PDA

View Full Version : Why is my squat so close to my deadlift?



Canadian Crippler
08-19-2005, 09:15 PM
I've got long arms and for the longest time my DL always dominated. However today I maxed below parallel 315 for 2... which would put me at ~335 or so parallel 1RM. My DL is only 375... this doesnt make sense because I have long legs (bad for squats) and long arms (good for DLs).

This makes no sense, no? I thought maybe my hammies and glutes were a weak point but they don't seem to be.

body
08-20-2005, 04:38 AM
you may just be better at one technique relative to the other technques.

just keep trianing them both, and there both get bigger.

Your deadlift is still bigger than squat though.

Gutz981
08-20-2005, 05:37 PM
Ehhhh its better than your bench beating your squat... :angel:

biggimp
08-21-2005, 01:08 AM
long legs are just as bad for squat as for deadlift, so no surprise there.

Hussein
09-10-2005, 08:26 PM
Doesn't sound all that bad. My squat and deadlift PRs are only 10 kg different (170 and 180).

PowerManDL
09-10-2005, 09:44 PM
Simple mechanics. 99% of people are going to have higher deadlifts than squats, with two exceptions:

1) Use of powerlifting gear
2) Piss-poor form/ROM

#1 is why you see almost every competing PLer with a significantly higher squat than pull. Equipment simply doesn't help the deadlift much at all, whereas wraps, briefs, and suit can add several hundred pounds to a squat.

#2 is self explanatory. I could "squat" 600+ raw by just unracking the bar and doing what amounts to knee bends. But I'd rather do an actual squat than just have a big number for the sake of a big number.

fixationdarknes
09-10-2005, 09:57 PM
Perhaps you should changeup your deadlifting style? Maybe try a different variation or something.

Maki Riddington
09-10-2005, 10:39 PM
I've got long arms and for the longest time my DL always dominated. However today I maxed below parallel 315 for 2... which would put me at ~335 or so parallel 1RM. My DL is only 375... this doesnt make sense because I have long legs (bad for squats) and long arms (good for DLs).

This makes no sense, no? I thought maybe my hammies and glutes were a weak point but they don't seem to be.

I'd chalk it up to a weakness. Most people have imbalances and don't realize that pin pointing them and smoking the heck out of them or it will do wonders.

Manveet
09-10-2005, 10:57 PM
#2 is self explanatory. I could "squat" 600+ raw by just unracking the bar and doing what amounts to knee bends. But I'd rather do an actual squat than just have a big number for the sake of a big number.

You mean like this:


http://www.filecabi.net/u.php?file=1126118860.wmv

fixationdarknes
09-10-2005, 11:10 PM
You mean like this:


http://www.filecabi.net/u.php?file=1126118860.wmv

LOL. What was the point of that video...

Btw, nice quarter squats.

Manveet
09-11-2005, 02:23 PM
LOL. What was the point of that video...

Btw, nice quarter squats.


lol, I was simply using the video to illustrate the futility of the quater squat.

ryuage
09-11-2005, 03:28 PM
hey if i can build legs like that doing quarter squats sign me up

getfit
09-11-2005, 03:35 PM
holy jesus this guys legs just blew me away!

lilmase1153
09-11-2005, 05:17 PM
maybe that guy was counting his hammy as being parralel.

Manveet
09-11-2005, 05:47 PM
Quarter squats or not, Ruhl is still a beast.

Canadian Crippler
09-11-2005, 07:15 PM
If all he ever did was those, his legs wouldn't necessarily look like that. When he does like half a dozen other exercises for his legs, it doesn't mean the 1/4 squat is why they look like that.

Guido
09-12-2005, 03:54 PM
True. But just think how huge he'd be if actually did them the right way.

HelpMeLift
09-12-2005, 06:23 PM
damn check out those quads.