Paul Anderson did do a lot of things that was considered odd but his numbers speak for themselves
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
I feel that one should ultimately squat to whatever depth accomplishes their goals, rather than define their goals based on what depth they are squatting at.[/quote]
Out of interest, what do you feel are the benefits of squatting slightly above parallel?
[quote]dagill2 wrote:
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
I feel that one should ultimately squat to whatever depth accomplishes their goals, rather than define their goals based on what depth they are squatting at.[/quote]
Out of interest, what do you feel are the benefits of squatting slightly above parallel?[/quote]
For me, it’s the depth where I am able to get bigger and stronger. I used to squat to powerlifting legal, and did that for years, and in turn stalled for years at a 465lb squat. Once I started squatting above parallel, I was able to finally break past that plateau, hitting a 502lb squat in competition as a 181 in 2012 and 545 for a few reps in the gym since then.
That said, I don’t just squat slightly above powerlifting legal. I’ll go pretty high above it in my training, but never below. I only do that in competitions that require it.
I feel like the biggest issue is that many people seem to feel that a squat by definition has some of predefined depth that must be hit, not really understanding that these are simply conventions that came about AFTER the squat was a movement.
I’ve never been one to keep up with each powerlifting Associations guidelines on a good squat but I’ve used supra-maximum static loads to get my system warmed up and ready for heavy singles but as a full routine I can’t justify not going deep
If you need to justify any movement, it’s definitely not worth doing. In my opinion, results should be the only reason to do or not do anything. I will squat on a bosu ball or crawl through broken glass if it makes me bigger and stronger.
For my body, going deeper with less weight gives me more of a pump and quad activation.
[quote]BigEasy24 wrote:
For my body, going deeper with less weight gives me more of a pump and quad activation. [/quote]
Assuming that is the reason you squat, it sounds like your approach is meeting your goals.
For pump and quad activation, I have had great success with not locking the weight out at the top. Really makes the legs suffer, haha.
x2 on the twojarslave love
[quote]twojarslave wrote:
Back on topic, I am going to go out on a limb and assume that OP is a beginner. With that in mind, I think it is instructive that an advanced brute like Th3pwnisher squats above parallel. That said, OP is most likely not advanced, and I believe he would be well-served to focus on learning how to squat with a full range of motion and doing so with no unexpected pain.
[/quote]
This is a good point.
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
[quote]BigEasy24 wrote:
I agree but 1/4 squats seem to be a knee issue waiting to happen[/quote]
They worked for Paul Anderson. I like them myself.[/quote]
Never heard of him.
On the other hand, Dmitry Klokov squats atg.
Not to mention, 100% of olympic caliber lifters.
Honest question, are you perhaps implying that half squatting has benefits, comparative to ‘full’ squatting?
[quote]Jarvan wrote:
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
[quote]BigEasy24 wrote:
I agree but 1/4 squats seem to be a knee issue waiting to happen[/quote]
They worked for Paul Anderson. I like them myself.[/quote]
Never heard of him.
On the other hand, Dmitry Klokov squats atg.
Not to mention, 100% of olympic caliber lifters.
Honest question, are you perhaps implying that half squatting has benefits, comparative to ‘full’ squatting?
[/quote]
Oly lifters need to be able to squat deep as to be able to catch the bar at its lowest point in the clean or snatch. Normal people don’t have as a goal catching a clean or snatch. (I take that back, many like to catch a snatch every now and then).
[quote]Ecchastang wrote:
(I take that back, many like to catch a snatch every now and then). [/quote]
I also prefer it clean.
If one’s goals were to increase squat ROM, how would you all suggest this?
-foam rolling, stretching, and mobility work
-decreasing weight until full ROM is achieved and working up
-keep the same weight and progressively increase ROM
-eccentrics
-raising the heels, decreasing the height over time
-assistance work
[quote]Jarvan wrote:
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
[quote]BigEasy24 wrote:
I agree but 1/4 squats seem to be a knee issue waiting to happen[/quote]
They worked for Paul Anderson. I like them myself.[/quote]
Never heard of him.
On the other hand, Dmitry Klokov squats atg.
Not to mention, 100% of olympic caliber lifters.
Honest question, are you perhaps implying that half squatting has benefits, comparative to ‘full’ squatting?
[/quote]
100% of olympic caliber lifters have more or less the same anthropometric dimensions. People who are not built like them will not be able to, and should not squat the same way.
Half squatting can certainly exceed full squats in benefits DEPENDING on how one is built, especially when it comes to quad hypertrophy. People built more like olympic lifters should, of course, squat as deep as possible to reap the full benefits.
Also, going heavy on full squats can, in fact, potentially cause cumulative lower back problems in the long run if one is not built for them.
This is not an issue of mobility nor flexibility.
[quote]Ecchastang wrote:
(I take that back, many like to catch a snatch every now and then). [/quote]
Hahahaha
[quote]Jarvan wrote:
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
[quote]BigEasy24 wrote:
I agree but 1/4 squats seem to be a knee issue waiting to happen[/quote]
They worked for Paul Anderson. I like them myself.[/quote]
Never heard of him.
On the other hand, Dmitry Klokov squats atg.
Not to mention, 100% of olympic caliber lifters.
Honest question, are you perhaps implying that half squatting has benefits, comparative to ‘full’ squatting?
[/quote]
You never heard of Paul Anderson?
[quote]Ecchastang wrote:
Oly lifters need to be able to squat deep as to be able to catch the bar at its lowest point in the clean or snatch. Normal people don’t have as a goal catching a clean or snatch. (I take that back, many like to catch a snatch every now and then). [/quote]
This is exactly what I mean on the topic of depth equating to goals. Excellent point.
Clint Darden had a pretty good video on this topic too.
[quote]dt79 wrote:
100% of olympic caliber lifters have more or less the same anthropometric dimensions. People who are not built like them will not be able to, and should not squat the same way.
Half squatting can certainly exceed full squats in benefits DEPENDING on how one is built, especially when it comes to quad hypertrophy. People built more like olympic lifters should, of course, squat as deep as possible to reap the full benefits.
Also, going heavy on full squats can, in fact, potentially cause cumulative lower back problems in the long run if one is not built for them.
This is not an issue of mobility nor flexibility.[/quote]
I don’t agree that build is the big decider here, I think that the end goal is probably more important. A powerlifter needs to squat to parallel regardless of build, an olympic lifter needs to squat as low as safely possible because that is a major advantage in their sport, again regardless of build.
So how far up do you go before you descend again?
[quote]dagill2 wrote:
[quote]dt79 wrote:
100% of olympic caliber lifters have more or less the same anthropometric dimensions. People who are not built like them will not be able to, and should not squat the same way.
Half squatting can certainly exceed full squats in benefits DEPENDING on how one is built, especially when it comes to quad hypertrophy. People built more like olympic lifters should, of course, squat as deep as possible to reap the full benefits.
Also, going heavy on full squats can, in fact, potentially cause cumulative lower back problems in the long run if one is not built for them.
This is not an issue of mobility nor flexibility.[/quote]
I don’t agree that build is the big decider here, I think that the end goal is probably more important. A powerlifter needs to squat to parallel regardless of build, an olympic lifter needs to squat as low as safely possible because that is a major advantage in their sport, again regardless of build.[/quote]
I was simply giving various examples where individual build(which is very often overlooked) comes into play when deciding on squat styles. The universal fix nowadays seems to be mobility stuff being prescribed instead of looking at individual builds and potential returns from squatting in a certain way.
Even a powerlifter will have to adjust his stance to cater to his build to move the most weight. Some even go deep to get the bounce at the bottom although they only have to break parallel.
Compare Konstantin Konstantinov’s squat to Andrey Malanichev’s squats to see a difference in styles and bar placement.
And, as I have written before, most of my bodybuilder friends do half squats. Some in the Smith Machine.
EDITED
[quote]BigEasy24 wrote:
So how far up do you go before you descend again?
[/quote]
Once I feel my hips trying to takeover toward the top, I drop down again. Check out Justin Harris squatting on youtube to see what this can look like.
[quote]dt79 wrote:
And, as I have written before, most of my bodybuilder friends do half squats. Some in the Smith Machine.
EDITED[/quote]
funny you should say that, all the really big dudes I know do half squats too.
Now I know where I’m going wrong!