Squat Depth Efficacy

[Mark Rippetoe]

I wonder why?

[rhett]

I wonder why?

Six year worth of assbananas would make anyone walk crooked.

[mkamaryn]

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:



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.

I would love to have this conversation with you, but first we would need to define exactly what a great ass is...

Also, I would love to respond to the merits of the article. However, since elite class powerlifters were used in the research (which means, no doubt, they were wearing their Inzer suits and knee wraps), I don't know how to respond - the results probably have a lot to do with how much each lifter got out of his equipment.

[Sean Herbison]

Rhett. AssBanana.

That was a quick change, it took a lot longer for Kregna to officially become Vegetableboy.

[Robert Santana]

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:



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.

So why are we still on this?

[Mark Rippetoe]

That was a quick change, it took a lot longer for Kregna to officially become Vegetableboy.

When things become obvious quickly, we can be very efficient.

[Kregna]

I tried to keep my vegetarianism to myself, but someone saw me eating a pepper with quorn

[Sqwt]

However, since elite class powerlifters were used in the research (which means, no doubt, they were wearing their Inzer suits and knee wraps), I don't know how to respond - the results probably have a lot to do with how much each lifter got out of his equipment.

Yeah, I really hadn't considered that.

So why are we still on this?

We're not anymore, not after the AssBanana post. Not much more to say after that.

[Les Hahn]

That was a quick change, it took a lot longer for Kregna to officially become Vegetableboy.

True. And I have been petitioning for Kitten Commander for years! :-)

[DirtyRed]

Boy, you're sure right about that. Clarity has always been a problem for me.

I remember back in grade school we had an assignment to write some instructional paper about a topic of our choice. I picked shooting a basketball, because I hadn't yet grasped that the dwarfish kid wasn't making the NBA. The teacher told me to assume the reader had ABSOLUTELY no idea what they were doing, and be as clear as possible in order to adequately instruct them. Obviously, you have been overestimating the intelligence of certain people.

Side Note: I still look at JJ Barea and wonder what could have been.

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.

Aha! There it is! This is all just a ploy to get free books.