Comrade Wolf on the Low Bar and High Bar Back Squat

[Tom Campitelli]

If left to his own devices, Wolf might not post this here, so I will. He recently published an article looking at the low bar back squat and the high bar back squat. It's a thoughtfully written piece that deserves a wider reading. Enjoy:

http://www.wolfstrength.com/2013/10/...-squat-debate/

[patterson]

I think a lot of us would like to see a break down of the hbbs much like the one of the lbbs in ssbbt3. it still is a strong powerful movement, but it would just be nice for those that swear by it to prove why it is their number one choice. many times all you get is because our some bull shit about how low bar isn't actually a squat but a cheated movement to reach depth in a compitition. ( which would make it a legal squat?)

[OCG]

If one is talking about a "low bar" squat and imagining a three ply squat with your feet against the sides of the rack then you might have a point. But pretty much no one squats like that raw, so it's not a very good point.

I agree that an analysis and also instruction (beyond "put the bar on your back and squat up and down as vertical as possible") on the high bar squat much like has been done with the low bar squat would be very interesting. I kind of wonder though, if one preforms a "moderate" high bar squat with the feet about shoulder width pointed out somewhat and sticks their knees out and squats down between their legs. Would that really look all that different to a low bar squat for most people (i.e. not short femured freaks)?

[Michael Wolf]

If left to his own devices, Wolf might not post this here, so I will. He recently published an article looking at the low bar back squat and the high bar back squat. It's a thoughtfully written piece that deserves a wider reading. Enjoy:

http://www.wolfstrength.com/2013/10/...-squat-debate/

Why thank you, Comrade Campitelli.

I don't think I came up with anything new that hasn't been written before, either here on the forum or in some of Rip's books and articles, but perhaps some of the different ideas and elements weren't put together in one piece before. Not sure. Whatever the case, I hope it is a useful clarification on the issue.

[Kyle Schuant]

Logically, the LB uses more hamstrings and will thus be more useful. But we've not any actual data either way to show the results, like one group does LB and the other group does HB, which group ends up improving their snatch and C&J more. That's the problem with much of this stuff, nobody is going to experiment with top athletes, when you have someone even halfway good you stick to what you've always done.

I don't pretend to know either way, I only deal with novices and intermediates. For them, well LB is harder to learn than HB, I've found if I give general gym members LB they simply don't squat, if I give them HB they do. And I say it's better to squat than not to, whatever squat you're doing. Whereas with my PT clients, well I'm there watching every rep so they just do what I tell them. So general gym members I get to HB, and all my PT clients get low bar.

[Michael Wolf]

I think a lot of us would like to see a break down of the hbbs much like the one of the lbbs in ssbbt3. it still is a strong powerful movement, but it would just be nice for those that swear by it to prove why it is their number one choice. many times all you get is because our some bull shit about how low bar isn't actually a squat but a cheated movement to reach depth in a compitition. ( which would make it a legal squat?)

The reason this is unlikely to happen is because we're unlikely to do it, and I don't know of anyone else who is analyzing the lifts at this level of detail. Since we don't use the HBBS unless someone physically cannot LBBS (usually due to fairly rare shoulder mobility/tightness issues) to delve into such great detail in an analysis of a lift we only use rarely as a second resort seems to be putting resources into the wrong endeavor, when we could be spending the time to further our understanding of the lifts we use primarily.
Maybe we'll eventually get around to it, or maybe someone else will do it. But don't hold your breath.

If one is talking about a "low bar" squat and imagining a three ply squat with your feet against the sides of the rack then you might have a point. But pretty much no one squats like that raw, so it's not a very good point.

I agree that an analysis and also instruction (beyond "put the bar on your back and squat up and down as vertical as possible") on the high bar squat much like has been done with the low bar squat would be very interesting. I kind of wonder though, if one preforms a "moderate" high bar squat with the feet about shoulder width pointed out somewhat and sticks their knees out and squats down between their legs. Would that really look all that different to a low bar squat for most people (i.e. not short femured freaks)?

I think part of the misunderstanding is what you mention, that some in the OL world don't really read SS or know what our LBBS looks like. They just assume, or prefer to assume, it's a Westside style thing and then pontificate accordingly. I don't think they'd agree with us if they did know what our squat looks like, because the ones I've talked to aren't ready to accept any other possibility than the one they're already sure about, but I do think they'd perhaps be less knee-jerky vehemently against. My friend who originated the conversation and made the facebook snipe at us, wrote, in that FB post, something to the effect of "bend your knees, people." Which displays a misunderstanding of how we squat, I think shared by many in the OL world. It's true that we don't achieve as much flexion at the knee joint and that we use a more open knee angle than a HBBS; but we most certainly flex and extend the knees during the movement and use the quads. We fix at least one person's squat every seminar who is just sitting back and squatting with shins too vertical, because that's what they've seen somewhere on the internets.

The high bar squat done with our LBBS mechanics is still not as effective in fulfilling our criteria of most muscle mass over longest effective ROM, allowing use of the most weight and thus getting you stronger. It may shift things slightly better, but due to the need to keep the bar over mid-foot and the placement of the bar several inches higher up, the diagnostic angles will be different and the hamstring recruitment will not be as favorable.

[OCG]

The reason this is unlikely to happen is because we're unlikely to do it, and I don't know of anyone else who is analyzing the lifts at this level of detail. Since we don't use the HBBS unless someone physically cannot LBBS (usually due to fairly rare shoulder mobility/tightness issues) to delve into such great detail in an analysis of a lift we only use rarely as a second resort seems to be putting resources into the wrong endeavor, when we could be spending the time to further our understanding of the lifts we use primarily.
Maybe we'll eventually get around to it, or maybe someone else will do it. But don't hold your breath.

It would be very interesting. But useful is another thing.

The high bar squat done with our LBBS mechanics is still not as effective in fulfilling our criteria of most muscle mass over longest effective ROM, allowing use of the most weight and thus getting you stronger. It may shift things slightly better, but due to the need to keep the bar over mid-foot and the placement of the bar several inches higher up, the diagnostic angles will be different and the hamstring recruitment will not be as favorable.

It is a different squat, and I know this. It's just that as much as I see people assuming a "low bar" squat must look a certain way I also see usually the same people assuming that a "high bar" squat must also look a certain way. Usually with heels 6" apart and feet straight forwards and a back so upright it puts the bar actually behind the heels. I have seen an actual photo in a weightlifting book that depicts the "correct" way to squat that quite clearly shows the bar behind midfoot. It also shows a "low bar" squat with the bar in front of the midfoot. Obviously an empty bar was being used in these photos. I have also read other people seriously suggest that anything up to a year (!)(!!!) of mobility work in order to squat deep, for a non competitive general strength trainee, is perfectly fine.

But then again, if we get into Stupid Shit People Type On The Internet we'll be here all day.

Anyway, my point was, if I have a point, if we look at the way the average person who isn't a weirdly proportioned super flexible O-lifter actually squats, not the way many people would like them to squat, the differences between high bar and low bar aren't actually as huge as some people would have you believe. Of course, I'm sure you know this already being a competent coach and all.

[Haggit]

We fix at least one person's squat every seminar who is just sitting back and squatting with shins too vertical, because that's what they've seen somewhere on the internets.

The high bar squat done with our LBBS mechanics is still not as effective in fulfilling our criteria of most muscle mass over longest effective ROM, allowing use of the most weight and thus getting you stronger. It may shift things slightly better, but due to the need to keep the bar over mid-foot and the placement of the bar several inches higher up, the diagnostic angles will be different and the hamstring recruitment will not be as favorable.

Does the vertical shin usually effect depth when you see it?

in my (very limited) experience it seems some people will select the bar position for a low bar squat(for comfort) yet try to stay as upright as possible unless coached otherwise. Or in other words they try to use high bar mechanics. Have you seen this or am I imagining this problem?

[Michael Wolf]

Logically, the LB uses more hamstrings and will thus be more useful. But we've not any actual data either way to show the results, like one group does LB and the other group does HB, which group ends up improving their snatch and C&J more. That's the problem with much of this stuff, nobody is going to experiment with top athletes, when you have someone even halfway good you stick to what you've always done.

I don't pretend to know either way, I only deal with novices and intermediates. For them, well LB is harder to learn than HB, I've found if I give general gym members LB they simply don't squat, if I give them HB they do. And I say it's better to squat than not to, whatever squat you're doing. Whereas with my PT clients, well I'm there watching every rep so they just do what I tell them. So general gym members I get to HB, and all my PT clients get low bar.

Yes Kyle, we don't have a well designed study, or any study, to compare the efficacy of LB vs HB for olympic lifters. Nor will we ever, I suspect, do to so many issues that I don't want to type about them. In absence of that, it makes sense to do what makes the most sense, right? And seeing as we're currently finishing so low internationally, there's not much to lose by trying.

I agree that for the vast majority of people, it's better to high bar than not squat at all, but I haven't found most people resistant to learning low bar and doing it on their own afterwards. When I just teach it to them as if "this is how you squat" and don't even talk about other ways, that's how they see it and then continue accordingly.

Nicely written.

Thank you, my king.

I have also read other people seriously suggest that anything up to a year (!)(!!!) of mobility work in order to squat deep, for a non competitive general strength trainee, is perfectly fine.

Jesus. This is even worse than the olympic lifting coaches who have people do nothing but a PVC or broomstick for months, or who use the bar but don't let them lift it above the knee for months.

But then again, if we get into Stupid Shit People Type On The Internet we'll be here all day.

Always the case.

Anyway, my point was, if I have a point, if we look at the way the average person who isn't a weirdly proportioned super flexible O-lifter actually squats, not the way many people would like them to squat, the differences between high bar and low bar aren't actually as huge as some people would have you believe. Of course, I'm sure you know this already being a competent coach and all.

You probably are right about this. I train one guy who I have high bar squat because he fucked his elbows up squatting on his own one weekend by messing up the low bar position and getting bad tendonitis. It curtailed his lifting for a few months and he's (understandably) very afraid of doing that again, and he's not THAT serious a trainee, so it's not worth the battle of convincing him to try low bar again. He high bar squats and it's fine. He's a lawyer, partner at a big firm, sits at a desk 10-12 hours/day, late 40's, etc... Very much representing your average dude, not especially mobile or flexible. His high bar squat does indeed look more like a low bar squat than the type of "olympic" high bar squat you referred to, and is probably not as far away from it in terms of muscular recruitment. But it's still inferior as far as fulfilling our criteria, even if less so than the extremely vertical back, ass to grass version.

Does the vertical shin usually effect depth when you see it?

Sometimes.

in my (very limited) experience it seems some people will select the bar position for a low bar squat(for comfort) yet try to stay as upright as possible unless coached otherwise. Or in other words they try to use high bar mechanics. Have you seen this or am I imagining this problem?

You're right, and this is definitely a more common issue than the one I referenced above. We unfuck more people who are trying to high bar/front squat with the bar in the low bar position, than we do people who are trying to do a vertical shin, sit-back squat. But both are present at just about every seminar.

[Haggit]

You're right, and this is definitely a more common issue than the one I referenced above. We unfuck more people who are trying to high bar/front squat with the bar in the low bar position, than we do people who are trying to do a vertical shin, sit-back squat. But both are present at just about every seminar.

I really need to get to a seminar or at least a camp.

Great job on the article by the way.