Quote:
Low bar squats are a powerlifting invention that does not offer benefits to a noob. This modification of the original exercise allows you to lift more weight by increasing the stress on the hips at the expense of the quadriceps, but the shift isn’t beneficial to the average novice.
The high bar back squat is a better leg builder, arguably easier to learn and far more shoulder friendly.
Mark Rippetoe and his army have been doing their best to justify the implementation of the low bar squat through all kinds of maneuvers. One of them would be the assessment that the low bar squat is better than the high bar because it hits the almighty posterior chain harder. This is indeed true – one of the fastest ways to grow a big booty is to do low bar squats a.k.a. cheated good mornings. But as I already told you, this comes at the expense of leg development.
The fans of low bar squats will tell you that the movement gets you stronger faster by allowing you to lift more weight, but that isn’t true. You are not getting stronger faster, you are simply doing a squat version that gives you an opportunity to lift more. More weight on the bar does not always equal more strength. If this was the case, doing rack pulls would make deadlifts obsolete.
Is he right? If not, why?