Squat Depth

[quote]kroby wrote:
I mix it up. On max effort days, I box squat (18") PR - 335 2x2. On DE, ATG @ 225 3x10. Oh, and I weigh 217, 5’11". Sometimes I’ll box squat 5x5 at 275. I’ve even 10x3 @315 box squat. The key is to keep 'em guessing. Nothing to brag about, but I’m proud of my strength gains since learning to squat properly last December.[/quote]

Good job Kroby!
Why do you use the box squat? Is it to keep the movement consistent by giving you a measure to lift by? I have thought about that myself.

For me, ATG squatting recruits much more of my quads. When squatting only to parallel, people tend to lean forward a bit more and stick their butt out. Their squat looks like more of a powerlifting squat that recruits far more posterior chain, at least from what I’ve seen. When I go ATG, it forces my upper body to stay more upright and back, which puts much more of the focus of the squat on my quads. My quads got a huge jolt in strength and size once I started ATG squats. My weights went down by like 30% initially, but it yielded huge results in my quads. Its also just about the best thing I’ve found to really hit my VMO hard.

So for me, squats are about focusing on the quads and the supporting hip musculature, which has a much greater athletic carryover. The powerlifting squat uses more posterior chain and allows you to handle more weight squatting, but it doesn’t give me the same quad work that I want. For my time, its far more efficient for me to hit posterior chain more directly with DL, Romanian DL, Good mornings, etc.

[quote]gojira wrote:
“Friends don’t let friends squat high”.

I actually squat on a 12" box, which is well below parallel for me. I am of the belief that squatting high puts extra stress on your knees and that this is where the “squats are bad for your knees” myth comes from. When you go all the way down, the stress is transferred to your glutes, hams and hip flexors when coming out of the hole instead of your knees.

Yes, I think most people lie or perhaps they just don’t know. I would say a good 90% of the people I see squat do not even get to parallel, much less break it. [/quote]

When you go to parallel (even if you go ATG you’ll be at parallel at some point) the patella is pretty heavily loaded.

I have bad knees (they make a very audible crackling sound when I squat down without any weight), so I had to stop doing squats until T-Nation introduced me to box squatting (I do squats on a relatively high box an inch or two above parallel… I’m 6’4" so there’s still a fair amount of flexion).

But if your knees are fine ATG, I’d agree that ATG is generally the best way to go.

[quote]summa wrote:
I am writing to ask people how low they go in the squat and how they feel that affects the growth stimulation and the weight used. The reason I am asking is that I have been reading articles and posts on this sight for a year or so and am amazed by some of the lifts people claim. Currently, I am only using around 300lbs pounds for 5 sets of 5 but I go as low as possible. I weigh 240lbs at 6’ and am 34 years old. My diet isn’t bad but does consist of a lot of beer and cigars each week. My training is very sporadic since I have a young familly and parenting or an illness gets in the way of putting more than a 2-3 weeks of solid training together at a time. I am going to guess my legs are around 27" and have always been my strong body part. 10 years ago I remember squating 495lbs for 8 reps. They were not ass to the grass squats but still lower than I see people lifting in most gyms. What I can parallel squat currently I do not know, but I don’t really care also. When people on this site are saying they are squating 300lbs for reps at a bodyweight of 150lbs I scream “BS!”
Is it because people are not going to parallel or below parallel that they can post pretty big numbers? More importantly, do people feel there is more benefit to going heavier and not too low or using less weight and going ass to the grass? Maybe I am just weak or can I honestly claim my squat is over 400lbs for reps?
Just wondering![/quote]

i have front squatted 330 at 152lbs just recently set the personal record, my previous best was 319…ass to grass…i have also back squatted 396…

this is above average but there are many stronger than me

the problem is most americans dont know how to train

[quote]pushharder wrote:
nbutka wrote:
summa wrote:
I am writing to ask people how low they go in the squat and how they feel that affects the growth stimulation and the weight used. The reason I am asking is that I have been reading articles and posts on this sight for a year or so and am amazed by some of the lifts people claim. Currently, I am only using around 300lbs pounds for 5 sets of 5 but I go as low as possible. I weigh 240lbs at 6’ and am 34 years old. My diet isn’t bad but does consist of a lot of beer and cigars each week. My training is very sporadic since I have a young familly and parenting or an illness gets in the way of putting more than a 2-3 weeks of solid training together at a time. I am going to guess my legs are around 27" and have always been my strong body part. 10 years ago I remember squating 495lbs for 8 reps. They were not ass to the grass squats but still lower than I see people lifting in most gyms. What I can parallel squat currently I do not know, but I don’t really care also. When people on this site are saying they are squating 300lbs for reps at a bodyweight of 150lbs I scream “BS!”
Is it because people are not going to parallel or below parallel that they can post pretty big numbers? More importantly, do people feel there is more benefit to going heavier and not too low or using less weight and going ass to the grass? Maybe I am just weak or can I honestly claim my squat is over 400lbs for reps?
Just wondering!

i have front squatted 330 at 152lbs just recently set the personal record, my previous best was 319…ass to grass…i have also back squatted 396…

this is above average but there are many stronger than me

the problem is most americans dont know how to train

Digital cameras have come way down in price lately.[/quote]

lol that comment only makes me feel better about myself…

but put in perspective the accomplishment isnt that terrific…i know 16 year old kids who do about the same and weigh only slightly more than me

you would get humbled if you were at the gyms i have been to…

but seriously, ill get video or picture uploaded on here some time no problem

[quote]nbutka wrote:
summa wrote:
I am writing to ask people how low they go in the squat and how they feel that affects the growth stimulation and the weight used. The reason I am asking is that I have been reading articles and posts on this sight for a year or so and am amazed by some of the lifts people claim. Currently, I am only using around 300lbs pounds for 5 sets of 5 but I go as low as possible. I weigh 240lbs at 6’ and am 34 years old. My diet isn’t bad but does consist of a lot of beer and cigars each week. My training is very sporadic since I have a young familly and parenting or an illness gets in the way of putting more than a 2-3 weeks of solid training together at a time. I am going to guess my legs are around 27" and have always been my strong body part. 10 years ago I remember squating 495lbs for 8 reps. They were not ass to the grass squats but still lower than I see people lifting in most gyms. What I can parallel squat currently I do not know, but I don’t really care also. When people on this site are saying they are squating 300lbs for reps at a bodyweight of 150lbs I scream “BS!”
Is it because people are not going to parallel or below parallel that they can post pretty big numbers? More importantly, do people feel there is more benefit to going heavier and not too low or using less weight and going ass to the grass? Maybe I am just weak or can I honestly claim my squat is over 400lbs for reps?
Just wondering!

i have front squatted 330 at 152lbs just recently set the personal record, my previous best was 319…ass to grass…i have also back squatted 396…

this is above average but there are many stronger than me

the problem is most americans dont know how to train[/quote]

I am Canadian so I guess we suck too!
If you are not full of shit, you are strong as hell. Good fucking lifting our foreign friend.

[quote]beans wrote:
For me, ATG squatting recruits much more of my quads. When squatting only to parallel, people tend to lean forward a bit more and stick their butt out. Their squat looks like more of a powerlifting squat that recruits far more posterior chain, at least from what I’ve seen. When I go ATG, it forces my upper body to stay more upright and back, which puts much more of the focus of the squat on my quads. My quads got a huge jolt in strength and size once I started ATG squats. My weights went down by like 30% initially, but it yielded huge results in my quads. Its also just about the best thing I’ve found to really hit my VMO hard.

So for me, squats are about focusing on the quads and the supporting hip musculature, which has a much greater athletic carryover. The powerlifting squat uses more posterior chain and allows you to handle more weight squatting, but it doesn’t give me the same quad work that I want. For my time, its far more efficient for me to hit posterior chain more directly with DL, Romanian DL, Good mornings, etc.[/quote]
I’ve found the same thing in my quest for quad development. When I went to parallel, my glutes took over much more of the work than I wanted. I brought my stance in (which helps too) and started dropping ATG and now my quads get hammered.
As for knee stress, the ligaments and tendons in the knee are in their most vulnerable position at parallel, which makes that the least logical position to reverse your momentum.

[quote]summa wrote:
Good job Kroby!
Why do you use the box squat? Is it to keep the movement consistent by giving you a measure to lift by? I have thought about that myself.[/quote]

Essentially to force myself to go down past parallel. As the weight increases, I have a tendency to progressively get more shallow in my squat. It’s an anti-cheat mechanism.

[quote]summa wrote:
When people on this site are saying they are squating 300lbs for reps at a bodyweight of 150lbs I scream “BS!”
[/quote]

Just this afternoon I watched a 150 pounder (my former workout partner) squat four plates a side for 5 reps, just like he’s been doing for a long time. Rare, I agree. But they do exist.

[quote]summa wrote:
Hatebreeder wrote:
I alternate wide stance to parallel and close stance ATG every few months.

What is your reasoning? I am seriously curious.[/quote]

Three reasons really. First, it gets boring doing the same variation of a lift all the time. Second, it keeps my squat from plateauing. Finally, I love what wide stance squats do for my strength but I feel I get more hypertrophy from close stance ATG. Since I want to be big and strong, I drink my milk and do both variations of squats.

To me, it feels harder to hold it at a point that’s parallel to the floor. If I want to go to parallel I have to bounce right back up. I got in the habit right away of going pretty low.

As far as 150 pounders squatting 300, I’m not that incredulous at those sorts of claims. There’s a cat in my gym that’s in the 170s range and maxes out at 645. I know it’s not world record setting but it’s impressive to watch. When he leaves the gym in his street clothes, you wouldn’t have any clue he was a powerlifter. Like someone said, it all depends what type of gym you go to.

[quote]pushharder wrote:

Speaking of squat depth, what squat depth?[/quote]

Slightly below parallel. Not ATG.

[quote]Magister Ludi wrote:
summa wrote:
When people on this site are saying they are squating 300lbs for reps at a bodyweight of 150lbs I scream “BS!”

Just this afternoon I watched a 150 pounder (my former workout partner) squat four plates a side for 5 reps, just like he’s been doing for a long time. Rare, I agree. But they do exist.[/quote]

That is some pretty fantastic lifting but it also brings up the question, “why are all these 150lb mega-strong people only 150lbs.”
Just wondering?

[quote]summa wrote:
That is some pretty fantastic lifting but it also brings up the question, “why are all these 150lb mega-strong people only 150lbs.”
Just wondering?

[/quote]

I dunno. Could be because he’s about 5’2". This guy (Noel Thompson) is a former powerlifter who also took first place in the lightweight division of the NPC nationals about 3 years ago.Only pro BB in our town as far as I know. He is strong as hell and owns the gym I work out in.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Speaking of squat depth, what squat depth?[/quote]

Just below parallel when I’ve seen him go really heavy without a box. Depth is important to people that are being judged on it in competition. He’s actually at the Canadian Powerlifting Championships in BC this weekend.