Squat Depth Efficacy Squat Depth Efficacy - Page 3

starting strength gym
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 42

Thread: Squat Depth Efficacy

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    3,227

    Default

    • wichita falls texas december seminar 2020
    • wichita falls texas february 2021 seminar
    • starting strength seminar april 2021
    Quote Originally Posted by rhett View Post
    The book could stand some clarity on this point. If you are saying you should stop just below parallel then stop calling it a full range of motion. I'll spell it out for you - if you can keep moving it wasn't a full range of motion.
    Gotta agree with Rip here, I think it's perfectly clear. Look at the cover of the book.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    202

    Default

    Rip, what will make me stronger:

    Doing five sets of five Kegels, or five sets of ten second Kegel holds? Will too many Kegels prevent me from deadlifting correctly?

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    12,578

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rhett View Post
    You are equating ATG with high bar squatting. Why? If you do a low bar squat, you can stop just below parallel or you can keep going. What does high bar have to do with this discussion?
    Please provide video of yourself squatting "ATG" with a challenging weight in the low bar position. Then take 50 pounds off the bar, put it in the high bar position and squat "ATG." Tell me what differences you see. Of course this should be self-evident, if you've actually pondered the biomechanics for 30 seconds or more.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Boy, you're sure right about that. Clarity has always been a problem for me.
    Don't say "don't even think about stopping high; just go to the bottom" if what you really mean is "stop a few inches before you get to the bottom". Why not clarify the distinction between the two and lay out your position for why JBP is better than ATG?

    But I like the character on display here. I recently made an observation that helped the author Sam Harris improve the clarity of his wording. His response? He sent me a signed copy of every one of his books in thanks. I make an observation about the language of your book that, if they are being honest, any English speaker would interpret differently than you intend and your response? More snarky, smart-ass comments.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elVarouza View Post
    Gotta agree with Rip here, I think it's perfectly clear. Look at the cover of the book.
    If the pictures say one thing, but the words say another, then there is a lack of clarity. This is an inconvenient fact for Mark, but the squat he coaches is a partial squat and is not the full range of motion.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jordan Feigenbaum View Post
    How many times have you seen the second scenario play out? If someone squats 405 ATG and it's a pretty good fight. 500 is not close.
    How many times have you seen the scenario I was responding to, where one can squat 500 past parallel but only 315 ATG?

    I've seen 315 past parallel and 255 ATG. Fairly close, proportionally.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mkamaryn View Post
    If you get your 1rm squat to 500- just below parallel, you can squat 315 ATG - even if you haven't ever gone ATG before.

    If you get your 1rm ATG squat to 315, you can't put 500 on your back and squat it to just below parallel.
    That about wraps it up. But let me play devil's advocate here for a minute, if nothing than for the sake of discussion. Strength is obviously the primary concern for members of this board, and that's why we squat. A lot. Some trainees, however, have other goals than just strength where the squat is still a useful tool, such as in developing a pleasing set of glutes. I've seen the paper below used as an argument for squatting ATG instead of just breaking parallell, especially if your goals are more based on aesthetics than strength. The primary reason being that ATG squats activates the glutes more than in a parallell squat. Here's a paste of the relevant portions with some added emphasis:

    Caterisano, et al. demonstrated that while average muscle activity of the gluteus maximus was not significantly different in both the partial squat (16.92 ± 8.78%) and parallel squat (28.00 ± 10.29%), it increased significantly during the full squat (35.47 ± 1.45%) (2). Similar results were shown for peak values, which displayed significantly greater activity during performance of the full squat as compared to lesser squat depths.

    As opposed to the GM, squat depth has little effect on hamstrings involvement. Maximum hamstrings activity tends to occur between 10 to 70 degrees of flexion, but the magnitude of variation in peak and mean torque is not significant between partial squats, parallel squats and full squats (4, 17, 19). This is consistent with the bi-articular structure of the muscle complex. Since the hamstrings function both as hip extensors and knee flexors, muscle length remains fairly constant throughout performance, providing a relatively even force output. Muscular forces at the knee are largely produced by the quadriceps femoris, with muscle activity peaking at approximately 80 to 90 degrees of flexion and remaining relatively consistent thereafter (4, 19). This would seem to infer that squatting past 90 degrees is superfluous if the goal is to maximize the development of the quadriceps.

    In conclusion, there is scant evidence to show that deep squats are contraindicated in those with healthy knee function. The decision as to how low to squat should therefore be based on an individual’s performance-oriented goals and considered in conjunction with any pathological issues that may be apparent. Those with PCL disorders should refrain from squatting below 50 to 60 degrees until the injury is fully healed. Disorders such as chondromalacia, osteoarthritis, and osteochondritis may also contraindicate the performance of deep squats. To optimize development of the gluteus maximus, squats should be carried out through their full range of motion. To target the quadriceps femoris, a squat depth of 90 degrees appears to be optimal.
    Source: The Biomechanics of Squat Depth - Brad Schoenfeld

    So there you have it. I find it curious that the paper deals with muscle activation and focusing on glutes VS quads, but nothing about strength as a whole. I wouldn't know what to argue here if a trainees goal is Dat Ass and uses this paper as evidence to do ATG squats. If their spine lumbar doesn't go into flexion when they squat ATG then have at it for all I care. Hell, they can do it if their spine is all over the place. I'll keep squatting to slightly below parallell and mind my own business.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Morris County, NJ
    Posts
    160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rhett View Post
    The book could stand some clarity on this point. If you are saying you should stop just below parallel then stop calling it a full range of motion. I'll spell it out for you - if you can keep moving it wasn't a full range of motion.
    You really are a fool or you didn't bother to read the book. I'll spell it out for you - looking at words on a page is not reading. You need to comprehend what those words mean.

    The full range of motion of the LBBS as described in great detail in the book is not defined as high far your butt moves towards the ground. It involves the full range of each *muscle* and joint involved in the lift. The hamstrings should be at a full stretch as well as the inner thigh. The back should be in full extension with the abs tight. The bar must remain over the mid-foot.

    The goal is to use the most muscle mass over the greatest ROM to drive the greatest strength gains. Not see how close you can get your balls to the floor and still manage stand back up.

    This is clear to anybody who has read the book.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    43,293

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rhett View Post
    If the pictures say one thing, but the words say another, then there is a lack of clarity. This is an inconvenient fact for Mark, but the squat he coaches is a partial squat and is not the full range of motion.
    Rhett. AssBanana. http://startingstrength.com/resource...ead.php?t=6848

    You are wasting this board's electrons.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    124

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Rhett. AssBanana. http://startingstrength.com/resource...ead.php?t=6848

    You are wasting this board's electrons.
    You were such a teddy bear back then.

Page 3 of 5 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
  •