squats - Olympic or 90 degree?

Fausto

Fausto

HST Expert
Liege

I have to ask this question so that I might get some insight and guidance.

I take this statement to heart and all newbies should too:

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Most of us are going to have to get pretty strong to get big. Only those select few and those on gear are going to get big without having to move some impressive weights. Focus on moving more weight in those 7 exercises. Forget the iso's for now. </div>

I know you and Lcars move some impressive tonnage and I can't deny that you need to in oredr to get results.

Now to the real thing:

I do both types of squats but the gap in poundage between them is hoooge, olympics - 85 Kg at best, whereas 90 degree ass-to-low bench can do 140 Kg.

How can I improve my loympic squat performance, there is quite a difference, olympics gets your whole leg sore, with half squats are hardly feel the legs the next day, just feels that my back is compressed to smithering while doing it.

That's it mate!
 
Fausto, how would you classify these squats as done Jesse Marunde style (after the powercleans and pull-ups)?

Jesse Squats (89MB movie)

This is the way I try to squat. It allows you to go pretty deep and still shift some big weights. If I were to try to go any deeper than this my lowerback would start to round. I try to avoid that now as I don't like the feel of it.

I, too, would be interested to know what Liege thinks.
 
Lol

Cannot see pic at work at all, downloading sets up for some 2 Hr, any other way I can view it? Maybe just a bmp or Jpeg.
 
<div>
(Lol @ Jul. 19 2006,07:19)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Fausto, how would you classify these squats as done Jesse Marunde style (after the powercleans and pull-ups)?

Jesse Squats

This is the way I try to squat. It allows you to go pretty deep and still shift some big weights. If I were to try to go any deeper than this my lowerback would start to round. I try to avoid that now as I don't like the feel of it.

I, too, would be interested to know what Liege thinks.</div>
It took a long time to load the video. Anywho, aren't Jesse's squats a full squat with a wider stance? I also do squats like this, except on a Smith machine. I may try to change up the cadence and give some more rest at the top of the motion as that may help me lift more weight.

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I do both types of squats but the gap in poundage between them is hoooge, olympics - 85 Kg at best, whereas 90 degree ass-to-low bench can do 140 Kg.</div>

In terms of ROM, what is the difference between 90 degree and Olympic squats? I assume Olympic are just full squats
 
Fausto and Colby: Apologies for not warning about the file size. I got to see it while it loaded in my browser plus I have a pretty good broadband connection. I will add a note to my previous post (which I can now do thanks to JV's efforts).

If Jesse's squat is classed as an Olympic style squat that's great. I will stick with that. I feel comfortable with that ROM.
 
When I started doing olympic squats in Febr. I was able to do 500x5 in the parallel squat. The first time doing olympic squats I barely hit 225x5. Since then I have hit 380x5 for three sets and that's while cutting. I'm sure I can hit 405-410x1. I started doing a 5x5 last week and I hit 355x5x5 on Monday. Each rep is bottomed out and, unlike what most lifters will tell you, there is no soreness in my knees. When doing half squats I got really sore knees when I hit the 5's. Not so with olympic squats.


First, don't worry about the lighter load, you'll get the strength back and the increased strength will carry over to other lifts, (i.e., cleans, push press) unlike with the half squat. I lost no size in my legs and actually increased the size of my calves to 17.5 from 17.

There is a big difference between the traditional powerlifting type half squat to parallel and the olympic squat. The bar is held very high on the traps, there is no forward lean and the hamstrings are on the calves.

As far as helping to build the strength, I think Rippletow's 3x5 works well. I used it and went from 225-380 from Febr. through July.
 
<div>
(Lol @ Jul. 19 2006,07:19)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Fausto, how would you classify these squats as done Jesse Marunde style (after the powercleans and pull-ups)?

Jesse Squats (89MB movie)

This is the way I try to squat. It allows you to go pretty deep and still shift some big weights. If I were to try to go any deeper than this my lowerback would start to round. I try to avoid that now as I don't like the feel of it.

I, too, would be interested to know what Liege thinks.</div>
While Jesse's 20 repper is pretty good, I don't think those are olympic squats.  Maybe I just don't know what an olympic squat is, but he's not going ATG.  This guy is though -- http://www.youtube.com/v/AH-IadDDsK4.   When you go this low, the primary muscles being used to get you back up are the glutes and hamstrings.  However, when you only go parallel, you are placing undue stress on the knee because it comes more into play when it's time to stop and then ascend to complete the lift.  If, after going low, your back is beginning to round, then your lower back is not strong enough to remain straight and you need to lighten the weight and work on the strength of your lower back.   I have found that, even though you are using lighter weight, the extra depth is much more conducive to quad, glute, and hamstring growth.
 
<div>
(Lol @ Jul. 19 2006,07:19)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Fausto, how would you classify these squats as done Jesse Marunde style (after the powercleans and pull-ups)?

Jesse Squats (89MB movie)

This is the way I try to squat. It allows you to go pretty deep and still shift some big weights. If I were to try to go any deeper than this my lowerback would start to round. I try to avoid that now as I don't like the feel of it.

I, too, would be interested to know what Liege thinks.</div>
While Jesse's 20 repper is pretty good, I don't think those are olympic squats.  Maybe I just don't know what an olympic squat is, but he's not going ATG.  This guy is though -- http://www.youtube.com/v/AH-IadDDsK4.   When you go this low, the primary muscles being used to get you back up are the glutes and hamstrings.  However, when you only go parallel, you are placing undue stress on the knee because it comes more into play when it's time to stop and then ascend to complete the lift.  If, after going low, your back is beginning to round, then your lower back is not strong enough to remain straight and you need to lighten the weight and work on the strength of your lower back.   I have found that, even though you are using lighter weight, the extra depth is much more conducive to quad, glute, and hamstring growth.
 
<div>
(stevejones @ Jul. 20 2006,01:18)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">If, after going low, your back is beginning to round, then your lower back is not strong enough to remain straight and you need to lighten the weight and work on the strength of your lower back.</div>
Are you sure this is correct?

I always thought it was more to do with flexibility - I wouldn't be able to go below parallel on squats even with no weight unless i got up on my toes. Simlarly for deadlifts I use a sumo stance as I can't keep my back straight otherwise at the point at which I pick up the bar (that's also partly because I have short arms tho).

I've always attributed that to having played football all my life and never stretched properly so therefore tight hamstrings...

I could understand it being down to back strength if someone can squat with no weight to that level and their back only rounds when they start adding heavy weights.

Cheers

Rob
 
If you cannot do a 'weightless' low squat without rounding your back, then I imagine you are correct. Seems like a flexibility issue or injury preventing you from doing it.
 
I just tried this. The only way I can go 'a to g' and keep my feet flat on the ground is if my lowerback rounds a bit. Raising up on my toes allows me to keep my lowerback and, therefore, spinal erectors tight. I think it may be hip flexibility that's the issue for me. My hammies are nice and stretched. I have no problem putting my palms flat on the floor with legs straight.

Great vid link Steve. Very helpful. What a strong guy too.

Thanks for the tips Liege. I'm going to try to get my form really good before trying to push the weights up any more. I'm hoping a set of Oly shoes will help a bit too.
cool.gif
 
The sacral spine will 'tuck under' in every human being who isn't gumby in an olympic squat. This is normal.

The type of 'rounding' dangerous in squats/deadlifts is not the type that occurs in a normal athlete with decent flexibility in a full squat. Hell, even slight rounding probably isn't that dangerous as long as it's maintained (imho, the real danger is when you have a lower back collapse into deeper rounding in a heavy movement).
 
LOL, the olympic lifting shoes have a heel in them so they should really help.

Thanks for that video steve, geez, 295 kilos, that's impressive at any weight, but at 99! Who was that and what does he jerk?
 
LOL, the olympic lifting shoes have a heel in them so they should really help.

Thanks for that video steve, geez, 295 kilos, that's impressive, especially at 99K! Who was that and what does he jerk?
 
Wow, just saw the vid from youtube. That guy was really impressive.
cool.gif
barely 220 pound guy squatting 650 pounds, that's almost 3x his bodyweight.
 
the squats steve put up are the ones i do.
and imo they are the old fashioned ass to grass squat.i do 140k 4 sets of five
i thought that olympic squats were the ones were you held the weight over your head and squatted as far as i know they are the only ones done in the olympics,as powerlifting is not an olympic sport.
 
Wow that vid is just cool, damn strong guy!

Liege, thanks, I found out by reading Louis Simon's stuff that what I do are called box squats and there is actually nothing wrong with them, but as you say I must not get discouraged.

It feels good to do the full olympic squats but I'll have to do some of the auxiliary exercises in order to develop my strength and keep going!

I never used to do them before and would ceratinly not havew been able to do even 80 Kg last year this time anyhow, so I am happy as is, but will have to keep tryin' ATG squats more often.

I do not have problems with the knees but also learn't that when doing the box squats, one must actually sit as far back as possible so that the shins are straight and that way the knees do not get hurt at all.

Seems to me the danger is doing actual half squats and stopping half way without a box, then reversing motion, as that point of reversing is what gets to the knees, am I right?

I don't want to get all technical about it, but it seems to me that we should settle this doubt to the benefit of all, if needed I'll post Loui's article.

Thanks
biggrin.gif
 
Faz, you're referring to overhead squats, those are where you squat while holding a BB overhead.

I don't think box squats are necessary for a big squat. The olympic lifters I know all laugh at the idea of box squatting, and each one is a tremendous squatter. One guy is training for the olympics and he does well over 500 pounds for reps, no knee wraps, no belt, hits rock bottom and only weighs 185. I'm sure the guy in the video doing reps with 285K doesn't do box squats either.

Fausto, you may be correct about the knees when box squatting, I think the wrapping of the knees probably contributes to knee problems.

Give the 3x5 or 5x5 a shot, I'm sure if you eat properly you'll increase your olympic squat. I've made good gains so far.
 
cheers leig but why do they call ass to grass squats olympic squats when they are what i used to do as a junior powerlifter
 
study from natural bbing fed
The BNBF Squatting Experiment: Does squatting involve the same amount of muscular activation as leg press or hack squatting?


In order to establish the most effective resistance exercise for quadricep development the BNBF sanctioned a scientific investigation, collaborating with Napier Universities sports science research department. The investigation was prompted by varying opinions on the optimal resistance exercise to induce muscular hypertrophy in the quadriceps of body builders. Many body builders and trained coaches believe that conventional squatting is ineffective at producing large quantities of muscular hypertrophy when compared to such exercises as hack squatting and leg pressing. In order to establish whether these views had any scientific grounding, a series of controlled experiments were undertaken in a private resistance training facility.
Three trained body builders with at least five years resistance training experience were recruited for this micro study. Each of the subjects had refrained from leg training 2 days prior to the commencement of the experimental protocols to ensure neuromuscular fatigue and myofibril damage had no influence on results. The testing was separated into three phases, squatting, leg press and hack squatting conducted in randomised order to eliminate any potential influence of fatigue on the results as previously stated. The exercises were as follows; wide and normal stance squatting at 3/4 depth and 90 degrees (parallel), wide and close stance leg press and finally close and wide stance hack squats. Each subject performed 3 repetitions of each exercise at 90% of there 1 repetition maximal established 1 week prior to the testing session. Five minutes recovery was given between trials.

Muscular electromyography was used to measure muscular activation during each trial in millivolts. A four channel EMG was attached to the Vastus Medialis, Rectus Femoris and Vastus Lateralis of the right quadriceps and also the Biceps Femoris of the Hamstrings. The average of the three repetitions was taken as the result for each exercise. After the completion of the testing the results were collated and subsequently analysed.

The results demonstrated that shallow ¾ squatting (68º knee flexion), both wide and shallow stances, produced the greatest amount of quadriceps stimulation. Shallow squatting elicited 20% more muscular activation throughout the three quadricep muscles measured compared to full 90º squats. This is likely due to the constant load applied to the quadriceps during shallow squats. During full squats the load is assisted by the gluteus and hamstring muscles during the concentric drive phase of the action which reduces the load and subsequent activation of the quadriceps. This was evident from the EMG results, with the Biceps Femoris muscle being stimulated 50% more during full squats compared to shallow squats.

Hack squatting and leg press both produced similar muscular activation patterns for those measured during close and wide stances. However quadriceps activation was 30% and 15% less when compared with shallow squatting and normal squatting respectively. Biceps Femoris activation however was significantly reduced during leg press compared with all other exercises. Activation of the Biceps Femoris muscle was 18%, 200% and 450% greater for hack squatting, shallow squats and full squats respectively compared with leg press.


These results suggests that leg press isolates the quadriceps muscles better than squatting or hack squatting. However in relative terms, squatting shallow and to a lesser extent full squatting, produces more muscular activation of the quadriceps in relation to the relative load applied compared to any of the other exercises tested. Squatting also utilised more of the biceps femoris (hamstring muscle) than leg press or hack squatting as previously stated. This translates into a more complete utilisation of the leg muscles during each contraction. Also full (90º) squats elicits the utilisation of the gluteuls which again provides a more complete leg workout compared to hack squatting or leg press. Therefore squatting should provide more muscular stimulation and subsequent development compared to other exercises. A greater level of muscular activation results in a larger percentage of the muscle fibres being utilised during the activity allowing for more muscular damage to result. As the body is an over compensatory system, if enough recovery is given the body will not only repair the myofibril damage but muscle hypertrophy will result. If this form of training is continued with a constant progression of the imposed load, the result will be larger stronger muscles which is the ultimate goal of the body builder.

Accordingly squatting to 68º and 90º of knee flexion should produced greater gains in muscle mass and strength in the quadriceps compared with leg press and hack squats.
However squatting below parallel will noticeably shift the implied load away from the quadriceps and induce greater activity within the hamstrings and gluteuls. This may reduce quadricep development. However squatting below 90 degrees will shift the emphasis from hamstrings to gluteals. Accordingly squatting to 85º will likely induce the optimal ratio between quadricep and hamstring / gluteul development in one exercise and result in greater overall leg development compared to leg press or hack squats. Therefore squatting, preferably to 85º should be an essential part of any bodybuilders leg workouts.


Written by Scott Macrae,BNBF Scientific development officer.
Bsc Honours Sports Science.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top