilitate hip drive. This fucks up your leverage. You may have to think about leading with the chest for a while to get this corrected.

and another this:

You are trying to keep your chest/upper back too vertical. When you get tired at the end of the set, your enable to hold it there and you see your back angle go horizontal as you drive your hips. You feel this, and you try to re-lift the chest, slowing you down on the way up.

I'm trying to find the middle ground between those two. When I focus intensely on chest up to get less horizontal I lose balance and fall backwards. When I don't focus on that I easily lean too far forward and go horizontal. So, the real intent of me posting here is to see if your trained eye would notice anything in my body type (the high pelvis deal) that would lend itself to these issues, or if I'm just stupid and need to shut up and work on the mental game. And, regarding shoes, the previous posts throughout the board seem to show they could help big time w/ my anthrop and issues.One person suggested .75-1.25" heels for me. Wanted to see what you said before dropping the cash. Would the Rogue do-wins w/ .6 be sufficient, or the higher the better for me?

Thanks a ton

[Mark Rippetoe]

Knees out is what produces depth, which you need to worry about before a technical dissection of back angle mechanics. And any shoes are better than the ones you've got now. I fear you are concerned with minutia prematurely.

[mrflibble]

my body type (the high pelvis deal)

You do seem overly fixated on your supposedly high pelvis. While there is of course some variation person to person, I wouldn't say there's anything unusual or "crazy" about your proportions. It's quite common to have a relatively small gap between the iliac crest and the 12th rib. I'd also suspect if you got the average person with no grounding in A&P to show you where they think the top of their pelvis is in their lower back, they'd guess it's much lower than it really is.

[johnb]

Knees out is what produces depth, which you need to worry about before a technical dissection of back angle mechanics. And any shoes are better than the ones you've got now. I fear you are concerned with minutia prematurely.

good deal. i'm not sure i remember the article name—think it was something like Active Hip 2.0—really helped me start getting in the vicinity of parallel. I'll keep my focus on that, grab some shoes this week and keep moving forward.

thanks for the help-

[johnb]

You do seem overly fixated on your supposedly high pelvis. While there is of course some variation person to person, I wouldn't say there's anything unusual or "crazy" about your proportions. It's quite common to have a relatively small gap between the iliac crest and the 12th rib. I'd also suspect if you got the average person with no grounding in A&P to show you where they think the top of their pelvis is in their lower back, they'd guess it's much lower than it really is.

i can see how it would seem so. i'm not really, though. after getting varying ideas/responses from people on this board and others i just wanted to check and make sure that there wasn't something concrete in my body type that needed to be compensated for or if i was good to go w/ just mentally fixing it during my workouts, stretching properly, getting shoes, etc. and all the standard stuff to help w/ such things. seems like ripp confirmed that i go that way and not worry about such nuanced issues of body type. ordering my shoes today.