Who Uses a False Grip?

If anybody wants some good reading, here’s what Mark Rippetoe has to say about it.

(This is reproduced from his book purely for explanatory reasons and to educate anybody that might benefit from it.)

For squatting, according to page 32 in “Starting Strength”:

“The vast majority of people will prefer to grip the bar with a thumbs-around grip. At lighter weights, this is fine since the load presents no problem to keep in place. But, when heavier weights are being used, and eventually they should be, the [thumbs-around grip] can create problems. The thumb should be placed on top of the bar, so that the wrist can be held in a straight line with the forearm.” (Skip forward a few sentences.) “With heavy weights, the loading is quite high, and these structures (the wrists and elbows) are not nearly as capable of supporting 500 lbs. as the back is. If the thumb is on top of the bar, the hand can assume a position that is straight in line with the forearm when the elbows are raised up. In this position, none of the weight is over any part of the arm, wrist, or hand, and all of the weight is on the back.”

The pictures he includes show the person lifting their elbows rearward & upward, thereby creating pressure through the hands forward & downward on the bar, essentially trapping it in place on the back with none of the weight being supported by the arms. This is best accomplished with a false grip.

For bench press, according to pages 76-77:

“Maybe the biggest, dumbest, most common problem involving the hands is the use of the thumbless grip. This is absolutely the worst habit you can develop with regard to safety, and is detrimental to performance as well. Many lifters start with a thumbless grip in an attempt to get the bar over the very end of the arm, off of the wrist, which is correct. But doing this with a thumbless grip is unnecessary, since the same position can be obtained with the thumb hooked around the bar with little change in the elbow position, and the risk of having an unsecured bar over the face and throat is just too great to be acceptable. The grip is thumbless in the squat because the bar is not moving - you are; for all movements where the bar moves, the [thumbs-around] grip should be used.” (Skip forward a few sentences) “Another problem with the thumbless grip is that it diminishes lifting efficiency: what the hands cannot squeeze, the shoulders cannot drive.” (Skip forward again) “Squeezing involves closing the thumb and fingers around the bar until effective pressure can be applied with the forearm muscles in isometric contraction, increasing the tightness of the muscles on the forearm side of the elbow, making rebound out of the bottom more efficient, and increasing motor unit recruitment throughout the arms and upper body.”

[quote]majik wrote:
wow, ok. In my opinion and experience I have no been able to get a proper grip on the bar when using a false grip on squats. I lose the feeling of overall upper back tightness. As a personal preference I think that using a proper grip will help control the bar better.

Again, all personal opinion and preference. As for Mischa’s squats, it is a high bar squat and to use his no hand squat as an example is like saying sumo deadlift is improper because Andy bolton doesn’t pull that way. Don’t use an extreme example to try to moot a point when the point is actually an opinion that differs from yours.[/quote]
Don’t get whiny. You dismissed the false grip for squats out of hand when you had no knowledge of its usefullness. Everyone is shaped a little different and has tight muscles here or there. Even high bar an open or false grip could be merited depending on shoulders, elbows, and/or wrists. It’s fine to have an opinion. It’s another thing entirely to call someone elses useful opion “dumb”.

[quote]jakerz96 wrote:

[quote]majik wrote:
wow, ok. In my opinion and experience I have no been able to get a proper grip on the bar when using a false grip on squats. I lose the feeling of overall upper back tightness. As a personal preference I think that using a proper grip will help control the bar better.

Again, all personal opinion and preference. As for Mischa’s squats, it is a high bar squat and to use his no hand squat as an example is like saying sumo deadlift is improper because Andy bolton doesn’t pull that way. Don’t use an extreme example to try to moot a point when the point is actually an opinion that differs from yours.[/quote]
Don’t get whiny. You dismissed the false grip for squats out of hand when you had no knowledge of its usefullness. Everyone is shaped a little different and has tight muscles here or there. Even high bar an open or false grip could be merited depending on shoulders, elbows, and/or wrists. It’s fine to have an opinion. It’s another thing entirely to call someone elses useful opion “dumb”.[/quote]

alright, My opinion comes from the fact that it has never come up in any of the conversations I have had with any powerlifter, strongman, bodybuilder, strength coach, etc. In my eyes if none of them have mentioned that at a heavier weight it can be useful for better control then I haven’t seen a use for it. In personal experience I have found that the regular grip works better for me.

Yep I dismissed it because it has never come up and from every time I have ever seen it used, it was by the inexperienced, not the experienced. I’m not getting whiny, I am just annoyed at the fact that instead of providing useful information about it, some jumped on me saying my opinion was dumb.

Next squat session I’ll try it out based on what has been said and from that i’ll re-evaluate my opinions on it.

EDIT: according to this site: Advanced_Powerlifting_Techique

is explains grip:
"Hand placement on the bar and bar placement on the back:

A personâ??s structure, limb lengths and size have a lot to do with hand placement on the bar. The main rule of thumb is the closer the better. It will keep the bar tighter on your back, and no chance for the bar to roll. The lighter lifter usually has no problem with this, but the bigger and heavier lifter, usually through inflexibility, wants put his hands out wide. Thus, he decreases his leverage by the fact the bar will have to be placed higher on the neck to keep it from falling. “I will say this once, and I am sure I will take some hits on it, but it is the absolute truth. The vast majority of bigger/heavier lifters have very poor form, for many reasons, but inflexibility and the refusal to practice good form is the main reason. They pretty much try to rely on their size to muscle up a lot of weight. That is one reason why the smaller lifter is so much superior pound for pound at all the lifts.” The weight should be supported by not only the back of the deltoids where the bar sits, but some should be supported by the arms, forearms, elbows, wrists, hands. This dictates as narrow a hand placement as possible. Smaller frame people will have narrower grips than bigger

frame people, i.e. My grip is considerably narrower than Bill Kazmaier’s. Grip the bar tight. The tighter the grip, the less pressure will be on the wrists and elbows and shoulders, and the bar will have less of a chance or almost no chance of moving or rolling."

[quote]majik wrote:
I’m not getting whiny, I am just annoyed at the fact that instead of providing useful information about it, some jumped on me saying my opinion was dumb. [/quote]

Irony.

[quote]UrbanSavage wrote:

[quote]canada wrote:

[quote]UrbanSavage wrote:

[quote]canada wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
I tried it for bench for a month and my numbers using the false grip were still way lower. It seems to cause more triceps activation and less chest and is easier on the shoulders. [/quote]

Yeah i watched a vid of tate on youtube and he said there will be more stress on the arms/triceps and less on the pecs and delts with a false grip. I really don’t plan on using it for bench presses. Squat and push presses i plan on working on it.[/quote]

I use the false grip for strict/military pressing, but not when push pressing. I think that the false grip helps the most, when it comes to overhead pressing, in the first half of the press. For push presses and jerks, your sticking point will come in the second half of the lift. So, I don’t think it’s as important to use a false grip when push pressing but it’s still ideal when military pressing.

When it comes to squatting, I feel that the hand/wrist positioning you use will be determined by bar placement. Rippetoe recommends the false grip because he trains all of his lifters to squat low-bar. When squatting low-bar, wrist flexibility/strength will become more of an issue and the false grip works well as a quick fix. For high-bar squatters, wrist flexibility and hand placement aren’t as big of a concern because most lifters can comfortably use a standard grip with that bar placement. Basically, if you’re squatting low-bar, a false grip is probably better. If you’re squatting high-bar, use the grip that’s most comfortable, which usually is the standard grip. [/quote]

Thanks, what do you feel are the pros and cons of the high back squat and the lower one? I used to do the high bar but the bar moves to far pass my feet. IE i’m rounding my back too much with heavy weights. I can lift more with the low version buts its a bitch to get the bar real low, but i’ve since used a wider grip on the low bar squat so flexibility is not such an issue.[/quote]

Well, the high-bar position generally is best for building athleticism and has better carry over to other lifts, but the low-bar position will allow just about anyone who uses it to immediately squat more weight. My thoughts are that if you’re training for anything other than powerlifting, use the high-bar squat. I even think it’s good for powerlifters to do the majority of their training high-bar and then move the bar down lower as specific meets get closer. I think the majority of people end up using low-bar all the time as an ego thing.

The high-bar position is usually used to squat with an upright torso and the low-bar position is used with more forward bend. If you were squatting high-bar and ending up hunched over trying to good morning the weight up, then you either have a flexibility/mobility issue or you have a muscular weakness. My guess is that you have a stronger posterior chain but have weaker quads. Since high-bar squatting is more demanding on the quads, you were probably trying to find a way to incorporate more of your posterior chain into the movement. You could start front squatting to build your quads up and try out high-bar again, or just stick with low-bar if you’re happy with it.[/quote]

Which position do you feel directly improves the conventional deadlift more? Increasing my dead is priority number 1.

[quote]UrbanSavage wrote:

[quote]majik wrote:
I’m not getting whiny, I am just annoyed at the fact that instead of providing useful information about it, some jumped on me saying my opinion was dumb. [/quote]

Irony.[/quote]
That’s what I thought when I just read it.

[quote]canada wrote:

Which position do you feel directly improves the conventional deadlift more? Increasing my dead is priority number 1.

[/quote]

Again, depends on where your muscular weakness/sticking point is.

In general, narrow stance ATG high-bar squats, as well as front squats, improve strength off of the floor. Wide stance powerlifting style low-bar squats, especially when done with a box, improve strength in the lockout.

If I had to choose between the two, I’d always pick the high-bar squat. I don’t see any reason to not use both on a weekly basis though. Plenty of people squat 2 or 3 times a week without issue. I’ve heard people say that you can box squat more often than free squat, but most lifters who box squat don’t do so more than once or twice a week. There are olympic lifters all over the world that squat high-bar and/or front squat daily.

Tried false grip for my DE work today. I actually liked it. I felt tighter with less wrist and shoulder strain. I actually felt even more stable. I’ll have to try on an ME lift soon.

[quote]UrbanSavage wrote:

[quote]canada wrote:

Which position do you feel directly improves the conventional deadlift more? Increasing my dead is priority number 1.

[/quote]

Again, depends on where your muscular weakness/sticking point is.

In general, narrow stance ATG high-bar squats, as well as front squats, improve strength off of the floor. Wide stance powerlifting style low-bar squats, especially when done with a box, improve strength in the lockout.

If I had to choose between the two, I’d always pick the high-bar squat. I don’t see any reason to not use both on a weekly basis though. Plenty of people squat 2 or 3 times a week without issue. I’ve heard people say that you can box squat more often than free squat, but most lifters who box squat don’t do so more than once or twice a week. There are olympic lifters all over the world that squat high-bar and/or front squat daily. [/quote]

Thanks, i have no idea who you are but you seem to know a thing or 2. :slight_smile:

I’ll be playing around with my back squat. I’m squatting 2-3x per week.

I use false grip for damn near everything, including bench press. It just feels so much better to me.

[quote]UrbanSavage wrote:
Well, the high-bar position generally is best for building athleticism and has better carry over to other lifts, but the low-bar position will allow just about anyone who uses it to immediately squat more weight. My thoughts are that if you’re training for anything other than powerlifting, use the high-bar squat. I even think it’s good for powerlifters to do the majority of their training high-bar and then move the bar down lower as specific meets get closer. I think the majority of people end up using low-bar all the time as an ego thing.
[/quote]

  1. Strength is VERY movement specific. Getting stronger in a different squat stance does not necessarily translate over to competition. Methods like Westside use variations like different bars, GMs, etc to address specific weaknesses, but the joint movements are still mimicking their competition lift.

  2. Why would you not master the form you will be using in competition? What advantage does using a different stance for the majority of lifting offer?

  3. Doing a lift not as one would do in competition does not necessarily address weaknesses. For example, one could bring their quad strength up (and their high bar), but if their back is weak in the competition squat, nothing has been accomplished.

  4. I can’t think of any elite level lifters/gyms that ascribe to your program. Westside, Supertraining, BIG, Russians, even as far back as Doyle Kenady. It’s a bit naive to think all these people are too egotistical to try something like high bar squats if it would add pounds to their total. They’d squat in a pink tutu if it’d add weight.

  5. Less weight on the bar means one doesn’t get used to the heavier weight.

So what’s your logic for using high bar the majority of the time?

[quote]UrbanSavage wrote:

[quote]majik wrote:
I’m not getting whiny, I am just annoyed at the fact that instead of providing useful information about it, some jumped on me saying my opinion was dumb. [/quote]

Irony.[/quote]

I admit to taking it all too personally. After more reading, it looks to be a preference to the lifter and I concede my points.

[quote]johnnytang24 wrote:

  1. Strength is VERY movement specific. Getting stronger in a different squat stance does not necessarily translate over to competition. Methods like Westside use variations like different bars, GMs, etc to address specific weaknesses, but the joint movements are still mimicking their competition lift.

  2. Why would you not master the form you will be using in competition? What advantage does using a different stance for the majority of lifting offer?

  3. Doing a lift not as one would do in competition does not necessarily address weaknesses. For example, one could bring their quad strength up (and their high bar), but if their back is weak in the competition squat, nothing has been accomplished.

  4. I can’t think of any elite level lifters/gyms that ascribe to your program. Westside, Supertraining, BIG, Russians, even as far back as Doyle Kenady. It’s a bit naive to think all these people are too egotistical to try something like high bar squats if it would add pounds to their total. They’d squat in a pink tutu if it’d add weight.

  5. Less weight on the bar means one doesn’t get used to the heavier weight.

So what’s your logic for using high bar the majority of the time?[/quote]

I’ve already said what I wanted to say in this thread. To answer your questions, Glenn Pendlay is more of an authority on this subject than you or I will ever be and he already made the case for squatting high-bar far better than I ever could.

Here is his entire post on the subject. The most important point he made and the one that you (and everyone here) should read is #2.

"So much has been said here, but I have a couple of observations that (I think) havnt been made…

  1. There is the assumption that high bar squats, done very deep, do not work the posterior chain. I would propose that they do, and the difference between high bar and low bar and the posterior chain is not as large as some would assume it is.

When I converted from PL to OL, I converted from low bar, powerlifting type squats (medium stance) to closer stance high bar squats with a fairly upright torso, although I dont think my torso was ever as upright as some coaches would prefer. I remember my lower back and glutes being very sore over the first couple of workouts, these workouts were with weights around 365lbs to 405lbs. For comparison, my last heavy low bar back squat set done before this was 730lbs for a set of 3, to be fair this was with suit and wraps. I still remember that set, done in the left hand squat rack in the back of Rip’s old gym, because it was supposed to be a set of 5, and I lost my balance and dumped it on the pins on the 4th rep.

My observations at the time were that the longer lever arm created by putting the bar higher on the back was overriding the decreased angle of the back, and making it even harder for my lumbar muscles to maintan a tight back and for my hip extensors to extend the hip. I am not trying to say that HB squats work the posterior chain more than LB squats, I do not personally believe this, I am just making the point that the differences are not as clear cut as some are making them.

  1. As I see it, the heart of this argument is really about the carry-over of LB and HB squats to other things, specifically OL. Here are a few general observations about carry-over.

When I was a good LB squatter, that strength did not carry over well to HB or front squats, as evidenced by some of the numbers above. When later in my lifting career, I became a decent HB squatter, it directly and immedietly carried over to being able to do very respectable numbers in the LB squat. My front squat of 550lbX5reps and HB back squat of 606lbsX10 reps, both done without a belt, these sets done about a month apart, allowed me to do several very, very respectable LB squats, and LB box squats with no practice or training on either the LB squat or the LB box squat. My feeling was that strength gained from HB squatting was just more “transferable” to other things than strength gained from LB squatting. Through many conversations with others, and a fair bit of experience coaching ex-powerlifters in the Olympic lifts, I have found that this seems to be quite universal. HB, Olympic style squatting will make you strong at the LB squat, LB squatting with a more bent over stance and less depth will NOT carry over well to the HB, Olympic style squat. I think the carry over from one to another bears considering, because what what we are really talking about here is the carry over from one type of squat or another to a completely different exercise.

Fred Hatfield, AKA “Dr. Squat” who is a respected authority on strength training, has written a couple of very good books on the subject, and who competed at a fairly high level in both gymnastics and OL before achieving a 1008lb squat at 44 years of age and I believe around 255lbs, has argued extensively that not only should the HB squat be used EXCLUSIVELY for the training of athletes, but its qualities of carry over are such that even POWERLIFTERS who are actually competing with a low bar, bent over, only to parallel and sometimes wide stance squat, should in fact do HB, Olympic style squats for much of the off season. In a rough quote of his words, HB squats build strength, LB squats demonstrate it.

  1. Positions become habit, and I have not seen much about this in the specific arguments over Olympic lifters doing one type of squat or another. I remember when I was first starting the Olympic lifts, the hardest thing in the world for me was to catch a heavy clean with a torso upright enough to hold the bar on the shoulders, and not let it roll off. The second hardest was to stand up with it without sticking the but immedietly out, and raising the hips first, and dumping the bar off the shoulders, even though had I been magically able to glue the bar in place, I had plenty of strength to stand up with it. I believe that at least part of this was very simply that I was used to this position from doing so many squats this way, and whenever anything was heavy, I , without thinking, reverted back to it. It was a hard, hard habit to break, one I really never completely broke. I would propose that for Olympic lifters, it is better, as a rule, to have the torso and hips in the approximate position that they need to be in when you are going to be in that hole in competition every time you are in that hole in training.

  2. A bit has been said about relative strength, and the weak hamstrings of Olers… or more specifically the relative strength of OLers hamstrings and thighs leaving them quite quad dominant. I would propose that OLers SHOULD be more quad dominant given the demands of the sport, and that given a solid diet of nothing but the competitive lifts only, with no assistance exercises, you would develop a quad dominant athlete. A quad dominant athlete will be much more likely, when the weights get heavy, catch a clean with an upright torso and stand without kicking the hips way out, and to dip and drive straight on the jerk. With maximal weights, the body has a way of getting into its strongest positions naturally, and for a quad dominant lifter, the strongest positions are the right ones for the sport, and the ones that will allow successful lifts with the greatest weight. I think that part of my problem successfully catching cleans early in my OL career was due to the “bad habit” of being leaned over too far in the bottom of a squat, but another factor was that I was, at the time, quite hamstring/posterior chain dominant. The wrong recipe for success in OL.

  3. The last thing, one that I havnt seen touched on, is ease of coaching. A high bar position is pretty natural. Its where most people will put the bar without being coached. Its also pretty comfortable for the vast, vast majority of people. No undue strain on the back, neck, shoulders, or wrists. On the other hand, a low bar squat usually has to be coached, to get the wrist and hands and bar all in the right position, it often has to be coached extensively. It is not unusual for it to cause shoulder pain, or wrist pain if the shoulders/arms are too tight to keep the hands and wrist in the right position. In my experience it is, at the least, initially uncomfortable.

I remember all kinds of shoulder pain when I was squatting low bar as a powerlifter. Literal cramps in the shoulder muscles during sets of 5, shoulder pain the next day, etc. And I remember that it was bad enough that it interfered with my bench press training at times. This is an experience shared by many, many powerlifters. One thing that was great when I switched to HB squats was that the shoulders no longer hurt! It was great to be able to do a hard squat workout, and not have my shoulders and/or wrists hurting as bad as my legs!

Carrying heavy weights in that low bar position is just plain hard and fatiguing on the sholders. For many people, if you dont NEED to do it that way, I am not sure why you would.

To be fair, I think squats done the way Rip coaches them are great. A great exercise. The guy certainly knows how to teach people to squat, hes proven that many times, and someone squatting with form acceptable to him is squatting in a more productive and safe manner than the vast majority of those squatting. I also think the HB vs LB controversy has less meaning than has been assigned to it… for example, one certainly can squat with the bar in a low position and still do a pretty upright, deep squat, that as far as body position would satisfy any Olympic lifting coach. One can also do a HB squat and get quite bent over, I have personally proven that many times! Simply changing the position of the bar on the back doesnt magically change a good exercise to a bad one, or vice versa.

But, Olympic lifting is a sport, and it is pretty universally agreed by those with extensive experience as athletes and coaches in that sport that there is an advantage in that sport to be gained from squatting in a certain way, and that way is a high bar, upright squat. I do agree with this.

I am not so sure that I agree with Fred Hatfields view that HB, Olympic style squats are so superior and have such a superior strength transfer to other activities that not only all athletes should be doing it that way, but even competitive powerlifters who compete with a low bar squat should do much of their training with the HB squat. I am inclined to think in this direction, but it is certainly not as clear cut an issue as the one pertaining to OLers. Fred’s accomplishments and achievements do lend some credibility to his views though.

glenn"

[quote]majik wrote:

[quote]UrbanSavage wrote:

[quote]majik wrote:
I’m not getting whiny, I am just annoyed at the fact that instead of providing useful information about it, some jumped on me saying my opinion was dumb. [/quote]

Irony.[/quote]

I admit to taking it all too personally. After more reading, it looks to be a preference to the lifter and I concede my points. [/quote]
Now sweat man.

That picture is absolutely hilarious.

[quote]UrbanSavage wrote:

[quote]johnnytang24 wrote:

  1. Strength is VERY movement specific. Getting stronger in a different squat stance does not necessarily translate over to competition. Methods like Westside use variations like different bars, GMs, etc to address specific weaknesses, but the joint movements are still mimicking their competition lift.

  2. Why would you not master the form you will be using in competition? What advantage does using a different stance for the majority of lifting offer?

  3. Doing a lift not as one would do in competition does not necessarily address weaknesses. For example, one could bring their quad strength up (and their high bar), but if their back is weak in the competition squat, nothing has been accomplished.

  4. I can’t think of any elite level lifters/gyms that ascribe to your program. Westside, Supertraining, BIG, Russians, even as far back as Doyle Kenady. It’s a bit naive to think all these people are too egotistical to try something like high bar squats if it would add pounds to their total. They’d squat in a pink tutu if it’d add weight.

  5. Less weight on the bar means one doesn’t get used to the heavier weight.

So what’s your logic for using high bar the majority of the time?[/quote]

I’ve already said what I wanted to say in this thread. To answer your questions, Glenn Pendlay is more of an authority on this subject than you or I will ever be and he already made the case for squatting high-bar far better than I ever could.

Here is his entire post on the subject. The most important point he made and the one that you (and everyone here) should read is #2.

"So much has been said here, but I have a couple of observations that (I think) havnt been made…

  1. There is the assumption that high bar squats, done very deep, do not work the posterior chain. I would propose that they do, and the difference between high bar and low bar and the posterior chain is not as large as some would assume it is.

When I converted from PL to OL, I converted from low bar, powerlifting type squats (medium stance) to closer stance high bar squats with a fairly upright torso, although I dont think my torso was ever as upright as some coaches would prefer. I remember my lower back and glutes being very sore over the first couple of workouts, these workouts were with weights around 365lbs to 405lbs. For comparison, my last heavy low bar back squat set done before this was 730lbs for a set of 3, to be fair this was with suit and wraps. I still remember that set, done in the left hand squat rack in the back of Rip’s old gym, because it was supposed to be a set of 5, and I lost my balance and dumped it on the pins on the 4th rep.

My observations at the time were that the longer lever arm created by putting the bar higher on the back was overriding the decreased angle of the back, and making it even harder for my lumbar muscles to maintan a tight back and for my hip extensors to extend the hip. I am not trying to say that HB squats work the posterior chain more than LB squats, I do not personally believe this, I am just making the point that the differences are not as clear cut as some are making them.

  1. As I see it, the heart of this argument is really about the carry-over of LB and HB squats to other things, specifically OL. Here are a few general observations about carry-over.

When I was a good LB squatter, that strength did not carry over well to HB or front squats, as evidenced by some of the numbers above. When later in my lifting career, I became a decent HB squatter, it directly and immedietly carried over to being able to do very respectable numbers in the LB squat. My front squat of 550lbX5reps and HB back squat of 606lbsX10 reps, both done without a belt, these sets done about a month apart, allowed me to do several very, very respectable LB squats, and LB box squats with no practice or training on either the LB squat or the LB box squat. My feeling was that strength gained from HB squatting was just more “transferable” to other things than strength gained from LB squatting. Through many conversations with others, and a fair bit of experience coaching ex-powerlifters in the Olympic lifts, I have found that this seems to be quite universal. HB, Olympic style squatting will make you strong at the LB squat, LB squatting with a more bent over stance and less depth will NOT carry over well to the HB, Olympic style squat. I think the carry over from one to another bears considering, because what what we are really talking about here is the carry over from one type of squat or another to a completely different exercise.

Fred Hatfield, AKA “Dr. Squat” who is a respected authority on strength training, has written a couple of very good books on the subject, and who competed at a fairly high level in both gymnastics and OL before achieving a 1008lb squat at 44 years of age and I believe around 255lbs, has argued extensively that not only should the HB squat be used EXCLUSIVELY for the training of athletes, but its qualities of carry over are such that even POWERLIFTERS who are actually competing with a low bar, bent over, only to parallel and sometimes wide stance squat, should in fact do HB, Olympic style squats for much of the off season. In a rough quote of his words, HB squats build strength, LB squats demonstrate it.

  1. Positions become habit, and I have not seen much about this in the specific arguments over Olympic lifters doing one type of squat or another. I remember when I was first starting the Olympic lifts, the hardest thing in the world for me was to catch a heavy clean with a torso upright enough to hold the bar on the shoulders, and not let it roll off. The second hardest was to stand up with it without sticking the but immedietly out, and raising the hips first, and dumping the bar off the shoulders, even though had I been magically able to glue the bar in place, I had plenty of strength to stand up with it. I believe that at least part of this was very simply that I was used to this position from doing so many squats this way, and whenever anything was heavy, I , without thinking, reverted back to it. It was a hard, hard habit to break, one I really never completely broke. I would propose that for Olympic lifters, it is better, as a rule, to have the torso and hips in the approximate position that they need to be in when you are going to be in that hole in competition every time you are in that hole in training.

  2. A bit has been said about relative strength, and the weak hamstrings of Olers… or more specifically the relative strength of OLers hamstrings and thighs leaving them quite quad dominant. I would propose that OLers SHOULD be more quad dominant given the demands of the sport, and that given a solid diet of nothing but the competitive lifts only, with no assistance exercises, you would develop a quad dominant athlete. A quad dominant athlete will be much more likely, when the weights get heavy, catch a clean with an upright torso and stand without kicking the hips way out, and to dip and drive straight on the jerk. With maximal weights, the body has a way of getting into its strongest positions naturally, and for a quad dominant lifter, the strongest positions are the right ones for the sport, and the ones that will allow successful lifts with the greatest weight. I think that part of my problem successfully catching cleans early in my OL career was due to the “bad habit” of being leaned over too far in the bottom of a squat, but another factor was that I was, at the time, quite hamstring/posterior chain dominant. The wrong recipe for success in OL.

  3. The last thing, one that I havnt seen touched on, is ease of coaching. A high bar position is pretty natural. Its where most people will put the bar without being coached. Its also pretty comfortable for the vast, vast majority of people. No undue strain on the back, neck, shoulders, or wrists. On the other hand, a low bar squat usually has to be coached, to get the wrist and hands and bar all in the right position, it often has to be coached extensively. It is not unusual for it to cause shoulder pain, or wrist pain if the shoulders/arms are too tight to keep the hands and wrist in the right position. In my experience it is, at the least, initially uncomfortable.

I remember all kinds of shoulder pain when I was squatting low bar as a powerlifter. Literal cramps in the shoulder muscles during sets of 5, shoulder pain the next day, etc. And I remember that it was bad enough that it interfered with my bench press training at times. This is an experience shared by many, many powerlifters. One thing that was great when I switched to HB squats was that the shoulders no longer hurt! It was great to be able to do a hard squat workout, and not have my shoulders and/or wrists hurting as bad as my legs!

Carrying heavy weights in that low bar position is just plain hard and fatiguing on the sholders. For many people, if you dont NEED to do it that way, I am not sure why you would.

To be fair, I think squats done the way Rip coaches them are great. A great exercise. The guy certainly knows how to teach people to squat, hes proven that many times, and someone squatting with form acceptable to him is squatting in a more productive and safe manner than the vast majority of those squatting. I also think the HB vs LB controversy has less meaning than has been assigned to it… for example, one certainly can squat with the bar in a low position and still do a pretty upright, deep squat, that as far as body position would satisfy any Olympic lifting coach. One can also do a HB squat and get quite bent over, I have personally proven that many times! Simply changing the position of the bar on the back doesnt magically change a good exercise to a bad one, or vice versa.

But, Olympic lifting is a sport, and it is pretty universally agreed by those with extensive experience as athletes and coaches in that sport that there is an advantage in that sport to be gained from squatting in a certain way, and that way is a high bar, upright squat. I do agree with this.

I am not so sure that I agree with Fred Hatfields view that HB, Olympic style squats are so superior and have such a superior strength transfer to other activities that not only all athletes should be doing it that way, but even competitive powerlifters who compete with a low bar squat should do much of their training with the HB squat. I am inclined to think in this direction, but it is certainly not as clear cut an issue as the one pertaining to OLers. Fred’s accomplishments and achievements do lend some credibility to his views though.

glenn"

I think you could even make a good case for safety squat bar most of the time for all the same reasons. The group that I lift with does this and it seems quite effective.

[quote]UrbanSavage wrote:

I’ve already said what I wanted to say in this thread. To answer your questions, Glenn Pendlay is more of an authority on this subject than you or I will ever be and he already made the case for squatting high-bar far better than I ever could.

Here is his entire post on the subject. The most important point he made and the one that you (and everyone here) should read is #2.

  1. As I see it, the heart of this argument is really about the carry-over of LB and HB squats to other things, specifically OL. Here are a few general observations about carry-over.

When I was a good LB squatter, that strength did not carry over well to HB or front squats, as evidenced by some of the numbers above. When later in my lifting career, I became a decent HB squatter, it directly and immedietly carried over to being able to do very respectable numbers in the LB squat. My front squat of 550lbX5reps and HB back squat of 606lbsX10 reps, both done without a belt, these sets done about a month apart, allowed me to do several very, very respectable LB squats, and LB box squats with no practice or training on either the LB squat or the LB box squat. My feeling was that strength gained from HB squatting was just more “transferable” to other things than strength gained from LB squatting. Through many conversations with others, and a fair bit of experience coaching ex-powerlifters in the Olympic lifts, I have found that this seems to be quite universal. HB, Olympic style squatting will make you strong at the LB squat, LB squatting with a more bent over stance and less depth will NOT carry over well to the HB, Olympic style squat. I think the carry over from one to another bears considering, because what what we are really talking about here is the carry over from one type of squat or another to a completely different exercise.

Fred Hatfield, AKA “Dr. Squat” who is a respected authority on strength training, has written a couple of very good books on the subject, and who competed at a fairly high level in both gymnastics and OL before achieving a 1008lb squat at 44 years of age and I believe around 255lbs, has argued extensively that not only should the HB squat be used EXCLUSIVELY for the training of athletes, but its qualities of carry over are such that even POWERLIFTERS who are actually competing with a low bar, bent over, only to parallel and sometimes wide stance squat, should in fact do HB, Olympic style squats for much of the off season. In a rough quote of his words, HB squats build strength, LB squats demonstrate it.
[/quote]

A) Fred Hatfield says to use a variety of squats, not the high bar squat for much of the off season. He has articles on his site stating such.

B) This is powerlifting. It doesn’t matter what transfer the squat has to other sports.

C) His post is for Crossfit. This is powerlifting.

His post is for powerlifting and olympic lifting, if you’re going to dismiss it because he posted it on a crossfit board then that’s your problem.

99% of people who squat aren’t elite powerlifters and they care about what transfer the squat has to other sports, if you’d like to only be strong while squatting and not during real life activities then once again, that’s your problem.

[quote]UrbanSavage wrote:

[quote]canada wrote:

Which position do you feel directly improves the conventional deadlift more? Increasing my dead is priority number 1.

[/quote]

Again, depends on where your muscular weakness/sticking point is.

In general, narrow stance ATG high-bar squats, as well as front squats, improve strength off of the floor. Wide stance powerlifting style low-bar squats, especially when done with a box, improve strength in the lockout.

If I had to choose between the two, I’d always pick the high-bar squat. I don’t see any reason to not use both on a weekly basis though. Plenty of people squat 2 or 3 times a week without issue. I’ve heard people say that you can box squat more often than free squat, but most lifters who box squat don’t do so more than once or twice a week. There are olympic lifters all over the world that squat high-bar and/or front squat daily. [/quote]

Hmm… would about strength off the floor for sumo pulls?

[quote]UrbanSavage wrote:
His post is for powerlifting and olympic lifting, if you’re going to dismiss it because he posted it on a crossfit board then that’s your problem.
[/quote]

And I refer to this:

[quote]UrbanSavage wrote:

  1. As I see it, the heart of this argument is really about the carry-over of LB and HB squats to other things, specifically OL. Here are a few general observations about carry-over.
    [/quote]

[quote]
99% of people who squat aren’t elite powerlifters and they care about what transfer the squat has to other sports, if you’d like to only be strong while squatting and not during real life activities then once again, that’s your problem.[/quote]

I’ll do you one better and say 100% of powerlifters care about bringing up their squat in competition. In it’s most canonical form, you are saying the high bar squat has better carry over to the competition squat than… the competition squat.

Your shit about real life is irrelevant as well as being ridiculous. What do you think the difference in ‘real life’ activities is between a 400lbs high bar and a 500lbs low bar squatter?

God, you’re a jackass.