After reviewing Wiemann and Tidow’s NSA study from 1995 and I know it’s 13 years old, but it does have EMG data relating to support and non support phases of sprinting and a chart. It would have been better to have joint angle data as well, but this will suffice for the argument of the role of gluteal muscles in sprinting. The EMG data certainly indicates that gluteals are activated in the unsupported phase and length of activation seems to suggest a dual role for the gluteals as a supplementary muscle for hip extension from forward swing to back swing and preparation of the hip for ground contact. The data suggests the hamstrings are much more involved in sprinting and this shouldn’t be surprising since the hamstring group crosses both the knee and hip joints and can be a prime mover in knee flexion and hip extension. If the hamstrings are active for hip extension and sprinting requires an upright posture one can assume the back extensors are required to stabilize the torso about the hip while sprinting if the gluteals are inactive at anyone time while the hamstrings are active? Couldn’t one also assume the result of weak back extensors or under utilized ones is the side to side movement that some runners/sprinters exhibit as they go inefficiently faster and faster. Possibly a study/review of hip extensors and knee flexors during sprint running is needed covering joint data to include ROM, moments, and power at hip and knee along with emg data from back extensors, bicep femoris (hamstrings), and gastroc. Wouldn’t excessive activation of gluteals also lead to excessive backside mechanics if the hamstrings are also active at this time?
Everyone makes valid points in the previous posts. But things don’t have to be so complicated. The studies are interesting, and I love to read them, but if you want to know how to improve posterior chain power in your athletes, look at those athletes whose primary goal is to increase power...i.e. powerlifters. If squatting deep did more to improve power through the entire ROM, then powerlifters would do most of their squatting deep. In practice, most powerlifters’ squat depth ranges from an inch or three below parallel to an inch or three above parallel. Higher than that does very little to improve full ROM power. Squatting lower than that also does very little to improve full ROM power. If either did work in improving full ROM power, every top powerlifter would already be doing ATG squats at least once a week. Most never do them.
As for translating improved full ROM power to the track and what makes an athlete run faster, that’s another story.
Star that isn’t quite true. First, some of the best in the world do squat ATG. Does Kroc sound familiar at all???
Many don’t have the mobility to get that low in the first place and many use stances that tear up their pelvis and surrounding connective tissue, so I don’t think that you want to necessarily take what powerlifters do verbatim without some huge changes.
The goal of powerlifter is to move more weight at a very specific depth, regardless of how it is achieved. If you widen your chance an inch, there you go. If you wear a tighter suit, there you go,
Wow! Thanks for the info. guys. I thought this topic might be a little too simple to get much of a response. I was hoping for maybe an article or two with a few comments.
Mike,
After being on these forums for the last few years, I have to say that I always love it when people get you going on a good argument. Differing views bring out so much great info.
What would be the best way to allow my athletes to gauge where parallel is? I have two “safety squat” beepers from BFS, but I’m not sure if I like them and I will have a lot more than 2 athletes working out at one time. I thought I read somewhere that touching a 12” box works well. Would that be about right? I would like to have something to help them gauge how low to go, especially in the beginning. Plus, I won’t always be ablt to watch every workout or rep.
Mark Rippetoe has covered this subject extensively in his books and answers these very questions at his Q&A;at strengthmill.net
Thats good. Are you familiar with Coach Mark Rippetoe’s work? He is someone who has 30 years of experience with barbell training. And he says squatting above parallel can hurt your hips and knees. He has authored couple of great books too.
Spur:
I have to say no, and most likely I probably won’t read it, because book’s aren’t subjected to same scientific or professional scrutiny and peer review as articles in scientific and professional journals. That doesn’t mean I won’t read or reference books ever, but their use to someone such as myself is they are 5 years behind research by the time they are published.
On a side note, I seriously doubt squats above parallel hurt knees and likely saves them as the research posted earlier points out and I have serious doubts my athletes lack hip mobility or flexibiliy with amounts of work we do that involve large ROM’s about the hip. That said, the only injuring in 5 coaching years related to training was a stress fracture of a foot, likely caused by running hallway corners indoors too fast during winter and sprinting hallways has been reduced to straight away acceleration sprints of 30m or less, because of that injury.
Not sure how you are certain about all books being 5 years behind on research. And what makes you think that some one with 30 years of experience and observation like Mark Rippetoe has not considered the research. But hey whatever makes you happy.
Mark Rippetoe has covered this subject extensively in his books and answers these very questions at his Q&A;at strengthmill.net
Why the constant Rippetoe promotion? From your posts, one would think he is on par with Chuck Norris.
I have coached a bunch of people who, like dbandre’s guys, squat a bit above parallel with no problems. It’s kinda hard to definitively argue one way or the other given extremely variant training nuances of successful track athletes.
I don’t consider only one source, I consider multiple sources and my knowledge as a coach is always evolving through study, observation, and occasional research (if I am interested in what the local biomech lab is doing). From a scientific standpoint, squats above parallel don’t stress the knees as they do vertebral column, hips, and ankle and thus likely won’t hurt them from squatting only above parallel. People with bad knees have placed too much stress from either torque or shear forces, that will not happen when squatting above parallel 1-2 times per week. It’s more likely that squatting above parallel with supramaximal loads will cause back problems. I am sure Mr. Rippetoe has considered the research, but if he makes statements such as the one you claim then I doubt he understands the research or the intended audience of that research. Experience means a lot, but anyone can write books, but not everyone gets a peer-reviewed research article published and even then some things slip through the cracks either because the reviewers didn’t catch it or it is not fully understood at the time.
Do you really want me to go to this man’s site and start posting research to contradict what you say he says?
If you consider my time in the weight room and those observations we are talking about my 20 years of experience. So I don’t think Mr. Rippetoe has anything over any well educated and experienced (5-6 years as athlete/coach) member of this board.
From personal experience I’ve seen more improvements in my running from DEEP squats as compared to parallel or above parallel squats. DEEP squats emphasize more than just strength they include a good amount of flexibility and stabilization. At least I get some flexibility work out of them since most days of the week I barely get anywhere near touching my toes in a stretch. I also feel they help to build more core strength than do parallel or above parallel squats. The added core strength helps counter act my scoliosis. So from a personal experience I’d chose DEEP squats if I had to pick but since variety is the spice you can’t just do one type of squat when there are so many fun ways to squat.
Star that isn’t quite true. First, some of the best in the world do squat ATG. Does Kroc sound familiar at all???
Davan, reread my post. I never said that there weren’t any powerlifters that squatted ATG in training, I said most include squats that range from a few inches below parallel to a few inches above parallel. This is absolutely true. There are exceptions and Kroc would be the exception, not the rule. As I’ve said, its not that complicated. You look to see what most of the top lifters are doing to increase power and learn from that.
Many don’t have the mobility to get that low in the first place and many use stances that tear up their pelvis and surrounding connective tissue, so I don’t think that you want to necessarily take what powerlifters do verbatim without some huge changes.
With all due respect, I don’t buy this at all. Most top powerlifters would have no trouble dropping ATG. Stances tearing up tissue and the pelvis?????? Powerlifters have long careers, much longer than sprinters. If your statement were true then most lifters would be out of the game in their early to mid twenties. Many stay in until their 40’s and beyond and still compete at the highest levels.
The goal of powerlifter is to move more weight at a very specific depth, regardless of how it is achieved. If you widen your chance an inch, there you go. If you wear a tighter suit, there you go,
Moving weight (through a set ROM not a specific depth) requires power. Without the power, the weight goes nowhere. The goal of training in the squat is to increase power. That was also the stated goal of the OP in this thread. I agree that you don’t take what powerlifters do verbatim, but I would expand that to Oly lifters etc. I look at all forms of explosive training, including those used by shot putters, who are some of the most explosive types around. I guess my final point would be that I have yet to see any kind of reasonable study looking at empirical data, such as 20m times or flying 10m times, that show, empirically, that ATG squats are more effective than parallel squats in improving explosive starts, acceleration or speed.
Davan, reread my post. I never said that there weren’t any powerlifters that squatted ATG in training, I said most include squats that range from a few inches below parallel to a few inches above parallel. This is absolutely true. There are exceptions and Kroc would be the exception, not the rule. As I’ve said, its not that complicated. You look to see what most of the top lifters are doing to increase power and learn from that.
Are you only looking at SHW and equipped lifters or are you looking at all weight classes and including non-equipped as well? Most of the powerlifters I have read about that are against squats much below parallel are SHW.
With all due respect, I don’t buy this at all. Most top powerlifters would have no trouble dropping ATG.
Tate, Simmons, Aichs, etc.?
Stances tearing up tissue and the pelvis?????? Powerlifters have long careers, much longer than sprinters. If your statement were true then most lifters would be out of the game in their early to mid twenties. Many stay in until their 40’s and beyond and still compete at the highest levels.
Sprinters generally retire because they can’t run as fast, not because they are crippled. You can powerlift your entire life and you don’t really lose strength in the sense you lose elasticity, especially when you lift without drug testing and the solution for improving numbers is to use more drugs.
Look at all of the injuries the WSBB guys have had. Is there a single one that hasn’t had some sort of near catastrophic injury? Tearing entire labrums, needing disc surgery, etc.?
Having an ultrawide stance like most is NOT good for the hips, period.
From personal experience I’ve seen more improvements in my running from DEEP squats as compared to parallel or above parallel squats. DEEP squats emphasize more than just strength they include a good amount of flexibility and stabilization. At least I get some flexibility work out of them since most days of the week I barely get anywhere near touching my toes in a stretch. I also feel they help to build more core strength than do parallel or above parallel squats. The added core strength helps counter act my scoliosis. So from a personal experience I’d chose DEEP squats if I had to pick but since variety is the spice you can’t just do one type of squat when there are so many fun ways to squat.
Agreed. I think people’s who hips tend to rotate, deep squats also have a correction effect. I can think of reasons why I like both deep squats and parallel squats and every other form of squat. All of them fit in the training plan at some point. A single exercise is only as good as the entire scheme.
One of the best reasons to squat deep is that you actually progress faster.
When I first started squatting, I added weight every week while cutting the depth higher and higher. An older lifter clued me in on depth.
I dropped back on the weight and hit proper depth. I started progressing much more quickly and very soon passed the weights that I was cutting high. I often see beginners struggle with 1/2 reps and too much weight. Week after week. If they did it properly they would be much further ahead in a few months…
Many people who 1/2 squat just bend from the knees until they are basically stuck. It isn’t as if they are doing a proper squat, with limited depth.
Are you only looking at SHW and equipped lifters or are you looking at all weight classes and including non-equipped as well? Most of the powerlifters I have read about that are against squats much below parallel are SHW.
I’m not talking about what I’ve read, I’m talking about discussions I’ve had with hundreds of powerlifters of all classes, experience levels and genders (all three) in person at meets, both tested and non-tested. My guys lift in both, by the way, and are lifetime drug free. And I say again, for the final time, most do not feel the need to go ATG because they do not feel it has any benefit. Most do train with some regularity a few inches below parallel, but usually no deeper. This is first hand information gathered during literally hundreds of conversations with powerlifters in their gyms or at meets.
Tate, Simmons, Aichs, etc.?
I don’t really consider Tate that much of a powerlifter. He writes well, though. If you want to talk WSBB start with Vogelpohl, Wenning, and Weisberger. They don’t look too beat up to me.
Sprinters generally retire because they can’t run as fast, not because they are crippled. You can powerlift your entire life and you don’t really lose strength in the sense you lose elasticity, especially when you lift without drug testing and the solution for improving numbers is to use more drugs.
The drug and suit thing is a weak argument. Are you saying most sprinters are clean?
Look at all of the injuries the WSBB guys have had. Is there a single one that hasn’t had some sort of near catastrophic injury? Tearing entire labrums, needing disc surgery, etc.?
Another weak argument. Those same injuries happen to powerlifters who use a narrow stance. The injuries are the result of squatting with weight that is 3-4 times bodyweight. One wobble or form break, and you have over half a ton of weight to deal with.
Having an ultrawide stance like most is NOT good for the hips, period.
This thread isn’t about stance width. My main points were that unless you have very good documented scientific studies, or at least a proponderance of the anecdotal evidence, there is no reason to reinvent the wheel. The arguments I see, including those above, for squatting ATG are anecdotal, and not based on any real science data. The data lacking, my suggestion is to do what seems to work best for those whose primary goal is developing the skill or trait you are working on. I tell football players the same thing. You don’t need to reinvent the wheel if you want to improve your speed. Just look to see what sprinters are doing...that’s their main focus and they (the CF’s, Mike Youngs and Pfaffs of the world) probably know what they’re talking about when it comes to speed. Perhaps the speed guys should give the strength and power guys the same benefit of the doubt when developing posterior chain strength and power is the topic of conversation.
I don’t really consider Tate that much of a powerlifter. He writes well, though. If you want to talk WSBB start with Vogelpohl, Wenning, and Weisberger. They don’t look too beat up to me.
They are also are not as beat up because they don’t compete that often. Vogelpohl actually quit WSBB because Louie wasn’t allowing him to compete when he wanted. Powerlifting is less pounding on your body so you can last a bit longer in that sport. Also Olympic lifters squat ATG and create even more power than powerlifters and are just as strong. Side note-Wenning is no longer with WSBB either. Him and Louie had some disagreements on training.
The drug and suit thing is a weak argument. Are you saying most sprinters are clean?
Drug use between the sports is night and day, just like with bodybuilding. Sure, a lot of elites use various substances, but they are heavily restricted in the kinds, amounts, and times they can/do use. Powerlifters who are never tested in any sort of fashion have a much different set of circumstances. Equipment makes a HUGE difference.
Another weak argument. Those same injuries happen to powerlifters who use a narrow stance. The injuries are the result of squatting with weight that is 3-4 times bodyweight. One wobble or form break, and you have over half a ton of weight to deal with.
Why aren’t there tons of olympic lifters, who are going deeper and without equipment, getting the same rate of injuries in a much more complex activity?
This thread isn’t about stance width. My main points were that unless you have very good documented scientific studies, or at least a proponderance of the anecdotal evidence, there is no reason to reinvent the wheel. The arguments I see, including those above, for squatting ATG are anecdotal, and not based on any real science data.
You just said you want anecdotal and empirical now you say it is crap.
The data lacking, my suggestion is to do what seems to work best for those whose primary goal is developing the skill or trait you are working on. I tell football players the same thing. You don’t need to reinvent the wheel if you want to improve your speed. Just look to see what sprinters are doing...that’s their main focus and they (the CF’s, Mike Youngs and Pfaffs of the world) probably know what they’re talking about when it comes to speed. Perhaps the speed guys should give the strength and power guys the same benefit of the doubt when developing posterior chain strength and power is the topic of conversation.
The speed coaches know what you need to get faster--including the strength needed.
You say there are no studies showing the wide stances specifically cause problems (though the vast majority tend to use a wider stance and the injuries powerlifters face is well documented in literature), but you have no studies to show the opposite, either.
Also, if power is the issue, shouldn’t we look at olympic lifters or throwers?
