I just read about Rock-Bottom Bench Presses and Squats and am thinking of putting them into my workout. My question is, would it be productive to use this technique for an extended period of time, or should it only be used to break a sticking point?
Get Dinosaur Training & read it 100 times. Brooks says you’ve got to go a few months on really low reps & singles before starting on bottom position stuff. From what I’ve heard, bottom position stuff is waaaay harder. Say you can squat 300 regular style, once you work up to 300 from the bottom you’ll be able to do a whole lot more when you go back to the conventional style. It would be fine if you only do lifts from the bottom. Some guys do it almost exclusively, like Bud Jefferies, who’s dong 1000 in the bottom position squat. Everyone does bottom position stuff anyway without knowing it, like overhead presses & curls. Once you’ve done bottom positon stuff for a while (like months), you can start ADDING partials (not replacing the full range stuff) to work your weak points or sticking points…
In case you haven’t read the article, Rock-Bottom means starting from the bottom position instead of the top. In the article, Chris Shugart outlined the technique for bench and squats.
I use them to mix things up a bit. Use rock bottom for 3 to 6 workouts then lay off them for a couple months then use them again. Very humbling experience going from the rock bottom position.
There’s a chapter on power rack training in Dinosaur Training where Brooks says bottom position or ‘rock bottom’ stuff (I’ve seen it called bottoms up as well but it’s all the same) is so good because it’s way harder. Whatever you call it Brooks says it’s better to do heavy regular style singles/double/triples for a bunch of months to prep your tendons & ligaments for the added stress of bottom position or ‘rock bottom’ lifting. If the number of guys doing it ecxclusively is anything to go by, I’d say it’s productive. If you just want to do partials at you sticking points that would be productive too.