Bloggers Wanted
We're looking for people to help with the main blog. If you are consistent, knowledgeable and you're into it, please drop me a note.
|
|
|
|
|
PaulMc Donagh
Senior Boarder
Posts: 61
|
|
I want to know the biomechanical reasons why knee stress is affected by squat depth. Doctors have advised me not to do deep squats, but I doubt the ones I've consulted have expertise in this area. (I don't have knee problems.)
I assume that improper technique increases the risk of injury and that all three types of barbell squats (full, parallel, and partial) can be safe and productive. Assuming proper technique is used and that lack of flexibility is not a limiting factor, do certain depths place one's knees at greater risk?
I do front squats and try to go an inch or so past parallel. I rarely do rear squats. (I figure deads and front squats will give me the results I want.) I never try to go rock bottom. However, the Training Guide in Muscle Media, May 2003, advises people to go 'rock bottom' with front squats as high-front squats are too rough on the knees. Should I take this to mean that only going an inch or so below parallel is inadvisable? Also, how far apart should one's feet be when performing front squats? And should the toes be pointed slightly outwards?
With regard to rear squats, the same issue of Muscle Media offers this advice: '...Lower yourself to the point where your hip joint is the same height as your knee joint when viewed from the side...' (The illustration doesn't seem to demonstrate this depth. If anyone has this mag, please tell me what you think.) On another page, the advice is that parallel means that the top of one's knees are higher than the crease separating one's thigh and lower abs. Do both of these descriptions amount to essentially the same thing?
Readers are also advised to take a super-wide stance with rear squats. 'The distance between your feet should be up to 2/3 of your own
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
rohankrishna
Senior Boarder
Posts: 69
|
|
In fact, nothing is absolutely neccissary.
But you might want to butch up and try a clean grip instead of the plastic. If my 100 lb girlfriend can handle it, so can you.
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
Kebsis
Senior Boarder
Posts: 79
|
|
A couple of threads up you'll see me mention my video clip of me front squatting two kettlebells. I don't think you'll find my depth lacking.  Go rock bottom unless you're into moving the heaviest weight for competition or other purposes - your knees will thank you. As long as your knees track your feet and you sit back, not just down, you should be OK.
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
1212
Senior Boarder
Posts: 54
|
|
Unless training for powerlifting, squat depth should not be judged by the relationship of the thigh to ground ( parallel ). When performed too deep, the pelvis goes to posterior tilt, which transfers much of the load to the lower back. The point at which the pelvis tilts can be altered by stance, wide or narrow.
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
DavidDrake
Expert Boarder
Posts: 82
|
|
Maybe later I'll try the clean grip. For now, it's plastic! I've got a MantaRay too, but I don't do rear squats so I don't use it.
I've been doing parallel (or slightly lower) front squats continuously (3X/week) for about a month and nothing bad has happened to me, but I want to be safe as the weight gets heavier. That's why I'd like to know how seriously to take the MM recommendation to go 'rock bottom' when doing front squats.
I'll guess that an experienced squatter who uses good form would not be at greater risk of injuring his knees by doing full squats over parallel ones. It might even be safer. Since, however, squatting is a technical exercise and full squatting is the most technically demanding version of the squat, it seems to make sense to recommend going to parallel for most people. (I'm sure partial squatting can be productive and safe as well, if done correctly and for the right
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
heetrii
Senior Boarder
Posts: 64
|
|
No, you're a very deep dude, fur shure!
Maybe it's a lack of flexibility on my part that explains why I don't go rock bottom. I DL and do FSs to parallel, but any deeper makes me feel somewhat posturally insecure. What do you recommend to get someone to go lower - other than limbo contests or vacations to exotic places below sea level?
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
lilskank
Senior Boarder
Posts: 67
|
|
Are you saying that going to rock bottom causes the pelvis to go to posterior tilt (which looks like what?) And when that happens, how should one adjust one's stance?
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
udpcfljgm
Senior Boarder
Posts: 60
|
|
Go as low as you can providing you can still maintain an arch in your lower back. You can tell when your lower back is arched by doing a deadlift, see how you instinctively arch your lower back. You do that to put your lower back in a position of strength. Once you are familiar with the feeling of an arched lower back, use it as a guide for squat depth. If your lower back becomes flat or round, you can easily suffer a bulging or herniated disc. A bulging disc is far more likely.
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
0chas
Expert Boarder
Posts: 81
|
|
Here is a link relevant to squat depth http://www.gymaddiction.com/Quads.html Keep your low Keep your lower back flexed and locked into its natural arch back flexed and locked into its natural arch.
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
|
|
|