Why Starting Strength is Incorrect About Squat Variations

[catkeson]

In Starting Strength, Mr. Rippetoe goes into detail about how an individual's anatomy will dictate form on the deadlift. When back angle gets too flat due to an individual's anatomy, Mr. Rippetoe says that Sumo deadlifts can be substituted for the traditional deadlift. However, for the squat, Mr. Rippetoe barely talks about individual anatomy and says that the low bar squat is the only acceptable form for his program. He argues that the low bar squat is always superior to other variations due to increased posterior chain recruitment and the fact that you can perform the movement with more weight.

However, like the deadlift, the form of a squat is dictated by an individual's anatomy and variations can be used to control body position. It may blow your mind, but an individual with a larger femur to torso ratio might have the same body position on a high bar squat as an individual with a smaller ratio on the low bar. Would the long femur individual really benefit from moving the bar to a lower position, changing his perfectly fine body position to a Layne Norton style good morning squat? If that is the case, why don't we wrap our wrists and try to get the bar even lower on the back? Heck, you would get even more posterior chain recruitment and be able to push more weight.

The truth is that bar position should not be the focus of a discussion on squats. BODY POSITION should be the focus. Just like the deadlift, back angle should be considered when choosing a squat variation. If an individual can achieve a superior body position in a high bar squat, he/she should be high bar squatting. Mark can shout all day about how "You're not doing the program" but at the end of the day, he is wrong about this topic. And if you don't agree with me, in the words of Mark himself, I am narrow casting and the rest of you are too stupid to realize that I am right. (Now if that isn't an ignorant argument then I don't know what is).

[Tom Campitelli]

You would do well to use a more measured tone in your posting because this is an interesting question. Alas, I suspect you are not interested in discussion so much as a shouting match. However, I will refrain from such contrivances and attempt to answer your question. Please do the same, should you choose to respond.

The use of sumo deadlifts in the book is reserved for those whose shoulders are below their hips in the conventional setup. This is a very rare anthropometry, however. I have seen it no more than about four or five times that I can remember in the last several years. There may be others for whom sumo pulls, or other deadlift variants, are appropriate, but that is beyond the scope of this discussion. However, to clarify the example in your post above, there is a very specific case Rip talks about with respect to sumo vs. conventional and that case is rare, indeed.

To address the squat, you assume that there is a "superior body position" that we could instantly recognize in the squat. I am not sure what this would be. I have never seen someone get their shoulders below their hips in the normal course of squatting, even those with anthropometries that would preclude conventional deadlifts. Some people lean over more in the squat than others. This is not inherently evil. You mention Layne Norton, who squatted 303 kg in the 93 kg class at IPF Worlds in 2015, which happened to be a world record. Layne leans over a lot, but, once again, I don't know that is bad in and of itself. While looking at the best in the world and trying to emulate them is not necessarily a productive exercise, would you advance an argument that Layne would squat more weight if he emulated Carl Yngvar Christensen, who also squatted a world record (albeit in a single ply suit and wraps) using a more upright high bar technique? I would not. All we can say is that strong people are strong and that there is a fair amount of variation in the techniques they use to squat in competition. I don't think there is an ideal body position in the squat that is universal among lifters with varying limb lengths. For each lifter, there is probably an ideal torso position on each squat variant that will change based on bar position. Lifter A's torso angle will not translate to Lifter B, unfortunately, unless they are clones.

I can assure that my mind is not blown when you mention that long legged people lean over more when they squat, or that their high bar squats have similar torso angles to the low bar squats of others with shorter legs (assuming similar torso lengths). Since they are already leaned over, why not put the bar lower on the back with the additional support of the tightened upper back musculature that low bar provides? Why not use hip drive since they are in good position to do so and would likely be doing the same with a high bar squat? Putting the bar below the contracted posterior deltoid is generally not possible for most people. I don't believe Layne Norton does this, either. The bar would want to roll down the back.

Lastly, be nice. I have followed my own advice here, despite your tone, and ask that if you want to discuss these topics dial things back and perhaps this thread will go somewhere useful. If not, I reserve the right to delete postings or lock the thread.

[Steve Hill]

The individual posting misses one critical constraint, and thus a vital difference, between the deadlift and the squat. Namely, that the deadlift is constrained by not only the need to keep the bar over the mid-foot, but the initial starting position and the movement itself is constrained by the bar position (against the shin, and against the leg for the entire rep) - something the squat does not suffer from.

In the squat unlike the deadlift, and individual with (as posited by the OP) longer femurs, can allow the knee to be further in front of the toe than say, a person with shorter femurs. The goal being to properly load the hamstrings at the bottom of the rep so that they can participate in moving the weight. This is an important thought exercise since a person with longer femurs also has longer hamstrings. Since allowing the knee to travel forward farther, thus flexing the knee joint more, shortens the hamstring slightly, it concomitantly requires that the lifter bend over more to access them.

[jbackos]

I'll make this even simpler.

People criticizing the SS squat frequently fall into a logical trap by assuming the the SS squat technique is preached as the only viable technique. As I understand it the SS squat technique is merely a starting point for beginning lifters. As lifters become more experienced and gain body awareness after a few thousand reps, they can and often will make modifications to the SS technique. IMO, most of these individuals will be competitive powerlifters whose goal is to lift the most weight BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.

A that level, there is no questioning the technique nuances of the individual. So a Ray Williams, Dan Green, Ed Coan, and any of a number of others will display an individual technique which works for them.

[KangaJoo]

If an individual can achieve a superior body position...

Can you clarify this point? What is the ideal body position and why?

[Treg]

Tom and Steve's replies are remarkably civil and cogent, given the arrogant tone of the original poster (not to mention the shaky logic of her/his argument). I will just add, I had never heard of Layne Norton before, so I followed the link Tom provided, and then watched a couple more of his videos, and I maintain there is absolutely no goodmorning-ing going on there, at all. Those are just good low bar back squats with a nice low back angle. This may blow someone's mind, but I happen to have some anthropometry or other that requires me to keep a low angle as well. Norton's back angle looks about like mine when I'm doing them right. And I can assure anyone who may care to read this, I don't goodmorning at all in the hole or on the way up. My only ugly reps these days are when I fail to really lean in.

[Steve Hill]

Tom and Steve's replies are remarkably civil and cogent, given the arrogant tone of the original poster (not to mention the shaky logic of her/his argument).

It was amusing to me that someone who had an issue with Rippetoe's book posted in the Staff forum, when Rip has one of his own RIGHT UP THERE....

[Satch12879]

It was amusing to me that someone who had an issue with Rippetoe's book posted in the Staff forum, when Rip has one of his own RIGHT UP THERE....

I thought the same thing. Usually it actually ends up in far worse places down below...

[catkeson]

Mark is rude so I don't know why I can't be rude. I was not being rude for the sake of being rude. My tone was a satire of Mark's tone. Ok now to break down these arguments.

Deadlifts: Yes, you are right. It is outside the scope of my main argument. The only reason I included it was because it exemplifies how exercise variation can effect body position, which I am arguing is the only thing that matters.

Squats: I would argue that a "superior body position" would be a position that balances muscle recruitment, safety, and comfortability in accordance to an individual lifter's particular goals. Why should we be pushing low bar squat technique on all lifters when adjusting the bar position can improve body position for certain lifters. (For those of you who can't follow an argument my definition of improved body position is outlined in the first sentence). My point that the "low bar is always better" approach is completely ignorant because body position should be the focus, not bar position. As I said before, if low bar is always better, why don't we slide the bar even further down our backs then the low bar position? There is nothing magical about the low bar position. It is completely arbitrary. In an alternate universe people's back and shoulder anatomy is different and the low bar position is four inches lower on the back than our low bar position (not actually but you see my point). Why don't you go check to see how much Layne Norton is lifting today. Oh... thats right. He broke his back squatting and now teenage girls can lift more than him. I don't know of the 303kg squat was worth it to him but I bet if he could do it again he would go with a high bar position to get a more vertical back angle and reduce the torque on his lower back while squatting.

Q:"Since they are already leaned over, why not put the bar lower on the back with the additional support of the tightened upper back musculature that low bar provides?"
A: Because the high bar variation might facilitate superior body position for that lifter throughout the movement. The traps are perfectly capable of handling the load of the bar.

Q:"Why not use hip drive since they are in good position to do so and would likely be doing the same with a high bar squat?"
A: Hip drive is not some phenomenon that only occurs when the bar is lower on the back. That is totally ridiculous. Hip drive is a function of body position, not bar position! As I have already pointed out, some lifters with long femurs will have the same amount of hip drive in the high bar position as shorter femur lifters in the low bar position (because these lifters will have the same body position throughout the movement). Why are we telling these lifters to move the bar lower but not telling the short femur lifters to move the bar lower as well since they both have the same body position. You can see how inconsistent this line of thinking is.

"Putting the bar below the contracted posterior deltoid is generally not possible for most people. I don't believe Layne Norton does this, either. The bar would want to roll down the back"
Yes but at the end of the day all of this stuff is arbitrary. What if human anatomy was such that the deltoid went 4 inches lower than it does now? Do you think the upper back evoloved to support metal, loaded bars precisely below the deltoids? No, of course not. Put an untrained person in the low or high bar position and they will complain about how uncomfortable it is. If you wanted to train in accordance with how the human body is evolved to carry weight, you should wear some kind of weighted vest that distributes the weight across a large amount of surface area over our body.

Steve Hill: You are missing the point. Read my first post again. I don't know if it is worth trying to explain it to you since I put it very logically and simply in my initial post but I will try.

1) Assumption 1: BODY POSITION is the only thing that matters in the squat
2) Assumption 2: Not all body positions are equal and a superior variation exists for an individual. Clearly if the bar were too low on the back (imagine if it was located at your mid back), forward lean would be so excessive that the squat wouldn't hit quads enough and would be a back movement(like a good morning). If the squat was too far in front of the body, the torso might be so vertical and knees so far out that the movement is too quad dominant and knee safety might be a risk. Clearly there is a "superior" variation somewhere in-between these two points where form balances muscle recruitment and safety.
3) Conclusion 1: If body position is the only thing that matters in a squat, and some body positions are superior to others, the logical conclusion is that we should be choosing bar position such that body position is as close to optimal as possible.
4) Assumption 3: Two individuals with different anatomy might have the same body position in two different variations of the squat (for example high bar and low bar).
5) Conclusion 2: Claiming one variation is always superior to another for all individuals is a logical fallacy since human anatomy varies enough such that different bar positions on different individuals can lead to the same body position in the movement.

Treg:
It sounds like you should consider changing your squat variation if your squat form is like Layne's. Ties back into my whole point about body position being the only thing that matters. I bet Layne Norton's high bar body position looks similar to most people's low bar body position.

[Tom Campitelli]

Sigh. Well, peeps, I tried. catkeson, please think more about the tone of your posts. I asked you to be nice and you disregarded my request. Any further posts from you in this thread will be deleted. I am happy to discuss contrary ideas and argue (in the classical sense), but that is not what you are here for. Best of luck to you. Adieu.