Why you should squat deep

[DiViN]

This article is brilliant, if you havn't read it, you're in luck:
http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/sh...&postcount=825

[Blackcat]

Stopping at or above parallel places direct stress on the knees, whereas a deep squat will transfer the load to the hips.

Two things
1. At some point when you ascending dont your knees reach the same bad stress point on the knees?
2. I would hate to be the ass to ankles squatter that has to be facing a lineman that utilizes parallel squat practices who is hoisting several hundred lbs more. Who do you think is going to win that battle. Would it be mr 405 grass ass or Mr parallel 650.
Dont misinterpet me here I believe in both training pratices just not to the end of the other.

[Built]

1. They do indeed reach it. They don't pause there and suddenly reverse direction. It's a little different.

2. The day I face a lineman who squats that much is the day I realize someone's been slipping dbol into my little pink waterbottle.

[FortifiedIron]

Just to add a little bit because I know it will come up.

Some of you guys mind find this stuff interesting:

Chandler, TJ, Wilson, GD, & Stone, MH, The effect of the squat exercise on knee stability. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 21(3), 1989.

Past studies have produced conflicting results as to the effect of squat exercises on knee stability. One hundred male and female college students were measured using a knee ligament arthrometer on nine tests of knee stability. Over an 8-wk training program, full or half squats did not consistently affect knee stability compared to non-squatting controls. To measure the effect of long-term squat training 27 male powerlifters (14 Elite or Master Class) and 28 male weightlifters (8 Elite or Master Class) were measured on the same tests. Powerlifters were significantly tighter than controls on the anterior drawer at 90 degrees of knee flexion. Both powerlifters and weightlifters were significantly tighter than controls on the quadriceps active drawer at 90 degrees of knee flexion. Data on powerlifters and weightlifters were also analyzed by years of experience and skill level. No effect of squat training on knee stability was demonstrated in any of the groups tested.
--------

ESCAMILLA, R. F. Knee biomechanics of the dynamic squat exercise. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., Vol. 33, No. 1, 2001, pp. 127-141.

Purpose: Because a strong and stable knee is paramount to an athlete's or patient's success, an understanding of knee biomechanics while performing the squat is helpful to therapists, trainers, sports medicine physicians, researchers, coaches, and athletes who are interested in closed kinetic chain exercises, knee rehabilitation, and training for sport. The purpose of this review was to examine knee biomechanics during the dynamic squat exercise.

Methods: Tibiofemoral shear and compressive forces, patellofemoral compressive force, knee muscle activity, and knee stability were reviewed and discussed relative to athletic performance, injury potential, and rehabilitation.

Results: Low to moderate posterior shear forces, restrained primarily by the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL), were generated throughout the squat for all knee flexion angles. Low anterior shear forces, restrained primarily by the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), were generated between 0 and 60[degrees] knee flexion. Patellofemoral compressive forces and tibiofemoral compressive and shear forces progressively increased as the knees flexed and decreased as the knees extended, reaching peak values near maximum knee flexion. Hence, training the squat in the functional range between 0 and 50[degrees] knee flexion may be appropriate for many knee rehabilitation patients, because knee forces were minimum in the functional range. Quadriceps, hamstrings, and gastrocnemius activity generally increased as knee flexion increased, which supports athletes with healthy knees performing the parallel squat (thighs parallel to ground at maximum knee flexion) between 0 and 100[degrees] knee flexion. Furthermore, it was demonstrated that the parallel squat was not injurious to the healthy knee.

Conclusions: The squat was shown to be an effective exercise to employ during cruciate ligament or patellofemoral rehabilitation. For athletes with healthy knees, performing the parallel squat is recommended over the deep squat, because injury potential to the menisci and cruciate and collateral ligaments may increase with the deep squat. The squat does not compromise knee stability, and can enhance stability if performed correctly. Finally, the squat can be effective in developing hip, knee, and ankle musculature, because moderate to high quadriceps, hamstrings, and gastrocnemius activity were produced during the squat.

[snapback]670459[/snapback]

the reason letting your knees drift in Oly squats is VERY simple. When your knees drift, you place them in an awkward position (when bearing load) in which forces parallel to the ground and over the knee itself will create shearing forces.
Note in the drawing that if the thigh is at parallel, the force of gravity pulls 100% in the x direction (i drew from an odd angle so X is up down and Y is left right). That means all of the force is placed over the knee cap directly down... greatest shearing forces. If you go below parallel, then what happens is as you can see, the Fy and Fx change magnitude and direction slightly to lessen the load and pull back on the kneecaps, actually reducing some of the shearing force.
Also, notice how powerlifters mention to push your legs apart? Or how even when you rock bottom when your knees hit about 90 degrees they tend to come in?
Simple reason for that t=rxF or torque=rFsinX. The sine of X is greatest (in our range of motion) at 90 degrees... meaning the MAXIMUM torque (which does the greatest damage to our knees) is done at parallel. Usually people tell you to go a little below parallel for that reason. Changing direction at 90 degrees does the most damage to your knees. Also, because of the direction of r and F, the torque is directed inwards, so your knees tend to buckle in. Hope this clears a few things up.

[snapback]124846[/snapback]

Generally from all the stuff I've seen this far on the topic, the knee is at its most exposed position at approx. 90 degrees. When your standing or squatted at your best 'passive' ROM your knee joint is more stable.

Wilk K et al. A comparison of tibiofemoral joint forces and electromyographic activity during open and closed kinetic chain exercises. Am J Sports Med; 24(4):518-527 - Actually shows that a leg extension is putting more shear pressure on the knee than a squat.

And of course Zatsiorsky, Siff, and Verkhoshansky all suggest squatting to full flexion.

Hope that helped some people.

Kc

[Chris686]

2. I would hate to be the ass to ankles squatter that has to be facing a lineman that utilizes parallel squat practices who is hoisting several hundred lbs more. Who do you think is going to win that battle. Would it be mr 405 grass ass or Mr parallel 650.

Um...
This may be just me, but this sounds equivocal to saying using a partial ROM with heavier weight = stronger.

[Tofer]

Yay for using basic first year mechanics.

I really think that oversimplifies things, though.

[Bob]

2. I would hate to be the ass to ankles squatter that has to be facing a lineman that utilizes parallel squat practices who is hoisting several hundred lbs more. Who do you think is going to win that battle. Would it be mr 405 grass ass or Mr parallel 650.

Not exactly a fair comparison...
You need to compare an ATF Squatter who has a parallel squat close to the Parallel Squatter's.. all things being equal, if you took 2 similiar natural-sized FT players, who put in the same effort, ate the same foods and rested the same... only one did parallel squats and the other did ATF squats.. then then ATF squatter will be more athletic, have stronger hips, a better hammie to quad balance and much better knees...

ATF wins... functional full ROM strength wins...

[BigCorey75]

hey i used to be an offensive lineman who squatted 650 pounds past parralell and i used to kick plenty of ass...lol

[Blackcat]

Um...
This may be just me, but this sounds equivocal to saying using a partial ROM with heavier weight = stronger.

Depending on the situation it can be applicable.

[Blackcat]

Not exactly a fair comparison...
You need to compare an ATF Squatter who has a parallel squat close to the Parallel Squatter's.. all things being equal, if you took 2 similiar natural-sized FT players, who put in the same effort, ate the same foods and rested the same... only one did parallel squats and the other did ATF squats.. then then ATF squatter will be more athletic, have stronger hips, a better hammie to quad balance and much better knees...

ATF wins... functional full ROM strength wins...

Guaranteed the partial squatter will reach higher weights before the ATF squatter all factors being the same.
My point is in this particular instance it wont matter atf or partial style I have never seen someone pushing someone with there ass on the ground.

[bmanderson]

"My point is in this particular instance it wont matter atf or partial style I have never seen someone pushing someone with there ass on the ground."

One trains with weights to develop the musculature as much as possible, not to mimic actual moves on the field. If full squats (or heavier partial squats) better develop the muscles of the hips, thighs, and lower back, it does not matter whether or not one ever pushes someone else with their "ass on the ground". If you've developed your musculature as much as possible, it doesn't matter if it was accomplished with partial or full squats.

The skills for any sport are developed in the practice of the specific sport, not when training with weights.

[Sleepy Guy]

Deep squats are sexy, do you really need another reason?

[Mad Martigan]

Um...
This may be just me, but this sounds equivocal to saying using a partial ROM with heavier weight = stronger.

Over that ROM, yeah.

[Blackcat]

[QUOTE=bmanderson;1595584
One trains with weights to develop the musculature as much as possible, not to mimic actual moves on the field. If full squats (or heavier partial squats) better develop the muscles of the hips, thighs, and lower back, it does not matter whether or not one ever pushes someone else with their "ass on the ground". If you've developed your musculature as much as possible, it doesn't matter if it was accomplished with partial or full squats.

The skills for any sport are developed in the practice of the specific sport, not when training with weights.[/QUOTE]


Do both, reason being you will be handling more weight sooner incorperating parallel or partial reps and that equates to higher performance.

[drwost]

I always love "scientific articles" that have a statement with the word "may" in it.

"because injury potential to the menisci and cruciate and collateral ligaments may increase with the deep squat"

[Guido]

Not exactly a fair comparison...
You need to compare an ATF Squatter who has a parallel squat close to the Parallel Squatter's.. all things being equal, if you took 2 similiar natural-sized FT players, who put in the same effort, ate the same foods and rested the same... only one did parallel squats and the other did ATF squats.. then then ATF squatter will be more athletic, have stronger hips, a better hammie to quad balance and much better knees...

ATF wins... functional full ROM strength wins...

Not to mention that ATF Guy is probably going to have a longer career than Mr. Parallel Only because he's got healthier knees.

Also, all things being equal, if you can ATF squat more than someone else, you can more than likely parallel more than them, also. Just because someone is parallel squatting more weight than someone else is doing ATF, doesn't mean they are stronger.

[zen]

hey i used to be an offensive lineman who squatted 650 pounds past parralell and i used to kick plenty of ass...lol

You have to admit that 98%+ of the time on the field, your functional strength requirements were used with your knees bending less than 90degrees.

[Blackcat]

Not to mention that ATF Guy is probably going to have a longer career than Mr. Parallel Only because he's got healthier knees.

Also, all things being equal, if you can ATF squat more than someone else, you can more than likely parallel more than them, also. Just because someone is parallel squatting more weight than someone else is doing ATF, doesn't mean they are stronger.

I don't know if it limited time under the bar or not being able to look beyond studies.
Why do you think benchers do board work? isnt this partial reps? arent they stronger after they train boards? doesnt this equate to increase strength, bar speed?

Show me a **** load of ATF squatters that are doing 600-1000lbs good luck finding them, however I can find plethora of parallel squatters doing just that.
Open your eyes and training techniques to maximize your potential.
Thats all I'm saying

Stay Strong!

[mredn1]

when i go to the gym i usually dont have a workout partner so i put a bench under me as a spot. i touch my but to the bench before i finish the movement. its parrallal or really really close. how much do i lose by doing my squats this way?

[RichMcGuire]

I don't know if it limited time under the bar or not being able to look beyond studies.
Why do you think benchers do board work? isnt this partial reps? arent they stronger after they train boards? doesnt this equate to increase strength, bar speed?

Show me a **** load of ATF squatters that are doing 600-1000lbs good luck finding them, however I can find plethora of parallel squatters doing just that.
Open your eyes and training techniques to maximize your potential.
Thats all I'm saying

Stay Strong!

Uhm, benchers that use boards are doing that to help develop a "sticky" point. Its not like they just train that way for a higher bench.. And so you know, if I can squat 200 ATF.. and someone else was doing 240 partials.. do you think I too might be able to do 240..or even more.. if I did partials? I would think training in a complete ROM would actually make you stronger when you went to partials.

[SkinnySadMan]

For the casual lifter just breaking parallel is good enough I think. I don't think most people are flexible enough to squat deep. They would probably just end up hurting themselves by leaning forward too much; rounding the lower back.

[Guido]

I don't know if it limited time under the bar or not being able to look beyond studies.
Why do you think benchers do board work? isnt this partial reps? arent they stronger after they train boards? doesnt this equate to increase strength, bar speed?

Show me a **** load of ATF squatters that are doing 600-1000lbs good luck finding them, however I can find plethora of parallel squatters doing just that.
Open your eyes and training techniques to maximize your potential.
Thats all I'm saying

Stay Strong!

I am a powerlifter. I do board presses, as do many others. They are for a strong lockout, which mostly helps out when benching in a shirt, because most people's weakness in shirt benching is lockout because a shirt gives you a good amount of "pop" off the bottom.

As for ATF squatting, yes I do it, as do most PL'ers I know. I also do heavy rack squats above parallel to help, again, with lockout at the top once I come out of the hole (also because there is carryover to the initial pull off the floor on the deadlift). However, I do know that my parallel squat started really going up once I started going ATF squatting, and I don't think that's by accident considering that no other training variables changed.

As far as what I pointed out in bold, I can't point out a "*****load" because there aren't a "*****load" of squatters, period, who can do 600-1,000lbs. I'm sure that a good portion of the one's that do, however, incorporate ATF squatting into their programs.

[Blackcat]

I never said dont do ATF squats. I am responding to so many people swearing to only doing ATF, I dont agree.

Yes I think you could squat 240++ this is my point dont you see a strength benefit to the heavier load the body is enduring?

Unfortunatly a 240 partial to a 200 ATF is no where near the difference I am speaking about. I am talking about a 200lb difference which is 200 xtra lbs that the hole body is supporting thoughout the parallel squat range.
Same w/ my point about board work that lockout strength has to be measureable added output performance.
To only train full range is missing out IMO.
Well that was a nice side step if your a pl then you know their are quite a few that can squat parallel 600 and up whereas ATF Style with these weights not anywhere near as many.
Guido if you dont mind how much can you squat ATF,Parallel?

[Natetaco]

I never said dont do ATF squats. I am responding to so many people swearing to only doing ATF, I dont agree.

Yes I think you could squat 240++ this is my point dont you see a strength benefit to the heavier load the body is enduring?

Unfortunatly a 240 partial to a 200 ATF is no where near the difference I am speaking about. I am talking about a 200lb difference which is 200 xtra lbs that the hole body is supporting thoughout the parallel squat range.
Same w/ my point about board work that lockout strength has to be measureable added output performance.
To only train full range is missing out IMO.
Well that was a nice side step if your a pl then you know their are quite a few that can squat parallel 600 and up whereas ATF Style with these weights not anywhere near as many.
Guido if you dont mind how much can you squat ATF,Parallel?

powerlifters dont have to have any concern what their ATF squat is. All they have to worry about is what is their parallel squat. I dont see what your trying to prove. ATF is harder than parallel, we got it.

[djreef]

I dunno, ATF just feels more natural to me. Almost easier, from a biomechanical perspective.

DJ