PDA

View Full Version : Deep squats and sports



Hazerboy
04-05-2006, 07:37 PM
Do deep squats carry over to sports strength better than parallel squats?

Bohizzle
04-05-2006, 07:56 PM
yes.

Hazerboy
04-05-2006, 10:21 PM
Ok. Why?

And why does it seem like most coaches emphasize parallel squats more than Deep squats? Is this because they're afraid their players will get hurt?

Last, do deep squats have a good carry over to parallel squats? Like, for every 5lbs I add to my deep squat will I add 5 lbs to my paralle squat?

Sidior
04-06-2006, 02:34 AM
Last, do deep squats have a good carry over to parallel squats? Like, for every 5lbs I add to my deep squat will I add 5 lbs to my paralle squat?

No, for every 5lbs you add to your deep squat your parallel squat drops 5lbs.

KevinStarke
04-06-2006, 07:22 AM
lmao

khari
04-06-2006, 08:47 AM
Ok. Why?

And why does it seem like most coaches emphasize parallel squats more than Deep squats? Is this because they're afraid their players will get hurt?

Last, do deep squats have a good carry over to parallel squats? Like, for every 5lbs I add to my deep squat will I add 5 lbs to my paralle squat?

There is carry over, but certainly not 1-1.

Maki Riddington
04-06-2006, 11:52 AM
Ok. Why?

And why does it seem like most coaches emphasize parallel squats more than Deep squats? Is this because they're afraid their players will get hurt?



Coaches emphasize this because of misconceptions surrounding the squat and the risk involved to their athletes (bear in mind minimizing injury and maxmizing performance is of the upmost importance to a coach).

The other reason might be that it is specific to many sports (the range of motion is all that is needed), so why do more. The problem I see with this is the carry over of strength and what happens as fatigue sets in during a game.

As fatigue sets in a players coordination of movement starts to diminish. If strength is built up through an entire range of motion the risk of injury will not be as likely to occur since strength can be displayed throughout the entire range of motion.

Bohizzle
04-06-2006, 02:43 PM
Coaches emphasize this because of misconceptions surrounding the squat and the risk involved to their athletes (bear in mind minimizing injury and maxmizing performance is the of the upmost importance to a coach).

The other reason might be that it is specific to many sports (the range of motion is all that is needed), so why do more. The problem I see with this is the carry over of strength and what happens as fatigue sets in during a game.

As fatigue sets in a players coordination of movement starts to diminish. If strength is built up through an entire range of motion the risk of injury will not be as likely to occur since strength can be displayed throughout the entire range of motion.
:bow:

Hazerboy
04-06-2006, 07:27 PM
No, for every 5lbs you add to your deep squat your parallel squat drops 5lbs.


Hah, what I really meant by that is not "if my deep squat increases, then so will my parallel squat," it was more "is the relationship linear?" (Or pretty close). For instance, for every x lbs added to deep squat, add 2x pounds to parallel squat, or for every x lbs added to deep squat, x^1.25 is added to parallel. Ok, maybe not that scientific, but you get the point. I'm asking because I'm considering doing Deep squats instead of parallel but I'd still like to keep my parallel max going up as quickly as possible.


The other reason might be that it is specific to many sports (the range of motion is all that is needed), so why do more. The problem I see with this is the carry over of strength and what happens as fatigue sets in during a game.

As fatigue sets in a players coordination of movement starts to diminish. If strength is built up through an entire range of motion the risk of injury will not be as likely to occur since strength can be displayed throughout the entire range of motion.

Yeah, this is what I meant by "is it worth it to train deep squats for sports."

However, would it still be worth it to train the entire range of motion of the sport was more anaerobic rather than aerobic, and one is looking for pure strength rather than strength and endurance throughout the entire range of motion, I.E. a 6 minute wrestling match rather than an hour long football game.

Bruise Brubaker
04-06-2006, 09:58 PM
For instance, for every x lbs added to deep squat, add 2x pounds to parallel squat, or for every x lbs added to deep squat, x^1.25 is added to parallel.

I know the equation, but I can't write it down here because its boolean parallelism instability could ruin the entire universe, and, worst of all, ruin this forum. Some of the variables could be very offensive, given their sexual nature.

Some people will respond better and have an almost 1 to 1 relation, while for some, it will be quite less. Some might even gain more on their parallel squat while solely doing deep squat. It will change over time. It also highly depends of your weak points.

Sensei
04-07-2006, 05:51 AM
Hah, what I really meant by that is not "if my deep squat increases, then so will my parallel squat," it was more "is the relationship linear?" (Or pretty close). For instance, for every x lbs added to deep squat, add 2x pounds to parallel squat, or for every x lbs added to deep squat, x^1.25 is added to parallel. Ok, maybe not that scientific, but you get the point. I'm asking because I'm considering doing Deep squats instead of parallel but I'd still like to keep my parallel max going up as quickly as possible.

There is carry-over, but probably a lot less than you'd think. If you want to "keep your parallel max going up as quickly as possible", then you should keep doing parallel squats in your routine somewhere.

JDNY87
04-10-2006, 12:56 PM
If you are trying to raise your explosiveness/squat try speed squats i know they helped me a ton.

Jorge Sanchez
04-10-2006, 02:56 PM
Why do you want to get your parallel max going up? Unless there is a reason other than your ego you should just give them up. I'll take functional strength over big numbers any day.

Maki Riddington
04-10-2006, 05:58 PM
However, would it still be worth it to train the entire range if motion of the sport was more anaerobic rather than aerobic, and one is looking for pure strength rather than strength and endurance throughout the entire range of motion, I.E. a 6 minute wrestling match rather than an hour long football game.

Why compromise your ability to move efficiently and transfer strength throughout its entire ROM by short changing yourself through half ROM movements?

Depth has nothing to do with the energy systems involved. You don't select a movement based on an energy system that is required of you in a sport. You train a movement that is used in your sport by manipulating the exercise variables so that the energy system in question is trained at an optimal level.