02-12-21 01:01 PM - Post#907714    

Should back squats go the way of the Dodo?

For athletics, I believe leg power can best be built utilizing hill sprints and pushing/pulling a Prowler. Throw in some power cleans and some front squats and what more is needed?

Want leg mass for bodybuilding? Leg press.

Want basic leg strength/hypertrophy for everyday living? Goblet squats.

I believe that back squats, particularly over the long term, are a good way to create a bad thing: spinal compression.

Are back squats conducive to healthy aging? I think not.

Are back squats the best way to develop "functional" strength for athletics? I think not.

Are back squats the best way to develop leg mass? I think not.

Are back squats just one of those things we have done for years because of a psychological need to maintain the status quo? You be the judge.

Squats. Squats and milk. High rep squats. All that kind of get big chatter that goes on ad nausea without analysis about the long term detriments.

Perhaps it is a coincidence but I just seem to know and or read about too many long term lifters who maintained back squats as a go to movement - over years - and ended up with back and hip issues. Causation or simply correlation?

For example: https://cbass.com/news12.html



Stay Healthy, Stay Strong

02-12-21 01:33 PM - Post#907717    

Well, can of worms opened. LOL.

I believe back squats to be the preeminent movement for putting on whole body size and gaining whole body strength, for people who have a need or desire for those things.

That said, I doubt most of those benefits are worth it for lifters over 40 (or even over 30 if not an NFL lineman or similar) and I personally at this time do not perform back squats. In my experience, the barbell back squat has some downsides, including, but not limited to, making it very hard to drop any weight and tight hips. While I understand many people experience pain and/or injury, especially in the lower back, knees and hips, I never had those issues. The cost-benefit analysis, for me, however, did not add up in their favor. This was a hard thing for me as the back squat is in many ways my favorite exercise, and the one I am best at. On top of that, most every "serious" program I have ever done had back squats as either a key component or THE key component. These days, again just for myself, my squat needs are met with double KB front squats and pistols.

Got my bag of popcorn ready for this discussion...

02-12-21 01:56 PM - Post#907720    

I kind of agree with Nick Horton when he says that, in order to replace back squats efficiently, you should be doing front squats, RDLs and hip thrusts.

And I also agree with Kyle Schuant when he says that, if you can back squat it, you can also deadlift it without even practicing it.

So, in a very powerful way, I’d say back squats are the best lift there is. But... you may not need them. At all.

Yes, a Ferrari is the quintessential car, but it’s not the best choice to make a long trip, or to do off-road stuff, or even to serve as a family vehicle.

I like front squats better (I also prefer RDLs to regular DLs and inclines to flat bench presses), but KBs, sandbags and even one’s bodyweight are fine too.

It all depends on what we are trying to accomplish.

"I think we often spend too much time focusing on max fitness and not nearly enough on maintaining our minimums. It seems we need to think sustainable rather than obtainable. Meaning whatever we do today, we can do it again tomorrow. Never taking so much from ourselves that we can't." Dan Martin

Back Squats Bad?
02-12-21 02:45 PM - Post#907722    

The advice I had throughout my youth on weights (from athletics coaches) was simple: avoid back squats (harmful to back, interferes with training), and curls and bench press (utterly irrelevant and pointless unless your interest is in the mirror). All the advice was in line with Traveler's.

Having said that, when I did MMS once and spent six weeks really practicing my back squat regularly, I learned to do them right, and what was previously a week of lower back soreness after a big session turned into 2 days of normal post-workout fatigue.

Perhaps it's more about what you do in a session. If you want to build mass, you do lots of reps and time under tension, and that's not going to play well with your sport practice in the next day or two.

Edited by Old Miler on 02-12-21 02:45 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

Back Squats Bad?
02-12-21 02:55 PM - Post#907724    

Back squats safely performed at reasonable intensities and volumes are no more unsafe than any other barbell movement, your anecdotal evidence notwithstanding. Whether or not they are the best choice is too dependent upon each particular situation to make blanket reductions like 'back squats are bad'.

The only people that MUST back squat are powerlifters. But I would go so far as to say that no successful strength athlete (thrower, weightlifter, bodybuilder, powerlifter, strongman) can be their best without back squatting. You may see a lot that don't push the back squat hard at an advanced stage, but somewhere in their development you can bet they all got respectably strong on them. Anyone who needs to get as big and strong as possible must back squat at some point.

Regular people and non-strength athletes absolutely do not need to back squat. But they don't even really need to lift at all unless they are in a collision sport.

"The trouble about always trying to preserve the health of the body is that it is so difficult to do without destroying the health of the mind."~GK Chesterton

Edited by Browser on 02-12-21 03:09 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

Re: Back Squats Bad?
02-12-21 03:31 PM - Post#907727    

I believe that front squats and stiff leg deadlifts can probably give a trainee everything, and perhaps more than, a back squat can. And I say this as someone who has done a fair share of back squatting.

My concern about a multi-decades long diet of back squats is spinal compression. Maybe a negative result is simply the luck of the draw. Maybe.



Stay Healthy, Stay Strong

Back Squats Bad?
02-12-21 03:55 PM - Post#907731    

I suspect what you're seeing isn't related to 'spinal compression' but rather to the fact that strength athletes are psychos who rarely exhibit moderation. And also to the fact that back squats are very often performed with terrible technique. Any lift pushed to its limits is going to cause some issues. Overhead presses are all the rage now as a supposedly healthy alternative to benching, but back when it was contested in weightlifting it destroyed guys shoulders and backs.

"The trouble about always trying to preserve the health of the body is that it is so difficult to do without destroying the health of the mind."~GK Chesterton

Edited by Browser on 02-12-21 03:58 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

02-12-21 05:24 PM - Post#907733    

Back squats are awesome.

That is all.

02-12-21 06:49 PM - Post#907736    

I'll bite. I definitely had a 'never again back squat cause why' stage. After a year and a half, maybe 2 years, of not back squatting I'm actually getting back into it again slowly.

At this point, after having a few never again moments with big compound moves, I'm realizing that I need to be more careful saying 'never again'. Especially after doing a movement exclusively/excessively for a long period of time it's pretty natural to get really bored of it. I don't wonder if a lot of these never again things are really just boredom. And that's ok, we should do all kinds of movements. The biggest enemy in the weight room is boredom after all.

But, I'm really enjoying back squats again. As for the spinal compression thing. I dunno? I mean, you get what 60s of compression from a couple sets of heavy back squats. You really don't need more than 1 or 2 sets anyway. Just do your pullup bar hangs and it's all good I say.

There's no worse enemy for the spine than father time. Sitting in a chair for 8 hours, then sitting in a car and driving, then sitting on the couch at home is probably way worse for the spine than a couple back squats. Besides, literally any movement done standing up will load the spine. Deadlifts, front squats, farmer walks. All that force goes down the spine. The back squat/front squat thing is really lifter dependent I think, but everyone should spend time with both; at least enough to know what they prefer.

Maybe going heavy should be avoided long term, but that can be said with anything. The thing with back squats is they can be loaded and repped almost endlessly. They're weird that way. You can keep standing there breathing and squatting for waaaaay longer than you probably should. So just stay within some limits. And do your stretches, which you should be doing anyway.

I read a thing recently, societies where people sit cross legged on the floor tend to not get hip issues. Societies where people sit on their shins tend to have less knee problems. When I'm watching TV or playing some games, I try to not just sit on the couch the whole time. I go through a few positions on the floor just relaxing into a stretch.

This kinda thing happens with any panacea. Back squats are king they say. What they're not? Oh my gosh they're the worst! Nah, they just are what they are, same with any other movement.

Look at that... all those words and all I did was agree with what browser and jordan d said. A fool multiplies his words they say...

Re: Back Squats Bad?
02-12-21 08:07 PM - Post#907738    

• Traveler Said:

I do not agree. If this were true then the best strength athletes in the world would be doing it. But they all still back squat.

I’m a nobody, but I’ve back squatted at least 315 (and up to mid 500s) pretty much every week since about 1990. The only times I’ve had lower back issues from squats were when I was pushing volume really hard or I misgrooved a rep going for a PR. Either way it was not the movement’s fault, it was because of too much volume or a technique breakdown.

"The trouble about always trying to preserve the health of the body is that it is so difficult to do without destroying the health of the mind."~GK Chesterton

Edited by Browser on 02-12-21 10:53 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

02-12-21 08:42 PM - Post#907740    

I'll just chime in one more time to agree with Derksen -- it's not a "never again" thing for me, and most things aren't and shouldn't be that. It's a "not at this time" thing. Maybe it'll turn out to be never again, maybe not.

And I'll also just add agreement with part of Browser's original response -- if you're not a strength athlete, you prolly don't need to back squat. I'll disagree with the part about not needing to lift at all, but don't think the average Joe or Jane "needs" the back squat.

Back Squats Bad?
02-13-21 01:51 AM - Post#907744    

Could it be as simple as matching the squat to what it is that you want to achieve. Mass and brute strength - back squat. Athletics - front squat. General health and longevity - goblet squat. I understand those things are not necessarily mutually exclusive or at least that people may have goals that span all of those categories.

Edited by AusDaz on 02-13-21 08:16 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

02-13-21 06:21 AM - Post#907747    

Criminal dismissal of the unilateral squats in this thread

02-13-21 10:22 AM - Post#907753    

Anyone else use a squatty potty?

Life changing.

02-13-21 10:28 AM - Post#907754    

Back squats are probably a "never again" for me. I've tried them multiple times over the last five years and had an aching back every time. I have also been able to maintain the strength to do and enjoy everything in life I want to do without them, so I don't have a need for them anymore.
The problem for me may not be just the movement though. I did them for years when I was powerlifting, but with an over-extended lumbar spine most of the time. I think this probably caused some mild arthritis that prevents me from doing them now. If someone has the appropriate anatomy and technique to do them safely, they can be great. They aren't the answer to every strength or fitness problem and they also shouldn't necessarily be avoided by everyone either. Strength and fitness seems to want to push people to the extremes of every issue just like the rest of the world these days.

02-13-21 12:11 PM - Post#907763    

squats - good
goblet squats - good
back squats - good, better with bands
front squats - good
zercher squats - gooder
belts squats - really gooder
box squats - the best - perfect with bands

To squat well takes well developed abs, hips, ham strings, calves, feet, entire back. and the ability to really brace. I don't see any down side to squatting. It makes you strong and you can squat to emphasize pure strength, strength speed, or explosive strength. Squatting properly doesn't set one up for long term health issues. My last squat work out, 260 off a below parallel box for five sets of five. I did'm very fast with less than a minute between sets and using a safety squat bar. My age is the same as Dan John's. My weight is about 227.
My two caveats (1) squats really do require very good technique or they will hurt you (2) heavy squatting with an olympic bar is hard on you shoulders, not many squat that heavy. I never have. I have never squatted above 315. Around 300 is my sweet spot for Judo, my sport.

02-13-21 12:35 PM - Post#907764    

Back squats changed my physical life. I squatted at least twice a week and in the beginning of sensible training I squatted three days a week. After a brief break-in period I started to move my stance out. Once I found the stance that gave me a solid position to break parallel with ease I was off to the races.

After about two years of this I added one day of ATG narrow stance squats. If I had known about the Brettzel I would have done more fronts squats.

Mark it Zero.

02-13-21 12:52 PM - Post#907767    

• Matt_T Said:

Totally. Very underrated. There are some coaches who push them to the limit. Always been curious about that myself, but never really did it.

When I was competitively weightlifting I incorporated an exercise called jerk steps to build up my foot positioning and base for split jerks. Plus it balances out both sides. Load up the weight, and just walk to gym stepping out into your split stance; no need to do a full knee to the floor split squat, Just your receiving split jerk stance and hold for a few seconds. Then stand and do other leg. It was an amazing exercise. My back squat shot up after a few weeks of those. I went from around 400 for a single to 375x5 done fairly easily.

For people struggling in bilateral squats, unilateral work is a great way to unlock more gains.

02-13-21 02:35 PM - Post#907768    

Dan, I had a similar experience. Back squatted regularly (2-4 times a week) for a long time. I used to think you couldn’t even make gains squatting less than 2-3 times a week. My first time doing 531 and squatting once a week was an eye opening experience. A big part of handling heavy weight properly is getting that stance and form dialed in. It’s all dependent on hip structure and even type of squat. I would imagine people who do low bar powerlifting squats put way more strain on their hips. I always did exclusively hi bar because of Olympic lifting.

Similar to what Dan J has said many times I found they were the greatest mass builder. I was a 6’2 135lb shrimp in high school. I worked out for a while and it took me years to get to 150 doing magazine pump routines. Started back squatting and I shot up to 190 pretty quickly. Other big exercises like Deadlifts and front squats just don’t have the same affect for me.

These last two years I haven’t really done them at all, and although I haven’t lost a ton of weight all my clothes are loose and pants are a very different experience.

02-13-21 06:26 PM - Post#907774    

• Sean S Said:

This is a really good point. It makes me wonder if by ‘spinal compression’, Traveler really means excessive lumbar extension. Because loading the spine with an exaggerated lower back arch will for sure cause problems.

"The trouble about always trying to preserve the health of the body is that it is so difficult to do without destroying the health of the mind."~GK Chesterton

02-13-21 06:57 PM - Post#907776    

• Browser Said:

The common cue back then in powerlifting circles was "arch, arch, arch". For someone who falls into flexion that might get them back to neutral. For me it probably just put huge compressive forces on the facet joints. Now that I understand spinal anatomy and loading better, I realize what I was doing probably caused some long-term irritation. In the grand scheme of things I'm thankful I didn't have any serious back injuries like many others have had.

Back Squats Bad?
02-13-21 07:14 PM - Post#907777    

The squat has a good track record but some over the long term are better served looking at alternatives, especially if they can’t full squat for those people the deadlift and stiff legged deadlift seems to be ample but even then the low back gets a beating if sets and rep’s (as with full squats) and general programming isn’t sensible for them.

Nice legs-shame about the face

Edited by Andy Mitchell on 02-13-21 07:19 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

02-13-21 08:10 PM - Post#907778    

• Browser Said:

Browswer, how about this? If you spend years doing back squats with bad form you are likely to hurt your back. And it is all too easy to back squat with bad form.

I would add, that perhaps - and I am just thinking about this - it is tougher to do bad front squats. By their nature you are forced to maintain better form. Also, the center of gravity is different.

I have back squatted my fair share.

Certainly, a powerlifter - and I powerlifted - will have to practice and perform the back squat. However, for athletics in general, bodybuilding and general fitness I am leaning toward believing it does not have to be the centerpiece of a training program.

I have known some solid powerlifters who really gained just about everything from the back squat. The better their squat, the better their deadlift. A few of these guys had pitiful bench numbers but the solid squat and deadlift made them competitive.

But getting away from powerlifting and strongman competitions, are back squats necessary or even desirable? I wonder.

You could become quite a dynamic athlete on a steady diet of hill sprints, power cleans and front squats I think.

My thinking is along the lines of Dan John recommending the Bulgarian Goat Bag Swing instead of the kettlebell swing, unless someone has truly mastered the swing.

Input?




Stay Healthy, Stay Strong

Back Squats Bad?
02-13-21 09:42 PM - Post#907779    

I'm nearly 100% with Traveler here, and my position might actually be even more extreme than his. In my experience, the problem with virtually all bilateral barbell lifts is their emphasis on the prime movers at the expense of the support musculature. Sure, back squats are great at growing big, strong quads and lower backs, but if their relative development exceeds that of the feet, calves, hip flexors, and lateral hip muscles, then performance and health will be compromised.

There was a Japanese imaging study years ago involving Asafa Powell and a number of national/international level local sprinters, and what it uncovered was that the size of the illiopsoas relative to the quads was strongly correlated with top speed. There was another study correlating relative gastrocnemius thickness with top speed. These findings mirror my experience as both a coach and an athlete. Both health and sporting performance (outside of strength sports) are not primarily dependent upon overly hypertrophied prime movers, but on lean, balanced physiques with an emphasis on the hips, core musculature, hands, and feet. The problem with focusing on squats and deadlifts is that they promote so much prime mover hypertrophy that the support muscles literally do not have the growth capacity to keep pace, and so athletic balance is disrupted.

I've had the opportunity to participate and coach in athletics, strength sports, and the tactical realm, and while power lifts build big, impressive physiques, I have not known them to be conducive to "all around" fitness and health. The best runners, jumpers, and ruckers I've worked with all had meaty calves. The best climbers have all had massive forearms. And the best fighters have always had thick necks and torsos. On the contrary, I have never seen someone with overly impressive quads or biceps perform well out in the field.

For a site-appropriate example, and with nothing but love for Dan John, Glenn Passey never cleaned 400 or deadlifted 600, but he threw the discus further than Dan ever did, while weighing around 50 pounds less to boot. Being big and strong is fun, but if we're really worried about performance, health, and longevity, I don't think the current weights/numbers/size-driv en approach is optimal, and neither are the tools which we've used to pursue it.

Just for reference, I've attached a pic of Passey. He weighed 178 pounds, and while he looks healthy and athletic, his physique is nothing special. His performance, on the other hand...




Edited by Roger Nelsen on 02-13-21 09:45 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

02-13-21 10:13 PM - Post#907780    

Roger, good stuff, interesting perspective.
Sport performance is tricky, you can have 2 athletes with the same 'test' numbers, one is going to outperform another, true in throwing, even truer in hockey.
Other than that, what you're saying is in line with what Russians call OFP.

02-14-21 08:54 AM - Post#907782    

Here’s Asafa Powell quarter box squatting 585 for 6 reps. It’s ugly.

https://youtu.be/HvzWB9EDZkA

Perhaps world record holders have different considerations than the rest of us. Hmm. I don’t know what they could be. I’m sure if I just foam roll and squat enough I too can become a Jamaican world record holder, right?

02-14-21 09:04 AM - Post#907783    

• Jordan D Said:

That's not an argument for 'the rest of us' avoiding quarter box squatting (at what is a sensible weight in relative terms obviously) if you too would like to run a bit faster.

02-14-21 09:44 AM - Post#907784    

The problem with most of us is we view everything through the lens of a "lifter" and not from the viewpoint of the particular type of "athlete" involved. Strength per pound of BW is critical in many sports - heavy deep back squatting isn't ideal for that purpose. And even the movement itself may be less than ideal.

Back Squats Bad?
02-14-21 10:09 AM - Post#907785    

• Chris Rice Said:

and there lies the crux of the issue - transferrability. If I am say a rugby player, do I do half squats or full squats. Some will say halves is all you need, because it's close to what you do in your sport. Others will say - full squats are safer and provide better engagement of more muscles. Bla-bla-bla. The debates is ongoing.
I know one thing. Soviets spent (and continue) more time and money than any one else on sport research trying to prove their political system was better, they failed with the system, but some of their records are still standing and these guys were full squatting mostly. Is it helpful for the average Joe? I don't know, because professional sport is not a healthy endeavor in general.




Edited by h&t on 02-14-21 10:10 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

Re: Back Squats Bad?
02-14-21 10:24 AM - Post#907786    

• Roger Nelsen Said:

Almost 40 years ago, I worked as a trainer in a gym before that field really took off. And before that, I had coached some of my fellow powerlifters.

One of them was a national Tae Kwon Do champion. Extraordinary athlete. Competed in the triple jump in high school. Was encouraged to make it his sport in university, with a view towards competing in the Olympics.

He choose Tae Kwon Do instead and, with his great natural ability and work ethic, rose to the top.

At one point he came to me because he wanted to get bigger and stronger. At the time he was approximately 6'3" 215 lbs. He was a lean athletic specimen. His kicking prowess was other worldly.

I gave him a typical powerlifting workout and a "get big diet." It was what he wanted.

In a blink of an eye he was 225 lbs., then 232, then 245. Within 3 years or so, he hit 290.

His lifts skyrocketed. His TKD training had been 500 push ups and 500 sit ups a day, along with skipping rope. That and he spent hour upon hour practicing his kicks.

I would say while weighing around 235 lbs. he was squatting 500+ lbs. for low reps - 3, 4, 5. This was about 9 months after he began lifting.

At about the 9 month mark he deadlifted for the first time, he pulled 505 lbs. I never saw that from a first time puller, before or since.

He was unhappy with his performance in the bench, so he focused more on that, as well as gaining weight.

Weight training wise, He probably had gotten everything he needed by the time he was in the low 230s. He had added some quality muscle and gained some strength. But the iron bug had bitten, so he wanted to get bigger and stronger.

He continued along until 290, at which time the weight gain was uncomfortable and his mobility had significantly decreased. After all that, within a few years he had paired himself back to the 230s and then back to 215.

He pursued what he wanted to pursue. I cannot help but think however, that he would have been better off sticking to TKD and focusing on a few strategic movements and only discreetly increasing his weight. But every mind is a universe.

He never competed in TKD again. He had been a champion.

Bigger and stronger makes sense, sometimes.

The back squat makes sense for powerlifters and people who need to back squat. Otherwise ...

No, this story does not prove that backs squats are bad. As an aside, he has some back issues today. In fairness, though, that could be from any number of things.

Instead, this is a story I have seen play out and read about through the years.

The back squat tends to be the foundation upon which get-bigism is built.

Get-bigism is often deleterious to sports performance and health.

Again, for everyone who does not have to compete in a sport where they must back squat, I see the front squat, power clean, stiff legged deadlift, Prowler, tackling dummies, hills sprints, goblet squats, etc. as better tools to promote lower body strength.

Roger made some excellent points. I was reminded of the anecdote above by his cogent writing.

Thank you Roger.





Stay Healthy, Stay Strong

Re: Back Squats Bad?
02-14-21 10:43 AM - Post#907787    

• h&t Said:

I wonder if this is a case of post hoc ergo propter hoc - correlation but not causation.

The Soviets/Russians along with their Eastern block satellites spent considerable money, time and effort as I understand it, on developing steroids and other performance enhancing drugs to aid their athletes.

Perhaps their successes, such that they were, had more to do with feeding their athletes exogenous substances to "help them" than it had to do with back squats.

As mentioned in my previous post, my friend the TKD champ did 500 push ups a day as part of his training regimen. Is that what made him great? I doubt it.

Lots of status quo keeping in the world of training. Also, a lot of conflating correlation with causation.

I do not pretend to have all the answers. However, I do have lots of questions.




Stay Healthy, Stay Strong

02-14-21 10:45 AM - Post#907788    

Back in 1975 when I started powerlifting the wide stance squat was still an outlier. It was a god send for me. I could finally move some weight. That said, there was no real application for that strength other than powerlifting. However, full ass to grass narrow stance high bar Olympic lifting style squats did. YMMV

Mark it Zero.

02-14-21 10:56 AM - Post#907789    

• DanMartin Said:

Very close form wise to a front squat, IMHO.




Stay Healthy, Stay Strong

Back Squats Bad?
02-14-21 12:00 PM - Post#907791    

Ok now I see where you’re coming from traveller. Obviously your champion is an outlier of the highest degree. I have never met someone with numbers like that who gained weight that easily. Squatting 500+ at 215? Who needs more than that?! I wanted to add this caveat: I was watching a video of alexi torokhty (spelled it wrong I think but you know, Olympic champ and all) and he went off about getting an email from some guy who back squatted like 250kg but could hardly clean and jerk 140. The guy was commenting on one of his programs saying ‘there’s not a lot of back squats in here’. He laughed and he said ‘if that’s what your back squat is at, you don’t need to back squat again forever, focus on clean and jerk to build that lift up. The back squat is probably just holding you back at this point by taking all your recovery.’ There’s some good lifters out there who never squat more than 100-110% of their max clean, and looking back on my competitive time I wish I had done the same. I cared way too much about my back squat.

As Dan J has continually pointed out, how much is enough? Let’s cut out the outliers, because they can walk into a weight room and breathe and get strong. Someone who gets back problems from squatting 500+ and weighing 290 for a few years? Makes sense to me!

I’ll say this much, the average person would never need to back squat more than body weight to be healthy. More can help athletic power for an average joe, but only to a point. And in that regard you don’t even need back squats, do double kettlebell front squats or whatever. You don’t need much to be overall healthy.

I’ve been trying to figure this out these last few years. This forum has taught me to examine myself from an athletic perspective, you know what do the weight numbers actually mean outside of the weight room? Hockey is my main sport at this point, but it’s just for fun. Same with lifting. I’m trying to find the line between the two. It’s given new life to weight training, but it’s also taught me that numbers don’t mean everything and if chased just for the sake of can hamper athletic performance.

So far my discovery has been that if I don’t back squat my legs aren’t ‘tired’ and heavy, so I’m faster and more coordinated on the ice. But, I definitely feel like I’m lacking a ‘grounding’ so to speak on the ice. When I did 531 and hit the 2,3,4,5 numbers on Press, bench, squat, dead I felt undefeatable on the ice. It was a surprising experience the power and stability I felt. Playing hockey was extremely fun at that point.

My current experiment is I want to rebuild my legs through using the squat (specifically the back squat - because especially in hockey I think the back squat transfers really well) and get back up there, but use a reduced volume approach, sort of like easy strength (not the 5 day a week EES, but the 2-3 day a week 80-90% version from the book) during my ‘in season’ next year. Hockey has basically not existed this year thanks to Covid, so I want to get my numbers back up and see if I can find the balance next year to staying strong and quick.

So, to recap, I think backs squats would have value for us normies who have to work our butts off balancing recovery and training to even get close to reasonably strong numbers like 3 or 400 pound squats for singles. And the whole ‘front squats are more athletic thing’. I really wonder where that came from? I tried exclusively front squats for a while, and they have never helped me feel as powerful as back squats do. Plus, I find it really hard to make gains on just front squats. Back squats build good front squats, but not the other way around for me.



Edited by Jordan Derksen on 02-14-21 12:07 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

Re: Back Squats Bad?
02-14-21 12:36 PM - Post#907795    

Interesting seeing Powell's squats. I once asked some really good sprinters why they squat like this, and one said it's because they want to work the strongest end phase of the glute extension the way they do in sprinting. Another admitted that a deadlift does exactly the same with a lot less risk to your back, but reckoned it had become more of a psyching-each-other-out contest among sprinters.

Re: Back Squats Bad?
02-14-21 12:36 PM - Post#907796    

Very well reasoned Jordan.

Like I said, I do not have a lot of answers, but I do have a lot of questions.

It is now 47 years since I picked up my first barbell. I began calisthenics and isometrics prior to that.

I have met some gifted athletes over the years. They are the exception, not the rule. They seemed to excel no matter what they did.

For everyone else, who has accomplished anything, the key has been hard, consistent work over time.

Here is the thing. The gifted athletes do X and swear by X as to what makes them great. They back squat, or bench or run stadiums and that becomes their proclaimed "key to success."

Then for the rest of us mere mortals, who are willing to work hard, we commit - over the long term - to a course of action. Along the way, we find we have some preferred movements. Often, we then proclaim them to be our "key to success."

Over the years we have all seen this on the Internet. The proclamation, "The solution to all things is ________."

I am as enthused about strength training as ever. With that said, I continue to look for the connection between movement selection and success in a given endeavor.

Sure, if the goal is to have a big back squat, you need to back squat. But is it the end all and be all for everything else, as it has often been made out to be? I have serious doubts.

I also have my doubts about the cult of get-bigism.

Adding some muscular size is welcome in many athletic endeavors and in life in general, I believe. However, I also believe that it can lead to diminishing returns to scale faster than we might think.




Stay Healthy, Stay Strong

Re: Back Squats Bad?
02-14-21 12:39 PM - Post#907797    

While I wasn't looking, my Youtube advanced itself from the Powell video to this one of Yohan Blake. This has got to be a LOT more relevant to an athlete!

https://youtu.be/4sDMQyqNZi4

Re: Back Squats Bad?
02-14-21 02:12 PM - Post#907799    

• Old Miler Said:

That's awesome. What's the name for that move where you're sat on your haunches and jump up? Never seen those weighted before. Another move I remember with hatred from when my Thai Boxing coach used to make us do them as our minute 'rest' between rounds. Wonder if I can do them with a couple of light KBs...

Re: Back Squats Bad?
02-14-21 03:57 PM - Post#907807    

• Matt_T Said:

YouTube seems to favour "knee jump".

I've been watching that again and again. It's brilliant - so many little exercises that demand a minimum level of explosiveness and power from the hips. And stuff this forum would approve of - the crawls and dragging-plates-with-feet , or plyos into prowler. But knee jumps with what must be 50kg on the barbell....well, I guess he was second best in the world for a reason...

Re: Back Squats Bad?
02-14-21 05:45 PM - Post#907810    

h&t, thanks. I've seen the same things as you regarding the applicability of training tests. The only real tests are how well the athlete performs on the field, and how healthy he is off of it. Everything else is a waste of time. I used to love all the old Soviet factor analysis and transfer of training tables when I was younger, but time and experience have revealed them to be little more than another manifestation of Traveler's get-bigism, and I wasted my best training years pursuing pointless benchmarks. I'm inclined to think Soviet success had less to do with brilliant training and more to do with systematic athlete selection, full time training, and state-sponsored pharmacology.

Traveler, your story is a great illustration of what's wrong in modern sport and physical culture, and like I said, I fell for it too. I ran my fastest, jumped my highest, and felt my best at 6'2" and under 200 lbs. I've been as big as a lean 232, and while I looked impressive, I have never moved as well, or as pain free, as when I largely forsook weights, kept my weight down, and just ran and jumped. I thought adding more strength was the key to getting better, but more time in the weightroom led to less time on the field, and whatever strength and power gains I made were ultimately eaten up by the extra mass that came along with them.

Like you said, Traveler, some degree of muscular development is necessary for peak athletic performance, but it's definitely less than is typically sought after, especially when health and longevity are taken into consideration as well. Whether muscle or fat, you feet, ankles, and knees have to carry your extra weight every step of the way, and your organs have to work harder to maintain it too.

02-14-21 06:17 PM - Post#907811    

• DanMartin Said:

Can you remember who, when and where...?

In terms of changing your squat.
It seems to take its toll.

Nice legs-shame about the face

Re: Back Squats Bad?
02-14-21 06:33 PM - Post#907812    

• Roger Nelsen Said:

This sums up quite a lot. Great training wisdom Roger. Well said.




Stay Healthy, Stay Strong

Re: Back Squats Bad?
02-14-21 07:31 PM - Post#907813    

• Old Miler Said:

It's inspirational. Obviously I have no business as a 40 something trying to do anything more potentially injurious as a push up or a Goblet Squat anymore but might just set a couple of those circuits up in the garden this week...

02-14-21 08:26 PM - Post#907818    

What’s one of the main pieces almost no one includes when they follow 531?

The jumps and throws. Easily one of the most important parts of the overall program.

02-15-21 02:50 AM - Post#907823    

• Jordan Derksen Said:

I was just thinking in my ungainly sequel to the YouTube clip posted by Old Miler I could start with a med ball knee jump, to box jump, depth drop and throw

02-15-21 05:01 AM - Post#907826    

Awesome thread! I like this. Thank you all for your inputs!

My 5 cents: despite being a former shot putter, WL-coach and gym enthusiast, after 30+ years of squatting I'm more into goblets, fronts- and RDL-/DL- stuff. I like Bsq but nowadays I pay the price for it with low-back soreness and knees. The volume is a killer, 5x5x80% makes me sore for a week, 2x5 or 3x3..4 or 3x2 heavy'ish (whatever that means for the day) is OK.

Goblets as a warmup, 2-3 sets of heavyish fronts, finished by 1-2 sets of DLs is my choice of today.

02-15-21 08:50 AM - Post#907833    

I was going to say something, but everything has been said already :)

Back Squats Bad?
02-15-21 09:23 AM - Post#907834    

Just to piggyback on several posts above (Derksen's about hockey, Traveler's about TKD and Roger's about running and jumping), I think the answer for most sports and most people is "it depends" and it is a great idea to try it and see.


For some people, sometimes, back squats are great. I think this for sure includes rugby and American football players, bobsledders, shotputters and discus throwers. Passey aside, for these athletes, being bigger and stronger is almost always a one-for-one benefit.

And for some people, sometimes, back squats are an essential. Power lifters, strongman competitors, etc.

I have a suspicion that most people playing most sports would find that their performance in those sports is not really improved via heavy back squats. Of course, whether those people have then been bitten by the iron/squat bug and just want to continue pushing their squat for the sake of it is another question.






Edited by BrianBinVA on 02-15-21 09:24 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

02-15-21 09:53 AM - Post#907842    

Much of this discussion reinforces my thought that the optimal size and strength of athletes for performance is highly individualized. Strength training in general, and squats in particular, seemed to greatly enhance my athletic ability and performance, up to a certain point. My best athletic performance came with relatively modest strength levels. (SQ: low 300's, BP: 275ish, Power clean: 250) Trying to increase my strength substantially beyond that required significant weight gain that stifled by ability to run and jump.
I think some of that had to do with my long limbs and the resulting poor leverage for lifting. Others may need bigger strength numbers to achieve their ideal athletic performance, but I think we do have to be careful pushing everyone to some arbitrary level of strength.

Back Squats Bad?
02-15-21 10:13 AM - Post#907845    

• Andy Mitchell Said:

Andy, when I first started I didn't really know anyone who power lifted so I actually went to some commercial gyms and tried to figure out what's what. Of course I didn't ask anyone. I'd just watch and then try the stuff myself. I may have mentioned this before, but when I could do a few shaky sets of 5 with 135 pounds I decided to add weight. So instead of adding a 5 or 10 pound plate to each side of the bar I added another 45 instead. Lord have mercy. I made to rep but it was beyond ugly.

Mark it Zero.